Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Utah Get US out! Campaign
The New American ^ | April 21, 2003 | Warren Mass

Posted on 04/16/2003 12:31:50 PM PDT by Nephi

Citizen activists and legislators work together to send a message to Congress: "Get US out! of the United Nations."

How do you educate 104 state legislators? Patiently, persistently, and enthusiastically — if the experience of Get US out! of the United Nations activists in Utah is any indication. Using this approach, the educational efforts of Utah’s citizen activists to inform their fellow citizens and elected officials concerning the dangers posed by the UN to America are bearing fruit.

(Excerpt) Read more at getusout.org ...


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: communism; constitution; getusout; nations; out; sovereignty; united; us; warrenmass
My understanding is that Utahns led the fight to their political leaders. Here in Colorado, Tancredo and Hefley are already on board.

You can go to the site and download petitions and get bumperstickers, etc. and get the heads rolling in your state.

Get US out! of the UN

1 posted on 04/16/2003 12:31:50 PM PDT by Nephi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Nephi
INCOMING!!!!!!
2 posted on 04/16/2003 2:01:58 PM PDT by tracer (/b>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nephi
Unfortunately, the "Get US out! of the U.N." slogan is too reminiscent of the JBS kooks.

When I lived in Broken Arrow, OK a few years ago, there was a farmer who had a sign with this wording up on his property. It was sort of a local landmark. He was considered a very strange bird.

Ironically, I doubt there are many FReepers who would disagree that the U.N. ought to be sent packing--maybe to Havana--without any more of our participation, but perception is everything.
3 posted on 04/16/2003 2:18:59 PM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nephi
Here is the full article:

How do you educate 104 state legislators? Patiently, persistently, and enthusiastically — if the experience of Get US out! of the United Nations activists in Utah is any indication. Using this approach, the educational efforts of Utah’s citizen activists to inform their fellow citizens and elected officials concerning the dangers posed by the UN to America are bearing fruit.

In February, state Representative Don E. Bush sponsored a resolution (H.R. 7) in the Utah House urging Congress to withdraw the United States from the United Nations. Building on past efforts and their statewide network, Utah’s Get US out! Committees swung into action to win passage of H.R. 7. When the UN recently took to bashing the U.S. and some of its allies, it provoked anti-UN sentiment nationwide, increasing the likelihood that the Utah resolution would pass. The resolution sailed easily through committees and was headed for victory when it was stopped by what would seem to many an unlikely source of opposition: Republican leadership, most notably Utah’s U.S. Senator Orrin Hatch and Utah Governor Michael Leavitt.

Fearing the resolution would pass if brought to the floor for a vote, the House leadership sent H.R. 7 to "legislative Siberia," the Rules Committee. In March, during the closing days of the legislative session, Rep. Bush and other backers of the measure succeeded in breaking it loose from the Rules bottleneck, but were unable to get a full House vote before the legislative clock ran out. Nevertheless, Utah’s hardy patriots are undaunted; in fact, they are already planning, organizing, and working toward victory in the next legislative session. "Instead of letting up we will be intensifying our educational campaign," says Ogden Get US out! Committee Chairwoman Ann Turner.

"We will be scheduling more UN video showings and speakers, doing more petition signing, more letter writing, more literature distribution, and putting up more billboards," Mrs. Turner told The New American. "Utah’s citizens are becoming better informed about the UN, and the politicians who support the UN are going to be feeling a lot of heat from them. I think we are going to see H.R. 7 passed here."

The Utah Get US out! effort shows how positive things can happen when opportunity meets preparation, organization, and dedication. It also serves as a model for other states to follow in building support for state and local resolutions similar to Utah’s H.R. 7, all of which will greatly increase the likelihood that Congress will finally move toward terminating U.S. membership in the UN.

The Sowing

Back in 1995, about the same time that the Global Conference on the International Year of the Family took place in Salt Lake City, Get US out! billboards started springing up around Utah. Local activists posted them hoping to counter media support for the UN, such as a column written by Lois Collins, "human services" editor of Utah’s Deseret News. Therein, she stated that the conference "could be likened to a global hug — dozens of countries banding together to wrap their arms around the issues that trouble them."*

If there were any hugging to be done, most Utahns preferred that it be done within the confines of their own families, and not "globally"! The publicity given to the internationalist-minded event undoubtedly provided anti-UN activists with excellent rhetorical ammunition that helped them build a case against the anti-family UN.

In late 2001 and early 2002, three separate Get US out! Committees were formed in Utah. The committees, a project of the John Birch Society that also welcomes the participation of non-JBS members, took opposition to the UN to a new level. Each committee had to reach certain organizational requirements prior to being established, including a minimum number of members and volunteer leaders willing to serve as chairmen of various functional subcommittees. In other words, each committee’s members demonstrated organization, dedication, and the willingness to accomplish the goals set before it.

Early in 2002, members of the Utah County Get US out! Committee leased a large, commercial billboard alongside I-15 in Orem for a message that read: "The United Nations Wants to Take YOUR Gun!" Members of the Get US out! Committees and the John Birch Society raised over $10,000 from donors across Utah for the project. The donations funded not only the billboard but also statewide network television commercials, county-wide radio spots, and pamphlet distribution. One of the group’s high-profile projects was an April speech event, built around the topic: "The United Nations’ No-Win War on Terrorism." From January through April of 2002, the committee also organized weekly video presentations to build an audience for that speech.

The I-15 billboard caught the eye of Eric D. Snider, whose "Snide Remarks" column appears in the Provo, Utah, Daily Herald. Responding to the billboard’s message, Mr. Snider wrote a column headlined: "If I had a gun, the U.N. would be welcome to it." Committee members were undaunted, however, because they realized that, critical though the column was, it provided free publicity for their campaign. Besides the write-up in the press, the committee’s Get US out! commercials aired on Salt Lake City’s TV channel 13 (Fox) during the Olympics, when many thousands of people from around the world were visiting the city.

A committee organizer in Utah noted at the time: "With Secretary-General Kofi Annan coming to Utah for the Olympics and Governor Mike Leavitt hosting him at a reception, we are glad to have the commercials and the billboard here to greet the UN monster."

The Reaping

With such heavy publicity and organizational activity occurring throughout 2002, it is not surprising that 2003 would see more concrete results.

On February 1st, a Salt Lake Tribune headline announced the story: "Lawmaker: Get Nation Out of U.N." The story reported, with less than wholehearted enthusiasm, that Utah state Representative Don E. Bush had introduced House Resolution 7, urging Congress to withdraw the United States from the United Nations. John Hughes, editor of Utah’s Deseret News, was highly critical of H.R. 7 and complained in an editorial that the measure "would undo much of the good the Olympics did for Utah’s image one year ago." Mr. Hughes is anything but an impartial observer; he is a former UN undersecretary-general and a member of the internationalist-minded Council on Foreign Relations (CFR).

Activists diligently working in Utah’s Get US out! Committees realized, however, that articles of this sort would only make people aware that opposition to the UN was gaining strength, and also make them curious about the Get US out! campaign. And so, they sprang into action to support H.R. 7.

One committee member wrote a citizen’s alert, which, in keeping with the religious nature of many members, included recommendations for fasting and prayer. Next, they appointed three resolution project chairmen for each of the Get US out! Committees in Utah, with each chairman having responsibilities for a specific geographic area. They got an updated address and phone number list of state legislators and divided the task of contacting each legislator by committee. Ann Turner was in charge of the printing project. They had 104 copies of H.R. 7 printed up (one for each legislator), together with 104 copies of a 21-page documentation packet. They got packets and resolutions in the hands of all the legislators. They gave many of them copies of the United Nations special issue of The New American, as well as other issues of and reprints from the magazine. All of this work built upon other activities stretching as far back as last fall, when committee members had invited legislators to UN-themed speaker events they had sponsored. Committee members also showed some legislators videos, including the popular John Birch Society-produced documentary The U.N. Deception.

When it came time for H.R. 7 to be considered, some members of the Get US out! Committees testified before the Utah House’s Government Operations Committee, and received substantial media coverage outside the statehouse. Camera crews from three Salt Lake City TV stations converged on the scene and interviewed several Get US out! Committee members.

Several times throughout the legislative session, opponents of H.R. 7 attempted to bury the measure by sending it back to committee, but thanks to the persistence of the resolution’s supporters, it proved unusually resilient. At one point, H.R. 7 backers forced a recorded vote and defeated a motion to bury the resolution in committee, by a 34-33 margin. As late as the final evening of the legislative session, March 5th, supporters hoped for a vote, but the calendar was crowded with other measures competing for legislators’ attention and the legislature adjourned for this year without H.R. 7 having a chance to be voted on by the full House.

Senator Orrin Hatch appears to have played a decisive role in torpedoing the resolution. Senator Michael Waddoups, the majority leader of the Utah Senate, told Get US out! Committee member Deanna Arnason that he had conferred with Hatch on the matter and Hatch had dismissed the resolution as a "joke." Following Hatch’s lead, Waddoups turned thumbs down on the resolution. Another activist, who works closely with the legislature and asked not to be named, told The New American: "Majority Leader Waddoups has been good on many issues, but his running to Senator Hatch on the UN resolution is a bad sign; it shows the harmful influence that Hatch has on the legislature and state politics in general. The real joke is Hatch’s unwarranted image as a conservative. He supports many unconstitutional, Big Government programs and has been praised by UN officials for his support of UN programs. But the Get US out! campaign is gaining steam and next time around it will take more than Hatch and Leavitt to stop it." Senator Hatch reportedly also spoke to members of the House to dissuade them from supporting the measure. Governor Leavitt, a strong UN supporter was quoted in the Deseret News, one of the Beehive State’s leading newspapers, as opposing the resolution.

Planning Next Year’s Crop

Rep. Don Bush says he intends to reintroduce the resolution in the next legislative session. Rep. Glenn A. Donnelson, who co-sponsored the measure, believes that support is building for this effort. "This is a very important matter not only for our state legislature but for every state legislature," he told The New American. "The time for getting out of this organization [the UN] is long overdue." Rep. Donnelson also recognizes the importance of citizen involvement in this effort. "The legislators can’t do this without the help of informed, dedicated citizens," he said. The legislators need both "the information and the prodding" from their constituents to get them to move on this issue.

Utah Get US out! Committee members plan to be there offering that help. They are encouraged by the number of legislators who demonstrated support for the measure and also by the publicity generated for their campaign. Ann Turner promised: "[N]ext year we intend to come back.... We’re going to continue with this campaign all year; then we’ll come back and we’ll start it in the Senate."

4 posted on 04/16/2003 2:35:30 PM PDT by 2nd_Amendment_Defender ("It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains." -- Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nephi
I live in Utah and hate the tyrannical attitude of the United Nations. Any organization that wants your firearms is not looking after your best interests.
5 posted on 04/16/2003 2:42:17 PM PDT by 2nd_Amendment_Defender ("It is when people forget God that tyrants forge their chains." -- Patrick Henry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nephi
Besides the President and our troops.. this is something we could get behind too!!

The money would be better spent sending it directly to countries that we would like to see embrace democracy!!

We kind of left things hanging after the fall of the Soviet Union, it would have been nice to have seen more commerce go that direction.

It would have been nice to have spent the money in the Balkans, restoring their countries.

The UN is in control in Bosnia..and have made a mess of things. Imagine what our dues to the UN could have accomplished in a ton of places.

Kind of like the idea. Lets hope it spreads. If for no other reason than to put a SPINE on the back of the UN.
6 posted on 04/16/2003 2:53:11 PM PDT by Vets_Husband_and_Wife ("CNN - WE report WHEN WE decide.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nephi
What site? Please post where we can sign petitions - thanks.
7 posted on 04/16/2003 4:15:34 PM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Illbay

8 posted on 04/16/2003 4:58:25 PM PDT by unixfox (Close the borders, problem solved !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: unixfox
Jeez, what's anyone got against Iceland and Australia?
9 posted on 04/16/2003 5:04:45 PM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: yoe
If you click on the "Excerpted" link, it will take you to the Get US out! page. Click on the "Help Get US out! link on the left.

That's why I didn't post the whole article, so that people would go to the site and see all the goodies.

10 posted on 04/16/2003 5:27:49 PM PDT by Nephi (Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Unfortunately, the "Get US out! of the U.N." slogan is too reminiscent of the JBS kooks.

Yeah, people who support the constitution are somewhat peculiar.

11 posted on 04/16/2003 5:28:58 PM PDT by Nephi (Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nephi
Well, "people who support their own peculiar reading of the Constitution," at least.

Whenever I hear the term "fiat money," I roll my eyes and look for the nearest exit.
12 posted on 04/16/2003 6:38:16 PM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Plane loads of money sent to Iraq as an interim currency. Karma or conspiracy, or?

Respectfully, jr

13 posted on 04/16/2003 8:28:49 PM PDT by justrepublican (The purpous of peace and justice activism is to show that the power structure can never listen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe; Nephi; Alex Murphy
Sounds like certain idiots don't recall a gent named Ezra Taft Benson. :) My condolences Nephi and nice post. Hope we get rid of the UN in an expeditious manner.


Nice weather tonight!
14 posted on 04/16/2003 10:17:20 PM PDT by CARepubGal (I am an FR Meteorologist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
...and that "participation" word has $ signs on both ends.
15 posted on 04/17/2003 5:31:04 AM PDT by wita (truthspeaks@freerepublic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 2nd_Amendment_Defender
That's putting it mildly, but I'm with ya, bro. From what I've seen of Utah, ya'll have your heads screwed on pretty tightly, except for the Commielib Kalifornicrats that have spread their virus through the entire Intermountain West. Something's gotta be done about that, 'cause Utah is too beautiful a state to have such litter polluting it.

Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!

16 posted on 04/17/2003 5:50:50 AM PDT by wku man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CARepubGal
Yeah, it kind of dulls the excitement of being a freeper when you discover people of your own camp are so ignorant.
17 posted on 04/17/2003 9:13:48 AM PDT by Nephi (Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. Moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Ironically, I doubt there are many FReepers who would disagree that the U.N. ought to be sent packing--maybe to Havana--without any more of our participation, but perception is everything.

