When the big hand says Thirteen Moon Calendar by Judi McLeod, Canadafreepress.com

August 27, 2004

The United Nations, which has a finger in every global pie, and ambitions to take over the World Internet, is inching its way towards calendar reform.

Long on lofty words and windy clauses, the official UN description for calendar reform is, "Calendar Reform and the Future of Civilization" (CRFC).

Ostensibly, the UN rejected considering calendar reform in 1995 as part of its 50th anniversary. Within four years, UN officials were passing calendar duty over to lifetime activist for peace, Dr. JosÚ ArgØelles, an originator of Earth Day.

Dr. Arguelles’ World Summit on Peace and Time was convened on June 22-27, 1999 at the UN-owned University for Peace, in Costa Rica.

Why is the UN itching to change the method by which the world tells time?

It’s the Gregorian Calendar. Having replaced the Julian Calendar, the Gregorian was instituted by papal decree in the year AD 1582 and adopted by virtually all nations as the common world standard.

Accepted by virtually all nations notwithstanding, the Gregorian Calendar is irksome to New Agers because the whole world marks time based on the Birth of Jesus Christ. And as far as the occultist UN is concerned, that will never do.

So why not break and fix it?

If the concept of throwing the Gregorian Calendar out to replace it with the World Thirteen Moon 28-day Calendar of Peace isn’t ludicrous enough, calendar challengers say they are basing their reform on "common sense".

"By rational discourse and common sense, it has been determined that the Gregorian Calendar does not represent a true or accurate standard of measure or belong to any systematic science of time, and hence, is worthy of reform," states a CRFC resolution from the World Summit on Peace and Time.

The usual suspects were on hand when more than one hundred "followers of the World Thirteen Calendar Change Peace Movement" convened at the Costa Rican summit.

Letters of acknowledgement were sent to the summit on behalf of UN Secretary-General, Kofi Annan; Secretary-General of UNESCO, Federico Mayor Zaragoza; His Holiness, the Dalai Lama; and by Jonathan Granoff of the Lawyers Alliance for World Security.

Dr. Rodrigo Carazo, former President of Costa Rica and founder of the University gave the opening address for Peace. In attendance with Dr. Carazo was Gerardo Bidowski, acting Rector and representative of the then newly appointed President of the University for Peace, Maurice Strong.

Seven commissions were set up during a four-day period and participating was former UN assistant Secretary-General Robert Muller, now UP chancellor, who gave a guided tour of the archeology and history o f the site of the University of Peace which was concluded by a walk to his nearby residence.

The Thirteen Moon "Natural Time" Calendar is touted as "a universal application of the mathematics and cosmology of the Mayan calendar as deciphered by Dr. Jose Arguelles. Ph.D., and presents a simple yet so profound opportunity to shift our everyday consciousness."

Described on his Internet home page as "both a visionary and a prophet", Dr. Arguelles bestowed upon himself the pagan name of, "Valum Votan". In a New Age magazine interview, he said it was "not until after he experimented with LSD that he realized he was a visionary."

The final goal is to change the calendar from its present "artificial" 12-month year to a more "natural" 13-month year that more closely parallels the lunar and biological cycles.

The results and declarations from the World Summit on Peace and Time have been submitted to the General Assembly of the UN.

Wild and weird as it may sound, the Thirteen Moon Natural Time Peace Calendar could replace the Gregorian Calendar, courtesy of future UN resolution.

It is, after all, Canadian Maurice Strong and former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev who, under the auspices of the UN, are working on an agenda to replace the Ten Commandments with the Earth Charter.

-- - (David@excite.com), August 29, 2004

Answers

I guess Jesus must offend them. :-(

-- - (David@excite.com), August 29, 2004.

The Gregorian was instituted by papal decree in the year AD 1582 and adopted by virtually all nations as the common world standard.

-- - (David@excite.com), August 29, 2004.

Blibbity blah. Well, the French tried to phutz with the calendar after their little revolution; yay for the 'Age of Reason'! Meanwhile, in Reality Land, a virtually universally accepted calendar that works is being shoved aside because some silly little pagan-wannabes want to make a cosmic anti-Christian fashion statement.

The UN witches can do whatever they want. The People of God can keep time perfectly well thank-you-very-much.

-- anon (ymous@god.bless), August 29, 2004.

