Trading US rights for
Communist UN Rules. Controlling your Children.
Document 029.18.0.0 # 32 >>>>Disclaimer: This document may be used as
you will except: If you change anything in the text, remove my name and
other Ident. You may use it without my identification also if you wish...I
only ask that people read it and think...think...think. Sources/Ref's if not
in the text will be found on the last page of Doc 000.0.0.1 and 000.0.6.
CLMsr.<<<<
We have a Constitution and our Bill of Rights (the first 10 amendments) that
makes us free. Right? Then visit:
http://www.trimonline.org
http://www.getusout.org
http://www.thenewamerican.com
http://www.givemeliberty.org
http://nca.mybravenet.com
http://www.jbs.org
Then take a look at these sites:
http://www.dixierising.com
http://www.dixienet.org
http://www.palmetto.org
http://www.southerncaucus.org
http://www.spofga.org
http://www.southern-style.com
Subject: Trading U.S. Rights for UN Rules. Date: Wednesday, March 14,
2001 12:06 AM
A report on Executive Order 13107 "The Implementation of Human Rights
Treaties", signed by President Clinton, December 10, 1998, By Berit Kjos
http://crossroad.to/text/articles/turfur12-98.html
While Americans focused on more scintillating news, President Clinton
quietly signed a new executive order titled "The Implementation of Human
Rights Treaties." The media ignored it and our leaders didn't tell us. Yet
we will pay the cost -- in freedom as well as dollars -- for the creation of
a massive government bureaucracy to promote, monitor, and enforce compliance
with human rights regulations mandated by the United Nations. Remember, this
governing body shows only contempt for biblical values, American
sovereignty, and the U.S. Constitution.
Clinton's timing was perfect. An attack on Iraq had been planned. And after
December's impeachment proceedings, Congress would adjourn for the holidays.
Without its objection, the executive order would take effect within 30 days
(not a hard and fast rule 1), and become a federal law. Once implemented, no
one would be free to do or say anything contrary to the new global ideology.
Hard to believe? Before studying the executive order itself, take a look at
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It illustrates the deceptive
meanings behind the noble words used to persuade the American people to
accept unthinkable regulations. Even so, on December 10, 1998, President
Clinton used its 50th anniversary to celebrate its ideals, to honor its late
sponsor Eleanor Roosevelt, to announce his Human Rights Initiatives, and to
sign this executive order.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
At the first glance, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights sounds good,
as do all the intrusive UN human rights treaties. Article 18 upholds "the
right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion..." Article 19 affirms
"the right to freedom of opinion and expression... and to seek, receive and
impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
But Article 29 states that "these rights and freedoms may in no case be
exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations." In
other words, these "rights" or "freedoms" don't apply to those who would
criticize the UN or its policies. Your rights would be conditioned on your
compliance. Only if your message supports official ideology are you free to
speak it. As Andrei Vishinsky wrote in The Law of the Soviet State, "There
can be no place for freedom of speech, press, and so on for the foes of
socialism."[2] The Convention on the Rights of the Child has not been
ratified by the Senate. Yet, it would be included among "other relevant
treaties" in this executive order which begins with these words: "By the
authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and bearing in mind
the obligations of the United States pursuant to the International Covenant
on Civil and Political Rights and other relevant treaties concerned with the
protection and promotion of human rights to which the United States is now
or may become a party in the future, it is hereby ordered." Like the Univer
sal Declaration of Human Rights, the Convention on the Rights of the Child
uses manipulative and misleading language. According to Article 13, "The
child shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall
include freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all
kinds, regardless of frontiers..." In other words, parents have no authority
to keep a child from reading a sexually explicit magazine or visiting pagan
chat rooms on Internet.
While parents lose their right to set safe boundaries for their children,
the State assumes full power to "protect" the child and define the rules.
Thus Article 13 concludes with: "This right may be subject to certain
restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are
necessary for respect of the rights or reputations of others; or for
protection of national security or public order." Likewise, if parents
restrict their child's "right to freedom of association" or their child's
ambiguous rights to "privacy" or "conscience and religion" (Articles
14 -16), they would break this law and face the potential loss of their
child to the state's "protection" services.
