Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
The following program contains material that may be disturbing to some viewers. Viewer discretion is advised.
America is surrendering it’s sovereignty to a world government. Hooray
World Government is coming. Deal with it.
Robert Wright senior editor of the New Republic writes that: ''Much power now vested in the nation state
is starting to migrate to international institutions.''
World government he claims is probably in the cards and what’s more, it's a good idea.''
Often those working for world government present themselves
not as advocates
but as mere analysts of inevitable natural trends.
By casting the steps toward world government in a favourable light they prepare the public to accept what lies ahead.
The John Birch Society presents
The U.N
The U.N DECEPTION
New York City
The World Federalist Association or WFA is one of the largest
organizations that openly promote world government.
Periodically the WFA extends a world governance award to a prominent
individual pushing for the same goal.
Former CBS anchorman Walter Cronkite was among the recipients of the WFA award
Thank you very much. Today we must develop federal structures on a
global level
to deal with problems we need a system of enforceable world law.
A democratic federal world government.
In a close circuit hook-up Hillary Clinton congratulated Cronkite.
For decades you told us the way it is,
but tonight we argue for fighting for the way it could be.
In nineteen ninety three
the WFA honoured an editor for Time magazine for an essay he had written
entitled
''The Birth of the Global Nation''
''Nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority.''
After receiving the award the editor Strobe Talbott
was appointed deputy secretary of state in the Clinton administration.
In February of 2000
the New York Times allowed the WFA
a full page ad to spread it’s globalist propaganda.
Washington D.C
However those striving for world government
generally keep their objective hidden from the public eye. The late senator
Alan Cranston explains why to his fellow globalists in April 1976
issue of Transition magazine.
The more we talk about world government, the less chance of achieving it,
because it frightens people who would accept the concept of world law.
Globalist often cloak they're ultimate goal behind less threatening labels
Terms such as ''world order'' and ''collective security''
''inter-dependence'' ''global community''
''economic integration'' or ''convergence'' however all point down the same road.
Yet candid admissions do occur
occationally they even expose official policy. One of the most blatant
is recorded in a confidential 1961 study
commissioned by the U.S state department ''A World Effectively Controlled
by the United Nations'' directly states the key point. ''it is government we are
discussing here - inescapable.''
The author
MIT professor Lincoln P. Bloomfield
also explains that the U.N would have to have
an unchallengeable monopoly on military power.
''A world effectively
controlled by the United Nations
is one in which 'world government' would come about through the establishment of
supranational institutions
characterized
by mandatory universal membership.''
''National disarmament is a condition... for effective U.N control.''
The Bloomfield study is grounded in official American policy. That policy is stated
openly
in ''Freedom from War. The United States program for a general and complete
disarmament in a
peaceful world.'' 67 00:04:51,099 --> 00:04:55,009 It was presented to the U.N general assembly by President Kennedy.
The document calls for the transfer of national armaments to U.N control
in three stages stage two proposes that: ''The U.N Peace Force shall be establishment
and progressively strengthened.'' At the dawn of the twenty first century programs to
complete this stage are firmly established and well underway.
The freedom from war blueprint concludes with stage three. ''...where no state would have
the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N Peace
Force.'' This policy has guided every administration since.
Even so-called Conservative Republican administrations
have been committed to building this new world order.
We have before us the opportunity to forge
for ourselves and for future generations
a new world order.
A world where the rule of law
not the law of the jungle
governs the conduct of nations.
When we are successful
and we will be
we had a real chance at this new world order.
An order in which a credible United Nations
can use it’s peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision
of the UN's founders.
Yet the potential dangers from this massive power transfer are not being
discussed in the public arena.
Behind the conduct of top American officials and their media allies
exist motivations that stepping back in time can help clarify.
THE AGELESS *** FOR POWER
The framers of the Constitution
had a profound understanding of human nature.
They knew that even the best of men could not be trusted with power.
So they designed a government with checks and balances to make it difficult
for officials to accumulate
and abuse power.
The United Nations however embodies few of those checks and balances
and it recognizes no moral authority greater than itself.