I think someone is pulling someone’s leg.

Why would, how could, the UN “replace the Ten commandments”? As the UN is not a Christian or Jewish organisation, it has no direct concern with, let alone control over, the ten commandments.

As I understand the Church’s position, it is open to any proposed reform of the calendar, provided the seven-day week is retained. But the half-baked wacko idea referred to above would not be supported by any rational person.

-- Steve (55555@aol.net), August 30, 2004.

Looks like a good article from The Onion. Don't know if this is where it came from though.

BTW, The Onion is a great news source, but you need a sense of humor :)

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 30, 2004.

Be very afraid of Gorby. Surely he, and his ilk, who have positions of power in the UN would like to do away with the Ten Commandments, Gregorian Calendar etc. Gorbachev's earth charter is scary, he is scary, and to me, the UN is scary. Also, ironic is the fact that a communist, who presided over one of, if not THE, the biggest polluting nation in the world, is preaching to others about the saving Mother Earth, or as he calls her, Gaia. The promoters of the Earth Charter, concocted by Gorbachev and billionaire Maurice Strong, do indeed intend for it to rival the Ten Commandments. The have even created their own Ark of Hope which mimics the Ark of the Covenant. Accompanying the Charter and the Ark are the Temenos Books, containing aboriginal Earth Masks and visual prayers/affirmations for global healing, peace, and gratitude, created by 3,000 artists, teachers, students, and mystics. According to the Temenos Project, which launched the effort, a temenos is "a magical sacred circle where special rules apply and extraordinary events inevitably occur."

"Cosmos is my God. Nature is my God." —Mikhail Gorbachev, on the PBS Charlie Rose Show, Oct. 23, 1996

"Do not do unto the environment of others what you do not want done to your own environment....My hope is that this charter will be a kind of Ten Commandments, a 'Sermon on the Mount', that provides a guide for human behavior toward the environment in the next century." --Mikhail Gorbachev, May 8, 1997

Yes, I admit that this document is far from being ideal. It is far from those 10 or 15 Commandments which we all know about and which have played their role for 2000 years. But here is the document which can be considered as an important step toward those famous testaments. --Mikhail Gorbachev, March 18, 1997 (note "10 or 15" commandments)

"The goals of the Earth Charter Campaign are the following:...(c) the Earth Charter principles and values as part of curricula of formal and informal educational institutions; (d) the Earth Charter endorsed and taught by religious and spiritual groups" --Earth Charter campaign website

"[nations must] Ensure universal access to health care that fosters reproductive health and responsible reproduction." --UN earth Charter (clue: "responsible reproduction is UNspeak for abortion)

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), August 30, 2004.

Brian,

Are saying the posted article is legit?

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 30, 2004.

The article is not satirical, if that's what you mean. Although they may be afraid to say so, I believe there are many in the UN hierarchy who would like to do away with any vestige of Christian values and cultures in order to facilitate the one world government. In fact, that's what is scary, they don't show their hand. At least you can see Gorbachev coming if you happen to look his way.

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), August 30, 2004.

I've never heard if this Earth Charter before Brian. Thanks for the info.

-- Andy S ("ask3332004@yahoo.com"), August 30, 2004.

" I never heard of the earth charter before Brian thanks for the information..."

According to the Charter, we must:

"Recognize that all beings are interdependent and every form of life has value...." (Unborn children, of course, are not included in the UN’s definition of "every form of life." The Earth Summit II documents continue to support the UN’s pro-abortion policies.) "Affirm faith in the inherent dignity of all human beings." (UN agencies, however, support policies of euthanasia for those determined not capable of living a "quality" life.) "Adopt at all levels sustainable development plans and regulations...." (This is a prescription for global socialism in a super-regulated global state.) "Prevent pollution of any part of the environment...." (Enforcing this dictum would mean stopping virtually all human activity.) "Internalize the full environmental and social costs of goods and services in the selling price." (This seemingly harmless sentence would empower the state to price, tax, and regulate all production and consumption.) "Ensure universal access to health care that fosters reproductive health and responsible reproduction. (This is a thinly disguised call for socialized medicine that includes abortion and population control.) "Eliminate discrimination in all its forms, such as that based on race … [and] sexual orientation." (This provision is clearly aimed at criminalizing those who refuse to accept homosexuality as positive and good.) "Promote the equitable distribution of wealth within nations and among nations. (Few Marxist documents have put their "redistribution of wealth" program more plainly.) The Charter includes much, much more. It ends with this stirring exhortation: "In order to build a sustainable global community, the nations of the world must renew their commitment to the United Nations, fulfill their obligations under existing international agreements, and support the implementation of Earth Charter principles with an international legally binding instrument on environment and development."