In the context of UN ideology, "national security or public order" refers
to the concept of solidarity, a utopian community oneness based on shared
values defined by globalist leaders. In their minds, anything less than
social solidarity in every community could stir conflict or incite violence.
In this context, dissenters become foes; facts or beliefs that clash with
its vision of unity become threats; and the uncompromising truths of
biblical Christianity become intolerable, even dangerous to public safety.
These "human rights" restrictions are already filtering into American
culture. For example, any Christian website that promotes biblical standards
for right and wrong could be targeted for censorship by Cyber Patrol, the
world's most powerful Internet thought police. Owned by The Learning
Company, America's "premier developer of educational software," it has
formed some powerful "partners" around the world. These include AOL, AT&T,
Bell Atlantic, CompuServe, IBM, Microsoft, Netscape, Scholastic Network, and
others. Its website [3] shows the categories in its CyberNOT Block List, a
list of offenses that determines which web sites should be screened to
protect schools and families that buy their service. These dangers include
Violence/Profanity, Nudity, Sexual Acts, Intolerance, Satanic/Cult, Drugs,
and Militant/Extremist.
Notice "Intolerance" amidst the more obvious threats. CyberPatrol warns us
that "any picture or text that elevates one group over another" would be
considered intolerant. Their filters now "protect" children and schools
across the country from visiting American Family Association and other
Christian websites simply because they present God-given warnings and view
Christian truth and lifestyles as superior to pagan alternatives. An
international "Declaration on Tolerance," prepared by UNESCO and signed by
its member nations, defines the new global standard for right and wrong. All
nations would be responsible for fulfilling this international contract by
teaching the "right" kind of tolerance and training their people to
"respect" every kind of ritual and lifestyle -- no matter how contrary to
God's Word. Though the U.S. didn't sign this anti-Christian Declaration 4,
our leaders are fueling the transformation. Consider how its decrees would
undermine our Bill of Rights: *"Tolerance is respect, acceptance and
appreciation of the rich diversity of our world's cultures It is not only a
moral duty, it is also a political and legal requirement." *"Tolerance
involves the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism." [Biblical truth?]
*"Tolerance... means that one's views are not to be imposed on others."
[Would this end freedom to share the gospel with others? Could the UN still
share its views?] *"Intolerance... is a global threat." *"Scientific
studies and networking should be undertaken to coordinate the international
community's response to this global challenge, including analysis of root
causes and effective countermeasures, as well as research and monitoring...
"*"Tolerance promotion and the shaping of attitudes of openness, mutual
listening and solidarity should take place in schools and universities, and
through non-formal education... at home and in the workplace." *"Promote
rational tolerance teaching methods that will address the cultural, social,
economic, political and religious sources of intolerance-- major roots of
violence and exclusion. 5" As you read on, you will see how the suggestions
in the last three points are worked into President Clinton's Initiatives and
Executive Order. But don't forget, the first four points provide the
rationale for the last three points.
Clinton's Human Rights Initiatives
A White House Press Release, posted with the executive order at the White
House website, explained that "on the historic anniversary of the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, President Clinton announced several policy
initiatives to advance human rights at home and abroad." These initiatives
include the following:
1. "Signing of a Human Rights Executive Order, that strengthens our efforts
to implement human rights treaties, and creates an Administration working
group to coordinate these efforts." Its main points are listed below.
2. "Establishment of a Genocide Early Warning Center, jointly run by the
State Department and the Central Intelligence Agency, to train intelligence
resources on situations that could potentially lead to genocide."
The response of the liberal media and politicians to the bombing of the
Oklahoma Federal Building gives us a clue to the rising hostility toward
those who refuse to embrace the new global visions. Remember how Christian
and conservative radio hosts were accused of "creating a climate of hate"
That could incite violence. In this cultural atmosphere, such an Early
Warning Center, using intrusive CIA surveillance technology to monitor those
who dissent, could well lead to repression of contrary opinions.
In fact, that might be its main purpose. Remember UNESCO's Declaration on
Tolerance which equates intolerance with biblical absolutes. Since
"intolerance is a global threat," today's crisis calls for analysis "of root
causes effective countermeasures" and "monitoring..."