Investigative reporter for the New American magazine
and author of ''The United Nations EXPOSED'' William F. Jasper
Certainly one of the most important principles
embodied in the U.S constitution is the recognition
that individual rights come from God
and the purpose of government is to protect those rights. The United Nations
recognizes no God above the U.N.
The United Nations recognizes no impediments or restrictions on its
power.
A DISTURBING PATTERN
An early U.N peacekeeping operation
illustrates the inherent nature of entrusting the U.N with power.
The study is the Belgian colony in Africa known as the Congo.
In the early 60's European nations fell under intense international
pressure
to give up their colonies in Africa and prepare them for independence and self
rule.
To hasten this process
the U.N formed a committee on decolonization.
At the same time the Soviets were working to gain control of these colonies
for themselves.
They sponsored so-called liberation movements
and conspired to bring their front men to power
through international pressure,
bribery
and even terrorism.
In 1960 Belgium yielded to the international pressure
and granted independence to the Congo.
The Soviets where ready to fill the vacuum
Patrice Lumumba was there man bought and paid for with cash, arms,
luxuries
and all the women gin and hashish he desired.
With Lumumba as premier
peaceful independence lasted one week.
Lumumba then unleashed a communist reign
of terror against the populace.
Men, women and children were tortured and murdered.
A mix of terror in the Congo
the province of the Katanga remained by comparison an island of peace order
and stability.
Under the able leadership of Moise Tshombe
Katanga declared it’s independence from the central Congolese regime.
''I am seceding from chaos'' declared president Tshombe
a devout Christian and an
ardent anti-Communist.
For a brief moment
the courageous people in this infant nation stood as the singular testament to the
capability
of the newly independent Africans
as a free people they were capable of governing themselves with a sense of
peace, order and justice.
Moise Tshombe misfortune however
was to be
pro-Western
and pro-free enterprise.
Nikita Khrushchev declared Tshombe to be a turncoat, a traitor to the interests
of the Congolese people.
American liberals echoed the Kremlin hue and cry.
Soon after the U.S joined with the U.S.S.R
in support of a U.N resolution authorizing the world body to send troops to the Congo.
The U.N troops were used to assist Lumumba
the chief terrorist
in his efforts to subjugate Katanga.
U.N troops advancing from all sides.
Systematically wipeing all resistance pockets.
and in the process machine guns and bazookas killing many innocent civilians running for there lives
to find cover from U.N fire.
Smith Hempstone African correspondent for the Chicago daily news
witnessed the December 1961 U.N attack on the capital of Katanga.
The U.N jets next turned their attention to the center of the city. Screaming in a treetop level,
they blasted the post office and the radio station, severing Katanga's communications with the outside world.
One came to the conclusion that the U.N's action
was intended to make it more difficult for correspondents to let the world know what was going on...''
Forty-six doctors of Elizabethville
Belgian, Swiss, Hungarian, Brazilian and Spanish fired off telegraphs to the U.N
pleading for a cease-fire. Latter
they unanimously issued a joint report indicting the U.N for atrocities
against innocent civilians.
Tshombe takes reporters on an eye witness tour an Elizabethville hospital
which although clearly identified by red cross markings and flags
had been bombed and shelled by the U.N.
After waging three major offensive campaigns against the infant state
U.N forces overwhelmed Katanga and forced it back
under Communist rule.
The U.N and it’s internationalist proponents continue to refer to the
Katanga operation as a resounding success.
Peacekeeping has proven to
be a very useful device not just in the Middle East
but in Cyprus, the Congo
the subcontinent
and a score of other places.
When the U.N left the Congo four years later it had achieved what it had been
sent in to do. 1982 UN propaganda film
The United Nations operation in the Congo did not just help re-establish
order and peace
more importantly it provided all around technical assistance to help build the
infrastructure of a brand new country.
The residents of Katanga
undoubtedly had a less enthusiastic view.
RECOLONIZATION
The U.N has portrayed it’s role in Africa as helping to liberate black
Africans from their white colonial oppressors.
A message that plays well to the sympathies of most Americans.
Yet the fact remains the U.N served as a vital Soviet ally in ensuring that the end of
European colonialism in Africa would be replaced with Soviet style
colonialism.
The result was that most of the people of Africa
were denied true independence.
The decolonization campaign also impacted the United Nations itself.