The Charter will soon be making its way to schools, city governments, state legislatures, teachers organizations, civic groups, professional associations, judges, and law schools. The aforementioned Global Judges Symposium concluded its summit activities by issuing the so-called Johannesburg Principles on the Rule of Law and Sustainable Development. "We recognize," it states, "the importance of ensuring that environmental law and law in the field of sustainable development feature prominently in academic curricula, legal studies and training at all levels, in particular among judges and others engaged in the judicial process."

The judicial symposium was sponsored by the United Nations Environmental Program (largely supported by U.S. tax dollars) and the Environmental Law Institute, one of the principal eco-activist legal groups supported by U.S. tax-exempt foundations.

For the amount of time, effort, and money invested in the Earth Charter program over the past decade, its profile at the recent Johannesburg Earth Summit was remarkably subdued. Apparently, the plan is to orchestrate a global stealth campaign for the Charter among a sympathetic core constituency. As the campaign picks up steam, activists will obtain signatures and public support for this new global ethic from local, state, and national governments, schools, and organizations — without stirring the suspicions and opposition of churches, pro-life, and pro-family forces. Once a critical mass of support has been built among students, teachers, journalists, and public officials, the Charter will appear to be universally accepted and unstoppable.

Americans can make sure that that scheme does not work by informing themselves and their friends and neighbors about this blatantly diabolical and blasphemous deception.

God bless you Brian

-- - (David@excite.com), August 30, 2004.

"I think someone is pulling someone’s leg..."

Steve the only leg[s] being pulled are the babies legs that are going to keep getting ripped out of their Moms' wound if kerry& edwards are voted in.

From the National Abortion Rights Action League (NARAL)

“NARAL Pro-Choice America knows, based on John Kerry’s record in the U.S. Senate, and the positions he has articulated as a candidate for President, that Roe v. Wade would be safe in his hands if he is elected President. He is an unwavering supporter of a woman’s right to choose as well as the privacy rights guaranteed in the Constitution.

“We also know that based on everything George Bush has ever said or done about choice that Americans’ rights are in severe peril, and if he is president for four more years, women will lose the right to choose. His record of nominating the most vehemently anti-choice judges and his recess appointments of the most extreme anti-privacy judicial activists prove that President Bush will fulfill his promise to “do everything in my power to restrict abortion.”

-- - (David@excite.com), August 30, 2004.

David, you really show marvellous ingenuity in bringing Kerry’s pro- abortion policy into every thread, no matter how unrelated.

Re the Earth Charter you quote (MINUS your tendentious parenthetical additions) I certainly don’t see anything in it which conflicts with Catholic teaching. In fact the Church itself has expressed the same desires in almost the same words.

Re Gorbachev, OK, he’s not a Christian, he’s some kind of panentheist (someone who worships the whole of nature). So what? Do you want to ban non-Christians from having any voice in international affairs? It's not compulsory to agree with them. And no, my paranoid friends, I really can't see the UN forming some kind of Thought Police who come round to your house and investigate your brain to make sure you agree. Just recently you guys were telling me the UN is absolutely useless and impotent and we should just ignore it. Now you're saying the UN is immensely powerful and about to stamp out Christianity and rule the world with an iron fist, and we must be very afraid of it! At least one of your contradictory statements must be a lie.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), August 30, 2004.

Steve,

Did I ever say to "ignore" the UN? I wish we could ignore them. Am I one of "you guys"? Maybe I did say to ignore them. They are inept, and corrupt, for the most part in matters of security, as we have seen. I think they are diabolical in matters such as the Earth Charter and other one-world government types of initiatives. Just look at some of the language in the Charter. It is laden with ambiguous, vague, lawyerly language which can be used to justify about anything. I'm sure Gorby and Strong would be happy to hear that you take their document at face value; even comparing it with Catholic teaching. The problem lies in the interpretation. In addition to David's here are some of my own (tendentious?) interpretations,:

"6. d. Prevent pollution of any part of the environment and allow no build up of radioactive, toxic, or other hazardous substances."