When the US delegation signed the Action Plan prepared at the 1995 UN
Conference for Women in Beijing, we agreed to "develop gender-sensitive
databases, information and monitoring systems." These information systems
would monitor every school, workplace, and home for compliance with "women's
rights" to cast aside traditional gender roles in the home and assume 50-50
representation in business, entertainment, and political leadership. This
massive global information management system would be controlled by the UN
Social and Economic Council 6.
The technology needed for worldwide surveillance has been created. Existing
databases are being linked and the information management systems completed
7. The planned "unique personal identifier" is becoming reality, and the
process of intrusive surveillance is under way. We are ready for the next
step:
3. "Enhancing our response to human rights emergencies. The U.S. Agency for
International Development will provide up to $8 million over the next five
years to non-governmental organizations to enhance their rapid response
capacities. Organizations can use these funds for a variety of purposes,
including the creation of assessment teams, monitoring units or other means
of addressing situations where human rights may be imminently threatened."
Whenever you see the open-ended word "other", beware. It could be
interpreted to mean anything the authors might later include 8.
4. "Preventing youth hate crime through publication in January of a guide
for schools entitled 'Protecting Students from Harassment and Hate Crimes,'
developed jointly by the Department of Education and the National
Association of Attorneys General. The guide provides suggestions to school
systems for addressing the issue of school violence."
Remember, words such as violence and hate have been redefined to reflect a
global perspective. They now include various forms of conflict, biblical
"intolerance", and failure to comply with the new global standards for
mental health, i.e. the attitudes, values, beliefs, behavior, and collective
mindset required for community solidarity. (See "Zero Tolerance for
Non-Compliance" and "Clinton's War on Hate Bans Christian values" at our
website http://www.crossroad.to
6. "encourage greater reporting to and cooperation with U.S. authorities in
targeting abusers of human rights."
Assessing, monitoring, re-educating, and tracking every person around the
world is key to the UN vision of global governance 9. And, as President
Clinton stressed at his 1997 White House Conference on Hate Crimes,
"reporting" intolerant words and attitudes is the duty of every person in
the community. The following executive order adds legal authority to this
unconstitutional plan.
The Executive Order The President summarized the scope of the executive
order in its opening paragraph:
"By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws
of the United States of America, and bearing in mind the obligations of the
United States pursuant to the International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights (ICCPR), the Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or
Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT), the Convention on the Elimination
of All Forms of Racial Discrimination (CERD), and other relevant treaties
concerned with the protection and promotion of human rights to which the
United States is now or may become a party in the future, it is hereby
ordered."
Notice that it includes "other relevant treaties concerned with the
protection and promotion of human rights..." In other words, it would
apparently include such unratified treaties as The Convention on the Rights
of the Child and other treaties "to which" we may "become party in the
future." As you read its precepts below, consider whether this executive
order protects human "rights" or oppressive "responsibilities."
Section 1(a) commits the U.S. "fully to respect and implement its
obligations under the international human rights treaties to which it is a
party, including the ICCPR, the CAT, and the CERD." Don't assume that this
EO only applies to ratified treaties. This section doesn't rule out all the
other present and future unratified treaties included in the opening
paragraph and in Sec. 4(vi). While the Convention on the Elimination of All
Forms of Discrimination against Women has not been ratified, its values has
been established as a cultural norm through the liberal media, education,
and a variety of laws, rules and regulations. To speed the process,
President Clinton established an agency to manage and oversee the
implementation of the Beijing Plan for Action signed after the 1995 UN
Conference for Women. It includes all the key provisions of the above
Convention, such as 50-50 representation in influential positions. "(b) It
shall also be the policy and practice of the Government of the United States
to promote respect for international human rights, both in our relationships
with all other countries and by working with and strengthening the various
international mechanisms for the promotion of human rights, including, inter
alia, those of the United Nations, the International Labor Organization, and
the Organization of American States." Don't forget that ILO, the
International Labor Organization, shows little concern for the rights of
those who oppose its liberal, political, and global agenda. Sec. 2 titled,
"Responsibility of Executive Departments and Agencies" brings all these
agencies together in a coordinated effort to follow UN guidelines for human
rights and global solidarity. Sec. 4 establishes "an Interagency Working
Group on Human Rights Treaties for the purpose of providing guidance,
oversight, and coordination with respect to questions concerning the
adherence to and implementation of human rights obligations and related
matters." It would be chaired by the "designee of the Assistant to the
President for National Security Affairs."