As new pro-Soviet nations were invited to join the U.N general assembly became
more anti-American.
The composition of the U.N security council was also affected by
this shift to a less free world.
Members in good standing
The nationalist government of free China was one of the founding members
of the U.N
and a permanent member of the security council. ''That seat is given
to a free
and independent Chinese government.''
representing a free and independent Chinese people. Following World War Two
the communist rebels under Mao Tse Tung
succeeded in capturing the mainland provinces
and the nationalist government was forced to retreat
to Taiwan.
For many years thereafter
the communist agitated to have red China replace
free China in the U.N.
Opposition of such a move
was based on the fact that the communist regime maintained it’s grip on the
Chinese people
through cheer terror.
In fact the 1975 edition of the Guinness book of world records reports
that
the greatest massacre in human history ever attributed to
any nation is that of 26,300,000 Chinese
during the regime of Mao Tse Tung
between 1949 and May 1965.
Admission of communist China into the U.N
would have made a mockery out of the U.N charter
and the U.N’s image as an organization dedicated to promoting human rights.
Still in 1971 the U.N
general assembly voted to admit Mao Tse Tung's red China into the U.N
and ousted nationalist free China. Great tribulation
ensued among the delegates.
U.N secretary-general U Thant
admirer of Vladimir Lenin
heralded the move as a major positive accomplishment.
''and will eventually lead to the strengthening and betterment
of this organization. In 1989
the world caught a glimpse of the brand of justice that the red regime dispenses
as communist troops massacred peaceful pro freedom
demonstrators at Tiananmen square.
On Beijing's avenue of eternal piece many where crushed under armoured vehicles.
Another genocidal night near the twentieth century
where the killing fields of Cambodia
in 1975 the revolutionary Khmer Rouge captured the
capital of Cambodia
and took control of the nation.
In less than four years this group of Cambodian communists
were responsible for the death of as much as one third of Cambodia's
population.
U.N spokesman frankly admit that the U.N did nothing to stop the genocide
however the Khmer Rouge was supported by the major communist states. States which
often engineer terrorism and support the violent overthrow of established governments and
which from the beginning have been members in good standing
at the U.N.
After the early massacres in Cambodia
Ieng Sary foreign minister for the Khmer Rouge flew to a special session of the
United Nations general assembly.
After his arrival he boasted
''We have cleansed the cities!''
When he appeared at the United Nations
delegates enthusiastically applauded.
Similar treatment is extended to other like-minded potentates.
Yasser Arafat brandished a pistol in front of the U.N general assembly
as he was given
a standing ovation by
the ''peace'' organization.
To anyone who has observantly followed the United Nations
over the past fifty years
it comes as no surprise that every
communist
terrorist, thug,
bureaucrat who comes to United Nations
is welcomed there.
In the after math of World War One
a powerful group of internationalists offered humanity a solution to the ravages
of war.
Collective Security Through
World Government.
The most prominent advocate of this plan
was United States president Woodrow Wilson.
The league of nations he proposed
would enforce peace by threatening to use collective force against individual
aggressors.
But Americans were leery of entanglements of the constantly warring
European powers.
They wanted no part of a world superstate.
The United States senate refused to ratify
the league of nations cover
and without the U.S membership
the league was doomed.
In response the league international sponsors
decided to found the Council on Foreign Relations.
Based in New York City
this private groups purpose would be to lay the groundwork in America
for world government.
While gaining control within the U.S state department during world war two
CFR members covertly work towards establishing a successor
to the league of nations.
The plans for the future United Nations were drafted by the Informal Agenda Group.
A secret committee set up by secretary of state Cordell Hull the
group was composed entirely of CFR members.
At the U.N’s founding conference in San Francisco forty three of the U.S
delegates
virtually the entire contentment where CFR members.
Acting secretary general for the conference was CFR member Alger Hiss.
Later the American public would learn that Hiss was a soviet agent.
Few Americans however
would learn that the United Nations was the creation of the CFR
and from world war two to the present the CFR's influence in
American government and society has grown dramatically.
In 1966 the CFR's influence was confirmed in Tragedy and Hope
a history of the world in our time.
Its author, celebrated historian professor Carroll Quigley
sympathized with the CFR's agenda.