Perhaps my memory is going but i recall reading reports after the African summit (last year ?) that the US and Israel were the true terrorist nations. Anyone else remember this ? I've done a search but can't seem to locate it. If true i'm sure its in FR archives.. Help, please . thanx in advance

vsm

18 posted on 04/18/2003 5:30:18 AM PDT by vinylsidingman (euroweenies can't handle getting rid of scum,, so again ,the US will show em how)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Illbay
Why do you consider JBS members to be "kooks". I think they were way ahead of the game and should be commended for their visions and for speaking out when others were in favor of being in the U.N.
19 posted on 04/18/2003 9:10:52 AM PDT by panaxanax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 2nd_Amendment_Defender
Off subject, but do you think it is Utahans that are keeping "the yodeler" on American Idol week after week? Just curious.
20 posted on 04/18/2003 11:31:19 AM PDT by fightinJAG (A liberal mind already is terribly wasted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Nephi
Here in New York, we have Chuckles Schumer and sHrillery! crowned Sinators.
We also have Maurice Hinchey, Sheldon Silver, and a whole band of cut-throat and gelatinous spined rogue's gallery of elected officials.
None of whom actually pay attention to what the 'little people' say.
21 posted on 04/18/2003 2:21:55 PM PDT by Darksheare (Nox aeternus en pax.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2nd_Amendment_Defender
place marker
22 posted on 04/18/2003 7:16:18 PM PDT by TREGEN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nephi
I would like to help, but I don't wish to PAY for bumper stickers, etc.!
23 posted on 04/18/2003 7:26:00 PM PDT by timestax (Posted by muggs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nephi; All
Passing it on.....


24 posted on 04/19/2003 9:35:49 AM PDT by davidosborne (www.davidosborne.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JennieOsborne; /\XABN584; 10mm; 3D-JOY; 75thOVI; 5Madman; <1/1,000,000th%; 11B3; 1Peter2:16; ...
http://www.getusout.org

Passing it on..

25 posted on 04/19/2003 9:44:00 AM PDT by davidosborne (www.davidosborne.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: All
TV COMMERCIAL (real audio format)

Petition Link - End United Nations tyranny inside the U.S.

26 posted on 04/19/2003 9:53:17 AM PDT by davidosborne (www.davidosborne.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: panaxanax
Why do you consider JBS members to be "kooks". I think they were way ahead of the game and should be commended for their visions and for speaking out when others were in favor of being in the U.N.

Agreed...

27 posted on 04/19/2003 9:54:13 AM PDT by davidosborne (www.davidosborne.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne
BTTT!!!!!
28 posted on 04/19/2003 9:59:31 AM PDT by E.G.C.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: All
I believe I signed this same petition a long time ago.. but I just signed it again... #5016

Click here to sign...

To: The Congress of the United States of America

From: Concerned American Citizens

We, the below-signed citizens of the United States believe that NOW, at the beginning of a new millennium, is the time for the United States to remove herself from membership in the United Nations and to physically remove the United Nations Organization, it buildings and its membership, from the United States of America.

We feel it is in violation of the Constitution of the United States to be signatories to a World Constitution or Charter such as that of the United Nations.

We feel that many, if not all, of the activities of the United Nations are in direct conflict with the American Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. To cite a few examples:

GUN CONTROLS

The United States Constitution says plainly:

AMENDMENT II (1791) A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Yet, in no small part due to UN influence, the citizens of America find their RIGHT to keep and bear arms infringed, regulated, and acted upon under the color of law.

The following excerpts from an article: The United Nations: Pressing for U.S. Gun Control By the Executive Director, Gun Owners of America shows UN involvement in the internal affairs of the United States, which is clearly not legal ACCORDING TO THE UN’S OWN CHARTER AND BYLAWS.

Why should gun owners concern themselves with the United Nations? After all, what jurisdiction do U.N. bureaucrats have for sticking their nose into the U.S. gun control debate since the United States Constitution gives no authority of any kind to the U.N?

Clearly, gun control (or more plainly called civilian disarmament, which is what concerned the founders) is prohibited by the Second Amendment. In reality, the Second Amendment was specifically intended to protect an individual's right to own the type of firearms in "common use." Consider the statement by the Supreme Court in U.S. v. Miller (1939): "The Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense... [and that] when called for service, these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."

...The Constitution gives Congress no authority to enact gun control legislation.

Second, and perhaps even more surprising...the Constitution allows the Congress to require gun ownership.

Consider a law which Congress passed in 1792 -- a law which is clearly authorized by the "arming and disciplining the militia" clause in the Constitution:

In the Militia Act of 1792, the second Congress defined "militia of the United States" to include almost every free adult male in the United States. These persons were obligated by law to possess a [military-style] firearm and a minimum supply of ammunition and military equipment....

The above quote comes from a statement issued in 1982 by the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on the Constitution. The subcommittee correctly observed that Congress can require gun ownership.

The documents from the U.N.'s own web page (http://www.un.org) make it clear that they are very serious about disarming American civilians.

On December 22, 1995, the UN announced the launch of a study of small arms. According to the U.N., small arms "are increasingly associated with crime, accidents and suicides, and form a major source of illicit profits for transnational criminal networks.... While trade in major weapons is on the decline, small arms are spreading."

This worldwide survey of firearms ownership is being financed by the Japanese government. The Canadian government is supplying a number of gun control bureaucrats to assist in the U.N. project. Also participating is Stewart Allen, Chief of the Intelligence Division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms along with the Russian in charge of the Firearms Control Division of the Russian Ministry of the Interior.

The survey is being done, according to a December 22, 1995 press release from the U.N., in cooperation with U.S. police, customs and military services. The Clinton Administration evidently is hoping to use the U.N. study to lend support to its own desire to disarm American citizens.

Former U.N. Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali spoke of a world "awash" with small arms. The Japanese got the U.N. to approve a resolution authorizing the U.N. Crime Commission to consider various measures to regulate guns. Several of the member governments spoke of the "alarming rise in the proliferation of small arms and underscored that their mounting use by drug traffickers and criminal gangs posed a grave threat to public safety and the rule of law." The same sinister depiction of guns as only used by drug dealers is the same rhetoric employed in the U.S. by Handgun Control and their champions in the Congress and other government bodies.

An earlier draft of the resolution would have encouraged the U.N. Secretary-General "to continue efforts to curb the illicit circulation of small arms and to collect such arms in the affected States, with the support of the United Nations Regional Centre for Peace and Disarmament in Africa." While that resolution was dealing with Africa, Americans should not be relieved that the U.S. was not included -- in that resolution. The fact of the matter is, the U.N. is increasingly assuming the jurisdictional authority of a federal world government with the U.S. as just one of scores of member states. And gun control -- meaning civilian disarmament -- is high up on the agenda of the U.N.

With the end of the Cold War, the U.N. has shifted its focus to gun control and fighting drugs as a way of continuing to justify its existence. We see the same pattern of big government refocusing in the United States using the same themes of a war on drugs and gun control.

Gun control illustrates one of the dangers of the U.S. membership in the U.N.

LESS SOVEREIGNTY CAN LEAD TO MORE GUN CONTROL

The web of international organizations being spun around the United States has already begun to reveal a transfer of sovereignty from our national government to unelected, supra-national organizations. When the GATT (General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade) Treaty was being adopted, proponents declared that treaty language would prohibit any part of the treaty from having effect if it would be inconsistent with any law of the United States. But other advocates, such as House Speaker Newt Gingrich, were more candid. He likened GATT to the Maastricht treaty governing much of Europe, by which individual states have surrendered an unprecedented degree of sovereignty. Gingrich said that we need "to be honest about the fact that we are transferring from the United States at a practical level significant authority to a new organization. This is a transformational moment." (Human Events, 11/25/94, p.4)

Another candid advocate of the GATT's transfer of sovereignty to the World Trade Organization (WTO) was William Holder, the Deputy General Counsel of the International Monetary Fund who told an American University audience on November 19, 1994: "The WTO is de jure [legally] world government." That kind of fallacious and dangerous thinking has held sway in the United States, (and causes us to believe) that assumptions of international government power even worse than we have inflicted on ourselves domestically will be imposed on the United States by the U.N. and other "entangling alliances" that George Washington warned us against.

We have seen from the discussions at the United Nations that gun control is one of the top agenda items of the U.N. and many foreign nations. The U.S. gun laws are much freer than those of most of the rest of the world. Through the web of entangling treaties attaching the U.S. to various international organizations, the rope is being slipped about the neck of the Second Amendment.

One of these days, we may wake up to headlines that the U.N. or the WTO have demanded that the U.S. "harmonize" its gun laws (translation: disarm our civilians the way Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and many others have).

UNAUTHORIZED FEDERAL LAND GRABS

The Constitution says plainly in ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8, paragraph 17: The Congress shall have Power to : (17) To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may be, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the erection of forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful buildings:

Yet, under color of law and using illegal Presidential Directives and Executive Orders, land belonging to the sovereign people of the United States has been repeatedly seized and turned over to the United Nations.

In 1998, as if Congressional greed and stupidity weren't enough, America took place in a master environmental plan known as United Nations Agenda 21. About 450 delegates of governments, world environmental groups, universities and banks met in Rio de Janeiro to "map the future of mankind" through Agenda 21 which is also known as "Rio+5." The conference was a follow-up to the 1992 United Nations Earth Summit and spawned several treaties, each designed to destroy our national sovereignty under the guise of environmentalism.

One such treaty is the so-called Bio-diversity Treaty which calls for global eco-regions controlled by Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), which is nothing more than a code word for organizations under United Nations control.

Since 1978, without Congressional approval, 47 U.N. "Biosphere Reserves" have been established on 43,560,254 acres (68,863 sq. miles) of United States soil. Two designations of 'international status' by the United Nations currently take place with no need of congressional approval: UNESCO Biosphere Reserves and World Heritage Sites.

United Nations bureaucrats have the final say over acquisition of Biosphere reserves and World Heritage Sites, and no public hearings in the United States are required. Third world and communist dictatorships decide what goes on in Americans' backyards, and our elected officials have nothing to say about it. The United States part of the Biosphere reserve program is run by a committee of ten federal agencies, with no congressional direction or authorization. Biosphere reserves in 1998 contained a total land area larger than the State of Colorado.

The United States now has 20 World Heritage Sites, 18 of which are national parks and include the Statue of Liberty and Independence Hall. Over 68 percent of our national parks, preserves and monuments are currently designated at a United Nations World Heritage Site, Biosphere Reserve or both.

We are in this mess because Congress and the President have ignored two provisions of the Constitution. The first, Section Eight, Clause Seventeen of the Constitution limits federal ownership of land. The second, Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2, specifically designates Congress as the overseer of United States property and forbids federal, or any other takeover, of state land.

Yet President Clinton, who took an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, was so in favor of bio-diversity and the United Nations and destroying United States sovereignty, he even called a United Nations environmental panel to support his decision to ban a gold mine near Yellowstone National Park. His decision to steal 1.7 million acres of Utah land and place it into Grand Staircase–Escalante National Monument, was based in-part on his support of United Nations goals for land-use.

Our delegates to the Rio+5 conference signed the treaty, but to date, Congress has refused to ratify the agreement. If Congress ratifies the bio-diversity treaty, it will take precedence over the Constitution. So Clinton, using the weight and power of the Presidency, has been pressuring states to comply with the provisions of the un-signed treaty or lose federal funds.

Congress and the federal government have, under the pretense of law, seized or stolen millions of square miles of valuable land and even worse, much of it has been placed under the control of foreigners. While America was engrossed in arguments about various issues, such as the sex life of the president, he and the United Nations were busy stealing America. But that doesn't make it constitutional. Just calling an act legal doesn't make it legal.

The Constitution has never been amended to allow federal ownership of any lands other than originally authorized by the founding fathers. Nor does the Constitution allow foreign powers to assume control over American soil. We have surrendered, thanks to Clinton, sovereign rights to nearly 75 million acres of the some of the most beautiful parts of our nation – the giveaway was kept secret and we never fired a shot in our own defense. The 20 World Heritage Sites are: Wrangell-St. Elias National Park/Glacier Bay, Alaska; Olympic National Park, Washington; Redwood National Park, California; Yosemite National Park, California; Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming and Montana; Grand Canyon National Park, Arizona; Chaco National Historic Park, New Mexico; Cahokia Mounds Site, Illinois; Mammoth Cave National Park, New Mexico; Statue of Liberty, New York; Mesa Verde National Park, Colorado; Independence Hall, Pennsylvania; Monticello and the University of Virginia, Virginia; Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Tennessee; Everglades National Park, Florida; Pueblo de Taos, New Mexico; Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, Hawaii; Carlsbad Caverns National Park, New Mexico; Glacier National Park, Montana; and La Fortaleza and San Juan, Puerto Rico.

THE UN PROMOTES IMMORALITY AND THE HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA

America was founded by Christian men with Christian principals. Following are excerpts from the Declaration of Independence:

When in the course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature's God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.

We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness – That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it

The United Nations, on the other hand, is a moral cesspool filled with perverts and fat cats. In 1993, the UN Economic and Social Council granted consultant status to the International Gay and Lesbian Association which includes the North American Man/Boy Love Association (advocates of child molestation) and the Dutch group Vereniging Martijn (which also promotes use of children as sex objects). In 1988, the top Belgian UN Children's Fund (UNICEF) official was one of a group convicted of running a child sex ring. Moral bankruptcy is commonplace in UN operations. In Zimbabwe, UNICEF-donated equipment helped terrorists seize power. In Vietnam, the Communists received $13 million from UNICEF while untold thousands of boat people fled for their lives. Fat cats? UN employees are paid 40% more than comparable U.S. workers and have subsidized rent. An ex-UNICEF official confirmed that "pampered and cosseted staffs" of various aid agencies "absorb 80% of all UN expenditures."

THE UN IS DESTRUCTIVE OF AND IS TRYING TO DESTROY THE U.S. MILITARY

The U.S. Constitution says, in ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8, beginning with paragraph 11: Congress shall have the power to: (11) To declare War, grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal, and make Rules concerning Captures on Land and Water; (12) To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that use shall be for a longer Term than two Years; (13) To provide and maintain a Navy; (14) To make Rules for the Government and Regulation of the land and naval Forces; (15) To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions; (16) To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress...

Yet the United Nations through various “peacekeeping” missions and disarmament hoaxes, has conspired, often with the willing help of traitors inside our own government, to weaken the United States Military through the introduction of homosexuals into the armed services, the “dumbing” down of recruits, demands they agree to serve under the United Nations flag and accept orders from United Nations commanders, in effect, placing the United States military might under the control of foreigners.