The functions of this Interagency Working Group would include: "(i)
coordinating the interagency review of any significant issues concerning the
implementation of this order..." "(iii) coordinating the responses of the
United States Government to complaints against it concerning alleged human
rights violations submitted to the United Nations, the Organization of
American States, and other international organizations;" "(iv) developing
effective mechanisms to ensure that legislation proposed by the
Administration is reviewed for conformity with international human rights
obligations and that these obligations are taken into account in reviewing
legislation under consideration by the Congress as well;" Apparently, the
United Nations and its Human Rights treaties would replace the U.S.
Constitution as our main standard and filter for legal action. "(v)
developing recommended proposals and mechanisms for improving the monitoring
of the actions by the various States, Commonwealths, and territories of the
United States... for their conformity with relevant treaties, the provision
of relevant information for reports and other monitoring purposes, and the
promotion of effective remedial mechanisms;" Remember UNESCO's Declaration
on Tolerance. It, too, called for "analysis of root causes [of intolerance]
and effective countermeasures, as well as research and monitoring...." Just
as the provisions of the unratified [it was ratified in the bunch of
unedited, unread, unknown treaties Klinton slipped into the Senate in the
last week of the 106th congress, and they all were approved by voice vote so
that we the people could not tell who voted to sell this country out]
Bio-diversity treaty are being implemented through the EPA regulations,
executive orders, and environmental guidelines so unratified human rights
agreements are being implemented through executive orders, reinterpretation
of old laws, and a variety of local, state and national regulations that
bypass Congress. However, the heart of the transformation is UNESCO's plan
for Lifelong Learning, a psycho-social process of re-learning: replacing
traditional beliefs, values, attitudes, and individual thinking with the new
global ideology and collective thinking.
This program demands everyone's participation in the Hegelian dialectic (or
consensus) process. Everyone must be willing to compromise in order to find
"common ground". People from every cultural background must agree to
dialogue to consensus over divisive social issues under the leadership of a
facilitator trained in psycho-social manipulation. "(vi) developing plans
for public outreach and education concerning the provisions of the ICCPR,
CAT, CERD, and other relevant treaties and human rights-related provisions
of domestic law;" The last sentence would include Clinton's hate-crimes
initiatives and legislation as well as other prohibitions against any
information that would be offensive to our politically correct thought
police. That Christian websites are being tagged by the Cyber Patrol because
they violate its guidelines on "tolerance" shows how "private"
organizations, in partnership with our government, are implementing the
international political agenda.
Remember the last two points in UNESCO's Declaration on Tolerance. They
call for "rational tolerance teaching methods that will address the
cultural, social, economic, political and religious sources of
intolerance-major roots of violence and exclusion."No person would be free
from the duty to conform to UN standards through its manipulative program
for "shaping... attitudesof openness, mutual listening and solidarity in
schools and universities, and through non-formal education... at home and in
the workplace."
These two points summarize the UNESCO plan for re-learning" or
"remediation" for adults as well as children. Tied to the
national-international plan for School-to-Work signed into law by Clinton in
1998, this section probably means that no one would receive a work
certificate without conforming to the new ideology and group thinking 10.
"(vii) coordinating and directing an annual review of United States
reservations, declarations, and understandings to human rights treaties, and
matters as to which there have been non-trivial complaints or allegations of
inconsistency with or breach of international human rights obligations..."
A typical inconsistency would be churches that refuse to hire pagans or
homosexuals. Such "separatism" could be challenged both on the bases of
discrimination and refusal to enter into dialogue and seek "common ground."
The UN vision of solidarity rules out such "separatism." Al Gore summarized
this sentiment well at a 1991 Communitarian conference in Washington:
"Seeing ourselves as separate is the central problem in our political
thinking." Clinton's Hate-Crimes Conference called for "some sort of club or
organization at the school - because if you think about it, your parents are
still pretty well separated.... Most houses of worship are still fairly
segregated. We have to find a disciplined, organized way out of this so that
we reach every child in an affirmative way before something bad happens..."