Concerning the secret network that manages the CFR
Quigley wrote I know of the operations of the network because I have studied it for 25 years
and was permitted for two years to examine it’s papers and
secret records. Quigley also described their ultimate goal: ''...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.
Admiral Chester Ward
former judge advocate general of the U.S navy was for many years a CFR
member
subsequently he became one of it’s chief critics.
According to Ward
''... the submergence of U.S sovereignty and
national independence into an all-powerful, one-world government.''
Richard Harwood at the Washington Post
also openly conceded that CFR members are the
nearest thing Americans have to a ruling establishment.
Harwood's 1993 column pointed to the White House.
The president is a member. So is his secretary of state
the deputy secretary of state, all five of the undersecretaries,
Harwood went through a litany of CFR members in the
Clinton administration.
In fact the CFR has dominated every presidential administration since world
war two.
The list of CFR members serving in the Bush administration
is extensive.
The Rise of Resistance
Despite their great influence the CFR elites have yet to see fully empowered U.N.
While U.N activity began to compile a less than attractive track record, critical
books,
film showings,
and radio broadcast began to alert many Americans about the dangers of an
empowered U.N.
As a result faith in the U.N began to diminish.
A 1959 Gallup poll reported that 87% of the
American people thought the U.N was doing a good job but by 1980
the gallop reported that only 31% felt the U.N was doing a good
job.
Resistance to the globalist agenda was also felt on Capitol Hill.
Between 1975 and 1982
Congress received petitions with over eleven million signatures
calling for the United States
to withdraw from the United Nations.
But the battle
had just begun.
Diverting Resistance
The top planners behind the globalist drive did not underestimate the resistance
they would face
They were committed fulfill their new world order in whatever way they could.
Whatever time it might take.
That was the subject of the hard road to world order.
A frank article published by the Council on Foreign Relations in April 1974
issue of the CFR's journal
veteran state department official Richard Gardner
expressed his disappointment that like-minded internationalists had failed
to achieve what he termed
''instant world government''
more importantly he described an alternate route to the creation of an
all-powerful super state.
''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,
but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece-by-piece,
will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.''
Following this approach
the house of world order architects have adopted a variety of strategies large
and small to achieve their goal.
Yet the strength of each of their strategies rests on one key element. DECEPTION
or as British statesman Edmund Burke once said
''The people never give up their liberties
but under some delusion.''
The Illusion of Support
in order to pave the way for national governments to surrender any political
power to the U.N
the globalists need more than just a possible pretexts such as solving a
crisis.
They must also create the appearance
of popular support for their plans.
For several decades the U.N CFR axis has been organizing non-
governmental organizations or NGOs
into a force that it calls.
Global ''civil'' society
this NGO movement has been developed by the CFR strategist
as a deniable asset
for the NGO's must appear to be spontaneous and independent of the power
structure.
The desired illusion
is that the public is demanding change.
To drive their agenda forward
the CFR leadership uses the NGO movement as one-arm of a giant
Pincer strategy.
The huge NGO network applies pressure on government from below
the other arm of the Pincer consisting of CFR elites inducing political
leaders
supplies pressure
from above
while NGO's clamour for world governments,
political leaders can respond according to plan
through the so-called public will.
And the transfer of more power to the U.N
is achieved with a Pincer strategy and is employed with a variety of pretexts.
Civilian Disarmament
The plan to disarm civilians has been part of the earliest plans to disarm
nation states.
The mode is simple
if no nation has allowed the military power to challenge U.N authority
then no private citizen or group should be able to resist that authority either.
In the 1990's
the U.N itself began to take a much more visible lead in this movement.
In the U.N presentation
armed to the teeth.
The campaign for civilian disarmament is packaged as a response to a new threat,
suddenly a global plague of small arms threatens world peace.
The small arms crisis so acute
that the United Nations now considers it one of the greatest challenges facing
the world.
The U.N demonises the widespread availability of guns as the cause of
tragedy and death
and makes an extreme claim
it's not lawbreakers and terrorist movements that are the problem.
It's the gun itself.
Small arms are like uninvited guests that won’t leave.
Once they take over a country they are virtually impossible to get rid of.
Small arms are not fussy about the company they keep.
