The United Nations and Globalization

This week Barack Obama spoke before the UN General assembly in New York City, and extolled globalism. I decided to tweak this essay that I wrote quite a while back but never published, and turn it into a blog post.

In this essay I intend to give a relatively brief history of the United Nations and their aims at consolidating political power to set the stage for a one world socialist government. This essay is the result of reading several JBS books and UN documents totaling well over 600 pages and doing some internet research.

The push for the creation of the United Nations (UN) began years before its establishment. In 1942 there was a Declaration of United Nations issued by several countries-including the U.S.A.-concerning cooperation of governments against the Third Reich. There was also a preliminary meeting in August of 1944 by a group of men at the luxurious Dumbarton Oaks estate in the Georgetown neighborhood of Washington, D.C. These men were working to create a newer version of the failed WWI era League of Nations.

Then in 1945, there was a meeting held in San Francisco at which the charter of the United Nations was written. This meeting was presided over by Alger Hiss, an American, CFR member, and spy for the Soviet Union. On October 24, 1945, the treaty/charter of the UN was ratified by the five permanent members of the Security Council and came into effect.

The General Assembly is the parliament of the UN and the Secretariat is the executive arm. However, it appears to me that the Security Council is the center of power at the UN. The Security Council concerns itself with warfare, sanctions against nations, and “peacekeeping” operations. The Security Council’s five permanent members are the U.S.A., UK, France, Soviet Union (now Russia), and China (originally Chiang Kai-Shek’s nationalist China {Taiwan}-but after 1971 replaced by the communist Peoples Republic of China).

Not only was the UN’s founding conference chaired by a communist, the most important body (Security Council) of the UN has historically been loaded by socialists and communists. The United Nations has always been pro-communist.

William F. Jasper’s 2001 book The United Nations Exposed quotes G. Edward Griffin as follows:

“In 1950 the State Department issued a document entitled Postwar Foreign Policy Preparation, 1939-45… This and similar official records reveal that the following were key government figures in UN planning within the U.S. State Department and Treasury Department: Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, Virginius Frank Coe, Dean Acheson, Noel Field, Lawrence Duggan, Henry Julian Wadleigh, John Carter Vincent, David Weintraub, Nathan Gregory Silvermaster, Harold Glasser, Victor Perlo, Irving Kaplan, Solomon Adler, Abraham George Silverman, William L. Ullman, and William H. Taylor. With the single exception of Dean Acheson, all of these men have since been identified in sworn testimony as secret Communist agents!

What the excellent Griffin quote above left out was that at least 3-and possibly seven or more- of those seventeen men were Jews. The John Birch Society has published some very good material concerning the CFR, UN, and communism; however they stay far away from open criticism of International Jewry. (Griffin does have the guts to briefly acknowledge that Rothschild and other principal international bankers are Jewish in his book The Creature From Jekyll Island; whether his mention of this is to the credit of his honesty or patriotism, or just an example of something that he would have lost all credibility if he had not admitted, I will leave my readers to judge).

The UN has many agencies and programs, some of the more benevolent sounding ones are: United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), World Health Organization, and United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). These organizations were created with nice, humanitarian sounding goals to lull the populace of the Western world into accepting the UN. In a free country, it is not the job of the government-or a supranational governmental organization such as the UN- to legislate, oversee or fund the health, education, nutrition, scientific research, or cultural activities of the citizens.

The UN has established so many agencies and programs that I cannot possibly cover them all in this essay. The United Nations Exposed by William F. Jasper is a 354 page work that goes into detail on many of the UNs activities. I shall only cover a few of the most destructive of the UNs activities in this essay.

Agenda 21 was a product of the UN’s Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992. Agenda 21 concerns itself with sustainable development, environmentalism, combating poverty, etc. Agenda 21 would like to have the UN and the governments of the world taking jurisdiction over the management and use of the entire land and ocean area of the earth. To put it simply, Agenda 21 is zoning on steroids.