But that isn't enough. Every person-young and old -- must be held
responsible for reporting violations. As in Nazi Germany, children would
have to report on parents, neighbors on neighbors, etc. Our president
outlined the plan at his 1997 Hate-Crimes Conference, "The Justice
Department will make its own hate crimes training curriculum available. A
lot of hate crimes still go unreported?. If a crime is unreported, that
gives people an excuse to ignore it." "the real answer to our success in
this endeavor is obviously that we all have to work together. And all of you
can strike new energy into this entire endeavor around the country."
At the same conference, Attorney General Janet Reno added: " ...the first
line of defense is to prevent it. But then it is very important when you see
hate to speak out against it immediately and strike it down. How can we in
the federal government improve our coordination with local law enforcement,
with the state authorities, and with groups such as the churches or other
advocacy groups in the community, one, to get it reported, and two, to work
with you so that the investigations and the prosecutions are designed with
one objective in mind to eliminate hate..."
This executive order links Clinton's goals to the UN vision of controlled
solidarity. For the Interagency Working Group would coordinate its efforts
with "international human rights institutions, including the Inter-American
Commission on Human Rights and the Special Rapporteurs and complaints
procedures established by the United Nations Human Rights Commission." Sec.
6, "Judicial Review, Scope, and Administration" gives an example of
Clinton's ambiguous and misleading legal language: "(c) The term 'treaty
obligations' shall mean treaty obligations as approved by the Senate
pursuant to Article II, section 2, clause 2 of the United States
Constitution." This statement appears to be little more than a smoke
screen, for the actual executive order extends far beyond ratified treaties
or, rather, "our treaty obligations" (remember the first paragraph and Sec.
4 vi). Our president intends to create the American part of the United
Nations' massive management system and monitoring process. He is betraying
our nation into the hands of a global government with a newly established
International Criminal Court with authority to prosecute its opposition. And
he is ready to provide the technology the UN needs in order to track every
person and community in the world. Once this monstrous system is in place,
it may not matter whether human rights treaties are ratified or not. We will
have yielded control of our lives and thoughts to an anti-Christian world
government. Let's hope Congress will awaken to this threat, blocks this
executive order, and refuse to fund any of its seditious programs.
Meanwhile, the deception grows. In his speech commemorating the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, our president gave a glimpse of the changing
meaning of "rights" and "freedom":
"In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a
world founded four essential human freedoms. 1. "The first is freedom of
speech and expression -- everywhere in the world. 2. "The second is freedom
of every person to worship God in his own way - everywhere in the world. 3.
"The third is freedom from want . . . . 4. "The fourth is freedom from fear
. . . anywhere in the world . . . . The world order which we seek is the
cooperation of free countries, working together in a friendly, civilized
society." The last two "freedoms", which apparently are now considered human
rights, would require a totalitarian world government. The third "freedom"
would require a global welfare system, and the fourth would require absolute
control of human behavior -- no guns, no free speech, etc., except in the
hands of elitist rulers.
"This transfer of power from Congress to the United Nations has not,
however, been limited to the power to make war. Increasingly, Presidents are
using the U.N. not only to implement foreign policy in pursuit of
international peace, but also domestic policy in pursuit of international,
environmental, economic, education, social welfare and human rights policy,
both in derogation of the legislative prerogatives of Congress and of the 50
State legislatures, and further in derogation of the rights of the American
people to constitute their own civil order." --Rep. Ron Paul's Special Order
Speech - 9/18/00
029.18.0.0 # 32 End.
"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary
Americans." Comrade Pres W. J. Klinton. USAToday. 11 Mar 93. Pg 2A. "You
know the one thing that's wrong with this country? Everyone gets a chance to
have their fair say." Comrade Pres W. J. Klinton. 28 May 93. The Courtyard.
City Hall, Philadelphia. "I'm not going to have some reporters pawing
through our papers. We are the President." Comrade Hillary Diane Klinton.