They can *** indiscriminately
men and women,
young and old, rich and poor.
This U.N propaganda aims to persuade viewers
that they will be better off
safer
if they allow government to take away their means to defend themselves.
Of course
not mentioned in the video is the role of the U.N and it’s revolutionary
friends
in fermenting much of the aggression described.
The U.N even goes so far as to site the Rwandan genocide carried out with
machetes as a reason to confiscate civilian guns.
Eight hundred thousand men, women and children where murdered.
The United Nations special reporter saw the disaster approaching
he warned the international community
that if the arms were not collected immediately
the result would be
catastrophic.
In many of these instances
this horrendous slaughter could have been prevented if the civilian
population had not been disarmed.
Generating pressure from bellow
the NGO network also plays a critical role
in the push for civilian disarmament.
The armed to teeth video retains a classic example
of the Pinsure strategy at work.
IANSA
is a network of over two hundred grassroots organizations from around the
world
which coordinates the fight against the proliferation of small arms
and also puts pressure on governments to act.
IANSA was not created as the result of a spontaneous outpouring from global
civil society as the United Nations would insist.
It is entirely aimed at the creation
of the United Nations in collaboration with tax-exempt foundations and certain
socialist governments in Europe.
The Sky is Falling
Revolutionary strategists have long recognized that a crisis can facilitate
a major change in political arrangements.
Among the useful crises war or the threat of war has always topped
their list.
The threat of environmental catastrophe is still another crisis being used to
persuade Americans to accept a revolution in world political
arrangements.
Although many Americans have serious concerns about the environment
such genuine concern does not motivate the U.N CFR elites
their object is power.
They have no interest in actually solving environmental problems as that would
defeat their objective by removing the impetus for political change.
More and more Americans are being told that global problems required global
solutions.
Global solutions
meaning U.N power.
History shows that giving more power to government
is exactly the opposite of what those concerned about the environment should
champion.
The most spectacular examples of environmental destruction are those that
took place under state control in the former Soviet Union and in it’s colonies
and it seems to be that people were genuinely concerned about environmental
protection should understand that the last thing we would want to do if we
want to protect the environment
is to turnover total power to a political elite.
They can to spoil the environment without sanction.
By contrast the best protectors of the environment are private property owners
simply because they have a vested interest.
Thousands of years ago Aristotle pointed out
that that which is owned by everyone is equally neglected by all alike and of
course that principle applies to the question of environmental protection.
Obviously
the people who have the greatest interest in preserving the environment
are property owners. People who want to develop property to increase it’s value
and transmit it to their own children. Convened under the pretext of saving
planet earth from environmental destruction the 1992 U.N
earth summit was a major watershed event for the globalist agenda.
The summit put governments on notice
that major changes were needed and economic agendas
and in our institutions of governance.
The earth summit gathering was designed to give the illusion of planetary democracy
at work
delegates laboured over details of language
while the NGO's lobbied up outside for tougher measures.
In fact the principal programs to come out of RIO
had already been worked out well in advance by the CFR brain trusts.
In supporting the illusion of democracy at work however
U.N propaganda portrays the NGO's at RIO
as an independent voice representing a cross-section of civil society.
The Viking ship Gaia sales here from
Scandinavia
bringing ten thousand
messages from children
of many nations here in the global forum non governmental organizations
and environmental action groups hold there own little summit
under the symbolic tree of life
to monitor the work of the official conference.
The massive and growing NGO contingent at
the United Nations has become a global rent a mob
and if you look at who is
actually funding them, this becomes apparent.
They are there to make
the one-worlders who are grasping for power look more conservative by
taking the more radical
stance in many instances
and at the same time give the appearance that they are representing the people of
the world the voice of global civil society.
Another group found that many U.N conferences
are the so-called representatives
of indigenous peoples
the U.N gives the impression that these activists represent the genuine
independent voice of their people.
At virtually all of the U.N summits
for instance you will see
so-called representatives of indigenous peoples.
You always see these same representatives miraculously showing up at these summits
they were going to come there to represent people of their jungle or
of their rainforest or of their mountain tribe
and virtually in every case
they are there repeating the phrases that have been fashion for them
by these same
NGO leaders
who are promoting the U.N line.