Perhaps the most pressing current threat to American citizens from the UN is global arms control. This arms control affects both states and individuals. The UN began a drive for international weapons controls with the 1961 U.S. State Department document entitled Freedom From War: The United States Program For General And Complete Disarmament In A Peaceful World (Department of State Publication 7277). The Freedom From War document called for a gradual, three stage plan for the disarmament of every nation on earth and the simultaneous progressive strengthening of the UN by the creation of a U.N. Peace Force! In the third stage of this plan, it states that (formerly independent) nations would “retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order; they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a U.N. Peace Force ”. The U.N Peace Force would be “equipped with agreed types and quantities of armaments”. Note that the states may not own nuclear weapons, but the UN is subject to no such prohibition!

Here we have a proposed one world army under the command of the UN with types and quantities of weaponry that would make it basically impossible for any (formerly) sovereign nation to challenge them, much less a citizenry fighting for their freedom!

Another part of phase three of this plan was that “The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used  by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes”.  Now we see that civilian ownership of firearms would no longer exist under this plan! The Freedom From War document is nothing more than the deranged fantasy of a would be global tyrant. Regrettably, the Freedom from War proposal was not the last UN gun control attempt.

The push for internationally directed gun control has accelerated in the last two decades; it is perilously near its goal. The International Action Network on Small Arms (IANSA) is a non-governmental organization (NGO) that is recognized by the UN and has played an important role in the destruction of the firearms ownership rights of citizens of America and other countries. Rebecca Peters of IANSA was involved in the institution of the extremely strict gun control in Australia. (People who follow the pathetically mainstream National Rifle Association (NRA) will perhaps remember that Peters formally debated NRA official Wayne LaPierre at King’s College in Great Britain several years ago).

Another powerful woman working with the UN to establish international gun control is Cora Weiss. Cora Weiss is a member of the CFR, a 1960’s anti-war activist, official at The Hague Appeal for Peace, Marxist sympathizer, daughter of noted communist Samuel Rubin, husband of New York lawyer Peter Weiss, and a Jew by birth. Both Peter and Cora Weiss have been affiliated with the Institute For Policy Studies (IPS), a Washington, D.C. based progressive think tank which had possible ties to the Soviet KGB. Cora Weiss has also been involved in gun control activities in the United States. Traitors like Cora Weiss are the people wishing to disarm American citizens.

In 2013, there was a UN conference held in New York City which produced the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT); the ATT was approved by the UN General Assembly in April of 2013. The ATT was signed by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry (Cohen), but it has not been ratified by the U.S. Senate and is not legally binding.

The ATT talks about the illicit trade in conventional arms, but how do they define illicit? The ATT regulates the international trade in weapons-including firearms and ammunition-and declares that individual states are duty bound to “establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list…”.

The ATT acknowledges no right of citizens to own firearms; the Preamble declares: “Mindful of the legitimate trade and lawful ownership, and use of certain conventional arms for recreational, cultural, historical, and sporting activities, where such trade, ownership and use are permitted or protected by law…” There is no UN acknowledged right of a citizen to own or use a firearm for personal defense or defense against a tyrannical government.

The UN ATT only acknowledges the right OR privilege of citizens owning CERTAIN types of firearms for recreational purposes. Article 5 (2) of the ATT demands that: “Each State Party shall establish and maintain a national control system, including a national control list, in order to implement the provisions of this treaty”. Article 5 (3) states that: “Each State Party is encouraged to apply the provisions of this Treaty to the broadest range of conventional arms”. Article 12 (2) states that: “Each State Party is encouraged to maintain records of conventional arms covered under Article 2 (1) that are transferred to its territory as the final destination…” Article 12 (3) states that “Each State Party is encouraged to include in those records: the quantity, value, model/type…”  The ATT is the foundation for internationally coordinated control of civilian small arms and ammunition.

