SUBMIT OR PERISH: Obama Demands Limits on American Freedoms at the UN [VIDEO]

20 Sep, 2016 by Greg Campbell

Print this article Font size -16+

According to Barack Obama, what is necessary for countries to defeat terrorism is not a steadfast resolve to decimate these savages with sophisticated military operations. It is not a steadfast resolve to bring the fight to radical Islam.

Nope, according to Barack Obama, the answer for countering terrorism rests in submitting to a one-world style of government and a willingness to “limit freedom.”

Speaking before the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, Obama told world leaders that our only hope is to rely upon collaborative bodies of government like the UN and relinquishing our freedoms – our “freedom of action” as he put it.

Obama also stated that “powerful nations” like the U.S. will have to limit their freedom in order to submissively submit to the will of the international body – a belief for which Obama acknowledges he has been criticized.

“We have to put our money where our mouths are. And we can only realize the promise of this institution’s founding to replace the ravages of war with cooperation if powerful nations like my own accept constraints. Sometimes I’m criticized in my own country for professing a belief in international norms and multilateral institutions, but I’m convinced in the long run giving up some freedom of action, not giving up our ability to protect ourselves or pursue our core interests but binding ourselves to international rules, over the long-term, enhances our security.”

The UN was a noble experiment, but one that has long been proven to be a failed one. The practical purpose of the UN is nothing more than serving as an agency for redistribution of wealth and power amongst nations. In this body, the U.S. and other powerful nations do the heavy lifting and are only rewarded with limitations, cynicism and collectivist-inspired resentment from other nations.

Since America elected a president who prioritizes the needs of other nations over the needs of the one he has sworn to serve, we have fared poorly on the global stage and it is hardly surprising to see that our outgoing coward has remained true to his vision of one-world governance and limitations of freedom throughout the world.

Remember when America had presidents that believed in America so much that they stressed that the rest of the world should try to strive for our kind of ideals instead of the other way around?