One of the major CFR inspired programs to come out of RIO was agenda 21.
A massive environmentalist manifesto. A U.N approved summary notes:
''Effective execution of Agenda 21 will require a are profound reorientation of all human society,
unlike anything the world has ever experienced.
A major shift in the priorities of both governments and individuals...
There are specific actions which are intended to be undertaken...
by every person on earth.''
World Justice
For several decades
globalists developed the idea of a permanent international criminal court
with the power to try individuals.
At the dawn of the twenty first century the United Nations announced specific
plans to implement such a court.
Proponents suggested that the demand for ICC
simply wilde up in the U.N general assembly
but the Council on Foreign Relations was clearly pulling the strings.
The Council on Foreign Relations hand was very evident in the perpetratory meetings
for the ICC.
I was at the Los Angeles
conference and
ambassador David Scheffer member of the Council on Foreign Relations was the
keynote speaker, the chairman of the event there was also a member of the
Council on Foreign Relations as were many of the other prominent people in
attendance.
In addition we see that the legal scholars like Richard Falk and others
who are
putting together the actual documents themselves
are hammering out the wording are also members of the Council on Foreign
Relations.
In 1998
the U.N convened a conference in Rome to hammer out a treaty that would
establish the court.
Much like the Nuremberg trials dealt with Nazi official after world war two.
Proponents say the ICC
will provide an impartial international venue to
try tyrants and other sorts of threats to world peace.
In Rome a widely-read NGO publication reminded conference attendees
where world justice was needed most.
The primary target of condemnation by both the NGO's and the delegates
was the United States.
The ICC summit turned into huge bash America fest.
Each day the official delegates
came to the rostrum as well as the NGO representatives denounced the United
States, decried us for our supposed violations of human rights, of economic
rights, of social injustice, many of them inexplicitly stated that they wanted to
use the ICC
eventually to try U.S citizens and U.S officials for these perceived crimes.
The final day of the conference would serve as an omen
when the minimal objections of the U.S where refuted by the
rest of the delegates
the entire assembly errupted
in a display of
anti-American jubilation. In that brief moment
the U.N delegates cast judgement
America is the principal
if not the sole source of evil in the world.
All that remains
was the sentencing.
The resulting 166-page Rome statute has been submitted to
individual nations for ratification.
Professor Charles Rice of Notre Dame University school of law examined the
proposal for an ICC.
In our system a law is supposed to be
a rule of reason
which in a sense controls the state
and the state should operate under law. I mean this there is simply no
reasonable expectation that that will be the case under this.
But the ICC Rice points out
has no limits to it’s jurisdiction.
Claiming jurisdiction to try
Americans
for
actions committed within the United States
which fit their definition of these crimes you know crimes against humanity, genocide
and so on
and
that is is simply a repeal of the declaration of independence I mean this is outrageous.
The Rome statute claims jurisdiction for the ICC to try
any individual charged with genocide,
war crimes,
crimes against humanity,
and aggression.
However no reasonable consensus was reached at the Rome conference concerning the
definition of these crimes.
Their definition will be left to the arbitrary interpretation of ICC
judges.
There are other ICC problems as well
judges, prosecutors and counsel
can be drawn from authoritarian regimes that are resentful of Americans.
The ICC will recognize no right to a trial by jury
and certainly no right to a speedy trial.
An American citizen
weather in or out of the U.S
could be accused of violating an undefined U.N law,
he would then be tried and convicted by foreign prosecutors and judges,
then sent to some undisclosed prison somewhere in the world.
Most importantly we should sign and ratify the treaty for an (ICC)
international criminal court.
The majority of ICC supporters in government
cannot risk showing their hands so openly.
Initially the Clinton administration objected to some of the provisions of
the ICC statute
and refused to sign.
Political leaders expressed similar reservations.
While some of this resistance was genuine much of it followed a familiar
pattern.
Many politicians will often conceal their support for radical proposals
by putting on an initial show of opposition.
Eventually
these false opponents reverse themselves at a strategic moment
claiming a compromise has been achieved
and the public has led to believe that it's interests have been protected.
Eventually
the Rome treaty was signed by Clinton shortly before he left office.
