TexasCHLforum.com

gdanaher wrote:Please cite the source of your quote. I am unable to find any reference to what you are describing. It appears that the OSCE is not and has never been part of the UN, but you can think whatever you think to calm your fears.

I bet you did not search very hard. How about their own fact sheet posted on their website?

http://www.osce.org/atu/13578" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

The OSCE is a regional arrangement under Chapter VIII of
the United Nations Charter and the legal framework for the
OSCE’s action against terrorism is found in the universal
anti-terrorism conventions and protocols as well as the relevant
UN Security Council resolutions, in particular UNSCR
1373 (2001)...

I got my information from this link, where they describe the UN as an external partner.

http://www.osce.org/ec/43240" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

gdanaher wrote:Please cite the source of your quote. I am unable to find any reference to what you are describing. It appears that the OSCE is not and has never been part of the UN, but you can think whatever you think to calm your fears.

That was on their own web site: http://www.osce.org/atu/13578" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

You can defend them all you want, but their charter is for EUROPE not the US, and as pointed out in their own PDF they are part of the UN.

Please cite your sources.

Edited to add: Posted simultaneously, but obviously the document stating that they are part of the UN is very easy to find.

I really don't care if they are a part of the UN or not, my point was it's not as if they will be standing there with blue berets and FAL's. If the US doesn't want to have elections monitored by an outside source, that's fine with me. We also shouldn't attempt to monitor anyone else's.

I just haven't heard of this group causing any problems in the past, so I was wondering what the issue was now.

Actually they are not "part of the UN".
They are "recognized" as a "regional arrangement" by the UN, as is permitted under UN Charter Chapter VIII. Very different.
http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter8.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks to gdanaher for pointing out my incorrect understanding.

I still don't like it. They should keep out.

RoyGBiv wrote:Actually they are not "part of the UN".
They are "recognized" as a "regional arrangement" by the UN, as is permitted under UN Charter Chapter VIII. Very different.
http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter8.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks to gdanaher for pointing out my incorrect understanding.

I still don't like it. They should keep out.

They are riding for the brand.

What is the difference?

Anygunanywhere

Manure by any other name would smell the same.

JCole wrote:I really don't care if they are a part of the UN or not, my point was it's not as if they will be standing there with blue berets and FAL's. If the US doesn't want to have elections monitored by an outside source, that's fine with me. We also shouldn't attempt to monitor anyone else's.

I just haven't heard of this group causing any problems in the past, so I was wondering what the issue was now.

For me it is this effort in combination with the UN's attempt at universal taxation of trade and their pushing their small arms treaty. I do realize that some of this has been around a very long time and that it may only be my perception that it is gaining in support strength. I want none of it. And I'm upset at our Federal leadership for even entertaining any of it. The UN is the consummate failure of the Progressive agenda in that they haven't accomplished a single objective in their charter and continue to sponsor exercises like the council on Human Rights being made of of the worst human rights offenders in the world. Personally, I see the tentacles of the UN reaching further and further into areas where they don't belong, directly or indirectly and it is time to lop off a few of those tentacles so that the beast that they are attached to gets the message about its boundaries. Those boundaries will never include the inter-workings of the US political system if I can help to prevent it. Foreign interference already exists in our politics and it does not need organizational support from such a corrupt and world government minded group.

"It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is.".......Dont let this issue be obfuscated by semantics.

The OSCE/UN relationship is a definite one regardless of the terms used to define it.

The OSCE is a regional arrangement under Chapter VIII of the United Nations Charter and the legal framework for the OSCE’s action against terrorism is found in the universal anti-terrorism conventions and protocols as well as the relevant UN Security Council resolutions, in particular UNSCR 1373 (2001) – which among other things calls upon all states “to co-operate, particularly through bilateral and multilateral arrangements and agreements, to prevent and suppress terrorist attacks and take action against perpetrators of such acts”.http://www.osce.org/atu/13578

chasfm11 wrote:

JCole wrote:I really don't care if they are a part of the UN or not, my point was it's not as if they will be standing there with blue berets and FAL's. If the US doesn't want to have elections monitored by an outside source, that's fine with me. We also shouldn't attempt to monitor anyone else's.

I just haven't heard of this group causing any problems in the past, so I was wondering what the issue was now.