In other words: You can be fined or prosecuted for anything, any time, anywhere since we pollute the environment by our very existence. Ludicrous!

"6. e. Avoid military activities damaging to the environment"

In other words: NO MILITARY ACTIVITIES, EVER! Not even in self defense, not even in just war, not even to train.

"7. d. Internalize the full environmental and social costs of goods and services in the selling price ...

In other words: We'll set the price for all goods and services and you can bet we'll make it impossible to buy things we don't like, such as: big, safe cars, guns, non-vegan food etc.

7. e. Ensure universal access to health care that fosters reproductive health and responsible reproduction.

In other words: make (keep) abortion legal, and very accessible.

Steve, won't you please join me in singing the UN theme song (C'mon you know the tune, just don't sing like Yoko):

Imagine there's no heaven, Its easy if you try

No hell below us, Above us only sky

Imagine all the people, Living for today...

Imagine there's no countries, It isn't hard to do

Nothing to kill or die for, And no religion too

Imagine all the people, Living life in peace....

You may say I'm a dreamer, But I'm not the only one

I hope someday you'll join us, And the world will be as one

Imagine no possessions, I wonder if you can

No need for greed or hunger, A brotherhood of man

Imagine all the people, Sharing all the world...

You may say I'm a dreamer, But I'm not the only one

I hope someday you'll join us, And the world will be as one

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), August 30, 2004.

bold off

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), August 30, 2004.

Brian, you don't seem to understand that the Charter is a statement of ideals to be striven for, not a list of laws to be enforced. Of course it's vague and ambiguous, that's the only way they could ever hope to get everyone from all countries, cultures and religions to agree to it.

Yes your interpretations are tendentious. Some may think "responsible reproduction" means legal abortion. To me it means avoiding sexual intercourse outside marriage and having the number of children God planned for me. And if the UN is so inept in matters of security, how is it going to stop you waging a war you think is just? Yes you are one of those guys and you continue to contradict yourself.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), August 31, 2004.

Steve, pardon me but no one at the UN cares what nice interpretation YOU want to give to "reproductive rights". They MEAN ABORTION. That's been proven repeatedly since 1994's Cairo conference when the whole issue was what those words meant. Clinton's white house sent a cable to all US Embassies urging them to get their host countries on board with that language to promote abortion.

Go to any UN related website and check this out... go to any US Pro- life group, go to the Holy See's website... over and over it is agreed by all sides that "reproductive rights" only refers to ABORTION, CONTRACEPTION, ETC. not "the right to feel good about oneself" or "responsibility with respect to sexual choices within marriage" blah blah blah.

The UN is full of seriously sinister people who really believe in a atheistic hedonist utopia.

But don't take my word for it...go GOOGLE this stuff for yourself.

Try American Life League www.all.org, Human Life International (www.HLI.org), and others. International Planned Parenthood IPPF... they all use the phrase as code for abortion.

I'm not against the UN in principle. I'm for keeping them honest and reforming it by getting better people in there. But to do this, we can't play the naive game of "let's pretend they don't mean what they say they mean 'cause this may mean we're faced with a diametrically opposed enemy rather than simple misunderstanding."

-- Joe (joestong@yahoo.com), August 31, 2004.

Joe I am well aware that many if not most people in the UN and elsewhere regard “responsible reproduction” (Brian’s quote from the Charter made no mention of “reproductive rights”) as including legal abortion. What I reject is the paranoid theory that EVERYONE in the UN is involved in a vast conspiracy to force abortion and atheism on the whole world.

You guys seem to see nothing but evil everywhere you look. Christ has redeemed our sinful world, despite the worst that sinful men continue to do, and His work of redemption continues in many ways and in many institutions and people both within and outside the visible Church. The world is a mix of good and evil, but the glass is not half empty, it's half full, of the redemptive grace of Christ.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), August 31, 2004.

Steve,

Your scrambling ability on this thread is impressive.

First it was: "I think someone is pulling someone’s leg."

Wrong

Then it was: "Re the Earth Charter you quote (MINUS your tendentious parenthetical additions) I certainly don’t see anything in it which conflicts with Catholic teaching."