Ratification by the U.S senate is all that is needed for Americans to become
victims
of an ICC.
A Less Free World
If a U.N controlled world government is achieved
Americans can expect their lives to change dramatically.
For example
population controls would go into effect in America.
These controls include mandatory abortion, modelled after China's U.N funded
one-child policy.
To eliminate surplus population
euthanasia and assisted suicide would be promoted.
Private and homeschooling would be outlawed as the U.N takes control over all facets of
education.
New global taxes would also be imposed on Americans in addition to federal and
state taxes.
To transform much of the United States into wild lands habitat
millions of Americans would be relocated and miles of roads would be declared off
limits.
The very right to own property would be restricted
and eventually abolished altogether
all law enforcement officers will fall under control of a global U.N police
force.
Local police would exist to serve and protect the state,
not the citizens.
And the entire American military would fall under the command of the U.N as
part of the world's most powerful force
U.N peacekeepers. Their prime objective?
To suppress any opposition to the United Nations.
If plans for a U.N-controlled world government continue unchallenged
Americans will soon discover that their constitutional protections will be gone.
That resistance to the U.N is impossible
and that the once-mighty America is unable to defend herself
against an emerging totalitarian order.
In Defence of Freedom
Opportunities to reverse America's course are abundant.
Our constitutional system and cultural traditions continue to protect the
freedom to speak out without fear of reprisal
and a giant advantage for the defenders of freedom is simply the
desire
to be free.
At the same time the internationalists fear an aroused and organized American
public.
They work to misinforming and confuse
so that the public won’t know where to turn for real leadership.
Leadership for
effective opposition to the globalist agenda.
''There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil, to the one who is striking at the root.'' Henry David Thoreau
Rather than cutting at the ever-expanding branches of U.N programs
we'll need a sharp axe to the root of the U.N tree would assure a more permanent
result.
In this case
the rout of that tree is United States membership in the U.N.
U.S withdrawal would stop the U.N's subversion in our nation and ultimately
cause the U.N to whither and die.
Serving as the axe
is the house of representatives.
It has the power to kill U.S membership in the U.N
simply by refusing to fund any part of the U.N program.
A majority of 218 votes could effectively
get us out of the U.N.
In 1997 the first measure calling for the termination of
the United States membership in the United Nations
came before the house.
54 representatives voted in favour
two years later 74 representatives voted to cease all
funding to the U.N. At present
the remainder of the house lacks the backbone
to resist
the influence of the internationalists.
The key to changing that condition however is taking place in communities across America.
What is well understood by the internationalists is the power of
organization it's why they've invested so much efforts building it.
Inturn those who cherish freedom must also organize.
In order to maximize their impact.
Vice president of the John Birch Society
Tom Gow. A congressman focused
on job security and getting re-elected
and the founding fathers intended it that way
when they setup the house of representatives to be responsive to the
American people and there local communities
and the internationalists know that
and that's why they've invested so much time into trying to gain influence in the organs of
mass communication so they can influence that public opinion
and it's very difficult for the congressman to fight that influence fight
the heat and the emotion that's generated in the nightly news and
what not
unless they have some means or see a voice for sanity
that's reaching their constituents and that's one of the roles of the John Birch
Society our primary function at the John Birch Society is to provide that voice.
Informed constituent pressure is essential in order for Congress to
sever U.N ties.
CEO of the John Birch Society
G. Vance Smith.
We have a great campaign.
We have
all kinds of tools we have wonderful pamphlets,
that will really help people to understand what's going on, we have billboards, books,
and videos all kinds of important things relative to this campaign, tools for
this campaign.
But those are not the campaign
the objective of the campaign is to change
the individual, to help the individual understand how important their freedom
is and the fact that they're going to have to do something about it.
The only way there’s going to be change is when the American people individually one at a time wake up and do something.
For our campaign is to empower people
under organized leadership to work together to bring about this
change.
With that kind of pressure
that they can put upon the members of the house of
representative, on there own Congressmen
if you really want change
but there has to be a concerted action program.
Ultimately the outcome is determined by the inspired action of individuals
across this great land.
We really need the American people while there's still time
to stand up for freedom
and to stop the plans that
the United Nations and In fact to get us, the united states
out of the United Nations.