For me it is this effort in combination with the UN's attempt at universal taxation of trade and their pushing their small arms treaty. I do realize that some of this has been around a very long time and that it may only be my perception that it is gaining in support strength. I want none of it. And I'm upset at our Federal leadership for even entertaining any of it. The UN is the consummate failure of the Progressive agenda in that they haven't accomplished a single objective in their charter and continue to sponsor exercises like the council on Human Rights being made of of the worst human rights offenders in the world. Personally, I see the tentacles of the UN reaching further and further into areas where they don't belong, directly or indirectly and it is time to lop off a few of those tentacles so that the beast that they are attached to gets the message about its boundaries. Those boundaries will never include the inter-workings of the US political system if I can help to prevent it. Foreign interference already exists in our politics and it does not need organizational support from such a corrupt and world government minded group.

From every corner of the world, the American population is a result of its people rejecting the governments that now make up the membership of the UN.

chasfm11 wrote:

JCole wrote:I really don't care if they are a part of the UN or not, my point was it's not as if they will be standing there with blue berets and FAL's. If the US doesn't want to have elections monitored by an outside source, that's fine with me. We also shouldn't attempt to monitor anyone else's.

I just haven't heard of this group causing any problems in the past, so I was wondering what the issue was now.

For me it is this effort in combination with the UN's attempt at universal taxation of trade and their pushing their small arms treaty. I do realize that some of this has been around a very long time and that it may only be my perception that it is gaining in support strength. I want none of it. And I'm upset at our Federal leadership for even entertaining any of it. The UN is the consummate failure of the Progressive agenda in that they haven't accomplished a single objective in their charter and continue to sponsor exercises like the council on Human Rights being made of of the worst human rights offenders in the world. Personally, I see the tentacles of the UN reaching further and further into areas where they don't belong, directly or indirectly and it is time to lop off a few of those tentacles so that the beast that they are attached to gets the message about its boundaries. Those boundaries will never include the inter-workings of the US political system if I can help to prevent it. Foreign interference already exists in our politics and it does not need organizational support from such a corrupt and world government minded group.

Its that infamous "camel's nose under the tent", IMHO. I agree with you. They WANT to have a say in our elections and will take whatever baby-steps they can to slowly insinuate themselves into the process with an eye to eventually influencing the outcome, all in the name of "fairness" and "social justice", of course.

JCole wrote:I really don't care if they are a part of the UN or not, my point was it's not as if they will be standing there with blue berets and FAL's. If the US doesn't want to have elections monitored by an outside source, that's fine with me. We also shouldn't attempt to monitor anyone else's.

I just haven't heard of this group causing any problems in the past, so I was wondering what the issue was now.

"I really don't care".

Famous last words of many a civilization, culture or government.

Insert the language and nation of your choice in the equation above.

However I do agree that it is a two-way street. They keep out of our junk and we keep out of theirs... Ron Paul, hold the door open for me please!

Purplehood wrote:

JCole wrote:I really don't care if they are a part of the UN or not, my point was it's not as if they will be standing there with blue berets and FAL's. If the US doesn't want to have elections monitored by an outside source, that's fine with me. We also shouldn't attempt to monitor anyone else's.

I just haven't heard of this group causing any problems in the past, so I was wondering what the issue was now.

"I really don't care".

Famous last words of many a civilization, culture or government.

Insert the language and nation of your choice in the equation above.

However I do agree that it is a two-way street. They keep out of our junk and we keep out of theirs... Ron Paul, hold the door open for me please!

Dont mean to go off topic but the above hi-lighted statement brought to mind a passage I read in "The Last Lion", a bio of Winston Churchill (a great book btw)

It quoted the German generals stating that at the time Germany was weak and didnt have enough resources to fight when they invaded the Rhineland. This invasion was in fact an illogical and insane move that they all feared would disastrously fail.

They further stated that if only the French had resisted minimally would have revealed just how tentative Hitler's situation among the mainstream Germans was at that time, as the delicate political support behind Hitler would have collapsed and WWII would have never been. The generals said this was the milestone that made Hitler a force to be reckoned with.

Ok, Now Hillary Clinton is telling Greg Abbot that Texas WILL ALLOW the OSCE to come in to election locations whether we Like IT Or Not.


http://www.inquisitr.com/381307/state-d ... tate-laws/

(edited to remove duplicate link)

TexasGal wrote:Ok, Now Hillary Clinton is telling Greg Abbot that Texas WILL ALLOW the OSCE to come in to election locations whether we Like IT Or Not.


http://www.inquisitr.com/381307/state-d ... tate-laws/

and

http://www.inquisitr.com/381307/state-d ... tate-laws/

Well, if they claim the election observers are immune to state laws, how 'bout a good old fashioned lynching?