Wrong

Then it was: "...the Charter is a statement of ideals to be striven for, not a list of laws to be enforced. Of course it's vague and ambiguous, that's the only way they could ever hope to get everyone from all countries, cultures and religions to agree to it."

And this is good because...?

And finally: " What I reject is the paranoid theory that EVERYONE in the UN is involved in a vast conspiracy to force abortion and atheism on the whole world."

"EVERYONE," Ha, now look who's using hyperbole. While there are those who would conspire, I think it's mostly groupthink. Atheists and secularists and other "ists" are drawn to such an organization.

Just to let you know Steve; you may think I see evil everywhere I look, but I wouldn't be so paranoid if everyone wasn't out to get me. ;-)

-- Brian Crane (brian.crane@cranemills.com), August 31, 2004.

Don’t know what you mean by “scrambling”, Brian.

Yes I still think the original post is a hoax, and you haven’t given me any reason to think otherwise, other than simply stating “Wrong”. To point out another of its absurdities, why would it be necessary to change the calendar “because the whole world marks time based on the Birth of Jesus Christ.”? If that is “irksome” it could be overcome simply by changing the year which we count from (the birth of Karl Marx perhaps?) No change to the calendar would be necessary. The present calendar has nothing to do with Christianity. Its months are named after pagan gods and Roman numbers. The division of the year into months is based on the moon’s cycle, with a few days added so that there are an even 12 months in a year. The days of the week are named after pagan gods. Pope Gregory made only a very slight change to how often we have leap years. He did this not for any religious reason but simply to stop the calendar falling out of line with the actual position of the earth and the seasons. Otherwise the calendar is the same as it was set by Julius Caesar before Christ was born! This “Julian” calendar was based on earlier Roman and Egyptian calendars. The only thing about the calendar even peripherally related to Christianity is the 7 day week. The Jews saw this as corresponding to the 7 days in which God created the earth and then rested in Genesis. But the pagan Egyptians were using a 7 day week before the Jews did!

And you still haven’t pointed out anything in the Charter which conflicts with Catholic teaching. As I said it’s generally along the very same lines as Catholic teaching. Why do you painstakingly try to search out and see extremely unlikely evil in things that are basically good?

“the Charter is a statement of ideals to be striven for, not a list of laws to be enforced. Of course it's vague and ambiguous, that's the only way they could ever hope to get everyone from all countries, cultures and religions to agree to it." And this is good because...?” Because getting them to agree even on a vague and ambiguous document is the first step to getting them to agree on something more substantial. (such as stamping out female circumcision.) You see every new development as negative. Gorbachev and co spent most of their life as atheists. Now they have some dim grasp of the divine. Why not applaud and encourage their progress instead of damning them as irredeemably evil because they don’t have the whole truth?

You call it “hyperbole” when I deny that “everyone” in the UN has the evil agenda you speak of. I was merely responding to Joe who said “The UN is full of seriously sinister people who really believe in a atheistic hedonist utopia.“ and YOU who said “the UN” is “corrupt” and “diabolical”! and not forgetting David calling it “Marxist” etc.

“Atheists and secularists and other "ists" are drawn to such an organization.” So are many, many Christians, including all the Popes of its time. I really can’t understand your implacable hostility to the UN. Sure, it’s failed in a lot the good things it’s tried for, and VERY occasionally it (that is, the majority of its member countries’ governments, who decide what the UN does) tries for something bad like encouraging abortion. But it has achieved an incredible amount of good in the last 59 years, in ways like improving health, preventing hunger, and best of all achieving its primary intention – preventing World War 3.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), August 31, 2004.

This is all quite interesting. I think people are right though when they say that the leaders of the UN are anti-Christian people. I think they really do want a society that is rid of Christianity. I think they want this because they only see the evils that Christianity has done. However, they miss the point that Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Paganism, and Atheism have also done very evil things in their histories. Nothing is perfect and nothing ever will be.

To call the Gregorian calender unnatural isn't correct however the Mayan calender would be more accurate. However, there is no way that the world could just change, overnight, what the date is. I for one would continue to use the Gregorian.

The UN could do some very interesting things with this. They might succeed in creating either a Christian backlash or a Christian underground that could really change the world.

Who ever said that the UN wants to rule the world, I think is right. I think that the UN really does have plans to become a world government. Hmm. Can anyone see 1984 in this? Can anyone see communism is this? I can.