Whereas these above stated facts are in general print and available to all, and are therefore, generally accepted as fact, we the below-signed citizens of America feel it is un-American to maintain U.S. membership in the United Nations and plead, petition and beg Congress to remove the United States from its membership in that organization, and to remove all vestiges of the United Nations from the shores of the United States of America. We hereby also demand that all land belonging to the citizens of the United States that has been seized improperly, illegally, and often secretly, be returned to its rightful owners, the individual states of the United States and the people, in accordance with the United States Constitution.

We further demand that all servicemen be required to swear an oath of allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and that oath include a provision that they will only serve American officers, in American units, and under the American Flag and that they will never follow an order to fire upon American citizens, regardless of the source of that order.

We remind you: "It is not the function of our Government to keep the citizen from falling into error; it is the function of the citizen to keep the Government from falling into error." U.S. Supreme Court in American Communications Association v. Douds, 339 U.S. 382, 442.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned

29 posted on 04/19/2003 10:03:53 AM PDT by davidosborne (www.davidosborne.net)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne
thanks for the heads-up on this.
I have already communicated my displeasure with continued US involvement in the UN to both my State and Federal elected representatives.
30 posted on 04/19/2003 11:51:35 AM PDT by demosthenes the elder (If *I* can afford $5/month to support FR: SO CAN YOU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: davidosborne
"Every child is our child."
-- Motto of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF).

"To achieve One World Government it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, their loyalty to family traditions and national identification."
Brock Chisolm, when director of UN World Health Organisation

1948 -- UNESCO president and Fabian Socialist, Sir Julian Huxley, calls for a radical eugenic policy in UNESCO: Its Purpose and Its Philosophy. He states: "Thus, even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy of controlled human breeding will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake that much that is now unthinkable may at least become thinkable."

• "In order to stabilize world population, it is necessary to eliminate 350,000 people a day. It is a horrible thing to say, but it's just as bad not to say it." - Oceanographer Jaques Cousteau Published in the Courier, a publication of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

UN Wants to Replace the 10 Commandments!
UNICEF and the WAR on the Family
UNICEF-Guilty As Charged.pdf 15 pages
Your UNICEF dollars at workThe New World Religion
What's UNESCO Good For?
UNICEF--United Nations International Children's Fund, The War on America's Family!!
UNICEF and Halloween--Vatican Halts Payment

PLANNED PARENTHOOD SAYS POPE GUILTY OF "WAR" AGAINST WOMEN
The New World Religion! Satanism, New Ageism and Luciferism
Ushering One-World Religion, CBN News
Child Sex Book Given out at UN Summit
Bush Says YES to UNESCO
UN WANTS POPULATION CONTROL IN ETHIOPIA and ATTEMPTS TO SKIRT PROCEDURES TO RATIFY FEMINIST DOCUMENT (CEDAW)
The UN Wants Population Control in Ethiopia, CEDAW Passed, Appointed 3 Pro-Abortion Judges to the International Court
UN Treaty on Women - ACTION ALERT
CHRISTIANITY UNDER SIEGE, TOWARD A ONE WORLD RELIGION
The UN is EVIL!
What the UN Doesn't Want You to Know
Population Research Institute, Get the TRUTH Here About Population Control!!
The UN's Earth Charter

The Earth Charter Index

UNESCO: A Budding Global School Board
Get the US out of UNESCO

The New World Religion!

The New Ark of the Covenant in the UN

The Earth Charter Index
A CHRISTmas to Remember
Defender of the Decalogue Interview of Chief Justice Roy Moore by Thomas R. Eddlem
Feeding the God of War
Teaching God's children to worship "Divine Nature"
Homosexuality and the Church of England
Rebutting Rockefeller and the New World Religion
The Apostle of Perversion
Divine Design
Unmentionable Vice "GAY" Goes Mainstream
Focus on Population Control Red Star over the Christ Child
Quotes on Christmas
Quotes on God and Country
Quotes on Religion
Quotes Worth Repeating
The EU's Stealth Attack on Religion
The New World Religion
Focus on Homosexuality
Do Public Schools Have a Prayer?
Parents' Rights and the Decay of the American Family
The UN's BIG Green Machine
A World Without the UN
God, Man and the Government
One Nation Under the State?
The UN Wants to Take Your Gun
The UN Wants to Decide if YOUR Baby Lives!
The UN Wants Control of YOUR Child
UNFPA Supports Coercion in Viet Nam
Illinois UN Official Predicts New World Order in 10 Years
The UN Wants America's Armed Forces
The UN Wants to Take Your Land
The UN Wants to Take Your Gun
The UN Wants to Decide if YOUR Baby Lives!
The UN Wants Control of YOUR Child
The UN & CFR Wants the US to do Away With our Boarders
UN Wake-Up Call?
Tell Your Elected Representatives that "I LOVE America!
BrainWashing
Proud to Be an American--Editorial
The Long Loving Marriage of Boys To Guns
The Naked Communist
U.S. backs gun rights at U.N. Summit--It's a Miracle
It's amazing what one has to believe to believe in gun control
Family Issues
Religion and Values Issues
Exposing the United Nations
Focus on the Military
United Nations: Don't Smack Your Child
UK urged to ban child smacking
Deliberately dumbing us down (Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt's, "The Deliberate Dumbing Down of America"
UK urged to ban child smacking
U.N. land grab in the works
Remember the tragedy of Katanga
Speak Up for Sovereignty and Patriotism!
The UN is Communist
Flower Child Fascism
The UN Plan For Your Mental Health
The UN's Global Malfeasance
Kofi Anan, Bigot
List of Communist Organizations Operating in US
Let's Quit the UN
UN charter deserves the dustbin
Who Created the United Nations? Communists!
New World Order Rising? - Thoughts on the UN World Summit on Sustainable Development
Senate LEFT Pushes Intrusive U.N. Treaty (CEDAW)
United Nations-Sustainable Development
A U.S. Senator Rebukes the U.N. - WHY?
UN Wants a Global Gun Ban!
UN Wants a Global Gun Ban.
Standing Guard -- "The end game...includes overriding national sovereignty regarding firearms
TRT Flyer for Patriot Movement Against UN
Erasing Our Borders
A Choronological History of the New World Order
STATE OF THE WORLD FORUM" TO ADVANCE "GLOBAL GOVERNANCE" FOR EVERYONE
Bilderberg group wants vigorous Atlantic alliance / REUTERS IN A RARE INTERVIEW
History of the New World Order in the 20th Century
Info on the FED - Rockefeller Shadow Government
MASTERLINK TO FREE REPUBLIC EDUCATION THREADS (#6)
The United Nations’ Grab for Power
Who Is Running America?
POPE COULD FACE CHARGES UNDER INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
RADICAL FEMINISTS LAUD INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT
World Summit on Sustainable Development
Global Criminal Court Starts March 14, 2003
Deconstructing the Western Mind: Gramscian-Marxist Subversion of Faith and Education
Current Communist Goals
The Ten Planks of the Communist Manifesto
Communists Should Not Teach In American Colleges - 1949
Black Book of Communism:
The Socialist Will to Power - from About Socialism and Socialists
Did Communists Infiltrate the Catholic Church?
"The National United Nations-free Zone Committee"
The New International Criminal Court
Al Gore - FOR a One World Church and UN Dictatorship
THE TRUTH ABOUT THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES
The slide into dictatorship
United Nations Children's Fund Seeks to Usurp Parental Rights
Education Articles
The Adams County Patriot's League: Parental Rights in America
The Federal Reserve Is A privately Owned Corporation
Government has its eye on your money !
GLOBAL GOVERNANCE
The United Nations plans to CONFISCATE your profit and ---.
International Criminal Court Index
Don't say that we weren't warned--Put "ICC" in the Search Engine and see what comes up
A WORLD EFFECTIVELY CONTROLLED BY THE UNITED NATIONS A Preliminary Survey of One Form of a Stable Military Environment Lincoln P. Bloomfield
Building World Order
Worldwide Welfare--Managing the Global Financial Market
Pushing For A World Currency, Good-Bye Dollar
Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev Wants a New World Order, Really?
STATUTE OF THE INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
International Criminal Court to Be Launched This Year
Conference gears up for world court
Bill would keep U.S. out of world court, Call your Congressman
Drudge Report, Flash
EU urged to resist US on world court
Government Links Reference Page

The UN has always chosen socialist one-worlders for leaders. The Secretary-General at the UN founding conference was Soviet spy Alger Hiss. He was followed as Secretary-General by Norwegian socialist Trygve Lie, Swedish socialist Dag Hammarskjold, Burmese Marxist U Thant, Austrian former Nazi Kurt Waldheim, Peruvian socialist Javier Perez deCuellar, and Egyptian socialist Boutros Boutros-Ghali. Each has consistently used the full resources of the UN to promote Communist and socialist causes around the world. The Socialist International (which proudly traces its origins to the First International headed by Karl Marx) today claims tens of millions of members in 54 countries. At its 1962 Congress, it declared: "The ultimate objective of the parties of the Socialist International is nothing less than world government ... Membership of the United Nations must be made universal ..." Almost all of the UN's "independent" commissions for the last thirty years have been headed by members of the Socialist International.

Dueling Vetoes

John L. Perry
Tuesday, Feb. 18, 2003

"Veto" is Latin for "I forbid."

Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States each may forbid any United Nations action. Now, countervailing vetoes loom.That is another way of saying the United Nations is at long last well on its way to the ash heap of history.Which is another way of saying all of this is good news, not calamity, for the United States, for the entire Free World and for those peoples struggling under the yokes of dictatorships to become members of the Free World.

Enforce or Ignore?The present veto issue is over whether the U.N. Security Council will adopt yet another resolution - requiring once and for all time Iraq's forthwith compliance with a long string of 17 previous resolutions - demanding full disclosure and destruction of weapons of mass destruction.As it is now shaping up, the United States, in close cooperation with the United Kingdom, is expected to sponsor such a resolution within the 15-member Security Council, whose five permanent members enjoy the power of veto.One of those five, France, with the connivance of non-veto-toting Germany, is poised to sponsor a resolution aimed at preventing just such a compliance resolution. Those two will have the support of recently communist Russia and currently communist China, both of which have veto power.

Greed and AggrandizementThey are that determined, for their own reasons of selfish economic and political enhancement, to keep the regime of Saddam Hussein in power in Iraq.A historic collision is about to occur. Consider the implications:

If the Security Council takes up the U.S.-U.K. resolution first, the factotums of France and Germany - with those of Russia and China dog-trotting alongside - are confronted with three options:
(a) Go along with a "yes" vote, which would cause them to have to execute a hairpin reversal of course with all the attendant embarrassing consequences domestically and internationally;
(b) Abstain, which would cost them equivalent humiliation at home and elsewhere, since even the bumfuzzled value a certain degree of constancy in their leadership, or
(c) Veto the U.S.-U.K. resolution, which would place them irreconcilably at odds with America and its allies, who far outnumber them.

On the other hand, if the French and Germans are the first to offer their resolution, which would litter the Iraqi landscape with U.N. "inspections" bureaucracies and dot the sky over Iraq with French and Russian "surveillance" aircraft, here are the options confronting the United States and the United Kingdom:
(a) President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair could approve its adoption, about as likely as either one resigning from office, which is what a complete reversal of their positions would honorably call for;
(b) Abstain, a posture leaving those two as emasculated impotents adrift on the world scene, at the whim of the likes of France, Germany, Russia, China, Syria and on and on, or
(c) Exercise the veto, which would cut the American alliance free of the baleful influence of Old Europe, but also thrust it face to face with the loonies of radical Islam and the always-sinister and rapidly developing People's Republic of China - an inevitable confrontation incalculably more expensive later on.

Those consequences range far beyond the immediate issue of how to treat with Iraq's malevolent tyrant. They will cast the mold for the reconfiguration of economic relationships, political alignments and military deployments of world powers for decades to come.This a most-sobering reality. Either way the cat jumps, it constitutes nothing less than the most fundamental upheaval since the onset of the Cold War in the wake of World War II.Nothing like this has come along since the now-defunct Soviet Union under Joseph Stalin gambled on possible nuclear annihilation to subjugate the United States and all it represents.

The Threat Was Well Known
That came at a time when the United States was victorious in World War II and there was widespread appreciation among the American people of the mortal danger the Soviet Union represented.The greatest peril implicit in this present crisis - which neatly fits the Japanese dual ideogram for danger combined with opportunity - is that millions of Americans still don't get it.Much of that disconnect from reality can be laid at the door of American elitist, leftist mass communications and eight years of unethical leadership and neglect by the Clinton administration that those media so gleefully celebrated - and now so vengefully mourn.

Blind Self-AbsorptionA staggering number of Americans remain, even post-Sept. 11, in a combination state of denial of the horrific danger pressing upon them and smug preoccupation with personal pleasures and distractions.That is many times more unsettling than whether the latest surveys of opinions purport to show that most of the rest of the world's population is not on America's side in this time of peril.The courageous leadership of Bush and Blair, who have not allowed opinion polls to blind their perception of their duty, will go down in history alongside that of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill.

Train Wreck AheadSo what happens if, as seems likely, the two headlong opposing resolutions work their way up to a vote in the Security Council after every other U.N. member state has been given face time on world television to do its posturing?Despite strenuous efforts now being made to mush together some sort of face-saving compromise resolution, it seems humanly impossible that, in the end, the two opposing camps can avoid having to split. Each side has gone too far to double back on itself.As Bush has promised, should the Security Council chicken out on its responsibility, the United States will lead a Coalition of the Willing - impressive in number and strength - to liberate the people of Iraq and destroy Saddam's weapons of mass destruction.

Taking the Time to Ramp UpAny passage of days between now and then will be occasioned not by the grant of more time for U.N. inspectors but by the arrival on station of that fourth U.S. carrier battle group and the ominous thud of the final platoon's boots hitting the ground.At that point, there goes the United Nations. Why is that?The answer lies in the history behind the founding of the United Nations as World War II was coming to a close.That awful conflict was won by the wartime unity of the Big Three - as Britain, the Soviet Union and the United States were known then. The concept was that post-war peace could be maintained only if the Big Three remained in effective unanimity.