The UN has already been involved in door to door arms confiscations outside of the USA. In the pictures section of Steve Bonta’s book Inside The United Nations you can see a color photograph of US troops, in combat gear and under UN authority, doing a door to door search for weapons in Kosovo-with black uniformed, blue helmeted UN police officials overseeing the operation!

It is also worth noting that the Korean War (1950-53) was fought under UN authority! American President Harry Truman called the Korean War a “police action” and not a war. American, British, and South Korean troops fought together under UN command against the communist North Koreans and their Chinese allies. Truman prosecuted this war without the Constitutionally mandated Declaration of War; Truman was fighting under United Nations authority!

The UN’s ATT went into effect for those who had ratified it on December 24, 2014. The ATT is law in some countries around the world as you read this. The United States has signed it, but it cannot be law until the U.S. Senate ratifies it. Our Senate could betray us, or Barak Obama –or a future president Clinton- could issue some (unconstitutional) Executive Orders to implement provisions of the ATT without Congress. If Obama were to make that move, it could easily set off a chain reaction that would lead to violent resistance- in short, to the second Revolution.

The UN’s 1948 “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” is a weak and pathetic document compared to the U.S. Constitution’s Bill of Rights or the earlier Virginia Declaration of Rights. The legal/trial protections of the UN Declaration are far inferior to the U.S. Bill of Rights. For example, UN Article 9 states: “No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile”. This is a huge difference from the U.S. Bill of Rights’ 4th Amendment, which reads: “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized”. How does the UN define arbitrary? Why is there no UN protection against unreasonable searches or general warrants?

The UN also does not guarantee a trial by a jury of one’s peers, or other Common Law rights held by Americans. Obviously there is no 2nd Amendment or right to bear arms in the UN Declaration!

In 1959 the UN General Assembly passed the “Declaration Of The Rights Of The Child”. This Declaration has ten articles, some containing multiple rights. This Declaration creates new rights, such as in its article 4. Article 4 states that: “The child shall enjoy the benefits of social security. He shall be entitled to grow and develop in health; to this end, special care and protection shall be provided both to him and to his mother, including adequate pre-natal and post-natal care. The child shall have the right to adequate nutrition, housing, recreation and medical services”.

While the Bible and American cultural tradition place the responsibility of providing and caring for a child on the child’s parents-and specifically the child’s father-the UN declaration declares entitlements that are to be fulfilled by government. Who shall pay for this food/nutrition, housing, and medical care if the family is not able to? Government will. This article is pure socialism.

Please note that Americans have the God given and Constitutionally secured right to life, liberty, and the PURSUIT of happiness. Recognizing the natural, inborn right to pursue goods or services is dramatically different from proclaiming an entitlement to goods or services; this is the difference between the U. S. Bill of Rights and the UN Declaration; this is the difference between freedom and slavery.

Switching away from the UN, in 2002 the International Criminal Court (ICC) came into existence. The ICC is headquartered at The Hague, Netherlands. The ICC was created by the Rome Statute, a treaty that was ratified into law in 2002. The ICC is not a formal part of the UN, however it is designed to work in synthesis with the UN. The ICC claims jurisdiction over four broad areas of crimes: “war crimes”, “genocide”, “crimes against humanity”, and the “crime of aggression”; these crimes can be defined very broadly.

The ICC claims the jurisdiction to try American citizens for supposed crimes committed on American soil in a world court! This is no different than when the British declared their (supposed) authority to try American colonists for “crimes” committed in America in a British court in Great Britain; that was a part of the “long train of abuses and usurpations” that led to the American Revolution!

It was also during 1944 that the Bretton Woods conference was held. The conference was officially called the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference and was held in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire. The top American representative at this conference was none other than Jewish communist Harry Dexter White. The British were represented by well-known socialist economist and homosexual John Maynard Keynes. The Bretton Woods conference created the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.

To be blunt, the World Bank exists to take money from self-sufficient countries and give it to Third World countries in the form of “loans” that will never be repaid; the World Bank is international socialism. An international currency known as the “bancor” was talked about at this conference, but the world was not yet ready for such open globalization.

