Replies

Friday, February 28, 2003

Said it a long time ago, said it many times since again, will continue to say it: We never should have gone to the U.N. in the first place. A mistake we are now, I believe, fully realizing.

As Charles Krauthammer wrote in an article this morning, its absurd the most powerful nation on Earth has to beg non-entities like Angola and Guinea for permission to defend itself in the face of Saddam Hussein. The UN Security Council's writ is not holy gospel. We should really be getting out of the UN and reasserting the sovereignty we thought we won back in 1776 when national independence was in the eye of history a pipe dream at the time.

Up late again, huh? :-)

Isn't the use of the UN now simply an extension of what began as containment of Iraq via the UN 12 years ago? Because 12 years ago, we rescued a country without being directly attacked ourselves. I see this as a special circumstance of unfinished business that began multilaterally.

I could be wrong but I think Bush would never allow the UN to stand in the way of our own security and I think he's just about to prove it. I will admit, however, that I find the polls which demonstrate the majority of US citizens wanting UN approval to be frustrating. That will quickly dissipate after the next terrorist attack on our soil, however.

It is truly disheartening to see such a large portion of the population falling for the old "good cop - bad cop" (starring Bush, Clinton, and Bush) ruse.

Their have been those that have argued for years that there has been only one political battle in America. That being, the battle between those who wish to have a one-world government and those who do not. Any posturing by political and ideological parties is simply that.

Perhaps they are correct. While I may be or not be, favorable to this particular viewpoint, I still cannot dismiss the possibility. Sometimes one's designs can be seen in one's actions.

The post-communist world socialist movement (Animal Farmers), including the most corrupt neo-fascists such as China, N.K., Cuba, Islamia, France, Russia, South Africa, and California are seething that GW ( aka voters persuant to our Constitutional rule of law) rejected the favored works of XXX42 Clinton(s) undermining American national sovereignty and security, such as Kyoto and NAFTA as implimented, and strategic defense technologies.

The Democrats with their UN comrades have embarked on their Long March to recapture the White House, ultimately for XX44 Hillary (before her menopause unkindly reveals her Leninist manliness), with Bill continuing as a twisted member of the UN's politburo.

Our Constitution, now lead by XY43 GW and defended by our minority patriotic citizens, stands in their way. When the fascist Democrat politburo recaptures our government's police powers, more treaties will be structured so that Americans' rights are sacrificed on the alter of "world peace".

The second American republic will be known as the Peoples'
Republic of America, with Hillary Rodham - President/General Secretary for life.

Authority to employ armed force is not the issue.

Only the Congress of the United States can do this:

"the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war and, to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States."

All the resources of the country are hereby pledged...

That is what our armed forces must have when they go to war. When they do not have it, the result is disaster.

And since the only master in this house is We, the People of the united States, only Our Representatives in Congress assembled can deliver it.

Not the UN, not NATO, not the Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces-only Congress.

The actions of the Bush administration in its push for war have done nothing but legitimize the U.N., undermining our freedom and security as a nation.

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

BUMP TO TRUTH........

I've been thinking about how much the coverage of these votes has hammered home to the sheeple some notion that the UN treaties are ALL to be considered moral and for the common good. Thinkng specifically of CEDAW.

Security Council members in New York continue to debate proposals on the table that range from declaring Saddam Hussein in material breach of Resolution 1441 and invading now, to giving Hussein another six months to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors.

They can debate all they want, Saddam Hussein is finished

war maneuvers play into hands of internationalists

We'll see after the UN waffles, and we do it anyway. Yeah, that's going to strengthen the UN.

Titus sees a hidden danger in the Bush administration's need to appease the international community by working through the diplomatic channels of the United Nations Security Council.

This was done to help Tony Blair, not to appease the international community.

Security Council members in New York continue to debate proposals on the table that range from declaring Saddam Hussein in material breach of Resolution 1441 and invading now, to giving Hussein another six months to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors.

We've already said repeatedly that we don't need another resolution.

Titus is considered one of America's leading constitutional scholars.

I've heard the same thing siad about Al Franken and Michael Moore. So what.

And in doing so, he argues, Bush and his predecessors play into the hands of internationalists who assert only the U.N. can authorize war and view the U.N. charter as trumping the U.S. Constitution.

Let the UN say that we can't go to war with Iraq, and then see what happens when we do. Remember all of those references about being 'irrelevant'.........they will be just that.

"If you want constitutional government," said Titus, "don't look to the courts for your salvation. Look to yourselves and who you're electing to office."

This pretty much tells it all!

Bush wants to prove that the UN is irrelevant, before Bill Clinton can take his seat as Sec. General. Can you imagine the fits the Bush admin. would have if they had to send Powell before the UN, with Bill Clinton at the helm? Not to mention, down the road, when Hillary is elected... then she really would be co-president... Bill, President of the World, she, President of America.

I'm not sure if you two have seen this or not. You may find it very interesting.

The Lucis 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.

The Lucis 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. I happened to stumble on it one morning and have been researching it for a few weeks now. 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

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.