Antiquated VetoThe veto was grafted into the U.N. Charter to make that _expression of Big Three unity possible, by ensuring the impotence of the United Nations if any one of the Big Three was willing to precipitate its collapse through exercise of the veto.That made sense only if Big Three unity persisted, which of course it didn't. Even before World War II ended, even before the United Nations came into being, Big Three unity was falling apart.In actuality, the United Nations as an effective instrument of international cooperation and peacekeeping was stillborn.
Disunited From the Get-GoWhat did emerge and has hung on by a thread ever since is not a United Nations, but a hopelessly Disunited Nations - as illustrated by the numerous vetoes cast by the Soviet Union.An effective, relevant United Nations has been flat-line brain-dead these nearly 60 years, and what the world is now witnessing are the terminal twitchings of its prolonged state of artificially suspended animation.The very idea of the United States, or any country, thinking it had to go to such a United Nations with hat in hand and obtain approval to do what has to be done to protect its own people's vital national interests has been a dirty joke all these long years.So now, in the impending Shootout at the East River Glass Corral, two principals on the misnamed Security Council are about to fire veto bullets at each other. The current world economic, political and military realities are such that America and its allies will win that duel.

A Demise to CelebrateThe United States and the United Kingdom will walk away. France and Germany will not perish, although they will be grievously wounded, lingering as cripples for generations.But lying lifeless on New York's East Side, in form as well as in substance, will be what once had the presumption to call itself the United Nations.No need for grieving over that. The Free World will be the better for it.

John L. Perry, a prize-winning newspaper editor and writer who served on White House staffs of two presidents.
International court readies to open
International Criminal Court is a Reality and a Nightmare
Confronting Empire (A 3'rd World View Of The NWO)

"If instant world government, Charter review, and a greatly strengthened International Court do not provide the answers, what hope for progress is there? The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple solutions to complex problems, but it comes down essentially to this: The hope for the foreseeable lies, not in building up a few ambitious central institutions of universal membership and general jurisdiction as was envisaged at the end of the last war, but rather in the much more decentralized, disorderly and pragmatic process of inventing or adapting institutions of limited jurisdiction and selected membership to deal with specific problems on a case-by-case basis ... In short, the 'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather than f rom the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing confusion,' to use William James' famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault."
Richard N. Gardner, in Foreign Affairs (April 1974)
______________________________________

Under the U.N. Gavel
By Sen. Larry E. Craig, R-ID

August 22, 2001

At its founding, the mission of the United Nations, as stated in its charter, was "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war." It made no claim to supersede the sovereignty of its member states. Article 2 says that the United Nations "is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members," and it may not "intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state."

Since then, the United Nations has turned the principle of national sovereignty on its head. Through a host of conventions, treaties and conferences, it has intruded into regulation of resources and the economy (for example, treaties on "biological diversity," marine resources and climate change) and family life (hyping phoney liberalism while masculinity is scorned and western manhood is amputated - causing untold grief to the family unit) (conventions on parent-child relations and women in society). It has demanded that countries institute racial quotas and laws against hate crimes and speech (while the U.N. itself can jail someone for 30 years without trial). Recently the United Nations tried to undermine Americans' constitutional right to keep and bear arms (with proposed restrictions on the international sale of small arms).

Fortunately, many of these have been dead on arrival in the U.S. Senate, successive presidents have refused to endorse others, and in any case the United Nations had little power of enforcement. But in 1998, one mechanism of global government (there it is in the Washington Post folks) came to life with the so-called "Rome Statute" establishing a permanent International Criminal Court (and abolishing the Magna Carta in Britain). Once this treaty is ratified by 60 countries, the United Nations will wield judicial power over every individual human being -- even over citizens of countries that haven't joined the court.

While the court's stated mission is dealing with war crimes and crimes against humanity (what about their own crimes against humanity when they committed widespread genocide in the Balkans and East Timor? Dare I say they are hypocrites?) -- which, because there is no appeal from its decisions, only the court will have the right to define -- its mandate could be broadened later. Based on existing U.N. tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, which are models for the International Criminal Court, defendants will have none of the due process rights afforded by the U.S. Constitution, such as trial by jury, confrontation of witnesses or a speedy and public trial (that's a communist court system!).

President Clinton signed the Rome treaty last year, citing U.S. support for existing U.N. war crimes tribunals. Many suppose the court will target only a Slobodan Milosevic or the perpetrators of massacres in Rwanda, or dictators like Iraq's Saddam Hussein. But who knows? To some people, Augusto Pinochet is the man who saved Chile from communism; to others he is a murderer. Who should judge him -- the United Nations or the Chilean people?

In dozens of countries, governments use brutal force against insurgents. Should the United Nations decide whether leaders in Turkey or India should be put in the defendants' dock, and then commit the United States to bring them there? How about Russia's Vladimir Putin, for Chechnya? Or Israel's Ariel Sharon? Can we trust the United Nations with that decision (the more evil these premieres are - the more the U.N. loves them)?

The court's critics rightly cite the danger to U.S. military personnel deployed abroad. Since even one death can be a war crime, a U.S. soldier could be indicted just for doing his duty. But the International Criminal Court also would apply to acts "committed" by any American here at home. The European Union and U.S. domestic opponents consider the death penalty "discriminatory" and "inhumane." Could an American governor face indictment by the court for "crimes against humanity" for signing a death warrant?

Milosevic was delivered to a U.N. court (largely at U.S. insistence) for offences occurring entirely within his own country. Some say the Milosevic precedent doesn't threaten Americans, because the U.S. Constitution protects them. But for Milosevic, we demanded that the Yugoslav Constitution be trashed and the United Nations' authority prevail. Why should the International Criminal Court treat our Constitution any better (they're already destroying the 2nd amendment with their gun grab and the 1st with their phoney 'hate crime' nonsense)?

Instead of trying to "fix" the Rome treaty, the United States must recognize that it is a fundamental threat to American sovereignty. The State Department's participation in the court's preparatory commission is counterproductive. We need to make it clear that we consider the court an illegitimate body, that the United States will never join it and that we will never accept its "jurisdiction" over any U.S. citizen or help to impose it on other countries.
____________________________________________________

Wake Up! Enemy forces are usurping control!

Paul Joseph Watson

"'It can't happen here' is number one on the list of famous last words"
David Crosby
__________________________________________________

We are not going to achieve a new world order without paying for it in blood as well as in words and money."

Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., in Foreign Affairs (July/August 1995)

THAT quotation and the following - and many others like them - clearly demonstrate that the words "new world order" are deadly serious and furthermore, have been in use for decades. They did not originate with President George Bush in 1990. The "old world order" is one based on independent nation-states. The "new world order" involves the elimination of the sovereignty and independence of nation-states and some form of world government. This means the end of the United States of America, the U.S. Constitution, and the Bill of Rights as we now know them. Most of the new world order proposals involve the conversion of the United Nations and its agencies to a world government, complete with a world army, a world parliament, a world court, global taxation, and numerous other agencies to control every aspect of human life (education, nutrition, health care, population, immigration, communications, transportation, commerce, agriculture, finance, the environment, etc.). The various notions of the "new world order" differ as to details and scale, but agree on the basic principle and substance.


"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order [referring to the 1991 LA Riot]. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond [i.e., an "extraterrestrial" invasion], whether real or *promulgated* [emphasis mine], that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this *scenario*, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government."
Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991

"The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control.... Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent."
Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976, killed in the Korean Airlines 747 that was shot down by the Soviets

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries."
David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991.

"The idea was that those who direct the overall conspiracy could use the differences in those two so-called ideologies [marxism/fascism/socialism v. democracy/capitalism] to enable them [the Illuminati] to divide larger and larger portions of the human race into opposing camps so that they could be armed and then brainwashed into fighting and destroying each other."
Myron Fagan

"No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation."
David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

"In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder interest, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press....They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers.
"An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers."
U.S. Congressman Oscar Callaway, 1917

"The world can therefore seize the opportunity [Persian Gulf crisis] to fulfill the long-held promise of a New World Order where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind."
George Herbert Walker Bush

"In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all."
Strobe Talbot, President Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.

"We shall have world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent."
Statement by Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member James Warburg to The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17th, l950

"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."
Benjamin Disraeli, first Prime Minister of England, in a novel he published in 1844 called Coningsby, the New Generation

"The governments of the present day have to deal not merely with other governments, with emperors, kings and ministers, but also with the secret societies which have everywhere their unscrupulous agents, and can at the last moment upset all the governments' plans. "
British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, 1876

"Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the Field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it."
Woodrow Wilson,The New Freedom (1913)

"What is important is to dwell upon the increasing evidence of the existence of a secret conspiracy, throughout the world, for the destruction of organized government and the letting loose of evil."
Christian Science Monitor editorial, June 19th, l920

"The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen....At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties."
New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, 1922

"From the days of Sparticus, Wieskhopf, Karl Marx, Trotsky, Rosa Luxemberg, and Emma Goldman, this world conspiracy has been steadily growing. This conspiracy played a definite recognizable role in the tragedy of the French revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the 19th century. And now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their head and have become the undisputed masters of that enormous empire."
Winston Churchill, stated to the London Press, in l922.

"We are at present working discreetly with all our might to wrest this mysterious force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local nation states of the world."
Professor Arnold Toynbee, in a June l931 speech before the Institute for the Study of International Affairs in Copenhagen.

"The government of the Western nations, whether monarchical or republican, had passed into the invisible hands of a plutocracy, international in power and grasp. It was, I venture to suggest, this semioccult power which....pushed the mass of the American people into the cauldron of World War I."
British military historian MajorGeneral J.F.C. Fuller, l941

"For a long time I felt that FDR had developed many thoughts and ideas that were his own to benefit this country, the United States. But, he didn't. Most of his thoughts, his political ammunition, as it were, were carefully manufactured for him in advanced by the Council on Foreign Relations-One World Money group. Brilliantly, with great gusto, like a fine piece of artillery, he exploded that prepared "ammunition" in the middle of an unsuspecting target, the American people, and thus paid off and returned his internationalist political support.
"The UN is but a long-range, international banking apparatus clearly set up for financial and economic profit by a small group of powerful One-World revolutionaries, hungry for profit and power.

"The depression was the calculated 'shearing' of the public by the World Money powers, triggered by the planned sudden shortage of supply of call money in the New York money market....The One World Government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank."

Curtis Dall, FDR's son-in-law as quoted in his book, My Exploited Father-in-Law

"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson."
A letter written by FDR to Colonel House, November 21st, l933

"The real rulers in Washington are invisible, and exercise power from behind the scenes."
Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, 1952

"Fifty men have run America, and that's a high figure."
Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, in the July 26th, l936 issue of The New York Times.

"Today the path of total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government - a bureaucratic elite."
Senator William Jenner, 1954

"The case for government by elites is irrefutable"
Senator William Fulbright, Former chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, stated at a 1963 symposium entitled: The Elite and the Electorate - Is Government by the People Possible?

"The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States. The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power political, monetary, intellectual and ecclesiastical. What the Trilateral Commission intends is to create a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nationstates involved. As managers and creators of the system ,they will rule the future."
U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater in his l964 book: With No Apologies.

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds' central banks which were themselves private corporations. The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups."
Tragedy and Hope: A History of The World in Our Time (Macmillan Company, 1966,) Professor Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University, highly esteemed by his former student, William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.

"The Council on Foreign Relations is "the establishment." Not only does it have influence and power in key decision-making positions at the highest levels of government to apply pressure from above, but it also announces and uses individuals and groups to bring pressure from below, to justify the high level decisions for converting the U.S. from a sovereign Constitutional Republic into a servile member state of a one-world dictatorship."
Former Congressman John Rarick 1971

"The directors of the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) make up a sort of Presidium for that part of the Establishment that guides our destiny as a nation."
The Christian Science Monitor, September 1, l961

"The New World Order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down...but in the end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault."
CFR member Richard Gardner, writing in the April l974 issue of the CFR's journal, Foreign Affairs.

"The planning of UN can be traced to the 'secret steering committee' established by Secretary [of State Cordell] Hull in January 1943. All of the members of this secret committee, with the exception of Hull, a Tennessee politician, were members of the Council on Foreign Relations. They saw Hull regularly to plan, select, and guide the labors of the [State] Department's Advisory Committee. It was, in effect, the coordinating agency for all the State Department's postwar planning."
Professors Laurence H. Shoup and William Minter, writing in their study of the CFR, "Imperial Brain Trust: The CFR and United States Foreign Policy." (Monthly Review Press, 1977).

"The most powerful clique in these (CFR) groups have one objective in common: they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the national independence of the U.S. They want to end national boundaries and racial and ethnic loyalties supposedly to increase business and ensure world peace. What they strive for would inevitably lead to dictatorship and loss of freedoms by the people. The CFR was founded for "the purpose of promoting disarmament and submergence of U.S. sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful one-world government."
Harpers, July l958

"The old world order changed when this war-storm broke. The old international order passed away as suddenly, as unexpectedly, and as completely as if it had been wiped out by a gigantic flood, by a great tempest, or by a volcanic eruption. The old world order died with the setting of that day's sun and a new world order is being born while I speak, with birth-pangs so terrible that it seems almost incredible that life could come out of such fearful suffering and such overwhelming sorrow."
Nicholas Murray Butler, in an address delivered before the Union League of Philadelphia, Nov. 27, 1915

"The peace conference has assembled. It will make the most momentous decisions in history, and upon these decisions will rest the stability of the new world order and the future peace of the world."
M. C. Alexander, Executive Secretary of the American Association for International Conciliation, in a subscription letter for the periodical International Conciliation (1919)

"If there are those who think we are to jump immediately into a new world order, actuated by complete understanding and brotherly love, they are doomed to disappointment. If we are ever to approach that time, it will be after patient and persistent effort of long duration. The present international situation of mistrust and fear can only be corrected by a formula of equal status, continuously applied, to every phase of international contacts, until the cobwebs of the old order are brushed out of the minds of the people of all lands."
Dr. Augustus O. Thomas, president of the World Federation of Education Associations (August 1927), quoted in the book International Understanding: Agencies Educating for a New World (1931)

"... when the struggle seems to be drifting definitely towards a world social democracy, there may still be very great delays and disappointments before it becomes an efficient and beneficent world system. Countless people ... will hate the new world order ... and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to evaluate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people."
H. G. Wells, in his book entitled The New World Order (1939)

"The term Internationalism has been popularized in recent years to cover an interlocking financial, political, and economic world force for the purpose of establishing a World Government. Today Internationalism is heralded from pulpit and platform as a 'League of Nations' or a 'Federated Union' to which the United States must surrender a definite part of its National Sovereignty. The World Government plan is being advocated under such alluring names as the 'New International Order,' 'The New World Order,' 'World Union Now,' 'World Commonwealth of Nations,' 'World Community,' etc. All the terms have the same objective; however, the line of approach may be religious or political according to the taste or training of the individual."
Excerpt from A Memorial to be Addressed to the House of Bishops and the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in General Convention (October 1940)

"In the first public declaration on the Jewish question since the outbreak of the war, Arthur Greenwood, member without portfolio in the British War Cabinet, assured the Jews of the United States that when victory was achieved an effort would be made to found a new world order based on the ideals of 'justice and peace.'"
Excerpt from article entitled "New World Order Pledged to Jews," in The New York Times (October 1940)

"If totalitarianism wins this conflict, the world will be ruled by tyrants, and individuals will be slaves. If democracy wins, the nations of the earth will be united in a commonwealth of free peoples, and individuals, wherever found, will be the sovereign units of the new world order."
The Declaration of the Federation of the World, produced by the Congress on World Federation, adopted by the Legislatures of North Carolina (1941), New Jersey (1942), Pennsylvania (1943), and possibly other states.