The UN had bascially declared war against Christianity. But they do it like the US declares war. They don't, they just attack.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), September 01, 2004.

Here is an article on it.

Article by Canada Free Press

Website for Calender Reform

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), September 01, 2004.

You guys all seem to be labouring under the misapprehension that “the UN” is some sort of omnipotent force and Kofi Annan a dictator. Annan and his fellow bureaucrats are mere functionaries. “The UN” and its agencies can do nothing unless the governments of the majority of the world’s countries authorize it. On security matters, the UN can do nothing unless the governments of the USA, Russia, China, Britain and France all jointly authorize it. If "the leaders of the UN" are anti- Christian it is only because they are carrying out the directions of their predominantly anti-Christian masters, the governments of the world's countries, especially the five countries with veto power. If you want "the UN" to change its policies, you have to convince the national governments to change THEIR policies and the UN will dutifully follow.

Correction: not all the months are named after pagan gods and Latin numbers. July and August are named after pagan dictators and April is named after the Latin word "aperire" to open (as flowers in spring). I repeat, there is nothing "Christian" about the present calendar except for possibly the 7-day week. To insist on retaining it simply because we have had it as long as Christianity has existed, is not being Christian, it is simply being conservative for conservatism's sake. The Church's own "calendar year" begins on the first Sunday of Advent.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), September 01, 2004.

Steve,

"Kinky Kofi" is about as respectable as your other hero, John (baby killer) Kerry.

Grow up slim! You can't fool Catholics with your abortion loving, one world order.

-- - (David@excite.com), September 01, 2004.

"To insist on retaining it simply because we have had it as long as Christianity has existed, is not being Christian.."

Realy Dawg? Explain your words yesterday about pulling that leg. :-()

Now you think your a expert? Who is pulling whose leg?

-- - (David@excite.com), September 01, 2004.

No I don’t think I’m an expert David, but I obviously know more than you about the subject, since instead of even attempting to refute the facts I refer to, you simply indulge in juvenile ad-hominem name- calling. I deeply resent your reference to me as “abortion- loving” as I have done not the slightest thing to suggest I am anything but adamantly opposed to abortion in all cases. It is you who needs to grow up.

In case you still have any doubt:

CONSTITUTION ON THE SACRED LITURGY - SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM

SOLEMNLY PROMULGATED BY HIS HOLINESS POPE PAUL VI ON DECEMBER 4, 1963

APPENDIX

A DECLARATION OF THE SECOND ECUMENICAL COUNCIL OF THE VATICAN ON REVISION OF THE CALENDAR

The Second Ecumenical Sacred Council of the Vatican, recognizing the importance of the wishes expressed by many concerning the assignment of the feast of Easter to a fixed Sunday and concerning an unchanging calendar, having carefully considered the effects which could result from the introduction of a new calendar, declares as follows:

1. The Sacred Council would not object if the feast of Easter were assigned to a particular Sunday of the Gregorian Calendar, provided that those whom it may concern, especially the brethren who are not in communion with the Apostolic See, give their assent.

2. The sacred Council likewise declares that it does not oppose efforts designed to introduce a perpetual calendar into civil society.

But among the various systems which are being suggested to stabilize a perpetual calendar and to introduce it into civil life, the Church has no objection only in the case of those systems which retain and safeguard a seven-day week with Sunday, without the introduction of any days outside the week, so that the succession of weeks may be left intact, unless there is question of the most serious reasons. Concerning these the Apostolic See shall judge."

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), September 01, 2004.

I thought yesterday "sombody was pulling somebody's leg" Steve?

-- - (David@excite.com), September 01, 2004.

We only have 2 more years of Annan. Steve is right in one respect, that the UN leaders are only appointed by the majority of the nations. He is wrong about the security council though. Yes France, the US, Russia, the UK, Gremany and China have major role to play. But there are also 7 or 8 rotating members of the council.

The UN has done a decent job in preventing war. However there are still many wars and much killing. So those who hold the UN up as a beakon of hope are unfortunatly mistaken.

The thing that I don't like about the UN is that they don't seem to have any respect for culture. The UN should promote cultural understanding, not one culture. They don't seem to realize that many different cultures go on different calenders. Some the Gregorian, some the Mayan, some the Jewish, or Muslim and it goes on. And they have every right to do so.

