With all the attacks on the Constitution, the economy, internal and external security, state’s rights, and the declination of civil liberties abundant in our nation, one could logically assign myriads of left wing conspiracies, Marxist movements, wealth mongering, and anti-Christian groups as the perpetrators of these attacks, and those assignments would be deserved by the alleged parties. But, there is one overriding, omnipresent sponsor and benefactor of all the threats to the USA we see today, and that one source is the United Nations.

Up until the fall of the Berlin Wall, the U.S.A. and U.S.S.R. prevented any movement toward global empowerment by the U.N. through the use of their veto power and status as permanent members of the Security Council. But some very important expansions of the organization were taking place that would be the basis and legality of the formation of a world government and the subjugation and, indeed, the destruction of all other government sovereignty as a necessary result. These expansions of influence include the U.N. Environment Plan of 1973, the U.N. Conference on Human Rights of 1993, the U.N. World Trade Organization of 1994, the U.N. Conference on Population and Development of 1994, the U.N. World Summit on Social Development of 1995, and in that same year, the U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development held its third global meeting, and the fourth World Women’s Congress was held.

In 1995, the 50^th anniversary of its charter, the U.N. convened their Conference of the Parties to the Framework Convention on Climate Change and their Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Most important though, was the report by the Commission on Global Governance entitled Our Global Neighborhood. 

One of the recommendations made by that report is this:

Other recommendations include a new Economic Security Council, the restructuring of the Security Council eliminating veto powers of the permanent members, abandonment of permanent member status, a standing army, curtailing the international arms trade, the international de-militarization of society, and disarming of all civilians. WORLDWIDE.

The report stated that the security of the people inside the borders of sovereign nations is the responsibility of the Security Council and should be enforced with or without the invitation or permission of the national government.

It is clear and undeniable that the U.N. seeks to become the one totalitarian world government and is moving steadily toward that goal.

Since 1980, several presidents and the congress of the USA have signed and ratified many U.N. treaties and agreements that have served to promote the U.N. march toward global domination, some by mistake even. The Montreal Protocol, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development, the President’s Council on Sustainable Development (Clinton), the World Conference on Human Rights, the First Meridian Conference on Global Governance, the Campaign for U.N. Reform, and the Millineum Summit, to name a few, have all succeeded in the progression of world dominance of the U.N. In every charter, resolution, agreement, council, and commission, a declaration of intent on global governance by the U.N. is included and linked by that declaration to all other works by the various groups of the whole. This declaration is titled Agenda 21.

Due to the creation of a World Court with the ability to unilaterally widen it jurisdiction, the U.S.A. could be judged as an impairment to the furtherence of the U.N. global agenda and be susceptible to invasion and imposition of U.N. law. The Council on Human Rights  has already declared US military pilots guilty of crimes against humanity and has declared capital punishment an international crime.

I believe the actions and decisions of our members of congress and the supreme court are designed specifically to abide by the treaties so thoughtlessly agreed to and to prevent future adverse decisions by an up and coming world court. These decisions also bolster the cosmopolitan reputation of the members in the eyes of the international body and who among us is not all for that? The banning of domestic oil production is in compliance with the environmental policy, the de-valueing of the dollar is in compliance with the economic policy of redistribution of wealth, the unconstitutional rulings by our courts are in compliance with the human rights policy, and all politicians, it seems, are scared out of their skins at the thought of violating one of these Marxist ideologies being passed as international law.

President Bush, the current, has been the sole source of patriotic backbone for this country by refusing to sign the Kyoto Protocol, refusing to allow the US to become a member of the new, corrupt Commission on Human Rights amd the Narcotic Control Board, opposing the Conference on Racism, and, in general, clinging to the Constitution as direction for our nation. John Bolton, who never faced an approval hearing for his appointment as ambassador, was also vehemently opposed to much of the decisions made by the U.N. in the past two decades. He quit his appointment after two years as ambassador protem when Nancy Pelosi tabled his appointment hearings. He just wasn’t compliant enough, one could assume.

http://www.sovereignty.net

and

http://www.unwatch.org

for the unadulterated truth.

Glenn Flowers