"New World Order Needed for Peace: State Sovereignty Must Go, Declares Notre Dame Professor"
Title of article in The Tablet (Brooklyn) (March 1942)

"Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles tonight called for the early creation of an international organization of anti-Axis nations to control the world during the period between the armistice at the end of the present war and the setting up of a new world order on a permanent basis."
Text of article in The Philadelphia Inquirer (June 1942)

"The statement went on to say that the spiritual teachings of religion must become the foundation for the new world order and that national sovereignty must be subordinate to the higher moral law of God."
American Institute of Judaism, excerpt from article in The New York Times (December 1942)

"There are some plain common-sense considerations applicable to all these attempts at world planning. They can be briefly stated: 1. To talk of blueprints for the future or building a world order is, if properly understood, suggestive, but it is also dangerous. Societies grow far more truly than they are built. A constitution for a new world order is never like a blueprint for a skyscraper."
Norman Thomas, in his book What Is Our Destiny? (1944)


"He [John Foster Dulles] stated directly to me that he had every reason to believe that the Governor [Thomas E. Dewey of New York] accepts his point of view and that he is personally convinced that this is the policy that he would promote with great vigor if elected. So it is fair to say that on the first round the Sphinx of Albany has established himself as a prima facie champion of a strong and definite new world order."
Excerpt from article by Ralph W. Page in The Philadelphia Bulletin (May 1944)

"Alchemy for a New World Order"
Article by Stephen John Stedman in Foreign Affairs (May/June 1995)

"The United Nations, he told an audience at Harvard University, 'has not been able--nor can it be able--to shape a new world order which events so compellingly demand.' ... The new world order that will answer economic, military, and political problems, he said, 'urgently requires, I believe, that the United States take the leadership among all free peoples to make the underlying concepts and aspirations of national sovereignty truly meaningful through the federal approach.'"
Gov. Nelson Rockefeller of New York, in an article entitled "Rockefeller Bids Free Lands Unite: Calls at Harvard for Drive to Build New World Order" -- The New York Times (February 1962)

"The developing coherence of Asian regional thinking is reflected in a disposition to consider problems and loyalties in regional terms, and to evolve regional approaches to development needs and to the evolution of a new world order."
Richard Nixon, in Foreign Affairs (October 1967)

"He [President Nixon] spoke of the talks as a beginning, saying nothing more about the prospects for future contacts and merely reiterating the belief he brought to China that both nations share an interest in peace and building 'a new world order.'"
Excerpt from an article in The New York Times (February 1972)

"If instant world government, Charter review, and a greatly strengthened International Court do not provide the answers, what hope for progress is there? The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple solutions to complex problems, but it comes down essentially to this: The hope for the foreseeable lies, not in building up a few ambitious central institutions of universal membership and general jurisdiction as was envisaged at the end of the last war, but rather in the much more decentralized, disorderly and pragmatic process of inventing or adapting institutions of limited jurisdiction and selected membership to deal with specific problems on a case-by-case basis ... In short, the 'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing confusion,' to use William James' famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault."
Richard N. Gardner, in Foreign Affairs (April 1974)

"The existing order is breaking down at a very rapid rate, and the main uncertainty is whether mankind can exert a positive role in shaping a new world order or is doomed to await collapse in a passive posture. We believe a new order will be born no later than early in the next century and that the death throes of the old and the birth pangs of the new will be a testing time for the human species."
Richard A. Falk, in an article entitled "Toward a New World Order: Modest Methods and Drastic Visions," in the book On the Creation of a Just World Order (1975)

"My country's history, Mr. President, tells us that it is possible to fashion unity while cherishing diversity, that common action is possible despite the variety of races, interests, and beliefs we see here in this chamber. Progress and peace and justice are attainable. So we say to all peoples and governments: Let us fashion together a new world order."
Henry Kissinger, in address before the General Assembly of the United Nations, October 1975)

"At the old Inter-American Office in the Commerce Building here in Roosevelt's time, as Assistant Secretary of State for Latin American Affairs under President Truman, as chief whip with Adlai Stevenson and Tom Finletter at the founding of the United Nations in San Francisco, Nelson Rockefeller was in the forefront of the struggle to establish not only an American system of political and economic security but a new world order."
Part of article in The New York Times (November 1975)

"A New World Order"
Title of article on commencement address at the University of Pennsylvania by Hubert H. Humphrey, printed in the Pennsylvania Gazette (June 1977)

"Further global progress is now possible only through a quest for universal consensus in the movement towards a new world order."
Mikhail Gorbachev, in an address at the United Nations (December 1988)

"We believe we are creating the beginning of a new world order coming out of the collapse of the U.S.-Soviet antagonisms."
Brent Scowcroft (August 1990), quoted in The Washington Post (May 1991)

"We can see beyond the present shadows of war in the Middle East to a new world order where the strong work together to deter and stop aggression. This was precisely Franklin Roosevelt's and Winston Churchill's vision for peace for the post-war period."
Richard Gephardt, in The Wall Street Journal (September 1990)

"If we do not follow the dictates of our inner moral compass and stand up for human life, then his lawlessness will threaten the peace and democracy of the emerging new world order we now see, this long dreamed-of vision we've all worked toward for so long."
President George Bush (January 1991)

"But it became clear as time went on that in Mr. Bush's mind the New World Order was founded on a convergence of goals and interests between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, so strong and permanent that they would work as a team through the U.N. Security Council."
Excerpt from A. M. Rosenthal, in The New York Times (January 1991)

"I would support a Presidential candidate who pledged to take the following steps: ... At the end of the war in the Persian Gulf, press for a comprehensive Middle East settlement and for a 'new world order' based not on Pax Americana but on peace through law with a stronger U.N. and World Court."
George McGovern, in The New York Times (February 1991)

"... it's Bush's baby, even if he shares its popularization with Gorbachev. Forget the Hitler 'new order' root; F.D.R. used the phrase earlier."
William Safire, in The New York Times (February 1991)

"How I Learned to Love the New World Order"
Article by Sen. Joseph R. Biden, Jr. in The Wall Street Journal (April 1992)

"How to Achieve The New World Order"
Title of book excerpt by Henry Kissinger, in Time magazine (March 1994)

"The Final Act of the Uruguay Round, marking the conclusion of the most ambitious trade negotiation of our century, will give birth - in Morocco - to the World Trade Organization, the third pillar of the New World Order, along with the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund."
Part of full-page advertisement by the government of Morocco in The New York Times (April 1994)

"New World Order: The Rise of the Region-State"
Title of article by Kenichi Ohmae, political reform leader in Japan, in The Wall Street Journal (August 1994)

"The new world order that is in the making must focus on the creation of a world of democracy, peace and prosperity for all."
Nelson Mandela, in The Philadelphia Inquirer (October 1994)

The renewal of the nonproliferation treaty was described as important "for the welfare of the whole world and the new world order."
President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, in The New York Times (April 1995)

EU deal to exempt US from new world court



The 45 Goals of Communism
The forty-five "communist goals" listed below appeared in the Congressional Record of January 10, 1963. In both WWI and WWII the American Government fought on the side of the Communists.

Despite the "cold war" that followed, the goals of the communists were steadfastly imposed upon the American people. Ask yourself Americans, what kind of leaders have you elected?
How could it be that Americans so blindly followed corrupted politicians?

How can Americans even assume that they are still a free people? Men who elieve that they are free when in reality they are mere slaves are to be pitied more than those who know that they are slaves.

These 45 communist goals are a matter of public record. Wake up people, wake up and see to it that your fellow citizens wake up also! Those hiddeous men who have sold out the entire American contintent and its people have made their goals "current". Read them here now:

1. U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.

2. U.S. willingness to capitulate in preference to engaging in atomic war.

3. Develop the illusion that total disarmament [by] the United States would be a demonstration of moral strength.

4. Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.

5. Extension of long-term loans to Russia and Soviet satellites.

6. Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.

7. Grant recognition of Red China. Admission of Red China to the U.N.

8. Set up East and West Germany as separate states in spite of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German question by free elections under supervision of the U.N.

9. Prolong the conferences to ban atomic tests because the United States has agreed to suspend tests as long as negotiations are in progress.

10. Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the U.N.

11. Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set up as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces. (Some Communist leaders believe the world can be taken over as easily by the U.N. as by Moscow. Sometimes these two centers compete with each other as they are now doing in the Congo.)

12. Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.

13. Do away with all loyalty oaths.

14. Continue giving Russia access to the U.S. Patent Office.

15. Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.

16. Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.

17. Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

18. Gain control of all student newspapers.

19. Use student riots to foment public protests against programs or organizations which are under Communist attack.

20. Infiltrate the press. Get control of book-review assignments, editorial writing, policymaking positions.

21. Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.

22. Continue discrediting American culture by degrading all forms of artistic expression. An American Communist cell was told to "eliminate all good sculpture from parks and buildings, substitute shapeless, awkward and meaningless forms."

23. Control art critics and directors of art museums. "Our plan is to promote ugliness, repulsive, meaningless art."

24. Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them "censorship" and a violation of free speech and free press.

25. Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures, radio, and TV.

26. Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as "normal, natural, healthy."

27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a "religious crutch."

28. Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principle of "separation of church and state."

29. Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

30. Discredit the American Founding Fathers. Present them as selfish aristocrats who had no concern for the "common man."

31. Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part of the "big picture." Give more emphasis to Russian history since the Communists took over.

32. Support any socialist movement to give centralized control over any part of the culture--education, social agencies, welfare programs, mental health clinics, etc.

33. Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the Communist apparatus.

34. Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.

35. Discredit and eventually dismantle the FBI.

36. Infiltrate and gain control of more unions.

37. Infiltrate and gain control of big business.

38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].

39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.

40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.

41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.

42. Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use ["]united force["] to solve economic, political or social problems.

43. Overthrow all colonial governments before native populations are ready for self-government.

44. Internationalize the Panama Canal.

45. Repeal the Connally reservation so the United States cannot prevent the World Court from seizing jurisdiction [over domestic problems. Give the World Court jurisdiction] over nations and individuals alike.



24 Reasons to Oppose NATO

(1) NATO is a creature of the Cold War and should be abolished, not expanded.

(2) NATO's official military doctrine reserves for itself the right to use nuclear weapons despite the fact that in 1996 the World Court made such use, or threat, illegal. NATO's "first use" nuclear weapons policy means it is willing to use nuclear weapons even when none have been used against them. The use of nuclear weapons contravenes International Humanitarian Law because civilian deaths would be massive and indiscriminate. NATO's nuclear weapons also pose the risk of environmental catastrophe, including the global holocaust of "nuclear winter." NATO's nuclear weapons policy also contravenes the Nonproliferation Treaty (to which all NATO members are signatories) that requires all states to press quickly to abolish nuclear weapons. NATO member states (US, UK and France) now have more than 9,000 nuclear warheads in active service, about 60% of the world's nuclear arsenal. These three NATO states have committed some of their nuclear weapons to NATO for its use in war. NATO itself maintains between 60 and 200 nuclear weapons at airbases in Western Europe. NATO's nuclear weapons and the threat of their use are a means of coercion and intimidation, especially against states that do not possess these weapons.

(3) NATO's powerful core members (the U.S., the U.K., France, Germany, Holland, Belgium and Spain) have a long history of controlling vast empires. Former colonies of these NATO countries -- today's Third World -- still suffer from tragic economic inequalities resulting from hundreds of years of imperialism imposed by nations that are now members of NATO. Transnational corporations controlled by economic interests in NATO countries continue to dominate these former colonies under a neoliberal economic system now labeled "corporate globalization."

(4) According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, about 80% of the world's total military equipment was produced by NATO members in 1996. The following NATO members are among the world's top ten military producers: the U.S., the U.K., France, Germany, Italy and Canada. The U.S., U.K. and France alone contributed about 70% of world's total arms production for that year.

(5) After the disappearance of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, NATO became increasingly irrelevant and needed a reason for its continued existence. NATO therefore escalated its efforts to foment ethnic wars in the Balkans in order to create excuses for its own military interventions in the region. NATO's interventions -- so-called "humanitarian wars" -- were then sold to the public as a means of settling conflicts between ethnic groups. NATO's real purpose is to expand the colonial spheres of influence of its member states and their corporate allies.

(6) NATO waged a war of aggression against Yugoslavia that was illegal under its own Charter and various international laws.

(7) NATO forces used 1,200 warplanes and helicopters to fly 35,000 combat missions against Yugoslavia. It dropped 20,000 bombs and missiles containing 80,000 tons of explosives on that country. Contrary to international law, NATO targeted civilian infrastructure, including over 1,000 targets of no military significance, such as: schools, hospitals, farms, bridges, roads, railways, waterlines, media stations, historic and cultural monuments, museums, factories, oil refineries and petrochemical plants.

(8) NATO's illegal bombing campaign severely impacted the health of Yugoslavia's civilian population. Thousands of civilians were killed, at least 6,000 were injured and countless others, especially children, suffered severe psychological trauma.

(9) According to the UN Environmental Program, NATO's bombing campaign triggered an ecological catastrophe in Yugoslavia and the surrounding region.

(10) In its war against Yugoslavia, NATO used weapons that are prohibited by the Hague and Geneva Conventions and the Nuremburg Charter, such as depleted uranium missiles that are radioactive and highly toxic weapons with long-term, life-threatening health and environmental consequences, and anti-personnel cluster bombs designed to kill and maim (that contravene the "Ottawa Process on Landmines" because many "bomblets" do not explode during initial impact). NATO continues to stockpile these prohibited weapons for use against civilian populations in future wars.