There is also a problem with changing the calender. Why should we follow it? Just because someone at the UN said so? Remember that everyone said that we should speak one world language. See how that worked? Or remember when the US government tried to impose the metric system instead of the old imperial system? See that only a few things actually have metric on them.

Also, if the UN is so good at preventing wars and what not, then why did we get attacked by terrorists? Or why are there problems in Sudan, Yugoslavia, and Checynia? Remember that the UN told Clinton not to send troops to the Balkans, but he did anyway. Thank God that he did. If the UN could do it's job well then there would be peace in Israel. The problem is that the UN spends all of it's time on stuff like population control, instead of solving the problems that we have now, like AIDS and genecide.

If anyone is the beakon of hope for really solving the worlds problems, it is the US because we aren't going to sit around and wait for people to die. Annan probably doesn't care about AIDS because it will help reduce the population of the world. He seems so bent on that anyway.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), September 02, 2004.

My dear Scott, you forget (or never knew) that Mr Annan was chosen as secretary general precisely to satisfy the USA, who objected to the previous incumbent and insisted that his term be cut short, which it was. If the US made it clear today that they had lost confidence in Mr Annan, he would be booted out tomorrow.

“He is wrong about the security council though. Yes France, the US, Russia, the UK, Gremany and China have major role to play. But there are also 7 or 8 rotating members of the council.”

No I’m afraid you are wrong. Germany does NOT have a major role in UN authority, it is just another member country. There are TEN rotating members of the security council in addition to the 5 permanents. But even if the other 14 members of the security council, and the other 190 members of the UN, all vote to do something, if the USA alone opposes it, it cannot be done. This is the main reason why the UN is sometimes impotent in great crises. (They couldn’t intervene in the former Yugoslavia or in Chechnya because Russia vetoed it.) But this is the system which the US and the other 4 powers insisted on when they set up the UN, and they have steadfastly refused to change it.

“If the UN could do it's job well then there would be peace in Israel.” It is the USA which has several times vetoed proposals for the UN to intervene between Israel and Palestine.

I haven’t seen any evidence that the UN wants to impose one world culture and one world language. In fact, quite the opposite. The UN through UNESCO has been prominent in helping preserve the diversity of cultures and languages in the world. Yes the UN has promoted the adoption of universal standards of justice, human rights, and respect for the environment. I hope you don’t see anything wrong with that.

“remember when the US government tried to impose the metric system instead of the old imperial system?” Now your ignorant parochialism really shows through. EVERY country in the world with the single exception of the USA, uses the metric system exclusively. The old British “empire” abandoned the “imperial” system 40 years ago. The USA is the one being perverse about systems of measurement.

“If anyone is the beakon of hope for really solving the worlds problems, it is the US because we aren't going to sit around and wait for people to die.” LOL! Like in Sudan for example? Oh yes, they don’t have oil, their country isn’t geopolitically important and they’re only black, so it’s all right to sit around and watch them die. But we’re heroes for making war on Iraq because its dictator gassed some Kurds 12 years previously! Your blinkered chauvinism would be very funny except that so many Americans actually believe this garbage.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), September 02, 2004.

"the leaders of the UN are anti-Christian people. I think they really do want a society that is rid of Christianity. I think they want this because they only see the evils that Christianity has done." (Scott)

Kofi Annan is a practising Methodist, just like George Bush. In fact ALL of the secretaries-general of the UN have been Christian, with the exception of one Buddhist.

"Annan, who graduated from Macalester College in St. Paul, Minn., the Institut Universitaire de Hautes Edudes Internationales in Geneva, Switzerland, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, also attended a Methodist primary school in his native Ghana. He credited his religious teachers and scripture with instilling in him the principles that guide his life and work. Annan is a Christian, who attends a number of Protestant churches in New York, according to his staff."

FindArticles http://www.findarticles.com/cf_dls/m1141/7_35/53460476/p1/article.jhtm l

From a speech given by Kofi Annan at Tübingen University, Germany, 12 December 2003:

"...No religion or ethical system should ever be condemned because of the moral lapses of some of its adherents. If I, as a Christian, for instance, would not wish my faith to be judged by the actions of the Crusaders or the Inquisition, I should be very careful to judge anyone else's faith by the actions that a few terrorists may commit in its name."

Stiftung Weltethos http://www.weltethos.org/st_2_xx/s_3201.htm

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), September 03, 2004.