There is also the European Union model to consider. In post-WWII Europe there was a drive for international unity; this is a very unwise concept when one considers the ethnic, cultural, religious, and legal theory differences of the different nations, not to mention the history of war between many of them during the last five centuries.

The European Coal and Steel Community (1952) led to the European Economic Community (1957). The European Economic Community was commonly called the Common Market. In 1993, the European Union (EU) became a legal reality. The Treaty of Lisbon became law in 2009 and further strengthened the powers of the European Union.

The EU came into being gradually, not in one agreement. One could say that the EU is an example of Fabian principles applied to international organizations.

I, and many American patriots, believe that the Unites States of America is likely being slowly led down the road to a planned EU style union of the countries of North America. In 1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) came into legal effect. There also was the Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP) that was founded in 2005 by the USA, Canada, and Mexico. The SPP concerned itself with a variety of issues including trade, border security, and pandemic planning. There is talk among patriots of potential government plans to build a NAFTA Superhighway running from Mexico to Canada; the failed Trans Texas Corridor highway plan was most likely a part of this system.

I would recommend everyone read the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Declaration of the Rights of the Child, Arms Trade Treaty, and the 1961 U.S. State Department document Freedom from War to understand the treacherous UN through their own documents. The anti-UN books The United Nations Exposed by William F. Jasper, Inside The United Nations by Steve Bonta, and Global Gun Grab by William Norman Grigg are worth reading if one desires a more in depth knowledge of UN history and crimes than this brief essay has given you.

You might also find it enlightening to look up the documentary film Katanga The Untold Story that was produced in the 1960s. It is the story, narrated be a U.S. Congressman, of how the UN backed (with military aid) the communist government of the Congo in it’s violent, rape filled war of subjugation of the peaceful, free market, province of Katanga that had seceded from the Congo in order to preserve their pro-Christian, pro-Western democratically elected government.

The 20th century saw a powerful drive for global government. In addition to the global organizations covered in this chapter, the Cold War threat of nuclear destruction was used to frighten people into desiring world peace at any cost. All globalization is achieved at the expense of national sovereignty and human liberties. Globalization destroys the culture and the principles of free government cherished by Americans. All globalization must be opposed by freemen.

~Remember the Founders and the 14 Words~

Copyright © 2016 by Joseph Charles Putnam of Orange County, Indiana. All rights reserved.

 

Advertisements

Author: Joe Putnam

I am a Christian (Reformed/Sovereign Grace Baptist type), white American of Western European bloodline, advocate of an agrarian social order, Kinist, White Nationalist, admirer of America’s Founding Fathers and the Boys in Gray, homesteader, indie published author, and amateur historian. I have indie published several books, all of which are available from Amazon. I am a life long resident of rural Orange County, IN –in the part of the Upper South that many would term Greater Appalachia or the Dixie Frontier. In addition to my own blog, I am a contributor to the multi-author blog Identity Dixie. I am active in promotion of the Alt-South movement. In addition to my blog writings, I am currently gearing up for (at least) two more book projects –one theological and one historical. The theological one will cover the three interpretational views of Daniel’s 70th Week. I hope to have this book in print in late summer 2017. (Hint: I am, not a Dispensational Futurist). The historical book will be a biography of George Rogers Clark (1752-1818). Clark was a noted Virginia militia officer who’s campaigns, including his successful siege of Vincennes, basically took the Old Northwest from Britain during the American Revolution. Clark spent the rest of his life around the river that separates Clarksville, IN from Louisville, Kentucky. I hope to have my Clark bio in print in early 2018.

1 thought on “The United Nations and Globalization”

  1. The UN Declaration of Human Rights always has a “get out clause” on their statements. The right of freedom of religion and press is always qualified with the UN’s “except where prohibited by law”. Each and every time the UN can remove said rights when they feel justified. This is nothing more than the state granting privileges and not recognizing God-given rights.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s