(11) After its bombing of Yugoslavia, NATO refused to disarm the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) as required by United Nations resolution 1244. Instead, NATO converted the KLA into the Kosovo Protection Force supposedly to maintain peace and order in NATO-controlled Kosovo. Under the watchful eye of 40,000 NATO troops, the revamped KLA terrorists ethnically cleansed the area of 250,000 people who were not of Albanian heritage (as well as some ethnic Albanians loyal to Yugoslavia). During NATO's occupation, 1,300 citizens have been killed and another 1,300 have been reported missing. Kosovo's remaining minorities have no freedom of movement, live in ghettoes and face frequent terrorist attacks and property destruction.

(12) NATO appointed Agim Ceku, an alleged war criminal, as commander of the Kosovo Protection Force. Ceku, an Albanian Kosovar, led the Croatian army's "Operation Storm" that ethnically cleansed the Serbian population from their ancestral lands in Croatia. If the Hague were to pursue an indictment of Ceku, and other such terrorists, it would be a major embarrassment to their NATO bosses.

(13) As an occupying colonial power, NATO forces helped to enforce the cancellation of election results in Bosnia, shut down the offices and transmission towers of media stations that were critical of NATO's presence and seized the assets of political parties that refused to cooperate with them.

(14) The exploitative behavior rampant in military culture is exemplified by the actions of NATO troops based in the Balkans. For example, NATO troops fuel the demand for prostitution in both Bosnia and Kosovo. The women who service NATO troops live in deplorable conditions and are frequently held against their will by local captors. When evidence of UN or NATO involvement in this trade has surfaced, implicated officers have been discharged and sent home but no criminal proceedings have ever been initiated against them.

(15) NATO has been a prime source of destabilization in Macedonia by giving military assistance to Albanian terrorists there. The London Times (June 10, 2001) reported that NATO's appointee to the Kosovo Protection Force, Agim Ceku, sent 800 KLA troops to Macedonia to aid the nascent Albanian insurgency there. This June, NATO troops intervened to evacuate KLA fighters when Macedonian forces closed in on the rebels near Aracinovo. German media reports state that NATO's evacuation was ordered because 17 former U.S. military personnel -- hardened by years of Balkan fighting and working for a private U.S. mercenary group -- were among the KLA terrorists. NATO has also used diplomatic means to pressure the Macedonian government to succumb to Albanian demands.

(16) NATO's aggressive policy of expansion into Eastern Europe severely threatens international stability. With NATO's annexation of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland now complete, Albania, Bulgaria, Estonia, Georgia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia have declared an interest in joining the NATO juggernaut. NATO has also set its sights on penetrating even further into former Soviet spheres of influence by trying to encompass Azerbaijan, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan and the Ukraine. NATO's intention to press beyond the former borders of the Soviet Union is dangerously confrontational and risks provoking war with Russia.

(17) NATO's expansion into Central and Eastern Europe is a means of integrating the military forces within those countries under NATO (and largely U.S.) control As military units within NATO, the armed forces of new NATO member states must submit to demands for standardization of military training, weapons and other military equipment. Requirements that new members standardize their military equipment to NATO's exacting specifications is a tremendous boon to U.S. and European military industries that profit greatly from these expanded export markets.

(18) New NATO member states may also lose sovereignty over other important aspects of their armed forces, such as the command, control, communications and intelligence functions, which also risk being subsumed under the auspices of NATO standardization.

(19) The reasons for NATO's expansion eastward are largely economic. For instance, NATO's military access and control over Eastern Europe helps Western European corporations to secure strategic energy resources such as oil from the Caspian Sea and Central Asia. The U.S. and Western European corporations will greatly benefit from NATO's control of the oil corridor through the Caucasus mountains. NATO wants its troops to patrol this pipeline and to dominate the Armenian/Russian route to the Caspian Sea. The Caucasus also link the Adriatic-Ceyhan-Baku pipeline with oil-rich countries even farther east, in the former Soviet Central Asia republics of Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. Billions of dollars in oil may someday flow through these corridors to Western Europe for the benefit of Western-based oil companies.

(20) NATO's growth is not only a provocation to Russia, it also threatens the security of China and other Asian states that may respond in kind by increasing their military spending, thus diverting resources from the essential needs of their citizens. NATO's expansion may eventually provoke an anti-NATO alliance in Asia, further destabilizing peace and leading to possible future wars.

(21) As part of the "NATO Defence Capabilities Initiative," NATO member states have committed themselves to increase their military abilities for "power projection, mobility and increased interoperability." This will require significant additional military expenditures. European NATO countries have already increased their expenditures for military equipment by 11% in real terms since 1995. Meanwhile, military budgets in the U.S. and Canada have also increased over the past two years. The military budgets of NATO countries amounted to about 60% of the world's total military spending (US$798 billion) for the year 2000. Rather than focusing on such genuinely humanitarian priorities as providing food, housing, health care, education, environmental protection and public transportation for their populations and the rest of the world, NATO is intent on increasing their military budgets for future interventions even farther afield.

(22) The testing and training conducted by NATO to prepare for war, also has numerous negative impacts on people and the environment. NATO's war preparations include military exercises, the training of pilots and the testing of weapons and warplanes. For instance, low level flight training areas and bombing ranges in Nitassinan threaten the traditional lifestyle of many in the Innu Nation. Their unceded territory in Quebec and Labrador is being turned into a military wasteland by NATO test flights. NATO nations also carry out dangerous bombing practices on Vieques Island, off Puerto Rico.

(23) In the late 1940s-early 1950s, at the bidding of the CIA, NATO helped to set up secret paramilitary, anti-communist cells in at least 16 European states. Originally called Operation "Stay Behind," this network of guerrilla armies was created to fight behind the lines in case of a Soviet invasion. It was codified under the umbrella of the Clandestine Co-ordinating Committee of the Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe (which became NATO). These clandestine armies were condemned by the European Union in a resolution (Dec. 22, 1990) that blamed the CIA and NATO for their 40 year role in overseeing this covert operation. Widely known by the code name for the Italian campaign (i.e., "Operation Gladio") these organizations, which the EU feared may still have been operating in 1990, were accused of illegal interference in political affairs, conducting terrorist attacks, jeopardizing democratic structures and other serious crimes.

(24) Key NATO representatives have interfered with internal electoral/political developments in Europe. Although recent elections in Albania were fraught with irregularities and fraud (ballot box stuffing, ghost voters, selective disenfranchisement) NATO General Secretary George Robertson pronounced the election fair and legitimate. Earlier this year, another NATO spokesperson openly threatened that if the Movement for a Democratic Slovakia (the party of former premier Vladimir Meciar) entered a coalition government, Slovakia would not be welcomed into NATO or allowed early European Union membership.

NATO’s Terror Campaign

NATO’s "victory" over what remains of Yugoslavia offers even less cause for patriotic celebration than the Spanish-American War. The U.S.-led terror campaign against Yugoslavia pitted the massed assets of the world’s largest and wealthiest nations against a country the size of Vermont,
whose gross domestic product is smaller than that of Idaho. Compounding this indecency is the fact that the NATO leadership collective chose not to engage the military assets of our "enemy," but instead focused on Yugoslavia’s civilian population in what has to be considered an act of international terrorism.

According to Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK), who was a bomber pilot in World War II, it is perverse even to refer to the campaign against Yugoslavia as a war. "They never came to war with us," Senator Stevens told reporters at a Washington, DC breakfast meeting in early July. "We just bombed the hell out of them until they signed an agreement. We had 780 million people [in the NATO alliance] attacking 20 million people, and they finally came to their knees.... [After] defeating 20 million people the way we defeated them, I don’t think that’s something we should go around holding our head high in the air [about] and saying we’re superior...."

"They Needed Some Bombing"

The chief author of the Yugoslav terror campaign was Bill Clinton, and the effort displayed his distinctive combination of arrogance, mendacity, cowardice, and bullying. In a videotaped speech broadcast into Serbia the day after the war began, the impeached President insisted: "I cannot emphasize too strongly that the United States and our European allies have no quarrel with the Serbian people.... The NATO nations have tried to avert this conflict through every means we knew to be available. Each of us has ties to Serbia. Each respects the dignity and courage of the Serb people.... I call on all Serbs and all people of good will to join with us in seeking an end to this needless and avoidable conflict."

Given that the source of these statements was Bill Clinton, it is not surprising that they are mostly penetrable lies - all except for the description of the war as "needless and avoidable." As has been previously noted in these pages ("Why the Bombing?" July 19th issue), "Appendix B" of the Rambouillet "peace" agreement amounted to an ultimatum, demanding that the Serbian government submit to the occupation of its country by an international "peacekeeping" force. During the Rambouillet conference, one Clinton Administration official explained to reporters: "We intentionally set the bar too high for the Serbs to comply. They needed some bombing, and that’s what they’re going to get."

After the 78-day bombing campaign, with much of Serbia’s infrastructure - including bridges, hospitals, schools, and power plants - in ruins, Mr. Clinton announced that Serbia would be excluded from a proposed Balkan reconstruction program. "What the Serbian people decide to do, of course, is their own affair," stated the President in a June 25th press conference. "But they’re going to have to come to grips with what Mr. Milosevic ordered in Kosovo. They’re just going to have to come to grips with it. And they’re going to have to get out of denial.... And then they’re going to have to decide whether they support his leadership or not."

False Images

Invoking the image of "all those tens of thousands of people … killed, and all those hundreds of thousands of people [who] were run out of their homes … all those little girls [who] were raped, and all those little boys [who] were murdered" by Serb forces in Kosovo, Mr. Clinton concluded: "If [the Serb people] think it’s okay, they can make that decision. But I wouldn’t give them one red cent for reconstruction if they think it’s okay, because I don’t think it’s okay, and I don’t think that’s the world we’re trying to build for our children."

In other words, it appears that Mr. Clinton does have a "quarrel" with the Serb people, whom he insists on holding accountable for the actions of Slobodan Milosevic’s regime. Mr. Clinton’s statements presuppose that the calculated destruction of Serbia’s civilian economy and infrastructure is justified by atrocities allegedly committed by that nation’s government against Albanians in Kosovo. Nothing in U.S. law or in Western just war tradition supports the notion that it is right to "punish" an evil ruler by terrorizing and slaughtering his subjects. Furthermore, the parade of atrocities cited by Mr. Clinton has proven to be largely a work of embellishment, if not outright propaganda.

This is not to say that the Serbian paramilitary and regular Army units deployed in Kosovo are blameless. Ben Works, head of the Strategic Research Institute of the United States (a private intelligence consulting firm), who has analyzed Balkan affairs for more than a decade, told The New American: "It’s pretty clear that there is a pattern of war crimes by Serb forces in Kosovo. It’s by no means of the magnitude that NATO officials have suggested, and there have been plenty of outrages committed by all sides - including NATO. But it would be dishonest to say that the Serb forces in Kosovo are completely innocent."

Canadian photojournalist Paul Watson was one of the few Western reporters who covered the Kosovo tragedy on-site. In an interview with CBC radio’s As It Happens program, Watson testified: "I have spoken personally to people who have been ordered to leave their homes by police in black. I’ve also spoken to people who are simply terrified.... I don’t think that NATO member countries can, with a straight face, sit back and say they don’t share some of the blame for the wholesale depopulation of this country." While Serb forces were doing some terrible things, Watson explained, there was no evidence of systematic, genocidal "cleansing." "It is very hard to hide an anarchic wholesale slaughter of people," he pointed out. "There is no evidence that such a thing happened" in Kosovo.

Watson’s account was corroborated by a July 2nd USA Today front-page story documenting that the casualty and refugee figures - as well as the lurid atrocity accounts - peddled by NATO and Clinton Administration mouthpieces during the 78-day war "now appear greatly exaggerated as allied forces take control of the provinces.... Instead of 100,000 ethnic Albanian men feared murdered by rampaging Serbs, officials now estimate that about 10,000 were killed." How many of those victims perished as a result of the NATO bombing campaign, we may never know.

In a May speech before a veterans group, Mr. Clinton asserted that 600,000 ethnic Albanians were "trapped within Kosovo itself lacking shelter, short of food, afraid to go home, or buried in mass graves dug by their executioners." In fact, reported USA Today, "Though thousands [of Albanian men] hid in Kosovo, they are healthy." Additionally, "Kosovo’s livestock, wheat, and other crops are growing, not slaughtered wholesale or torched as widely reported." "Yes, there were atrocities," commented House Intelligence Committee Chairman Porter Goss (R-FL). "But no, they don’t measure up to the advance billing."

Bill Clinton’s allusion to accounts of "little girls" being raped - a singularly audacious charge, coming as it did from a plausibly accused rapist - also embroiders the facts that are becoming available. In the Kosovo conflict, as in nearly every other military struggle, the tragedy of rape was a tangible reality. However, as Lori Montgomery of the Sydney Morning Herald reported in a July 3rd dispatch from Prizren, there is no evidence of "systematic" rape conducted by Serb forces. Such rape as did occur was "a vicious aberration among Serb forces, an opportunistic act perpetrated by the mean and the drunken who tried to hide it from their superiors."

Further complicating efforts for Bill Clinton and others who wish to depict the Serbs as genocidalists is the fact that no threat was made to evict or exterminate Belgrade’s population of 100,000 ethnic Albanians; the only threat they faced came from NATO’s bombing runs. Furthermore, the Yugoslav government actually provided weapons to loyalist ethnic Albanians in Kosovo.

KLA "Cleansing"

By way of contrast, NATO’s leadership collective has shown little concern over the "ethnic cleansing" campaign being waged against Serbs in Kosovo under the leadership of the Marxist Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). While many Kosovo Albanians are exacting revenge against specific Serbs who burned and looted Albanian homes, the Serb victims include many people who tried to intervene on behalf of their Albanian neighbors.

When, shortly after the NATO bombing campaign began, troops from Serbia’s Interior Ministry went on a rampage through the village of Sekiraca, 80-year-old Srbislav Dukic "implored the troops not to burn the ethnic Albanian houses and a flour mill owned by 28-year-old Mustafa Ejupi," reported the July 3rd Sydney Morning Herald. Standing with his arm around his elderly benefactor, Ejupi recalled how Dukic intervened with the soldiers and pointed out that the younger Albanian had no connections to the KLA. "Srbislav saved my mill," testified Ejupi. Now the elderly Good Samaritan and his family face "revenge" attacks mounted by the KLA.