“remember when the US government tried to impose the metric system instead of the old imperial system?” Now your ignorant parochialism really shows through. EVERY country in the world with the single exception of the USA, uses the metric system exclusively. The old British “empire” abandoned the “imperial” system 40 years ago. The USA is the one being perverse about systems of measurement.

Actually there is a large movement in Britian to abandon the metric system and go back to the imperial system because it makes trade with the US easier.

Also just because someone is of a particular religion doesn't necessarily mean that that person doesn't want to end all religion. Fyodor Dostoevsky was a practicing Russian Orthodox, but in the Brothers Karamazov, he makes a very strong arguement for atheism.

-- Scott (papasquat10@hotmail.com), September 03, 2004.

“there is a large movement in Britian to abandon the metric system” –this supposed “movement” would be about as “large” as the Flat Earth Society, with about as much chance of having its wacko agenda accepted by the British govt. Not one person of any influence in Britain or any other country wants to abandon the metric system. I can’t believe you are seriously suggesting that the whole world must change to accommodate the US’s solo perverse attachment to its own confusing and difficult system. Even when Britain had its “imperial” units, they did NOT facilitate trade with the US; they made it even more confusing, because the British units were a different size to the US units, even though they used the same names.

“just because someone is of a particular religion doesn't necessarily mean that that person doesn't want to end all religion.” – a novel and desperate argument indeed! Surely the first step to abolishing religion is to abandon your own religion, unless you're being fiorced to practice it. So now Annan is desperately trying to stamp out Christianity but he is being FORCED against his will to go to Methodist services! Reductio ad absurdam.

The Brothers Karamazov is a work of art; a play, not a polemic. Just like the play Saint Joan, which makes a very strong argument for Catholicism although it was written by the atheist George Bernard Shaw. Or the play A Man for All Seasons, which makes a very strong argument for Catholicism though it was written by a purely nominal protestant Robert Bolt.

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), September 03, 2004.

The Calender Reform folks are just a group of cosmic girlie-men. Dr. Arguelles should revisit the LSD experience and then try to prove that the world really is flat.

-- (wdwelsh@socal.rr.com), September 15, 2004.

try to prove that the world really is flat

actually, one of the definitions of a straight line is a segment of the circumference of a circle as the diameter approaches infinite...

by that definition, the world just may be large enough to be considered flat.

-- paul h (dontSendMeMail@notAnAddress.com), September 16, 2004.

Paul, I think you meant to say "one of the definitions of a flat plane is a segment of the surface of a sphere as the diameter approaches infinite".

-- Steve (55555@aol.com), September 16, 2004.

In any case it is an unworkable, impractical, and totally theoretical definition since a sphere with a diameter approaching infinity cannot exist in real time and space. In fact, the very term "approaching infinity" is essentially meaningless.

-- Paul M. (PaulCyp@cox.net), September 16, 2004.

How many children has John (baby killer) Kerry actually killed, David@excite?

NONE, DAVID. As for abortion, it was the supreme Court in 1973 which created abortion on demand. And no, the Court was not composed o Democrats!!!

The Republicans use this issue year after year to get votes but they do nothing. They had a majority in the court for more than 20 years.

They had a majority in the House and in the Senate. What have they done?Nothing!!!!!

It is like the Cuban issue. Kennedy tried to get rid of Castro in 1961. What have republicans done? they have held the house from 1969- 76, 1981-1992, and 2001-until now. That's 24 years. And they have done nothing for the Cubans!!!! President Clinto tried to reconcile families from Florida and Cuba. Instead, President Bush doesn't want want to unite families anymore.

President Bush sent 50 people to death row in Texas. He is responsible for all iraqi deaths after May 2003, when the war was over.

Iraqis were not terorists except for Saddam, his family and associates who were brutal savages. Yet, they were secular.

By trying to make money from oil, President Bush has created terrorists in that country.

I supported President Bush to fight Al-qaeda abd the Taliban in Afganistan, not to create a puppet government.

I supported the overthrow of Saddam Hussein, but not to have a puppet government.

The Afganis and Iraqis are mature enough to deal with their own problems. Let them deal with their own problems themselves.

The Christian Yahwist

PS: I am a Democrat, David.

-- Elpidio Gonzalez (egonval@yahoo.com), September 20, 2004.