"I don’t know how Serbs and ethnic Albanians can live together in the future, but our leadership is guilty," declares Dukic. "The leadership has created this environment. And we poor people, workers who have been working all our lives, we’ve never had problems." Now that the KLA, largely unmolested by NATO "peacekeepers," is conducting depredations against Kosovo Serbs, the relative tranquility described by Dukic will probably never return.

The monks of Decani monastery also acted to protect their Albanian neighbors from Serb paramilitaries. According to a June 17th BBC report, ethnic Albanians in Decani "say they owe their lives to the humanity and courage of the local Orthodox monks." When paramilitary gangs stormed nearby villages demanding money - and killing Albanians who wouldn’t or couldn’t buy them off - the monks offered sanctuary to as many refugees as they could take in. "We helped them in the best way we could," recalled the monastery’s abbot. Agim Morani, one of the Albanians saved by the monks, told the BBC that the abbot "took us to the church and then came back for the others. If he hadn’t come it is one hundred percent certain we would be dead." The KLA has repaid the Christian solicitude of the Decani monks by vandalizing the monastery and destroying its icons.

Mother Maharija, the abbess of Zvecan’s Holy Mother Orthodox Convent in Kosovo, also provided shelter for ethnic Albanians during the war. "Our dearest neighbors are Albanians," Maharija told the Chicago Tribune. "During the war, we protected them, brought them medicine and took them to the hospital in Kosovska Mitrovica." Since the end of the war, notes the Tribune, "Nuns have been raped, churches vandalized, and members of religious orders robbed by the Kosovo Liberation Army"; the Holy Mother Orthodox Convent has been spared thus far, and Maharija intends to continue ministering to the needs of her neighbors.

Elsewhere in "liberated" Kosovo, KLA terrorists have vented their hatred on Orthodox Christian monks and nuns. The Times of London reported on June 21st that KLA marauders "attacked and possibly raped nuns" and began "a vicious series of revenge killings of Gypsies in the southern Prizren area." One British officer assigned to the area described as "sickening" the three-day ordeal of nine nuns who were trapped in a nearby convent. "I know [KLA guerillas] fired guns right next to the sisters’ heads and I believe very possibly the youngest sister was raped," he told the Times.

Bill Clinton’s legendary empathy flags when the subject is the plight of Kosovo’s Serbs, who are being "cleansed" from their homes under the largely indifferent gaze of UN/NATO "peacekeepers." During his June 25th press conference, Mr. Clinton was asked by a reporter about "Serb homes that are being burned, Serb stores that are being looted, and Serb civilians that are being terrorized" by KLA-led mobs. The impeached President actually defended the perpetrators: "I’m not particularly surprised after what they’ve been through."

The Clinton Administration and the UN’s so-called International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia have actually made it plain that the KLA can ravage Kosovo Serbs with impunity. "The U.S. government and the United Nations said … they have no plans to investigate the Kosovo Liberation Army for possible war crimes, arguing that a wave of revenge against Serbs in the province does not appear to be coordinated by the KLA leadership," reported the June 29th Washington Times. "Our mandate is to investigate crimes that occur during the war, during armed conflict that involve members of armed entities," declared Tribunal spokesman Paul Riley. Of the KLA’s post-war rampage, Riley opined, "I don’t think it’s an organized KLA attempt. I think it’s just guys doing what they think is right - burning houses."

While Serb civilians, as Bill Clinton has made clear, must pay the price for acts of terror committed by Milosevic’s minions, the KLA will not be held accountable for supposedly unorganized acts of terror they are committing against Serb civilians.

NATO "Success"

NATO’s 78-day bombing campaign inflicted little damage on the Serbian military and interior ministry forces responsible for terrorizing Kosovo’s Albanian population. "Within Kosovo, NATO’s KFOR troops have found few examples of bombing damage," Britain’s Sky News service reported in early July. "Strategic sites in the capital, Pristina, had been destroyed, as had some key bridges. But large columns of retreating Serb forces showed little sign of attack at the end of the conflict." "We all saw the Serbs leaving Kosovo with their tails and their flags flying," observed Lieutenant General Sir Roderick Cordy-Simpson, a British official who has commanded UN "peacekeepers" in Bosnia. "Certainly we did not do anything like [the damage] we pretended we had done...."

During the air campaign, reported military analyst Colonel David Hackworth, NATO’s "smart bombs and missiles costing from 50 grand to 2 million bucks repeatedly blew up decoy ‘tanks,’ ‘artillery pieces,’ and other ‘targets’ made of sticks and plastic...." Yugoslav Army units would rig dummy mobile-air-defense units, many of which were placed next to dummy bridges and "mock roads - strips of black plastic sheeting laid across open fields with ‘tanks’ and other ‘military vehicles’ painted on them," Hackworth continued. "U.S. aircraft flying at 15,000 feet had a field day blowing up these ‘Serb air defense units’ and other dummy targets, while their spinners back at NATO headquarters daily chanted to the world, ‘We are significantly degrading their air defense and combat ability.’"

NATO’s air campaign against civilian targets was significantly more "successful." At least 74 Kosovo Albanian refugees were slaughtered during a NATO air strike on the road between Prizren and Djakovica; the refugees were killed while attempting to return to their homes in Kosovo. Robert Fisk of London’s Independent newspaper described the "torn and mangled bodies" of NATO’s victims - "a young and beautiful girl, her eyes gently staring at me between half-closed lids, the bottom half of her head bathed in blood.... [T]he old man ripped in half and blasted into a tree … the smoldering skeleton with one bloody still flesh-adhering foot over the back of a trailer … the dead, naked man slouched over the steering wheel of a burnt tractor...."

Reporting from Surdulica, Fisk described the casualties of a NATO bomb that destroyed a sanitarium for lung and tuberculosis patients. At least 18 patients died in the attack on the hospital, which is clearly identified, according to Fisk, "on every map," and nowhere near a military installation. Fisk described teen-age Milena Malobabic, whose body was found near "that of her mother - both feet torn off but placed beside her legs, and Milena’s two brothers, one of them with an arm bent over his face as if still cowering from the bombs." As Fisk recounted the attack, "About 40 patients at the Special Hospital for Lung and Tuberculosis were seriously wounded when the NATO bombs fell on them just after midnight. Part of the two-story, 75-year-old hospital simply caved in on the men and women in their beds, which is where most of them died, although one old man whose body I saw was still dressed in a pair of old blue trousers and a torn striped shirt."

"Geneva Conventions - assiduously produced by NATO in response to war crimes against Albanians in Kosovo - state that civilians must be protected even if in the vicinity of military personnel," Fisk pointed out. "But the patients at Surdulica were not given that protection." Branislav Ristic, commander of the local civil defense unit, pointed out to Fisk that during World War II, resistance fighters were stationed near the sanitarium "and the Germans knew they were here but never touched them."

"The Germans never did anything like this," agreed Jokvana Ilic, a Belgrade schoolteacher reacting to a late April bombing of the Vracar residential district. "I cannot believe it. I simply cannot believe it." According to the Associated Press, "The heat from the explosions was so great, residents said, it burned the hair of those who ran out into the streets to see what had happened." "They are destroying us, one by one, piece by piece," wept 30-year-old Jasminka Radovanovic. "What do they want from us?"

Price of "Peace"

NATO’s attack on Yugoslavia, observed Professor Robert Hayden of the University of Pittsburgh, was "the first unprovoked, opposed military aggression in Europe since Soviet troops invaded Hungary in 1956." In this war of aggression, continued Hayden, "NATO’s attacks [were] aimed against civilian targets since literally the first night of the bombing, when a tractor factory in the Belgrade suburb of Rakovica was destroyed by cruise missiles. Since then, NATO targets have included roads, railroad tracks and bridges hundreds of miles from Kosovo, power plants, factories of many kinds, food processing and sugar processing plants, water pumping stations, cigarette factories, central heating plants for civilian apartment blocks, television studios, post offices, non-military government administrative buildings, ski resorts, government official residences, oil refineries, civilian airports, gas stations, and chemical plants."

Said Hayden: "That NATO planned from the start to hit civilian targets was made clear to me a few days before the attacks began by an employee of a U.S. intelligence organization who said that the CIA had been charged with preparing lists of Yugoslav economic assets and that, ‘basically, everything in the country is a target unless it’s taken off the list.’ NATO’s strategy is not to attack Yugoslavia’s army directly, but rather to destroy Yugoslavia itself.... With this strategy it is military losses that are ‘collateral damage,’ because most of the attacks are aimed at civilian targets."

During a March 31st interview, Dan Rather asked Bill Clinton if he had given the order to (in military parlance) "go downtown" - that is, to bomb non-military targets in Belgrade. Seeking refuge in circumlocution, the impeached President drawled out an answer worthy of a Soviet commissar: "We are attacking targets that we believe will … raise the price of aggression to an unacceptably high level so that we can get back to talking peace and security."

The world neither needs nor can afford the Soviet-style "peace and security" represented in NATO’s "victory" over Serbia.

The Lucis (Lucifer) Trust and the United Nations seem very innocuous on the front but their agenda is the ruination of souls and the conversion of the world to Satanism.

The Lucis (Lucifer) Trust is on WOR radio, New York, New York City's 2nd-Largest AM Radio Station WOR Radio 710 AM on you dial every Sunday from 7:30 am - 8 am.New Age and Satan Worship.

Here are some links

http://www.lucistrust.org/arcane/nasymb.shtml

http://www.oneworld.ru/lucis-rus/lucispub/

Teaching God's children to worship "Divine Nature"
http://getusout.org/un/articles/essay.htm

The Earth Charter
http://getusout.org/earthcharter/

http://getusout.org/earthcharter/index.htm

UNESCO: A Budding Global School Board
http://getusout.org/un/articles/unesco.htm

http://getusout.org/un/articles/newworldreligion.htm

http://thenewamerican.com/tna/2002/12-16-2002/vo18no25_ark.htm

http://thenewamerican.com/focus/earth_charter/index.htm


Rebutting Rockefeller
http://thenewamerican.com/tna/2002/11-04-2002/vo18no22_rockefeller.htm

http://getusout.org/earthworship/index.htm

http://getusout.org/un/articles/rockford_ark.htm

http://thenewamerican.com/tna/2002/12-16-2002/vo18no25_ark.htm

The European Union's Stealth Attack on Religion
http://thenewamerican.com/tna/2000/07-31-2000/insider/vo16no16_eu.htm

http://thenewamerican.com/focus/religion/index.htm____________________________________________________

The Catholic Church is against Communism and Socialism, Make sure the socialists do not take over; they are working from within the church and are part of the media and will stop at nothing from destroying the Church.
 
QUOD APOSTOLICI MUNERIS
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE LEO Xlll ON SOCIALISM
DECEMBER 28, 1878
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13apost.htm
 
NOSTIS ET NOBISCUM
ON THE CHURCH IN THE PONTIFICAL STATES
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS IX
DECEMBER 8, 1849
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius09/p9nostis.htm
 
QUADRAGESIMO ANNO
ON RECONSTRUCTION OF THE SOCIAL ORDER
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE PIUS Xl MAY 15, 1931
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Pius11/P11QUADR.HTM
 
GRAVES DE COMMUNI RE
Encyclical of Pope leo XIII on Christian Democracy
January 18, 1901
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/Leo13/l13grcom.htm
 
MATER ET MAGISTRA
ENCYCLICAL OF POPE JOHN XXIII ON MAY 15, 1961
http://www.papalencyclicals.net/John23/j23mater.htm
 
Part of the 45 Goals of Communism
 
38. Transfer some of the powers of arrest from the police to social agencies. Treat all behavioral problems as psychiatric disorders which no one but psychiatrists can understand [or treat].
 
39. Dominate the psychiatric profession and use mental health laws as a means of gaining coercive control over those who oppose Communist goals.
 
40. Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
 
41. Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents. Attribute prejudices, mental blocks and retarding of children to suppressive influence of parents.
__________________________________________
Lucis Trust - The Spiritual Foundation of the United Nations
UN Logo

33 Segments surrounded by sprigs of acacia
'Welcome to the United Nations. It's your World'...

By, Atrayu

The Spiritual Foundation of the United Nations

The Lucis Trust

UN Meditation Room The Lucis Trust is the Publishing House which prints and disseminates United Nations material. It is a devastating indictment of the New Age and Pagan nature of the UN. Lucis Trust was established in 1922 as Lucifer Trust by Alice Bailey as the publishing company to disseminate the books of Bailey and Blavatsky and the Theosophical Society. The title page of Alice Bailey's book, 'Initiation, Human and Solar' was originally printed in 1922, and clearly shows the publishing house as 'Lucifer Publishing CoIn 1923. Bailey changed the name to Lucis Trust, because Lucifer Trust revealed the true nature of the New Age Movement too clearly. (Constance Cumbey, The Hidden Dangers of the Rainbow, p. 49). A quick trip to any New Age bookstore will reveal that many of the hard-core New Age books are published by Lucis Trust.

At one time, the Lucis Trust office in New York was located at 866 United Nations Plaza and is a member of the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations under a slick program called "World Goodwill". In an Alice Bailey book called "Education for a New Age"; she suggests that in the new age "World Citizenship should be the goal of the enlightened, with a world federation and a world brain." In other words - a One World Government New World Order.

Luci's Trust is sponsored by among others Robert McNamara, former minister of Defence in the USA, president of the World Bank, member of the Rockefeller Foundation, and Thomas Watson (IBM, former ambassador in Moscow). Luci's Trust sponsors among others the following organizations: UN, Greenpeace Int., Greenpeace USA, Amnesty Int. and UNICEF.

The United Nations has long been one of the foremost world harbingers for the "New Spirituality" and the gathering "New World Order" based on ancient occult and freemasonic principles. Seven years after the birth of the UN, a book was published by the theosophist and founder of the Lucis Trust, Alice Bailey, claiming that "Evidence of the growth of the human intellect along the needed receptive lines [for the preparation of the New Age] can be seen in the "planning" of various nations and in the efforts of the United Nations to formulate a world plan... From the very start of this unfoldment, three occult factors have governed the development of all these plans". [Alice B. Bailey, Discipleship in the New Age (Lucis Press, 1955), Vol. II, p.35.]

Although she did not spell out clearly the identity of these 'three occult factors', she did reveal to her students that "Within the United Nations is the germ and seed of a great international and meditating, reflective group - a group of thinking and informed men and women in whose hands lies the destiny of humanity. This is largely under the control of many fourth ray disciples, if you could but realise it, and their point of meditative focus is the intuitional or Buddhic plane - the plane upon which all hierarchical activity is today to be found'. [Ibid. p.220.]

To this end, the Lucis Trust, under the leadership of Foster and Alice Bailey, started a group called 'World Goodwill' - an official non-governmental organization within the United Nations. The stated aim of this group is "to cooperate in the world of preparation for the reappearance of the Christ" [One Earth, the magazine of the Findhorn Foundation, October/November 1986, Vol. 6, Issue 6, p.24.]

But the esoteric work inside the UN does not stop with such recognized occult groupings. Much of the impetus for this process was initiated through the officership of two Secretary-Generals of the UN, Dag Hammarskjöld (held office: 1953-1961) and U Thant (held office: 1961-1971) who succeeded him, and one Assistant Secretary-general, Dr. Robert Muller. In a book written to celebrate the philosophy of Teilhard de Chardin (and edited by Robert Muller), it is revealed "Dag Hammarskjöld, the rational Nordic economist, had ended up as a mystic. He too held at the end of his life that spirituality was the ultimate key to our earthly fate in time and space". [Robert Muller (ed.), The Desire to be Human: A Global Reconnaissance of Human Perspectives in an Age of Transformation (Miranana, 1983), p.304.]

Sri Chinmoy, the New Age guru, meditation leader at the UN, wrote: "the United Nations is the chosen instrument of God; to be a chosen instrument means to be a divine messenger carrying the banner of God's inner vision and outer manifestation."

William Jasper, author of "A New World Religion" describes the religion of the UN: "...a weird and diabolical convergence of New Age mysticism, pantheism, aboriginal animism atheism, communism, socialism, Luciferian occultism, apostate Christianity, Islam, Taoism, Buddhism, and Hinduism".

http://www.lucistrust.org

You can find out much more about them and how they're involved with the work of the United Nations by following their link "World Goodwill" at the top of their home page.


The Aquarian Age Community

http://www.aquaac.org/

This Website is sponsored by the United Nations and the whole NWO philosophy is there. The page which explains the work of the Aquarian Age Community, as they call themselves, has this proud quote at the header of their page at http://www.aquaac.org/about/about.html

Such a grandeur is ahead!
Such a great step awaits a fiery affirmation.
Our teaching and the affirmation of the Higher
Principles will reveal so much that is great to humanity!
A great period is drawing near: Thus we do create together.

Fiery World
Vol. III, par. 149

Amongst the many 'enlightening' pages in this website, you can easily find 'fascinating' articles entitled:

"The New World Order and the Work of the UN" http://www.aquaac.org/un/nwo.html

"The World Spiritual Teacher, the Esoteric Community and the United Nations" http://www.aquaac.org/meetings/rttop.html

Preparing the Way for the Reappearance of the World Spiritual Teacher, the Work of the United Nations and the World-Wide Esoteric Community

http://www.aquaac.org/meetings/RT2001.html and many more articles.

This is not Christian theology but New Age paganism. You can also read the NWO quotes I posted, further down this page. Here's another by Curtis Dall, FD Roosevelt's son in law as quoted in his book, My Exploited Father in Law:

"For a long time I felt that FDR had developed many thoughts and ideas that were his own to benefit this country, the United States. But, he didn't. Most of his thoughts, his political ammunition, as it were, were carefully manufactured for him in advanced by the Council on Foreign Relations One World Money group... Brilliantly, with great gusto, like a fine piece of artillery, he exploded that prepared "ammunition" in the middle of an unsuspecting target, the American people, and thus paid off and returned his internationalist political support.

The UN is but a long range, international banking apparatus nearly set up for financial and economic profit by a small group of powerful One World Revolutionaries, hungry for profit and power.

The depression was the calculated 'shearing' of the public by the World Money powers, triggered by the planned sudden shortage of supply of call money in the New York money market... The One World Government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank."

 

Under the U.N. Gavel
By Sen. Larry E. Craig, R-ID 

At its founding, the mission of the United Nations, as stated in its charter, was "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war." It made no claim to supersede the sovereignty of its member states. Article 2 says that the United Nations "is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members," and it may not "intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state."

Since then, the United Nations has turned the principle of national sovereignty on its head. Through a host of conventions, treaties and conferences, it has intruded into regulation of resources and the economy (for example, treaties on "biological diversity," marine resources and climate change) and family life (hyping phoney liberalism while masculinity is scorned and western manhood is amputated - causing untold grief to the family unit) (conventions on parent-child relations and women in society). It has demanded that countries institute racial quotas and laws against hate crimes and speech (while the U.N. itself can jail someone for 30 years without trial). Recently the United Nations tried to undermine Americans' constitutional right to keep and bear arms (with proposed restrictions on the international sale of small arms).

Fortunately, many of these have been dead on arrival in the U.S. Senate, successive presidents have refused to endorse others, and in any case the United Nations had little power of enforcement. But in 1998, one mechanism of global government (there it is in the Washington Post folks) came to life with the so-called "Rome Statute" establishing a permanent International Criminal Court (and abolishing the Magna Carta in Britain). Once this treaty is ratified by 60 countries, the United Nations will wield judicial power over every individual human being -- even over citizens of countries that haven't joined the court.

While the court's stated mission is dealing with war crimes and crimes against humanity (what about their own crimes against humanity when they committed widespread genocide in the Balkans and East Timor? Dare I say they are hypocrites?) -- which, because there is no appeal from its decisions, only the court will have the right to define -- its mandate could be broadened later. Based on existing U.N. tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda, which are models for the International Criminal Court, defendants will have none of the due process rights afforded by the U.S. Constitution, such as trial by jury, confrontation of witnesses or a speedy and public trial (that's a communist court system!).

President Clinton signed the Rome treaty last year, citing U.S. support for existing U.N. war crimes tribunals. Many suppose the court will target only a Slobodan Milosevic or the perpetrators of massacres in Rwanda, or dictators like Iraq's Saddam Hussein. But who knows? To some people, Augusto Pinochet is the man who saved Chile from communism; to others he is a murderer. Who should judge him -- the United Nations or the Chilean people?

In dozens of countries, governments use brutal force against insurgents. Should the United Nations decide whether leaders in Turkey or India should be put in the defendants' dock, and then commit the United States to bring them there? How about Russia's Vladimir Putin, for Chechnya? Or Israel's Ariel Sharon? Can we trust the United Nations with that decision (the more evil these premieres are - the more the U.N. loves them)?

The court's critics rightly cite the danger to U.S. military personnel deployed abroad. Since even one death can be a war crime, a U.S. soldier could be indicted just for doing his duty. But the International Criminal Court also would apply to acts "committed" by any American here at home. The European Union and U.S. domestic opponents consider the death penalty "discriminatory" and "inhumane." Could an American governor face indictment by the court for "crimes against humanity" for signing a death warrant?

Milosevic was delivered to a U.N. court (largely at U.S. insistence) for offences occurring entirely within his own country. Some say the Milosevic precedent doesn't threaten Americans, because the U.S. Constitution protects them. But for Milosevic, we demanded that the Yugoslav Constitution be trashed and the United Nations' authority prevail. Why should the International Criminal Court treat our Constitution any better (they're already destroying the 2nd amendment with their gun grab and the 1st with their phoney 'hate crime' nonsense)?

Instead of trying to "fix" the Rome treaty, the United States must recognize that it is a fundamental threat to American sovereignty. The State Department's participation in the court's preparatory commission is counterproductive. We need to make it clear that we consider the court an illegitimate body, that the United States will never join it and that we will never accept its "jurisdiction" over any U.S. citizen or help to impose it on other countries.




31 posted on 04/19/2003 4:40:01 PM PDT by Coleus (RU-486 Kills Babies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Free the USA; Libertarianize the GOP; Lion's Cub; MsLady; smarticus; Lloyd227; Mudboy Slim; ...
ping
32 posted on 04/19/2003 4:40:07 PM PDT by madfly (AZFIRE.org, NATURALPROCESS.net, AZAnderson.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unixfox
Nice Pick, I just made it a little smaller.

33 posted on 04/19/2003 7:58:34 PM PDT by Coleus (RU-486 Kills Babies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: madfly
bump
34 posted on 04/20/2003 7:35:30 AM PDT by Mixer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: vinylsidingman
Perhaps my memory is going but i recall reading reports after the African summit (last year ?) that the US and Israel were the true terrorist nations.

Seems to me it was earlier—like shortly before 9/11. It was a global gabfest in S. Africa about some big "issue" (third-world development? racism? I forget!) at which the USA and Israel were denounced as racist countries, etc.

And while they were there, the UN peons & bureaucrats pigged out on oysters, lobster, fine steaks, expensive wines, etc. while people just outdoors were starving.

35 posted on 04/21/2003 9:21:06 AM PDT by TonyRo76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: vinylsidingman
Found it! Here are some stories (titles mine):

Race conference targets Israel
Bush blasts UN hypocrites
Useless UN gabfest finally ends

36 posted on 04/21/2003 9:27:12 AM PDT by TonyRo76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: TonyRo76
Found it! Here are some stories (titles mine):

Thank YOU, friend,, i know i'm getting old and the old brain ain't what it used to be, but i was sure i didn't dream this up,, which a fellow freeper told me i had,,

AGAIN, Thanx,

vsm

37 posted on 04/21/2003 10:10:43 AM PDT by vinylsidingman (euroweenies can't handle getting rid of scum,, so again ,the US will show em how)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: vinylsidingman
No problem at all, vsm! Glad to help out :)
38 posted on 04/21/2003 11:09:17 AM PDT by TonyRo76
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: panaxanax
The John Birchers were, and those that remain persist in being, weird, arrogant, unthinking and uninformed isolationists whose world ceased to exist in 1898 with the emergence of the U.S. as a world power. When the Monroe Doctrine was put into action by Teddy Roosevelt after the war with Spain, a world without an international forum for the airing of divergent views and the ability to express a consensus of international legitimacy would become a world in constant hostile conflict.

The demise of the 17th Century Balance of Power geopolitical relationships was both the cause of, and the lesson of WW I. We failed to learn from that terrible experience and persisted in our wishful and whistful thinking that the oceans were all the barriers to conflict we needed. The cauldron of WW II demonstrated our foolishness and spawned the birth of an effective international body, the UN.

It suffers from many faults and frequently tries to block our pursuit of what we consider to be our vital national interests. But, despite its faults and influence by nation-states who hope to deter our role as the world's sole super power, it nonetheless provides the U.S. a forum for the unitary ability to persuade, cajole and influence geopolitics in the modern era.

In those instances, such as the Middle East, when the U.S. considers vital interests to supervene the will of the UN, we have the legitimate power to act contrary to that international expression and pursue a course of conduct we deem necessary. The UN does not infringe on our sovereignty when we find that compromise or conciliation to be inappropriate. To the contrary, it validates the legitimacy of the doctrine of sovereignty and the concept of vital national interests while, at the same time, providing a body for joint action on those subjects, like health, enviromental preservation and regional conflcits on which we agree with other nations.

The possession of supra power carries with it the obligation to be wise and prudent in the exercise of that power. The world as it exists today, in its much smaller state vis-a-vis the 19th Century, cannot exist peacefully if there were to be a return to a form of the discredited balance of power geopolitical relationships among nations. That is precisely what would result from a disintegration of the UN by the withdrawal of the U.S.

39 posted on 04/22/2003 1:07:06 PM PDT by middie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: middie
Very well written, but how could the John Birchers "world [have] ceased to exist in 1898"?

Do you really think (as you described) that the UN is an "effective international body?

I hold my ground in that we should get out of the UN, and fast.

Hope you enjoy being under their control when they come to get your weapons, when they control your national parks etc. etc.

Not me. I'll fight them on every front to retain US sovereignty. I do not and will not be one of Kofi's usefull idiots.
40 posted on 04/23/2003 8:59:49 PM PDT by panaxanax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Nephi
bttt
41 posted on 11/17/2003 9:19:51 PM PST by Coleus (Only half the patients who go into an abortion clinic come out alive.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nephi

what happened to www.getusout.org


42 posted on 01/24/2009 8:16:46 PM PST by Coleus (Abortion and Euthanasia, don't Obama and the Democrats just kill ya!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Illbay

There was a John Birch Society billboard that had that exact wording on it in the town where I grew up 30+ years ago.


43 posted on 01/25/2009 8:17:45 AM PST by kalee (01/20/13 The end of an error.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Nephi

read later, thanks!


44 posted on 01/25/2009 8:25:44 AM PST by AuntB (The right to vote in America: Blacks 1870; Women 1920; Native Americans 1925; Foreigners 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Coleus; AuntB
Whoa, that was a trip down memory lane. I counted about six freepers that have since been banned. Part of the Ron Paul purge?

Anyway, here's a readable summary.

Here's a summary of the end result:

Senator Orrin Hatch appears to have played a decisive role in torpedoing the resolution. Senator Michael Waddoups, the majority leader of the Utah Senate, told Get US out! Committee member Deanna Arnason that he had conferred with Hatch on the matter and Hatch had dismissed the resolution as a "joke." Following Hatch's lead. Waddoups turned thumbs down on the resolution.

Another activist, who works closely with the legislature and asked not to be named, told THE NEW AMERICAN: "Majority Leader Waddoups has been good on many issues, but his running to Senator Hatch on the UN resolution is a bad sign; it shows the harmful influence that Hatch has on the legislature and state politics in general. The real joke is Hatch's unwarranted image as a conservative. He supports many unconstitutional, Big Government programs and has been praised by UN officials for his support of UN programs.

But the Get US out! campaign is gaining steam and next time around it will take more than Hatch and Leavitt to stop it." Senator Hatch reportedly also spoke to members of the House to dissuade them from supporting the measure. Governor Leavitt, a strong UN supporter was quoted in the Deseret News, one of the Beehive State's leading newspapers, as opposing the resolution.

45 posted on 01/25/2009 10:07:31 AM PST by Nephi (Like the failed promise of Fascism, masquerading as Capitalism? You're gonna love Marxism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Nephi

But the Get US out! campaign is gaining steam >>

It’s dead here.

http://www.getusout.org/


46 posted on 01/25/2009 11:02:37 AM PST by Coleus (Abortion and Euthanasia, don't Obama and the Democrats just kill ya!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson