Chapter 1

The ThreatAmerica is surrend.ering its souereignty to a world gouern-

ment. Hooray.... Wodd gouernmerrt is coming. Deal with it.L

- The New Republic magazine, cover story headlines forJanuary 17,2O0O

We need a system of enforceable world, Iaw - a democrat-ic federal world gouernment - to deal with world problems.2

- Walter Cronkite, 1999

We must do euerything we can to abolish the UnitedStates.s

- Professor Mortimer J. Adler of the University ofChicago and the Aspen Institute, editor of Great Books of' the Western World,l94i

As the year 2000 approached, prophecies of doom proliferatedever5rwhere - in the major media, the Internet, talk radio,financial newsletters - offering dire predictions of massive com-puter failures, electrical grid blackouts, global technologicalmeltdriwns and "the end of the world as we know it." The dreadY2K forecasts were, of course, as everyone now knows, wildlyexaggerated; the specter ofglobal industrial collapse turned outto be a colossal boge5rman.*

*The New American magazine, of which this author is a senior editor, can claimthe stellar, ifnot singular, distinction ofhaving called the shots correctly on Y2I(In two major arbicles by Dennis Behreandt - "Millennium Mayhem" (September14, 1998), and "Y2K Is Here!" (April 26, 1999) - and in smaller articles, fNArepeatedly challenged, with calm reason and careful r6search, the widespreaddoomsday scenarios and tead for the hills" alarms that were leading many oth-erwise responsible citizens to give up the battle against collectivism andimmorality. See www.thenewamerican.comY2K.

13

THp Uxrrno NATIoNS Eleosno

However, while fears of the Y2K phantom menace seized theminds of billions of people worldwide, a very real global perilwent largely unnoticed. That global danger is with us still. Andit truly threatens to bring about "the end of the world as we knowit." The world as we know it is being radically "transformed." Weare not referring here to the usual apocalyptic alanrrs about"global warmingi'and other eco-doom scenarios, economic "glob-alizatiora," the mind-numbing pace of technological innovation,or the specters ofbiological and nuclear warfare.

We are talking about a revolutionary transformation that hasbeen gathering steam since World War II and is now entering itsfrnal stages. It is a revolution that, if completed, will mean theend of the United States ofAmerica - as well as the abolition ofevery other sovereign, independent nation. This radical revolu-tion is simultaneously overturning the nation-state system thathas been the foundation for governance on this planet for thepast several hundred years, and forging a world governmentwith unprecedented powers.

This is the most profound and far-reaching revolution ever tohit our planet. If allowed to proceed to completion, it will usherin an Orwellian global tyranny under the United Nations. Weknow that to many people this is an astounding statement. You,dear reader, may be among those who find such a slaim to be"ridiculous," oabsurd," "nutty." After all, you reason, the UnitedStates is the most powerful nation on earth, "the last superpow-ef - and the UN is a paper tiger, a joke, a bunch of globalbureaucrats belching platitudes about peace and brotherhoodand proposing grandiose schemes. Sure, it may waste some ofour money, but it is no threat to the U.S. The UN has no militaryof its own to impose global laws or regulations upon unwillingAmericans. In fact, the UN must come hat in hand to the U.S.every time it determines to send peacekeepers into some newarea torn by conflict. And hasn't the UN been complaining foryears about U.S. refusals to pay dues? The LIN looks like a pret-ty helpless, toothless "threat," you say.

And you would be right - except for one very important thing:

L4

Tnp Tnnmr

You would have completely misunderstood the nature of the dan-ger and direction from which the threat is coming. Observerswho have carefully followed and analyzed international develop-ments and the policies and institutions of the UN have neverworried that UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan - or one of hispredecessors or successors - would impose a IIN dictatorshipupon a strong and resistant United States. That is not going tohappen. We are not worried that an imminent IIN tyranny isabout to be militarily imposed uponAmericans against the wish-es of our own government. Or that, like the Y2K computer bug,some midnight soon the UN will strike, overwhelm the U.S. mil-itary, and we will wake up in the morning with blue-helmetedpolicemen on every street corner.

The danger is very real, nonetheless, but it emanates not somuch from Kofi Annan, the UN itself, or any foreign, externalsource as it does from those within our own government whoseek to impose a "new world order" upon us. As one of our morefamous former U.S. presidents accurately noted:

Shall we expect some transatlantic military giant, to step theocean, and crush us at a blow? Never!

All the armies of Europe, Asia and Africa combined ... could notby force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the BlueRidge, in a trial ofa thousand years.

At what point, then, is the approach ofdanger to be expected? I€rnswer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannotcome from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves beits author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must livethrough all time, or die by suicide.4 lAbraham Lincoln, 1838]

The Danger Springs From lYithinThe danger has indeed sprung up amongst us. There are manywho go by the name "American" who prefer to think of them-selves as "global citizens" or "citizens of the world" and who con-sciously are leading us to national suicide. An alarming numberofAmerican citizens who hold high elective and appointive office,

15

Tnu UNrrno N.quoNs Exposno

and who have taken oaths to defend our nation, ourConstitution, and our laws, are now committed to a "new worldorder" which does not allow for a free, independent, sovereignUnited States of America. They are joined by prominent individ-uals holding influential positions of trust in many of our privateinstitutions. In the nlew "interdependent" world order they envi-sion, a U.S.A. with continuing superpower status is viewed as a"threat" to global peace and security.

Let us be completely blunt: These globalists are after power -raw, absolute, global power, unimpeded by constitutionalrestraints, the rule oflaw, and the natural checks and balancesagainst worldwide power provided by sovereign nation-states.We all ought to be familiar with this dangerous lust for power.The 20th century, which we so recently left, was washed in theblood of millions of victims sacrificed on the altars of powerlust.The leaders of totalitarian socialism - of both the Communistand Fascist varieties - trod the same paths to power that arenow taken by our globalist would-be rulers. Lenin, Hitler, Mao,Fidel, Pol Pot, and innumerable lesser thugs all came to powerinvoking virtue and noble ideals. They appealed to fears aboutsupposed emergencies and crises. They incited and mobilizedresentment and hatred of one group or class for another, andmade scapegoats of their opponents. They gradually centralizedand consolidated power and eliminated all legal and structuralrestraints on their exercise ofit.

In every case, a small circle of power-lusting conspirators usedIarge movements of idealists and dupes to accomplish theirschemes. In every instance, the danger signs were there for thosewho were willing to see. The opportunities were there for thosewith courage to stop the madness by exposing and opposing thecriminals before they could seize total political power. Alas, ineach case, too few citizens were willing to see and to act coura-geously. For this they paid a horrendous price. The signs are herefor us to see today; we will have no excuse if we fail to act withresponsibility and courage. Our price for failing to do so will befar more terrible than anything this planet has yet seen.

16

Tuo Trmnar

Millennium MeetingsIn September 2000, some 150 presidents, premiers, dictators,and potentates converged on New York City for the UNMillennium Summit, the most spectacular UN gathering ever.Serving as co-chairman of the week-long political gala was SamNujoma, the Communist terrorist who was installed as"President" of Namibia in 1990 by the United Nations, the SovietIJnion, and the U.S. State Department. The Summit attendeesall received a copy of We the Peoples: The Role of the UnitedNations in the 27st Century, a report "authored" by Kofi Annanto guide the UN's "reform agenda" at the event.

Annan's We the Peoples proposed nothing less than a global,socialist superstate dressed in New Deal verbiage. The Annanplan even adopted Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Brain Thust rhet-oric of "Freedom from Fear" and "Freedom from Want" as titlesfor the report's sub-themes. It called for, among other things:

o a global war on poverty (imagine a planetary version of ourcostly federal Department of Health and Human Services!);

o ending "gender discrimination" (i.e. mandated gender quotas)"in wages, property rights, and access to education";

o goverrrment-provided education, school lunches, and healthcare for all;

o a global youth employment initiative, under the direction ofthe International Labor Organization and the World Bank;

r creation of an International Criminal Court; ando adoption of the Kyoto Protocol, which mandates drastic reduc-

tions in so-called "greenhouse gases."5

We the Peoples also proposed "new forms of global gover-nance," "global norms," "global rules" - all of which infer a rolefor the IIN as global legislator. None of this surprises us, ofcourse; fIN poohbahs like Annan are well known for their self-aggrandizing pontifrcations and appeals for'new global powers.However, this was not a typical, run-of-the-mill summit; some-thing new and more sinister was at work here. The Millennium

L7

Tnn UNrreo NerroNs ExPosoo

Summit showcased a frightening new level of capability forsophisticated orchestration of an intensive, worldwide, multi-pronged, multi-level propaganda campaign. This astonishingprocess is capable of mobilizing and coordinating the activitiesof an impressive number of politicians, IIN officials, corporateleaders, major organs of the media, academic institutions, thinktanks and innumerable-private, special-interest groups. Thus arelatively small but noisy, lavishly funded, and incredibly wellorganized minority has shown that it can generate tremendous,slmchronized pressure completely out of proportion to its realsize. This pressure is generated by deception, by falsely pre-senting the appearance of irresistible, universal support for UNproposals.

The concentrated pressure is aimed at intimidating, silencing,and neutralizing all active and potential opposition, among bothelected officials and private citizens. And it works with frighten-ing effect. The element of surprise, together with concerted force,overwhelms the opposition.

Virtually all of the Heads of State attending the Summit tooktheir turns at the UN General Assembly rostrum and echoedKofi Annan's appeals for global governance, some adding evenstronger appeals for global taxation, a permanent UN military, aglobal environmental police force, etc. Meanwhile, outside theIIN, crowds composed of members of various non-governmentalorganizations (NGOs) clamored for the creation of a GlobalPeoples Assembly, a sort of UN Congress to enact global legisla-tion. Afew blocks away another global confab was underway pro-moting the same one-world agenda. The State of the WorldForum 2000, sponsored by the Gorbachev Foundation, featureda week-long series of symposia with prominent participants fromthe worlds of international business and finance, labor, academe,philanthropy, religion, environmental activism, government,intergovernmental organizations, and non-governmental organi-zations - all beating the drums for world government under anempowered and greatly expanded IIN.

However, all of these meetings, s5mposia, demonstrations and

18

t

i

Tnp Tlrnner

speeches might be dismissed as bluster, globaloney, rant andcant - except for several important facts:

o They were preceded and accompanied by similar one-worldendorsements from some ofAmerica's top officials and politicaland intellectual leaders;

o They were preceded and accompaniedby concrete actions andproposals by leading U.S. political and intellectual leaders toimplement these proposals;

o Very wealthy and powerful U.S. individuals, companies, andinstitutions have committed massive financial support toestablishing "global governance";

o The UN system has been expanding dramatically in size andscope and now constitutes a huge planetary bureaucracy;

o Equally important (and dangerous) as the expanding super-structure of the UN itself is the proliferation of the UN's sub-ordinate international organizations and institutions, such asNATO, the Organization of American States (OAS), theInternational Monetary Fund (IMF), the Organization forEconomic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the WorldTtade Organization (WTO), etc.;

o Ahuge network of radical NGOs, financed by governments andtax-exempt foundations, and masquerading as authentic rep-resentatives of "global civil society," can now assemble mobs atwill to "lobb/ for the cause du jour;

o This drive for an empowered UN is the culmination of plansset in motion decades earlier by a power-seeking cabal (seeChapter 3).

Top Leaders Advocate World GovernmentOn February 18, 2000, the World Federalist Association (WEA),one of the largest and most ardent organizations promotingworld government, took out a full-page advertisement in the NewYork Times to proclaim triumphantly that "Cronkite and Clintonmake a strong case for recasting the United Nations as a worldfederation." 6

19

Tnn Umron NenoNs E:sosnn

The Clinton referred to was, of course, then-President Billclinton, while the other name referred to famed television news-man walter cronkite. The world Federalist Association adnoted: "Last October, President Clinton applauded federalism -the basis for the u.s. constitution - asthe arTangement of gov-

ernment most likely to give us the best of all worlds - theintegrity we need, the sblf government we need, the self-advancement we need - without pretending that we can cut allcords that bind us to the rest of humanity....' The Presidentclaimed that ,... we become more of a federalist world when theUnited Nations takes a more active role in stopping genocide "'and we recognize mutual responsibilities to contribute and payfor those things."'

President Clinton's speech was delivered at the Forum ofGlobal Federation conference in Mont-Tlemblant, canada. Boththe group he addressed and the WFA, which placed his words intheir newspaper ad, recognized the importance and true mean-ing of his speech when he fredicted that there will be "more fed-eralism rather than less in the years ahead."

What kind of "federalism" was Mr. Clinton predicting andendorsing? He cited "as Exhibit A the European Union," or EIf,which is rapidly subsuming its member countries in a colossal,socialist, and increasingly tyrannical superstate'

The WFAs New York Times ad noted that in the same monththat clinton was making his above-mentioned federalismspeech, former CBS anchorman Walter Cronkite received theWFAs "Norman Cousins Global Governance Award for his pro-motion of world government in his autobiography A Reporter'sLife." lnaccepting the award, Cronkite said: "Those of us who areIiving today can influence the future of civilization. we can influ-ence whether our planet will drift into chaos and violence, orwhether through monumental educational and political effort wewill achieve a world of peace under a system of law where indi-vidual violators of that law are brought to justice"" We need asystem of enforceable world law - a democratic federal worldgovernment - to deal with world problems." T

20

Tno Tnnpar

At the World Federalist tribute to Cronkite, First Lady HillaryRodham Clinton - now a U.S. senator - offered her congratu-lations via closed-circuit TV. She said, "For more than a genera-tion inAmerica, it wasn't the news, until Walter Cronkite told usit was the news." Hillary continued, "For decades you told us,'the way it is.'But tonight we honor you for fighting for'the wayit could be.' ... [T]hank you, Walter, thank you for inspiring all ofus to build a more peaceful and just world."

Please keep in mind the significance of such a statement. Thecause for which Cronkite was being honored was the cause ofworld government, and world government would mean the end ofU.S. sovereignty, the end of our country, the end of ourConstitution - the document to which her husband had swornallegiance (and to which she also has sworn allegiance in herSenate oath).

However, BiIl Clinton himself had already praised an earlierrecipient of the Norman Cousins Global Governance Award: hisold Oxford University. roommate, Strobe Talbott, whom he hadappointed U.S. Ambassador at Large. That praise came in theform of a letter dated J:une22,1993, which was read at the WFAawards ceremony two days later. Mr. Clinton's letter praisedWFA founder Norman Cousins' Iifetime effort "for world peaceand world government" and noted that Talbott's "lifetimeachievements as a voice for global harmony have earned him thisrecognition." s

Specifically, the World Federalists were honoring Talbott for apro-world government essay he had written for Time magazineentitled "The Birth of the Global Nation" (July 20, 1992 issue).Therein Talbott approvingly forecast that in the future "nation-hood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a sin-gle, global authority." "[I]t has taken the events in our own won-drous and terrible century to clinch the case for world govern-ment," he said.9

Talbott's advocacy of world government did not preventPresident Clinton from appointing him Deputy Secretary ofState. That should not surprise anyone. Clinton, like Talbott, is

2L

Tnp UNrrno NetIoNs Eleosno

a member of the world-government-promoting Council onForeign Relations (CFR), as were over 400 other members of hisadministration. In addition, both are also "members in publicservice" of the Tiilateral Commission (TC), an even more exclu-sive establishmentarian club greasing the skids for global gover-nance.

Greasing the SkidsThese groups have orchestrated an outpouring of symphonicappeals for world government and have been preparing theAmerican psyche for a major globalist push to provide the UnitedNations, the WTO, and other international institutions with leg-islative, executive, and judicial powers. This is a small samplingof that orchestrated outpouring:

o Richard FaIk (CFR), Professor of International Law atPrinceton University, an influential legal scholar, wrote "Onthe Creation of a Glob'al Peoples Assembly' for the Summer2000 Stanford Journal of International Law, with ProfessorAndrew Strauss. Said Falk and Strauss: "At this historicaljuncture we believe that the time for the establishment of aglobal assembly is ripening. We believe that our circumstancesand values are raising a crucial new question: If democracy isso appropriate in the nation-state setting, why should notdemocratic procedures and institutions be extended to theglobal setting?... The existence and empowerment of a GlobalPeoplesAssembly (GPA) would, at the most general level, chal-lenge the traditional claim ofstates that each has a sovereignright to act autonomously...."10 Falk and Strauss subsequent-Iy penned a similar appeal, "Tbward Global Parliament," forthe JanuarylFebruary 2001 issue of the CFR journal, ForeignAffairs.lL

o The headline on the cover of The New Republic for the liberal-Ieft journal's January L7, 2OOO issue proclaimed, "America issurrendering its sovereignty to a world government. Hooray."

22

Tnr Tunrer

Inside, teaser copy above a less descriptive title ("ContinentalDrift") declared: "World government is coming. Deal with it."The author of the piece, senior editor Robert Wright, noted:"Much power now vested in the nation-state is indeed startingto migrate to international institutions," and "world govern-ment . .. is probably in the cards.... And, what's more, it's a goodidea." 12

o Writing in Foreign ffiairs, the highly influential quarterly ofthe Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), Representative JimLeach (R-Iowa) declared: "Since one of the most effective anti-dotes to the irrationality of ancient enmity is the swift justiceof the law, a turn (or in the case of the United States, return)to the compulsory jurisdiction of the World Court wouldappear to be one ofthe most appropriate and achievable objec-tives of the decades ahead."13

o Henry Grunwald (CFR), a former editor in chief of Time Inc.and former U.S. ambassador toAustria, authored a January 1,t999 Watt Street Journal op-ed article entitled 'A WorldWithout a Country?" and subtitled "Not right away. But theidea of the nation-state is in for some profound changes." In hisJournal article, Grunwald predicts that the "nation-state willundergo sharp limitations of its sovereignt/ and that, tust asthe old, petty principalities had to dissolve into the widernation-state, the nation-state will have to dissolve into widerstructures." Moreover, "it will be increasingly difficult for thefuture nation-state to argue that its treatments of its own cit-izens is a purely internal matter." 14

o On October 14,1999, the Wall Street Journal's lead editorialpraised the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences for awardingRobert Mundell the Nobel Prize for Economics. The Journalnoted that Mundell "was the chief intellectual proponent of theeuro" and acclaimed him for championing the "common cur-rency'' for Europe.ls The Journal then devoted nearly one-

23

TTm Uxrrpo Narrows Exposoo

third of a page to reprinting a 1990 essay by Mundell advocat-ing a world central bank, including this large blow-up quote:"We have a better opportunity to create a world central bankwith a stable international currency than at any previous timein history." 16 A world central bank would globalize the cen-tralization already being wrought by the European CentralBank, which is bringing the countries of the EU under the con-trol of one-world Eurocrats in Brussels and Frankfurt. The endresult of the Mundell-Journal vision is a world economic cartelleading to world political control under the United Nations.

o Dr. Rashmi Mayur is Director of the International Institute fora Sustainable Future, editor of The War & Peace Digest, and aregular speaker at IIN and other globalist programs. In anessay entitled "World Goverrrment," in the March/April 2000issue of the Digest, he states: "The world is not working, andeach day we are getting closer to an unprecedented catastro-phe, possibly bringing an end to human civilization and earthhecological system on which life's survival depends.... If thehuman civilization is to survive in the next millennium, theremust be world rule of law, in which laws apply equally to allhuman beings and all societies.... Such a rule of law can onlybe implemented by an institution which has legitimacy andpower on a global seale, that is, World Government.... []tsresponsibility would be total and global." Dr. Mayur continues,"Our children have dreams.... Humanityhas no future until werealize their dream s: World Gouernment Now ." 17 (Emphasis inthe original.)

o On May 15, 2000 Representative James McGovern (D-Mass.)introduced a resolution (H. R. 4453) calling for the creation ofa standing 6,000-man UN Rapid Deployment Po1ice andSecurity Force that could quickly be deployed to conflict situa-tions worldwide. According to McGovern, "a lot of lives couldhave been saved" in East Timor if the UN had been equippedwith such a force. "This force will allow the Security Council ...

24

THn Tnnnar

to deploy well-trained peacekeepers within 15 days of a reso-lution," McGovern said. 18

. In 1998, while the United Nations was holding a summit inRome to establish an International Criminal Court, three U.S.Supreme Court Justices traveled to Europe to visit theEuropean Court-of Justice (ECJ), which is now runningroughshod over the national governments of the EU. In sever-al frightening admissions, these justices (Ruth BaderGinsburg, Sandra Day O'Connor, and Stephen Breyer - allCFR members) expressed their admiration for the ECJ andstated that they anticipate using and citing judgments fromthe ECJ and other jurisdictions in the future.le

o In 1999 the International Academy of Humanism publishedt}:le Humanist Manifesto 2000, signed by an impressive lineupof educators, authors, scientists, diplomats, philosophers, andpolitical figures, including 10 Nobel Laureates. It includes thisappeal: "We believe that there is a need to develop new globalinstitutions.... These include the call for a bicameral legisla-ture in the United Nations, with a World Parliament electedby the people, an income tax to help the underdeveloped coun-tries, the end of the veto in the Security Council, an environ-mental agency, and a World Court with powers of enforce-ment." 2o

These are but a few of the numerous examples in an acceler-ating campaign of elite opinion molders and government officialswho favor this new world order. The mere fact that so manyprominent citizens are promoting such an obviously subversiveand harmful agenda should be alarming in and of itself, even ifthey were taking no concrete actions to implement it.

But they have gone far beyond mere advocacy to actuallyensnare us in international treaties, conventions, and programsthat are bit by bit destroying U.S. sovereignty and independenceand subjecting us to rule by unaccountable international

25

Tnn Uxrrro NerroNs Expospo

bureaucrats and institutions. The vast majority of Americanshave no idea that a huge array of UN schemes - some of whichwe have already become officially a party to, and others whichare awaiting action by the U.S. government - pose very realthreats to their freedom. These include:

The World Thade OrganizationThe massive environmental manifesto, Agenda 21The Biodiversity TieatyThe Global Warming ConventionPrograms for national and personal. disarmamentThe Tobin Tax and global income taxThe vast expansion of UN military operationsProposals for a standing IIN military forceThe UN's new International Criminal CourtThe Convention on the Rights of the ChildThe IIN's global Education for All program

In the chapters that follow, we wiII be closely examining theseschemes, as well as the forces promoting them and the pretextsunder which they are being promoted.

26

rlil

Chapter 2Disarmament and Submission

A world effectiuely controlled by the United, Nations is onein which *world gouernment, would come about through theestablishment of supranational institutions.... trlhe presentuN charter could theoreticaily be reuised. in order to erectsuch an organization equal to the task enuisaged., therebycodifying a radical rearrangenxent of power in the world.L

National disarmamefi i:: condition sine qua non foreffectiue UN control.... The ouerwhelming central fact would.still be the loss of control of their military power by ind,iuid._ual nations.2

- Lincoln P. Blobmfield (CFR), 1962 U.S. Department ofState Study Mernorandum No. Z, AWorld, Effectiuely

Controlled By the tlnited Nations_

In Stage III progressiue controlled disarmament ... would,proceed to a point where no state would, haue the militarypouer to chall.enge the progressiuely strengthened, IJ.N. peaceForce-3

- U.S. Department of State document, Freedom FromWar: The United States program for General and Complete

Disarmament in a Peacefut World, lg6lThe fact is, I see no compelling reason why we should not

unilaterally get rid of our nuclear weapons.4

- Paul H. Nitze (CFR), former U.S. arms control nego_tiator in 1999 Neu.York Times op-ed

Following world war I, a powerful cabal of one-world interna-tionalists offered humanity a "solution" to the horrible ravages of

Trm Umrno Nauoxs Expospo

war: world government. The League of Nations was their instru-ment of salvation and U.S. President Woodrow Wilson was theirprophet. (These individuals and groups will be examined furtherin the next chapter.)

"The dream of a world united against the awful wastes of waris ... deeply imbedded in the hearts of men everywhere," Wilsonproclaimed. Wilson believed that "all nations must be absorbedinto some great association of nations...."5 The new League heproposed would provide "collective security," i.e., it would use col-Iective force against designated "aggressors," through someundefi ned instrumentality.

The U.S. Senate, however, refused to ratify the League ofNations Covenant. Americans were suspicious of entanglementswith the constantly waruing European powers and wanted nopart of submersion in a world super-state. They saw through thesophistry and the seductive "peace" appeals. Any League strongenough to "enforce peace" globally would also possess the powerto impose tyranny worldrvide. There would be no way to limit itspower.

Without U.S. membership, the League of Nations was doomed.However, in the wake of the even more massive death anddestruction wrought by World War II, the organized one-worldforces succeeded in pulling the United States into the League'ssuccessor, the United Nations. In the decades since, these advo-cates of a "new world order" have been working assiduously toinvest the United Nations gradually with legislative, executive,and judicial po\Mers that will transform it into a global govern-ment.

From the viewpoint of these "Insiders," who plan to be therulers of this new world government, providing the tIN withunchallengeable military power is a paramount objective.Tiagically, very fewAmericans realize that the post-World War II"arms control" process and the various "arms control" treaties towhich we are party have been designed to achieve precisely thatobjective. And this incredible scheme is far closer to final fruitionthan most Americans would ever imagine.

28

DrsenuaunNT AND SueMlssrolr

ADanning Piece of EvidenceProfessor Lincoln P. Bloomfield of the Massachusetts Institute ofTechnology is very important to our consideration here for hisrevelations about this conspiracy for world conquest. Unintendedrevelations, we hasten to add. Dr. Bloomfield is the author of oneof the most critical and damning pieces of evidence to fall intoour hands concerning the conspiracy by Insiders in oui own gov-ernment to destroy the United States and subject the Americanpeople, along with the people of all the world, to an all-powerfulUnited Nations.

What is so astounding is that even four decades after thisscheme was discovered and exposed, Dr. Bloomfreld and his co-'conspirators are not only still free (in fact they have never evenbeen officialiy investigated) but are actively pursuing the samecriminal scheme. Even more extraordinary still, as the readerwill soon see, the treasonous scheme Bloomfield devised isquite obviously still serving as a guiding light to official U.S.policies.

We are referring to the secret 1962 study Dr. Bloomfieldauthored for the Kennedy State Department entitled StudyMemorandum No. 7, A World. Effectiuely Controlled By (heUnited Nations. The title itself is startling, but the contents.are'absolutely shocking for their audacity and treachery.

In the study's opening summary, Professor Bloomfreldwrites:

A world effectively controlled by the United Nations is one inwhich "world gouernmento would corne about through the estab-lishment of supranational institutions, characterized by mandato-ry universal membership and some ability to employ physicalforce. Effective control would thus entail a preponderance ofpolit-ical power in the hands of a supranational organization.... [T]hepresent UN Charter could theoretically be revised in order to erectsuch an organization equal to the task envisaged, thereby co;dify-ing a radical rearrangement of power in the world.6 [Emphasisadded.l

29

Tlm Lhurrn NerroNs E:rposuo

Dr. Bloomfreld continued:

The principal features of a model system would includl the fol-lowing: (1) powers suffrcient to monitor and enforce disarmament,settle disputes, and keep the peace - including taxing pouters ... ;(2) an international force, balanced appropriately among ground,sea, air, and space elements, consisting of 500,000 men, recruitedindividually, wearing a UN uniform, and controlling a nuclear forcecomposed of 50-100 mixed land-based mobile and undersea-basedmissiles, averaging one megaton per weapon; (3) governrnentalpowers distributed among three branches...; (4) compulsory juris-diction of the International Court....7 [Emphasis added.]

In this blueprint for global tyranny financed by the U.S. gov-ernment, Bloomfield repeatedly stated a key point, that "it isworld government we are discussing here - inescapable."s Andhe leaves no doubt that the scheme would mean subjicting theU.S. to this omnipotent "contemplated regime" (his words).e Heemphasizes, for instance, that:

National disarmament is a condition sine qua non for effectiveIIN control....

Th.e essential point is the transfer of the most vital element ofsovereign power from the states to a supranational government....

The overwhelming central fact would still be the loss of controlof their military power by individual nations. 10

Dr. Bloomfield lamented that it would be extremely difficult tosell this program for world government to the American people.However, it would be possible, he mote, if our national leadersutilized "a grave crisis or war to bring about a sudden transfor-mation in national attitudes sufficient for the purpose." The MITprofessor went on to sugigest that "the order we examine may bebrought into existence as a result of a series of sudden, nasty,and traumatic shocks." 11

The Bloomfield scheme is as old as tyranny itself: Create a cri-sis and then offer a solution. That solution always entails, of

30

Erunruaunl\r,r AND StreMrssroN

course, "tempora4/ seizure of total power.

Official "Disarmament" plansDr. Bloomfield's study was not just a professorial pipe dream des-tined to be unread and forgotten in some musty, dusty archive.*It describes what has become the operational policy of the U.S.government. Bloonifield, we should point out, was, and is, amember of the council on Foreign Relations, and it was his fel-low CFR members in President Kennedy,s CFR-dominated StateDepartment who initiated the official implementation of thisscheme.

In 1961, the Kennedy administration promulgated the now-infamous disarmament plan entitled Freed,om From War: Theunited states Program for General and complete Disarmamentin a Peaceful World. Also known as Department of StatePublication 7277, this plan, which is very similar to theBloomfield study, plesented a three-stage program for the trans-fer of U.S. arms to the United Nations.

During Stage II (the'stage we are currently in), the documentmandates: "The U.N. Peace Force shall be established and pro-gressively strengthened." 12 This will be accomplished "to the endthat the Unifed Nations can,effectively in Stage III deter or sup-press any threat or use offorce in violation ofthe purposes anflprinciples of the United Nations.,, 13 This incredible, treasonouspolicy - which has been actively but quiefly brought alongtoward completion during successive administrations - con_cludes as follows:

In Stage III progressive controlled disarmament ... would pro_ceed to a point where zo state would haue the mititary power tochallenge the progressiuely strengthened [J.N. peace Force.L4lEmphasis added.l

*Ttre full text of the Bloomfield study is available electronically from ow Get usout! of the United Nations website: www.getusout.org.

31

Tno UNrrpo NeuoNs Elcosuo

Pause and reflect for a momerrt on tfr"'"rrormity of the audaci-ty and treason involved in such an incredibld plot. It says thatunder the system it envisions, "no state" (meaning no country,including the United States) would be able to challenge the LIN'spower. This means that the U.S., like every other nation, wouldbecome a vassal of an omnipotent UN.

Who would actually be in control of this power? ThomasJefferson wisely admonislhed: "In questions of power let no morebe heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischiefby the chains of the constitution." 15 No human being-or group ofhuman beings should be entrusted with the kind of power con-templated here. Are we to believe that perhaps the UN is popu-lated with angelic beings? Anything but! The tower on NewYork's East River is better known as Terrorists, Tlrants, andThugs "R" IJs. This "House of Peace," remember, regularly eruptsin obscene exaltation for Fidel Castro, "Butcher of TiananmenSquare" Li Peng, and other leaders of the most brutal regimes inhistory.

The disarmament scheme's leading proponents in the U.S. ggv-ernment have publicly sworn oaths to uphold our constitutionalform of government and to defend it against all enemies foreignand domestic. These same individuals straight-facedly pretendto be doing exactly that, and the vast majority ofAmericans inno-cently take them at their word. After all, these are "respectedstatesmen" whose names and faces have become familiar andwho have been anointed by the Establishment media and politi-cal powers. Surely they would not betray us. Yet, that is precise-ly what they have done and are doing.

We do not use the terms treason lightly or loosely; we mean itin the precise and literal sense intended by the FoundingFathers. According to our Constitution: "TYeason against theUnited States shall consist only in levying war against them, onin adhering to their enemies, grving them aid and comfort." 16

T}ne Freedom From War plara manifestly fits this definition. Itwould render all Americans subject to a foreign power (the UN)controlled by one-world internationalists who have made no

32

DSSARMAMENT aNn Sr;eMrssrox

secret of their hostility toward our syster; of government, and bytotalitarian regimes that clearly mean us harm.

Freed,om FromWar was amplified inApril 7962by another dis-armament document entitled Blueprint for the Peace Race:Outline of Basic Prouisions of a Tleaty on General and CompleteDisarmament in a Peaceful World. As before, its third stage callsfor the strengthening of the IIN Peace Force "until it had suffi-cient armed forces and armaments so that no state could chal-lenge it." 17

That is where the current CFR leadership in the Bush admin-istration, working together with the heirs of Gorbachev andYeltsin in Moscow, are planning to take us with the currentround of disarmament talks and the ongoing push to arm theUnited Nations with a standing army. Their true intent is notthe elimination of weapons, but ttre transfer of weapons and mil-itary forces from nation-states to the IIN, creating a monopoly oipower that will enable them to enforce their envisioned newworld order.

On October 79,1994, former Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachevreleased t}ne Final Report of the Global Security Project at the'CFR's Pratt House headquarters in New York City.18 The GlobalSecurity Project (GSP) is a joint effort of the GorbachevFoundation and the CFR. Besides our same Dr. Bloomfield, otherCFR "security experts" on the project include Richard Falk, SaulMendlovitz, Jonathan Dean, Jeremy J. Stone, and the arch-sub-versive Daniel Ellsberg (of the Pentagon Papers infamy). Theywere joined by the late Senator Alan Cranston, a longtime pro- ,

Communist,le a past president of the World Federalists, and amember of the Tlilateral Commission.

The Gorbachev/CFR GSP Final Report calls for the creation ofa UN "readiness force" provided by UN member states. It pro-poses "drastic cuts by nuclear weapons states to the level of 100nuclear warheads, to be achieved within ten years, by 2005A.D."20 These reductions would be made "irreversible" by the

33

Tnn UNrrno NnrroNs Eleospo

transfer of all weapons-grade "fissile material" to the UN'sInternational Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). It also recommendsthat the UN Security Council press aII other nations likewise toplace their nuclear facilities under UN control - or face 'Jointpunitive action." 21 In line with the Bloomfield study andFreedom From War, the GSP calls for the worldwide abolition ofconventional armed forces by nation-s tates.zz

For those who still -can't recognize the obvious, JamesGarrison, co-founder and president of the GorbachevFoundation/USA, candidly admitted the game plan in a 1995newspaper interview. "Over the next 20 to 30 years, we are goingto end up with world government," he said. "It's inevitable,"Garrison continued, "... through this turbulence is the recogni-tion that we have to empower the United Nations and that we ,

have to govern and regulate human interaction...."23

An "Independent' Commission?In the spring of 1995, shortly after the release of the GSP FinalReport, another one-world volley pushing the same global disar-mament program came in the form of Our Global Neighborhood,the report of the "independent" Commission on GlobalGovernance (CGG). The CGG includes among its august mem-bership former presidents and prime ministers, many of whomare also leaders ofthe Socialist International, the principal glob-al organization of Marxist parties promoting world governmentand East-West convergettce.24 Our Global Neighborhood wasreleased on the eve of the United Nations Social Summit inCopenhagen, Denmark. The influential CGG report insists thatthe UN and other international institutions must be vested withever greater legislative, executive, andjudicial powers - includ-ing new regulatory, taxing, police, and military capabilitiesincluding a standing IIN "peace force."

Interestingly, one of the CGG's key consultants/advisors forthis report was again our same Dr. Bloomfreld. In the yearsbetween his 1961 study and his efforts for the GSP and CGGreports, Bloomfield continued to serve the world government

34

DrsenuemNT AND Susl{rssroN

cause: teaching at MIT serving as director of global issues for tleNational Security Council, sitting on intgrnational panels, andauthoring additional pleas to empower the UN. He is like hun-dreds of other CFR members who rotate in and out of "govern-ment service" to prestigious (and profitable) positions in financeand consulting (for instance, Goldman Sachs, Chase Manhattan,the Blackstone Group, or Kissinger Associates), academe(Harvard, Yale, Priirceton, Columbia, Stanford, MIT, JohnsHopkins, etc.), think tanks (CFR, the Brookings Institution, theInstitute for International Economics, Rand Corporation, theWoodrow Wilson Institute, etc.) or the corporate world, whichincludes many top Fortune 500 companies whose boards of direc-tors and top officer slots have become heavy with CFR members.

Harlan Cleveland , '

Also serving with Bloomfreld as consultants to the CGG wereCFR members Michael Clough, Peter Haas, and HallanCleveland,25 a notorious pro-Communist security risk in theKennedy administration who helped draft the Freedom From Warprogram for U.S. disarmament.26 Mr. Cleveland was one of theearly tlN "founders'at the 1945 San Francisco Conference. Inthestudent yearbook at Princeton University, he listed himself as a"fugialist."27 Later, he wrote articles for Pacific Affairs, the jour-nal of the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR), an infamous Sovietespionage operation that played a critical role in delivering Chinato the Communist forces of Mao Tbe-tung. The IPR was describedby the Senate Judiciary Committee as "an instrument ofCommunist policy, propaganda and military intelligence." 28

While Cleveland was deputy chief of the United Nations Reliefand Rehabilitation Administration (UNRRA) mission in Italy,that organization helped implement "Operation Keelhaul," thetreasonous and brutal betrayal that delivered nearly five millionEuropeans to Stalin's death squads and concentration camps.Cleveland's boss at UNRRA was Soviet agent Harold Glasser.2eCleveland was later appointed U.S. ambassador to NATO. As wewill see in ensuing chapters, he is typical of the one-world sub-

35

Tno UNrrno NetroNs E>eosuo

versives who have penetrated and'infested the top irr"t. of thefederal government for several decades.

Mr. Cleveland has kept active writing and speaking on behalfof the UN, international socialism, and world government overthe past half century. In 1976, he authored The Third Tly atWorld Order: U.S. Policy for an Interdependent World, publishedby the World Affairs Council of Philadelphia and the AspenInstitute; both of which'are longtime advocacy centers for worldgovernment, intimately linked with the CFR.

In that book, Cleveland laments that the frrst try at "worldorder" collapsed with the failure to secure U.S. entry into theLeague of Nations and that the second failure resulted from aUnited Nations that was not invested with sufficient authorityand power to enact and enforce world law.30 According toCleveland, the third try, now underway, is an attempt to arriveat world governance piecemeal, by strengthening the UN to dealwith various global crises involving, for instance, the globhlenvironment, food reserve[s], enerry supplies, fertility rates,military stalemate, and conflict in a world of proliferatingweapons.3l

Power of the Purse Supports the SwordPlanlers such as Cleveland recognize that transferring armsalone is not enough to establish a standing IIN army. That andother IIN schemes require a steady revenue stream that is notbeholden to the nation states that the LIN seeks to dominate.

Since 1991, Cleveland has served as president of the WorldAcademy ofArt and Science. In 1995, besides contributing to theCGG's Global Neighborhoodreport for the UN Social Summit inCopenhagen, Cleveland also headed up an international cast ofscholars to produce a special IIN anniversary issue of Futures,the prestigious journal of forecasting. Entitled "The UnitedNations at Fifty: Policy and Financing Alternatives," the reportproposed a number of schemes for global taxation.

In his lead-off essay, Cleveland asserted that "we will be rely-ing more and more [on the UN] for peacekeeping and peaceful

36

Drsnnrunlmlrr AND SueMrssroN

settlement, for the promotion of fairness in the human family,and for fostering human development.... Financing the UN is nolonger an issue to be ignored, bypassed, or swept aside.... It ishigh time we looked hard at how best to finance a wideningrange of international functions that grows more obviously nec-essary with every passing yeat"32

Rather than relying on "the worn-out policy of year-to-yeardecisions by individubl governments" on how much of their citi-zens'money to give to the UN, said Cleveland, "what's needed isa flow of funds for development which are generated automati-cally under international control." 33 He suggests, for instance,UN taxes on passports, on international travel, on ships (for theuse ofinternational waters), on international financial transac-tions, and on emissions of CFCs, CO2, methane and-dthergases.34 When it comes to the potential sources of global taxa-tion, said Cleveland, "the list is limited only by the human imag-ination." 35

That naked admission should strike terror into the heart ofevery taxpayer familiar with the imaginative capabilities of one-world socialists like Cleveland. In typical socialist fashion, theseglobalists see every productive human effort as a taxable activi-ty, a potential "revenue stream" for the UN. t

The global tax proposal that has won the most support is theso-called Tlobin Tax (after Nobel Laureate economist and CFRmember James Tobin), which would raise hundreds of billions ofdollars annually by taxing international financial transactions.The Tobin Tax and other proposed global taxes would radicallyrearrange the entire international system, transferring one ofthe most important elements of national sovereignty to globalinstitutions and providing the UN with independent and unac-countable revenue sources that would enable its constantexpansion.

In the past decade, these proposals have gone from the purelytheoretical to near practical reality. Yet most Americans have noidea that such schemes are even in the offing. How can it be thatsomething so imminent and monumentally important could be so

37

Tnp Uurrno Narroxs Exposuo

completely unknown? Harlan Cleveland explains it this way:"Over the years, a good deal of thinking has been done, mostlybelow the surface of public attention, on this whole subject."36(Emphasis added.)

You see, in the elite circles of power in which Cleveland and hisCFR associates operate, the internationalists have been dis-cussing and refrning thpse one-world schemes for many years.They do not spring it on the general public, though, until theyhave lined up winning support for it. It's called getting yourducks in a row.

New World ArmyBesides conspiring to deliver our nuclear arsenal tq the IIN, one-world architects like Cleveland, Bloomfield, et al., also have beenpushing full tilt to build a globe-straddling LIN conventionalarmy. Everyone who wasn't hibernating for the past 10 years orstranded on a desert isle has heard of Operation Desert Storm,the massive, U.S.-led, tlN-sanctioned 1991 invasion of Iraq,which President George Bush (CFR) declared was necessary toliberate Kuwait, stop the "naked aggression" of SaddamHussein, and promote "a new world order."37

But how many people have heard of, or remember, OperationsDesert Spring, Laser Strike, Northern Watch, Southern Watch,Eagle Eye, Joint Falcon, Joint Forge, Deliberate Forge, orDetermined Forge? Probably not very many. And yet these are allongoing multinational military operations - in lraq, Kosovo,Bosnia-Herzegovina - involving large numbers of U.S. militarypersonnel and assets.

And how many people have heard of, or remember, OperationsShining Hope, Noble Anvil, Desert Fox, Desert Thunder, BevelEdge, Nob1e Obelisk, Joint Endeavor, Deliberate Guard,Determined Guard, Decisive Enhancement, Decisive Edge,Desert Strike, Desert Focus, or any of the dozens of other IIN,NATO, and other multilateral deployments of U.S. armed forcesthroughout the world over the past decade?

AMay 2000 report prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staffnotes:

38

DrsenucvmN'r AND SusMIssIoN

"Since 1990, the United States military has participated in morethan 90 'named' operations around the world." "Of these," itstates, "more than 55 involved the deployment of a substantialnumber of forces to combat operations, peacekeeping missions orhumanitarian endeavors." 38 Such missions have been costly.According to the General Accounting Office, these missions,which it calls "Operations Other Than War" (OOTW), will costtaxpayers $4.7 billion for Fiscal Year 2000. These wars that areno longer called wars have cost $21.3 billion since 1991.3e

These costly "operations" rob dollars from our defense budget,which should be reserved for protectingAmerica's national inter-ests. In fact, there is no constitutional authority for our militaryto be used for any other purpose thannational defense. Besidesconsuming scarce defense dollars, the UN OOTW capers havegreatly strained our weapons and personnel resources. In July1999, Congressman Floyd Spence, chairman of the HouseArmedServices Committee, warned:

Over the last nine months, the Joint Chiefs of Staff'have con-cluded that the ability of the U.S. armed forces to meet therequirements of the National Military Stratery entails "moderateto high risk." This disturbing assessment was made even beforeOperationAllied Force commenced in the Balkans. As a "major the-ater war," Operation Allied Force overextended the U.S. Air Force,placing heavy demands on aerial refueling, reconnaissance andelectronic warfare units.... This 'trigh-risk" stratery is unaccept-able.... Unless our nation frelds the forces and provides theresources necessary to execute the National Military Strategy, wewill surely inherit a more dangerous world in whichAmerica's cred-ibility and resolve are put to the test with alarming frequency.4o

"AnAir Force that is today forty percent smaller than it was in1990," noted Chairman Spence, "committed over 40Vo of itsassets to Operation Allied Force, a higher percentage than wascommitted during Operation Deserb Storm."4lRep. Spence quot-ed General Michael Hawley, who was Commander of the Air

39

Tnp Ulrmpo Nerrolrs Exposno

Combat Command during Operation Allied Force. 'TVe cannotcontinue to accumulate contingencies," warned General Hawley."At some point, you've got to figure out how to get out of some-t};ring."a2

But more "hot-spots" keep cropping up. Coups, revolutions,wars, and conflicts - in Fiji, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, Congo, SierraLeone, Sudan, Nigeria, Rwanda, Kosovo, Bosnia, Cyprus,Lebanon - guarantee bpportunities galore for the global inter-ventionists running U.S. foreign and military policy. Not sur-prisingly, these "opportunities" are being cited by one-worldadvocates as proof of the need for a standing IIN Army.

On May 15, 2000 Representative James McGovern (D-Mass.)introduced a resolution calling for the establishment of a 6,000-strong tIN force that could duickly be deployed to conflict situa-tions worldwide. According to McGovern, "a lot of lives couldhave been saved" in East Timor if the UN had been equippedwith such a force.43 "This force will allow the Security Council,subject to a US veto, to deploy well-trained peacekeepers within15 days of a resolutionj' McGovern said.a His proposed UNRapid Deployment Police and Security Force would only be forshort-term deployment ("a few months," he says) while more per-manent coalition forces are assembled.as

As we will see in future chapters, this effort to create a per-manent UN army is gathering steam, with all the usual CFRpuppeteers orchestrating a global "consensus." Tlagedy andtumult provide pretexts galore for intervention. Often these con-flicts have been fomented in the first place by Communist-trained guerrillas who have strong UN support. And, as we shallsee in Chapter 9, United Nations intervention frequently adds tothese tragedies by helping the worst tyrants crush their opposi-tion and solidifr their power.

40

Chapter 3The Secret Network of Power

We are at present working discreetly with all our might towrest this mysterious force called souereignty out of theclutches of the local nation states of the world.t

-Arnold Toynbee,Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1931

We shall haue world gouernment, whether or not we like it.The question is only whether world gouernment will beachieued by consent or by conquest.2

- James P. Warburg (CFR), testimony before the Senate

.. Foreign Relations Subcommittee, 1950

I know of the operations of this network [the internationalRound Table groups, including the Coun'cil on ForeignRelationsl because I haue studied it for twenty years and waspermitted for two yedrs, in the early 7960's, to examine itspapers and secret records.s

- Professor Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University,"mentor" to Bill C1inton, 1966

Ouer the next 20 to 30 years, we are going to end up withworld gouernment. It's ineuitable.... [W]e haue to empower theUnited Nations and ... we haue to gouern and regulatehuman interaction.4

- Jim Garrison,President of the Gorbachev Foundation/UsA, 1995

In Jonathan Swift's adventure parable, the giant Gulliver isbound by the tiny Lilliputians in a single night. Their ropes weremere threads to him, and he could have easily snapped them

4t

Tnn UNrroo NetroNs Expospn

individually or in small numbers. Yet, once those threads hadmultiplied to thousands, he would be rendered completely help-less. It was thus absolutely essential, from the standpoint of hislittle captors, that they complete their project before he awak-ened. So too, with our situation today. TheAmerican giant is fastasleep, completely unaware of the growing danger. In this case,however, the Lilliputians have inside help. They have traitorsinside our camp who aie slipping the American Gulliver seda-tives and tranquilizers.

The strands that are multiplying about the American peopleand gradually being forged into steel manacles are the work notof a single night but of decades. The network of individuals andorganizations leading this effort for global conquest has workedpatiently and assiduously to build a worldwide "movement"which, on the surface, appears to be a completely absurd mixtureofincongruous and opposing parts. It is a fusion ofradical social-ists, feminists, pacifists, environmentalists, and communiststogether with internatiopal bankers, industrialists, and corpo-rate CEOs, including some of the world's wealthiest capitalists.Yet the disparate members of this odd alliance chant the one-world mantra in unison: "Global problems require global solu-tions."And global solutions, they assure us, can only be providedby a world government - one with ever-increasing powers.

In this chapter, we are goin! to briefly examine some of themain groups and individuals in the 20th century who forged theconspiratorial drive for world government. This includes the ven-erated founders of the United Nations and many well-known andrespected leaders in the fields of politics, business, fi.nance, andacademia.

UN: Creature of the CFRThe United Nations, we learn as schoolchildren, representsmankind's highest aspirations and ideals. According to textbookIore and steady propaganda in the major media, the UN is theworld's "last best hope for peace." Following World War II, we aretold, the heroic and visionary UN founders came together to save

42

Trm Spcnm Nntwonx or Powrn

humanity from the certain annihilation that would result if anuclear war were allowed to occur.

That is a myth, a lie. The IIN, as we will show, is completely acreature of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and was cre-ated for purposes entirely different from the noble ones usuallycited. It was created to accumulate and usurp power so thateventually it could become a vehicle for imposing totalitariancontrol over our entird planet.

The plans for the United Nations were drafted in 1943 by theInformalAgenda Group (IAG), a secret steeringcommittee set upby FDRis Secretary of State Cordell HuIl. Besides HulI himself,the IAG was composed of Leo Pasvolskg Isaiah Bowman,Sumner Welles, Norman Davis, and Morton Taylor. AsProfessors Lawrence Shoup and William Mintner point out intheir critical study of the CFR, with the exception of HuIl, all ofthe secret IAG participants were CFR members. "They saw Hullregularly to plan, select, and guide the labors of the [State]Department's Advisory, Committee. It lthe CFR] was, in effect,the coordinating agency for all the State Department postwarplanning."s

At the UN's founding San Francisco Conference, 43 of the U.S.delegates - virtually our entire contingent - were, or wouldlater become, members of the CFR, including: Hamilton FishArmstrong, Ralph Bunche, John J. McCloy, Leo Pasvolsky,Nelson Rockefeller, Harold Stassen, Adlai Stevenson, IsaiahBowman, and John Foster Dulles (the last two being foundingmembers of the CFR).6 Of course, the top man at that confer-ence, serving as acting Secretary-General, was Soviet agentAlger Hiss, also a CFR member. Hiss not only ran the U[ showat San Francisco and appointed many of the delegates and LINofficers, but he also played a key role in drafting the UNCharter. T

Secret Shadow GovernmentFrom FDR's administration to the present, the CFR's perniciousinfluence in American society and government has grown dra-

43

Tlro Umrno NRrroNs Exposnn

matically. The CFR has become in effect the secret shadow gov-ernment of the United States; its members have dominatedevery administration since World War II. Presidents Eisenhower,Nixon, Ford, Carter, Bush, and Clinton were members, as werehundreds of their appointments. (President George W. Bush isnot a member, but his vice president, Dick Cheney, is, as aremany of the top Bush cabinet picks. See Chapter 9.) No otherorganization even comes close to exercising this kind of politicalpower in the United States.

Author/journalist Richard Rovere (CFR) has described theCouncil as "a sort of Presidium for that part of the Establishmentthat guides our destiny as a nation."8 Historian Arthur M.Schlesinger Jr. (CFR) has termed it a "front organization [for]the heart of the American Establishment."e Newsweek hasreferred to the Pratt House* one-world coterie as "the foreignpolicy establishment of the U.S." 10 Professors Lawrence Shoupand William Mintner have dubbed the organization "theImperial Brain Trust." 11 Author and hard-core radical activistRichard Barnet (CFR) wrote, as far back as l972,that "failure tobe asked to be a member of the Council has been regarded for ageneration as a presumption of unsuitability for high offrce in thenational security bureaucracy." 12

In his 1979 memofu With No Apologles, Senator BarryGoldwater noted that despite the heated rhetoric and change inparty label from one administration to the next, the same inter-nationalist policies continue unabated:

When a new President comes on board, th6re is a great turnoverin personnel but no change in policy. Example: During the Nixonyears Henry Kissinger, CFR member and Nelson Rockefellert pro-t6g6, was in charge of foreign policy. When Jimmy Carter was elect-ed, Kissinger was replaced by Zbigniew Brzezinski, CFR memberand David Rockefeller's prot6g6. 13

*The Harold Pratt House in New York City is the headquarters for the Councilon Foreign Relations.

44

;li!!-;!

tI

THp Srcnrt Nprwonx or Pownn

On October 30, 1993, the Washington Post printed one of themost candid (and rare) admissions against interest by theEstablishment: a column by Post writer Richard Harwood, enti-tled "Ruling Class Journalists." Mr.'Harwood openly concededthat the CFR's "members are the nearest thing we have to a rul-ing establishment in the United States." 14

To illustrate his claim, Harwood pointed to the Clinton admin-istration. "The president is a member," Harwood noted. "So is hissecretary of state, the deputy secretary of state, all frve of theundersecretaries...."15And on and on he went, through a litanyof the CFR membership roster in the Clinton regime.

How can it be that an organization that has gained suchincredible influence and power, that has virtually hijacked theAmerican government, is so little known to theAmerican public?The Posf's Mr. Harwood provides the answer:

The editorial page editor, deputy editorial page editor, executiveeditor, managing editor, foreign editor, national affairs editor, busi-ness and frnancial editor and various writers as well as KatharineGraham, the paper's principal owner, represent The WashingtonPosf in the council's membership.l6

Ditto for the other media giants: t}ne New York Times, WallStreet Journal, Los Angeles Times, Newsweek, Time, US News &World Report, NBC, CBS, ABC, et al. CFR members TomBrokaw, Dan Rather, Ted Koppel, Diane Sawyer, James Lehrer,Bernard KaIb, Irving R. Levine, David Brinkley, BarbaraWalters, and Morton Kondracke, along with hundreds of otherinlluential "journalists" and media executives, serve as propa-gandists for the Pratt House thought cartel.* In the words ofHarlan Cleveland, they make sure the CFRb subversive opera-tions stay "mostly below the surface of public attention."

Bilderberg Group: Power-mad ElitistsDavid Rockefeller gratefully acknowledged this indispensable"cloakingi' service provided by the CFR.[C-dominated media at a

45

THn Uxrrrn NetroNs Exposno

meeting of the secretive Bilderberg Group (BG). Gathering atSand, Germany in June 1991, this coterie of elite one-worldershad important global intrigues to plan and coordinate for thefinal decade of the millennium. Many top media Insiders were inattendance, but as in years past, they would reveal not a word ofwhat they had heard at the confab to their readers or viewers.

Despite the Bilderbergers' elaborate security precautions,however, the word did leak out in two French publications,Minute and Lectures Francaises. 17 Hilaire du Berrier, publisherof the authoritative, Monte Carlo-based HduB Reports, was thefrrst to inform Americans of goings-on at the BG conference atSand. Du Berrier, who has been closely following and chroniclingthe activities of the New World Order operatives for more thanfour decades, reported on the conference in his HduB Reports forSeptember 1991.18 His Bilderberg revelations then reached amuch larger audience inThe New American magazine, where heis a contributor.ls

What did David Rockefeller, then the chairman emeritus of theAmerican Establishment, have to say to the assembled aristoc-racy of the U.S. media? An amazing, stunning mouthful, that'swhat. We'll let you judge for yourself. This is part of Rockefeller'sgreeting to his Bilderberg boon companions:

We are gratefrrl to the Washington Post, t}ne New York Times,Tim.e rorragazine, and other great publications whose directors haveattended our meetings and respected their promises of discretionfor almesl forty years. It would have been impossible for us todevelop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the Qright

*The CFR's 2000 Annual Reporf states that 386 of its members are "Journalists,Correspondents, and Communications Executives." As in past Annual Reports, ltalso notes, under the heading, "Rules, Guidelines, and Practices": "Full freedomof expression is encouraged at Council meetings. Parbicipants are assured thatthey may speak openly, as it is the tradition ofthe Council that others will notattribute or characterize their statements in public media or forums or knowing-ly transmit them to persons who will. All participants are expected to honor thatcommitment." This is the Pratt House equivalent of Omerta, the Mafia "oath ofsilence."

46

i

Tnp Srcnm Nprwonx or Powrn

lights of publicity during these years. But the world is now moresophisticated and prepared to march towards a world goveramentwhich will never again know war but only peace and prosperity forthe whole of humanity. The supranational sovereignty of an intel-lectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the nationalautodetermination practiced in the past centuries. It is also ourduty to inform the press ofour convictions as to the historic futureof the century. 20

Incredible, no? WelI, what else would you expect from a cabalof power-mad elitists who consider the whole world to be theirown private oyster? These "enlightened ones," these illuminati,have been busily redesigning, reshaping, and "transforming" theworld according to their own desires throughout the past centu-ry. They intend to be the planetary overlords in the new worldorder. As Mr. Rockefeller said, it would have been "impossible,,for them to have come so far with their super-subversive plotexcept that their co-corrspirators in the media kept "the brightlights of publicity" offtheir dark schemes.

The Posf's Richard Harwood noted concerning the CFR mediaoligarchy: "They do not merely analyze and interpret foreign pol-icy for the United States; they help make it."2t (Emphasis added.)He might also have said that they smother, suppress, censor,quash, and kill much of the real news (and grossly distort therest) in order to help make "policy." While endlessly, piously prat-tling about their sacred role as "watchdogs," and "the public'sright to know," these criminal hypocrites have been engaged inthe biggest cover-up in history.

How did the CFR claque come to acquire so much power? Inthis compressed study, we can only briefly attempt to answerthat question.x

CFR Historian Speaks OutOne of the most informative and penetrating revelations con-cerning the CFR power network came in 1966 with publication of

47

Tns UNrrEo NlrIoNs Exposoo

Tlagedy arud Hope: A History of the World in Our Time byProfessor Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University. A celebrat-ed historian who was sympathetic to the CFR's globalist agenda,Quigley wrote:

I know of the operations of this network [the internationalRound Table groups, including the Council on Foreign Relationslbecause I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted fortwo years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secretrecords. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, formuch of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments....In general, my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remainunknown.22

And what are the "aims" of this network? According to Dr.Quigley: "lN]othing less than to create a world system of frnan-cial control in private hands able to dominate the political sys-tem of each country and the economy of the world as a whole." 23

The network to which Quigley referred had provided the "braintrust" and the financial impetus behind the drive for the Leagueof Nations, the effort Mr. Cleveland referred to as the "First T$'at world order. Leading that drive for the network was Col.Edward Mandell House, the key advisor and "alter ego" ofPresident Woodrow Wilson. When the League of Nations wasthwarted by the U.S. Senate, Col. House and his colleagues deter-mined to continue their struggle by other means. House was partof a cabal called "The Inquiry," a group of 100 "forward-looking"social engineers who created the Versailles Peace Tbeaty at theclose of World War I.2a This group formed the American nucleus

*Ttre development of this conspiratorial power network has been extensivelyexamined in such studies as: The Shadows of Power: The Council on ForeignRelations and The American Decline by James Perloff (Western Islands, 1988);Global Tlranny ... Step By Step by William F. Jasper (Western Islands, 1992);None Dare Call It Conspiracyby GaryAllen (Concord Press, 1971); The Insiders,4th Erlition, by John F. McManus (The John Birch Society, L995); The Wise Menby Walter Isaacson and Evan Thomas (Simon & Schuster, 1986); among others.

48

THn Spcnm Nnrwonx or Powrn

of what was to become the Council on Foreign Relations. TheInquiry's British counterparts created a companion organization- the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIlt;. zs

These groups were the product of an earlier secret societyformed in February 1891 by Cecil Rhodes, the legendary "dia-mond king" and "colossus" of Africa, with British journalistWilliam Stead. Rhodes, although famous as'the richest man inthe world," was an ardent disciple of socialist Professor JohnRuskin, under whom he had studied at Oxford. Dr. Quigleyexplains: "In this secret society Rhodes was to be leader; Stead,Brett (Lord Esher), and Milner were to form an executive com-mittee; Arthur (Lord) Balfour, (Sir) Harry Johnston, LordRothschild, Alberb (Lord) Grey, and others were listed as poten-tial members of a 'Circle of Initiates'; while there was to be anouter circle known as the Association of Helpers'(later organizedby Milner as the Round Table organization).... Thus the centralpart of the secret society was established by March 189L."26

The plan developed !y Rhodes and his small circle of co-con-spirators was one in which "a world system of financial control inprivate hands" would be used to bring about world government.

"This system," notes Quigley, "was to be controlled in a feudal-ist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, bysecret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings andconferences." 27 Professor Quigley explained further:

The apdx of the system was the Bank for InternationalSettlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and con-trolled by the worlds'central banks which were themselves privatecorporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like MontaguNorman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the NewYorkFederal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, andHjalmar Schacht of the Reichsbank, sought to dominate its gov-ernment by its ability to control Tfeasury loans, to manipulate for-eign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in thecountry, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent eco-nomic rewards in the business world.28

49

Tnn UNrrpn Nerrous Eleospn

In January 1924, Reginald McKenna, who was then chairmanof the board of the Midland Bank (and had been Britain'sChancellor of the Exchequer in 1915-16), confirmed that theBritish system was completely dominated by the conspiratorialmonied aristocracy. "I am afraid the ordinary citizen will not liketo be told that the banks can, and do, create money," saidMcKenna. "And they who control the credit of the nation directthe policy of Governments and hold in the hollow -of their handsthe destiny of the people." 2e

On November 11, 1927, th:e Wall Street Journal calledMontagu Norman, governor of the Bank of England, "the cur-rency dictator of Europe." Norman, a strange, furtive intriguergiven to wearing disguises, using assumed names, and inces-santly flitting about the world on mysterious missions, colr-firmed t]ne Journal's assertion before the Macmillan Committeeon March 26, 1930.30

AHigher PowerBut as Professor Quigley points out, Norman answered to pow-ers who stood in the shadows. "It must not be felt that theseheads of the world's chief central banks were themselves sub-stantive powers in world finance," writes Quigley. "They werenot. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the domi-nant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raisedthem up and. were perfectly capable of throwing them down." 31

Those bankers to whom Quigley refers were members of theRhodes-Milner network. Their immense power and inlluencewere exercised through the Royal Institute of InternationalAffairs, the CFR, and their many other levers of control in thegovernment, the major political parties, academe, business, andthe media.

As Rhodes biographer Sarah Millin put it: "The government ofthe world was Rhodes'simple desire." 32 The Rhodes Scholarships,like the Round Table groups, were integral to this global scheme.Part of Rhodes'plan was to bring bright, ambitious young men toOxford University for indoctrination and recruitment into his

50

Tnn Socnm NPrwom or PowPn

grand conspiracy. Co-conspirator William Stead said that Rhodes'own words were that after 30 years there would be "between twoand three thousand men [mathematlcally selected] in the primeof life scattered all over the world, each one of whom will havehad impressed upon his mind in the most susceptible period of hislife the dream of the Founder [Rhodes1."33

What were the qrraliti"s looked for in these specially selected"scholars"? According to Rhodes himself: "smugness, brutality,unctuous rectitude, and tact."34 Which pluperfectly describedthe ruthless Cecil Rhodes. And just as aptly fit his most famousRhodes Scholar and one-world acolyte: BiII Clinton.ss*

Over the years, Round Tab1e-style groups parallel to the CFRhave been established in France, Germany, Italy, Belgium,Norway, Sweden, India, Canada, Japan and dozens of othercountries. Rhodes'disciples have thus built a global network ofunprecedented power, capable of influencing, manipulating, sab-otaging, and controlling political and economic events on a scalepreviously unimaginable.

"When the influence which the [Royal] Institute wields is com-bined with that controlled by the Milner Group in other fields -in education, in administration, in newspapers and periodicals

- a really terrifying picture begins to emerge," wrote Quigley inThe Anglo-American Establishnt'ezf,3o which was publishedposthumously in 1981. He explained:

The picture is terrifying because such power, whatever the goals

at which it may be directed, is too much to be entrusted safely toany group.... No country that values its safety should allow what

*other American "Rhodies,, who have been boosted to pinnacles of power in thefields of politics, business, media, and academia include Harlan cleveland,George Stephanopolous, strobe Talbott, Ira Magazineq Robert Reich, NicholasKatzenbach, Lloyil Cutler, Erwin Canham, Dean Rusk, Richard N' Gardner'James Hester, Representative carl Albert, Senator J. William Fulbright, senatorRichard Lugar, Senator Bill Bradley, Senator David L. Boren, Justice ByronWhite, Justice David Souter, Hedley Donovan, Howard K. Smith, Walt Rostowstringfellow Barr, General Bernard Rogers, Admiral stansfield I\rrner, JamesWoolsey, and Joseph Nye.

51

Tnp Uxrrpo Nauoxs Exposoo

the Milner Group accomplished in Britain - that is, that a smallnumber of men should be able to wield such power in administra_tion and politics, should be given almost complete control over thepublication of the documents relating to their actions, should beable to exercise such influence over the avenues ofinforrration thatcreate public opinion, and should be able to monopolize so com_pletely the writing and the teaching of the history of their ownperiod.37

Admiral Chester Ward, who was himself a member of the CFRfor 16 years, saw that "terrifi.ing picture,, up close. AdmiralWard, who resigned in disgust, was not exaggerating when hecharged that the CFR agenda is to promote ,,disarmament andsubmergence of u.s. sovereignty and national independence intoan all-powerful one-world government.,,s8The leadership of thegroup, he wrote, "is composed of the one-world-global-govern-ment ideologists - more respectfully referred to as the organ-ized internationalists." Moreover, he charged, the ,,lust to sur-render the sovereignty aidindependence ofthe united states ispervasive throughout most of the membership.... The majorityvisualize the utopian submergence of the united states as a sub-sidiary administrative unit of a global government...."3s

Admiral Ward's shocking charge is more than substantiated byinnumerable writings, speeches and actions of CFR membersboth in and out of government. Even more astounding than thisincredible treachery by American leaders to subvert and destroyour liberty is the extensive record of treason showing that thesesame one-world advocates have been pursuing their evil purposein concert with the most brutal and murderous totalitarian dic-tators in the history ofour planet. That is the suhject ofour nextchapter.

52

Chapter 4

"Capitalists" and theCommunist Dimension

[T]he American Communists worked energetically andtirelessly to lay the foundations for the United Nations whichwe were sure would corne into existence.t

- Earl Browder, General Secretary of the CommunistParty USA

This task is the tash of the world proletarian reuolution,the task of the creation of the world Souiet republic.2

- V.I. Lenin,1920 Congress of the Communist International

IN World Union of Souiet Socialist Republics uniting thewhole of mankind under the hegemony of the internationalproletariat organized as a state.s

- "Program of the Communist International," 1928

The ,ultimate object of the parties of the SocialistInternatiortal is nothing less than world gouernnxent. As afirst step towards it, they seek to strengthen the UnitedNations....a

- Declaration of the Socialist International1962 Conference, Oslo, Norway

[T]he conflict between the two great superpowers ... will bereplaced by the USDR (a union of socialist democraticrepublics). This will be a penultimate stage of progresstoward a truly global world fed.eral Ltniorl...."5

- Professor MortimerAdler, socialist, author, 1991

53

Tre UNrrno NauoNs Eleospo

We saw in the last chapter that, Iike the Communists (see abovequotes), the American one-world Insiders, operating primarilythrough their CFR front, "worked energetically and tirelessly tolay the foundations for the United Nations."6 We saw also thatfrom start to finish the UN has been wholly a CFR-conceived anddriven operation. This is a fact that the historical record over-whelmingly and indispu{ably proves.* The historical record alsoproves with super-abundant documentation that these globalistarchitects intended that the United Nations and its relatedinternational institutions would be gradually enlarged andstrengthened until, ultimately, it would subsume all nationsunder an all-powerful, one-world government. 7

It is also beyond dispute that the leaders of the worldCommunist conspiracy were solidly behind the formation of theUN and have supported every effort to enlarge, strengthen, andempower it over the past half century. This is plainly evidentfrom the official speeches, writings, and actions of top SovietIeaders and Communist leaders worldwide, as well as from offi-cial documents of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union(CPSU). We have also very extensive testimony to this effectfrom numerous top Soviet defectors and former AmericanCommunist officials.

That the Communists would support an institution for worldgovernment is no mystery; the essence and substance of thewhole Communist program has been the pursuit of that veryobject. As long ago as 1915, before the Bolshevik Revolution,Vladimir Lenin himself proposed a "United States of theWorld." e Soviet dictator and mass murderer Joseph Stalin, as farback as 1922, stated: "Let us hope that by forming our confeder-ate republic we shall be creating a reliable bulwark againstinternational capitalism and that the new confederate state will

*Robert W Lee writes in his 1981 expos6, The United Nations Conspiracy, "When the SanFrancisco Conference convened on April 25 of that year [1945] to finalize and approve theUN Charter, more than forty members of the United States delegation had been, were, orwould later become members of the CFR." 8 Mr. Lee lists the CFR founding fathers of the UNin Appendix C to his book. (Or see: www.getusout.org.)

54

"CAprrAl,Isrs" AND trrp Covnvrulusr DrtvmNsroN

be another step towards the amalgamation of the toilers of thewhole world into a single World Socialist Soviet Republic." 10x

Earl Browder, general secretary of the CPUSA, stated in hisbook%ctory and After that "the American Communists workedenergetically and tirelessly to lay the foundations for the UnitedNations which we were sure would come into existence." 11

Moreover, this leader of theAmerican Reds declared:

It can be said, without exaggeration, that ever closer relationsbetween our nation and the Soviet Union are an unconditionalrequirement for the United Nations as a world coalition....

The United Nations is the instrument for victory. Victory isrequired for the survival of our nation. The Soviet Union is anessential part of the United Nations. Mutual confrdence betweenour country and the Soviet Union and joint work in the leadershipof the United Nations are absolutely necessary. 12

Clearly, Communist leaders have always advocated, support-ed, and promoted the goal of world government generally, andthe United Nations particularly, in word and deed. Dr. BellaDodd, a former top CPUSA official, told of her role in theCommunist campaign for the IIN: 'Iilhen the Yalta conferencehad ended, the Communists prepared to support the UnitedNations Charter which was to be adopted at the San Franciscoconference to be held in May and June, 1945. For this I organ-

*In his 1932 book Toward Soyiet America, William Z. Foster, national chairman of theCommunist Par/y USA (CPUSA), wrote: "The American Soviet govemment witl join withthe other Soviet govemments in a world Soviet Union.... A Communist world will be a uni-fied, organized world. The economic system will be one great organization, based upon theprinciple of planning now dawning in the U.S.S.R. The American Soviet govemment will bean important section in this world organizationl'L3

In 1936, the ofEcial pro$am of the Communist Intemational proclaimed: "Dictatorshipcan be established only by a victory of socialism in different countries or groups of countries,after which the proletmiat republics would unite on federal lines with those already in exis-tence, and this system of federal unions would expand .. . at length forming the World Unionof Socialist Soviet Republics." 14

55

Trm UNrrno Narroxs Exposno

ized a corps of speakers and we took to the street corners andheld open-air meetings in the millinery and clothing sections ofNew York where thousands of people congregate at the lunchhour. We spoke of the need for world unity and in support of theYalta decisions." 15

Shortly after the founding of the IIN, in March of 1946, Stalindeclared: "I attribute - great importance to U.N.O. [UnitedNations Organization, as it was then commonly calledl since it isa serious instrument for preservation of peace and internationalsecurity.D 16 On one level, Stalin's expressed desire for "peace"and "security''is an obviously disingenuous propaganda ploydevoid of any meaning, in the sense that most people ascribe tothose words. However, in the Communist sense, where "peace'and "security" are defined as an absence of resistance toCommunism, Stalin's endorsement of the UN is perfectly under-standable. He knew that the LIN's very nature and structurewould contribute to Communist advantage, since his agents hadhelped design it. And he,knew that the IIN was permeated withCommunist agents who would assure that it remained aCommunist instrument.

For these same reasons, The Constitution of the CommunistParty of the United States of America (1957 version) states that"the true national interest ofour country and the cause ofpeaceand progress require the solidarity of all freedom-loving peoples,peaceful coexistence of all nations, and the strengthening of theUnited Nations as a universal instrument of peace." 17

Reds Among the FoundersOf course, the Communists were not only working outside theUN to stir up support for the new global organization, they werealso running things on the inside - in concert with their like-minded, one-world CFR cohorts. Keep in mind that it was Sovietagent Alger Hiss (CFR), acting director of the StateDepartment's Office of Special Political Affairs, who served asexecutive secretary of the critically important 1944 DumbartonOaks Conference, where the UN Charter was drafted.ls In that

56

"CApITALISTS" AND tnp Comvrrmtsr DrnanNsIoN

"noble" endeavor, Stalin's secret agent Hiss and Stalin's openagent V. M. Molotov were the two prime players. TheCommunists couldn't lose: "our guy'' and "their guy'' were both"Stalin's guys," two hands on the same hairy body.

But it was much worse than that; Hiss was far from the onlyCommunist agent in (not under) the UN bed. The JuJy 7944Bretton Woods Conference was as important for the about-to-be-born IIN as was the Dumbarton Oaks Conference. BrettonWoods established the post-World War II global economic policiesand architecture, including the International Monetary Fund(IMF) and World Bank group of institutions. Bretton Woods wasplanned and initiated by the Economic and Finance Group of theCouncil on Foreign Relations. The leader of the conference andthe head of the U.S. delegation was Assistant Secretary of theTbeasury Harry Dexter White, a secret member of a Soviet espi-onage ring. rs Assisting White as technical secretary of the con-ference was another Soviet agent at the Tleasury Department,Virginius Frank Coe. ,

In his imporbant book on the UN, The Fearful Master, authorG. Edward Griffin wrote:

In 1950 the State Department issued a document entitledPostwar Foreign Policy Preparation, 1939-45.... This and similarofficial records reveal that the following men were key governmentfrgures in UN planning within the U.S. State Department andTreasury Department: Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, VirginiusFrank Coe, Dean Acheson, Noel Field, Lawrence Duggan, HenryJulian Wadleigh, John Carter Vincent, David Weintraub, NathanGregory Silvermaster, Harold Glasser, Victor Perlo, Irving Kaplan,SolomonAdler,Abraham George Silverrnan, William L. Ullman andWilliam H. Taylor. With the single exception of DeanAcheson, all ofthese men haue since been identified in sworn testimony a,s secretCommunist agentslzo [Emphasis in original.]

UN Charter: AMarxist-Leninist BlueprintWith the pedigrees of these designers in mind, it should come as

57

THn Umrpp NerroNs Exposen

no surprise that the great UN Charter, so reverentially extolledby all internationalists, is a purely Marxist-Leninist blueprint.But you needn't take our word for it; that's the assessment of for-mer top Communist Party member Joseph Z. Kornfeder. In hissworn testimony before Congress in 1955, 10 years after thefounding of the IIN, Mr. Kornfeder stated:

I need not be a member of the United Nations Secretariat to knowthat the UN "blueprint" is a Communist one. I was at the Moscowheadquarters of the world Communist party for nearly three yearsand was acquainted with most of the top leaders.... I went to theircolleges; I learned their pattern ofoperations, and ifl see that pat-tern in effect anywhere, I can recognize it,...

From the point of view of its master designers meeting atDumbarton Oaks and Bretton Woods, and which included suchmasterfrrl agents as Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, LauchlinCurrie, and others, the UN was, and is, not a failure. They and theK,remlin masterminds behina them never intended the UN as apeace-keeping organization. What they had in mind was a fancyand colossal Tlojan horse.... Its [the UN's] internal setup,Communist designed, is a pattern for sociological conquest; a pat-terrr aimed to serve the purpose of Communist penetration of theWest. It is ingenious and deceptive.2l

Kornfeder's evaluation of the UN is backed up by no less anauthority than former UN Secretary-General U Thant. Mr.Thant was a Marxist, winner of the Soviet lJnion's Lenin PeacePize. "Lenin was a man with a mind of great clarity and inci-siveness," Thant said, "and his ideas have had a profound influ-ence on the course of contemporary history." The BurmeseMarxist continued: "[Lenin's] ideals of peace and peaceful coexis-tence among states have won widespread international accept-ance and they are in line with the aims of the U.N. Charter."22

There you have it, and from an unimpeachable source: Ttreaims of the UN Charter are "in line" with the "ideals of peace" ofLenin, the Communist dictator and butcher. On this one point, at

58

CapIrar,rsrs" AND THE CorvrvruNlsr DrunNsroN

least, we can frnd no cause for disagreement with Mr. Thant. Ofcourse, it is of utmost importance that one keep in mind that"peace,'in Marxist-Leninist terms, does not mean an absence ofwar, but an absence of resistance to Communism.

Senring Red ImperialismThe Kremlin's agenQs wasted no time in using the newly createdIIN machinery to advance global Communist imperialism.Innumerable examples have been documented of LIN agenciesproviding concrete, material aid to Communist regimes and rev-olutionary efforts, and, conversely, opposing, thwarting, anddestroying non-Communist and anti-Communist governmentsand movements.2S

A condensed survey of the United Nations Relief andRehabilitation Administration (UNRRA), which was establishedby the CFR Insiders in our government evenbefore the foundingof the LIN, provides a tragic look at what was to follow. Under thedirection of Herbert.H. Lehman (CFR), the UNRRA staff wasturned into an international cabal of Communists from variouscountries who applied the billions of dollars of UNRRlfs'human-itarian aid" (taken from U.S. taxpayers) to Communist revolu-tionary purposes.

The U.S. Ambassador to Poland, Arthur Bliss Lane, told whathe had witnessed of UNRRAs pro-Communist actions at the endof World War II. "Over my personal protest," said AmbassadorLane, "Lehman had appointed as director of the first UNRRAmission to Poland the Soviet member of the UNRRA council, Mr.Menshikov, whose first duty would be ... distribution of UNRRAsupplies." As a result, supplies could be obtained "only by thosepersons holding a specified type of ration card issued solely togovernment employees or to members of the Workers andSocialist parties."24 Which greatly assisted the Red takeover ofPoland.

Likewise, Colonel Jan Bukar, in his testimony beforeCongress, described a similar experience in Czechoslovakia: "Inthe distribution of the goods through UNRRA, the people who

59

Tnp UNrrno NetIoNs Exposnn

got any portion of the goods had to be enrolled as members of theCommunist Party ... [and] I want again to state that throughLINRRAthe Communist Party gained many members."25

'Tv'ith a total disregard of our national interests," wrote authorand investigative reporter Eugene W. Castle, "LINRRA moneywas unreservedly given to the Communist-ruled nations behindthe Iron Curtain. It fed discontented peoples and strengthenedthe Red grrp on their governments."26

In China, millions of dollars in UNRRA funds and supplieswere going to Communist Madame Sun Yat-sen and Mao Tse-tung for their ultimate triumph over General Chiang Kai-shek.27 This same pattern would appear again and again overthe following decades through such UN institutions asUNIOEF, UNESCO, WHO, UNHCR, FAO, UNFPA, IM4 thcWorld Bank, etc.

Red Thojan HorseMillions of lives could have been saved and untold misery, mur-der, terror, and destruction averted, if U.S. officials had beenforced by an informed American public to heed the warnings ofcredible witnesses and an incredible trail of evidence. The tragichistory that has unfolded since the testimonies of Dr. BeIIa Dodd,Col. Bukar, Mr. Kornfeder, and others has more than vindicatedtheir most frightening alarms. The IIN has indeed proven to bea gigantic and deadly Thojan horse. The following are but a fewof the many advantages that the Communists expected torealizefrom the creation of the UN:

. Economic assistance through the vast array of UN agencies.

. Enormous potential for expansion of espionage, subversion,and terrorism through the diplomatic immunity offered UNoffrcials.

. IJse of the IIN podium for Communist propaganda purposes.

. Use of IIN diplomatic and propaganda machinery to attack andundermine anti-Communist countries and to support pro-Communist regimes and organizations.

60

"CApITALISTS" AND tnr CouuuNrsr DrupNsIoN

. Tbansfer of tremendous sums of money from the American pro-ducers to corrupt, collectivist projects and potentates through-out the world.

. Steady erosion of U.S. sovereign'ty through a myriad of UNtreaties and agreements.

. Depletion and weakening of U.S. military resources in IINoperations worldryide.

. Gradual subordination of U.S. military command to interna-tional authority (UN, NATO, SEATO, CENTO, OAS, etc.).

Unfortunately, the UN has delivered for the Reds beyond theirwildest dreams. In the freld of espionage and subversion alone, ithas been a huge bonanza. During U.S. Senate hearings in 1952,Senator James O. Eastland stated:

I am appalled at the extensive evidence indicating that there istoday in the United Nations arnong the American employees therethe greatest concentration of Communists that this committee hasever encountered.... [A]lmost all of these people have in the pastbeen employees of the United States Government in high and sen-sitive Positions.28{'

By the mid 1960s, frustrated Americans were angrily (andaccurately) charging that the United Nations "was conceived byCommunists, founded by Communists, has always been con-trolled by Communists, and has been used increasingly - andever more brazenly - to carry out Communist purposes."*Over the ensuing years, numerous investigations and reports have exposed the subversion,terrorism, and espionage activities of many foreign nationals operating through the UN as

well, especially those from Russia, China, Cuba, and the Soviet bloc states. "Oh, but that isancient history and no longer a concem, now that the Cold War is over," warble the UN'sdefenders. Not true; the UN continued to be a nest of spies. On October 24, 1991, the WallStreet Journal's deputy features editor Amity Shlaes (CFR) commented on evidence indicat-ing that the UN Secretariat headquartered in New York City was still under the domination ofold-line Communists, noting that following the supposed collapse of the Soviet Union,"Westemers who worked at the U.N. ... found themselves surrounded by what many havecalled a communist mafia."29

61

Tnp UNrrso NerroNs Expospn

lYho Is Really in Charge?However, this. characterization of the LIN was r;.ot completelyaccurate. As we have demonstrated in bare outline, Communistsplayed key, central roles at all levels in planning, promoting,establishing, and manning the UN, and they have used it togreat effect for their evil objectives ever since. Nevertheless, it isfar too simplistic to view the UN and its operations purely as a"Communist plot."

As our preceding chapters demonstrate, there was anotherforce at work on this grandiose and malevolent project as well -represented by the "one-world-global-government ideologists"described byAdmiral Ward. Many of these individuals obviouslywere not Communists; in fact they were arch-capitalists, titansof Wall Street, with names like Rockefeller, Morgan, Carnegie,Lamont, Warburg, and Schiff. And yet, they did indeed workhand in hand with the masters of the Kremlin to establish a sys-tem that they intended would supplant our own constitutionalsystem of government and grow into a global leviathan state.And their successors have continued this subversive cooperationwith both overt Communist leaders (as in China) and "ex-Communist" leaders (as in Russia), who now claim to be "demo-cratic reformers."

Professor Carroll Quigley, the Insider historian we met in theprevious chapter, conceded that anti-Communists who hadpointed to this strange and diabolic Communist-capitalist sym-biosis were not hallucinating:

There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an interna-tional Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in theway the radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this net-work, which we may identifu as the Round Table Groups, has noaversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups,and frequently does so.3o

"It was this group of people," said Quigley, "whose wealth andinfluence ... provided much of the framework of influence which

62

"CApITALIsrs" AND trrp Colrvrulust DrunNsIoN

the Communist sympathizers and fellow travelers took over inthe United States in the 1930s. It must be recognized that thepower that these energetic Left-wingers exercised was neuer theiroun power or Communist power but was ultimately the power ofthe international financial coterie...."31 (Emphasis added.)Regarding that secretive coterie, he described the "relationshipbetween the financialcircles ofLondon and those ofthe easternUnited States which reflects one of the most powerful in{luencesin twentieth-century American and world history. The two endsof this English-speaking axis have sometimes been ca1led, per-haps facetiously, the English and American Establishments.There is, however, a considerable degree oftruth behind thejoke,a truth which reflects a very real power structure. It is thispower structure which the Radical Right in the United Stateshas been attacking for years in the beliefthat they are attackingthe Communists."s2

Congressional InvestigationsThe treasonous workings of this elite were partially revealed, theprofessor noted, by congressional investigators in the 1950s who,"following backward to their source the threads which led fromadmitted Communists like Whittaker Chambers, through AlgerHiss and the Carnegie Endowment to Thomas Lamont and theMorgan Bank, fell into the whole complicated network of theinterlocking tax-exempt foundations." 33

'It soon became clea4" Quigley observed, "that people ofimmense wealth would be unhappy if the investigation went toofar and that the 'most respected' newspapers in the country,closely allied with these men of wealth, would not get excitedenough about any revelations to make the publicity worthwhile...."3a Here the professor sins by gross understatementand distortion. These "people of immense wealth" and their"closely allied" media did indeed get "excited," so much so thatthey went to incredible lengths to sabotage and stop the inves-tigation, smear its principal players, and smother the facts ithad uncovered.

63

Tnp UNrrro NeuoNs Expospo

Thus, it is not surprising that the Reece Committee, estab-Iished by Congress in 1953 to investigate the tax-exempt foun-dations, fell far short of fully exposing the mounting peril.Nevertheless, the committee's report did sound a serious alarm,warning that the major foundations (Carnegie, Ford,Rockefeller) and interlocking organizations like the CFR'traveexercised a strong effect upon our foreign policy and upon publiceducation in things international." 35

The committee stated: "The net result of these combinedefforts has been to promote 'internationalism' in a particularsense - a form directed toward'world government'and deroga-tion of American'nationalism."' 36

The Reece Committee also charged that these foundations(which were invariably directed by CFR members) "ltave active-ly supported attacks upon our social and government system andfinanced the promotion of socialism and collectivist ideas." 37 Itdeclared, moreover, that the CFR had become "in essence anagency of the United States Government" and that its "produc-tions [books, periodicals, study guides, reports, etc.] are notobjective but are directed overwhelmingly at promoting the glob-alist concept."38

A far more important revelation disclosed by the committee'schief investigator never made it into congressional testimony orthe committee's published report. Investigator Norman Doddrecounted that during his visit to the Ford Foundation, the insti-tution's president, Rowan Gaither (CFR), unexpectedly admittedthat he and his colleagues were operating under directives "tothe effect that we should make every effort to so alter life in theUnited States as to make possible a comfortable merger with theSoviet lJnion."3e This of course fit perfectly with the pattern thatDodd and the committee members had observed in the subver-sive projects and organizations funded by the foundation, but theadmission flabbergasted them nonetheless.

Common Ground: PowerAt this point a great many readers undoubtedly are scratching

64

Cnprrer,tsrs" AND THE CorvuvruNrsr DrupNslorrr

their heads in bewilderment. "I don't get it," they say. "Whywould wealthy capitalists conspire with Communists and pro-mote Communism? Don't they stand to lose the most ifCommunism were to triumph?"

If you are among the bewildered head scratchers, don't feelbad. The confusion is understandable; the idea of wealthy capi-talists scheming witlg bloody Bolsheviks does challenge somelong-accepted and basic assumptions and defrnitions most of ushold concerning socio-economic-political relationships and theway the world works. We agree that all capitalists should opposecollectivism in all its forms (i.e., communism, socialism, fascism),but it is a fact that many do not. Many "capitalists," while pay-ing lip service to "free enterprise" and "market economics," actu-ally abhor the competition of the marketplace. They would muchrather use government force (laws and regulations) to beat theircompetition than try to produce better widgets more effrcientlyand constantly have to come up with improvements, innovations,and better managemeut, marketing, and production.

They realize that communism, socialism, and fascism arenever the "share the wealth" schemes they pretend to be; theyare inevitably and invariably "control the wealth" schemes, inwhich an elite oligarchy employs political power (backed up bymilitarJz and police force) to control all the wealth. They realizethat step one in any "share the wealth" program is to "collect thewealth" (or "collectivization," as the Communists call it). Andthey realize that once "step one" is completed no collectivistregime ever proceeds to "step two": share the wealth. The collec-tivized wealth remains in the hands of the ruling elite and theirmanagerial class underlings (the privileged nomenklaturo in theSoviet Union) while the toiling masses remain mired in grindingpoverty, unable to escape by any amount ofhonest effort.

It is a well documented fact that some of the best-known"malefactors of great wealth" in this past century (and current-ly) have indeed conspired and collaborated with the most mur-derous dictators in history (Lenin, Stalin, Tito, Mao, Ceausescu,et al.) in the quest to establish their criminal scheme of totali-

65

Tnp Umrrn NeuoNs Elpospo

tarian world government. 40

The vast majority of these wealthy Insiders were not (and arenot) themselves Communists - although some definitely were(and are). Armand Hammer (CFR), Frederick Vanderbilt Field(CFR), and Corliss Lamont, for instance, were all immensely richCommunists. The non-Communist Insiders see the Communists(and their various Marxist brethren) as indispensable "partners"in the pursuit of "world order." The Communists are brutallyblunt instruments, but adequately efficient, for destroying theold order and constructing the new. The Insiders, ofcourse, peri-odically condemn their Communist partners and have frequent-Iy initiated massive military and intelligence operations ostensi-bly to oppose Communism. In fact, they repeatedly sold theUnited Nations and many of its programs to the American pub-Iic as a means of opposing and/or taming the Communist threat.

However, the one-world Insiders were faced with a dilemma:how to modify the image of the brutal Communist menace toenable an eventual merger of the West with the U.S.S.R. withoutsimultaneously undermining the impetus for collective globalsecurity and world government that the Communist threat pro-vides.

"If the communist dynamic were greatly abated," wroteProfessor Bloomfield in the previously mentioned study (seeChapter 2),"the West might well lose whatever incentive it hasfor world government.... tllf there were no communist menace,would anyone be worrying about the need for such a revolutionin international political arrangements?" a1 According toBloomfield, "if the communists would agree, the West wouldfavor a world effectively controlled by the United Nations."42Thus the concealed objective of U.S. policy, as Bloomfreldacknowledged, was not to defeat Communism, but rather "totransform and tame the forces of communism ... to the pointwhere the present international system might be radicallyreshaped." 4s

Perhaps the reader has already perceived that since the rise ofMikhail Gorbachev and "perestroika," and the subsequent "col-

66

"Cepttallsrs" AND tnn ComvruNlsr DruruNsroN

lapse" of Communism, we have been traveling the CFR-laidcourse "to transform and tame communism." And the world isindeed being "radically reshaped." A very important part of thatreshaping process involves finding,'or rather, manufacturing,credible menaces to substitute for Communism as "incentives forworld government." In the following chapters, we will witness -again and again - the Insider-Communist conspiracy at worksynthesizing these substitute menaces, and, in Bloomfield'swords, "a series of sudden, nasty, and traumatic shocks" 4 tobring about "the order" they desire. We will also see the incredi-ble global activist networks they have established and the elab-orate processes they have set up to propagandize and organize onbehalf of their criminal "new world order."

67

Chapter 5Orchestrating theGlobalist Concert

More and more, NGOs [Non-Governmental Organizations]are helping to set public policy agendas.... It is this mouement... that has such significance for gouernance.... What is gen-erally proposed is the initial setting up of an assembly of par-liamentarians ... and the subsequent establishment of aworld assembly through direct election by the people.L

- Commission on Global Governance, Our GlobalNeighborhood, 7995

National gouernments are ruot simply losing autonomy in aglobalizing econorny: They are sharing powers - includingpolitical, social, and security roles at the core of souereignty

- with businesses, with international organizations, andwith a multitude of citizen groups, known as nongouernmen-tal organizations (NGOs).... Increasingly, NGOs are abl.e topush around euen the largest gouernments.z

- Jessica T. Mathews (CFR, TC), Foreign Affairs,JanuarylFebruary, 1997

Establishing the dialogue with NGOs that haue issues rel-euant to your conxpany is a bottom line issue for Wall Street.s

- Robert Hormats (CFR Director), vice-chairman,Goldman Sachs

You will become the new superpowen

- Kofi Annan, UN Secretary-General, addressing theNGO Millennium Forum, May 20004

7l

THo Uxrrpo NarroNs Eteospo

Especially significant, of course, is the deuelopment of anNGO network worldwide and its increasing role in the d,euel-opment of a culture of democracy throughout the world....Ciuil society, in order to be an effecti\e partner with gouern-ment and business in prouiding global gouerndnce in the 27stcentury, must deuelop a clear uision of basic ualues and a bet-ter future.s

- Steven C. Rockefeller, Chairman of the Earth CharterDrafting Committee and Chairman of the Rockefeller

Brothers Fund, addressing the UN Millennium Forum,May 2000

During World War II, a Soviet spy network in Nazi-occupiedEurope kept Stalin supplied with first-rate intelligence onGerman military plans and political developments. It came to beknown as the Red Orchestra (Rote Kapelle). The network sent itsinformation to its Moscow superiors via secret radio transmittersthat operated only for qhort bursts and moved constantly toavoid detection by the Gestapo. Nazi intelligence referred to thetransmitters as "music boxes" and assigned the names of musi-cal instruments to the distinctive, but elusive, operators.

The elaborate Red Orchestra espionage operation was set upseveral years before the start ofthe war and involved agents whowere militar5r personnel, Nazi officials, clerks, janitors, andhousewives, as well as "businessmen" in a network of corpora-tions (both real and dummy companies) throughout Europe. Asimilar Red Orchestra was established in the United States, and,as noted in previous chapters, its agents succeeded in penetrat-ing to the highest levels of the federal government. A few topagents were exposed in high-profile cases - Alger Hiss, HarryDexter White, Victor Perlo, the Rosenbergs - but, according toboth Communist defectors and U.S. intelligence officials, dozensof Red cells involving hundreds of high-level Soviet agents werenever exposed.* Many of these agents were not engaged merelyin the lower level aspects of espionage such as stealing statesecrets and reporting on military plans and weapons develop-

72

Oncnnstnernlc rnu Gr,ont rst Cottcpnr

ment. They were performing a more critical role for the Kremlinas "agents of influence": misinforming and misdirectingAmerica's leaders and actually influencing and formulating U.S.policies concerning the most sensitive areas of our national secu-rity.

The Art of War by Sun Tzu has long served as a primary text-book for Soviet military and intelligence strategists. Written over2,000 years ago, it id one of the most famous studies of strateryever written. The Communists have especially focused on SunTzu's lessons on strategic deception and the supreme importanceof espionage and intelligence. They are completely familiar withwhat Sun Tzu described as the "five sorts of spies": Native spies;internal spies; double spies; doomed spies; and surviving spies."Native spies are those from the enemy countqy's people whomwe employ," explained Sun Tzu. "Internal spies are enemy offi-cials whom we employ. Double spies are enemy spies whom weemploy. Doomed spies are those of our own spies who are delib-erately given false information and told to report it to the enemy.Surviving spies are those who return from the enemy camp toreport information." 6

"When all these five types of spies are at work and their oper-ations are clandestine, it is called the 'divine manipulation ofthreads' and is the treasure of a sovereign," 7 continued China'smaster strategist. The Communists adapted and greatly expand-ed on the ancient sage's doctrines, creating a global apparatus

*On February 14 and 15, 1957, former Soviet NKVD agentAlexander Orlov tes-tified before the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee ("Scope of SovietActivity In The United States," Part 51). Orlov claimed knowledge of 38 espi-onage rings in the U.S., with only two exposed as a result ofthe revelations ofWhittaker Chambers and Elizabeth Bentley. Decades later, in the 1990s, evi-dence was still seeping out to confim those charges of penetration of the U.S.,including some of our most sensitive institutions and high-level positions. Therecently released'Venona intercepts" - decoded secret Soviet transmissions col-lected in the 1940s - verified that Harry Hopkins, top adviser to PresidentFranklin Roosevelt, was a Soviet agent. Ditto for atomic bomb scientists RobertOppenheimer and Theodore Hall. But the identities of many of the Venonaagents are still unknown.

73

THn Uxmpo NarroNs Expospo

with capabilities and long-term plans for world conquest thatwould have astounded Sun Tzu.

The Net That Covers the WorldIn 1955, British intelligence experb and author E. H. Cookridgeaptly described the global Soviet apparatus as "the net that cov-ers the world," in his book by that title. As he pointed out, theCommunists had at that time established a worldwide militantorganization of tens of millions of members, operating aggres-sively in virtually every country toward a centrally directed com-mon objective - an accomplishment without parallel at any timein history. Besides controlling these millions of disciplined mem-bers, who could be ordered into coordinated global action on shortnotice, the Communist leaders had developed an intelligenceapparatus of unparalleled, massive proportions. Cookridge noted:

The number of men and women employed by the Soviet govern-ment on intelligence work has been estimated at about 250,000 -this quite apart from the internal political police. The number is atleast ten times larger than that of agents used by all Westernnations combined. But even this is only part of the Communistsecret army.... A suggestion that there are 750,000 men and womenin the world - semiprofessional agents, informants, fifth-colum-nists, fellow-travelers, and sympathizers - whom the Soviet secretservice succeeded in ensnaring in some way into the spy net - isprobably an underestimate. It is a formidable army, combined witha quarter of a million of full-time agents and officials, and led by anelite of 10,000 to 12,000 trained master spies.s

"No other nation," Cookridge noted, "devotes anythingapproaching the proportion of its manpower and resources tosecret serwice work as do the Soviet Union and the satellite coun-tries." e Likewise, no other nation comes close to matching the sizeof the internal secret police forces required by the Communists tomaintain their Total State. Through innumerable movies, docu-mentaries, novels, articles, and history books, Hitler's dreaded

74

OncHpsrnauNc TlrE GLoeALrst Cot*cpnt

Gestapo has been cast as the epitome of evil incarnate in the longdrama of human existence' It has become slmonlrmous with total-itarian brutality and malevolence, and rightly so. Yet mostAmericans have never even heard of'Stalin's even more murder-ous and evil NKVD. Historian Martin Malia points out thatGerman National Socialism, for all of its cruelty and viciousness,was "distinctly less murderous than Communism." l0Amajor rea-son for this can be seen in the relative strength of the Nazi andSoviet secret police organs at the time of the Hitler/Stalin Pact: In1939, Hitler's Gestapo employed a total of 7,500 people; Stalin'sNKVD employed 366,000!

During the l-940s, '50s, and'60s, the U.S. Congress and manystate legislatures held extensive investigative hearings intoCommunist penetration and subversion in the United States'These offrcial inquiries produced a large number of importantreports that included testimony from top military and intelli-gence authorities, as well as Communist defectors. Reports bythe Committee on Un-American Activities of the House ofRepresentbtives, such as "The Communist Infrltration of theMotion Picture Industry" (7947), "Communist PoliticalSubversion" (1956), "soviet Total War" (1956), and "CommunistTarget -Youth" (1960) provided explosive, detailed informationabout the Soviet attack on America. As did reports of the SenateInternal Security Subcommittee (SISS), such as "The Institute ofPacific Relations" (1951), "Expos6 of Soviet Espionage" (1960),and "The Soviet Empire" (1965). The voluminous 1953 SISSreport entitled "Interlocking Subversion in GovernmentDepartments" labeled the Communist operations in our govern-ment "a conspiracy" and concluded:

Policies and progr:ams laid down by members of this Soviet con-spiracy are still in effect within our government and constitute acontinuing hazard to our national security. ll

The massive scope and insidious nature of the Communistoffensive was so far beyond what most Americans imagined that

75

THn Umrrnn NerroNs E>eospo

FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover stated in 1956 that "the individualis handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so mon-strous he cannot believe it exists." 12 That handicap, however,was largely the work of the CFR-dominated media, which madesure that the American public remained largely unaware of theshocking information uncovered by the congressional investiga-tions. The same media subversives attacked the congressionalinvestigators and chardcterized proper concern over Communistand socialist advances as "right-wing paranoia."

Many Tentacles, One BrainIn 1960, the Kremlin hosted the Congress of 81 CommunistParties from around the world. Those parties boasted a collectivestrength of more than 40 million members. But their realstrength then, as now, lay in their ability to get non-Communiststo do their work for them. In the U.S., as elsewhere, theCommunists created hundreds of front organizations and pene-trated virtually all existing organizations and institutions, withthe intent of gradually gaining signifrcant influence, if not totalcontrol. Labor unions were especially targeted because theyoffered: 1) huge sources of funds, in the form of members' dues;2) major political clout to elect sympathetic politicians and influ-ence legislation and policy;3) an important conduit of propagan-da for class warfare; 4) the ability to paralyze governments andeconomies through strikes; and 5) the ability to mobilize largenumbers of non-Communists (in marches and demonstrations) togive the appearance of popular support for Communist causes.

Similarly, the Communists and their various Marxist-socialistbrethren have, during the past century particularly, targeted thecolleges and universities - with amazing success. They havegained such inlluence in academia that from the 1960s onwardthey have been able to generate mass demonstrations of stu-dents, and even violent riots, by exploiting emotional issues suchas war, nuclear weapons, the environment, homosexual rights,feminism, civil rights, race, etc.

One of the most knowledgeable analysts of Communism is

76

OncnrsrneuNc THE GLosALIst Coxcpnt

Jimmy Clabough of Brooklyn, NewYork. Mr. Clabough, a carefulscholar of Communist literature and stratery, who has beenattending and monitoring Communist meetings in the NewYorkCity area for years, says the Red ndtwork in this country is asstrong as ever. "Look at the records ofall ofthe so-called expertswho keep assuring us that 'the Cold War is oYer,'' he says."These are the same voices - the Kissingers, the Kennans, theMcNamaras, the New York Times andWashington Post - whohave always been disastrously wrong on every major call con-cerning Communism. The Clinton'Chinagate' scandals were thetip of the iceberg. Communist activities in New York City aloneare increasing at a furious rate. They are practicing the old'unit-ed front' strategy of frnding 'hot button' issues that they canexploit with every group imaginable: the homeless, gays, envi-ronmentalists, feminists, ethnic minorities, clergymen, NewAgers, labor unions, etc. By appealing to these issues, they havedeveloped large cadres of what I call Enviro-Leninists, Homo-Leninists, Femi-Leninists, Afro-Leninists, Peacenik-Leninists,Guru-Leninists, and Labor-Leninists. And they so expertlymanipulate and orchestrate these various elements that theaverage television viewer or newspaper reader doesn't recognizethe Communist coordination behind the scenes. As Lenin said:Iile must build Communism with non-Communist hands.'"l3

This was precisely the message of Soviet Premier KonstantinChernenko, when, in his June 1983 address to the CentralCommittee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (CPSU),he made this noteworthy remark:

The battle ofideas in the international arena is going on withoutrespite. We will continue to wage it vigorously .'. our entire systemofideological work should operate as a well-arratged orchestra inwhich every instrument has a distinctive voice and leads its theme,whrle harmony is achieued by skillful conducting. 1a [Emphasisadded.l

As we will show in this and following chapters, despite the

77

Tnn Umrno Nerroxs Exposoo

supposed "collapse" of Communism, that global orchestra hascontinued playing, with the same "skillful conducting" continu-ing from the background. There are still official CommunistParties operating in most countries and dozens more socialistparties run by "former" Communists. Meanwhile, in the 1990s,Russia and China reestablished friendly relations and beganopenly cooperating on many economic and military fronts.*

What many readers will find most extraordinary is that it isoften difficult to discern whether it is the Communist leaderswho are in charge ofconducting this orchestra, or the CFR one-worlders, since they both are so frequently standing arm-in-armat the same podium, moving their conductor's batons in perfects5mchronization. And always, the "harmony'' they seek is thatwhich leads ineluctably to their mutual goal of world govern-ment.

To the massive, worldwide, militant network of theCommunists, the CFR Insiders have added their own formida-

*Some ofthe most clear-sighted analysts ofglobal affairs predicted this decadesago. Soviet defector Anatoliy Golitsyn and John Birch Society founder RobertWelch were ridiculed by both liberals and conservatives for contending that theso-called "Sino-Soviet Split" was entirely a strategic deception from the start,aimed at playing the West for suckers. Their carefirl research, reasoned analysis,and alarming predictions have proven true. Golitsyn's b ooks, New Lies for Otd, 15

atd,Thc Perestroika Deception,lo u" irnmensely important for an understandingof this deception. Eobert Welch's printed expos6 of the phony Sino-Soviet splitbegan ia the August 197 I Bulletin of Ttre John Birch Society and was developedin subsequent Bull.etins. For example, in the December 1971 Bulletin, heobserved: "If you have any doubt that these wars or threats of wars are allarranged by the Communists, with the actual fighting subject to being turned offor on by the Communists at will, then you are a long way from recognizing thekind of world you are living in. You might even swallow the now increasing rumorofsome kind ofborder military conllict being produced by the bitterness betweenRed China and Soviet Russia. Ofcourse they could no more be real enemies thancould the two hands of one human body clirected by one brain. But neitherMoscow nor Peking would have the slightest hesitation about getting a few hun-dred thousand oftheir respective subjects killed in such a 'war,'in order to maketheir'feud'look real, if the Insiders who write the script for this worldwide showdecided that such an act would be worth the trouble."

78

OncupsrurrNc THE Gr-onar,rsr CoNcunr

ble global resources, including: presidents, prime ministers,and other government offrcials; billions of dollars from tax-exempt foundations and corporate globalists; prestige andbrain power from numerous think tanks and universities; thetremendous impact of their one-world media cartel; and thegrowing power of their global rent-a-mob, otherwise known asthe NGO (Non-Governmental Organization) Iobby. Togetherthey apply simultaneous "pressure from above and below" in astrategy that is known in Communist circles as "revolutionaryparliamentarianism."

Pressure FromAbove and BelowThe one-world architects know that they must create theappearance ofpopular support for their global designs in orderto pave the way for national governments to surrender politicalpower to the UN. To accomplish this surrender, they havedevised a giant pincer strategy in the form of a huge NGO net-work (pressure from below) on the one hand, and sympatheticpolitical and corporate leaders (pressure from above) on theother. The NGOs clamor for "world governance," and theirorchestrated clamor is portrayed as the collective voice of thepeoples of the world expressing a global consensus. The politicaland corporate leaders - according to plan - then "respond" tothe "will of civil society."

The use of this pincer stratery to seize power was explained byCommunist Party "theoretician" Jan Kozak. In his instructionsfor "revolutionary parliamentarianism," written in the early1950s, Kozak detailed how he and his fellow Communist con-spirators overthrew a democratically elected, mainly non-Communist government in Czechoslovakia and turned it into aCommunist dictatorship - legally.tT

Kozak explained how his Communist minority in parliament(in coalition with socialists and "liberals") worked in concert withthe street-level activists and grassroots revolutionaries.Utilizing demonstrations, strikes, rallies, petitions, threats, and

- sometimes - sabotage, the radicals (like the NGOs today)

79

Tlrp Uxmpo Neuoxs Exposro

provided "pressure from below." Meanwhile Kozak and his co-conspirators provided coordinated "pressure from above" to getparliament to institute Communism piecemeal, by centralizingpower and taking over more and more functions that had previ-ously been left to local governments and the private sector. It isimportant to understand that this takeover was accomplished bya small minority. But this minority was highly organized and dis-ciplined. And it was also highly skilled in the art of deception, increating the false appearance of having overwhelming numberson their side. The opposition was psychologically outmaneuveredand made to believe that "resistance is futile." They surrenderedwithout firing a shot. The Communists won that war becausethey were the only side fighting; their opponents didn't even real-ize they were under attack!

A similar operation is underway today on a global scale. Thewar is on, but for the most part only one side is fighting. TheUN-CFR axis is organizing NGOs, churches, educational insti-tutions, labor unions, buqiness groups, and other organizationsinto a force that it calls "global civil society." At the UN's WorldCivil Society Conference in Montreal in 1999, UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan explained to the professional NGOactivists their new "partnership" with the UN. Annanexplained that the NGOs must serve as "strategic partners inpolicy - in areas where you can persuade your Governments towork through the United Nations. You can tell them that ourgoals are your goals, and that you want them to give us themeans to achieve those goals." 18

Kofi Annan is not the mastermind of this UN pincer stratery,of course; he is merely a factotum carrying out the program forthe Insiders who have posted him as their front man. The mag-nitude of this global pincer strategy and the incredibly deceptiveprocesses employed in the pursuit of their monstrous goals ismind-boggling. To paraphrase (and modifii) Sun Tzu, when all ofthese elements are at work and their operations and,/or connec-tions are clandestine, it is justly called the "diabolic manipula-tion of threads."

80

Oncnpsrnarruc trm Gl,osArrst CoNcunt

Orchestrating the gDisamrament" ConcertThis diabolic manipulation and conspiracy are very apparentwhen one looks beneath the surface ofthe global "peace'and "dis-armament" campaigns during the last half of the 20th century.These campaigns support a primary objective of the IIN'sfounders - providing the UN with a monopoly of force. Recallthat the primary im11etus, ostensibly, for creating the UN was to"put an end to wat''through an organization which would provide"collective security."As we have already seen, it was the CFR one-world brain trust, together with the Communists, that designed,organized, and launched the IlN. And it was the same cabal thatauthored the State Department policy documents, Freedom FromWar andAWorld Effectiuely Controlled By the United Nations.\s

The global "disarmament" campaign - which is, in truth, aprogram to transfer arms from private individuals and individ-ual nation-states to the IIN - continues unabated. In fact, it isaccelerating. In May 2000, thousands of activists from across theplanet gathered at the United Nations in New York for the"Millennium Fomm." Disarmament was very much on the agen-da. The Forum was the formal rent-a-mob warm-up to preparethe NGO militants for coordinated action at the MillenniumSummit of world leaders, which would follow in September.Addressing the NGO activists, UN Secretary-General KofiAnnan welcomed them as "the new superpower," leaders of thenew international "civil society," and "implementing partners" inthe work of the UN.20 But contrary to the manufactured image,these NGOs certainly do not represent civil society, and most arenot independent.

A key disarmament document advanced at the UN'sMillennium Forum, and later at the Millennium Summit, wasThe Hague Agenda for Peace and Justice for the 27st Century,2Lwhich was praised by Secretary-General Annan. The person incharge of presenting the Hague Agenda document at the Forumwas Cora Weiss, president of the private HagueAppeal for Peaceand Justice, Inc. "There are only three documents that you need. . . to be an informed, effective member of organized civil society,"

81

THo UNrrnn NarroNs E:cospo

Weiss told the Forum attendees. "The Charter of the UnitedNations, the [Universal] Declaration of Human Rights, and TheHague Agenda for Peace and Justice for the 27st Century.vz2 Mycolleague and fellow senior editor atThe New American, WilliamNorman Grigg, who attended that IIN session, noted: 'T.leitherthe Declaration of Independence nor the U.S. Constitution wasamong Weiss'indispensable texts, and once her background isunderstood it will becomb clear why neither of our founding doc-uments made the crltt."23

Cora Weiss is both a member of the CFR anil a veteran, hard-core Leninist. She is the daughter of Samuel Rubin, a longtimemember of the Communist Party, U.S.A., and heads a tax-exempt foundation that bears her father's name. The SamuelRubin Foundation is the chief financial angel behind theInstitute for Policy Studies (IPS), a very influential Washington,D.C. "think-tank" which has long served as a major front forSoviet KGB activities. The chairman of IPS is Cora Weiss'hus-band, Peter Weiss, a radical attorney who is a member of theCommunist-front National Lawyers Guild. Like Tom Hayden,Jane Fonda, and other pro-Communist traitors, Cora Weissmade the pilgrimage to Hanoi during the Vietnam War andorganized pro-Vietcong demonstrations. In 1969, she returnedfrom North Vietnam two days before Christmas and held a majorpress conference where she reported that American POWs weretreated well and housed in "immaculate" facilities. Weeks later,at a press conference she held in the Cannon House OfficeBuilding in Washington, D.C., Weiss scoffed at the claims of twoformer POWs - Lieutenant Robert Frishman and SeamanDouglas Hegdahl. Frishman and Hegdahl had testified beforeCongress concerning the inhumane treatment they had experi-enced at the hands of the Reds. Weiss made light of theirinjuries, and referred to our POWs as "war criminals."24

As self-appointed high priestess of disarmament at theMillennium Forum, Weiss declared to the IIN assemblage: "I pro-pose the activation of Chapter VII, article 47 of the UN Charter,which provides for a Military Staff Committee to assist the

82

Oncresrnamlqc trm Gl,osArrst CoNcnnt

Security Council for the maintenance of international peace."2sThe activation of Chapter VII would require a standing UN mil-itary with the power to "take such action by air, sea or land forcesas may be necessary to maintain or. restore international peaceand security." 26

In keeping with the schemes of the global strategists, both atPratt House and in the I(remlin, t}ne Hague Agenda proclaimsthat "it is time to redefi.ne security in terms of human and eco-logical needs instead of national sovereignty and national bor-ders."2? Which, naturally, will require the "creation of standingIIN peace forces for use in humanitarian interventions" and theimplementation of "demobilization programs" around the world to"reclaim and destroy weapon4/ not under UN control.2S Thisrefers not only to nuclear arms and other weapons of massdestruction, but also to "Iight weapons, small arms and guns" 2e

- meaning those held by private citizens, as well as those undercontrol of national military forces. (More on the UN drive for per-sonal disarmament in. Chapter g).

Joining Cora Weiss (CFR, IPS) on the board of directors of theHague Appeal for Peace and Justice, Inc. are: Adele Simmons(CFR and president of the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthurFoundation); World Federalist Movement officials Tim Barnerand William Pace (CFR); and Peter Weiss (IPS). Funding for theHague Appeal is provided by the usual CFR-dominated sources:Ford Foundation, Carnegie Corporation of New York, SamuelRubin Foundation, Stewart R. Mott Charitable Thust, billionaireGeorge Soros (a CFR directot), The Nation magazine,Institutefor Policy Studies, Greenpeace International, UNESCO,LINIFEM, and the World Federalist Association. 30

The Hague Appeal is an international coalition of 180 organi-zations, most of which have been involved in the radical 'peaceand disarmament" movement for decades.* The Hague Appealreceived favorable support from the CFR media cartel during theForum, which was bracketed for months before and after with acoordinatedrelease of disarmament appeals in all the usual CFRtransmission belts: t}rre New York Times, Washinglon Post, Los

83

Trm Uxrrrn NrrroNs Exposro

Angeles Times, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Christian ScienceMonitor, etc.

lVhy This Orchestration Works!Why do the CFR elites go through such elaborate charades, cre-ating these multitudes of radical front groups (or co-opting exist-ing ones) and funding thSm with piles of money? And why all ofthe orchestrated media support? The CFR elites know, of course,that they wouldn't get very far if they were honest and straight-forward about their intent: "People of the world: Our global polit-ical, economic, and social arrangements are all wrong. However,our elite group ofsuperior thinkers have a plan. A11 you have todo is relinquish a1l political and frnancial power to us so we canfix everything. Thust us." Wouldn't work, obviously.

However, what if they employ a different strategy? What ifthey fund a gaggle of radical groups, with various elements call-ing for the transfer of power in one area or another to interna-tional authorities? What if they also fund another gaggle of evenmore rad,ical groups to make the first gaggle appear "moderate"and "reasonable"? And suppose they saturate the print andbroadcast media with the antics and propaganda of these groupsfor a sufficient length of time. And suppose that this propagandaclamors for government to address outrageous problems whileignoring any possible danger to freedom in the new "arrange-ments." Then the pressure from below will reach the point thatthe Insiders above can have their political agents in Congressand the White House respond to the "will of the people" with"compromise" legislation. These "compromise" solutions alwaysmove the whole political arena further leftward, toward ever big-ger, more oppressive government.

In his 1968 book The Strawberry Statement: Notes of a Coll.ege

xThese include Amnesty International, the American Friends ServiceCommittee, Friends of the Earth, Pax Christi, the International Fellowship ofReconciliation, Parliamentarians for Global Action, IINICE$ the Women'sInternational League for Peace a:rd Freedom, the World Order Models Project,and the WorldWatch Institute.

84

Oncnnsrnerntc urn Glorar,rsr CoNcnnt

Reuolutiona4y, radical activisUauthor James Kunen made aninteresting admission about this process. Concerning the campusriots then rocking the nation, he wrote:

In the evening, I went up to the U. to check out a strategy meet-ing. A kid was grving a report on an SDS [Students for aDemocratic Societyl gonvention. He said that ... at the convention,men from Business International Round Tables ... tried to buy upa few radicals. These men are the world's leading industrialistsand they convene to decide how our lives are going to go.... Theyoffered to finance our demonstrations in Chicago. We were alsooffered ESSO (Rockefeller) money. They want us to make a lot ofradical commotion so they can look more in the center as theymove to the left.31

Another similar revelation was provided by Jerry Kirk, who,as a student, was active in the SDS, the DuBois Club, the BlackPanthers, and the Communist Party. In a 1970 interview, Kirksaid:

Young people have no conception ofthe conspiracy's stratery of"pressure from above and pressure from below".... They have noidea that they are playing into the hands of the Establishment theyclaim to hate.... The radicals think they are fighting the forces ofthe super-rich, like Rockefeller and Ford, and they don't realizethat it is precisely such forces which are behind their own revolu-tion, financing it, and using it for their own purposes.S2

Understanding the objectives, it was not surprising that theHague Agenda and the UN Millennium events were accompa-nied by a deluge of disarmament propaganda - courtesy of thePratt House mediacracy. Simon and Schuster, one of America'slargest book publishers, brought out William Shawcross' newpaean to the lJN, Deliuer [Is from Euil: Peacekeepers, Warlords,and a World of Endless Conflict.33 Written largely from the per-spective of KofiAnnan, whom the left-wing Shawcross obviously

85

Tnp UNrrpo Nenoxs Exposno

adores (and with whom he traveled the world), the book repeat-edly indicts the U.S. for its miserly refusals to surrender more ofour sovereignty, money, and military to the noble LIN. Glowingreviews followed in the CFR media choir.

The CFR's Foreign Affairs (which Ttme has dubbed "the mostinfluential journal in print" and. Newsweek h;as called the "pre-eminent" journal of its, kind) and the Carnegie Endowment'sForeign Policy both provided several issues running ofglobalistdisarmament forensics. In the September/October 2000 issue ofForeign Affairs, timed for the Millennium Summit, JonathanSchell led off with "The Folly of Arms Control," in which heargued for complete nuclear disarmament as envisioned in the1946 Baruch Plan.sa And he reminded "the great and good" thatthe U.S. is obligated under Article VI of the NonproliferationTieaty (NPT) to "pursue negotiations ... [for] nuclear disarma-ment, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmamentunder strict and effective international control." 35 The sameissue of Foreign Affairs featured an article by Russian Ministerof Foreign Affairs Igor Ivanov warning that any U.S. movetoward deploying a missile defense system would jeopardizeNPt ABM, CTBT - the whole edifice of arms control treaties.36Also in the same issue, General Andrew J. Goodpaster (CFR)offered boilerplate Pratt House 'Advice for the Next President,"echoing the Schell and Ivanov appeals for disarmament, and urg-ing the use of NGOs to "mobilize understanding."sT

Writing in 1975, retiredAdmiral Chester Ward, a veteran CFRmember who had grown sharply critical of the organizationwrote:

Once the ruling members of CFR have decided that the U.S.Government should adopt a particular policy, the very substantialresearch facilities of CFR are put to work to develop arguments,intellectual and emotional, to support the new policy, and to con-found and discredit, intellectually and politically, any opposition.The most articulate theoreticians and ideologists prepare relatedarticles, aided by the research, to sell the new policy and to make

86

OncnosrmtlNc TlrE GLoeALrsr Coxcnnr

it appear inevitable and irresistible. By following the evolution ofpropaganda in the most prestigious scholarly journal in the world,Foreign Affairs, anyone can determine years in advance what thefuture defense and foreign policies of fhe United States will be.38

Millennium Summit PressureAs the UN Millennium Summit got underway, the pressure fromabove and below increased. Following the pattern from pastSummits, it was a well-honed, multi-level, multi-pronged, multi-dimensional attack aimed at multiple targets. Prime targets, ofcourse, were the heads of state in attendance; if they could beinduced to sign the disarmament treaties, declarations, and res-olutions, it would add to the international momentum and legit-imacy of the LIN disarmament agenda. Other intended targets,however, were the U.S. public and the U.S. Congress, as well asthe U.S. governmental, academic, and intellectual cadres whofollow, influence, and make foreign policy - and then help sell itto the public.

The UN's glossy UN 2000 report, which was provided to allSummit participants, included an essay by President Clinton'sAmbassador to the UN, Richard C. Holbrooke (CFR, TC). Mr.Holbrooke parroted the globalist hymn to enlarge and empowerthe UN, calling for a major boost in the world body's militaryand police capacities. It also featured similar bilge by billionaireeco-socialist and CNN founder Ted T\rrner, whose UNFoundation has contributed more than $250 million in supportof UN programs and activities. Joining them in this orgy ofpraise for the UN were such one-world luminaries as: formerNorwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland, nowDirector-General of the IIN's World Health Organization; ChrisPatten (TC), who played a key role in the betrayal of Hong Kongto Red China and who now serves as a member of the EuropeanCommission; former Socialist President of Ireland MaryRobinson, now LIN High Commissioner for Human Rights; left-wing author William Shawcross; and Bjorn Stigson, president ofthe environmental extremist World Business Council for

87

Trp Umrpo NarroNs Elcosno

Sustainable Development. 3e

Among the profusion of programs circulating at the Summit,the Middle Powers Initiative (MPI) is particularly noteworthy.Claiming to represent the non-nuclear umiddle-power" countriesof the world, it describes itself as "a carefully focused campaignestablished by a network ofinternational citizens organizationsto encourage ... leaders of the nuclear weapons states to breakfree from their Cold Wai mindset" and embrace disarmament -as defrned by the MPI and the IIN.aO But, as we shall see, MPI's"independence" is all illusion; while posing as a "citizens net-work," MPI is, in reality, nothing less than a front group for theone-world internationalists.

Independence ShamMPI's primary spokesperson is New Zealand Prime MinisterHelen Clark, whose Labour Party is affrliated with the SocialistInternational. The eloquent Mrs. Clark championed the MPI dis-armament campaign both at the UN Summit and at theGorbachev Foundation-sponsored "State of the World Forum,"which ran concomitantly with the UN affair, a few blocks awayat the Hilton Towers. Many UN leaders and heads of state jock-eyed back and forth between the tlN and the Gorbachev confab,where they shmoozed and "brainstormed" with corporate titans,academics, NGO rabble-rousers, and NewAge gurus.As it turnsout, Gorbacher/s State of the World Forum is also one of the orig-inal eight co-sponsors of the MPI, as well as a funder of thegroup.

And we see the same repetitious pattern emerge in the MPIcase: funding for the Initiative comes from the RockefellerFoundation, Samuel Rubin Foundation, and the W. Alton JonesFoundation. MPI's International Steering Committee includesComrade Peter Weiss, and it included the late Senator AIanCranston (TC, WEA), a veteran one-worlder. Other "Estab-lishment" activists at the Initiative include General Lee Butler,General Andrew J. Goodpaster, and former Secretary of DefenseRobert Strange McNamara (all CFR). The "anti-Establishment"

88

OncrmsrruuNc TIrE Gr,osAllst CoNcrnt

activists at MPI include a host of revolutionary radicals. Amongthe MPI co-sponsors are the Parliamentarians for Global Action,the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, theNuclear Age Peace Foundation, and the International PeaceBureau.41 All of these groups have been long conlected to theKGB-created-and-controlled World Peace Council (WPC), which,since its founding in 1949 by Communist mass-murderer JosephStalin, has served thle dual purpose of leading the drive for U.S.disarmament and providing support for terrorist groups andregimes worldwide.*

Both the Establishment and anti-Establishment activists wereeager to cite the fact that the World Court at the Hague hadissued an opinion on July 8, 1996 that: "There exists an obliga-tion to ... bring to a conclusion negotiations leading to nucleardisarmament in all its aspects under strict and effective inter-

*One of the most informative studies on the WPC, The War Called Peace: TheSoui.et Peace Offensiue, was published in 1982 by the Western Goals Foundation.The study accurately notest: "Since 1950, when it launched the Stockholm PeaceAppeal, the World Peace Council (WPC) has been the Soviet Unionls single mostimportant international front organization." During the 1960s and'70s, the WPCplayed a crucial role in organizing the anti-Vietnam War protests throughout theU.S. and stirring up antiAmerican demonstrations throughout the world. It hasled, albeit often from the background, most of the "popular" disarmament cam-paigns, such as those supporting the ABM, SALT, INF, and CWC treaties, and thecrusades against building a U.S. missile defense system. The WPC has support-ed, with financial aid and propaganda, terrorist organizations such as the PLO'ANC, tIDT, and SrffAPO. In fact, the WPC has included leaders of terrorist groupsamong its top officers. Which is hardly surprising considering that the WPC'slongtime president, Romesh Chandra, was a member of the Central Committee ofthe Communist Party of India. The Soviet "control agent" over Chandra for manyyears was KGB officer Aleksandr Berkov, who was later replaced by fellow KGBofficer Igor Belyayev. Although Chanclra was the WPC's front man, Berkov andBelyayev actually called the shots - as directed by Moscow. WPC national alfili-ates, such as the U.S. Peace Councii (USPC), were and are controlled by nation-al Communist parties. The WPC and USPC closely coordinate their activitieswith other KGB-connected groups, such as the Institute for Policy Studies,Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, the Woment Strike forPeace, the Center for International Policy, the Center for Defense Information'Citizens Committee for a Sane World, and others.

89

Tlrr Uxrrpo NrrroNs Expospn

national corttrol." 42 They prattled that the nuclear weaponstates are "flouting the World Court" and the rule of law by notdisarming. They cited o'eminent" scholars who argued that theU.S. and the other nuclear states risk running afoul of "theNuremberg Principles" and "international humanitarian law." 43

They posed as the moral voice of the majority of the world's non-nuclear powers while rebuking the major powers for endanger-ing the planet because of chauvinistic adherence to narrownational and ideological interests.

Of course, the MPI does not represent the "middle power"states at all; its whole purpose (and the reason that it has beenso bountifully funded and promoted) is to provide orchestratedpressure from below so that the Insiders ofthe "weapons states"will have the excuse to do what they have wanted to do all along.Our home-grown internationalists realize that by having thedisarmament pressure appear to come from an independent citi-zens network, the motives and agendas of those who must imple-ment the changes will not be seriously challenged.

As a journalist covering the UN Millennium Summit, theGorbachev State of the World Forum, and a number of addition-al programs that took place in NewYork City in September 2000,this reporter had a front-row seat to this amazing spectacle. Thediabolic "manipulation of the threads" was both fascinating andfrightening to behold. It was not the first time that I hadobserved this phenomena; I had seen it in operation at previoussummits.

Still, it was evident that, with practice, the Kremlin-PrattHouse one-worlders are perfecting their pincer stratery. Theyhave become very adept at managing their ranry NGO rent-a-mob, which, on cue, either chants and demonstrates in thestreets, or comes inside the halls of power and negotiates like agenuine "superpower."At the same time, they have assembled anamazing array of politicians-and-professors-for-hire, who can becounted on to spout the proper globalist slogans, and reporterswho reliably retail every line of internationalist propagandahanded to them.

90

OncnpsrnnrlNc THE GLoeALrsr CoNcnnr

With the orchestra so lavishly funded and skillfully conducted,they are able to give the appearance that their position trulydoes "represent the will of global civil society." Politicians whomight normally do battle are completely outgunned and over-whelmed; there is no way they can match, by themselves, theintellectual firepower of the assembled think tanks and univer-sities that have been preparing their positions for months - oreven years. And when their congressional offices are besiegedwith an orchestrated campaign of telephone calls, e-mails, faxes,and letters; while CNN, C-Span, and the other networks are allspewing forth the same story - even the stalwart begin to crum-ble before such an onslaught. That is what has been happening,and what we can expect to see a great deal more of, as the advo-cates of "global democracy" continue to press their fraudulentand totalitarian agenda.

We hasten to add, however, that this totalitarian agenda canbe stopped, and it must. In fact, the plans of this cabal have beendisrupted many times through well-organized exposure of thehidden agendas and the phony orchestration. The good news isthat these deceptions cannot stand the light ofday. The bad newsis that credible evidence to support this story will never reachsuffrcient numbers of Americans through disorganized action.However, the existence of strong organizationalleadership opensup real opportunities. For more on the antidote, the reader maywish to jump to Chapter 14. However, there is still much more tothe story. The following chapters wiII examine some of the otherprominent strategies of this cabal.

91

Chapter 6Enviromania

World Federalistsbelieue that the enuironrnental crisis fac-ing planet earth is a global problem and therefore calls for a"global" solution - a worldwide United Nations Enuiron-mental Agency with the power to make its decisions stick-l

- World Association of World Federalists, 1972

[TJhe great enetny is not the Souiet Union but the rapiddeterioration of our planet as a supporting structure for ciui-lized life.z

- George F. Kennan (CFR), Washington Posf column,November 12, 1989

Gtobal warming, ozone d,epletion, d,eforestation and, ouer-population are the four horsemen of a looming 27st centuryapocalypse. As the cold war recedes, the enuironment isbecoming the No. 7 international security concern.s

- Michael Oppenheimer (CFR),New York Tintes, March 27, 1990

We'ue got to ride the global warming issue. Euen if the the-ory is wrorug, we will be doing the right thing in terms of eco-nomic and enuironmental policy.a

- Timothy Wirth (CFR),former U.S. Senator and Under Secretary of State,

now head of Ted T\rrner's IIN Foundation

In searching for a new enerny to unite u,s, u)e came up withthe id,ea that pollution, the threat of global warming, watershortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.... All thesedangers are caused by human interuention.... The real

93

THo Uurrpo Nerroxs Exposno

enen'Ly, then, is humanity itself.s

- The Council of the Club of Rome, 1991

Tfre [UN] Security Council recently expanded the conceptof threats to peace to includ,e economic, social and ecologicalinstability.6

- "The New World Army," New York Times editorial,March 6, L992

Global warming, ozone depletion, deforestation, species extinc-tion, wildlife habitat destruction, resource exhaustion, overpop-ulation. Since the 1960s, these and a host ofother supposed envi-ronmental "crises'have exploded onto the world scene, mobiliz-ing millions of people in a global crusade to "save the planet."This writer was involved as a true believer in the early period ofthis global movement, and, as a high school senior and studentbody secretary, helped plan and organize a 1970 school ceremo-ny for the first Earth Day: a demonstration in which studentsdonned gas masks, as a "consciousness-raising" protest againstair pollution, and symbolically buried an automobile carburetor.

In the three decades since that time, the environmental move-ment has grown into a global green juggernaut involving mil-lions of activists and wielding enormous political, social, and eco-nomic power. Contrary to popular misconceptions, this has notbeen a healthy development for "Mother Earth" or her humaninhabitants. As my colleague William Norman Grigg has rightlynoted, "the environmental movement is animated by a desire toregiment human society rather than 'save the planet.' Themovement's economic outlook is socialist, its political ambitionsare totalitarian, and its religious affinities are unmistakablypagan."7

The Big Green agenda is about power and control, not clean airand saving whales. While the vast majority of pedestrian-levelenvironmentalists may genuinely care about local ecology issuesand really believe in the apocalyptic scenarios regarding the so-called "ozorte hole" and the alleged dangers from greenhouse

94

Elrunorualrn

gases, clearly the elites guiding these concerned cadres knowsuch threats are bogus or vastly exaggerated. Certainly, the sci-entifrc evidence does not support the charges that these alleged"crises" are so imminent and of such"planet-threatening magni-tude as tojustify totalitarian solutions.

In fact, the overwhelming weight of real science and the bulkof honest scientists argue that genuine environmental problemsare best solved not by draconian governmental fiat but by mar-ket forces and the enforcement of private property rights.Conversely, it is also true that the worst environmental degra-dation on the planet has taken place under those Communistand socialist regimes where free markets and property rightshave been most ruthlessly suppressed.

It is not the purpose of this study to address or refute the myr-iad absurd claims of the enviro-extremists; that has already beendone by many eminent scientists and scholars.* It is, instead,our purpose here to show ruhy the Establishment opinion cartelinsists on ignoring the"clear verdicts of science and enshrines asoracles the charlatans whose eco-science has been repeatedlyexposed as error-ridden or completely fraudulent.

Earth Summit EyewitnessThis blatant deception and censorship by the "ruling class jour-nalists" was especially crucial to the "success" of the 1992 UNConference on Environment and Development (UNCED), the so-called Earth Summit, in Rio de Janeiro. This writer can claimthe dubious distinction ofbeing, perhaps, the only "non-greenie"journalist amongst the thousands of reporters and media per-sonalities who converged on this global orry of environmentalextremism.

Providentially, I met up with one of the few other "contrarian"souls attending the Summit almost immediately upon exiting myplane onto the sweltering tarmac of the Rio airport. As the longpassenger lines from the various airliners converged under theairport's shade cover for the two-hour Customs process, I had thegood fortune to "converge" with Dr. Dixy Lee Ray, who had just

95

THn UNrrno NarroNs Expospo

deplaned from another aircraft. Dr. Ray, who died in 1993, wasone of my heroes: a genuine, eminent scientist who boldly chal-lenged the absurd claims and dangerous proposals of the.envi-ronmental fanatics and calmly disregarded the vicious, personalattacks that she received in return.

As a distinguished professor of zoolory, author and commenta-tor, former chairman of the Atomic Enerry Commission, formergovernor of the state bf Washington, and recipient of manyawards (including the United Nations Peace Pize), one might beforgiven for naively assuming that this woman would be mobbedby reporters seeking her learned opinion on the weighty mattersunder discussion at the Summit. Hardly! Dr. Ray was virtually*See, for instance, Rational Read.ings on Enuironmental Concerns, editecl by JayIL I€hr (Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1992); The State of Humanity, edtted. by JulianL. Simon (Blackwe]l, 1995); Earth Report 2(N0: Reuisiting the Tlue State of thePlanet, edited by Ronald Bailey (McGraw-Hi1l, 2000); Enuironmcntal Gore: AConstructiue Response to Earth in the Balance, edited by JohnA. Baden (PacificResearch Institute, 1994); Ecology, Liberty and Properiy:. A Free MarketEnuironmental Read.er, edited'by Jonathan H. Adler (Competitive EnterpriseInstitute, 2000); Tlashing the Plarwt, by Dky Lee Ray (Regrrery, 1990);Enuironmental Ouerkill, by Dixy Lee Ray (Regnery, l99B); Science Under Sicge:Hout the Enuironmental Misinformation Campaign Is Affecting Our Laws, Taxes,and Our Daily Liues , by Michael Fumento (New York: W. Morrow, 1996); PollutedSci.ente: The EPAs Campaign to Expand Cl.ean Air Regulntions, by MichaelFumento (Washington, D.C.: AEI Press, 1998); Sound And Fury: The Sci,ence andPolitics of Global Warming, by Patrick J. Michaels (Cato Institute, 1992); TheSatanfu Gases: Clearing the Air About Global Warming, by Patrick J. Michaelsand Bobert C. Balling (Washington, D.C.: Cato Institute, ZO0O); Tbe Heated,Debate: Greenhouse Predictions Versus Climate Reality, by Robert Balling (SanFrancisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1992); Hot Talk, ColdScience: Global Warming's Unfinished Debate, by S. Fred Singer (TheIndependent Institute, 1997); The Ultinnte Resource 2, by Julian L. Simon(Princeton University Press, 1998); Iloodwinking the Nation, by Julian L. Simon(Tfansaction Publishers, 1999); Free Market Enuironmentalism, by Terry L.Anderson and Donald R. Leal (St. Martin's Press, 2001); Ecocid.e In the USSR:Health and Nature Undzr Sicge, by Murray Feshbach and Alfred Friendly, Jr.(Basic Books, 1992); "East Europe's Dark Dawn," National Geographic, J'wreL99L; Enuironmental Politics: Public Costs, Priuate Reward.s, by Michael S.Greve and Fred L. Smith, Jr. (Praeger, 1992); and Undue Influence, by RonArnold (The Free Enterprise Press, 1999)

96

Exunouaru

ignored, as were other noted scientists and scholars, while theCFR Establishment press drooled over every sacred syllableuttered by the likes of Fidel Castro, Mikhail Gorbachev, Jerry"Governor Moonbeam" Brown, then-senator Al "I invented theInternet" Gore, Jacques Cousteau, and Maurice Strong.

During the course of the Summit, I had the opportunity tomeet with, interview, and compare notes with Dr. Ray severaltimes. I noted that with her background in zoolory she should bebetter prepared than most for the profusion of weird specimenspopulating the conference. "Ite never seen a bigger zoo," t}:,.e

feisty scientist responded, in a comment intended to convey boththe absurdity and seriousness of what was transpiring at the LINconfab.

Although ignored by most of the media (and even pointedlycensored and rebuked by some) at Rio, Dr- Ray did successfullyexpose some of the dangerous LINCED policies and proposals'Through her columns and live talk-radio interviews from theEarth Summit, and by,her speeches and explosive book expos6following the event, she alerted many Americans to the perils ofthe global green agenda. ln Enuironmental Ouerkill, she wrote:"First, we must recognize that the environmental movement isnot about facts or logic. More and more it is becoming clear thatthose who support the so-called 'New Wor1d Order' or WorldGovernment under the United Nations have adopted global envi-ronmentalism as a basis for the dissolution of independentnations and the international realignment of power-" 8

The opinions of other prominent scientists were also censoredor suppressed by the Insider-run media. Shortly before the con-vening of the Earth Summit, a group of more than 250 distin-guished scientists, including 27 Nobel Laureates, released astatement called tlne Heidelberg Appeal to Heads of States andGouernmenf,s. The statement, which was subsequently signed byhundreds of additional scientists worldwide, said, in part: "Weare, however, worried at the dawn of the twenty-first century, atthe emergence of an irrational ideology which is opposed to sci-entific and industrial progress and impedes economic and social

97

Tnu UNrrro Nnrtoxs E:<posro

development." e This private ad hoc group appealed to govern-ment oflicials to base ecological proscriptions "on scientifrc crite-ria and not on irrational preconceptions," and earried a warning"to the authorities in charge of our planet's destiny against deci-sions which are supported by pseudoscientific arguments or falseand non-relevant data." 1o

Forgive the political rraivet6 of these well-meaning scientists.But appealing to venal politicians and the prostitute press on thebasis of facts is almost like trying to seII compassion to Mafiathugs or morality to the studio execs of Hollywood Babylon.What was the reaction of the CFR media cartel to the Heid.elbergAppeal? Predictable: They ignored it.

The same blackout occurred later when an even larger groupof scientists signed a petition opposing the half-baked "science"undergirding the incredibly dangerous IIN Kyoto Protocol onglobal warming. Headed by Dr. Frederick Seitz, former presidentof the National Academy of Sciences and president emeritus ofRockefeller University, fhe petition was signed by more than18,000 scientists, including thousands of meteorologists, clima-tologists and atmospheric scientists. The scientists' statementsaid, in part:

We urge the United States government to reject the global warm-ing agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December 1997,and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on green-house gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance ofscience and technolory, and damage the health and welfare ofmankind....

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release ofcarbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing orwill, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of theEarth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate.Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases inatmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects uponthe natural plant and animal environments of the Earth. 11

98

Errunouaxn

Nonstop Fropaganda and CensorshipBut the "ruling class journalists" are more than willing to playthe scientist numbers game when it suits the one-world agenda.Before, during, and after Rio, the media mavens trumpeted thesupposed findings of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change (IPCC).rz Then-Senator Al Gore, who led theU.S. Senate delegation to Rio, repeatedly cited the "authorita-tive" IPCC report in-his fervent pleas of support for the globalwarming treaty. At his major press conference at the Rio Hilton,this writer challenged his citation of the IPCC report and hisrepeated ludicrous claim that 98 percent of the scientific com-munity endorsed the global warming idea as fact. The IPCCreport had been fraudulently altered, I pointed out, and many ofthe scientists who had worked on the project had publicly dis-avowed its political agenda disguised as science. This easily ver-ified fact had been reported (albeit in "small print") in the "main-stream" press. Gore evaded the tough question like a true politi-cian, stating: "I don't want to open a debate on this, but let mesay that I will stay after-[the press conference] if you like.-.."

Thanks to Senator Steve Symms (R-Idaho), who took themicrophone followingAl Gore, I was able to ask Gore a follow-upquestion, zeroing in on the well-documented IPCC fraud andpointing out that the Gallup poII of climatologists and meteorol-ogists taken a few months earlier found that only 79 percent, not98 percent, believed in global warming.ls Again Gore evaded,snidely remarking that there are a lot of people who "still arguethat NASA staged the moon landing in a movie lot." I repliedthat the poll I had just cited was not a survey of wild-eyedcranks, but, on the contrary, represented the vast majority of cli-matic scientists, including internationally recognized authoritieslike Hugh Ellsaesser at Lawrence Livermore Laboratory,William Reifsnyder at YaIe, Nathaniel Guttman at the NationalClimatic Data Center, Robert Balling, director of the ArizonaClimatolory Laboratory, and many others. Senator Gore, whootherwise never missed an opportunity to pontificate on hisfavorite subject, was suddenly under great pressure to leave.

99

Tnp Uurroo NnrroNs Expossn

"WelI, we've really got to go," he said.Although Gore's evasiveness and slippery exit were frustrat-

ing, they were not surprising; it was precisely what one wouldhave expected of him. What was harder to take (though not total-Iy unexpected) was the reaction of the press corps. It was obviousto this correspondent - and should have been, as well, to all oth-ers present - that my questions had caught him off balance. Ihad refuted his claims urith fact, backed up with citations andsources. I had even challenged one of his prized documents asfraudulent. He was caught in a lie and was clearly uncomfort-able. This is the kind of "blood in the water" situation that nor-mally sets off the shark sensors of journalists and sends theminto a "feeding frenzy." If Senator Symms, a conservative, hadbeen similarly caught, you can be sure the shark pack wouldhave been all over him in a split second. That didn't happen withGore, ofcourse, because the horde of"journalists" in attendancehad come not as news reporters but as advocates and propagan-dists. They were there to,regurgitate and retail as gospel what-ever globaloney the UN and its proponents dished out.

Allow us to provide a few more examples. One of the majorscare stories that had received a major buildup prior to Rio, andwas a key focal point of the Summit, concerned the alleged mas-sive destruction of the Amazon rain forest. According to the mil-itant enviro-lobby and its media allies, we could expect cata-clysmic global environmental consequences unless IIN authorityover the world's forests was established. So, again, one mightnaively think that the man of the hour would be ProfessorEvaristo Eduardo de Miranda, the world's leading expert onAmazon deforestation. Dr. Miranda, an ecologist at theUniversity of S5o Paulo, is a former consultant to the tlN whoheads Brazil's center for monitoring the Amazon region by satel-lite. His laboratory was the only source for complete satellitedata on the status of Amazon deforestation.

But to the U.S. media, Dr. Miranda and his fellow scientistsdidn't exist. Small wonder: His data did not support the apoca-lyptic paradigm the Insider-managed media were selling. In fact,

100

Exunoruexte

Dr. Miranda's data showed that the studies sponsored by theUnited Nations Food and Agriculture Organization, the WorldBank, World Wildlife Fund, and the Conservation Foundationwere exaggerating the rate ofdeforestation by 300 to 400 percentand grossly misrepresenting other data.la

Moreover, much of the destructive deforestation decried by thegreen extremists was the result of the socialist policies of Brazil'ssocialist government. The solution, Dr. Miranda pointed out,would not be found in international socialist policies implement-ed by the IIN's bureaucracy. Moreover, he noted, not all defor-estation is bad; converting some of the massive jungle for farm-ing, livestock, timber harvest, and other productive uses is agood, thingand necessary for food, jobs, and economic progress. ls

Another expert "pariah" at Rio was Dr. Alexander Bonilla ofCosta Rica. A world-famous ecologist and former recipient of theUnited Nations' top environmental honor, the GLOBAL 500Award, Dr. BoniIIa was a natural to respond to questions about"biodiversity" and "sustainable development," which were majorwatchwords at the Summit. However, as with Drs. Ray andMiranda, Dr. Bonilla's science did not fit the reigning paradigm.The outspoken scientist urgently warned ofthe danger posed bythe "greening of the Reds." Even more than in the U.S. andEurope, he noted, the Communists and "former'Communists inLatin America had poured into the environmental movement,where they exploited environmental issues to promote Marxistideology and "class struggle."16

Dr. Bonilla was angry and disturbed over the usurpation of sci-ence by those who would use it for purely political purposes. "Wehave many poor people with very substandard living conditions,'he explained. "They need jobs, decent housing, clothes, food,drinkable water, things that can be provided in a manner com-patible with sound economic and ecological practices." 17 But theenvironmental leftists; he said, want to stop aII economic devel-opment, in the name of environmental protection. This will con-sign many people to lives of grinding poverty, sickness, illiteracy,and early death. "The knowledge and technology is available to

101

Tnn Uurrno NauoNs Exposno

enable a stewardship ofnatural resources that allows both pros-perity and environmental integrity," Bonilla asserted. 18

As expected, Dr. Bonilla's message was deemed unimportantby the "ruling class journalists"; instead, the American peopleneeded to hear and see and read the blatherings of"experts" likeCastro, Gorbachev, and Gore.

Ihe New York-Moscow Green AxisAs in the other areas we have examined, the one-world Insiders,both in New York and in Moscow, have been working hand inhand to excite and exploit environmental fears in the service ofbuilding world government. Over and over again, we see thesesupposedly opposing forces supporting the same subversive,totalitarian programs and agenda.

Environmentalism offers the would-be global dictators unpar-alleled opportunities to exercise their statist ambitions. Three ofthe broad primary objectives they expect to realize through theirenvironmental agenda a4e:

o Abolition of private property, the keystone of every socialistpolitical-economic system (see next chapter).

o Global regimentation, with draconian regulation, in minutedetail, of (in the words of one of their favorite eco-programs)"every person on earth."

r World government, with legislative, executive, and judicialpowers, including military and police to enforce "world law."

The internationalist elite of the New York-Moscow Axis havebeen working in tandem to convince the peoples of the worldthat, in the words of the World Federalist Association, "GlobalProblems Require Global Governance." Through the influence oftheir symbiotic power networks, this one-world slogan hasbecome universally adopted by Communists, socialists, femi-nists, environmentalists, human rights activists, disarmamentadvocates, and others worldwide. As usual, the coordinatingbrain center is Pratt House, the CFR.

LO2

ElwmoulNra

Previously we noted that CFR braintruster Lincoln P.Bloomfield, in his 1962 study for the CFR-dominated KennedyState Department, A World Effectiuely Controlled by the UnitedNations, had conceded that it wouldbe difficult to bring about amerger between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Obviously,Americans would not go for union with a murderous, totalitari-an system. That is why the threat of nuclear annihilation,"mutually assured distruction," had to be built into a crediblethreat more to be feared than Communism itself. Then, at thecritical point, the Soviets would come to their senses and realizethat only "collective security," under which national armamentswere transferred to IIN authority, offered a viable future. TheKremlin would mellow and democratize. However, Bloomfieldsaw that this scheme posed a major problem. He wrote: "if thecommunist dynamic were greatly abated, the West might losewhatever incentive it has for world government." 1e

Indeed, if the nasty, blood-soaked Reds convincingly demon-strate that they are "1nellowing," then much of the pressure forsurrendering our arrns evaporates. Obviously another sufficient-ly grave threat (or threats) must be found to substitute for, oraugment the nuclear holocaust fear. As Bloomfield saw it, thedrive for world government would require "a crisis, a war, or abrink-of-war situation so grave or commonly menacing thatdeeply rooted attitudes and practices are sufficiently shaken toopen the possibility of a revolution in world political arrange-ments."2o

Dr. Bloomfield is not alone in recognizing the utility of war andcrisis in the service of totalitarianism. Another Insider strategistwho has expounded on this subject is the late Herman Kahn(CFR), physicisUfuturist founder of the Hudson Institute. In hisessay, "World Federal Government," co-authored with Anthony J.Wiener, Kahn acknowledges that building world governmentrequires "intense external dangers."21 Echoing Bloomfreld, Kahnstated that "a world government could only be created out of waror crisis - an emergency that provided an appropriate combina-tion of the motivations of fear and opportunity." 22 The

103

Tnn Umrro NrrroNs Exposrn

Kahn/Wiener essay so impressed the leaders of the WorldFederalist Association that they have reprinted and promotedit.23

Still another voice in the crisis choir.is Brian Urquhart, a for-mer IIN under secretary-general and now a full-time UN propa-gandist at the Ford Foundation. Urquhart has lamented, "Thereare moments when I feel that only an invasion from outer spacewill reintroduce into the Security Council that unanimity andspirit which the founders of the Charter were talking abortt."2aMr. Urquhart's one-world colleagues have actually consideredthe feasibility of creating such a unifying extra-terrestrial"threat." That was one of the considerations pondered by the"Special Study Group" (SSG) convened in 1963 by the same PrattHouse gang in the Kennedy administration who commissionedBloomfield's study.25 The SSG produced a secret report that cre-ated a storm of controversy when it was anonJrmously released in1967 as the Report From lron Mountain.2s*

According to the lron Mountain teport, the SSG consideredwhether "such a menace ivorrld offer the'Iast, best hope of peace,'etc., by uniting mankind against the danger of destruction by'creatures'from other planets or from outer space."2l B:ut t}i,Legroup decided such far-out scenarios lacked "credibility." Dittofor most other contrived "menaces." However, they decided, "theenvironmental-pollution model" offered hopeful potential.28 "Itmay be," said the Report, " ... that gross pollution of the envi-ronment can eventually replace the possibility of mass destruc-tion by nuclear weapons as the principal apparent threat to thesurvival of the species."29

The line adopted by the CFR Establishment press was that theReport From Iron Mountain was a hoax, a "brilliant satire." Butwas it? At the very time that they were dismissing the report as

*The available evidence indicates that Herman Kahn and his CFR-laden HudsonInstitute may have formed the core of the SSG, or that the SSG may have beenentirely a Kahn/Iludson operation. See Gary Allen's articles "Think Tanks:Where the Revolution Is Being Planned" and'lVlaking Plans: For a Dictatorshipin America" in American Opinion magazine, March and April 1971, respectively.

L04

ENvrnoulNn

a delightful joke, the Pratt House illuminati were implementingthe game plan it proposed. Through their power and inlluence ingovernment, academe, the media, tax-exempt foundations, andWall Street, they were furiously building the threat of environ-mental destruction into "a credible substitute for war capable ofdirecting human behavior patterns in behalf of social organiza'tion."30 Three years after the publication of lron Mountain t}nefrrst Earth Day wad held, launching a global crusade that hashad a dramatic impact on our world - politically, economically,socially, philosophically, morally, and religiously.

Recall that according to Dr. Bloomfreld (see Chapter 2), "iheorder we examine may be brought into existence as a result of aseries of sudden, nasty, and traumatic shocks."Sl The IronMountain gang concurred, noting that the new "war substitute"must provide an "immediate, tangible, and directly felt threat ofdestruction." 32 Thus, a nonstop series of nasty and traumaticshocks has been provided by the Insider-frnanced and -directedenvironmental movement. Those shocks have been aimed at con-vincing a significant share of the population of the Western coun-tries that our planet faces imminent, cataclysmic consequencesunless immediate, global action is taken - action that includesglobal regulation of environmental "menaces."

For three decades we have been assaulted with an incessantbombardment of environmental doomsday propaganda. At everyturn, eco-destruction awaits us: The oceans are dying; the rainforests are disappearing; the deserts are growing; species arebeing driven to extinction; critical resources are being depleted;CO2 is increasing; the earth is warming; the polar ice caps aremelting; carcinogens are everywhere; pesticides are killing us.Crises! Crises! Crises!

We Are All OneBut mere crises are not enough; they must be GLOBAL CRISES!T[aditionally, war has been the ultimate crisis for mankind.During war the people yield vast powers to the government forthe welfare and survival of the tribe, city, or nation. The envi-

105

Tnu Ur.rmro Narroxs Ereospo

ronmental "crises" we face, say the one-world eco-saviors, areglobal crises, presenting a global threat as deadly as war.Obviously, handling this threat is beyond the capabilities of indi-vidual nation states. Ergo, we must haveglobal gouernment vuithglobal powers.

This was the theme of Mikhail Gorbachev's celebrated "End ofthe Cold War" speech in Fulton, Missouri, in 1992. "The prospectof catastrophic climatic changes, more frequent droughts, floods,hunger, epidemics, national-ethnic conflicts, and other similarcatastrophes compels governments to adopt a world perspectiveand seek generally applicable solutions," he declared. This couldonly be accomplished, said Gorbachev, through "some kind ofglobal government." "I believe," said the CFR-approved "former"Communist,"that the new world order will not be fully realizedunless the United Nations and its Security Council create struc-tures ... which are authorizedto impose sanctions and make useof other measures of compulsion.'33

Gorbachev's Fulton spegch (which perfectly reflected the CFRline - and was probably written by Pratt House wordsmiths)signaled a new stepped-up phase in the drive for global "interde-pendence" and "convergence." That drive includes an enorrnouspropaganda campaign saturating the American public with theidea that our environmental problems are too immense to bedealt with by our present system of independent, sovereignnation states. Thus we increasingly find ourselves confrontingsuch pre-fabricated slogans as "Global Problems Require GlobalSolutions," "Global Problems Require Global Governance," and"Think Globally, Act Locally."

Amongst environmentalists and many other one-world "griev-ance" agitators, these slogans have become incessant mantras."The first law of ecology tells us that 'everything is connected toeverything else,"' proclaims environmental radical JeremyRifkin in his book Entropy: Iruto the Greenhouse World.sa Thisthesis ofglobal "interconnectedness," "unity," and "oneness'- 2new "paradigm shift" - now permeates all discussion of thingseconomic, political, social, environmental, moral, and spiritual -106

Exunouaxra

thanks to the promotion it has received from the Insider elite.School children are inculcated with this message from their text-books. Children and adults receive daily doses of interdepend-ence from television "news" and "nature" programs. This is a con-scious, subversive effort to reorient the public to a "one-world"view.

Professor of international law and one-world architectBenjamin Ferencz asserts that "antiquated notions of absolutesovereignty are absolutely obsolete in the interconnected andinterdependent global world of the 21st century."35 This is alsothe message of New Age political activists Corinne Mclaughlinand Gordon Davidson. In Spiritual Politics: Changing the WorldFrom the Inside Out, they write: "A systems approach is needed,as all our problems are interconnected and interdependent,facets of one single crisis - essentially a crisis of perception.This crisis is parb of a cultural shift from a mechanistic world-view to a holistic and ecological view, from a value system basedon domination to partnership, from quantity to quality, fromexpansion to conservation, from effrciency to sustainability."a0

In the same vein, New Age futurist and best-selling authorAlvin Toffler approvingly notes that the "Third Wave" era, inwhich we are now living, "gives rise to groups with larger thannationalist interests. These form the base of the emerging glob-alist ideology sometimes called'planetary consciousness.''37Fellow globalists Jessica Lipnack and Jeffrey Stamps developthis thesis in their book Networking. In this emerging worldview, they say, "nature's ecological orchestra is revered as oneunified instrument, inner development is valued as a correlate tosocial involvement, and the planet is understood to be an inter-connected whole." 38 But this is not "nature's' orchestra we arehearing; it's the same Pratt House-orchestrated choir singing thesame anti-national sovereignty, pro-world government refrain -with a decidedly neo-pagan spiritual twist added. (This "spiritu-al" dimension of the globalist agenda will be more closely exam-ined in Chapter 12).

If we "follow the money," we quickly see that the funding for

107

Trr Urrrpo NATroNs Expospo

the groups and individuals singing this tune comes from theusual sources: the big CFR-dominated tax-exempt foundationsand corporations.se The tune is amplified in the political realmby CFR politicians like Senators John Kerry, Charles Schumer,John D. Rockefeller, John Chafee, and Joseph Lieberman, andRepresentatives Richard Gephardt, Lee Hamilton, BarneyFrank, Jim Leach, Sam Gejdenson, and Charles Rangel. NewtGingr"ich, the CFR's piize "conservative," invites Alvin Toffler(repeatedly) to address the House of Representatives and evenpens a glowing introduction to one of the futurist's works ofMarxoid flummery.ao

And the CFR media cartel dutifully publicizes the apocalypticscenarios of the doomsayers and praises them as courageous"prophets." Fright peddlers and one-world apostles such asGorbachev, Rifkin, Toffler, Ferencz, et al., are favorablyreviewed, sympathetically quoted, and provided with nationalmedia platforms to trumpet their nonsense and disinformation.Their twaddle is assigned as required reading to millions of stu-dents as though it is gospel. As at Rio, genuine scientists andscholars representing the authentic voice ofscientific consensusare ignored or even vilified when they refute the hysterical non-sense and claptrap of the environmental gurus. Because of thisblatant bias of the controlled media, these lunatic ravings andNew Age mystic musings are no longer relegated to the wackyfringes ofsociety, where they belong; they are expounded by sup-posedly "serious' think tanks, "respected" journals, and "main-stream" politicians, and form the basis for international treatiesand fed.eral policies and law.

The Work of DecadesThis "cultural shift," as Mclaughlin and Davidson put it inSpiritual Politics,aL has not happened overnight; it has been thepatient work of more than a generation. Earth Day 1970 markedthe launch of an ongoing offensive by an "ecolory movement"that the Insiders had been building for years. 1972 markedanother major watershed. In that year, the Club of Rome, an

108

EwunouaNre

international coterie of one-world elitists (including many of theusual CFR regulars) came out with a much-heralded study, ?heLimits to Growth. This eco-socialist jeremiad proclaimed:"Entirely new approaches are required to redirect society towardgoals of equilibrium rather than growth ." 42 lrt order to save theearth, said the Club report, "joint long-term planning will be nec-essary on a scale and scope without precedent." 43 A 'supremeeffort" by aII would lie required "to organize more equitable dis-tribution of wealth and income worldwide."a4

The authority of The Limits to Growth was presented asbeyond question. After all, it was produced by researchers using"sophisticated" computer models at the "prestigious"Massachusetts Institute of Technolory. Added to this was thestature of the scientific, intellectual, political, and corporatecelebrities associated with the esteemed Club of Rome. These"impressive" cachets notwithstanding, the Limits study wasabout as "scientifrc" as Chicken Little's claims that "the sky isfalling." The main difference is that Chicken Little was a poorfool who actually believed her own hysterical alarms. The Clubof Rome Insiders are peddling Chicken Little hysteria in order topanic and stampede all the barnyard animals into their NewWorld Order corral.

Interestingly, that same year, 1972, Gus HaIl, NationalChairman of the Communist Party of the United States(CPUSA), released a book entitled Ecology with a similar mes-sage. "Human society cannot basically stop the destruction of theenvironment under capitalism," said Comrade Hall.a5 "Socialismis the only structure that makes it possible." 46 He continued:"Socialism corrects the basic flaw of capitalism. It sets humansociety on a new path. The means of production, factories, minesand mills become the properby of the people. They operate andproduce only to fulfill human needs.... This is the foundation fora new set of priorities, for new values.... What is involved is a'conflict of values."' 47

1972was also the year of the first "Earbh Summit," the UnitedNations Conference on the Human Environment, held in

109

Tnp Ulnrro NATroNs Eleosno

Stockholm, Sweden. Serving as secretary-general of that eventwas Canadian billionaire-socialist Maurice Strong (whom we willsee, later on, become a high-level Insider). The conference vrashosted by Swedish Prime Minister Olof.Palme, one of the manyleaders of the Socialist International in attendance. An immedi-ate outcome of that summit was the creation of the UnitedNations Environment Program (UNEP), with Mr. Strong as itsfirst executive director. Other summit results included a socialist-environmentalist manifesto called the Stockholm Declaration,a8consisting of 26 principles, and the Stockholm PIan of Action,ae aset of 109 (mostly Marxist) recommendations. One of the keyintellectuals advising the conference and helping write its reportswas Rockefeller University microbiologist Rene Dubos.*

That same year, Dubos came out with the celebrated bookOnlyOne Earth, which was co-authored with the British FabianSocialist Barbara Ward (Lady Jackson).50

Thus, in 1972, the same eco-socialist "marching orders" weregiven to the hard-core Communist cadres, the worldwide social-ist parties, and the great'global mainstream of environmental-ists and concerned citizens. In the years since those reports bythe CIub of Rome, the Communist Party, the UN, andDubosAVard, a deluge of similar and increasingly militantreports and books appeared from the Communist-socialist leftparalleling, and at times converging with, the themes espousedin reports, articles, and books by the CFR "capitalist" elites.Although these "opposing sides" may attack each other rhetori-cally, what's important is the bottom line: Both sides are advo-cating central planning (socialism) and internationalism (worldgovernment). The Red-Green orchestra was playing furiously.

By the mid-1980s, we see U.S.-Soviet "convergence" in fullswing, with Soviet dictator Mikhail Gorbachev and U.S. Ieadersengaged in large-scale cooperative propaganda efforts to pushthe same global environmental agenda. Gorbachet's subsequentreplacement by Boris Yeltsin, and then Vladimir Putin, did notderail the CFR-Kremlin cooperation in this ongoing venture; in*Dubos coined the slogan "Think Globally, Act Locally."

110

ErvwnoueNre

fact, it accelerated the agenda. Comrade Gorbachev, actingostensibly as a private citizen,launched his "global brain trust,,(his words), the Gorbachev Foundation, staffed in Moscow with150 "former, communist apparatchiks, and with affiriated insti-tutes in the U.S. and other nations. During the 1990s, whichleading world-order theorist Professor Richard Falk (CFR) saidwould be the "decade of transformation," 51 Gorbachev was inconstant motion, along with the leading lights of pratt House,pushing the CFR-Kremlin one-world line.

In his 1992 book Voting Green, Rifkin wrote: ,,[T]he new Greenvision places the environment at the center of pubric rife, makingit the context for both the formulation of economic policies andpolitical decisions." 52 That was penned to coincide with the IrN,sEarth summit. And the cFR media orchestra made sure thatthat message was delivered repeatedly to theAmerican public, toopinion molders, and to policy makers and legislators by a gag_gle of different messengers. This kind of orchestrated saturationis essential if you are going to effect a real ,,cultural shifb,, or"paradigm shift."

A cascade of enviro-Marxist offerings mushroomed out ofnowhere with the same theme. on the plane to Rio de Janeiroand at the Earth Summit itself, everywhere I looked, delegates,activists, and reporters were ravenously devouring (and laterparroting) the contents ofa host ofnew books and reports. ?fteState of theWorld, an annual environmental fright report put outby the Worldwatch Institute (WI), was eve4rwhere cited as holywrit.53 Worldwatch is headed by Lester Brown (CFR), whom theWashington Post has admiringly described as.,one of the world,smost influential thinkers."54 His website notes that he foundedWI in 1974 "urith support of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund." bs

And the wI annual reports acknowledge that "the RockefellerBrothers Fund and the winthrop Rockefeller TFust provide corefunding for the State of the World series.,, 56

Another tome that excited the Earth Summit greenies, whilegarnering rave reviews from the Establishment media, wasChanging Course, by Stephen Schmidheiny and the Business

111

Tnp Uumpo Nrrrorqs Exposno

Council for Sustainable Development (BCSD).s7 The BCSD isloaded with corporate-socialist one-worlders, such as Maurice R.Greenberg, chairman of American International Group, Inc. Mr.Greenberg is vice-chairman of the CFR and his AIG is a CFR cor-porate member.

One of the most celebrated books to come out at the time of theSummit was produced by then-SenatorAl Gore. In Earth In TheBalance: Ecology and thi Human Spirit, Gore insisted that "theeffort to save the global environment" must become the "singleshared goal [andJ the central organizing principle for every insti-tution in society."58 The book is a perfervid piece ofsocialist eco-propaganda larded with an incredible number of errors, ludi-crous claims, and blatant misrepresentations. But it was exactlywhat the Pratt House globalists wanted, and it was a relativelyeasy matter for them to provide the hype necessary to turn it intoa bestseller. Gore, a prot6g6 of Communist billionaire ArmandHammer,5e led the U.S. Senate delegation to Rio and waslaunched on his way to becoming Vice President of the UnitedStates.

Thilateral Road to RioMore important than the Gore book, though read by a far small-er, elite audience, was the revealing TYilateral Commission bookBeyond Interdependence: The Meshing of the World.'s Economyand the Earth's Ecology, by Canada's Jim MacNeill, Holland'sPieter Winsemius, and Japan's Taizo Yakushiji.60 DavidRockefeller (then head of the CFR and Tiilateral Commission)and Maurice Strong teamed up to write, respectively, the fore-word and introduction to the Tiilateral book. "...I have beenprivileged to work closely with the principal author, JimMacNeill, for over two decades," wrote Strong. "He was one ofmy advisors when I was secretary general of the StockholmConference on the Human Environment in 7972. We were bothmembers of the World Commission on Environment andDevelopment and, as secretary general, he played a fundamen-tal role in shaping and writing its landmark report, Our

tt2

ENvIRoMANIA

Common Future [a socialist/environmentalist manifesto alsoknown as The Brundtland Reportl."61 What's more, revealedStrong, MacNeill "is now advising me on the road to Rio," 62

where Strong served a dual role, as the UN impresario and theInsiders' on-site manager.

Beyond Interdependence served as the Thilateral game plan forRio, and it had Strong's full endorsement. "This book couldn'tappear at a better time, with the preparations for the EarthSummit moving into high gea4" said Strong.63 To stress itsimportance, he said it would help guide "decisions that will liter-ally determine the fate of the earth."6a According to this headsummiteer, the Rio gathering would "have the political capacityto produce the basic changes needed in our national and inter-national economic agendas and in our institutions of gover-nance...."65 In his estimation, "Beyond Interdepend.ence providesthe most compelling economic as well as environmental case forsuch reform that I have read."66

MacNeill and his co-authors advocated "a new global partner-ship expressed in a revitalized international system in which anEarth Council, perhaps the Security Council with a broadermandate, maintains the interlocked environmental and econom-ic security of the planet."ez "The Earth Summit," wrote MacNeilland his cohorts, "will likely be the last chance for the world, inthis century at least, to seriously address and arrest the acceler-ating environmental threats to economic development, nationalsecurity, and human survival."68

Of course, all of the official preparatory meetings and negotia-tions leading up to the Earth Summit were really just so muchspectacle for public consumption. And the Rio gathering itselfwas additional "consensus" sideshow to provide an aura ofplan-etary "democracy" for a program that was already worked out indetail by the one-worlders, with their CFR brain trusts at theWorld Resources Institute, Worldwatch Institute, World OrderModels Project, the Business Council for SustainableDevelopment, etc., long before. The objective? The obvious onewas to give impetus to the global environmentalist agenda. But

113

THp UNrrro NATroNs Expospn

an important additional objective was to prepare the world toaccept a broad new UN mandate (without rewriting its charter):The UN was notjust about peacekeeping anyrnore.

Ronald I. Spiers (CFR) was one of many globalist agents whoprepped public opinion and policy makers for what was to come,when he wrote, in the March 13, t992 New York Times: "ThelUnited Nationsl Thusteeship Council should be changed from abody dealing with the vestiges of colonialism to one dealing withthe environment, becoming in effect the trustee of the health ofthe planet."6e Surprise! That's precisely what happened at Rio.

An earlier purveyor of this line, the venerable CFR "wise man"George F. Kennan, explained in a Washington Posl columnappearing on November 12, 1989 that we now live "in an agewhere the great enemy is not the Soviet Union but the rapiddeterioration ofour planet as a supporting structure for civilizedlife." 70 Kennan, a Princeton University professor and formerU.S. Ambassador to the Soviet lJnion, was the author of ournation's phony Cold War policy of "containment" of Communism.

Jessica T\rchman Mathews (CFR, TC), then vice president ofthe World Resources Institute, followed with an arbicle in theJuly/August 1990 EPA Journal asserting that "environmentalimperatives are changing the concept of national sovereignty,"and "multipolarity [isJ replacing the bipolar U.S.-U.S.S.R. axisaround which nations used to array themselves." Tl Moreover,she wrote, "it is likely that international problem-solving in thedecades ahead will for the first time depend on collective man-agement, not hegemony. And it is to precisely this form of gover-nance that global environmental problems will yield." 72

Gorbachev's Ibxic GlobaloneyMikhail Gorbachev, who is the darling of new world order pro-moters, and was one of the superstars of the Earth Summit, hadalso been thumping this theme for a couple of years. Addressingthe 1990 Global Forum in Moscow, he called for "ecologizing"society and said: "The ecological crisis we are experiencing today

- from ozo'ne depletion to deforestation and disastrous air pol-

7L4

EmvrnoueNre

Iution - is tragic but convincing proof that the world we all livein is interrelated and interdependertt.'73

"This means," Gorbachev continued, "that we need an appro-priate international policy in the freld of ecology. Only if we for-mulate such a policy shall we be able to avert catastrophe. True,the elaboration of such a policy poses unconventional and diffi-cult problems that will affect the sovereignty of states." 7a In a1994 interview withihe significant title, "From Red to Green," inthe Insider-funded Audubon magazine, Gorbachev stated: 'TVemust change all our values.... What we are talking about is cre-ating new forms of life on the basis of new values." 75

In a 1995 interview with the environmental magazineGrassroots, Gorbachev insisted that the only hope for saving ourplanet lay in "the development and implementation of an EarthCharter, a body of international ecological laws that would guidethe actions of individuals, corporations and governments ... thetime has come for a code of ethical and moral principles that willgovern the conduct qf nations and people with respect to theenvironment." T6

But what are these "new values" and "moral principles" thatMr. Gorbachev insists that all humanity must embrace? That isan important question to answer, since he is playing such a keyleadership role in this process. Besides heading up hisGorbachev Foundation and State of the World Forum, Mr.Gorbachev (Nobel Laureate, Time magazine's "Man of theDecade" 77) is also head of Green Cross International, of whichGlobal Green USA is the American affiliate. And he was chosenat Rio by his good buddy Maurice Strong to lead the drafting ofthe Earth Charter.

Let's take a look at the values and principles of the "Prophet ofPerestroika." This is the same Gorbachev who, in November1987, proclaimed: "In October 19L7, we parted with the OldWorld, rejecting it once and for all. We are m.ouing toward a newworld, the world of Communism. We shall neuer turn off thatroad."78 (Emphasis added.) "Perestroika," he said then, "is a con-tinuation of the October Revolution."Te By which he means V.I.

115

Tnn UNrrpo N,qrroNs Expospo

Lenin's bloody, murderous Bolshevik Revolution. As we will seebelow, Gorbachev is an unrepentant, unregenerate, militant,atheist Communist. (And, as we will see in Chapter 12, that hasnot hindered in the least his ascent into the ranks of the IIN'spremier spiritual leaders who are confecting the diabolical newGlobal Ethic, or world religion.)

In 1989, Gorbachev declared: "I am a Cornmunist, a conuincedCommunist For some thit may be a fantasy. But for me it is mymain goal." 80 The following year, even as he was being hailed asthe "man who ended Communism," he reiterated this conviction,stating, "I a.nL now, just as I'ue always been, a conuincedCommunist " 81 He has never repudiated these or his many othersimilar statements. And a close examination of his speeches andstatements that appear to show a *new' Gorbachev actuallyshow him to be still a hardcore Leninist. Just as Hitler revealedhis real self in Mein Kampf, for all who were willing to see,Gorbachev has made quite clear where he stands, and for whathe stands.

Are the CFR cognoscenti promoting Gorby illiterates? Are theyunaware that his "ex-Communist" act is a ruse? Of course not;they arcfully aware of the deception involved here. It is the PrattHouse plutocracy that has been his main sponsor and the pri-mar5r force assisting his deception.*

Given his unrepentant convictions, it is a simple matter to seewhy Gorbachev so enthusiastically supports the global enviro-Leninist regimens emanating from the UN. Such as Agenda 21.

*In his famous bookPerestroiAo, he plainly admitted: ''We are not going to changeSoviet power, ofcourse, or abandon its fundamental principles, but we acknowl-erlge the need for changes that will strengthen socialism." 82 (Emphasis added.)In the same revered text he explained that "according to Lenin, socialism anddemocracy are inclivisible," and the "essence of perestroika lies in the fact that itunites socialism with dcmocracy alrLd revives the Leninist concept ofsocialist con-struction both in theory and in practice." 83 (Emphasis in original.) Thus, whenhe declares for "democracy," he means "democrac/ qrithin the Leninist concep-tion and definition of the term, something quite the opposite of that which mostAmericans assume he is talking about.

116

EuunomnNrn

Agenda 21's Temifying AgendaThis mammoth program for global social engineering and eco-tyranny is a massive blueprint for regimenting all life on PlanetEarth in the 21st century - in the name of protecting the envi-ronment. Agenda 21: The Earth Summit Strategy to Saue thePlanet (EarthPress, 1993), one of the UN-approved editions ofthe program, makes this brazen assertion:

Effective execution ofAgenda 21 will require a profound reorien-tation of all human society, unlike anything the world has everexperienced - a major shiJt, in the priorities of both governmentsand individuals and an unprecedented redeployment ofhuman andfrnancial resources. This shift will demand that a eoncern for theenvironmental consequences ofevery human action be integratedinto individual and collective decision-making at every level.84

With breathtaking audacity, the document continues:

There are specific aetions which are intended to be undertakenby multinational corporations and entrepreneurs, by frnancialinstitutions and individual investors, by high-tech companies andindigenous people, by workers and labor unions, by farmers andconsumers, by students and schools, by governments and legisla-tors, by scientists, by women, by children - in short, by every per-son on Earth.85

If Gorbachev is a "socialist," a "Communist," a "Leninisf," -which he says he is, and vindicates that claim with many actions

- it is perfectly understandable that he would be very pleasedwith the direction that the United States is going with the UNenvironmental agenda. As a Leninist, he is comfortable withlong-term stratery, and, as his idolizing biographer, GaiI Sheehy,noted, he has long been known for "his emulation of Lenin's pol-icy of two steps forward, one step backward." 86

But Comrade Mikhail, as we've noted, is getting plenty of helpfrom "our" side. He and his Russian colleagues are provided withcontinuous tutoring and infusions of cash from world order

tt7

Tlm UNrrrn NlrroNs Ereospo

heavyweights such as George Soros (CFR), Zbigniew Brzezinski(CFR, TC), George Shultz (CFR, TC), Henry Kissinger (CFR,TC), David Rockefeller (CFR, TC), and Richard N. Gardner*(cFR, TC).87

It was Professor Gardner who penned the now-famous article,"Ttre Hard Road to World Order," in the April L974 issue ofForeign Affairs. One of the boldest calls for world governmentever to appear in the CFR's journal, it proposed building the"house ofworld order" through "an end run around national sov-ereignty, eroding it piece by piece."88 What's more, it set out theCFR Insider plans for exploiting fears about environmentalcalamity as a vehicle for expanding the IIN's power. In this 1974article, Gardner wrote:

The next few years should see a continued strengthening ofthenew global and regional agencies charged with protecting theworld's enuironment In addition to comprehensive monitoring ofthe earth's air, water and soil and of the effects of pollutants onhuman health, we can lobk forward to new procedures to imple-ment the principle of state responsibility for national actions thathave transnational environmental consequences, probably includ-ing some kind of "international environmental impact state-ment"....89 [Emphasis in original.]

Tbgether with Gorbachev and his "former" Communist croniesin the Kremlin, the Pratt House one-worlders intend to fasten aglobal enviro-Leninist world government upon the planet Earth.And they are far along the way to accomplishing this.

*Gardner also tutored then-Governor Jimmy Carter in foreign potcy "issues" fortwo years to prepare him for the presidency.90

118

Chapter 7The UIYs War onPrivate Property

Priuate land ownership is also a principal instrument ofaccumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore con-tributes to social injustice.... Public control of land use istherefore ind,is p ens able....L

- United Nations "Habitat I" Conference Report, 1976

In one word, you reproach us with intending to do awaywith your property. Precisely so; that is just what we intend.2

- Karl Mam, The Communist Manifesto,1848

Property is theft!3.

- P.J. Proudhon, the "Father ofAnarchy," 7840

Property struck the first blow at Equality,. ... the support-ers of Governments and property are the religious and civilLaws; therefore, to reinstate man in his primitiue rights ofEquality and Liberty, we must begtn by d.estroying allReligion, all ciuil society, and finish by the d,estruction of allproperty.a (Emphasis in original.)

-Adam Weishaupt, founder of the Order of theIlluminati, 1776

According to Karl Marx, "the theory of the Communists may besummed up in the single sentence: abolition of private proper-ty." 5 That's pretty plain, and it's directly out of the CommunistManifesto. It has been the rallying cry of collectivists of allstripes - communists, socialists, anarchists, fascists - and hasguided the most ruthless and bloody regimes of the past century.Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Ceausescu, Tito, Gomulka,

119

Tnp Ulurno NerroNs Expospo

Castro, Pol Pot, Mengistu, Ortega, and dozens of otherCommunist dictators and satraps all fervently espoused thatMarxian precept and applied it with a vengeance. And in sodoing, they produced mountains of corpses and rivers of bloodunequalled in aII history.

Conversely, the champions of freedom have ever recognizedthat private property is essential both to human liberty and tothe material well-being and economic advancement of all classesof people. "Let the people have property," observed NoahWebster, "and they will have power - a power that will for everbe exerted to prevent a restriction ofthe press, and abolition oftrial by jury, or the abridgement of any other privilege." 6

(Emphasis in original.) Justice Joseph Story, who was appointedto the Supreme Court by President James Madison and becameone ofAmerica's most revered jurists, put it this way: "That gov-ernment can scarcely be deemed to be free when the rights ofproperty are left solely dependent upon the will of a legislativebody, without any restraint. The fundamental maxims of a freegovernment seem to require that the rights of personal liberbyand private property should be held sacred."7

"It is the glory of the British constitution," said SamuelAdams,"that it hath its foundation in the law of God and nature. It is anessential, natural right, that a man shall quietly enjoy, and havethe sole disposal of his own property."s Moreover, said Adams,"Property is admitted to have an existence even in the savagestate of nature.... And if property is necessar5r for the support ofsavage life, it is by no mean less so in civil society. The utopianschemes of levelling, and a community of goods, are as visionaryand impracticable as those which vest all property in the Crownare arbitrary, despotic, and in our government, unconstitution-aI." 9

In his famous encyclical Rerum Nouarum, written in 1891,Pope Leo XIII stated: 'IN'e have seen that this great labor ques-tion cannot be solved save by assuming as a principle that pri-vate ownership must be held sacred and inviolable. The law,therefore, should favor ownership, and its policy should be to

120

Tnr IIN's Wen oN Pnrvnrn Pnopunry

induce as many as possible of the humbler class to become own-ers.'"Men always work harder and more readily,,, he continued,"when they work on that which belongs to them; nay, they learnto love the very soil that yields, in fesponse to the labor oftheirhands, not only food to eat but an abundance ofgood things forthemselves and those that are dear to them." 10

In our own day, this same powerful truth was expounded clear-ly by the great economist FriedrichA. Hayek. "What our genera-tion has forgotten," he said in his 1944 Nobel Prize-winning clas-sic, The Road to Serfdom, "is that the system of private propertyis the most important guaranty of freedom, not only for thosewho own property, but scarcely less for those who do not. It isonly because the control of the means of production is dividedamong many people acting independently that nobody has com-plete power over us, that we as individuals can decide what to dowith ourselves." 11

It is easy, then, to see why those who have totalitarian ambi-tions always attempt, to destroy private property. Because, likeHayek, they understand that as long as "the control of the meansof production is divided among many people acting independent-ly," their plans for total power will remain frustrated. The mil-lions of farmers, homeowners, businessmen, shopkeepers, arti-sans, laborers, and professionals who own their own propertyform a natural obstacle to tyrannical aspirations. If people areallowed to own their land, grow their food, manufacture whatev-er products they choose, live in homes of their own, and freelyexchange their goods, services, and labor - why, they just mightnot meekly yield to the dictates of central planners, whether ofthe fascist, communist, or socialist variety!

So whom do you think the folks at the United Nations andtheir Insider sponsors choose to follow: Adams, Webster, LeoXIII, and Hayek? Or Marx, Mao, Lenin, and Stalin? you guessedit: Time after time after time, they've chosen the path of power,slaughter, tyranny, and destruction, rather than liberty, morali-ty, and justice. As we will see next, with an examination of a fewof the IIN's eco-Marxist programs.

t2t

Trm Umrrn N,rtroNs Exposuo

The UN Gets Into the ActWe begin with "Habitat I," the Conference Report of the UnitedNations Conference on Human Settlements, held in Vancouver,Canada, during June 1976. The Preamble of this important doc-ument, endorsed by the United States and the other participat-ing nations, declares:

Land ... cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled byindividuals and subject to the pressures and ine{ficiencies of themarket. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument ofaccumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore con-tributes to social injustice.... Public control ofland use is thereforeindispensable....12

The main body of the text then proposes the following Marxistpolicies, among others:

Recommendation D.1 Land resource management(a) Public ownership or effective control of land in the public

interest is the single most important means of .. . achieving a moreequitable distribution of the benefrts of development whilst assur-ing that environmental impacts are considered.

(b) Land is a scarce resource whose management should be sub-ject to public surveillance or control in the interest ofthe nation....

(d) ... Governments must maintain full jurisdiction and exercisecomplete sovereignty over such land with a view to freely planningdevelopment of human settlements....13

Then there is Agenda 21, t}lre massive environmental mani-festo that came out of the 1992 UN Earth Summit. As we saw inChapter 6, this is a monstrous socialist scheme for micromanag-ing every square centimeter of the planet's surface - not to men-tion the air and space above it and the ground and seas below it.This green communist manifesto holds that "land must beregarded primarily as a set of essential terrestrial ecosystemsand only secondly as a source of resources." 14 We must develop

722

Tnp LIN's Wan ou Pnrvem Pnoppnry

new social systems, it says, because "traditional systems havenot been able to cope with the sheer scale of modern activities."These new systems will "have as their goal both the effectivemanagement of land resources antl their socially-equitableuse." 15

Agenda 21 states further: "All countries should undertake acomprehensive national inventory of their land resources inorder to establish a system in which land will be classifiedaccording to its most appropriate uses....'16 Moreover: 'All coun-tries should also develop national land-management plans toguide development." 17

Another frightful creature to emerge from the Rio EarthSummit (UNCED) was the Global Biodiversity Assessment(GBA). The GBAis a huge, 1,140-page instrument that claims toprovide a "scientific" basis for implementing the Convention onBiological Diversity. "Property rights are not absolute andunchanging," it informs us, "but rather a complex, dynamic andshifting relationship between two or more parties, over spaceand time." 18 A,rrd the UN ecocrats are determined to make anyproperby rights they don't abolish outright as "complex, d5mamicand shifting" as possible. "We should accept biodiversity [i.e.,plants and animalsl as a legal subject, and supply it with ade-quate rights. This could clarify the principle that biodiversity isnot available for uncontrolled human use." le Thanslation: Wemust assign legal "rights" to animals, trees, bugs, bushes, weeds,birds, fishes, even mountains, and then appoint 'custodians,""guardians," or "trustees" (all of whom must be watermelonMarxists, of course) to look out for and speak for these rights.

"Contrary to current custom," says the GBA, "it would there-fore become necessary to justify any interference with biodiver-sity, and to provide proof that human interests justifu the dam-age caused to biodiversity."zo In other words, under this socialistscheme, a "guardian" or "stakeholder" (someone claiming to rep-resent a plant or animal species on the property) can assert a pri-ority right over that ofthe actual property owner, and force theowner to "prove" that any activity he contemplates for "his" prop-

123

Tnp UNnro Nntlotrs Expospo

erty will not adversely impact the flora and fauna which consti-tute the "biodiversity''in that "ecosystem."

T\ro other alien entities spawned at the Earth Summit werethe UN Commission on Sustainable Development and an inter-national NGO with quasi-official functions known as the EarthCouncil. These organizations coordinate the activities of nation-al councils on biodiversity, which have been established to imple-mentAgenda 21. The Earth Council is presided over by MauriceStrong, Secretary-General of the Rio Earth Summit, a director ofthe World Economic Forum, a member of the Commission onGlobal Governance, and a director of the Gorbachev Foundation.

U.S. Pressure From AboveIn 1993, President Clinton (CFR) created the President's Councilon Sustainable Development (PCSD) by executive order. ThePCSD joined five Cabinet members with the leaders of the SierraClub, the Natural Resources Defense Council, theEnvironmental Defense..Fund, and the Nature Conservancy andcharged them to "develop policy recommendations for a nationalstrategy for sustainable development that can be implementedby the public and private sectors."21 They were to use as theirguide the UN Convention on Biodiversity, which Clinton signedin June 1993 (but which the Senate has yet to ratify).

In 1995 the PCSD issued its report, Sustainable America, ANew Consensus, which stated:

Privately owned lands are most often delineated by boundariesthat differ from the geographic boundaries ofthe natural system ofwhich they are a part. Therefore, individual or private decisionscan have negative ramifications ... that result in severe ecologicalor aesthetic consequences to both the natural system and to com-munities outside landowner boundaries.22

That same year, President Clinton demonstrated how suchinternationalist socialist policies can play out when he broughtin a team of UN bureaucrats (at U.S. taxpayer expense) from the

124

Tnn UN's WAR oN Pnwlrp Pnoppnry

UNESCO World Heritage Committee (WHC). Their mission wasto close down a proposed gold mine on private property in thevicinity of Yellowstone National Park, which the UN lists as aWorld Heritage Site. Militant eco-fanatics together with theClinton-Gore administration had been trying for years to stopthe Crown Butte Mining Company from starting operationsthere. The company had jumped through all of the costly andconvoluted state and federal environmental impact analyses andpresented no risk to the park or surrounding area.

But before Crown Butte could begin operation, the UNESCO-WHC "scientists" came up with a frnding that allowing the proj-ect to go forward would be ecologically disastrous. That was theonly pretext President Clinton needed to issue an executiveorder stopping aII new mining permits within a 19,000-acre areaof federal land near Yellowstone. The UNESCO delegation wenteven further, seeking to review all policies involving mining, tim-ber, wildlife, and tourism within an area of nearly 18 millionacres sarrounding the park, including millions of acres of privateIand. They and their U.S. enviro-Leninist allies want to createthe "Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem," an enormous "biodiversityreserve." This is part of the IIN's global Wildlands Project, aimedat "re-wilding" literally half of the U.S. land area.

Wildlands are constructed of habitat zones called "core areas,'in which human activity is increasingly restricted and ultimate-ly (virtually) eliminated. The core areas are then linked torestrictive "buffer zones.'These areas are then connected by net-works of "wildlife corridors."

It's important to recognize that this U.S.-UN eco-entangle-ment didn't begin with Bill Clinton and it won't end now that hehas left office. George Bush the Elder (CFR) occupied the WhiteHouse in 1992, and his main representative at the EarthSummit that year was EPAAdministrator William Reilly (CFR),a militant greenie. Before coming on board the Bush team, Reillyhad served as president of both the Conseivation Foundationand the World Wildlife Fund-U.S. And he had served as execu-tive director of a land-use task force chaired by Laurance S.

125

THp Ururpo NerroNs E:rpospo

Rockefeller, which promoted Marxist land-use controls andexpropriation.

ReiIIy's contempt for private property was evident not onlyfrom the EPA policies he promulgated, but also from his ownwords. In his introduction to the 1985 bookNotional Parks for aNew Generation, for example, he advocated "greenline parks."Under this concept, cloasely akin to the tlN schemes, privatelyowned land adjacent to federal or state parks could be declaredpart ofthe park system by executive fiat and its use restricted toconform to park purposes - in blatant disregard and violation ofconstitutional protections against such abuse.

In addition, Reilly argued that the "mainstream" Americanattitude toward property rights in land has been "the right of cit-izens to exercise dominion over land they own," but if "parks areto be protected ... the tradition of park stewardship must gradu-ally be extended beyond park boundaries, to domains wheremainstream attitudes about private property and freedom ofaction still prevail today.l'2s

This "watermelon Marxism" - green on the outside, red on theinside - has been promoted and supported continuously in thehighest levels of our federal government, through bothRepublican and Democratic administrations, by the CFREstablishment. And the same one-world coterie also has contin-uously provided the "pressure from below" as well.

More Establishrnent RadicalsTake, for instance, watermelon Marxist Jeremy RiIkin, whosebook, Entropy: Into the Greenhouse World, we mentioned in theprevious chapter. It was published by Bantam NewAge Books, adivision of Bantam Books, one of the largest Establishment pub-lishing houses, and was highly praised in the CFR press. Andwho is Mr. Rifkin? A radical activist in the Vietnam anti-warmovement, he was a founder of the JohnnyAppleseed Brigades.In 1976 he headed up the Peoples Bicentennial Commission(PBC), a thoroughly Marxist operation funded by the usual tax-

L26

Tnr IIN's Wan oN Pnrvlro Pnoprnry

exempt foundations and the federal government. He has lecturedfor the KGB-front Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) and writtenfor the radical socialist Mother Jones magazine. All of which, ofcourse, has qualified him to join the august company of savantswho participate in the Gorbachev State of the World Forumpalavers. It also guapantees him Insider foundation funding forhis Washington, D.C.-based Foundation on Economic Thends.

And what type of economics does Comrade Rifkin espouse?Because of the worsening greenhouse crisis, he says in Entropy,"For the frrst time in our countqy's history we will have to dealwith the ultimate political and economic question - redistribu-tion of wealth." 24 (Though rest assured it is not his or Mr.Rockefeller's wealth he wants to redistribute.) Under the systemhe favors, "The long-accepted practice ofprivate exploitation of'natural'property is replaced with the notion of public guardian-ship." 25

This is also the message of Peter Bahouth, the former headgreenie at Greenpeace. Now he is director of the TurnerFoundation, where he ladles out millions of dollars to his com-rades at Greenpest, Fiends of the Earth, the EnvironmentalDefense Fraud, and other eco-fascist extortionists. The TurnerFoundation insists that property rights are responsible for a hostof problems associated with urban and suburban sprawl and fur-ther insists that state governments must impose more restric-tions on property rights. "States must insist localities determine... defined urban growth boundaries,"26 says a recentFoundation statement. Indeed, says the Foundation, "politicallypotent bubbles about free markets and property rights must bepopped." 27

The Ttrrner Foundation, of course, is the eco-hobbyhorse ofCitizen Ted T\rner, whose multi-million dollar palatial estateson several continents are not to be counted among the privateproperty bubbles to be popped by T\rrner's Greenpest lackies.T\rrner, Rockefeller, and other members of the ruling elite smug-ly believe that their money and political clout will protect themfrom the Marxist programs they are foisting on us lesser folk of

127

Trm Umreo NeuoNs Expospo

the middle class. As Marx pointed out inhis Manifesfo, his imme-diate target was "not the abolition ofproperty generally, but theabolition of bourgeois property." 28

Yes, it is the property of the bourgeois - the middle class -that is the principal target of Marx and his present-day disciples.We have already seen the "future" envisioned by these one-worldcorporate socialists. It is an Orwellian nightmare world in whichSoviet Commissars luxirriate in their Black Sea villas and theupper-level Communist nomenhlatura enjoy pampered, privi-leged lives - while the vast majority of the Russian people existin misery and grinding poverty.

But the Pratt House billionaires already possess greaterwealth and enjoy more luxury than their Soviet counterpartscould ever dream of, you say. True, but the Communist eliteenjoy something that the top Insiders crave more than wealthand luxury: power - raw, unchallenged power. The power of themaster over the slave. The power of the tyrant over the masses.Blocking their path to totalitarian power is the middle class.Thus the ongoing attack on middle class property by the would-be global overlords and their watermelon Marxist minions.

L28

Chapter 8The UN's International

Court of Criminals[The proposed International Criminal Court] repudiates

the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration ofIndepend.ence and cancels the 4th of July.... What are the lim-its on the ICC? There are none. It's insanelt

- Professor Charles Rice,Notre Dame University School of Law

With the strohe of a pen, President BiIl Clinton has a lastchance to safeguard humankind.... He must simply sign atreaty, finalized in Rome in 1998, to create a permanentInternational Crimin a.l C ourt. 2

- Robert S. McNamara (CFR, TC) and Benjamin B.Ferencz, New York Times op-ed, December 12,2OOO

The United States is today signing the 1998 Rome Tleatyon. the International Criminal Court.s

- President Bill Clinton (CFR, TC), December 3l-, 2000

On December 31, 2000, David Scheffer (CFR), President Clinton'sAmbassador for the International Criminal Court, signed the ICCRome Theaty for the United States. This was an incredibly radi-cal, revolutionary act, which will bring devastating consequencesfor the American people, if they allow the U.S. Senate to ratify it.If ratifred and implemented, this brazenly treasonous scheme bythe CFR Insiders would rend asunder our constitutional protec-tions and causeAmerican citizens to be vulnerable to prosecutionbefore international UN tribunals for alleged violations of lawlessIIN 'laws." If convicted by this UN kangaroo court system,American citizens could be subjected to whatever penalties the

t29

Ttrp Uurrro Narror.rs Eleospn

ICC judges decree, including imprisonment wherever the black-robed globalists may decide to send them.

Regardless of whether one views the prospect of the ICC sym-pathetically or with horror and revulsion, it must be admitted byall who are fair-minded that U.S. accession to this treaty wouldrepresent a momentous, colossal change to our judicial and con-stitutional system. Who but a totalitarian would argue that achange of this magnitude should be even contemplated, Iet aloneattempted, without an informed debate and a genuine publicconsensus? Yet there has been no public debate of this issue.Would Americans embrace this attack on their most preciousrights if there had been? Obviously not, which is why the entirecrusade for the ICC has been carried out by the Insiders as amassive stealth campaign, aimed at imposing UN judicial ruleon an unsuspecting America.

Ask yourself: Did you see the development of the ICC coveredon the evening news on NBC, ABC, CBS, and CNN? Did you seethe supposed merits apd real dangers debated on Face theNation, Nightline, The Capital Gang, Hardball, 60 Minutes,Larry King Liue, or 20120? Of course you didn't, because thosedebates never happened. At the time that President Clintonannounced the U.S. signing of the Rome Tleaty, probably not oneU.S. citizen in 100 had heard of the document, and not one in athousand had any inkling of what it entailed.

The organized forces for world government, however, had beenintensely active for several years preparing to spring the ICCtrap. Pro-ICC articles were appearing in the internationalistjournals, pro-ICC studies were issued by globalist think tanks, afortune in foundation grants was provided to pro-ICC academicsand NGOs to attend international conferences and s;rmposia -all of this was taking place on arr enormous scale, while mostAmericans were completely in the dark.

The op-ed quoted above by Robert McNamara and BenjaminFerencz appeared in the New York Times during the closing daysof the Clinton administration. It is a typical example of themeans by which the one-world Insiders signal their political

130

TUB LIN's INTSRNATToNAL Counr op CnrurNer-s

agents and intelligentsia to act on an issue of serious import totheir global agenda.* Similar editorials, op-eds, articles and com-mentaries appeared in the Washington Post, Christian ScienceMonitor, and many other Establishment print and broadcastpropaganda organs, while, at the same time, the mammoth, pro-ICC, NGO network intensified its lobbying for the tIN. All of theusual chorus voices began hymning in unison, creating the falseimpression that a new "consensus" had formed, that ,,enlight-ened" political leaders now accepted the virtuous and unanswer-able arguments of the selfless representatives of "global civilsociety." Hereafter, only hopeless, heartless, Neanderthal, ,,sov-ereigntists" would oppose the creation ofthis desperately neededinstitution that is designed (we are told) to establish "the rule oflaw" globally, "stop the culture of impunity," and bring to justicethe world's most terrible criminals.

Ameriean Criminal Justice SystemBut should weAmericins toss out our own justice system or allowit to be subsumed in some global ICC system on the basis of prom-ises by the UN and its champions? Do any of the UN's member

xAs Defense Secretarlz under both JFK and LBJ, Mr. McNamara (CFR, TC) wasa principal architect of the insane doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction(MAD) and the disastrous U.S. debacle in Vietnam. Following those efrorts,which were fiascoes forAmerica, but bonanzas for the Insiders, McNamara wenton to serve the cFR cabal as head ofthe world Bank, where he lavished billionsof dollars taken from U.S. taxpayers on Com-unist and socialist regimesthroughout the world.

Professor Ferencz of Pace university, an inveterate one-worlder and author ofmany books promoting disarmament and world government, is one of the earlyarchitects and proponents of the ICC. His books Defining InternationalAggression (1975), An International Criminal Court - A Step Toward WorldPeace (two volumes, 1980), .Ezfo rcing Internatinnal Law (two volumes, 1g8B), andPlawtHood: The Key toYour Future (1991) greatly inlluenced the development ofthe ICC statute, as did he personally. Professor Ferencz was the recognized emi-nence griese at the Ulrl's IQQ grrmmit in Rome, and it was due to his personal,vigorous lobbying that the undefined crime of"aggression" was included in theICC Statute.

131

Tun UNrrrn NeuoNs Exposoo

regimes now have in place better justice systems than we enjoyunder the U.S. Constitution? Ha! The thought is ludicrous!

One doesn't have to do an extensive study of foreign jurispru-dence to know that it would be a very bad idea to run afoul of theruling authorities in Red China, Russia, Cuba, Syria, Iraq, Iran,Rwanda, Nigeria, and dozens of other tyrannical regimesthroughout the world, where concepts ofdue process, the rule oflaw, and constitutional rights do not even exist.

Even in many Western European countries such as France,Germany, and Italy, rights that Americans take for granted -jury trial, habeas corpus, speedy trial, the right to counsel - areweak to nonexistent. During the Rome conference, ICC propo-nents frequently pointed to the Yugoslav war crimes tribunal asa model. That is a chilling thought to anyone familiar with theT?ibunal prosecutor's position that five years is a reasonabletime for a defendant to wait in prison for a trial. Other ICC advo-cates frequently cite the European Court of Human Rights as amodel for the ICC. But this supranational judicial body has ruledin various cases that pretrial detention of three, four, or evenseven years is acceptable!

The American criminal justice system is far from perfect, butin comparison to what exists in most of the rest of the world, itstands out as a shining beacon. And this is so in spite of the factthat over the past half century it has been mangled and trans-muted into a system that would be completely unrecognizable tothe framers of our Constitution. As originally conceived, virtual-ly all criminal law was left to the purview of state and local gov-ernments. There were no federal laws regarding murder, rape,robbery, theft, vandalism, fraud, and other ordinary criminalmatters. The central government was restricted to prosecutingtreason, espionage, malfeasance of office, and other mattersdirectly related to the federal government.

Over the past few decades, however, the federal government'sreach has been drastically lengthened through a massiveonslaught of federal legislation, presidential executive orders,and judicial decrees. The damage to our freedoms and constitu-

t32

THB UN's IxrsnNArroNel Counr or CnnarNa'r-s

tional order springing from the federal judiciary has been cata-strophic. The federal courts, especially since the New Deal, havebeen running amok, acting as a super-Iegislature in matters asdiverse as abortion, education, the bnvironment, pornography,race relations, sexual conduct, sedition, employer-employee rela-tions, religious practice, local police, state prisons, housing, etc.

Some of our early {ounders recognized the potential for thesetragic developments long, long ago. Writing in 1821, toward theend of his life, Thomas Jefferson predicted the dire conse-quences America might suffer as a result ofjudicial usurpation:"It has long ... been my opinion ... that the germ of dissolutionof our federal government is in the constitution of the federaljudiciary ... working like gravity by night and by day, gaining aIittle today and a little tomorrow, and advancing its noiselessstep like a thief over the field of jurisdiction, until all shall beusurped from the States, and the government of all be consoli-dated into one. To this I am opposed, because when all govern-ment ... shall be drdwn to Washington as the center of allpower, it will render powerless the checks provided ... and willbecome as venal and oppressive as the government from whichwe separated." 4

Jefferson's pessimistic view was based upon his sober assess-ment of the cormptibility of human nature. He was warning, inthe citation above, of the dangers inherent in the natural ten'dency in human beings and institutions toward greater andgreater corruption, not against any particular combination ofindividuals then scheming to overturn our system of govern-ment. However, as gloomy as his projections were, it is doubtfulthat even he could have imagined the outrageous and seditioususurpations of our federal judiciary. And it is certain that he andevery other Founding Father, along with generations of earlierAmericans, would stand in dumfounded disbelief to learn thatAmerica's leaders today are seriously proposing that the peopleof the United States be subjected to the jurisdiction of an inter'national judiciary.

133

Tnn Uxrrno Nerroms Exposun

The Campaign for an ICCThe vast majority of Americans today are blissfully ignorant ofthe fact that such a radical proposal is even under consideration.But the truth is that it is perilously close to becoming a reality.And unless the American public becomes sufficiently alerted,alarmed, and activated to oppose this incredibly subversivescheme, it will become reality.

The formal campaignfor an ICC was launched in the summerof 1998 at a United Nations summit convened in Rome. Themonth-long conference concluded on July 17th with theannouncement that 120 nations had voted in favor of approvingthe new "Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court" andthat it would enter into effect and becom.e binding upon the entireplanet as soon as it was formally ratified by 60 nations. Theostensible targets of the new ICC are dictators, tyrants, andother nasty practitioners of "genocide, war crimes, aggressionand crimes against humanity." But the UN membership isreplete with murderous dictators, tyrants, and the worst practi-tioners of these and other heinous crimes. The likes of FidelCastro, Yasir Arafat, Sam Nujoma, Mikhail Gorbachev, Li Peng,Madimir Putin, and other bloody-handed thugs have alwaysbeen welcomed and honored at the United Nations.

Ihe Real Targets of the ICCWho, then, are the real targets of the ICC proponents? Thosewho stand in the way of their proposed "new world order," nat-urally. That includes, of course, so-called "right-wing dictators,"like General Augusto Pinochet, who has never been forgiven bythe international Socialist-Communist-Insider cabal for over-throwing the brutal Communist regime of their favored. left-wing dictafor: Salvador Allende in Chile. In 1998, while the 82-year-old Pinochet was visiting England for medical treatment,he was arrested and held on a warrant issued by BaltazarGarzott, an investigative magistrate from Spain. Judge Garzon,a Marxist activist, was pursuing a revolutionary political agen-da, not seeking justice for real crimes. Many legal authorities

t34

Tnn, UN's lNrpnNerroNer, Counr or Cnrl{Ners

condemned Garzon's action for violating established canons ofinternational law. Eduardo Fungarino, Spain's chief govern-ment prosecutor, filed a court motion charging that the judgehad broken many legal procedures in issuing the arrest order'and that Garzon had "an absolute lack of jurisdiction" overalleged crimes committed outside of spain against citizens ofother countries.5

However, the Insider-controlled prostitute press would notallow these inconvenient facts, and others of equal importance inthe case, to come to the attention of the American people'*Instead, we were treated to a nonstop diet of shritt editorials andshrieking demonstrators demanding not only that Pinochet be

drawn and quartered, but that a permanent international tribu-nal, the ICC, be established to bring "dictators" of his ilk to jus-tice.

But the phony "human rights" activists demanding Pinochet'sscalp could not care less about genuine violations of humanrightsandrealjustiseforbloodydictators.AtthetimeofPinochet's affest in England on the Spanish warrant'communist dictator Fidel Castro was welcomed to spain andPLO terrorist leader Yasir Arafat was a guest of the ClintonWhite House. Likewise, Jiang Zemin, the butcher of fiananmenSquare,aswellasthebloody-handedSoviettyrantsMikhailGorbachev, Boris Yeltsin, and Madimir Putin - and virtuallyevery other mass-murdering despot of the left - have been con-

spicuously ignored by the self-righteous frauds leading the ICCchoir.

However, anti-Communist military leaders and heads of statelike Pinochet are not the only - or even the chief- targets ofthelCC.T}reprimarytargetofthelCCarchitectsistheUnitedStates and the American people. This was conspicuously obvious

*For an in-clepth look at the orchestratecl global campaign tn "gef Pinochet'

together with a thorough analysis of the charges leveled against him' please see:

"patriot Enchained," The New Am.erican, September 13, 1999; and "Persistentpersecution of Pinochet," The New Amcrican, Apil1o, 2000 at tttttw.thmotamsi-unomlfwtslPinrchetl.

135

Tnp Uumno Nerroms Expospn

at the ICC Summit in Rome, where America-bashing was theorder ofthe day.

As one who was in Rome "at the creation," this reporter canattest firsthand to the fact that the long-standing hatred towardthe United States by the vast majority of the pathetic regimesthat comprise the LIN menagerie is still alive and well. Day afterday, throughout the ICC conference, the U.S. was subjected totirades and condemnatibns - by official delegates as well as byNGOs - for supposed past and present sins. In fact, from thenonstop anti-U.S. invective one might imagine that America isthe principal, if not the sole, source of evil in the world. The bil-lions of dollars that we have ladled out over the past half-centu-ry to these countries and the UN itself have purchased us not aniota of good will.

There were calls at the Rome conference for prosecutingPresidents Bush (George W.'s father) and Clinton for war crimes.A handbill distributed at the summit by the Society forThreatened Peoples, one of the Marxoid groups among the NGOhorde, charged the U.S. with these past "war crimes": "Dropped15 million tonnes of bombs in the Vietnam War, conducted airraids on Cambodia, supported Indonesia's annexation of EastTimor, backed right-wing death squads in Guatemala in theearly eighties." 6

Months before the Rome conference had even begun, the UNCommission on Human Rights had targeted the U.S. with apurely political attack alleging that this country unfairly appliesthe death penalty. The Insiders'White House agent Bill Clintonaided the scheme by inviting UN human rights monitor BacreWaly Ndiaye to America to meet with U.S. offrcials and inspectour prisons. In September and October 1997, Mr. Ndiaye came tothe U.S. and visited prisons in Florida, Texas, and California.The New York Times reported:

For Mr. Ndiaye, the visit to the United States is importantbecause of the precedent it sets [emphasis added].

"I am really hoping that with this visit, the United States

136

Trm t-IN's INrBnNATroN.ql CoURT or CnrurNeLs

Government will show the way to other countries which have beenresistant to United Nations mechanisms," he said.7

Mr. Ndiaye's U.S. precedent-s"tti.g tour provided the Insider-funded NGO radicals at Amnesty International, Human RightsWatch, the ACLU, and the Lawyers Committee for HumanRights with a propaganda bonanza. The Insider media cartelretailed all their lurid charges of the horrors of theAmerican jus-tice system. In April 1998, shortly before the ICC Summit, theUN Commission on Human Rights released a report based onthe Ndiaye investigation. The report charged that application ofthe death penalty in the United States is tainted by racism, eco-nomic discrimination, politics, and an excessive deference to vic-tims'rights.s

The Commission also accused the U.S. of being in violation ofthe 1966IIN Covenant on Civil and Po1itical Rights and called onthe U.S. to suspend.all further executions until U.S. state andfederal laws were brought into compliance with "internationalstandards."e This provided the NGO cabal with another goldenopporbunity for a round of media-enhanced attacks on the U.S.Iegal system. One of the aims of this report and its companionNGO campaign was to sow seeds of doubt and guilt in Americanpublic opinion concerning the fairness of American justice; thiswould make the upcoming ICC proposals for an international sys-tem seem much more reasonable. It also gave the Clinton admin-istration an opportunity to strike a moderate pose while advanc-ing this radical agenda. The Clintonites said, in effect, "Well, wethink these UN charges are exaggerated but we recognize thatthe U.S. justice system isn't perfect. We want to be a good exam-ple to the rest of the world and cooperate with the IIN."

This was all a colossal, insidious charade, of course. Not tomention the epitome of hypocrisy. At the very time that KofiAnnan's Commission was denouncing the U.S. justice system,the sainted Mr. Annan was suppressing information that he hadbeen a key silent accomplice in the Rwandan genocide. Lt.-Gen.Romeo Dallaire, the former commander of Canada's UN "peace-

137

Tnn UNrrso NerroNs Expospo

keepingl mission to Rwanda in 1994, revealed that he had senta fax to Annan's office warning that Rwandan security officialshad been ordered to "register" the (predominantly Christian)Thtsis as an obvious prelude to mass li{uidation. Annan's officeordered Dallaire to "assist in the recovery of all weapons distrib-uted to or illegally acquired by civilians," which, in effect, meantdisarming the intended victimsllo So Mr. Annan, whoseCommission was chastising the U.S. for gross abuses, was him-self involved in one of the most atrocious genocides in world his-tory. Likewise, many of the IIN representatives at Rome whocited the Commission report in their denunciations of the U.S.were representing some of the most repressive and brutalregimes in the world.

We don't mean to imply that all of the U.S. bashing at Romewas emanating from Third World countries, Communistsatrapies, or IIN agencies. Canada, Norway, Britain, GermanSr,Italy, and other U.S. "allies" vied for top anti-U.S. honors, too. Onthe frnal day of the conference, when the very minimal objectionsof the U.S. to the ICC were soundly defeated, the assembled del-egations erupted in a tumultuous and defiant display of anti-American jubilation - which was joined by much of the pressco{ps, including "American" reporters.

Naturally, the U.S. NGOs topped all others in attacking theirhomeland. As Reuters reported, "the American NGOs were thescourge of the United States," 11 at the conference. On July 8th,Terra Vua, one of the major NGO newspapers that has become'must reading" at UN summits, carried this headline in largeprint: "Police Brutality Deeply Rooted in US" The storyannounced the release of a Human Rights Watch report charginga national epidemic of police brutality.i2 The 440-page report,entitled Shielded From Justice: Police Brutality andAccountability in the United States,L3 was time-released for max-imum effect on the conference. Human Rights Watch spokesmanRichard Dicker, who was one of the top NGO strategists at Rome,seemed never to be satisfied if not hurling vitriol at the U.S. Butthat has not hindered him or his group from receiving hundreds

138

TsB UN's lNrBmerroNer Counr op CnrMn{els

of thousands of dollars from the Ford Foundation, which hasenabled the group to push the ICC agenda.la

NGO Evolution-RevolutionThe revolutionary role of the NGOs at the Rome summit is oneof the biggest untold stories of that event. As CFR staffer JessicaT. Mathews approvingly noted in Foreign Affairs, ever since the1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, NGOs have been exercis-ing more and more influence at UN conferences.ls But the Romeexperience marked a watershed in the incredible evolution ofNGO power. At the ICC Conference, the NGOs were givenunprecedented access and privileges and accorded a statusalmost on a par with official state delegations. NGO experts andofficials, inflamed with their own self-importance, regularlyaddressed the ICC Plenary Session as though they were officialheads of state. They remonstrated, cajoled, and chastised theassembled plenipotentiaries to adopt NGO positions, whichalways argued for larger jurisdiction and more power for theCourt. NGO briefing papers, reports, resolutions, press releases,and legal opinions flooded the conference. The NGO Coalition foran International Criminal Court (CICC) was given a large suiteof offrces within the FAO (the UN's Food and AgricultureOrganization) conference building itself, just down the hall fromthe main meeting room, so that the NGO activists - who out-numbered the official delegates - could overwhelm the confer-ees with "good cop-bad cop" Iobbying tactics.

World Federalist Association leader William Pace (CFR),Richard Dicker, and other CICC spokesmen incessantly remind-ed the world press and the assembled dignitaries that they werevested with the moral authority of "over 800 NGOs worldwiderepresenting all sectors of global society." It was, of course, agigantic confidence game; the NGO "diversity'' amounted to achoice of your favorite flavor of socialism. Take your pick:Castroite, Tfotskyite,Gramsciite.

Certainly among the

Marxist, Stalinist, Leninist, Maoist,

most influential of the NGOs was the

139

TEn UNrrno NarroNs Exposno

Rome-based Thansnational Radical Party (TRP), an openlyCommunist organization that boasts Mayor of Rome FrancescoRutelli and European Commissioner Emma Bonino among itsmembers,lGboth of whom played prominent roles at the ICC con-fab. Together with its sister organization, No Peace WithoutJustice, the TRP and other NGOs organized daily demonstra-tions and panel discussions, in addition to ICC-related broad-casts on its radio program, Radio Radicale. As the host countryand the nation with the largest delegation - 58 delegates, ascompared to the next largest, the U.S., with 40 - Italy was inthe driver's seat. The Prodi government and Mayor Rutelli gaveevery advantage to the NGO radicals, granting permission forstreets to be blocked for marches and demonstrations and evenallowing NGO militants to set up a continuous propaganda stagepartially blocking the entrance to the FAO/ICC conference site.On JuIy 14th (Bastille Day, of course) Mayor Rutelli granted theTRP and its CICC allies an especially rare privilege: a torchlightmarch through the Via $acra (Sacred Way), a path through thetemple ruins that reportedly has only been opened twice thiscentury.

The Transnational Radical Party headquarters in Rome wasthe center for many NGO activities that spilled out of the FAOcomplex. At that venue, Judge Richard Goldstone, former prose-cutor for the UN war crimes tribunals for Rwanda andYugoslavia, presented a report promoting the ICC.17 Not sur-prisingly, the report was produced by a task force headed byGoldstone and sponsored by the Tlventieth Century Fund. ThisAmerican Insider foundation has been funding radical,left-wingcauses for much of this century. Accompanying Judge Goldstonewas Morton Halperin (CFR), the notorious Marxist activist andlongtime associate of the Institute for Policy Studies. PresidentClinton attempted to place Halperin in a sensitive, top DefenseDepartment post, but the Senate, prodded by exposure of hissubversive background, refused to confirm him. Halperin stayedon for awhile in other capacities in the Clinton regime, beforemoving on to a position in the CFR's Studies Department, and

L40

TnB UN's INrnnNeuoNel Counr or CnrNrnIALs

then an appointment as vice president of the Tkentieth CenturyFund.*

Of course, leading the clamorous lglobal civil society'' cabal**was the World Federalist Movement, whose representative,William R. Pace (CFR), ran the NGO show. The WorldFederalists (headed by CFR veteran John B. Anderson), whohave long advocated world government, clearly have masteredthe fine art of demagoguery and mob control. However, they donot exercise their leadership by virtue ofstrategic vision, tacticalgenius, or moral suasion. They have been accorded the piper sta-tus by those who pay for the tunes. It costs a great deal of moneyto assemble a horde of activists, fly them around the globe, setthem up with accommodations and entertainment in one of themost expensive cities in the world, and equip them with aII theresources they need to effectively push a coordinated, pre-arranged agenda. Even more than at previous summits, theNGO "citizen lobbyist" campaign at Rome was completely thecreation of the same'old Pratt House coterie: the CFR and itsfoundation, corporate, think-tank network.*In Rome, Halperin and Goldstone joined one-worlders Ben Ferencz, John Roper(Royal Institute for International Affairs), and Marino Busdachin (Secretary-General of No Peace Without Justice) at the Tlansnational Radical Party officesto help make the pitch for global governance. In January 2001, the CFRa:urounced that Halperin would be rejoining the group's staff to "direct a projecton democracy." 18

**Among the many other groups comprising the storied "diversit/ of the NGOclaque were: Parliamentarians for Global Action; European Law StudentsAssociation; Women's Caucus for Gender Justice; Caribbean Association forFeminist Research and Action; American Bar Association; InternationalFederation of Lawyers; International Women's Rights Action Watch; BeyondBorders; the Carter Center; Maryknoll Society Justice and Peace Office; Centerfor Reproductive Law and Policy; National Association of Democratic Lawyers;OXFAM UK; EarthAction International; Pax Christi International; Sisterhood IsGlobal Institute; Global Policy Forum; Gray Panthers; Vietnam Veterans ofAmerica Foundation; Washington Office on Latin America; InternationalAssociation of Democratic Lawyers; International Association of Judges;International Commission of Jurists; Women's Action Group; InternationalCouncil of Jewish Women; World Council of Churches; and the World OrderModels Project.

t47

Trp Uxrrun NerroNs Exposno

If you wish to take the time to do so, you can research the indi-vidual NGOs and the grants they received. But there is no needto do so, since these "anti-Establishment" rabble-rousers admittheir dependence on the globalist Establishment "sugar dad-dies." According to the Coalition for an ICC website home page,"Substantial funding for the CICC communications project hasbeen received from private foundations, progressive govern-ments, participating orginizations of the Coalition, and privateindividuals, including major grants from the European lJnion,the Ford Foundation, and the MacArthur Foundation." le

The principle NGO press conferences in Rome were presidedover by CFR handler William Pace, and his lieutenants RichardDicker and Professor Rhonda Copelon, a lesbian legal scholarfrom City University of New York, affiliated with the Women'sAction Group. Likewise, they and a select cadre of hardcore rad-icals led the daily strategy sessions at the NGO office suite.These events, which this writer attended, usually featured 50 to100 or more NGO activists of the Femi-Leninist, Enviro-Leninist, Afro-Leninist, Homo-Leninist, Lesbo-Leninist stripe.This motley menagerie of uncivil specimens, always spoutinghateful diatribes and Marxist cant, by no means can legitimate-ly claim to represent "global civil society." But their CFR pay-masters are hellbent on legitimizing this false claim, becausethese misfits and miscreants are essential components in their"pressure from below" stratery.

Shaping a ConsensusThe enormity of the deception and the immense resources andcoordination of this global network are amazing to behold. Buteven the astounding NGO-Insider spectacle at Rome fails to pro-vide a fuII appreciation of the fact that it was but a part of amuch larger scheme. The Rome gathering was the culmination ofa multi-year program of PrepComs (Preparatory Committeemeetings) that had been carefully orchestrated to arrive at thecontrived global "consensus" that is now being celebrated by thevotaries of "world order." The final PrepCom meeting, held from

742

Tur, UN's IlrrsRNATroNAL Counr or CrullrNers

March 16th through April 3rd, 1998 in New York, was a mini-preview of the Rome summit, with all the major actors, from UNofficials and pro-ICC national delegates, to NGO activists, hon-ing their skills, practicing their pdrts, and coordinating theiractivities with their Insider media allies.

In order to get all of the cadres marching in s5rnc, and to cre-ate the appearance ofpopular support, the Insiders had to set upa host ofongoing programs throughout the country before, dur-ing, and after the Rome summit. One of the major events attend-ed by this writer was an ICC symposium at the luxuriousBiltmore Hotel in Los Angeles on February 26,1998. The CFRIeadership was obvious. The moderator of the program was Dr.Edwin M. Smith (CFR), professor of international law at theUniversity of Southern California and formerly an appointee tothe U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency by PresidentClinton (CFR). The main speaker for the program wasAmbassador Scheffer (CFR), formerly an adjunct professor ofinternational law at Georgetown lJniversity Law Center,President Clinton's alma mater. The program was sponsored bythe United Nations Association; the World FederalistAssociation; Amnesty International; the American Civil LibertiesUnion; the American Bar Association; Friends of the UnitedNations; B'nai Brith; and the law firms of Gibson, Dunn, andCrutcher, and Milbank, TWeed, Hadley, and McCloy. CFR mem-bers play prominent, if not dominant, leadership roles in all ofthese organizations.

These individuals and organizations are engaged in whatProfessor George C. Lodge (CFR) calls "quietly assembling glob-al arrangements" and "shaping a consensus." Lodge, who is aprofessor at the Harvard Business School and a trustee of theCarnegie Endowment for International Peace, writes in his 1995book, Managing Globalization in the ASe of Interdependence,that there are "energetic and creative individuals in government,interest groups, and corporations [who] are quietly assemblingglobal arrangements to deal with crises and tensions. For themost part, they work outside of legislatures and parliaments and

L43

Tnp UNrrnn Nerrows Expospo

are screened from the glare of the media in order to find commoninterests, shape a consensus, and persuade those with power tochange."20

Professor Thomas R. Dye of Florida State University describedthis same "consensus shaping" process many years earlier in his1976 book Who's Running America? Dye noted that the CFR andits related "policy-planning groups are central coordinatingpoints in the entire elite policy-making process." He went on todescribe how they function:

They bring together people at the top ofthe corporate and frnan-cial institutions, the universities, the foundations, the mass media,the powerful law frrms, the top intellectuals, and influential figuresin the government. They review the relevant university- and foun-dation-supported research on topics of interest, and more impor-tantly they try to reach a consensus about what action should betaken on national problems under study. Their goal is to developaction recommendations - explicit policies or programs designedto resolve or ameliorate national problems. At the same time, theyendeavor to build consensus among corporate, financial, university,civic, intellectual, and government leaders around major policydirections. 21 [Emphasis in original.]

The Proposed ICCThe proposed ICC has proceeded through this process, and hasgone from "action recommendation" to "consensus" to (almost)full realization. The ICC is breathtakingly audacious on manycounts but the most amazingly brazen claim, and one unprece-dented even for so outrageous an outfit as the United Nations, isthe assertion by the UN that once the Rome Statute is ratified by60 countries (a completely arbitrarily selected number, by theway: totals ranging from 30 to 90 were considered), the newlyestablished court will then have compulsory jurisdiction over allcountries, even those that refuse to ratify it. This is, ofcourse, arevolutionary and flagrant violation of the most fundamentalprinciple of treaty law, namely, that a treaty is an agreement that

744

THr UN's INrBnNruoNer- Counr op Cnrunqers

is binding only upon those who are party to the treaty. Yet theICC zealots had no qualms of conscience in repeatedly and pious-ly invoking "the rule of law" to advance their totally lawless pro-posal.

By December 31, 2000, when President Clinton signed the ICCtreaty, 27 nations had ratifred the document, and the court'sadvocates were predicting that the requisite 60 ratifrcationswould be obtained by 2002. The new court is to be headquarteredin The Hague, Netherlands, which is already host to the WorldCourt, the UN tribunal that was set up in 1945 to try casesbetween nations. The new ICC would try indiuiduals who areaccused of violating international laws.

Dr. Charles Rice, professor of law at Notre Dame University,has termed the ICC "a monster," both in concept and reality, not-ing that it effectively "repudiates the Constitution, the BiIl ofRights, and the Declaration of Independence and cancels the 4thof JuIy." "In our system," Professor Rice explains, "law is sup-posed to be a rule ofreason which, in a sense, controls the stateand compels the state to operate under thelaw."z2 But the super-jurisdictional ICC, he points out, has no legitimate basis for itsclaimed authority, no protections against abuses, no accountabil-ity, and virtually no limits to its jurisdiction. 'I[hat are the lim-its on the ICC?" he asks, and then answers, "There are none. It'sinsane!" 23

What do esteemed legal scholars like Professor Rice find somonstrous about the ICC? Let's take a look at the kinds of crimesthe new ICC would claim jurisdiction over, and then brieflyexamine the structure and procedures of the court as laid out inthe Rome Statute.

The 166-page Rome Statute claims universal jurisdiction forthe ICC to try individuals charged with genocide, war crimes,crimes against humanity, and aggression, anywhere on earth. Inthe frrst place, these four ucore' crimes are so vaguely definedand were so contentiously debated at the Rome summit that noreasonable claim to consensus can be made concerning even thedefinition of these crimes, which is the most basic requirement

t45

Tno UNrrpo NatIoNs Exposno

for just laws. Which means the defrnition of the crimes will beleft completely to the arbitrary interpretation of the ICC judges.(In the case of the crime of "aggression," no defrnition was evenincluded in the statute.)24

But the severe defrnitional problems associated with thesefour "core crimes" don't even begin to hint at the nightmarishpossibilities that would be unleashed under a global ICC system.First of all, there is no question that, once formally established,many other additional "crimes" will be added to the ICC's juris-diction. We already have promises on that score from thedrafters of the Rome Statute.

In 1993, Connecticut Senator Christopher Dodd (CFR) intro-duced a resolution calling for the establishment of the ICC tocombat "unlalvful acts such as war crimes, genocide, aggression,terrorism, drug traffrcking, money laundering, and other crimesof an international character."2s Mikhail Gorbachev and otherone-world luminaries have called for adding "ecological crimes"to the jurisdiction of the ICC.26 At the Rome ICC Summit, manydelegates insisted that these and a vast array of other crimes -piracy, child pornography, kidnapping, political assassination,religious persecution, discrimination based on sexual orienta-tion, etc. - be included. The delegates were repeatedly assuredby the Summit leaders that these could be added later, but weretold they should not jeopardize the establishing of the ICC byinsisting on inclusion of all these other crimes at the beginning.

So, as if an ICC with global jurisdiction over the four "corecrimes" were not bad enough, the dials have been preset for avast expansion of court jurisdiction. But what about the ICC sys-tem itselfl Some of the most egregious threats that are built intothe system include:

o No right to trial by jury.o No right to a speedy trial.o Judges, prosecutors, and counsel drawn from murderous total-

itarian and authoritarian regimes with juridical views com-pletely at odds with Western concepts of law and justice and

t46

TsB UN's INrrnNerroNal Courr or Cnrunqers

specifrcally hateful of America and Americans.o No appeal of an ICC decision, except to the same ICC courb.o A person convicted under the ICC may be sentenced to prison

anywhere in the world the ICC chooses.o An ICC prosecutor may decide to bring charges against an

individual based upon accusations provided by NGOs, such asthe ACLU, the Environmental Defense Fund, the NationalGay and Lesbian Task Force, etc.

In other words, under an ICC regime, an American citizen,whether in the United States or abroad, could be accused of acrime by a member of some militant group, then indicted, extra-dited, tried, and convicted by prosecutors andjudges from NorthKorea, Zambia, Mongolia, China, Iraq, Cuba, Tirrkey, or Russia.And then sentenced to serve time at some undisclosed prison inZimbabwe, Kosovo, Albania, Cambodia, or Algeria.

U.S. Leaders Suppo'rt ICCAny reasonable American quickly realizes that Professor Ricewas indeed accurate in describing the proposed ICC regime as "amonster." And therein lies much of our problem: AverageAmericans cannot conceive that anything so patently absurd andobviously injurious to American interests could ever be adoptedby our elected leaders. Besides, they reason, even if the U.S.Senate ratifies the ICC statute, the U.S. government wouldnever allow wild abuses of the ICC against American citizens.And, as the U.S. is indisputably the most powerful nation onearth, we have no reason to fear that the ICC could force itsjurisdiction on us in any case harmful to our interests.

But, as we pointed out in Chapter 1, depending on U.S. courtsand elected officials to guard against abuses under a UN regimeis a dangerously misplaced hope. Many of them are already onrecord as favoring global institutions with legislative, executive,and judicial powers that could override U.S. sovereignty andsupersede our constitutional checks and balances.

Every American should take note of the fact that the primary

147

Tns UNrrEo Nauows Exposno

objection posed by U.S. Ambassador David Scheffer (CFR) andthe U.S. State Department at the ICC Summit was the concernthat U.S. Armed Forces personnel serving abroad might stand indanger of being accused of war crimes under the ICC statute.2TThis is a very real concern, of course, but far from the only ormost important concern. The official U.S. position appears to bethat if this one major area of concern can be addressed with someexemption or written assurance, then the U.S. could live with theICC - all in the interest of showing U.S. respect for the "rule oflaw" worldwide.

This is like leaders of a church girls camp agreeing to allow theLeague of Reformed Rapists to run their camp - as long as theLeague provides written certificates attesting to the reform of itsmembers and guarantees that the "ex-rapists" will not forcethemselves on girls under, say, 13 years of age. Or police officialsagreeing to merge with the Mafia in a "joint crime-frghtingeffort," as long as Mafi.a dons agree to have their extortionsquads stop breaking the legs ofshopkeepers (for a few weeks, atleast) and to nix the use of dum-dum bullets by their hit men.

It ought to be obvious to all that you don't establish justice andfight crime by inviting the worst criminals and terrorists to jointhe prosecution, sit on the judiciary, and staff the police. Yet thatis precisely what the ICC would do.

And America's opinion cartel is more than ready to accept thismonstrosity. The main organs of the CFR-dominated media (NeruYork Times,Washington Post,ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, etc.) havesupported the ICC. The massive NGO rent-a-mob, from radicalenviros to so-called human rights activists, are eagerly pushingthis agenda. That is to be expected.

However, what should be most alarming to Americans is thatmany of our top offrcials - together with their co-conspirators in

the whole movement to subject the United States to internation-al jurisdiction under the ICC. As mentioned in Chapter 1, mem-bers of the U.S. Supreme Court have already stated that in the21st century they will be relying on other international sources

148

Trm UN's INTgp.xanoNal Counr or Cmunqars

for their decisions.2s Many ofAmerica's leading law journals and"legal authorities" have adopted an "internationalist" view ofthelaw which holds that U.S. law must yield to wider "global legalmandates."

The federal executive branch has intervened several times instate criminal matters at the behest of the tlN. In November1998, U.S. Secretary- of State Madeleine Albright (CFR) urgedthe state of Texas to yield to a World Court decision and theappeals of"global civil society''and overturn the death penalty inthe case of Joseph Stanley Faulder.2e This U.S. concession wasan important part of the Insiders' calculated plan gradually toconcede U.S. sovereign jurisdiction in criminal matters. This isnot merely a grab for power by UN globocrats, third-wor1d dicta-tors, Communist commissars, and. fuzzy-headed Marxist aca-demics; it is a colossal grab for global judicial power by one-worldvotaries within our own government and other centers of powerin our society.

A Global ConstabularyAnd, naturally, it doesn't stop with an ICC. A global judiciarypresupposes a global constabulary, both to arrest accused "crim-inals" and to enforce the Court's rulings. Thus the same PrattHouse thought cartel that has brought us the ICC monster ispushing hard for an international police corps. Writing inForeign Affairs in 1997, New York University professor of lawTheodor Meron (CFR) told his one-world comrades that, "fromnow on, international criminal tribunals must be more effective-ly supported by police power." Professor Meron continued:

Just as there can be no national justice without a police force,there can be no effective international justice without arrests, sub-poenas, investigations, and a reliable enforcement mechanism. Theinternational community's inability to create such a mechanism,whether for ad hoc criminal tribunals or for the proposed interna-tional criminal court, threatens all efforts to create a system ofinternational criminal justice. But we must not give up in despair.s0

L49

Tlre Urrrpo Nmroxs Expospn

In December 2000, senior government officials from more than150 countries converged on Palermo, the capital of Sicily, for aLIN conference ostensibly aimed at stepping up the global fightagainst "transnational organized crime." The event, led by UNSecretary-General KofiAnnan and UN Under Secretary-GeneralPino Arlacchi, featured 20 heads of government and unveiled anew IIN convention against the scourge of organized crime.

Mr. Arlacchi, the LIiI's top globocop and the driving forcebehind the gathering, has been lionized by the Establishmentmedia as "the world's mafia buster." Reputedly a top expert onthe Sicilian Mafia, Arlacchi has been criticized by others who dis-pute his exaggerated and premature claims of victory over themob. "To talk of the death of the Mafia is unwise - it is justsleeping,"3l said Maria Falcone, in a report by The DailyTelegraph of London. Miss Falcone, sister of famed anti-Mafiainvestigator Giovanni Falcone, who was assassinated by a Mafiabomb in 1992, says, "How can you say that the Mafia is overwhen some of the biggest bosses, including the biggest, BernardoProvenzano, are still atlirge?"32

Good question. Even more important questions concern theLIN's direct and indirect roles in helping establish and expandthe global crime syndicates. Over the past decade, for instance,tens of billions of dollars that the IMF has pumped into Russiahave been funneled into the Russian Mafia, fueling the massivegrowth of this ruthless criminal behemoth, which the IIN nowpoints to as a prime target of its current crusade.*

At best, this would be evidence of gross incompetence. But anyreasonably intelligent analysis of the available evidence pointsdirectly to conspiracy by the world government advocates to cre-ate the problem in order to justifr the "solution," which, as usual,involves the transfer of more power to the UN.

*See the following articles from The New American: "Crime Fighters Converge,"August 22, L994; "G-Men Going Global?" January 23,1995; "Enemy Within theGates" and "Russian Mafia: Organized Crime is Big Business for the KGB,"February 19, 1996; "Russia's Global Crime Cartel," May 27,1996; "Drug War onthe West," April 10, 2000 at www.thenewamerican.com,focus/russia./.

150

Trm UN's INTSRNATIoNAL Courr or CnnarxaLs

Of course, by any reasonable standard, we would have toacknowledge that many, if not most, of the regimes that comprisethe UN General Assembly are themselves criminal enterprises,thugocracies in which the cleverest and most ruthless thugshave clawed their ways to the top. Certainly that is the case asregards such "respectable" UN member states as Russia, China,Belarus, Ilkraine, Yugoslavia, Montenegro, Albania, Georgia,Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, Zimbabwe, and dozens of otherregimes where the organized crime cartels are mere extensionsof the governments'police-state apparatuses. The UN has servedwell to cover the official criminal dealings of these governments,especially the central roles played by the Communist regimes ofRussia, China, and Cuba over the past three decades in directingand overseeing the largest narcotics operations in the world.*

Mr. Arlacchi, as the LIN's head of drug control and crime pre-vention, has been a key player in providing this cover to thecriminal regimes involved. Now, according to Arlacchi, the UNmust be empowered to deal with the global crime "crisis." One ofthe UN's Palermo propbsals calls for the creation of a IIN fund tohelp poorer states fight the crime syndicates. "This is the newIIN," said Arlacchi, "We are tryrng to create the UN of thefuture." 33

The would-be globocops also insist that since organized crimeis now a "transnational phenomenon,' the nations of the worldmust "harmottize" their criminal codes and crime-fighting meth-ods and efforts. "What we are tryrng to do here is set some stronguniversal standards for the fight against crime," said Arlacchi atthe Palermo conference. "If we don't do that then criminals sim-ply move their headquarters from those countries that are fight-ing the problem to those that aren't." 34

In this, Arlacchi is parroting the Establishment party line thatthe CFR brain trust began promoting in earnest during the

*See: Joseph Douglass, Red Cocaine: The Drugging of America and the West(1999). Also the following articles fuom The New American: "Danger! KI"A in theUSA," May 24, 1999; "Irlarco-Tbrrorism: Drug War on the West," and "I'{arco-Dollarization," April 10, 2000, at wwwthenewamerican. com/focus/drugs/.

151

Tnr UNrruo Nerroxs Expospo

1990s. Foreign Affairs has been the lead conduit, as usual.Tlrpical is this offering from CFR factotum Jessica T. Mathews inthe journal's January/February 1997 issue: "Globalized crime isa security threat that neither police'nor the military - thestate's traditional responses - can meet. Controlling it wiltrequire states to pool their efforts and to establish unprecedent-ed cooperation ... thereby compromising two cherished sovereignroles. Ifstates fail, ifcriininal groups can continue to take advan-tage ofporous borders and transnational financial spaces whilegovernments are limited to acting within their own territory,crime will have the winning edgg."es

Organized crime isn't the only excuse the one-worlders havefor grabbing global police powers; terrorism is another. Writingin the Summer 2000 issue of Foreign Policy (the CarnegieEndowment's sister journal to the CFR's ForeignAffalrs), RobertWright opined: "The most compelling incentive for broader anddeeper supranational governance may come from terrorism andcrime.... Policing will increasingly need to be a cooperative inter-national venture, and increments of national sovereignty willhave to be surrendered."s6

Similar paeans to global policing in law journals, Iaw enforce-ment periodicals, and academic publications have been prepar-ing the legal community, the law enforcement community, politicians, and opinion molders for this planned transformation of theUN into a planetary "Globocop."

Thus we have counterparts to the Palermo conference and theIIN crime convention purporting to offer solutions to the problemof terrorism. Which, again, would be laughable, except that thematter is so deadly serious. For, as in the case of organizedcrime, the member regimes of the UN who piously intone of theneed to combat terrorism are some of the major promoters andsponsors of terrorist groups worldwide. Those prime sponsorsinclude: Russia, China, Cuba, Syria, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Algeria,North Korea - to name a few.

The Insider-Communist cabal is accelerating the drive toinstall their planned system of global injustice. They intend to

t52

Tus IIN's INrsRNAroNar, Counr or CrururNlrs

control not only the judges and the courts but also the prosecu-tors and the police. If we allow them to succeed, we will soon beshackled in a state of affairs too horrible to imagine: a globalSulag in which the most vicious crirhinals are the jailers.

But now that Bill Clinton is out of the White House, we don'thave to worry on this score, right? We wish that were so; unfor-tunately it isn't. The Bush administration has been less thancomforting on this issue. In an October 12,2000 meeting hostedby the Council on Foreign Relations, CFR member CondoleezzaRice - who was then George W. Bush's foreign policy advisor -was asked whether a Bush administration would support theICC. Dr. Rice replied, in part: "Governor Bush has not yet takena position on the tICCl. I will tell you that I think there are con-cerns for a country like the United States.... I was deeply dis-turbed that someone would think it necessary to investigatewhether NATO had committed war crimes in the bombing ofKosovo."S7 In other words, she was repeating for CFR Team Bthe same "red herringl issue that Mr. Scheffer offered as anobjection for CFR Team A. The plan, obviously, is for this falseissue to be resolved as a way to soften U.S. opposition to the ICC.Perhaps NATO troops will be given immunity from ICC prosecu-tion in exchange for accepting prominent roles as ICCttenforcers."

It should be plain that the ICC cannot be made acceptable byany amending or reforming. It is not just flawed around theedges but at the very core. It is not wrongjust in particulars, butin principle.

It must be opposed and rejected en toto. We must heed JamesMadison who warned:

. .. it is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liber-ties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of citizens,and one of [the] noblest characteristics of the late Revolution. Thefreemen of America did not wait till usurped power had strength-ened itself by exercise and entangled the question in precedents.They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoided

153

ftm Umtm N.nrrioNs EreosED

the consequences by ileuying the principle. Wetevere this leesoatoo mueh, soon to forget it.38 :

Tlre ICC would be a disaster ev-en if itwere proposed by hon-orabl,e men. But as the proposed agency of a eriminal conspiracyagainst freedom and justice, it should be rejected out of hand.

L54

Chapter 9Civilian Disarmament

When the Cambrian measures u)ere forming, Theypromised perpetual pedce.

They swore, if we gaue them our weaponq that the wars ofthe tribes would ceq,se.

But when we disarmed They sold us and deliuered usbound to our foe,

And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to theDeuil you knou)."L

- Rudyard Kipling,"The Gods of the Copybook Headings"

I am a United Nations fighting person.... I would fire uponU.S. citizens who refuse or resist confi.scation of firearmsbanned by the U.S. gouernrnent.z

- from a "CombatArms Surve/ grven to members ofthe United States Marine Corps, 1994

It's high time to gun down the 2nd Amendment.... Americawill continue to haue its own uersions of the killing fi.elds aslong as there are millions of handguns floating around wait-ing for another psychopath with a grudge.s

- Walter Shapiro, USA Today columnist,anti-gun diatribe for Septembet 17,1999

I think the country has long been ready to restrict the useof guns ... and now I think we're prepared to get rid of thedamned things entirely - the handguns, the semis and theautomatics.a

- Roger Rosenblatt essay in Time, Arugttst 9, 1999

155

Tnp UNrroo NeuoNs Eleosno

The incredibly audacious schemes for national disarmament setforth in Freedom From War, Blueprint for the Peace Race, theGorbachev-CFR Global Security Project, and other programs dis-cussed in Chapter 2 are transparerlt plots to subject all thenations of the world, including the United States of America, toa global military-police state under an empowered UnitedNations. This is perfectly clear from any reasonable reading ofthe documents themselves.

Please understand this critically important point: These pro-posals do not advocate "world disarmament," as is generally sup-posed, based on the "peace" rhetoric used to promote them.Instead they propose to transfer world armaments from thenation states to the global superstate envisioned by the one-world Insiders and their Communist-socialist cohorts.

This represents the most gigantic, naked grab for power thisworld has ever seen. No previous world power or dictator hasever enjoyed such vast, unchecked power. Not Napoleon orQueen Elizabeth; not Stalin, Mao, or Hitler.

These proposals amount to giant "trust me" schemes that areso facially fraudulent as to be ludicrous. They could be comparedto the situation in which city officials get together with Mafiakingpins and announce that they are going to join forces to frghtthe crime and violence that are ripping the community apart.Under any circumstances, such a proposal would rightly beviewed as absurdly dangerous and a betrayal of office by thoseelected to uphold justice. The sanity and integrity of the officialsinvolved would be immediately suspect.

However, there would be no lingering doubts about integrity ifit became known to citizens that the mayor is involved in amulti-million dollar business deal with a mafia-owned dummycorporation, the police chief's election campaign is beingfinanced by mob-controlled unions, the district attorney's formerlaw firm (in which his wife and brother are still partners) is themain counsel for the chief mafra don, and all the top judges aredriving Rolls Royces and springing gangsters from jail, on theflimsiest of excuses, faster than they can be apprehended. This

156

Crulrax DrsenueupNr

would especially be the case if the officials involved are so fla-grantly arrogant that they are regularly seen socializing in pub-lic with leading mafrosi and are regular "guests" at gang-ownedrestaurants, brothels, and casinos. '

Under such circumstances, only the most dimwitted or willful-ly blind would fail to see that the city is facing a campaign of sys-temic corruption conceived and orchestrated by a criminal con-spiracy. And if the police chief appoints a notorious mob hit-man,with an arrest record as long as his arm, to head a "task force" ofconvicted felons to go about the city disarming all the citizens -in the interest ofpeace and security, ofcourse - it should thenbe crystal clear that the good citizens had better organize imme-diately and sweep the criminals from office, if they hope to haveany chance of saving themselves and their community. In theface of such overwhelming evidence, only total fools, completecowards, or corrupt souls who had alreadyjoined the conspiracywould fail to heed the call to battle.

We are, almost literally, at that very point today. Not only arethe one-world Insiders pushing relentlessly for national disar-mament, but for individual disarmament as well. For manydecades the same globalists who have lobbied ceaselessly forempowering the UN - the Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie foun-dations, the CFR, etc. - have carried on a continuous campaignagainst personal ownership of firearms.

Who is really calling the tunes and setting the agenda for thegun control "citizens network"? As usual, if you really want toknow, follow the money. Handgun Control Incorporated, theNational Council for a Responsible Firearms Policy, the Centerto Prevent Handgun Violence, the ACLU, the National Council ofChurches, and other groups that have led this campaign havebeen dependent upon these Insider feed troughs for funding. Andthey have depended on the CFR-dominated media cartel to dis-seminate their disinformation, while demonizing guns, gun own-ers, and all organized resistance to personal disarmament.

However, what even most of the organized gun-rights forceshave failed to realize until very recently - and what some are

r57

TIru UNrrno NerroNs Exposno

still oblivious to - is the fact that the program for disarming theindividual private citizen, depriving him of his means of self-defense, is directly tied to the United Nations and the programfor national disarmament. The Second Amendment to the U.S.Constitution, which guarantees "the right of the people to keepand bear arms, shall not be infringed," has to go. Free peoplewith the means to defend themselves are viewed by the UnitedNations as a threat to opeace."

They Want Your GulnThe same militant anti-gun organizations that are pressing forever more restrictive limitations on private gun ownership haveobtained NGO status at the UN and have been busy during mostof the 1990s developing the UN's gun control plans. And thoughtheir opening wedge cleverly suggests that they are targeting"illicit" civilian possession of "milita4y'' weapons, it is clear thattheir real agenda is outright confiscation of all civilian-ownedfirearms, including handguns, rifles, and shotguns.*

In May 2000, hordes of NGO activists converged on New YorkCity to attend the UN "Millennium Forum," a giant rehearsalsession to prepare the global rent-a-mob for its role as the voiceof "civil societS/ at the upcoming "main event," the MillenniumSummit of world leaders, which would be gathering at the UN inSeptember. At their May confab, the NGO leaders produced theirMillennium ForumAction Plan which, among other things, callson the IIN "to expand the United Nations Arms Registeq includ-ing specific names of arms producers and traders, in order toshow production and sale of small arrrus and light weapons." 5

(Emphasis added.)For those familiar with the UN's record over the past several

years in promoting an increasingly hostile attitude toward indi-vidual private ownership of firearms, this is a clear call for accel-erated pressure on national governments to ratchet up their guncontrol efforts at all levels. WeIl aware of Mao Zedongls dictumthat "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun," the one-world revolutionaries are accelerating their pressure from above

158

CruneN DrsenuavrPnr

and below to restrict (and eventually outlaw) private ownershipof firearms and concentrate all power in the hands of govern-ment.

In his report to the heads of state.attending the MillenniumSummit, entitled We the Peoples: The Role of the United Nationsin the 21st century, secretary-General Kofi Annan asserts that

xsome ofthe most rabid anti-gun propagandists have occasionally vindicatetl thefears of freedom-loving Americans by admitting that their attacks on handgunsor "assault weapons" are merely incremental steps in a piecemeal onslaught onall private firearm ownership' TIne Washington Post, for example, in an August19, 1965 editorial, stated: "We are inclined to think that every firearm in thehands of anyone who is not a law enforcement officer constitutes an incitementto violence." 6 The Post has given no evidence of having changed this totalitarianbent in the years since. Likewise, Joyner sims, deputy commissioner for theFlorida state Health Department, offered this gem, as quoted by thie chicagoTfibune, on October 31, 1993: "The goal is an ultimate ban on all guns, but wealso have to take a step at a time and go for limited access first. Lawmakers arescared to cleath of this issue. If we create anger and outrage on a national level,it would really help the local folks'" 7

Nelson T. Shields, who preceded sarah Brady as chairman of HandgunControl, Inc., was quoted in The New Yorker, J:uly 26, t976, as saying: "We'regoing to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily ... going

io be very modest.... And the final problem is to make the possession of all 1oa..d'

guns ancl oll hanilgun ammunition - except for the military' policemen, licensedsecurity guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors - totallyillegal."8 (Emphasis in original.) The.Los Angeles Times opined, in an eilitorialfor November 8, 1993, that "we must severely constrict if not virtually end theprivate possession of guns...' This country does^not need one more gun in circu-iation; in fact, it needs about 200 million less."9 Michael K. Beartl, president ofthe coalition to stop Gun violence, made this admission in an interview: "ourgoal is to not allow anybody to buy a handgun.... The stated goal of the most

active supporters of restrictions, aside from the 'moderate' goals they oftenespouse in the heat oflegislative battle, is to abolish gun ownership totally."1OThe campaign to disarm Arnerican citizens has intensified in recent years, risingto near hysteria following the columbine school shootings. Ttre ultimate objectiveof this media-driven campaign was given full voice by "comedienne" Rosie

o,Donnell, who declared on her nationally televised talk show ofApril 21, 1999:

"I dont care if you want to hunt, I don't care if you think it's your right. I say,,sorry., It is 1999. We have had enough as a nation. You are not allowed to own agun, and if you do own a gun I think you should go to prison' " 11

159

Tno UNrrnn NrrroNs Exposro

"small arms proliferation is not merely a security issue; it is alsoan issue of human rights and development." 12 He went on:

Even if all arms transfers could be eliminated, however, theproblem posed by the many millions of illicitly held small armsalready in circulation in the world's war zones would remain....Controlling the proliferation ofillicit weapons is a necessary firststep towards the non-ploliferation of small arms. These weaponsmust be brought under the control of states....13

Further, he announced, "The United Nations is convening aconference on the illicit trade in small arms and light weapons in?OOL."' 14 NGO activists and government delegates alike havemade it very clear in disarmament forums already held by theUN that virtually all private ownership is considered illicit.

The first notice most Americans received concerning the I-INplan for targeting frrearms came on May 24,1994, when theyopened their newspapers to a story byAssociated Press reporterCharles J. Hanley on a n'ew IIN stealth gun control initiative forthe whole world. The AP article reported:

So quietly that even the gun lobby hasn't noticed, the UnitedNations is beginning to set its sights on global gun control.

The U.N. Disarmament Commission has adopted a workingpaper, a basis for future debate, that proposes tighter controls onthe gun trade in the United States and other member nations as away of combating international arms trafficking. 15

That same day, the Washington Times, in an article entitled"U.S. OKs study of U.N. gun control," reported:

The Clinton administration has agreed. to participate in a dis-cussion of ways for the United Nations to control the manufactureofguns and their sales to civilians.

This represents the frrst U.N. effort to foster regulation of themulti-billion-dollar trade in small arms....

The U.N. working paper declares that governments individually

160

Crur,reN DrsannanunNt

are "impotent" to deal with global arms trafficking and proposes"harrronization" of gun control standards around the world tomake tra{frcking easier to spot and prevent.

"The arrrs permitted for civilian use r.. should be subject to con-trols at all points in the chain, from production and/or acquisitionup to the time they are sold to an individual. From then on theyshould remain subject to monitoring and control," the paper says.

Any "harmonizatiori" would inevitably mean tightening controlson the loosely regulated U.S. gun business....16

Concerning the above story, we should note, first of all, theploy commonly used in selling UN schemes, which invariablyinvolves porbraying the current U.S. Insider administration(whether Republican or Democrat) as the coy and reluctant lover.Thus it is reported that "the Clinton administration has agreedto participate" in the UN gun grab conference, implying thatClinton and his one-world CFR crew running the executivebranch of the most powerful country in the world are yielding toreason and the entreaties of the "world community."

Behind-the-Scenes LeadershipIn truth, the Clinton administration was working furiouslybehind the scenes l.eading the UN effort. This has been standardprocedure, in both Republican and Democrat administrations,since World War II. The Insider-chosen occupant of the WhiteHouse feigns opposition to the UN treaty, or at least expresses"grave concern" about some clause or provision (as, for instance,in the case of the Genocide Convention, the Law of the SeaT?eaty, or the treaty for an International Criminal Court), sothat when the administration embraces the treaty during thefrnal push for ratification, we are supposed to be satisfied that allof our concerns have been addressed by a president who is look-ing out for American interests.

U.S. involvement in the UN gun control plot came long beforethe Clinton administration, but, in the words of HarlanCleveland, that involvement has been carried out "mostly below

161

Tnn Ulurro Nerrows E:rpospo

the surface of public attention."* Recall that the L96L FreedomFrom War plan is a three-stage program for the complete dis-arming of nation states and the simultaneots arming of theUnited Nations. In its own words, Freedom From War states:

In Stage III progressive controlled disarmament ... would pro-

*It quickly became apparent that the Insiders intended that the tIN gu:r-grabconference not rise above "the surface of public attention." Considering this cam-paign's brazen assault on the U.S. Constitution, American national sovereignty,and the fundamental human right to self-defense, it is understandable that boththe UN and the Clinton administration would want to keep this subversive ini-tiative as quiet as possible and would be reluctant to discuss it. Officials at theU.S. State Department and the UN rebuffed repeated attempts by this writer toobtain a copy ofthe working paper or to discuss it in detail. First we were toldthat the AP an.d. Washington Times reports were erroneous and exaggerated, andthat concern was overblown. Unconvinced, we insisted we would like to judge forourselves by examining the document.

At the State Department, after several office transfers, we were informed thatAmbassador Stephen Ledogar, the U.S. representative on the DisarrnamentCommission, was out of the c6untry and no one else knew how to obtain a copyof the document. At the lIN, after six departmental transfers, we reached thedirector of the UN Disarmament Commission, a Mr. Sohrab Kheradi, whoinformed us that the report would not be released until mid-July (1994).However, under our persistent entreaties, Mr. Kheradi agreed that he wouldarange fot The New American to receive a pre-release copy forthwith. Dayspassed, but still no working paper. More calls to the UN and more promises tosend the report. Weeks passed. Finally, we reached the Secretary of theDisarmament Commission himself, Mr. Kuo-chung Lin, who had been away onvacation. Mr. Lin assured us that the concerns stir:red by initial news coverage ofthe working paper were "based on a misunderstanding" ofthe nature and signif-icance of the report. "Ttris is only the report of the chairman of the WorkingGroup for drscussion over t}rre next two years," he explained. "It doesn't establishany policy or have any binding effect." But is it not true, we asked, that its pur-pose is to bring about the establishment of policy that will have "binding effect"?No, no, he laughed. Its purpose is simply to encourage "debate and discussion." 17

Of course, as a IIN official from Communist China, where debate and discus-sion can land you in prison, and where unarmed dissenters are unceremoniouslysquashed beneath the tracks of army tan-ks, Mr. Lin's cavalier attitude towardattacks on the Second Amendment is understandable, even expected. It is theattitudes and actions of American officials, who collude with the likes of ComradeLin, that are far more troubling.

t62

Crur,reN DlsmueunNt

ceed to a point where no Etate would haue the military power to

challenge the progressiuely strengthened U.N. Peace Force.-..The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for

those agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N' Peace

Force and those required to maintain internal ordet. All otherarmaments would, be d.estroyed. or conuerted, to peaceful purpotes'Lg

[Emphasis added.]

"All other armaments would be destroyed." Notice that no pro-vision is made to exempt aflns owned by private citizens' Aninnocent oversight? Hardly. The LIN itself, as we've already seen,is hardly sympathetic to private gun ownership. That's to beexpected, since the Insiders who designed it and support it, alongwith all of the Communist regimes and most of the non-Communist countries who make up the UN membership, sharea statist hostility toward civilian possession of arms' Anyonefamiliar with the IIN's history in this matter, as weII as the his-tory ofits legal interpretation oftreaties, will recognize that pri-vate arms are targeted for destruction under the term "all otherarmaments." 'We can expect that this terminolory in FreedomFrom War and other agreements, conventions, and treaties willbe cited as legally requiring the U.S. to disarm its civilian popu-lation. All under the guise of following "the rule of law."

To initiate the Freedom From War program, PresidentKennedy signed Public Law 87-297 (H.R. 9118), creating theUnited States Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (ACDA)'According to that legislation, "as used in this Act, the terms'arms control' and'disarmament' mean'the identification, verifr-cation, inspection, limitation, control, reduction, or elimination,of armed forces arrd armaments of all kinds under internationalagreement ... to establish on effectiue system of internationalcontrol...."' le (Emphasis added.)

In its "Second Annual Report to Congress" (February 1963),the ACDA presented a simple glaphic depiction (see top of nextpage) demonstrating its proposed three-stage disarmamentprocess.2o Observe that in Stage III, as explained in Freedom

163

Tnp UNrrpo NlrroNs Exposno

This diagram appeared in the 1963 "Second Annual Report to Gongress,,of the U.S. Arms Gontrol and llisamament Agency.

From War arl.d Bluepriit for the Peace Race, the U.S. armedforces cease to exist and only "internal security forces" - i.e.those to be used against American citizens - are permitted. Ofcourse, under this scheme, the UN "peacekeeping machinery"wiII be superior to the "internal security forces" and will be ableto dictate the "laws" that will be enforced.

Authors of Freedom Frorn WarOffrcial responsibility for developing and initiating the disarma-ment program outlined in Freedom From War goes to PresidentKennedy and his Secretaries of State (Dean Rusk) and Defense(Robert S. McNamara), both of whom were members of the CFR.The real authors of Freedom From War and Public Law 87-297,however, were John J. McCloy, the chairman of the CFR, andArthur H. Dean, a CFR director - together with ValerianZorirr,their Soviet counterpart. 21

McCIoy, Kennedy's chief disarmament adviser and negotiatorwith the Soviets, entered the Establishment through the WalI

t64

U.S.THREE-STAGEDISARMAMENT PLAN

PEACEKEEPINGMACHINERY

STAGE I

STAGE II

I

STAGE III INTERNAL INTERNALSECURITY SECURITYFORCES FORCES

@IttoU

CrwneN DrsanueunNr

Street law firm of Cravath, Swaine and Moore, and later becamea senior partner at Milbank, Tkeed, Hadley, and McCloy, a firmclosely tied to the Rockefeller family. He served as an AssistantSecretary of War under FDR and as U.S. High Commissioner tooccupied Germany. He headed the World Bank, ChaseManhattan Bank, the Ford Foundation, and, most importantly,from 1953-1970 wa5 chairman of the Council on ForeignRelations. He was an adviser to nine presidents and sat on theboards of directors of many corporations. He and a small groupof CFR confederates "selected" the presidential candidates forboth the Republican and Democrat parties, and then selected thecabinets, ambassadors, and other top appointments of the win-ning contestant.22 Few would dispute journalist RichardRovere's characteization of McCloy in the May 1962 Esquiremagazine as "chairman of the American Establishmer':tt."23

McCloy's blue-chip r6sum6, however, included a few red flags.While serving in the War Department, McCloy approved anorder permitting Comrnunist Party members to become officersin the U.S. Army.2a He defended identified Communist JohnCarter Vincent and supported pro-Communist atomic scientist J.Robert Oppenheimer.25 In 1946, FBI head J. Edgar Hooverwarned President Truman of an "enormous Soviet espionage ringin Washington," and expressed concern over the "pro-Soviet lean-ings" of McCloy, DeanAcheson, andAlger Hiss.26 Hiss, of course,was later exposed as a Soviet agent. He was also a member of theCFR and one of the main architects of the United Nations.

Assisting McCIoy in drafting Freedom From War and thestatute for the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency wasArthur H. Dean.27 Dean was chairman of the U.S. delegation fortwo years to the UN disarmament conferences in Geneva.

A junior partner at Sullivan & Cromwell, Dean became thesenior partner when the prestigious law firm's hsadman, JohnFoster Dulles (a CFR founder), was appointed to filI a vacantSenate seat.28 Dean was also vice-chairman of the Institute ofPacific Relations (IPR), the Communist-run outfit most responsi-ble - together with our State Department - for turning China

165

Tnn Uxrmo NerroNs Expospo

over to the Communists in Lg4g.ze When IpR member AlfredKohlberg tried heroically to expose the treason within IPR, it wasDean who scuttled the investigation.s0 In 1952, the U.S. SenateJudiciary Committee issued a scathingreport on the IpR, citingit as "an instrument of Communist policy, propaganda and mili-tary intelligence."sl The Senate report also concluded:

Members of the small core of officials and staff members whocontrolled IPR were either Communist or pro-Communist....

The effective leadership of the IPR used IPR prestige to promotethe interests of the Soviet Union in the United States....

The IPR was a vehicle used by the Communists to orientateAmerican far eastern policy toward Communist objectives.s2

With the above information in mind, we direct the reader,sattention to The Wise Men, the glowing 1986 hagiography ofMcCloy and five of his globalist CFR cohorts, authored by WalterIsaacson (CFR) and Evan Thomas (CFR).33 This one-worldapologia provides many ddmissions against interest, including avery signifrcant photograph on page 605 showing McCloy andSoviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev chest deep in the waters ofKhrushchet's swimming pool, in a warm, comradely embrace,with Khrushchev's arm around McCloy's neck.

So, let us summarize some of the ground we've just covered: TheFreedom FromWar scheme for disarming the U.S. (nationally andindividually) can be traced back directly to a Russian Communist(Valerian Zorn) and two top Pratt House one-worlders with ex-tensive ties to Communist intelligence operations, one of whomcavorted in a swimming pool with the "Butcher of Budapest,,, theCommunist dictator who bellowed at the U.S., "\Me will bury you.,,

Yet Dean and McCloy, with the help of their CFR associates inthe media, passed themselues off as Republicans, antd conserua-tiue, anti-Communist Republicans at that!

Destructive Duo: Clark and SohnStill another important key to understanding the true nature

166

CruLrAN DrsanuxttPxr

and history of the Kennedy-CFR disarmament plan, and its suc-cessor incarnations, is the team of Establishment waII Streetlawyer Grenville clark and Harvard law professor Louis B. Sohn(cFR). John J. McCIoy had been strongly influenced by GrenvilleClark at a military training camp during the summer of 1915'34

clark was a vice president and founder of the United worldFederalists (UWF, which later changed its name to the WorldFederalist Association).Ss The LIWFA /FA, which has been one ofthe most hardcore groups advocating world government, wasactually conceived at a private conference on world Governmentin 1946 at Clark's home in Dublin, New Hampshire'36

"It has been well said," according to Mr. Clark, "that in ourmodern age the obdurate adherence to national sovereignty andnational armed forces represents a form of insanity which may,however, be cured by a species of shock treatment."37 He spelledout that "shock treatment" inWorld Peace Through World Law,a detailed plan for socialist world government through a revisedLIN Charter.s8

This text, co-authored with Professor Sohn and published in1958 by Harvard University Press, is venerated by all "worldorder" advocates. It proposes a global superstate in which a

"world police force" known as the united Nations Peace Forcewould be invested with "a coercive force of overwhelmingpower."3g "This world police force," wrote Clark and Sohn,"would be the orrly military force permitted anywhere in theworld after the process of national disarmament has been com-pleted." a0 (Emphasis in original.)

However, these architects of "world order" would not be satis-fied with a monopoly of military power. They believed that "evenwith the complete elimination of all lnational) military forcesthere would necessarily remain substantial, although strictlylimited and lightly armed, internal police forces and that thesepolice forces, supplemented by civilians armed with sportingrifles and fowling pieces, might conceivably constitute a seriousthreat to a neighboring country in the absence of a well-disci-plined and heavily armed world police."al (Emphasis in original.)

167

THn UNrrno Nerroxs Er<pospo

Thus, Chapter 3, Article 13 of the Clark/Sohn LIN schememandates that "the strength of the internal police forces of anynation shall not exceed two for each 1000 of its population," 42

and Article 14 orders strict controls on the possession of armsand ammunition by police and private citizens:

No nation shall allow the possession by its internal police forcesof any arms or equipment except of the types permitted by the reg-ulations adopted by the General Assembly ... and in no case shallthe number of revolvers and rifles combined exceed one for eachmember of the internal police forces, the number of automatic riflesone for each hundred members of such forces, and the ammunitionsupplies 100 rounds per rifle or revolver and 1,000 rounds perautomatic rifle. No nation shall allow the possession by any publicor private organization or individual of any military equipmentwhatever or of any arms except such small arms as are reasonablyneeded by duly licensed hunters or by duly licensed individuals forpersonal protection. 43

Care to speculate as to how diffrcult it would be under the envi-sioned UN regime to become "duly licensed" for hunting or per-sonal protection? Thy next to impossible, based upon the knownanimus of the one-world elite toward popular ownership offi.rearms, and the established record on this matter of theCommunist, socialist, and authoritarian regimes that constitutethe overwhelming majority in the UN.

The Clark/Sohn plan also would eliminate the "problem" of pri-vate citizens'access to ammunition by providing that "no nationshall produce or allow the production of any explosives exceptinsofar as the General Assembly may authorize...."44 Moreover,"every nation shall obtain a special license from the [IIN]Inspector-General for ... [t]he operation by it or by any public orprivate organization or individual ... engaged in the productionof any light arms, ammunition ... or of tools for any such pro-duction." 45

It also provides that "no nation shall produce or allow the pro-

168

CrulreN DrsenuaurNr

duction of any arn'Ls, weapons or military equipment whateuer, orof tools for such production, except" (emphasis added), and thengoes on to list those few exceptions:.internal police and the tinyminority of "duly Iicensed individuals." a6

In "Annex I" of the ClarUSohn program, we are told: "Finally,this Annex makes provision fot enforcement measures agairustindiuiduals, organizations and nations who may commit viola-tions of the Annex or of any law or regulation enacted thereun-deL"47 (Emphasis added.) And, presaging the InternationalCriminal Court, which would not be formally launched until 40years later (1998), it states: "All penal proceedings against indi-viduals and private organizations would be brought by a newIegal official - the United Nations Attorney-General - to beappointed pursuant to Part D ofAnnex III."48 So, you see, theglobal prosecutor post established by the ICC Statute of Rome in1998 was actually the implementation of the Insider-directedClark/Sohn plan issued 40 years earlier.

And supposing some "individuals, organizations and nations"decide they don't like the emerging tyranny of the globalists anddetermine to defy the "authority" of the new behemoth? For pre-cisely these contingencies t}ne World Peace Through World Lawplan provides that "the United Nations Peace Force shall be reg-ularly provided with the most modern weapons and equipment,"with special provision being made "for the use of nuclearweapons in extreme circumstances." 49

We needn't worry about abuse of such awesome powerbecause the UN "shall in no event employ nuclear weaponsexcept when the GeneralAssembly ... has declared that nothingless ... will suffice to prevent or suppress a serious breach of thepea.ce or a violent and serious defiance of the authority of theUnited Nations."50 (Emphasis added.) Who could ask for betterassurance than that? No need for concrete checks and balanceswhen we have the promises of the one-worlders and the soundjudgment and moral rectitude of the IIN General Assembly toprotect usl

169

Tnp UNrrso NArroNs Eleospo

The Plot ContinuesGrenville Clark passed on to his eternal destination in 1967 butProfessor Sohn has remained actively involved in the "new worldorder" business, writing legal treatises and training new genera-tions of one-world lawyers, Iegislators, judges, and propagan-dists. The current UN drive for civilian disarmament is unmis-takably a continuation of the scheme so methodically scripted byClark and Sohn, adopted as official policy under Freed,om FromWar, and developed in subsequent treaties under successiveadministrations.

In language very similar to that used by Clark and Sohn, theAugust 19, 1999 UN "Report of the Group of GovernmentalExperts on Small Arms" Iists, as weapons to be banned, andultimately confi.scated, "revolvers and self-loading pistols, riflesand carbines, submachine guns, assault rifles and light machine-guns." 51

Furthermore, the 1999 "Experts" document is listed as part ofthe UN's provisional age4da for "general and complete disarma-rr.tet:rt"S2 - a phrase that figures prominently in the texts ofWorld Peace Through World Law, Freedom From Wor, and sub-sequent policies. Suffice it to say the UN has a very literal under-standing of the phrase "general and complete disarmament."

And what if you fail to turn in or register, say, your .22 rifle,your .38 pistol, or your gunpowder and reloading equipment, andyou are charged with unlawful possession of "military equip-ment" under the UN General Assembly's ever-changing regula-tions? The IIN Attorney-General (or his subordinates) will bringcharges and a IIN tribunal will be your judge and jury, Clark andSohn say. And since they anticipate far more "business" than canbe handled by a single court, a whole new globaljudiciary systemmust be put in place:

In order to provide means for the trial ofindividuals accused ofviolating the disarmament provisions of the revised Charter or ofother offenses against the Charter or laws enacted by the GeneralAssembly ... provision is also made for regional United Nations

170

Crur,raN Drsenuamxr

courts, inferior to the International Court of Justice, and for thereview by the International Court of decisions of these regionalcourts.53

Our Global NeighborhoodThe UN is proceeding according to the Clark and Sohn pre-scription - with help from the usual suspects. In 1995, theUN's 50th anniversary yea\ the UN-funded Commission onGlobal Governance (CGG) released Our Global Neighborhood,its much-heralded report for fIN reform.5a But the CGG's recipefor "reform" is in reality a regurgitation of Clark and Sohn'sdeadly brew. Targeting America's heritage of gun ownership,the CGG warned, "Widespread criminalization can threaten thevery functioning of a state. In the United States, the easy avail-ability of weapons goes with a startling level of daily killings.""What is needed," according to the CGG's globo-savants, "isdemilitarization of international society." 55 The reportexplained:

Militarization today not only involves governments spendingmore than necessary to build up their military arsenals. It hasincreasingly become a global societal phenomenon, as witnessed bythe rampant acquisition and use of increasingly lethal weapons bycivilians - whether individuals seeking a means of self-defence,street gangs, criminals, political opposition groups, or terroristorganizations. 56

Yes, in the view of these globalists, the man defending his fam-ily and his home against robbers and gangsters, or the womandefending her person and her virtue against a rapist, have nomore right to a frrearm than do the rapists, robbers, gangbangers, and other vicious predators causing the "widespreadcriminalization" the CGG is decrying. Accordingly, the CGG sta-tists "strongly endorse community initiatives ... to encourage thedisarrring of civilians." 57

The CGG report, remember, was a collaborative effort of top

t7t

Tnn Umrpn NATroNs Exposno

members of the CFR, the UN plutocracy, the European lJnion,the Socialist International and various Communist Parties (seeChapter 2). It prefigured the 1999 UN "Report of the Group ofGovernmental Experts on Small Armsi' which complained bit-terly that "there are wide differences among States [nations] asregards which types of arms are permitted for civilian posses-sion, and as regards the circumstances under which they canlegitimately be owned, carried and used. Such wide variation innational laws raises difficulties for effective regional or interna-tional coordination." 58

Among the proposals adopted by the panel and enthusiastical-ly endorsed by UN Secretary-General KofiAnnan in his forewordto the report are measures aimed at increasing "control over theIegal possession of small arms and light weapons and over theirtransfer," expanding prohibitions on "trade and private owner-ship of small arms and light weapons," and tightening efforts to"control ammunition." 59

The UN Charter bars lJN intervention in "matters which areessentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state," 60 butthe UN, in typical fashion, has been defrning "domestic jurisdic-tion" out of existence. Kofi Annan explained in a September 20,1999 address before the UN General Assembly that "state sover-eignty, in its most basic sense, is being redefined." What is need-ed,Annan continued, is "a new, more broadly defined, more wide-ly conceived defrnition of national interest in the new century[where] the collective interest is the national interest."61 Fourdays later, Annan emphasized that "controlling the easy avail-ability of small arms was a prerequisite for a successful peace-building process,' which is why the United Nations "had playeda leading role in putting the issue of small arms frrmly on theinternational agenda." 62

All of this could, of course, be dismissed as meaningless UNblather - except for the fact that it is fully supported by the U.S.Insiders, including elected officials whom American citizens arenaively counting on to protect us against any encroachmentsfrom the tIN. Kofr Annan emphasizes in his foreword to the

t72

CrvrLrAN DrsanuaupNr

"Report of the Group of Governmental Experts on Small Arms"that it was "prepared, and adopted by consensus" and was theproduct of "unanimity'' among t\e "expert" members of thegroup.63

If we accept Annan's assertion at face value, we can presumethat none ofthe "experts" objected to this full-tilt assault on theright to keep and bear arms. Yet among the "experts" who draft-ed the report was U.S. State Department Senior ForeignAffairsSpecialist Herbert L. Calhoun. And none other than Secretary ofState Madeleine Albright (CFR) told the first-ever UN SecurityCouncil Small Arms Ministerial, on September 24, 1999, that"the United States strongly supports these steps," that we "wel-come the important precedent which the UN has set," and thatthe U.S. would work to "commit to frnishing negotiations on afi.rearms protocol to the UN Transnational Organized CrimeConvention by the end of 2000." 6a

The Orchestrated fii"arma-ent ChoirThe orchestrated "pressure from below" was already buildingsteam by that time. In November 1998, the UNESCO Couriernoted that "the political tides may be changing. An internationalcampaign is now underway with non-governmental organiza-tions of all stripes and colours - disarmament and gun controlgroups along with development and human rights associations inthe North and South - building common ground with the activesupport of governments like Mali, Canada, Norway andJapan." 65 4s in every other case we have seen, this "internation-al campaign" of NGOs is entirely a front for the one-world inter-nationalists, who pay the bills via foundations and government(i.e., taxpayer-funded) grants.

On September 24,1999 Kofi Annan reported to a ministerial-level meeting of the Security Council on small arms: "Themomentum for combating small anns proliferation has also comefrom civil society, which has been increasingly active on thisissue. The establishment early this year of the InternationalAction Network on Small Arms IIANSA] has helped to sharpen

173

Trp Uxrrno NerroNs Expospo

public focus on small arms, which has helped us gain the publicsupport necessary for success."66 IANSA is intended to "providea transnational framework" for the mobilization of a broad citi-zen movement in favor of gun control, aecording to the otganiza-tional goals posted on its website.6T The services IANSA intendsto provide the [IN-Ied global gun control movement include"campaigning and advocacy strategies," "developing culturallyappropriate'message' strategies," "information sharing" amongNGOs, and "constituency building." 68

And where will the funding for this propaganda campaigncome from? IANSA notes on its website that its eight most sig-nificant financial donors include frve government agencies: theBelgian Ministry for Development Cooperation; the SwedishMinistry of Foreign Affairs; the Netherlands Ministry ofForeign Affairs; the United Kingdom Department for Inter-national Development; and the Finnish Ministry of ForeignAIfairs. In other words, this "non-governmental" organizationis purely a front for the disarmament-obsessed totalitarians inthe increasingly militant socialist regimes of the EuropeanUnion.

The UN is putting our tax dollars to effective use in this cam-paign as well. Among other things, it is aggressively pushing itsrecent video, Armed to the Teeth.6e This UN "shockumentar5/ isa brutal, hour-Iong diatribe aimed at convincing the viewer that"small arms" are the cause of all violence, crime, and bloodshedin the world. Replete with gruesome fiIm footage of victims ofcrime and genocide, it relentlessly demonizes firearms andpounds home the message that this carnage will not stop untilcivilian populations are disarmed.

Armed to the Tbeth invests firearms with human-like qualities,so as to more easily and effectively vilifr these targeted instru-ments. 'A killer is on the loose," we are told in the video's open-ing scenes. The "killer," of course, is "small arms," i.e., guns,which are shown over and over in the most menacing ways thatthe video's creators could come up with. We are told that "smallarms are not fussy about the company they keep.... They can

t74

Crur,raN DlsmunupNr

murder indiscriminately. Men and women, young and old, richand poor.' Amidst Hollywood-style edits of sound effects andimages of gore and violence, comes the message: "Humankind isbeginning a new millennium under the sign of the gun, andsmall arms are like uninvited guests who won't leave. Once theytake over a country they are virtually impossible to get rid of."

Yes, according to this UN propaganda, a horde of "small arms'are "taking over" cbuntries. Utilizing dramatic footage fromMozambique, Rwanda, South Africa, Btazil, Kosovo, Albania,Afghanistan, and elsewhere, the video repetitiously hammersthis theme. At the same time, it conspicuously refrains frompointing any fingers at the real criminals responsible for the car-nage it depicts: thehuman agents who are using the frrearms forcriminal purposes. This would be like fomenting a worldwidecampaign against matches and gasoline because of the death anddestruction caused by arson - and completely ignoring the needto apprehend the arsonists! The UN fiImmakers know this, ofcourse. They have focused on the matches and gasoline andignored the arsonists for some very important reasons.

One reason is that they intend to so vilify "small arms" andassociate them with everything evil that people will have anautomatic emotional aversion to firearms and agree to civiliandisarmament. Another reason for the conscious failure of the UNvideographers to mention the responsibility of human agency isto divert attention from the UN's role in the very crimes it isdenouncing. In virtually all of the examples shown in Armed tothe Teeth, the UN and its institutions (particularly the IMF andWorld Bank) played major roles in creating chaos and revolutionthat produced the bloody scenes.

Rwandan GenocideThe IIN's video treatment of Rwanda is especially noteworthy.Rwanda's 1994 genocide is one of the strongest examples imagi-nable proving the case against civilian disarmament. Theslaughter of some 800,000 Rwandans in just 103 days makes itthe most concentrated genocide in the bloody 20th century. This

t75

THp UNrren NerroNs Eteosrn

horrible mass-murder was possible because the killers - in thiscase, the government forces and government-organized mobs -were armed and the victims were not. Rwanda's draconian 1979gun control legislation made it almost impossible for civilians topossess firearms. The government was thus given a monopoly onlethal force. Illtimately it used that force, and its victims werehelpless before it.

Most of the Rwandan victims were not shot; they were brutal-ly hacked to death with machetes or speared and clubbed todeath. According to survivors and eyewitnesses, many of the vic-tims did not meekly submit to slaughter; they tried to defendthemselves with stones, sticks, and their bare hands. In the fewinstances where the victims were able to obtain firearms theysucceeded in delaying or limiting the carnage and saving lives.The most detailed and enlightening analysis of the Rwandangenocide we have seen is published by Jews for the Preservationof Firearm Ownership (JPFO). Their heavily documented 1997study, Rwanda's Genocidg, 7994, atthoritatively states: "Thecareful planning of this genocide - and the near-total disarmedstate of its victims -- explains the speed and intensity of themurder process." To

The JPFO study cites abundant evidence to support the claim"that 'gun control' was a critical element in this genocide." 71

"Had the citizens ... not been disarmed," it notes, "they mighthave deterred the genocide entirely, or at very least reduced itsextent. Those who place their faith in any other form of preven-tion - especially in the IIN or other supranational organizations- seem blind to some hard realities." 72 After surveying the factscompiled by JPFO researchers, it is diffrcult to dispute thatassertion. Rwanda's Genocide, 1994 conchtdes with this soberingassessment:

The hard lesson ofRwanda is that the only potential saviors forthe intended targets of a genocidal government are the intendedvictims themselves. No one else is likely to care enough to do any-thing beyond protest, or to be able to provide direct help fast

176

Crur,raN Drsmuaunxr

enough. The intended victims of a genocidal government can savethemselves only if they have ready access to frrearms, particularlymilitary-type. For them to have access to frrearms, 'gun control'must be destroyed. How many more mountains of corpses need tobe piled-up before this lesson is learned?73

This bitter truth learned from the horrors of Rwanda comportscompletely with what we know of the other major genocides ofthe 20th century. Again, we can thank the JPFO for document-ing the critical role of civilian disarmament, i.e., "gun control,"for the slaughters in all of these cases. In their imporbant 1994study, Lethal Laws: "Gun Control" is the Key to Genocide, tb.eJPFO provides a valuable examination of the massive genocidesin Ottoman T\rrkey, Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Red China,Guatemala, IJganda, and Cambodia.Ta The report also photo-graphically reproduces the gun control laws (along with Englishtranslations) that disarmed the victims and made the genocidespossible in each of those countries. It is a deuastating indictmentof the program for civilian disarmament that the UN is pushingfor the entire world!

fIN "Peacemakingl': Drenched in BloodThe one-worlders' totalitarian scheme for personal disarma-ment and subjugation of all to an omnipotent UN is no longeridle theory; it has already received several recent trial runs,albeit on a limited scale. In Somalia, Haiti, and Kosovo the UN's"peacekeepers" have disarmed the civilian populations and leftthem at the mercy of lIN-supported totalitarian thugs. (InRwanda too, it should be noted, it was the UN-supported totali-tarian regime of General Habyarimana that carried out the hor-rendous slaughter.)

To get a picture of what the UN program for "peace" throughdisarmament is really all about, we need to take a brief look atone of the IIN's most vicious crimes: its brutal 1961 invasion ofpeaceful Katanga, in the Congo. In that murderous assault onthe people of the Congo, the UN's sainted "Blue Helmets" were

t77

Tnu UNrrno NarroNs E:rpospo

tasked with supporting Soviet-trained Communist terroristPatrice Lumumba against the democratically elected, Christian,pro-Western president of Katanga, Moise Tshombe.

Since the incredible story of the IIN's atrocities in Katanga hasbeen consigned to the Orwellian "memory hole" by the CFR's"ruling class journalists" and "court historians," it is imporbantthat we make at least a modest attempt to recount what hap-pened there. In The Blie Helmets: A Reuiew of tJnited NationsPeace-keeping, a self-serving encomium published by the IIN, weread: "The United Nations Operation in the Congo ... July 1960until June 1964, is by far the largest peacekeeping operationever established by the United Nations in terms of the responsi-bilities it had to assume, the size of its area of operation and themanpower involved. It included ... a peace-keeping force whichcomprised at its peak strength nearly 20,000 officers andmen...." 75

What were all of these "peacekeepers" doing in the Congo?Supporting Congolese "sqlf-determination" and "independence"says the LIN. In reality, they were propping up a succession ofSoviet stooges who were conducting a gnsly reign of terror. Formany years the Soviets had been supporting and establishing"independence" and "anti-colonialist" movements throughout theworld - always with the aim of converting European coloniesinto new colonies in the global Communist empire. The UnitedNations proved over and over again that it supported this newSoviet colonialism by materially supporting the Kremlin-backedterrorists through its various agencies and by bestowing politicallegitimacy on them from the rostrum of the General Assembly.

In the Congo, Moscow had hedged its bets, as usual, by back-ing several thugs. As soon as Belgium's King Baudouinannounced that the Congo was to be given its independence,however, the Soviets made clear that their top choice for viceroyin the area was Patrice Lumumba.

Lumumba, a thoroughly corrupt dope addict, ex-convict, andmurderer, was lionized by the CFR media machine as the GeorgeWashington of Africa. Emboldened by his international acclaim

178

Cnryr,rax Drsmuarvrexr

and the financial and military backing of the U.S.S.R. and RedChina, Lumumba dropped all pretenses of "democratic rule" andbegan an orry ofrape, pillage, tortupe, and terror.

On September 15, 1960, he issued a lengthy and detailed direc-tive to the heads of the various provinces of the Congo which Ieftno doubt as to his brutal intentions. Dictators frequently dis-guise their brutal decrees in genteel-sounding prose or bureau-cratic legalese, but Lumumba, intoxicated with his new power,and brimming with the Marxist drivel he had learned from hisSoviet masters, did not bother with such camouflage. In hisdirective, entitled, "Measures To Be Applied During the FirstStages of the Dictatorship," he let it be known that he hadassumed "full powers" and then listed the following points as the"most effective and direct means of succeeding rapidly in ourtask":

Establish an absolute dictatorship and apply it in all its forrrs.Tlerrorism, essential'to subdue the population.Proceed systematically, using the army, to arrest all members of

the opposition.... I sent the National Army to arrest Tshombe andKalonji and even to kill them if possible....

Imprison the ministers, deputies and senators.... Arrest them allwithout pity and treat them with ten times more severity thanordinary individuals.

Revive the system of flogging....Inflict profound humiliations on the people thus arrested....

[Sltrip them in public, if possible in the presence of their wives andchildren.

...If some of them succumb as a result of certain atrocities, whichis possible and desirable, the truth should not be divulged but itshould be announced, for instance, that Mr. X has escaped and can-not be found....76

That was just the first stage of Lumumba's Communist revo-lution. He ended his directive with the promise that "the secondstage will be to destroy anyone who criticizes us." 77 He ended a

179

Tnp UNrrno NertoNs Exposno

subsequent memorandum with this finale: "Long live the SovietUnion! Long live Khrushchev!"78

Long before this, however, Lumumba had left no doubt as tohis brutal nature and totalitarian orierrtation. He had actuallyput his dictatorship ofterrorism into practice before announcingit to his provincial officials in the directive cited above.Nevertheless, President Eisenhower (CFR) joined Soviet dictatorNikita Khrushchev in supporting a resolution authorizing theIIN to send troops to assist Lumumba! He then dispatched U.S.Air Force planes to transport LIN troops and supplies for that"peacekeeping" mission. He welcomed Lumumba to the U.S. witha royal reception and showered Lumumba's new regime withmillions of dollars.

However, there was widespread opposition to Lumumba'sSoviet brand of "independence" throughout the Congo. Thestoutest opposition arose in Katanga Province, a multi-racialarea about the size of France, under the able leadership oftheeducated and pro-Westeqn Moise Tshombe. Declaring, "l arl.tseceding from chaos," President Tshombe announced Katanga'sindependence from Lumumba's murderous central Congo gov-ernment. Amidst the sea of carnage and terror that was then theCongo, the province of Katanga remained, by comparison, anisland ofpeace, order, and stability.

Did the LIN peacekeepers try to put an end to Lumumba'sreign of terror - which included the systematic slaughter ofcivilian men, women, and children? No, they instead used UNpower to squash the fledgling republic of Katanga and force itback under Lumumba's control.

"From the outset of the hostilities," say the UN disinformationspecialists in The Blue Helmefs, "IJnited Nations military andcivilian officers did their best, in cooperation with theInternational Committee of the Red Cross, to relieve the distresscaused to innocent civilians."Te That lie, as well as hundreds ofothers in the book's treatment of the Congo operation, could havebeen written by propagandists from the Kremlin (or PrattHouse) - and, in fact, probably was. In truth, the UN's blue hel-

180

CrvrlreN DrsenueurNr

mets engaged in the very war crimes that the UN now demandsglobal jurisdiction to protect the world from. UN planes know-ingly and intentionally bombed hospitals, churches, and schools.Its troops attacked the same targets; as well as ambulances, andslaughtered noncombatant men, women, and children.*

After Lumumba's mysterious death, UN support swung to themilitantly pro-Communist Cyrille Adoula, and then toCommunist Antoine Gizenga. In September 1961, U.S. newspa-pers carried this account of the UN invasion of Elisabethville,the capital of Katanga:

The UN declared martial law and ... Michel Tombelaine ofFrance, deputy UN civilian commander, announced over the IINcontrolled radio that any ciuilians found in illegal possession ofarms will be swnrnarily executed.80 [Emphasis added.]

Yes, here was the UN imposing Communist-style disarmament

- which is always a prelude to Communist-style terror. Whatthe CFR-run U.S. media didn't tell theAmerican people was thatMr. Tombelaine had been identifred as a member of the French

*More details of this important and incredibly vicious chapter of UN history canbe found in the following: The Fearfut Masterby G.Edward Griffin;8t U/h, Kill"dthe Congo? by Philippa Schuyler;82 .Be bels, Mercenaries, and Diuid.ends by SmithHempstone;83 ail, 46 Angry Men by the 46 doctors of Elisabethvill". 34 Io 1962,a private group ofAmericans, outraged at our government's actions against thefreedom-seeking Katangese, attempted to capture on film the truth about whatwas happening in the Congo. They producedKatanga: The Untold, Slory, an hour-Iong documentary narrated by Congressman Donald L. Jackson.S5 With news-reel footage and testimony from eyewitnesses, including a compelling interviewwith Tshombe himself, the program exposed the criminal activities and brutalbetrayal perpetrated on a peaceful people by the Eisenhower and then Kennedyadministrations, other Western leaders, and top IIN olEcials. It documents thefact that UN (including U.S.) planes deliberately bombed Katanga's schools, hos-pitals, and churches, while IIN troops machine-gunned and bayoneted civilians,school children, and Red Cross workers who tried to help the wounded. This filmis now available on videotape, and is "must-viewing" for Americans who aredeterrnined that this land or any other land shall never experience similar IINatrocities. (For ordering information, please see above-referenced endnote.)

181

Tnp Ulnrno NRtIoNs Expospo

Communist Party by a subcommittee of the U.S. SenateJudiciary Committee.86 What they also failed to report (with afew brave exceptions) was that the UN forces were carrying outvicious atrocities against unarmed Katangese men, women, andchildren. Nevertheless, the CFR-dominated Kennedy adminis-tration, like the Eisenhower CFR gang before it, backed theLumumba-Adoula-Gizenga lineup and opposed the pro-U.S.Tshombe.

More CFR.LIN Iheachery and ButcheryThis sickening, treacherous pattern has been repeatedly reen-acted in more recent times. In Somalia, for instance, the U.S.-ledUN misadventure, Operation Restore Hope, was launched under"humanitarian" pretenses to suppress the forces that had oustedthe brutal, Soviet-installed Communist dictatorship ofMohammed Siad Barre. During his reign of over two decades,Siad Barre had been the recipient of hundreds of millions of dol-lars from the U.S. and the UN.

After U.S. troops were sent to provide humanitarian assis-tance, their orders mutated into disarming the "civilian militias."The CFR team in the Bush administration and the CFR team inthe succeeding Clinton administration - together with theirCFR media allies - aimed all of their vitriol at the forces ofGeneral Mohammed Aidid, the leader most responsible for theoverthrow of Communist dictator Barre, and the leader with thebroadest national support.

General Aidid became t}lre uillain du jour. He and his civilian"militias" had to be disarmed, we were told. The disarmamentprogram escalated into an illegal UN order for the arrest ofGeneral Aidid, with U.S. Army Rangers and Delta Force com-mandos assigned the job of effecting the arrest warrant. Theresult: a bloody U.S. defeat, with 19 American soldiers dead, 75wounded, and ugly video footage - agonizingly reminiscent ofVietnam - of an American pilot being dragged through thestreets of Mogadishu by an angry Somali mob.

What very few Americans ever learned was that the basis for

L82

Crur,rax DrsenueunNr

the illegal warrant issued by the UN Security Council was adeceptive report written by a CFR operative. The document citedby the LIN as justification for the warrant was The Report of anInquiry, Conducted Pursuant to Secrtrity Council Resolution 837,Into the 5 June 1993 Attack on UN Forces in Somalio written byTom Farer (CFR), a professor of international law at AmericanUniversity in Washington, D.C.87 This "Farer Report" wasclaimed to "prove" General Aidid's guitt in various crimes, mostparticularly the June 5, 1993 attack of Somalis upon IINPakistani troops that resulted in the deaths of a number of the"Blue Helmets."

The Farer Report, however, proved to be a tissue of lies anddeception. It also proued to be an. unintended indictment of theUN, rather than Aidid. For the report showed that the deadlyattack ofJune Sth had been precipitated not by General Aidid,but by a UN prouocation. Specifically, it was the IIN's blatantlyillegal seizure of Radio Mogadishu, an organ of the free press ofSomalia, that caused a spontaneous attack by the Somali peopleon the UN crintinals.S8 Moreover, the Farer Report inadvertent-ly shows that the UN-CFR cabal knowingly used this provoca-tion as a pretext for grabbing more power - and for usingAmerican troops to do its dirty work!8s

Obviously, the UN had to suppress its own self-indictingreport. Which is precisely what it did. It refused to release thereport to the U.S. Congress and the American peoplethough we were payrng for almost the entire operation and oursoldiers were dying because of the UN's illegal and deceitfulorders.

The New American magazine obtained a copy of the forbiddenFarer Report and published a major expos6 revealing the con-spiracy and deception involved.eo To date, this remains the onlysignificant press exposure given to this incredibly explosivereport. The CFR media cartel did not touch it, naturally; theywere busy, instead, diverting the public's attention with the O.J.Simpson and Menendez brothers murder trials and other simi-larly bizarre scandals. And the CFR'S Republican managers in

183

Tnp UNrrno NarroNs Exposro

Congress, such as Newt Gingrich (CFR) and Bob Dole (whomight as well be CFR), made sure that GOP members wouldn'traise a fuss over this UN outrage - even after the Republicanstook control ofCongress in 1994.

As a result, soon after the Somalia debacle, American troopswere sent into Haiti on another tlN assignment. Their job:restore to power the murderous, Communist, psychopath Jean-Bertrand Aristide,el so beloved by the CFR clerisy. Our troopshad another job, as well: DisarmAristide's opposition. Thanks tothe mandatory gun registration program in effect for many yearsin Haiti, the soldiers knew exactly where to go to confiscate theweapons. U.S. soldiers interviewed by this writer said they didnot like this job because they could see that it was leaving manyobviously law-abiding citizens and their families open to slaugh-ter byAristide's Communist mobs and common thugs. Some sol-diers admitted that they frequently disobeyed the orders to con-frscate weapons and left them in the hands of those they believedneeded protection. Several of these soldiers couldn't help com-menting that they feared the Haiti exercise might prove to be arehearsal for similar house-to-house searches for arms at somenot-too-distant point in America's future.

More recently, U.S. forces were sent into Kosovo - again, ini-tially, with the task of restoring order and providing support for"humanitarian assistance." Soon, however, they were ordered todisarm the Serbs, while concomitantly helping to arm the narco-terrorist Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). The KLA is a viciousAlbanian Communist mafia that is flooding heroin and otherdrugs into Europe and the U.S.e2 It is also closely allied with theterror regime in Iran and Osama bin Laden, the notorious fin-ancier of anti-American terrorism.es The K[,.{s well-document-ed, sordid record, however, did not sour the CFR coterie in theState Department or in the Establishment media on the terror-ist group's "potential."

Subversive Marine SurveyOn May 10, 1994, several hundred Marines stationed at the

L84

Crwrax DrsnnmeupNr

TWenty-nine Palms, California Marine base were given a surveywith potentially frightening ramifications. The "Combat ArmsSurvey" asked the Marines to respond along a scale runningfrom "strongly disagree" to "strongly agree" to a series of ques-tions and statements, including the following:

o "Do you feel that U.S. combat troops should be used within theUnited States for any of the following missions? Drug enforce-ment; Disaster relief...; Federal and state prison guards;National emergency police force; Advisors to S.WA.T. units,the FBI, or the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms(B.A.T.F.)...."

o "IJ.S. combat troops should be commanded by U.N. officers andnon-commissioned offi.cers (NCOs) at battalion and companylevels while performing U.N. missions."

o "I feel there is no conflict between my oath of office and serv-ing as a U.N. soldier."

o "I feel a designatedunit of U.S. combat soldiers should be per-manently assigned to the command and control of the UnitedNations."

o "I would like U.N. member countries, including the U.S., togive the U.N. all the soldiers necessary to maintain worldpeace.'

o "I would swear to the following code: 'I am a United Nationsfighting person. I serve in the forces which maintain worldpeace and every nation's way of life. I am prepared to give mylife in their defense."'e4

The final statement of the "Combat Arms Survey'' posed thisshocking scenario:

The U.S. government declares a ban on the possession, sale,transportation, and transfer of all non-sporting firearms. A thirty(30) day amnesty period is permitted for these firearms to beturned over to the local authorities. At the end of this period, anumber of citizen groups refuse to turn over their frrearms.

185

THn UNrrno NATroNs Expospo

Consider the following statement: I would fire upon U.S. citizenswho refuse or resist confiscation of firearms banned by the U.S.government.95

The "Combat Arms Survey' *", Rr.t brought to public atten-tion when a Marine sent a copy to The New Anterican maga-zine.e6 Disclosure of the survey by The New American touchedoffa firestorm ofpublic and congressional outrage. According toa press release from the Marine Corps public affairs office atTWenty-nine Palms, the survey originated from PresidentialReview [Decision] Directives 13 and 25, under which PresidentClinton (CFR) "directed DOD [Department of Defense] to createa U.S. military force structure whose command and controlwould include the United Nations."eT

But most of those things happened during the nasty oldClinton regime; now that we have George W. Bush in the OvalOffice, we can breathe a lot easier. Right?

Don't believe that for 4 moment. Yes, George W. received theendorsement of the NRA. But so did his father before him. As aTexas congressman in 1968, the senior Bush (CFR) voted for thatyear's draconian Gun Control Act. Tlventy years later, he wroteto the NRAduringhis victorious presidential campaign, pledgingto oppose "federal licensing, gun registration, background checksor a ban on frrearms."98

Once in ofEce, however, George the senior promptly issued anexecutive order banning the importation of 43 "military-style"semi-automatic rifles and endorsed a crime bill that called forthe registration of rifle and pistol magazines capable of holdingmore than 15 rounds. ee He also endorsed a five-day version ofthe Brady (waiting-period) bill, which caused Sarah Brady,chairman of Handgun Control, Inc., to exclaim that she was"very pleased.' 1oo

Perhaps even more important than those actions was GeorgeBush's ambush of the NRA - and all gun owners, for that mat-ter - in May 1995, shortly after the Oklahoma City bombing. Itwas a very crucial time, when all the country was reeling from

186

Cnnr,rew Drsenueupxr

shock over that deadly terrorist act, and the CFR media mavenswere fastening blame for that vile deed on the NtrLA, "gun fanat-ics," "right-wing extremists," and "anti-government" Repub-licans. George Bush, as the immediate past president of theUnited States and the most prominent and well-knownRepublican, greatly aided that vicious smear campaign of thewhole Political Righ! by very dramatically resigning from theNRA and denouncing the organization with the false claim thatan NRA fund-raising letter harshly critical of ATF excesses wasa slander against law enforcerp"n1.101

Is it fair to judge junior by daddy's record? No, unless he indi-cates that he is following in daddy's footsteps. George W. hasdone that. His top campaign and policy advisers were takenwholesale from his dad's CFR-T[ilateralist cabinet: Dick Cheney,Brent Scowcrofb, Colin Powell, Paul Wolfowitz, Robert Zoellick,Stephen Hadley, Robert Blackwill. To these he added PrattHouse venerables Henry Kissinger and George Shu1tz and fast-rising CFR star Condoleezza Rice.102

Cheney, of course, then came on board as vice president,Powell as Secretary of State, Wolfowitz as Deputy Secretary ofDefense, Zoellick as U.S. Tbade Representative, and Rice asNational Security Adviser. They were soon joined by other PrattHouse regulars who were tapped for high Cabinet posts: DonaldRumsfeld, Elaine Chao, Christine Todd Whitman, KennethJuster, Faryar Shirzad, John Negroponte, and George Tenet - toname a few.

One of the frrst persons Colin Powell officially received asSecretary of State was Frank Carlucci, who recentty chaired theCFR's panel on restructuring the State Department. 103 Powellthen traipsed off to the UN for a meeting with Kofi Annan, wherehe announced that the new Bush administration would be put-ting an end to the Republican Party's traditional antagonism tothe world body.loa

Writing in the CFR's Foreign Affairs for September/October2000, James M. Lindsay of the Brookings Institution noted that"BothAI Gore and George W. Bush are internationalists by incli-

187

Trm Umrnn NarroNs E:rpospo

nation...." 105 In the CFR's globalese, that can be taken as mean-ing that, rhetoric notwithstanding, George W. will reliably con-tinue to advance the one-world agenda of empowering the UnitedNations, including its attack on the right of privateAmerican cit-izens to own fi.rearms. And because of the widespread misper-ception that Bush is a genuine "conservative" (thanks to theCFR's "ruling class journalists"), he is well-positioned to makestrategic cave-ins on the gun issue that a Clinton or Gore couldnot pull off.

188

Chapter 10

Regionalism

We cannot leap into world gouernment in one quick step....[T]he precondition for euentual globalization - genuine glob-alization - is progressiue regionalization, because thereby wemoue toward largeti more stable, n'Lore cooperatiue units.L

- Zbigniew Brzezinski (CFR, TC),former National Security Advisor, 1995

Within and outside the United, Nations, world federalistsshould strongly support the growth of regional organizatinnssuch as the European Community and the Organization ofAfrican Unity and deuelopment of them into regional federa-tions with gouernnxental power in some policy areas.2

John Logue, Vice President,World Federalist Association

One of the most striking gouernance features of globaliza-tion is that it has a strong regional flauor Deep integrationhas proceeded fastest on a regional basis, notably within theEU [European Union].s

- The Commission on Global Governance

A day would come when gouernments would be forced toadmit that an integrated Europe wo,s dn accomplished fact,without their hauing had, a say in the establishment of itsunderlying principles. All they would haue to do was tomerge all these autononxous institutions into a single fedcraladministration and then proclaim a United States ofEurope....a

- Merry and Serge Bromberger in their sympatheticbiography, Jean Monnet and the United States of Europe

Tnr UNrrpn NerroNs Ereospo

"How do you eat an elephant?" asks an old riddle. The answer:"One bite at a time." It is the same with any large task; success-ful accomplishment requires dividing the project into logical con-stituent parts and then systematically, incrementally, proceedingstep by step, bite by bite. In the case of our elephant metaphor,that would mean skinning, dressing, and quartering or section-ing the animal, cutting it into smaller and smaller parts, untilthe desired consumable size is reached.

The globalist Insiders and their Communist partners havedone precisely this throughout the course of the 20th century.From one corner of the globe to the other, the Communists havesponsored revolutions and "wars of national liberation," pittingtribe against tribe, or exploiting some other division based uponrace, creed, class, nationality, or past grievances. The Insiders,operating from their positions of power in the business, financial,political, and media worlds, have repeatedly supported theseruinous tumults. They have provided financial and propagandaassistance as well as qndermined the targeted governmentsthrough direct political pressure or diplomatic intrigue fromWashington, D.C. and London.*

Through this convulsive process ofcontrolled chaos, nations,kingdoms, and empires have been toppled, borders erased andredrawn, stable social and political systems uprooted, andwhole peoples annihilated or driven as refugees into foreignlands. The maps of Europe, Africa, and Asia, especially, havebeen repeatedly redrawn in this fashion, with the result thatthe number of nation states in the world has increased from72 at the end of World War II to 195 today. Some of thesenations were artificially created by, and had their bordersdrawn by, the United Nations. Others, though not officiallyspawned by the IJN, are the illegitimate offspring of theInsiders and the Communists who created the UN. In virtual-ly every case where these new nations have been created orreformulated, the one-worlders have assured that corrupt,socialist regimes would be placed in power - either the total-itarian, revolutionary, socialist (Communist) variety, or the

190

RrcroNer,rsu

evolutionary, big-business, socialist (Fascist) variety.These newly created entities have been manipulated, with rel-

ative ease, into joining various regional organizations estab-Iished, ostensibly, for the mutual benefit of the countriesinvolved. Thus, the Organization of American States (OAS), theOrganization of African Unity (OAU), the North Atlantic TheatyOrganization (NATO), the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation(APEC), the European Union (EU), the European MonetaryUnion (EMU), the North American Free Trade Association(NAFTA), the Middle East-NorthAfrica economic area (MENA),and other regional organizations have sprouted and grown intosizable establishments wielding increasing power.** Originallyconcerned primarily with a very narrow range of military andeconomic matters, these regional entities have, Iike the LIN,gradually assumed more and more authority to deal with mat-ters concerning the environment, Iabor policy, human rights,

*The prototype for these operations was first put into operation by the secretRhodes network in South Africa in the late 19th Century. Carroll Quigley, inThe Anglo-Arnerican Establishment (pp. 44-47 and 107-112) ar;d Tlagedy andHope (pp. L36-144), provides an important inside look at the high-level con-spiracy involved in the Jameson Raid (1895) and the instigation of the BoerWar (1899-1902). James Perloff, in The Shadows of Pou;er, shows the CFR-RIIA machinations in bringing abqut U.S. entry into World War I and II. Thatstory is also powerfully told, in far greater detail, inAmerica's Second Crusad,e,by William Henry Chamberlain (Chicago: Henry Regnery, 1950). The Insider-Communist collaboration in turning Poland into a Soviet satellite is told in: 1Sau Poland Betrayed, by Ambassador Arthur Bliss Lane, The Rape of Poland,by Stanislaw Mikolajczyk, and,AlliedWartime Diplomacy,by Edward J. Rozek.David Martin tells the brutal story ofthe one-worlders'betrayal ofYugoslaviainto Communist hands in Ally Betrayed. Hilaire du Berrier's Background toBetrayal: The Tlagedy of Vietnam is essential reading for an understanding ofInsider treachery in undermining America's allies and supporting ourCommunist enemies in Southeast Asia. Nicaraguan President AnastasioSomoza tells the story of Insider perfrdy and support for Communist revolutionin Latin American in Nicaragua Betrayed. The Betrayal of Southern Africa:The Ilagic Story of Rhod,esia and, South Africo by Warren McFerran details theInsider treachery in the repeated betrayal of America's allies in southernAfrica and the handing over ofthat region to Communist terrorists and corruptthugs.

191

Tno Uurrpo Narroxs Eleospo

immigration, commerce, education, transportation, etc.It is no accident that these regional Intergovernmental

Organizations (or IGOs, in globospeak) have been grasping formore power - at the expense of their nation-state members.Most of them were planned from the beginning to do that verything. They were designed eventually to become - through grad-ual accretions of legislative, executive, and judicial powers -regional supra-state go-vernments which could, ultimately, bemerged with other regional entities to form a world governmentunder the United Nations. What is now known as the EuropeanUnion is a case in point. It was a colossal "bait and switch," pre-sented as a trade pact, but intended from the start to become anation-destroying super government.

In this, as in so many other areas we have already examined,we see an amazing parallelism between the plans of the PrattHouse one-worlders and those of the Communist strategists.Joseph Stalin, for instance, recognized that populations willmore readily merge their national loyalties with a vague region-al loyalty - with which they may be able to find some sense ofconnection or identity - than they will for a world authority. Inhis 1912 essay, "Marxism and the National Question," the aspir-ing dictator insisted that "regional autonomy is an essential ele-m.ent in the solution of the national problem."s (Emphasis inoriginal.) Again and again over the decades, the Communistsemphasized the necessity of creating "regional organs" to facili-tate the "eradication" of nationalism. In 1936, the official pro-gram of the Communist International declared:

**We cannot examine all of these gtoups here, but we especially direct the read-ers to the following articles fromThe New American for important exposr6s on themore recently launched APEC and MENA regional organizations. "The FreeTYade Charade" (December 27,1993) reveals the CFR-TC hands and machina-tions in the formation and control of APEC. "Play It Again, Uncle Sam"(December 12, 1994) tells the amazing story of the overt controlling role of theCFR in sponsoring (together with the World Economic Forum and the SocialistInternational!) the 1994 Casablanca conference that launched MENA. Both arti-cles are available at www.thenewamerican.com.

L92

RpcroNlr,rsnr

This world dictatorship can be established only when the victoryof socialism has been achieved in certain countries or groups ofcountries, when the newly established proletarian republics enterinto a federative union with the already existing proletarianrepublics ... [and] when these federations ofrepublics have finallygrown into a World Union of Soviet Socialist Republics uniting thewhole of mankind under the hegemony of the international prole-tariat organized as a state.6

The Communists and the Insiders were (and still are) workingfrom the same page: They are building regional blocs with struc-tures that override national sovereignty and can later be mergedinto a global superstructure.

T\vo of the main regional IGOs that currently present a realand increasing danger to the United States are NAFTA andNATO, the former being a fairly recent creation formed for eco-nomic pretexts (trade, principally), and the latter of considerablyolder vintage established as a military alliance under a pretextof "collective security." Each of these IGOs is serving, in thewords ofa top globalist operative, as an "end run around nation-al sovereignty, eroding it bit by bit."7

The North American Free tade Agreement (NAFTA) and thecampaign to secure its passage in Congress were closely modeledafter the Insiders'game plan four decades earlier to establish theCommon Market, later known as the European Community (EC)and (most recently) the European Union. And it is very clear thatthe Pratt House one-worlders intend to "evolve" NAFTA into afull-fledged, supra-national, regional government like the EU,but on an accelerated timeline, accomplishing in one decadewhat it has taken them four to do in Europe. We are not specu-lating on this; the CFR world planners have told us this repeat-edly, as we will show.

NAFTA, which was originally promoted as a tripartite "freetrade" agreement that would open markets and expand tradebetween Canada, the U.S., and Mexico, is now being transformedinto a Western Hemisphere Free Thade Association (WHFTA),

193

Tnr UNrmo Netrorrrs Expospo

with a single currency (the U.S. dollar is being proposed, fornow), a hemispheric central bank, and an entire hemisphericregime of regulations to "harmottize" business, industry, labor,agriculture, transportation, immigration, environment, health,trade, and other policies "from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego."NAFTA is not, and never was, about "free trade." Free trade -real free trade - is a voluntary exchange between two parties,unhampered by governrirent intervention.

But NAFTA, like the European lJnion, seeks to regulate andcontrol virtually every industrial, agricultural, environmental,and labor matter. Rather than creating or permitting economicfreedom by eliminating government intervention, NAFTA seeksto homogenize the plethora of socialist interventions that nowhamstring the U.S., Mexican, and Canadian economies.

Insider Jacques Delors, the socialist president ofthe EuropeanCommunity Commission in 1992, when the NAFTA debate wasraging, clearly saw the parallels between the two regional organ-izations. Delors gloated that "NAFTA is a form of flattery for usEuropeans. In many ways, we have shown what positive, liber-ating effect these regional arrangements can have." 8 Naturally,what a thorough socialist and internationalist like Delors con-siders "positive" and "liberating" tends to jarringly con{lict with'negative" and "retrograde" concepts such as independence, sov-ereignty, free enterprise, property rights, and constitutional lim-itations on power.

The CFR journal Foreign Affairs led the way, with a continu-ous fusillade of pro-NAtr"IA articles. Some even conceded, inessence, a key point made by this author and other NAtr'TAoppo-nents at the time, to wit, that NAtr'TA was, in reality, a stealthplan to foist an EU-type regional government scheme uponAmericans. "The creation of trinational dispute-resolution mech-anisms and rule-making bodies on border and environmentalissues may also be embryonic forms of m.ore comprehensiue struc-tu.res"e (emphasis added), M. Delal Baer approvingly wrote inthe Fall l99l Foreign Affairs. "Afber all, international organiza-tions and agreements like GATT and NAFTAby defrnition mini-

L94

RpcIoNg,Istvt

mize assertions of sovereignty in favor of a joint rule-makingauthority." 10 Dr. Baer went on to draw a direct analory to theEC, suggesting:

It may be useful to revisit the spirit or rn" ,oro"t Commission,which provided a blueprint for Europe at a moment of extraordi-nary opportunity. The three nations of North America, in moremodest fashion, have ilso arrived at a defining moment. They maywant to create a wiseman's North American commission to operatein the post-ratification period.... The commission might also adopta forward-looking agenda on themes such as NorthAmerican com-petitiveness, links between scientific institutions, borderland inte-gration, the continental ecological system and educational and cul-tural exchanges. ll

Dr. Baer was not telling anything new to the CFR's top politi-cal operatives; they were already lined up behind the interna-tionalist program. Republican President George Bush (the elder)(CFR), Democrat Horlse Majority Leader Richard Gephardt(CFR), and Republican House Minority Leader Newb Gingrich(CFR)* played the pivotal political roles in pushing "fast track"authority for NAFTA through Congress - with massive helpfrom their CFR confreres in the worlds of business, banking,media, and academia. And the same players campaigned furi-ously and continuously for final approval of the deceitful agree-ment.

The CFR internationalists intend to use NAFTA (and theirproposed WHFTA) to foster, fi.rst, economic interdependencebetween the united states and other nations and then economicintegration as a means, ultimately, to achieving political inter-dependence and integtation. Which is precisely the path theInsiders trod in foisting the EU upon the unsuspecting peoples ofWestern Europe.

European UnionBecause it is the internationalists'template for NAtr'TA/WHFTA,

195

THr Uxrmo NeuoNs Exposno

a rudimentary understanding of the EU - how it was launchedand by whom, what it has become, and what it is becoming - isabsolutely essential for American patriots, in order to be suc-cessful in stopping this insidious attaik on our sovereignty andindependence. Our treatment here must necessarily be brief.**The following points are key to an understanding of the CommonMarket/United Europe movement and its counterpart, NAFTA,in this hemisphere:

o While posing as a "bottom-up" popular movement, it was com-pletely a "top-down" enterprise, conceived and run entirely byan elite coterie ofone-worlders.

o While posing as a native European movement, it was largely

xAs House Speaker, the CFR's Newt Gingrich - posing as the nation's premierConservative - also played a decisive role in pushing the Insiders'WorldTrade Organization. During the 1994 hearings on the WTO, Gingrich disarmedWTO opponents by feigning concern over the WTO threat to our sovereignty.Gingrich noted that "yes, we tould in theory take the power back. Yes, we, dejure, as [Judge Bork] points out, can take the power back. But the fact is weare not likely to disrupt the entire world trading system [by pulling out]. And,therefore, we ought to be very careful, because we are not likely to take itback."

Gingrich expressed concern about the transfer of U.S. authority to GATIdeclaring that "we need to be honest about the fact that we are transferringfrom the United States, at a practical level, signifrcant authority to a neworganization. This is a transformational moment. I would feel better if the peo-ple who favor this would just be honest about the scale of change." He declaredthat GATT was very similar to the 1991 Maastricht Tfeaty, by which theEuropean Union's member nations had ceded a good deal of their economic andpolitical sovereignty, "and twenty years from now we will look back on this asa very important defrning moment. This is not just another trade agreement.This is adopting something which twice, once in the 1940s and once in the1950s, the U.S. Congress rejected. I am not even saying we should reject it; I,in fact, lean toward it. But I think we have to be very careful, because it is avery big transfer of power."

Nevertheless, Gingrich subsequently joined then-Senate Minority LeaderBob Dole (R-Kan.) in not only promoting and voting for the GATT pact, but urg-ing that it be considered during a lame-duck session of Congress when itsprospects for passage would be enhanced.

196

RrcIoNnr,rsu

directed by U.S. Insiders and almost totally financed by U.S.taxpayers.

o Presented to Americans as a way to defend Western Europefrom Communism, it has instead been used to drive Europeinto socialism.

o Warnings that the Common Market would erode national sov-ereignty were shoqted down as paranoid ravings, but theyhave proven true.

o The national and local governments of the EU countries arebeing swallowed up and increasingly overruled by unaccount-able Eurocrats and Eurojudges.

o The EU currency, the euro, and the Eurobank are destroyingthe value of the individual national currencies and the eco-nomic sovereignty of the member states.

o The EU governing institutions, acting in coordination withtheir fellow one-worlders in national governments, are becom-ing increasingly socialistic and oppressive'

A11 of this was for"."en by astute observers many years ago,when the foundations for this diabolical scheme were being laid.One of the most knowledgeable historians of the CommonMarket/EU, and an indefatigable critic of it, is Hilaire duBerrier, a contributing editor to The New American (and its pred-ecessors Arnerican Opinion arrd The Reuiew of the Ner.us). For'more than four decades he has published his authoritative HduBReports from Monte Carlo, Monaco and has repeatedly exposedthe machinations and plans of the European and AmericanInsiders for Europe and the world.

"The CFR," wrote du Berrier in January 1973, "saw theCommon Market from the first as a regional government to

**For a more detailed examination of the history of the Common Market/EC,please see this author,s book Global Tlrannytz and the following articles fromThe New Am.erican, available online at www.thenewamerican'com: "UnitedStates of Europe,"April 10, 1989 ; 'AEuropean Suprastate," May 7, 1991; "Fromthe Atlantic to the Urals (ancl Beyond)," January 27, L992; "Forcing a UnitedEurope," November 16, 1992; "European Nightmare," March 1' 1999.

t97

Tnr UNrrru NauoNs Expospo

which more and more nations would be added until the worldgovernment which the UN had failed to bring about would berealized. At a favorable point in the Common Market's develop-ment, America would be brought in. But the American public hadto be softened first and leaders groomed for the change-over." 13

Mr. du Berrier chronicled in his reports the "secret histo4y''ofthe Common Market, utilizing published statements from theEuropean and American press, offrcial documents of Europeangovernments, the diaries and memoirs of European Insiders, andhis own unparalleled intelligence sources developed over a life-time of direct participation in some of the most momentousevents of the 20th century. Step by step, he detailed the Insider-orchestrated program, from the pre-World War II era, throughthe war years, and then the post-WWII era.

As du Berrier notes, the first concrete step toward the aboli-tion of the European nation-states was taken in 1951 with thesigning of the seemingly innocuous treaty creating the EuropeanCoal and Steel Commuaity (ECSC). The ostensible purpose ofthis move was to so integrate the basic industries of coal andsteel that a future war between France and Germany would be"physically impossible."

The next nail in the coffin of European national sovereigntycame on March 25, L957 with the signing by the six ECSCnations (France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands,and Luxembourg) of the two Theaties of Rome. These created theEuropean Economic Community (EEC or Common Market) andthe European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom), whichgreatly furthered the process of merging the economic and ener-ry sectors of the member states. (As the ECSC, Euratom, andEEC gradually assumed more and more economic and politicalpowers, the name of this regional collective changed to theEuropean Community.)

The next stage involved bringing the rest of Western Europeinto the fold. In 1973 the United Kingdom, after more than twodecades of resisting, came in, as did Ireland and Denmark.Greece joined in 1981, bringing the number of member states to

198

RncroN.nr,rsvr

ten. Spain and Portugal became the 11th and 12th members in1986. The year 1986 also marked passage of the Single EuropeanAct, which mandated the establisliment of "an area withoutinternal frontiers, in which the free movement of goods, persons,services, and capital is ensured."

The 1991 Tieaty o{ Maastricht committed the EU signatoriesto a single currency and a European central bank.la TheEuropean Monetary Institute (EMI), the embryonic Europeancentral bank created by the treaty, was officially launched onJanuary l, 7994. Frankfurt was chosen as the site for the newentity and Alexander Lamfalussy, former head of the Bank forInternational Settlements (BIS) in Basel, Switzerland, wastapped to be president.*

Work in the ShadowsNow let's drop back for a moment and briefly examine the nuts-and-bolts process and,the main actors involved in putting thisamazing scheme together, beginning with the European CoaIand Steel Commission, or ECSC. "This was a truly revolutionaryorganization," wrote Georgetown University Professor CarroIIQuigley, the Insiders'own inside historian, "since it had sover-eign powers, including the authority to raise funds outside anyexisting state's power." 15 The ECSC merged the coal and steelindustries of six countries under a single High Authority. It was,Quigley pointed out, "a rudimentary government." In his 1966history of the world, Tlagedy and Hope, Quigley wrote:

This "supranational" body had the right to control prices, chan-nel investment, raise funds, allocate coal and steel.... Its powers

*Significantly, the establishment of the EMI in Frankfurt coincided with thatcity's March celebration ofthe founding ofthe Rothschild banking dynasty. About80 members of the famous fust family of international banking Insiders gatheredin Frankfurt duringthe first week of March to commemorate the birth of clynastyfounder Meyer Amschel Rothschild, who was born there 250 years ago. TheLamfalussy-BlS connection is also significant, inasmuch as the BIS has longbeen recognized by all observers of banking as the central bank of internationalbanking.

199

Tnp Uurrpo NarroNs Eleosuo

to raise funds for its own use by taxing each ton produced madeit independent of governments. Moreover, its decisions were bind-ing, and could be reached by majority vote without the unanimi-ty required in most international organizations of sovereignstates.16

The proposal for the ECSC was introduced, amidst great fan-fare, in May 1950 as the "Schuman Plan." Although JeanMonnet, a consummate Insider and at that time head of France'sGeneral Planning Commission, was the real author of the plan,he thought it expedient to name it for his comrade, RobertSchuman, the Socialist French Foreign Minister who laterbecame Prime Minister.

TheAmerican Insiders leapt to praise the Schuman Plan. JohnFoster DuIIes, a CFR founder, called it "brilliantly creative." 17

Dulles had become close pals with Monnet decades earlier, whenboth labored at Versailles following World War I to establish theLeague of Nations. LateS as Secretary of State, he would useU.S. power to help Monnet quash European opposition to aUnited Europe. Secretary of State Dean Acheson (CFR) termedit a "major contribution toward the resolution of the pressingpolitical and economic problems of Europe."18 The CFR domi-nated Carnegie Foundation awarded Monnet its Wateler PeacePrize of two million francs "in recognition of the internationalspirit which he had shown in conceiving the Coal and SteelCommunity...." le

Insider Jean Monnet, a life-long, self-avowed, multi-million-aire socialist, whom columnist Joseph Alsop (CFR) admiringlydubbed the "good, gray wizard of Western European union,"20was appointed the first president of the powerful new ECSC.Monnet knew fuII well just how subversive and revolutionary hisnew creation wbs. Merry and Serge Bromberger record in theirbiography Jean Monnet and the United States of Europe thalwhen Monnet and his "brain trust" had outlined the basics of theECSC proposal, they called in legal expert Maurice Lagrange totake care of the detail work. The Brombergers wrote:

200

RpcloN.qr-rsu

Lagrange was stunned. An idea ofrevolutionary daring had beenlaunched and was being acclaimed by.the Six and the UnitedStates - a minerals and metals superstate.... "I hope the structurewill stand up," Monnet said dubiously.zl

In other words, Monnet recognized that his scheme was so

audaciously subversive it was doubtful that the governments ofsovereign nations wriuld ever agree to such a radical proposal.Unless, of course, the proponents just as audaciously employeddeception, duplicity, bribery, extortion, and coercion. Which isprecisely what they did.

The Brombergers, who are ardent admirers of Monnet, admitthe conspiratorial and totalitarian mind-set of their hero:

Gradually, it was thought, the supranational authorities, super-vised by the European Council of Ministers at Brussels and theAssembly in Strasbourg, would administer all the activities of theContinent. A day would come when governments would be forced toadmit that an integrated Europe was an accomplished fact, with-out their having had a say in the establishment of its underlyingprinciples. All they would have to do was to merge all theseautonomous institutions into a single federal administration andthen proclaim a United States of Europe....

Actually, the founders of the Coal and Steel Community wouldhave to obtain from the various national governments -justifiablyreputed to be incapable of making sacrifrces for the sake of a feder-ation - a whole series of concessions in regard to their sovereignrights until, having been {inally stripped, they committed hara-kiriby accepting the merger.22

Again, a bald admission that the Insider founders of theECSC/EU knew from the start that they were slipping a noosearound the neck of an unsuspecting Europe and that theyplanned to gradually tighten it until it strangled their haplessvictim - to death.

Another very important source on this "hara-kiri" phenome-non is Insider Ernst H. van der Beugel, honorary secretary-gen-

20t

Tnp Urrrno Nerroxs Elcospo

eral of the Bilderberger Group, vice-chairman of the NetherlandsInstitute for Foreign Affairs (a CFR affiliate), member of theTkilateral Commission, Harvard lecturer, etc. In his book FromMarshall Aid to Atlantic Partnership:- which contains a fore-word by "my friend Henry Kissinger" -

'van der Beugelexplained the workings of the Monnet-CFR symbiosis and citedexamples of the diplomatic bludgeoning of those officials whobalked at administering national "hara-kiri." For instance, hereported how Monnet'sAction Committee, which was "supportedby funds from United States foundations," ramrodded the nego-tiations for the Rome Tbeaties:

Monnet and his Action Committee were unofficially supervisingthe negotiations and as soon as obstacles appeared, the UnitedStates diplomatic machinery was alerted, mostly throughAmbassador Bruce . .. who had immediate access to the top echelonof the State Department....

At that time, it was uslral that if Monnet thought that a partic-ular country made difficulties in the negotiations, the Americandiplomatic representative in that country approached the ForeignMinistry in order to communicate the opinion of the AmericanGovernment which, in practically all cases, coincided withMonnet's point of view.23

Monnet's high-Ievel friends, who assisted him in these strong-arm tactics, included President Eisenhower, John Foster Dulles,John J. McCloy, David Bruce, Averell Harriman, George BalI,and C. Douglas Dillon - all CFR one-worlders. All of this wasoccurring, remember, in the immediate post-WWII years, whenwar-ravaged Europe had become very dependent on U.S. aid andlooked to the U.S. for protection from the growing (Insider-backed) Soviet threat.

Hilaire du Berrier relates a story from the diary of JosephRetinger that illustrates how the CFR's agents built the move-ment for European merger. Retinger, a Polish one-worlder andinveterate socialist, was a longtime associate of CFR heavy-

202

Rpcloxar,rsu

weights John Foster Dulles, Averell Harriman, John J. McCloy,and Nelson and David Rockefeller. Retinger was seeking morefunds for the European Movement headed at the time by BelgianPrime Minister Paul Henri Spaak, who was affectionately knownin Europe as "Mr. Socialist." Du Berrier wrote:

Retinger and Duncan Sandys, the British Eurocrat, went to see

John J. McCloy, who in 1947 was American High Commissioner toGermany. McCloy, we learn from Retinger's diary, embraced theidea at once. Sheppard Stone, who was on McCloy's staff, andRobert Murphy, the U.S. ambassador to Belgium, whom Retingercalled one of the European Movement's best supporters, joinedMcCloy in raiding the huge reserye of European currencies called'counterpart funds'which had piled up as a result of Marshall Planaid.... McCloy, Stone and Murphy "promptly and unhesitatingly putample funds at the disposal of Paul Henri Spaak lto lobby for theEuropean mergerl," Retinger recorded. 24

Michael J. Hogan, professor of history at Ohio StateUniversity and editor of Diplomatic History, is another authori-ty who confirms this Insider use of Marshall PIan "counterpartfunds." In fact, Dr. Hogan shows that the whole push for theEuropean Recovery Plan (ERP, better known as the MarshallPlan) was a CFR-run affair to establish interventionist (socialist)policies for post-war Europe.

The Establishment effort was led, Hogan notes, by "theCommittee for the Marshall PIan to Aid European Recovery, aprivate, nonpartisan organization composed of labor, farm, andbusiness leaders who worked closely with government officials tomobilize support behind the ERP. The result was something likea coordinated campaign mounted by an interlocking directorateof public and private figures."25

"The leadership of this grouP," says Hogan "came largely fromacademic circles, from the major American trade unions, andfrom such business organizations as the Council on ForeignRelations (CFR), the Business Advisory Council (BAC), the

203

Tnp UNrmo NarroNs Expospo

Committee for Economic Development (CED), and the NationalPlanningAssociation (NPA;."2e But the top leadership, he makesclear, were CFR cognoscenti.

The CFR corporate fascists were evdr close at hand to assistEuro-socialist Insiders like Monnet, Retinger, Schuman, Spaak,Sandys and their ilk, and to sabotage all European opposition.Europeans representing anti-Communist, anti-socialist, anti-Soviet, pro-American, free market, Christian, monarchist,nationalist parties and viewpoints were undermined, co-opted,vilified, bribed, blackmailed, or otherwise eliminated from effec-tive leadership positions.

Startling new evidence concerning this cabal was reported inSeptember 2000 by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, the EU reporterin Brussels for The Telegraph of London. The story bore theheadline, "Euro-federalists financed by US spy chiefs," andreported on recently declassified American government docu-ments showing "that the US intelligence community ran a cam-paign in the Fifties and Sixties to build momentum fop a unitedEurope. It funded and directed the European federalist move-mertt."2I The U.S. effort was headed by "William J Donovan,head of the American wartime Office of Strategic Services, pre-cursor of the CIA."28

Mr. Evans-Pritchard reported:

Washington's main tool for shaping the European agenda wasthe American Committee for a United Europe [ACUE], created in1948. The chairman was Donovan, ostensibly a private lawyer bythen.

The vice-chairman was Allen Dulles, the CIA director in theFifties. The board included Walter Bedell Smith, the CIAs firstdirector, and a roster of ex-OSS frgures and officials who moved inand out of the CIA. The documents show that ACUE financed theEuropean Movement, the most important federalist organisation inthe post-war years. In 1958, for example, it provided 53.5 per centof the movement's funds.

The European Youth Campaign, an arm of the European

204

RpcIoNer,Isirl

Movement, was wholly funded and controlled by Washington. TheBelgian director, Baron Boel, received monthly pa;rments into aspecial account. When the head of the European Movement, Polish-born Joseph Retinger, bridled at this degree of American controland tried to raise money in Europe, he was quickly reprimanded.2g

What thLe Telegraph article didn't mention (and perhapsEvans-Pritchard didn't know) was that all of the OSS-CIA-ACUE principals involved in the "European federalist move-ment" - Donovan, Smith, and Dulles - were CFR members andkey Pratt House operatives.

With the media stranglehold exercised by the ruling elite ofthe Milner Group-Royal Institute of International Affairs-CFRthought cartel, few Europeans or Americans - even those whowere politically sophisticated - could put all of the piecestogether. Lone voices - even influential ones - could not breakthrough the media blackout. In 1959, for example, few Britishcitizens heard (and felver still understood the importance ofl thewarning of Reginald Maulding, Chancellor of the Exchequer,concerning the real nature of the Common Market. SaidMaulding: "We must recognize that for us to sign the Tieaty ofRome would be to accept the ultimate goal - political federationin Europe including ourselves." 3o

"Twenty years ago, when the process began, there was no ques-tion of losing sovereignty," Sir Peregrine Worsthorne wrote inLondon's Sunday Tblegraph in 1991. "That was a lie, or at anyrate, a dishonest obfuscation." Further, said Worsthorne, "Forthe past twenty years or so anybody wanting to have a career inthe public service, in the higher reaches of the city, or the mediahas had to be pro-European. In the privacy of the closet or amongclose friends, even many federalists would admit as much. Butsuch is the momentum behind the European movement thatnone of these individual doubts, expressed separately, will beremotely sufficient to stop the juggernaut." 31

Lord Bruce of Donington, a Member of Parliament from theLabour Party who has been a stalwart opponent of Euro-conver-

205

THn Uxrrpo NeuoNs Expospo

gence schemes for four decades, was likewise given the mediablackout treatment. In a 1962 speech he cited Mauldingis warn-ing that the Common Market was really aimed at eventual polit-ical unification. "This, of course, is not" how the issue has beenpresented by the government to the people of this country," LordBruce cautioned. "The matter has been put forward in terms ofthe economic advantages which would accrue to Britain if wejoinedthe Six'in a Cusdoms Union ... allowing our industries tothrive in what appears to be a lush 'home'market of 214 millionpeople." 32

No "right-wing isolationist," Lord Bruce served in theEuropean Parliament as a representative of the EuropeanSocialist Group. In a 1996 interview, Lord Bruce noted thatmuch of the impetus for European convergence comes from theruling elite of "the United States, which disguises its intent forpublic consumption but has consistently assisted the merging ofBritain and the other European nations into a regional bloc.""The Americans," he said, "have subsidized and promoted thisaberration almost since its inception, and they are very activetoday." 3e

Westem Hemisphere EUWith this knowledge in mind, the first thing an observantonlooker should have noticed when proposals for NAFTA andWHFTA began floating about was the Pratt House imprint. Itwasn't difficult to spot; the CFR logo was all over these schemes,as we have already seen in the case of NAFTA.Sa

The Insiders have stepped up their political, economic andpropaganda efforts for the next step, an EU for the WesternHemisphere. Following the pattern of the ECSC-EU, most of theimportant early activity for the WHFTAwas taking place "belowthe surface ofpublic attention." In 1999, after years ofprepara-tion, the business pages ofnewspapers began buzzing over thestartling proposal by Argentine President Carlos Menem toabandon his country's peso for the dollar. Similar proposals soonstarted flowing in from the leaders of Canada, Brazil, Mexico,

206

RrcroNeltsu

and Venezuela. AII of a sudden, "dollaization" became the sexyeconomic issue of the day, with Republicans and Democrats alikelining up with euphoric praise for the ultra-radical scheme.

What we were witnessing, in redlity, was another CFR ven-triloquism show; like the European leaders a generation earlier,the Western hemispheric choir hymning the dollarization themewere merely mouthpieces for the CFR puppet masters. In AprilL974, tine CFR telegraphed much of what was to come whenForeign Affairs published a remarkably frank attack on U.S. sov-ereignty. Authored by Columbia University law professor andveteran State Department offrcial Richard N. Gardner (Clinton'sAmbassador to Spain), the article was entitled "The Hard Roadto World Order." It began with CFR member Gardner's lamenta-tion that like-minded internationalists had failed to achievewhat he termed "instant world government." He proposed a newand more effective route to the creation of an all-powerful, glob-al superstate, asserting

In short, the "house of world order" will have to be built from thebottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great"booming, bttzzing confusion," to use William James' famousdescription ofreality, but an end run around national sovereignty,eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frorital assault. 35

Gardner's piecemeal scheme for world government proposed,among other things, Iuring all nations into a variety of economicand political entanglements, including trade traps like NAFTAand WHFTA.

The Dollari zatiotr B andwagonIn 1984, 10 years after Gardner's "Hard Road" manifesto,Foreign Affairs brought forth another audacious piece entitled'AMonetary System for the Future," by Richard N. Cooper (CFR,TC). Cooper, a professor of international economics at Harvard,boldly stated: "I suggest a radical alternative scheme for the next

207

Tnp UNnoo NluoNs Exposno

century: the creation of a common currency for all of the indus-trial democracies, with a common monetary policy and a jointBank of Issue to determine that monetary policy." 36

The main problem with this scheme, Gooper realized, is that "asingle currency is possible only if there is in effect a single mon-etary policy, and a single authority issuing the currency anddirecting the monetary policy." "How can independent statesaccomplish that?" he asled rhetorically. Naturally, he had theanswer: "They need to turn over the determination of monetarypolicy to a supranational body."3z

More recently, in its July/August 1999 issue, Foreign Affairsexplicitly took up the campaign for such a supranational powerand dollarization, with an essay by Zanny Minton Beddoes ofThe Economist, one of Britain's leading Fabian Socialist periodi-cals. In the opening paragraph ofhis globalist propaganda tract,"From EMU to AMU?: The Case for Regional Currencies,"Beddoes declared with oracular certainty: "By 2030 the worldwill have two major cuffqncy zones - one European, the otherAmerican. The euro will be used from Brest to Bucharest, andthe dollar from Alaska to Argentina - perhaps even Asia."38

Mr. Beddoes paid specific tribute to Richard Cooper's 1984Foreign Affairs article, and threw bouquets to other "farsightedacademics" who share his one-world view and chided skepticswho "argue that a national currency is a basic symbol of sover-eignty that countries choose to forfeit only under extraordinarycircumstances." se Mr. Beddoes and his devious allies would sure-ly like all of us to believe that a national currency is only a "s5rm-bol of sovereignty," but it is much more than that, of course. It isan essential ingredient ofsovereignty, and a nation is at the fear-ful mercy of any entity to whom it may be foolish enough to for-feit so important a power. The Federal Reserwe System and theInternational Monetary Fund have already vindicated that claima thousand times over, and yet here we are about to be enticedinto an even deeper abyss.

An even more extraordinary propaganda and disinformationsalvo, this one aimed at a broader audience, was provided by the

208

RpcroNar,rsna

Time magazine cover story for February 15, 1999. Along with theheadline, "The Committee to Save the World," the cover featuredthe beaming visages of Federal Reserve Chairman AlanGreenspan (CFR), then-Tleasury Secretary Robert Rubin (CFR),and Deputy Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers (CFR), whofollowed Rubin in the top Tleasury post. The article bore this riv-eting subtitle: "The,inside story of how the Three Marketeershave prevented a global economic meltdown - s6 fs1'."40

The adulatory piece, written by Time's Joshua Cooper Ramo(CFR), reverently refers to the CFR triumvirate as "the Trinity"and suggests that they are uniquely possessed of near-divinevirtues and insights, and, thus, deserve our trust in establishingnew monetary authority over the hemisphere.al

The "conservative," CFR-run Wall Street Jourrual assured itsreaders that "Dollafization has arisen as a spontaneous move-ment within our hemisphere,"42 and urged U.S. political leadersto embrace this opportunity to "score a powerful victory for freetrade and free markets." But the dollarization bandwagon isabout as spontaneous as the Normandy invasion, and it hasnothing to do with free markets.

The current dollarization-NAFTA/WHF'IA drive we are nowwitnessing is the culmination of a massive, long-range effort thatbegan many years ago as an intermediate stepping stone toworld government. Myriad documents, publications, statements,speeches, conferences, meetings, and events from the past sever-al decades copiously document that effort. One such document isWestern Hemisphere Economic Integration, a study by GaryClyde Hufbauer (CFR and former CFR vice president) andJeffrey J. Schott, published in 1994 by the Institute forInternational Economics (IIE). While hardly a household namein America, the IIE, according to Martin Walker of the LondonObseruer, "may be the most influential think-tank on the planet,"with "an extraordinary record in turning ideas into effective pol-icY." a3

The dedication at the beginning of this IIE book reads: "TODAVID ROCKEFELLER, For his lifelong devotion to promoting

209

Tnr UNrrpo N,mroNs Expospo

economic development in Latin America and to improving rela-tions among the countries of the Western Hemisphere. His wis-dom has been an enorrnous source of encouragement to the workof the Institute and inspired us to explore'the important ties thatunite the Americas."aa

Mr. Rockefeller, of course, was chairman of the CFR from1970-85 and, as we will see, has played an especially key role inthe dollarization and Western hemispheric economic conver-gence scheme. Likewise the IIE, which is virtually joined at thehip to the CFR.*

So what did the Hufbauer-Schott study published by the IIEadvocate? Very simply, "a Western Hemisphere Free Tlade Area(WHFTA)" following the sovereignty-destroying, mega-state pat-tern of the European Union (EU). "After four decades of dedicat-ed effort," said the report, "Western Europe has just arrived atthe threshold of ... monetary union, and fiscal coordination. Itseems likely that trade and investment integration will proceedat a faster pace within thq Western Hemisphere....'45

"Finally," the study stated, "the more countries that partici-pate in integration and the wider its scope, the greater the needfor some institutional mechanism to administer the arrange-ments and to resolve the inevitable disputes, and the strongerthe case for a common legal framework." (Which means supra-

*The executive director of the IIE is former U.S. Assistant Secretary of theTleasury for InternationalAflairs C. Fred Bergsten (CFR, TC), who appeared onMay 21, 1999 before the House Banking and Financial Services Committee toargu.e for the dollarization power scam. The complete interlock between the CFRand the IIE is further demonstrated by the list ofIIE officers and directors pro-vided in the Hulbauer-Schott study. IIE's chairman is listed as Peter G. Peterson,who is also chairman of the board of the CFR, a position he has held since 1985,when he succeeded David Rockefeller in that position. Chairrnan of the IIEExecutive Committee is Anthony M. Solomon (CFR). The study also lists the IIEboard of directors, which includes such CFR luminaries as W. MichaelBlumenthal, Carla A. Hills, Donald F. McHenry, Paul A. Volcker, MarinaWhitman, andAndrewYoung. Chairman of theAdvisory Committee is (surprise!)Richard N. Cooper (CFR). One of the members of that same Advisory Committeefor the Schott study was Lawrence H. Summers. Listed as an Honorary Directorwas Alan Greenspan.

zto

RpcroNar,Istrt

national legislative, executive, and judicial institutions, natural-ly.) "The European Commission, Council, Parliament, and Courtof Justice have many of the powers of comparable institutions infederal states," the report noted approvingly before commenting,"On this subject, we score Europe with a 5 [on a scale of 0 to51." +a

Not satisfied with the EU model, the authors proposed goingfar beyond it. They asserted that "integration between NAtr'TAand Latin America should be legally open-ended; potentially theWHFTA should include countries outside the hemisphere."Indeed, presaging Beddoes, they asserted: "Economic logic sug-gests that the expansion of NAFTA in an Asian direction is justas desirable as its expansion in a Latin American direction."aT

In countless similar studies, speeches, lectures, and programsover the years, the CFR elitists have prepped the upper echelonof the U.S. and Western intelligentsia and business communitiesso that they would enthusiastically embrace this deadly nostrum

- long before it appeared "spontaneously" for general public con-sumption. But how did they succeed in drawing Latin Americanleaders into this snare and overcoming the long-standing fear ofYankee "dollar imperialism"? One obvious answer is thatthrough the lending programs of the International MonetaryFund, World Bank, and Wall Street banks, they have saddledLatin American countries with hopeless debt burdens that haveIeft them desperate and willing to try radical measures. But amore complete answer is to be found in the long-term activitiesof groups like the IIE and the Council of the Americas (COA),which have for two generations been assiduously grooming andtutoring the business, academic, and political leaders of LatinAmerica.

The COA describes its origins thusly: "In 1965, DavidRockefeller and a group of like-minded business people foundedthe Council of theAmericas based on the fundamental belief thatfree markets and private enterprise offer the most effectivemeans to achieve regional economic growth and prosperity."a8(Those so narve as to believe in the COAs professed embrace of

2LL

Tnp UNrrpo NrtroNs Exposoo

"free markets and private enterprise" probably also believe thatthe Social Security Administration has set up a bank accountwith their name on it, awaiting their retirement!) Among theCFR brotherhood joining Mr. Rockefellei in the COAs leadershipare COA chairman Robert A. Mosbacher, Sr., vice-chairmanRobert E. Wilhelm, treasurer Richard de J. Osborne, and gener-al counsel Sergio J. Galvis.

Some 240 COA corporate members with interests in LatinAmerica - ranging from AT&l Bank of America, Coca Cola,Citibank, and Dow Jones & Company to Exxon, Ford, GeneralElectric, IBM, Microsoft, Neusweek, T\rrner BroadcastingSystem, Wal-Mart, and Xerox - provide impressive muscle (andfinancial support) for the COAs agenda.ae Most of these compa-nies, with a heavy CFR presence at their executive and direc-torate levels, have proven to be reliable supporters of the one-world corporatist line.

Working hand-in-glove with the COA-CFR corporate socialistsare the pampered princelings of the U.S.-tax-dollar-subsidizedmultilateral lending institutions like the IMF and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), many of whose officers arealso CFR members. The preface to the aforementionedHufbauer-Schott study, for instance, notes that "... the Inter-American Development Bank provided support for the researchunderlying this project and the bank sponsored seminars for thediscussion of its preliminary results." 50

Indeed, a brief survey of the daily faxes sent out by the IDB,IME, and their sister institutions makes very plain the com-pletely corrupt process by which the Insiders form their conver-gence "consensus." Each day brings announcements of tens ofmillions (sometimes hundreds of millions) of dollars in IDB"loans" for natural gas pipelines in Mexico, electric power plantsin Argentina, highways in Bolivia, coffee plantations in ElSalvador, etc. IDB cooperation can lift a Latin American politi-cian by financing the programs that make him look good, or helphis opposition by pulling funds and destroying confidence in hiseconomic program.

212

I

RpcroNer,rsnn

Thus, when President Carlos Menem of Argentina and HugoChavez, the Castroite, Marxist president of Venezuela, deliveredtheir CFR-scripted speeches at June 1999 COA luncheons inNew York, they knew they were addressing sympathetic moversand shakers of the COA-CFR-IIE-IDB axis who would parlaytheir proposals into the new "working consensus" that wouldbecome official U.S. policy.

Of course, what the new world order architects have in mindfor the Americas is exactly what they are foisting on Europe inthe form of the European Union and the new euro currency. Thatevolving supranational monstrosity was also presented tounwary Europeans as a "spontaneous" movement aimed at"freetrade" and "free markets." But Europeans are belatedly wakingup to the fact that it is no accident that the centralized, socialistbureaucracy of the EU is strangling their freedoms and nationalsovereignty. As we have seen, it was planned to develop intoexactly that from the start.

Like the slime trail that leads to a slug, virtually every trail ofAmerican policy disasters leads back to the Council on ForeignRelations. There is no longer reason for any sensible American todoubt that the CFR coterie intends to take us down the same sui-cidal path that Europe is now traveling. The one-world architectsof the European Monetary Union (EMU) are openly advocatingan American Monetary Union (AMU), as we have already seenfrom the pages of Foreign Affairs.

Words fail to convey the enormity and audacity of this colossal,dangerous fraud we are witnessing in the current "spontaneousmovement" to transform the Western Hemisphere into a carboncopy of the increasingly tyrannical European Union. But eventhat grim prospect of an America under an EU-style, centrallycontrolled economic bloc does not begin to convey the seriousnessof the peril we face if we allow these plans to succeed. Regional"integration" is but a stepping stone to the real objective soughtby the Insiders ofthis one-world conspiracy: Total, unrestrainedpower on a planetary scale is the real objective.

2L3

$

Chapter 11

The UN World Money System

What the Tlilaterals truly intend is the creation of a world-wide economic power superior to the political gouernments ofthe nation-states inuolued.... As nlanagers and creators of thesystem they will rule the future.t

- Senator Barry Goldwater

The only uiable way, it seen'Ls to me, to structure the inter-national economic order for the future is to install collectiueleadership arnong the Tlilateral partners - to uiew the threeregions not as the dictators or the dominators, but as a steer-ing committee, which must work out its own differences firstin order to lead a stable and prosperous world economy.z

- C. Fred Bergsten (CFR, TC), former U.S. AssistantSecretary ofthe Tleasury

In a globalized economy, eueryone needs the IMF[International Monetary Fund]. Without the IMF, the worldecononxy would. not become an idealized fantasy.... [T]he IMFis the souereign nations'credit union....s

- David Rockefeller, Tlilateral Commission Founder,longtime former chairman of both the TC and CFR

[The IMF is] in essence a socialist conception.a

- Hilary Marquand of the Socialist International,circa 1962-63

IN single currenql is possible only if theTe is in effect a sin-gle monetary policy.... How can independent states acconx-plish that? They need to turn ouer the determination of mon-etary policy to a supranational body.... The key point is that

2L5

Tnr UNrrpo NetroNs Eleosno

monetary control ... would be in the hands of a new Bank ofIssue, not in the hands of any national gouernment...-5

- Professor Richard N. Cooper (CFR, TC), HarvardUniversity, former U.S. Urider Secretary of State

The emerging multi-polar world .. . presents a better oppor-tunity to create a world central bank with a stable interna-tional curcency than it any preuious time in history.G

- Nobel Prize-winning economist Roberb Mundell in theTlilateral-CFR-dominat ed Wall Street J ournal,

October 14, 1999

For a generation now these columns haue preached eco-nomics from the gospel by Robert Mundell.T

Lead editorial in the Wall Street Journal,October 14,1999

The fifth plank of the Communist Manifesto calls for"Centralization of credit in the hands of the State, by means of anational bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly." 8 Itstands to reason: You can't establish the total state, the "dicta-torship of the proletariat," if people are allowed the freedom toproduce their own goods and services, buy and sell what theyneed and desire, and travel where they please when and howthey please. Communism is about rationed scarcity andtotal reg-imentation. Under Communism, "the State" (i.e., the ruling oli-garchy that rules in the name of "the people") controls andrations food, clothing, housing, transportation, fuel, health care,education, communications, publishing, entertainment - every-thing.

Monopoly control by "the State" of all money, savings, andcredit is as essential to the totalitarian Communist system as itssecret police, torbure chambers, firing squads, and gulags. Wehave seen throughout the 20th century that everywhere theCommunists have taken over they have religiously followedMarx's dictate in this matter. The reason is simple: power, con-

216

TIro UN Wonr-o Morrv Svsrprrr

trol. Power to exercise total control over all human activity. Anyprivate, independent initiative is seen as a threat to this monop-oly control and, therefore, cannot bd allowed.

Most people find it amazing, then, to learn that the world'spremier "capitalist" bankers and financiers subscribe to thesame Marxist program. For decades, led by the Rhodes-Milner-Morgan-Rockefeller-hllA-CFR-TC cabal, in one country afteranother, the Insider bankers have successfully pushed for theestablishment of central banks. These central banks are pat-terned after our own Federal Reserve System, a completelyMarxist operation that was foisted upon the American people bythe banking trust in 1913, in one of the most gigantic deceptionsin world history.* While having all the appearances of being runby national governments, these central banks are, in reality, runby the private RIIA-CFR-TC banking fraternity.

Why do these "capitalists" support Marx's program?Again, thereason is simple: poyer, control. Recall that arch-conspirator

*An understanding of the incredible deception involved in the creation of theFederal Reserve System will greatly help us in our current battle against thesame diabolic forces that are now so hellbent on establishing an all-powerfirlplanetary central bank. The campaign for the Federal Reserve was completely acreature of the Insider banking cartel, but the proposal was presented to theAmerican people by the cartel's front men as the only way to protect the countryagainst the power of the "money trust." One of the central players in this schemewas Insider Frank Vanderlip of National City Bank of New York, who laterdivulged his role in the conspiracy to create the Fecl. I\ro-and-a-half decadesafter the event, Vanderlip explained his role as a "conspirator" (his word) at asupersecret 1910 meeting at Jekyll Island, Georgia, where the Federal Reserveplot was conceived.9 This very elaborate scheme, in which the Insiders financedand controlled both sides of the issue, is brilliantly revealed in G. EdwardGriffin's masterful and detailed expos6, The Creature f'rom Jekyll Island: ASecond Look at the Federal Reserue (Appleton, Wis.: American OpinionPublishing, Inc., 1994). For a briefer treatment of the same subject, see also:None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen (Seal Beach, Cal.: Concord Press,1971); "The Federal Reserve System: The creature of a triumphant internationalbanking establishment" (The New American, October 27,1986); and "The SecretScience: How the Federal Reserve creates money out of debt" (The NewAmerican, December 19, 1988).

217

Tnr UNrrno NenoNs Expospo

Cecil Rhodes'"simple desire" was nothing less than "the govern-ment of the world." The one-world banksters, like theirBolsheviki brethren, want to control the world. And these sup-posed "mortal enemies" have worked hand in hand throughoutmuch of the past century to bring about this totalitarian, globalcontrol. As Ford Foundation President H. Rowan Gaither (CFR)put it (see Chapter 4), hQ and his one-world associates were mak-ing "every effort to so alter life in the United States as to makepossible a comfortable merger with the Soviet lJnion." 10

Spearheading the MergerSpearheading this capitalist-Communist "merger" scheme formuch of the past century has been one of America's wealthiestand most famous dynasties: the Rockefeller family. Microsoftmogul Bill Gates, investment wizard Wamen Buffet, and dot.comupstarts have grabbed headlines in recent years as the "world'srichest" tycoons, but their economic and political influence does-n't begin to compare with the global reach and power of theRockefellers.

David Rockefeller, the current pater familias of the super-richclan, was for many years chairman of the CFR (1970-85), chair-man of the T?ilateral Commission, and chairman of ChaseManhattan Bank (formerly the Chase National Bank). Althoughnow officially retired, he has remained actively engaged as chair-rnan emeritzs of all three institutions.ll

During the entire "CoId War" (and for decades before), theRockefellers served as the primary banker for the Reds. AsCongressman Louis McFadden, chairman of the House BankingCommittee, noted in 1933:

Open up the books of Amtorg, the trading organization of theSoviet Government in New York, and of Gostorg, the general offrceofthe Soviet trade organization, and ofthe State Bank ofthe Unionof Soviet Socialist Republics, and you will be staggered to see howmuch American money has been taken from the United StatesTbeasury for the benefit ofRussia. Find out what business has been

218

Trm UN Woru,n Molrsy Sysrru

transacted for the State bank ofSoviet Russia by its correspondent,the Chase Bank of NewYork....l2

"Arch-capitalist" David Rockefeller has always enjoyed imme-diate, privileged access to Communist countries and received theroyal "red carpet" welcome from them. His Chase ManhattanBank's Moscow branch enjoys the distinctiye cache of being locat-ed at "1 Karl Marx Square." ln 1974, the bank even saw fit toboast of this supposed trophy address in full-page newspaperadvertisements that read, in part: "From 1 Chase ManhattanPlaza to 1 Karl Marx Square, we're international money expertswith a knack for making good sense out of confusing East-Westtrade talk." 13 David Rockefeller also expressed pride in the factthat Chase Manhattan was the first Western bank to open forbusiness in Communist China.

A world central bank controlling all national monetary poli-cies and currencies - until such time as a single global cur-rency may be established - is essential to the one-worlders'East-West merger scheme. Much of their scheming, naturally,goes on secretly, behind closed doors, at the continuous andmysterious meetings of such Insider circles of high-levelfinance as the G-7, G-22, IMF, World Bank, Bank forInternational Settlements, the Paris CIub, the BilderbergGroup, and the World Economic Forum, as well as many small-er, informal conclaves.

However, in order to advance their conspiratorial agenda, theymust telegraph many of their plans to their lower-level opera-tives - in sanitized language, of course. By studying the docu-ments, reports, speeches, and published utterances of theseInsiders over the past several decades it is possible to determinetheir game plan and their ultimate goal. As we have seen in thepreceding chapter, the Insiders' penultimate goal is to createregional blocs in which the nation-states will become so econom-ically and politically interdependent and integrated that thenations are subsumed into regional supergoverrnents (the EU,WHFTA, APEC, etc.) with regional central banks and regional

219

Tno UNrruo Narroxs E>eospo

currencies. Once this is done, it is small work to merge theregional entities into a single global government.

Origins of Global AidThe institutions of the current "international economic system"grew out of the t944 Bretton Woods Conference. In addition tothe original World Banlr (WB) and International Monetary Fund(IMF), we now have an assortment of subsidiary institutions:International Development Association, International FinanceCorporation, Asian Development Bank, Asian DevelopmentFund, Inter-American Development Bank, African DevelopmentBank, Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency, and theWiteveen Facility. Over the past half century, this group of insti-tutions has devastated our planet by stealing hundreds of bil-lions of dollars from taxpayers in the West to fund socialismworldwide. No Communist butcher, socialist potentate, or ThirdWorld kleptocrat has escaped the largesse of these compassion-ate IIN bankers.

The cumulative effect of their efforts has been to subsidizebankrupt Communist regimes while saddling the poor of thedeveloping countries with an impossible debt load. Periodically,this has meant hitting up the taxpayers of Japan and theWestern countries for additional tens of billions of dollars for theIMF and WB institutions so that they can issue new 'loans" tothe Communist and socialist kleptocracies to make payments ontheir loans from the global banksters. la

Although we have mentioned U.S. Assistant Secretary of theTleasury Harry Dexter White (CFR) previously, it is importantto reemphasize his importance in the context of the Insiders'plan for a global monetary system. It was Soviet agent Whitewho led the U.S. delegation and presided as the overall leader ofthe 45-nation Bretton Woods Conference. It was White - togeth-er with his inseparable "dear friend" John Maynard Keynes, thehomosexual, Fabian Socialist, one-worlder - who designed theJMF.15x

On November 6, 1953, Attorney General Herbert Brownell

220

THr IIN Woruo MourY SYstnu

announced: "Harry Dexter White was a Russian spy. He smug-gled secret documents to Russian agents for transmission toMoscow." 16 Brownell also reported "that "Harry Dexter Whitewas known to be a spy by the very people who appointed him tothe most sensitive and important position he ever held inGovernment service. The FBI became aware of White's espionageactivities at an early point in his government career and from thebeginning made reports on these activities to the appropriateofficials in authority. But these reports did not impede White'sadvancement in the Administration...." 17

Attorney General Brownell made it clear that, in spite of hisRed record, White had received Insider clearance from the verytop: 'White's spying activities for the Soviet Government werereported in detail by the FBI to the White House by means of areport delivered to President Tfuman through his military aide,Brig. Gen. Harry H. Vaughn."18

Comrade White was no ordinary "espionage" agent. As formerCommunist Whittak6r Chambers observed, "Harry DexterWhite's role as a Soviet agent was second in importance only to

*Lord Keynes, who was lionized by the Insider opinion cartel as a towering intel-lect and the "greatest economist of our age," was, in fact, a notorious pervert andpederast. He was a member of England's infamous "Bloomsbury Group," found-ed by Eleanor Marx (Karl Man<'s lesbian, drug-addict tlaughter) to mix sexualclepravity, drugs, and socialist thought. He also was a member of the infamoushomosexual nest of 'Apostles" at Cambridge University that produced the noto-rious British traitors Guy Burgess, Donald Mac1ean, and Anthony Blunt, all ofwhom spied for Stalin.2l It is quite likely that Keynes was himself a consciousSoviet agent. Besides his "intimate" association with many Reds, he was marriedto Russian ballerina Lydia Lopokova (a common ploy among the Bloomsbury setto provide respectable "cover"). The unconventional couple were among the pro-tected few allowed to travel freely throughout Soviet Russia even during the RedTbrror. Although Keynes'hagiographers and promoters rigorously censored anypublic mention of his sexual deviancy or his socialist-commulist connections,these were well known to most ofhis associates. In 1967, 21 years after Keynes'death, his perverse life was laid bare with the publication of Michael Holroyd'sdetailed, two-volume biography of Lytton Strachey, one of Keynes'numeroushomosexual pr"r-oo"..22 Keynes' political, moral, and economic subversionwere thoroughly exposed it Keynes At Haruard, by Zygmund Dobbs. 23

227

Tnu Umrpn N,mroNs Expospn

that of Alger Hiss - if, indeed, it was second." 1e It wasChambers who recruited White and introduced him to CoI. BorisBykov, of Soviet military intelligence, in 7937.20

In his capacity as U.S. Assistant Secretary of the Tieasury,Harry Dexter White deliberately held up congressionallyapproved gold shipments to bolster China's currency duringWorld War II. His purpose in doing so was either to bring downthe anti-Communist Chiang Kai-shek or to force a coalition gov-ernment between Chiang's Nationalists and the Communists. AsAssistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, Walter S.Robertson candidly explained at the time: "In China, we with-held our funds at the only time, in my opinion, we had a chanceto save the situation. To do what? To force the Communists in." 2a

Serving as technical secretary at Bretton Woods and White'sright-hand man was fellow Treasury official Virginius FrankCoe, also a Soviet agent. With White's help, Coe became the firstsecretary of the newly created IMF, a powerful post he immedi-ately put in the service o,! the world revolution.2s What is mostextraordinary in all of this is not that a few clever Communistsmanaged to penetrate the top levels of the U.S. government by"outsmarting" the "wise men" of the American Establishment.That was not how it happened. Instead, it was top U.S. Insidersin our government - Dean Acheson, Robert Lovett, AverellHarriman, Nelson Rockefeller, Edward Stettinius, et al. - whorepeatedly interceded to prevent exposure ofthe records oftheseSoviet agents, arrd to promote these traitors to euen higher officeswhere they could increase their damage to our nation!

Fruits of Global AidUnder the leadership of White's and Coe's successors, the IMFhas been subsidizing the global socialist revolution for decades.Cato Institute researcher Doug Bandow pointed out in 1994:

[S]ix nations, Chile, Egypt, India, Sudan, T\rrkey, andYugoslavia, had been relying on IMF aid for more than 30 years;24countries had been borrowers for between 20 and 29 years. And 47,

222

Trr tIN Wonr.o Mourv Svsrpu

almost one-third of all the states in the world, had been using IMFcredit for between 10 and 19 years.... Since 1947, Egypt has neverleft the IMF dole. Yugoslavia took itsfirst loan in 1949 and was aborrower in all but three of the succeeding 41 years....

Bangladesh, Barbados, Gambia, Guinea-Bissau, Pakistan,Uganda, Zaire, andZambia all started borrowing in the early 1970sand have yet to stoptwo decades later.26

Like domestic welfare drones, once these parasites attachthemselves to the taxpayers, they never let loose. With theadmission in 1992 of virtually all of the "ex-Communist" coun-tries into both the IMF and World Bank, UN officials and theirinternational welfare lobbyists launched a sustained campaignfor massive new infusions of capital, which have thus farsiphoned billions into Russia and its "former" Warsaw Pactallies,27 all of which boast socialist regimes run by lifelongCommunists, who are now called "reformers."

None of the above'should surprise us, since the IMF wasdesigned, as we've shown, by Communists, socialists and one-worlders: The Socialist International has acknowledged that theIMF is "in essence a Socialist conception."28 Free market econo-mist Henry }Jazlitt, who stood virtually alone in exposing andopposing the IMF at its inception in 1944, clearly recognized itssocialist essence. Forty years later, in his book From. BrettonWoods to World Inflation, he warned: "The world cannot get backto economic sanctity until the IMF is abo1ished.... We will notstop the growbh of world inflation and world socialism until theinstitutions and policies adopted to promote them have beenabolished." 2e The warnings of this wise economist were absolute-ly correct in L944. They were just as correct in 1984. And theyare still correct today.

The World Bank, of course, has also played a central role in theglobal socialist revolution. India, one of the most pathetic social-ist examples, has been the WB's biggest recipient. From thebank's creation in 1946 until the late 1960s, the WB funneled bil-lions of dollars into socialist regimes, but by today's standards,

223

Tup Ururno NeuoNs Expospo

the amounts diwied out were relatively small. "Then, in 1968,Robert McNamara became bank president and dedicated himselfto continually raising loan levels," writes James Bovard in TheWorld Bank and the Impouerishment ofNations. "By 1981, whenMcNamara resigned, lending had increased more than 13-fold,from $883 million to $12 billion. Loan levels have continued soar-ing: now the bank exists largely to maximize the transfer ofresources to Third World governments."s0

Unfortunately, Bovard points out, "the bank has greatly pro-moted the nationalization of Third World economies andincreased political and bureaucratic control over the lives ofthepoorest of the poor." Whenever the public, the press, or membersof Congress raise a hue and cry over the bank's deplorable activ-ities, he notes, WB officials go on a "rhetorical crusade in favor ofthe private sector." But their bankrolling of revolution continuesunabated. "The bank, more than any other international institu-tion," says Bovard, "is responsible for the Third World's rush tosocialism and economic collapse." 31

Mr. McNamara is a former Secretary of Defense, a foundingmember of the ultra-Ieftist Center for the Study of DemocraticInstitutions, an endorser of the UN's occult Temple ofUnderstanding, and a big wheel in both the CFR and TC.32 Hiscampaign to raise the WB loan levels was not something hedreamed up on his own, but reflected the collective "wisdom" ofthe top CFR-TC leadership. The IMF and WB have worked inclose tandem with the top CFR-TC braintrusters and bankersfrom the beginning.

An example of this can be seen in the 1996 Annual Report ofthe CFR by Council Chairman Peter G. Peterson, who writesthat "one of our most important initiatives in the recent past hasbeen to expand our outreach to international institutions and toindividuals supportive of the Council's work around the world. Iam quite literally writing this letter on an airplane en route toAsia, where I will meet with leaders of the Hong Kong forum andthen continue on to Beijing, where our unique and quite unprece-dented 'home and home' dialogue with the Chinese People's

224

Tnp UN Wonlo Moxpy Svsrpu

Institute of ForeignAffairs moves into its next phase at a criticaltime in the U.S.-China relationship. This trip was immediatelypreceded by an all-day discussion with our distinguishedInternational Advisory Board, chaired by David Rockefeller, andcapped off with an intensive dinner discussion with James D.Wolfensohn, president of the World Bank."33

This account suggtists a fascinating decision-making hierarchyin international aJfairs. The CFR's InternationalAdvisory Board,under the direction of David Rockefeller, set the policy guidelinesfor U.S.-Chinese affairs; CFR Chairman Peterson was dis-patched to Beijing to confer with his counterparts in the Chineseequivalent of the CFR; a few months later, Secretary of StateWarren Christopher (CFR) was sent to lay the groundwork for aneventual summit between heads of state Bill Clinton (CFR) andJiang Zemin. And James Wolfensohn (CFR) gets new WB fundsrolling for the joint Beijing-Insider projects.

Revolution Over ProfrtsIn his 1979 book With No Apologies, Senator Barry Goldwateropined that "the Council on Foreign Relations and its ancillaryelitist groups are indifferent to Communism. They have no ideo-logical anchors. In their pursuit of a new world order they areprepared to deal without prejudice with a communist state, asocialist state, a democratic state, monarchy, oligarchy - it's allthe same to them."Sa

Although this cynical observation may seem, to the casualobserver, an adequate explanation for the Insider-Communistsymbiosis of the past few decades, it is sorely misleading. TheInsiders are not "indifferent to Communism." It is not "all thesame to them." Yes, they have done business with and arrangedIoans for democratic states, monarchies, and "right-wind'dicta-torships and oligarchies, as well as socialist and Communist dic-tatorships. But the pattern that emerges is striking: Virtuallyalways, they have used the leverage they have gotten throughloans to undermine the non-socialist, non-Communist govern-ments and push them into the Communist-socialist camp.

225

Tnp Uxrruo NarroNs Expospn

David Rockefeller returned from a visit to Communist Chinain 1973 (in his capacity as chairman of the Chase ManhattanBank) declaring that "the social experiment in China underChairman Mao's leadership is one of themost important and suc-cessful in human history."35 According to the most reliable esti-mates, Mao Tse-tungis "social experiment" had by that timeinvolved the murder of as many as 64 million Chinese by theCommunists.s6

In April 1974, Davtd Rockefeller's Chase Manhattan Bankloaned the USSR $150 million to build the world's largest truckfactory near the Kama River. The frrst trucks out of that plantcarried Soviet soldiers into Afghanistan in L979.37 In 1982 thechairman of the CFR, TC, and Chase Manhattan expanded onhis business "philosophy'' during a lO-nation swing throughAfrica, saying that "we have found we can deal with just aboutany kind of government, provided they are orderly and responsi-ble."38 By that standard, Rockefeller would have had no troubledealing with the "orderly. and responsible" Nazi regime of AdolfHitler. He found the Communist dictator of Zimbabwe, RobertMugabe, to be a "very reasonable and charming person" and saidthat the presence of 20,000 Cuban soldiers had no "direct bear-ing on American business operations in Angola. CIearIy it hasnot interfered with our own banking relations."se

As head Illuminatus at Pratt House, Rockefeller has welcomedFidel Castro, Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki, and other assortedterrorists and tyrants to the CFR's prestigious headquarters.This is not just about "business" and "profit," as SenatorGoldwater suggested, and as David Rockefeller's remarks abovewere intended to infer. This is about power.

Masterrninding Economic CollapseAn interesting window into the mindset of these Insiders wasprovided in 1990 by Canadian journalist Daniel Wood, who jour-neyed to the sprawling southern Colorado estate of one ofCanada's most renowned citizens, Maurice Strong. Mr. Strong isan engaging and controversial fellow: mega-millionaire industri-

226

Tnp IIN Wonlo Molpv SYsrrvt

alist, radical environmentalist, New Age spiritualist, UnitedNations plutocrat, fervent one-world socialist, economic savant,global gadfly, and close pal of David Rockefeller and MikhailGorbachev. Mr. Wood spent a week at Strong's Baca Granderanch interviewing this illustrious "world citizen."

During the course of Wood's visit, Strong told him of a novel hehad been planning to write. It was about a group of world lead-ers who decided the only way to save the world was to cause theeconomies of the industrialized countries to collapse. Strongexplained how his frctional leaders had formed a secret societyand engineered a worldwide financial panic and, ultimately, theeconomic crash they sought. Mr. Wood's account of that conver-sation appeared in the May 1990 issue of West rnagazine:

Each year, he fStrongl explains as background to the telling ofthe novel's plot, the World Economic Forum convenes in Davos,Switzerland. Over a thousand CEO's, prime ministers, frnanceministers, and leading academics gather in February to attendmeetings and set ecooomic agendas for the year ahead. With thisas a setting, he then says: 'lVhat if a small group of these worldleaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the earth comesfrom the actions of the rich countries?And if the world is to survive,those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducingtheir impact on the environment. Will they do it?... fire group's con-clusion is'no.'The rich countries won't do it. They won't change. So,

in order to save the planet, the group decides: Isn't the only hopefor the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't itour responsibility to bring that about?".. .

It's February. They're all at Davos. These aren't terrorists.They're world leadcrs. They have positioned themselves in theworld's commodity and stock markets. They've engineered, usingtheir access to stock exchanges and computers and gold supplies, apanic. Then, they prevent the world's stock markets from closing.They jam the gears. They hire mercenaries who hold the rest of theworld leaders at Davos as hostages. The markets can't close. Therich countries....a0 [Emphasis in original.]

227

Trp UNrrpo NarroNs Expospn

Wood wrote that at that point the tycoon cum novelist "makesa slight motion with his frngers as if he were flicking a cigarettebutt out the window."41PffIm!The fates of hundreds of millions,even billions, of people callously sealed with the flick of a finger

- their livelihoods, life savings, jobs, businesses, homes, dreams

- tossed out like a cigarette butt. AII for a good cause ("to savethe planet"), of course.

Wood wrote: "I sit thdre spellbound. This is not azy storytellertalking. This is Maurice Strong. He knows these world leaders.He is, in fact, co-chairman of the Council of the World EconomicForum. He sits at the fulcrum of power. He is in a position to doit." 42

Perhaps more important - and what makes this amateur,would-be novelist's tale so alarming - is that, from everybhingwe know about the eminent Mr. Strong, he is very likely inclinedto do it! Maurice Strong is the archetypal global elitist - asuper-wealthy collectivist of unbridled arrogance, who believesthat he, and a select fey others, have been chosen to run theworld and refashion it according to their utopian designs.

As Secretary-General of UNCED, the LIN Earth Summit inRio, Strong ranted against the lifestyles of "the rich countries"much like the "hero" of his novel. He declared that "the UnitedStates is clearly the greatest risk"' to the world's ecologicalhealth. "In effect," Strong charged, "the United States is com-mitting environmental aggression against the rest of theworld." 43

In a 1991 TINCED report, Strong wrote: "It is clear that cur-rent lifestyles and consumption patterns of the affluent middle-class ... involving high meat intake, consumption of largeamounts of frozen and 'convenience' foods, ownership of motor-vehicles, numerous electric household appliances, home andworkplace air conditioning ... suburban housing ... are not sus-tainable." Moreover, he insisted, a shift is necessary "towardslifestyles ... less geared to ... environmentally damaging con-sumption patterns."aa

Those are just a small sampling of Strong's eco-Stalinist

228

Tnn UN Woruo Morpv SYsrnn't

tirades. And remember, as Daniel Wood said, this man is in aposition to carr5r out the "fictitious" plan he outlined. Wood wasnot exaggerating. Maurice Strong is an Insider's Insider. The oiland enerry magnate is the former head of Dome Petroleum ofCanada, Power Corporation of Canada, Ontario Hydro, andPetro Canada. In 1972,he made his debut on the world stage asSecretary-Genera1 of the first IIN environmental conference,held in Stockholm, Sweden. He was at the time also a trustee ofthe Rockefeller Foundation, one of the premier, longtime pro-moters of world government. Following the Stockholm confab, hewas named to head the newly created United NationsEnvironment Program (UNEP).*

In 1991, Strong teamed up with David Rockefeller, founder ofthe Tfilateral Commission, to write the promotional introduc-tions to the Tiilateral Commission plan for radical global"reform" entitled Beyond Interdependence: The Meshing of theWorld's Econorny and the Earth's Ecology. This eco-socialistpaean to world government, Strong claimed, "provides the mostcompelling economic as well as environmental case for suchreform that I have read."45

One of the Tfilateral "reforms" that Strong, no doubt, fanciedwas the proposal for "a new global partnership expressed in arevitalized international system in which an Earth Council, per-haps the Security Council with a broader mandate, maintains theinterlocked environmental and economic security of the planet."a6

As "luck" would have it, one of the new global entities thatcame into being as a result of the Earth Summit was arl EarthCouncil. One guess as to who was appointed to head it. Yes,Maurice Strong is the chairman.

*strong is also a mover and shaker in such Insider circles ofpower as the clubof Rome, the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies, the Worlil Federation ofUnited Nations Associations, the World Economic Forum, the Worltl FutureSociety, the Lindisfarne Association, Planetary Citizens, the World WildernessCongress, the Business Council for Sustainable Development, the TfilateralCommission, the World Resources Institute, the Gorbachev Foundation, theWorld Bank, and the Commission on Global Governance.

229

Tnr Uxrrro NerroNs Expospn

Mr. Strong has remained very much in the thick of all thingsgreen and global. In 1995, he addressed the Royal Institute ofInternational Affairs, Britain's premier one-world organization,on his progress in organizing National Councils for SustainableDevelopment throughout the world to lobby for Agenda 21, theIIN's mammoth blueprint for global eco-socialism. He has joinedthe globalist glitterati at the Gorbachev Foundation's annualState of the World Fonim. In 1997, he hosted the global Rio+5Conference.

Together with Mikhail Gorbachev and other one-world lumi-naries, Maurice Strong has been promoting the environmentalmanifesto known as the "Earth Charter." This charter envisionsa planetary socialist welfare state, which would, among otherthings, "promote the equitable distribution of wealth withinnations and among nations."47 And Messrs. Strong, Gorbachev,Rockefeller, et a1., will be in charge of the distribution, of course.But before they can "distribute" the world's wealth, they mustfirst take full control of it. Which means it's really about power.That's what all wealth redistribution schemes are always reallyabout. And, clearly, power is what Mr. Strong and his one-worldconfreres are after.

The creation ofa global central bank, a global currency, a glob-al tax system, and a global trading authority have been keyobjectives of world government advocates for decades.Centralized monetary and economic institutions of this kindwould make the orchestrated world frnancial collapse scenarioMaurice Strong envisions mere child's play. They would alsofacilitate the grand redistribute-the-wealth schemes of the UN'sbureaucrats. As was evident in the previous chapter with regardto the EU and WHFTA, the one-world Insiders recognize thateconomic control is their sure path to political control.

Pooling Monetary SovereigntyOne of the Insiders' leading technicians helping to design theirenvisioned "new world order" is Harvard University ProfessorRichard N. Cooper (CFR, TC). Writing in the Fall 1984 edition of

230

THo UN Woruo MoUPY SYstnu

the CFR journal Foreign Affairs, Cooper proposed "a radicalalternative scheme" (his words) that would mean the end ofAmerica as we know it. In his article entitled 'A MonetarySystem for the Future," the Harvarddon wrote:

A new Bretton Woods conference is wholly premature. But it isnot premature to begin thinking about how we would like interna-tional monetary arangements to evolve in the remainder of thiscentury. With this in mind, I suggest a radical alternative schemefor the next century: the creation of a common currency for all ofthe industrial democracies, with a common monetary policy and ajoint Bank of Issue to determine that monetary policy.a8

"The currency of the Bank of Issue could be practically any-thing," the CFR economist continued. "The key point is that mon-etary control - the issuance ofcurrency and ofreserve credit -would be in the hands of the new Bank of Issue, not in the handsof any national gouernment..."4e (Emphasis added.) The prob-Iem, he noted, is that "a single currency is possible only if thereis in effect a single monetary policy, and a single authority issu-ing the currency and directing the monetary policy. How canindependent states accomplish t}irat? They need to turn ouer thedetermination of monetary policy to a supranational bod'y...."so(Emphasis added.)

As the Washington Post prtL it: "The real point is that a conl-n'Lon currency rnedns one cornnxon country, and all else is detailsto be fiIled in later." 51 (Emphasis in original.) Precisely! And theCFR-TC ueberlords are more than willing to provide thosedetails. Mr. Cooper realized that selling this flagrantly totalitar-ian idea to the public would not be an easy, overnight job. "Thisone-currency regime is much too radical to envisage in the nearfuture," he admitted. "But it is not too radical to envisage 25years from now.... tllt will require many years of considerationbefore people become accustomed to the idea." 52

Overcoming objections to "a pooling of monetary sovereignty''

- even with friendly nations - would be difficult under any cir-

231

Tlrr UNrrpo NrrroNs Exposro

cumstances. But how could Americans ever be expected to goalong with a "radical scheme" to merge economically withCommunist countries? It would be difficult, Cooper conceded, butdoable, nonetheless. He wrote: "First, it is highly doubtfulwhether the American public, to take just one example, couldever accept that countries with oppressive autocratic regimesshould vote on the monetary policy that would affect monetar5rconditions in the UnitedStates.... For such a bold step to work atall, it presupposes a certain convergence of political values...." 53

Creating ConvergenceCooper and his confreres in the CFR-dominated media, thinktanks, and academia went to work to create that "convergence ofpolitical values" in the public mind. A flood of articles and op-edsin the Nerl York Times, Los Angeles Times,Washington Post,WallStreet Journal, Foreign Affairs, Foreign Policy, Christian ScienceMonitor, The Economist, etc. soon began hammering home thetheme that the United $tates and Western Europe must helpGorbachet's "perestroika" transform the Soviet Union in thedirection of "democracy'' and a market economy. After the pur-ported "collapse of Communism" in 1989, they stepped up theconvergence drum beat, asserting that the taxpayers ofthe Westmust provide Russia and all the nations of her "former" satelliteempire more billions of dollars in credits and aid to help themmake the transition to freedom and stability.

The essential point here should not be missed: The advocatesof world government intend that their planned global superstate,although "initially limited," will, ultimately, exercise unlimitedplanetary power, a power far beyond that realized by Hitler,Stalin, or Mao. Surely, if we do not stop their megalomaniacalplans, we will see them use this power in much the same way asoutlined by Maurice Strong - and in ways even more brutal andhorrilic.

232

Chapter.L2The UN's One-World Religion

The histories arud symbols that serued our fathers encu.m-ber and diuide us. Sacraments and rituals harbor disputesand, waste our scanty emotions.... The modernization of thereligious impulse leads us straight to the effort for the estab-lishment of the world state as a duty....r

- H.G. Wells, author, historian, and one-world FabianSocialist, The Open Conspiracy, t928

o

The tlnited Nations is the chosen instrument of God; to bea chosen instrument means to be a diuine nxessenger carryingthe banner of God,'s inner uision. and outer manifestation-2

- Master Sri Chinmoy, head of the UN Meditation Room

The responsibitity of each'human being today is to choosebetween the force of darkness and the force of light. We musttherefore transform our attitudes and ualues, and adopt arenewed, respect for the superior law of Diuine Nature.s

- Maurice Strong, UNCED Secretary-General, keynoteaddress to the UN Earth Summit, 1992

We must now forge a netD "Earth Ethic" which will inspireall peoples and nations tojoin in a new global partnership ofNorth, South, East and West. a

- UN publication In Our Hands: Earth Summit'92

[T]heAntichrist and fhe Second Coming of women dre syn-onynxous. This Second Coming is not a return of Christ but anew arriual of female preseruce.... The Second Coming, then,

235

Tnn Uluruo NeuoNs Exposno

rneans that the prophetic dimension in the symbol of theGreat Godd,ess ... is the key to saluation from seruitude....5lEmphasis in original.l

Mary Daly, radicaf feminist "theologian,"Boston College

Witches were freedom fighters for women because theytaught contraception and abortion. The modern contributionis to eleuate reproductive freedom to a uniuersal humanright... -6 [Emphasis in original.l

- Gloria Steinem, socialist, radical feminist,founder of Ms. magazine

Only a person totally deaf and blind could fail to notice theincredible occult, New Age, and neo-pagan explosion that hasbeen rapidly transforming the Americas and Western Europeinto what the advocates of global change gleefully refer to as"post-Christian civilizatiqns." A majority of Americans still con-sider themselves Christian, but find they are increasingly inretreat before a steady onslaught of anti-Christian mediaassaults, court rulings, attacks from academia, and pop cultureofferings. Meanwhile, hedonism, Satanism, witchcraft, astrologT,vampirism, homosexuality Eastern mystic cults, and"Indigenous Peoples" religions are exalted by the same mediamandarins and Hollywood elites who control our "news" and"entertainment."

What very few of theseAmericans realize is that this hideous"spiritual transformation" is tied directly to the United Nations,where the one-world architects intend to enthrone their plannedNew World Religion. And as this Satanic enthronement pro-gresses (yes, we mean, literally, Satanic), Christians - andOrthodox Jews and Muslims as well - will find themselvesincreasingly in the crosshairs of the new world order, singled outas "bigoted," "dogmatic," and "intolerant" for insisting on cling-ing to their "archaic" and "divisive" religious beliefs.

Religious leaders and adherents ofall sects are being aggres-

236

Tnp IIN's Oue-Wonlo Rnl,rcroN

sively evangelized to adopt the UN's new ,,global ethic,,, a gooeym6lange of religious s5mcretism, environmentalism, socialism,and militant secular humanism. People of all religious back-grounds are being enlisted to embiace this ,,global ethic,, as a"core belief" of their religious faith.

As more and more people adopt this new "planetary conscious-ness,'the one-world-Insiders know that support will grow for:

o global disarmament, for both individuals and nationso world governmento paganismo environmental extremismo socialism and Communismo religious persecution, in the name of .tolerance" and combat-

ing "hate"

If the above statements are shocking and incredible to you,then you are unaware,of easily verffiable facts concerning eventsand developments that are dramatically impacting our society.Many of the steps in this diabolic scheme 31g laking place beforeour very eyes, in the open, as British novelist and FabianSoeialist historian H.G. Wells proposed in 1928 in his The OpenConspiracy: Blue Prints For a World Reuolution.

Wells, an ardent one-worlder and one of the most widely readauthors and intellectuals of his day, conceded that human his-tory has proven that religious ideals are essential to the sustain-ing of any society. However, having rejected Christianity and allother religions, he determined that only a new,,modern, religioncould sustain the socialist world government he was advocating."The conspiracy of modern religion against the established insti-tutions of the world must be an open conspiracy,,, he averred, andmust reject "secret methods or tactical insincerities.,,T

This statement was itself a "tactical insincerity,,, of course,since Wells and his one-world, socialist comrades never plannedto be completely open about their schemes. Thus the brazen sym-bol of deception on the Fabian Socialist coat-of-arms: a wolf in

237

Tnp Uurren Nauoxs Exposno

sheep's clothing!"It seems unavoidable," said the Fabian strategist, "that if reli-

gion is to develop unifying and directive power in the presentconfusion of human affairs it must adapt itself ... ; it must divestitselfofits sacred histories, its gross preoccupations, its posthu-mous prolongation of personal ends." "The time has come," saidWeIIs, "to strip religion right down to" what he saw as the spiri-tual essentials: "the desiie for service" and "subordination."8

But "service" and "subordination" to the deities created byProphet Wells and his fellow high-priests. Never one to allowhumility to dim the glory of his divine brilliance, Wells boldlyproclaimed: "So I bear my witness and argue my design. This is,I declare, the truth and the way of salvation." e Moreover, heannounced, "... it will be a world religion. This large loose assim-ilatory mass of groups and societies will be definitely and obvi-ously attempting to swallow up the entire population of theworld and become the new human community." 10

Occult Connections :j.'The global religion envisioned by Wells was a secular, socialistone, but some of his fellow Fabians had migrated from atheismto the occult. TWo of the most important pilgrims of that varietywere radical feminist Annie Besant and British journalist andnewspaper publisher William Stead.

Besant became a fervent disciple of Madame HelenaBlavatsky, the occultist, satanist founder of the modernTheosophical movement. Besant eventually became the interna-tional president ofthe Theosophical Society.

Alice and Foster Bailey, who succeeded Annie Besant,unabashedly revealed their demonic sympathies with thelaunching of Lucifer Publishing Company and its theosophicaljournal, Lucifer. Later, however, they realized that the ChristianWest was still too "unenlightened" to accept open Luciferian doc-trine and changed the name of Lucifer Publishing Company tothe more esoteric (and less likely to offend) Lucis PublishingCompany. They also established the Lucis Tbust to serve as the

238

Tne LIN's Orp-Wonr,o Rnr,rcrox

umbrella organization for a profusion of grobarist/I{ewAge/occultorganizations and programs that are key catalysts of the emerg_ing new world religion. These include the Arcane School, WorldGoodwill, Triangles, Lucis Publishihg, Lucis productions, LucisTlust Libraries, and the New Group of World Servers.ll

According to the Lucis Trust, "world Goodwill is recognised ...at the United Nations as a Non-governmental organisation" andis "represented at regular briefing sessions at the unitedNations in New York and Geneva.,, 12 The *regular weekly broad_casts of talks given at world Goodwill Forum meetings and pro-grams produced by Lucis Productions" in London and New yorkare beamed by Radio For peace International in English,Spanish, German, and French, on shortwave, to a ,,worldwideaudience" from the IIN University for peace in Costa Rica.l3

Lucis Thust also serves as custodian of the Meditation Room gtthe IrN's New York headquarters.la This dark and ominous theo-sophical shrine contains no syrnbols of the world's major religions.A barren, metallic alt4r and a stark, picassoesque mural of geo_metric shapes provide spiritual symbolism. Literature providedat the uN describes the symbols as "a rectangurar six-ton block ofiron ore lit by a single shaft of light and a muted abstract paint-ing at the far end of the small room, similarly illuminated." 15

And what does all this signifr? Theosophist authors Euniceand Felix Layton connect the room,s symbolism to "the story ofthe descent of the divine into every human life, its apparentdeath and burial in the material world and its inevitable finaltriumphant resurrection." 16 Keep in mind that it is Lucifer, the"light-bearer," who is the ,,divine,, one in Blavatsky's twistedtheosophist theology, and you,ll understand why this bizarretemple is entirely apropos for the Tower of Babel on NewyorksEast River.x

William Stead, publisher of the radical patt Mail Gazette, wasnot only a socialist and theosophist - he was also an intimateassociate of the super-rich, megalomaniacal, homosexual cecilRhodes, whom we discussed in Chapter B.

Recall that Rhodes, William Stead, and a small group of high_

239

Tnp Umrrso NATroNs Exposro

born graduates of Oxford and Cambridge, all fervent apostles ofthe socialist Professor John Ruskin, formed a "secret society''(thewords are Rhodes') called the "Society of the Elect." Rhodesadmitted that his plan for dominion wds "a scheme to take thegovernment of the whole wor1d." 17 In other words, a conspiracy.

Envisioning a UN-type world government vested with irre-sistible military force, Rhodes insisted that the scheme mustentail "the foundation of so great a power as to hereafter renderwars impossible." 18 It was in the furtherance of this conspiracythat Rhodes' secret society founded the Royal Institute ofInternational Affairs and CFR. Both of these front groups, as wehave seen, played key roles in establishing the IIN, and are like-wise involved in building the new global religion.

Indoctrination: Subordination to the StateLet us drop back for a moment to revisit H.G. Wells. We have

xAnother principal conduit oftIN spiritualism is the Tbmple ofUnderstanding,operated with the support ofthe Lucis T[ust. It is located near the UN at the his-toric Catheilral of St. John the Divine, a center of political and occult{New Ageactivism, which also houses the radical Interfaith Center of New York and thel,u6ifsrians ofthe Linclisfarne Center. Launched in the early 1960s as the "spiri-tual counterpart of the United Nations," The Temple of Understanding's found-ing sponsors included an odd assortment of Establishment Insiders, socialists,humenists, Communist fronters, religious figures, and entertainment celebrities:Senator John D. Rockefeller IV (CFR, TC); then-Secretary ofDefense Robert S.McNamara (CFR, TC); Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger; IBM pres-ident Thomas J. Watson (CFR); Socialist Party leader Norman Thomas; EleanorRoosevelt; Time-Life president James A. Linen (CFR); homosexual authorChristopher Isherwood; and Fabian Socialist professor and columnist MaxLerner.19

The Temple of Understanding works closely with the IIN Secretariat, theWorld Council of Churches, the World Conference on Religion and Peace, theUN's Society for Enlightenment and TYansforrnation, and other "spiritual lead-ers" to sponsor convocations for "global spirituality." These conferences, whichhave burgeoned in size and frequency over the past decade, invariably turn outto be workshops for religious syncretism, which aims at melding and blending theworld's disparate faiths into one global, neo-pagan, occult religion or "EarthEthic."

240

Tnn LIN,s Or,re-Wonr,o RnucroN

noted the continuing influence of his occult, socialist confreresAnnie Besant and William Stead from early in the last centuryto the present day. But wells himself is arso very much arive in"world order" circles. euotations ffom his works are scatteredthroughout New Age and new world order books and publica_tions. The world FederalistAssociation (wFA), for instance, con-tinues to publish some of his essays, including "How a FederalWorld Government May Come About," taken from his book TheOutline of History (1920;.zo

According to Wells, in that one-world polemic:

The essential task ofmen ofgoodwin in ail states and countriesremains the same, it is an educational task, and its very essence isto bring to the minds of all men eve4rwhere, as a necessary basis forworld co-operation, o, new telting and, interpretation, a cotlrnoninterpretation, of history.... The world perishes unress sovereignty is

tmerged and nationality subordinated.2l [Emphasis in original.J

wells sets down what he sees as "the broad fundamentals ofthe coming world state." "It will be based,,, he says, ,,upon a com_mon world religion, very much simplified and universalized....This will not be christianity nor Islam nor Buddhism nor anysuch specialized form of religion, but religion itself pure andundefrled; the Eightfold way, the Kingdom of Heaven, brother-hood, creative service, and self-forgetfirlness. Throughout th.eworld men's thoughts and motiues wilt be turned, by education....And, education, as the new age wil conceiue it, wilr go on through-out life."22 (Emphasis added.)

sound familiar? This is precisery what we have been experi-encing in our schools and colleges, as well as the government_directed "lifelong learning" programs that gradually havebecome an integral part of so many corporate and governmentaljobs. Which is not to imply that we are, or ought to be, opposedto "lifelong learning," as the term is commonly understood,ln itsmost innocent and benign meaning. Tb the contrarlr, we accept itas a fact of life. ours is not the first generation to realize that

24t

Trm UNrrpo NerroNs E>posno

Iearning does not (or should not) end with the completion of for-mal schooling; wise people (of all socio-economic and educationalbackgrounds) throughout the ages have recognized the need for(as well as the pleasure to be derived from) continuous lifelongeducation. In today's fast-changing, technolory-driven world, itis more important than ever to be constantly updating skills andlearning new ones.

However, in using the same terms, we do not all mean thesame thing. We should be very familiar with this phenomenon bynow. "Tolerance" no longer means "Iive and let live" civility; itmeans using the power of government to force majority accept-ance of the perverse practices of a militant minority."Peacekeeping" means carpet-bombing and,/or invading and mil-itarily subjugating whomever the UN has designated as uillaindu jour. "Multiculturalism" means demonizing Christian andEuropean civilization for genocide, exploitation, and rapingMother Earth. "Investing" doesn't mean private individualsfreely deciding what to dowith their own capital assets; it meanspoliticians and bureaucrats plundering your savings throughtaxation, and then spending it on socialist boondoggles.

So we should not be surprised that the same coercive utopianshave also co-opted "Iifelong learning." In their lexicon it nolonger is an elective; the individual cannot be allowed to deter-mine if and when he will take any continued formal schooling.Such important decisions must be made by superior "experts."Or as Wells put it, "\Me should have the collective affairs of theworld managed by suitably equipped groups of the most inter-ested, intelligent and devoted people" - such as himself and hisfellow Fabians.2s

Subversive World Council of ChurchesOne of the early major attempts to co-opt religion in the serwiceof world government came in 7942. Time magazine devoted con-siderable space in its March 76, L942 issue to a report on a gath-ering at Ohio Wesleyan University of hundreds of delegates rep-resenting the more than 30 denominations called together by the

242

Tur UN's Ouo-Wonm RnucroN

notoriously pro-Communist Federal Council of Churches (FCC).The FCC (which later changed its name to the National Councilof Churches, NCC) was the American branch of the Communist-controlled World Council of Churches, which still exists and hasnever ceased its subversive activities.

Chairing the 1942 FCC Wesleyan confab was Insider JohnFoster Dulles, a founder of the CFR and, together with his broth-erAllen Dulles (CFR), a member of the Woodrow Wilson-ColonelHouse team that tried to foist the League of Nations on theUnited States. John Dulles would later go on to promote the newworld order as Secretary of State under President Eisenhower.However, at the 1942 FCC conference he was lining up churchsupport for the United Nations that would be coming three yearslater.

As Time reported, the Dulles-led conference produced a politi-cal program of "extreme internationalism." Some of the "highspots" of that program,were, said Time:

o llltimately, "a world government of delegated powers."o Strong immediate limitations on national sovereignty.o International control ofall armies and navies.o '.Auniversal system of money...."o Progressive elimination ofall tariffand quota restrictions on

world trade.24

According to Time, the conference "held that 'a new order ofeconomic life is both imminent and imperative'- a new orderthat is sure to come either'through voluntary cooperation ... orthrough explosive political revolution."' "'Collectivism is comingwhether we like it or not,'the delegates were told by no less achurchman than England's Dr. William Paton, co-secretary of theWorld Council of Churches ." 25 T}lre problem is that Dr. Paton andhis comrades did want collectivism, and they were doing every-thing in their power to fasten it upon the peoples of the world,through both patient gradualism and "explosive political revolu-tion." The Time story finished on this note:

243

Tnp UNrrpn NarroNs Exposuo

The ultimate goal: "a duly constituted world government ... aninternational court ... international administrative bodies withnecessary powers, and adequate international police forces andprovision for enforcing its worldwide eco'nomic authority." 26

The Dulles-FCC propaganda parley no doubt greatly assistedthe Insiders'globalist plans, both in building religious supportfor U.S. entry into the iorthcoming United Nations, and in neu-tralizing opposition to the same organization. In the decadessince that confab at Ohio Wesleyan University IIN religioussummitry has played an increasingly important part in the one-world transformation scheme.

The World "Peace" SummitThe granddaddy of these convocations, the United NationsMillennium World Peace Summit of Religious and SpiritualLeaders, was held in New York City in late August 2000 (not tobe confused with the gathering of Heads of State at the IIN'sMillennium Summit, which followed in September). The PeaceSummit offered terrifying glimpses of the outrageous anddemonic "global spiritualit/ the Insiders have planned for us.

The outrages began even before the Peace Summit began,when the UN organizers announced that the Dalai Lama wouldnot be invited because his attendance would offend CommunistChina! 27 So, while more than a thousand religious leaders andgurus representing every conceivable "faith tradition" gatheredin NewYork under bamers of "tolerance," "peace,'and "brother-hood," one of the world's best-known religious figures, therevered leader of millions of Buddhists, and a man who exempli-fies those virtues the UN summit extolled, was barred fromattendance - because the totalitarian, genocidal butchers whohave been brutally occupying his tiny kingdom of Tibet for half acentury would get upset!

The hypocrisy and outrage multiplied as the Summit gotunderway. Not only was the Dalai Lama excluded, but Red Chinawas given a platform to denounce him and the many other vic-

244

Tnn IIN's Oxe-Wonr,n Rnr,rerox

tims of their brutal religious persecution. Representing theButchers of Beijing at this rrN spiritual confabulation was"Bishop" Michael Fu Tieshan of the pRC,s ,,patriotic CatholicChurch."z8 Bishop Fu is not a gemiine Roman Catholic bishoprecognized by the Vatican; he is an agent of the Communist gov_ernment who provides protective cover for his masters whilethey cruelly oppress Teal Catholic bishops, priests, and lay faith_ful. Real chinese catholics like the late Ignatius cardinal KungPin-Mei, who spent more than B0 years in Red China,s prisons.

Cardinal Kung was arrested in 1955, along with more than200 other Catholic priests and Church leaders. They wereabused, tortured, and publicly humiliated at show trials.cardinal Kung was kept in solitary confrnement during much ofhis heroic three decades of imprisonment. He died in exile, in theUnited States, at the age of 98, on March 12,2OOO - just a fewmonths before the IIN "Peace', Summit. He was the Catholicchurch's oldest cardinal.2e other aged servants of God remain inprison. In February 2000, for example, shortly before CardinalKungis death, 8O-year old Archbishop John yang was arrestedduring a midnight raid at his home by the communist authori-ties. so

The persecution continued after the Summit as well. OnSeptember L4,2000, barely a week after the pRC butchers werewelcomed to the Summit, Bishop Thomas Zeng Jingmu wasarrested in his town of Hangpu, in the Southeastern province ofJiangxi. The frail, S0-year-old bishop was taken by force to thelocal prison of Linchuan. Bishop Zeng, who has been arrestedmany times for his faith, has suffered more than B0 years inprison since the 1950s. Also arrested at the same time as BishopZeng were Auxiliary Bishop Deng Hui and Father LiaoHaiqing.sl

Many other Christians in China share this same fate. A fewdays before the start of the summit, three Arnerican evangelistswere arrested in china in the tyrannical regimet crackdown onEvangelical Protestant "house churches.,, The Americans wereamong 130 Christians netted in the Communist sweep of wor_

245

TEr Umrrrn NarroNs E>eospo

ship services in private homes.32 This was but the latest in anongoing pattern ofpersecution that includes the execution by fir-ing squad of Reverend Liu Jiaguo.33 And the persecution ofChristians has been increasing and intensifying - not mellow-ing - in recent years, with each new concession from the U.S.and the West. At the same time, the Beijing regime has also beenengaged in an ongoing brutal suppression of the Falun Gongspiritual exercise and meditation sect, as well as a continuingpersecution of Chinese Muslims.sa

In his address to the UN's "spiritual" Peace Summit, BishopFu Tieshan, the puppet-stooge ofthese Red Chinese persecutors,said:

Let us pray for the wisdom of the Holy Spirit, respect the pur-poses and principles of the U.N. Charter, and from now on, guardagainst and put an end to anything that taint and desecrate reli-gious purity....

Today in China, facts "1nd other practice genuinely reflect theharmony between different religions. And under the protection ofthe Constitution and other laws, we enjoy comprehensive and fullreligious freedom.35

In an obvious attack on the Dalai Lama and the many bravereligious believers suffering under the Communist regime,"Bishop" Fu said: "At present, there are still many violent andevil activities going on'in the name of religion.'Some people havemade use of religious differences to fuel ethnic feuds and provokeso-called conflicts of civilizations; some want to trample upon thesovereignty of other countries under the pretext of'protectingreligious human rights.'" 36

Did any of the esteemed spiritual leaders attending the PeaceSummit walk out in protest over this brazen display ofhypocrisy? Did they announce their "solidaitf with their broth-ers who are suffering for their religious convictions? Did theydemand that Red China stop its vicious persecution of all reli-gions? Did they even timidly ask orr Beijing "partners" to light-

246

Tnp UN's ONp-Woruo RPr,rcroN

en up with the truncheons and thumbscrews? Hah! Not evenclose! Instead, they politely applauded (some enthusiasticallycheered) this puppet of the Communist persecutors.

Most Americans, if they saw or heard any coverage of theSummit in the major CFR-dominated media, were not apprisedofthe cruel charade that was played out there. Few are awarethat Bishop Fu Tieshan is a fraud or that religionists of all typesare routinely persecuied in Red China.

CNN certainly wasn't going to expose this sham; CNN founderand current vice-chairman of CNN parent company TimeWarner, Ted Thrner, not only was a major frnancial sponsor of theSummit, but also honorary chairman of the event. Turner, who isinfamous for his profanity, womanizing, and scathing verbalattacks on Christianity, Christian leaders, the TenCommandments, and Biblical morality, couldn't resist using theSummit podium to criticize the "very intolerant" Christianity ofhis boyhood and to propose a. more global, all-embracing spiritu-ality for the "one hum4n tace."S1

Global Ethic Kung PhooeyThe "spirituality" that One-World Ted and his fellow Insidershave in mind is to be found in the IJN's "Declaration of a GlobalEthic," which UNESCO commissioned renegade "theologian"Hans Kung to draft.38 Yes, while real Christian heroes likeCardinal Kung, who suffer torture for their faith, are complete-ly ignored by the CFR "news" cartel,left-wing ideologues likeHans Kung are celebrated.

For those who like their theolory dished up from the likes ofTed Thrner and Bishop Fu Tieshan - which appears to be mostof the globalist folk who populate the UN diplomatic corps anddelegations to UN conferences - Hans Kung was a perfectchoice. In his 1991 book Global Responsibility: In Search of aNew World Ethic, Kung declared:

Any form of ... church conservatism is to be rejected.... To put itbluntly: No regressive or repressive religion - whether Christian,

247

Tns UNrrno NarroNs Exposno

Islamic, Jewish or of whatever provena has a long-termfuture.39

Moreover, he said: "If ethics is to function for the well-being ofall, it must be indivisible. The undivided world increasinglyneeds an undivided ethic. Postmodern men and women needcommon values, goals, ideals, visions."40 That's right, tlN "diver-sity''is broad enough to embrace every imaginable navel-gazingmystic, diapered swami, saffron-robed guru, befeatheredsachem, spell-chanting shaman, New Age psycho-babbler, tree-worshiping pantheist, witch, warlock, druid, animist, or Mamianspiritualist - but not those terrible, monotheistic creeds.Mustn't tolerate any of those "dogmatic," "absolutist" faiths; ofthat the "tolerant" globalists are dogmatically, absolutely cer-tain.

Another prominent "theologian" of the LIN's "global ethic" isDr. Robert MuIIer (whom we introduced in our Prologue). A for-mer LINAssistant Secretary-General, Dr. Muller served 38 yearsas a United Nations "civil servant," and - following his retire-ment in 1985 - has served as chancellor of the IIN's Universityfor Peace in Costa Rica. He is the author of the World CoreCurriculum now in use in schools worldwide. In his influentialbook Nezu Genesis: Shaping a Global Spirituality, Muller opines:"If Christ came back to earth, his first visit would be to theUnited Nations to see if his dream of human oneness and broth-erhood had come true. He would be happy to see representativesof all nations." a1

We remind you, dear reader, that in the contorted theosophicalsophistry of Muller and compan5r, "Christ" is not Jesus Christ butLucifer. According to Muller, the IIN's wondrous endeavors areleading us on a "grand journey of humanity towards oneness,convergence and unprecedented happiness." What's more, "'Wewere approaching Tbilhard's point of convergence, Wells' lastchapter of The Outline of History... Sri Chinmoy's world oneness... the apotlreosis [deification] of human life on eart}r.."A2

Ttre "Teilhard" Muller refers to is Pierre Teilhard de Chardin

248

Tnp UN's ONs-WonLo RnucroN

- the renegade Jesuit priest, theologian-philosopher, and pale-ontologist who perpetrated the great "Piltdown Man" evolution-ist hoax. "Wells" is, of course, H.G. Wells, whom we introducedabove. Sri Chinmoy is the one-world,"NewAge guru who runs theUN's Meditation Room and regularly leads the meditations.Chinmoy has offered his prophecy regarding the UN's divinemission:

The United Nations is the chosen instrument of God; to be a cho-sen instrument means to be a divine messenger carr5ring the ban-ner of God's inner vision and outer manifestation. One day, theworld will ... treasure and cherish the soul of the United Nationsas its very own with pride, for this soul is all-loving, all-nourishing,and all-fulfillirrg.ag

"Spiritual Leaders" for the New MillenniumIt was Master Chinmoy, appropriately, who presented the IIN'sU Thant Peace Award'to Maurice Strong, the globe-trotting bil-lionaire best known for his role as Secretary-General of the 1gg2UN Earth Summit inBrazil4 Strong was receiving the honor,said Chinmoy, for "his lifelong commitment to the soaring idealsof the United Nations."

The award was named for U Thant, the Burmese Marxist whoserved as the IIN's third Secretary-General and who, in 1970,brazenly declared: "Lenin was a man with a mind of great clari-W and incisiveness."4s Maurice Strong, who apparently sharesL€nin's 'great clarity and incisiveness," has been a driving forcein bringing the most extreme enviro-Leninism and far-out reli-gio-Leninism into the social, political, economic, religious main-stream.

Other vaunted "spiritual leaders" who are guiding humanityinto the developing "global ethic" of the new millennium include:

o Mohammed Ramadan, president of the UN's Society forEnlightenment and T[ansformation, which has offices in thebasement of the UN building where every conceivable variety

249

Tnp UNrrno NarroNs Expospn

of "spiritual sage" - witch doctors, mystics, "channelers,"UFO enthusiasts, reincarnated Masters - contribute theircosmic energies to the sacred mission of the UN.

o Apostate theologian Matthew Fox, whose radical New Agespirituality embraces Wicca, homosexuality, abortion, and one-world socialism. An apostle of the Gaia (Earth Goddess)Gospel, Fox says, "I-believe the appropriate symbol of theCosmic Christ ... is that of Jesus as Mother Earth crucifred yetrising daily.... [T1he symbol of which I speak holds the capaci-ty to launch a global spirituality of untold dimensions appro-priate for the third millennium."46

o Gerald Barney, founder and executive director of theMillennium Institute and a co-chair of the 1993 Parliament ofWorld Religions. In his keynote address at that summit, hesaid that "an internationally famous, highly inJluential authoron sustainable development told me bluntly, 'Religion mustdie. It is the fundamental cause of virtually all social, econom-ic, and ecological problems and much of the violence in theworld."'47 The only alternative to the destruction of religion,Barney asserted, is the "reinterpretation and even rejection ofancient traditions and assumptions" and the creation of a"'sustainable' faith tradition on earth...."A8 "Eyery person,"Baraey said, "must learn to think like Earth, to act like Earth,to be Earth."ae Barney was the lead author of the enviro-Leninist Global 2000 report for the Carter administration andwas a national program director for the Rockefeller BrothersFund.

o William Irwin Thompson, founder of the (Luciferian)Lindisfarne Association. "We have now a new spirituality,what has been called the New Age movement," Thompsonsays. "This is now beginning to influence concepts of politicsand community in ecology.... This is the Gaia [Mother Earth]politique ... planetary culture." 50

250

Tnp UN's ONo-Wonlo RplrcroN

o Mikhail Gorbachev, former Soviet dictator, butcher ofAfghanistan, and chairman of the Gorbachev Foundation andGreen Cross International. In a Los Angeles Times interview ofMay 8, 1997, Gorbachev insisted humanity must embrace "anew environmental legal code rooted in an Earth Charter ... akind of Tbn Commandments, a 'Sermon on the Mount,' thatprovides a guide for human behavior toward the environmentin the next century and beyond." "The most important thing,"he said, "is the shaping of a new value system" from a "news5mthesis" of "democratic, Christian, and Buddhist values ...which affirm such moral principles as social responsibility andthe sense of oneness with nature and with each other."s1Gorbachev's week-long State of the World Forum 2000 extrav-agarrza in New York City was the bridging event between thePeace Summit and the Millennium Summit, with many of theheads of state, ambassadors, UN offrcials, and spiritual leadersfrom both events also participating in the Gorbachev Forum.

Earth Charter Subversion and PerversionComrade Gorbachev knows something about the Earth Charter,since he helped compose it. It was his good friend, MauriceStrong, as chief of the Earth Summit, who commissioned him totake up the important task. While much of the Charter soundslike harmless eco-babble, or even sensible earth stewardshipthat is compatible with Christian theology, it is larded withdeceptive code words and traps aimed at destroying Judeo-Christian moral values and the non-socialist political-economicsystems. Article 12 (a) of the Earth Charter commits signatorygovernments to:

Eliminate discrimination in all its forms, such as that based onrace, color, sex, sexual orientation, religion, language, and national,ethnic or social origin.52 [Emphasis added.]

This is very clearly aimed at expanding the socialist state intoall spheres of life and especially to undermine the legal codes of

257

nations based upon the moral precepts of the monotheistic reli-gions, all of which proscribe homosexuality. The Charter, like themany "human rights" conventions it promotes, seeks to givehomosexual activists a pretext to clainrlegal footing to challengein the courts and legislatures national, state, and local lawsagainst sexual perversion.

This is already happening. The frrst case we are aware of waslaunched in 1992 whbn Nick Tloonen, a homosexual rightsactivist inAustralia, asked the UN Human Rights Committee toinvestigate the state of Tasmania's anti-homosexuality statute.The UN committee determined that Tbonen could be classified asa "victim."53

Similarly, here in the United States, militant sodomites havecharged that they are "victims" of human rights violationsbecause of our laws against homosexual practices and havetaken their cause to the United Nations. If we allow currenttrends to continue, we most certainly will see a federal court inthe near future rule that U.S. state laws concerning sodomymust be struck down to iomply with tIN "human rights" law.

Christian-Maxist 6Unit5/'Following the conclusion of the State of the World Forum 2000(September 4th-10th) in New York, Mr. Gorbachev was off on amulti-week evangelistic crusade that took him to some surpris-ing venues. He was received with apparent enthusiasm atchurches in Florida and Tennessee.

Then it was off to Salt Lake City, where Gorby addressedFranklin Covey's International Symposium at the Salt Palace.xAt a Salt Lake City press conference, the Nobel Prize winnerlamented to the assembled media corps that "we do not have anew world order, the kind of new world order that we need." 54

Later, in California, he shared a stage with William "StarT!ek" Shatner, before beaming his "global ethic" sermonette to aglobal television audience from the Reverend Robert Schuller'sfamous Crystal Cathedral. "I know that he calls himself an athe-ist," Rev. Schuller said, but Schirller believed, nonetheless, that

252

Tnp IIN's Our-Wonr,o Rplrcrox

God had used Gorbachev o'in a mighty way." And he hoped thatone day the former Communist dictator would become "a man offaith." 55

We join Rev. Schuller in that hope, as we hope that all atheistswill become "men of faith" - as that term has been understoodtraditionally by believers. But, in the meantime, is there any jus-tification for Christians to turn ouer their pulpits to atheists - toenemies of God - Iike Gorbachev? Comrade Gorbachev, after all,is a "man of faith": He believes in the gospels of Marx and Lenin.As we have already noted, Gorbachev declared in 1989: "I am aCommunist, a convinced Communist. For some that may be afantasy. But for me it is the main goal."s6 By both word and act,Gorbachev has confirmed many times since then his continuedadherence to his reuolutionary fait}n.

To anyone familiar with Commwistdialectical materialism asit concerns religion, Gorbachev's fixation with religion over thepast decade makes perfect sense. He is one of the leading globalactivists working to transform Christianity, to unite it withMarxism! As a mastei dialectician, he is expert in the use ofwords as weapons, particularly in using words that will appealto and disarm Christians. According to one of Gorbachet's oldfriends, Natasha Rimashevskaya, he had one phrase he loved tosay: "'As to this question, one must approach it dialectically.'That meant he wanted to entertain a thesis and its contradictionat the same time." 57

#Ihanks to a celebrity status that has been bestowed on him by the Insiders,Gorbachev is received like a rock star by politicians, journalists, business andreligious leaders, educators, and entertainers worldwide. He is, reportedly, thehighest-paid nrme for hire in the world, commanding $100,000 for a half-hourtalk. Gunter Kunkel, president of the Phoenix Club in Anaheim, California, felthis group had gotten a "bargain" because they only had to pay $75,000 for 50minutes ofthe Gorbachev wisdom and charm. "Can you think ofanybody bigger?"the awestruck Kunkel asked the Los Angeles Tl.mes'MLke Anton. "It will proba-bly be the greatest night we have seen here."58 Prior to the Millennium Surnmit,Gorbachev scored one of his biggest coups to date, when, on June 27 , 20O0, hewas given a place ofhonor between Cardinals Sodano and Silvestrini at a Vaticanpress conference in Rome.59

253

Tnp Umroo N,qrror.rs Expospo

Gorbachev's admiring biographer, Gail Sheehy, tells us: "Leninis in his blood, say Gorbachev's friends. And Lenin's doctrine oftwo steps forward, one step back'- or complete tactical flexibil-ity - appealed particularly strongly tdhim."60 Gorbachev is fol-lowing precisely the Leninist dialectical line that was spelled outby Li Wei Han of the Central Committee of the ChineseCommunist Party in 1959, in instructions sent to Fidel Castro'snew Communist regime. According to Comrade Li:

The line of action to follow against the Church is to instruct, toeducate, to persuade, to convince, and, gradually, to awaken andfully develop the political conscience ofCatholics by getting them totake part in study circles and political activities. By means of theseactivities, we must undertake the dialectical struggle within rcli-g1on. Gradually, we will replace the religious element with theMarxist element.Gl [Emphasis added.]

Have the Communists forgotten or abandoned this lesson?They have never been more active or aggressive in promoting it!In fact, Comrade Li's 1959 instructions have beeg reprinted inbooks currently available in Communist bookstores. Moreimportantly, it is a simple matter to observe them in action.These same instructions form the basis of the "LiberationTheologyz revolution that was launched from Cuba into LatinAmerica and North America in the 1960s and is operatingthroughout the world today. These instructions form the basis ofthe Soviet push (under Gorbachev) for development of the new"global spirituality."

While Christian leaders naively praise the new "openness" toreligion in Communist countries, Leninists like Gorbachev knowthis is only a temporary, tactical "one step back." There is noquestion that the Leninists - with the aid of foolish Christians,as well as agents posing as Christians - are "[replacingl the reli-gious element with the Marxist element." Thus we have seen ahost of books and articles promoting the diabolic dialectic themeof "Christian-Marxist Unity." One example of this, Christian-

254

Tno UN's Oun-Wonr,o Rpr,rcrorrl

Marxist Unity: A Miraculous, Explosiue Prescription, t}ire infl:u-ential text by Raimundo Garcia Franco, tells us:'Yes, Christianfaith and Marxism-Leninism do share almost complete overlap-ping of common objectives in the building of socialism. We can-not look backward, since the path ahead is that ofcreative trans-formation to communism and to the Kingdom of God on thisearth." 62

This is the samb subversive dialectic that permeatesGorbachev's annual State of the World Forums6s as well as all ofthe UN's "spiritual" confabulations. When the leaders of theseevents aren't directly "replacing the religious element with theMarxist element," they are fast at work replacing the Christianelement with various pagan and New Age elements, which theyrecognize as far more flexible and conducive to their Marxist one-world schemes than what they scornfully denounce as "dogmat-ic," "tigjd," and "sectarian."

Christianity's Epitaph?Where is this leading? It is worthwhile noting what the militantpaganists themselves say about this. In the Fall 1995 issue of theoccult journal Gnosis we find a very sobering report entitled

HIT'i,ln TLil.ffi fl ""T.ffJ ;i

":"J;l"ffi,*t3;;Christopher Bamford, head of Lindisfarne Press, exults that thelast 10 years "have seen a fundamental revision in our under-standing of Christianity, not in essence, but in application.... IAIdead monolith has been demolished, and in its place we cansense the presence of a living being...."65 The creation of a "liv-ingl Christianity, according to Bamford, reflects the growinginlluence in "mainstream' Christianity of such thinkers astheosophist Rudolf Steiner, occultisVpsychologist CarI Jung, andPierre Teilhard de Chardin.

Gnosis also trumpeted the exultant reports of Diane ConnDarling regarding the rise of neo-paganism, which is busy "build-ing interfaith relations with mainstream religious groups." Onemajor achievement in this effort, the not-so-darling Ms. Darling

255

Tne Umrpo NarroNs E:rpospo

reported, occurred when "several major Neopagan groups vrererepresented at the 1993 World Parliament of Religions inChicago. Our presentations were heavily attended, including abeautiful Full Moon Circle celebrated ih a nearby park.... Paganpriestess Deborah Light and the Fellowship of Isis (the world'slargest Pagan organization) are signatories on our behalfto theDeclaration of [a] Global Ethic...." 66 Darling glowingly remarkedthat "polytheism is .reaily universal in neopaganism." As is pan-theism. According to Ms. Darling: "Neopagans see the God/dessin all things: in each other, in persons following different paths,in animals, plants, planets, rivers, rocks, and in ourselves.... TheNeopagan mythos gives rise to an ethos grounded in the Earth.Indeed, for a great many Neopagans, the Great Goddess is theliving Earth herself."67 (Emphasis in original.)

These denizens of darkness, when speaking amongst them-selves, arejubilant because they are positive that they are ridinga cosmic neopagan wave that will soon overwhelm what they seeas a crumbling, dying C[rristianity.

Darkness Clothed in LightHaving closely followed the UN for more than two decades as ajournalist and researcher, and having attended UN Summitsfrom Rio to San Francisco to Rome to NewYork, it is clear to thiswriter that the neo-pagan one-worlders at the UN Tbwer of Babelare accelerating the tempo of their program of spiritual subver-sion, even as they become more swollen with arrogance. The RioEarth Summit was a watershed event, very powerfully and pub-Iicly wedding the UN to the New Age, one-world, neo-pagan"worldview."

In his opening address to the UNCED (Earth Summit) plena-ry session, Maurice Strong directed the world's attention to theDeclaration of the Sacred Earth Gathering, which was part ofthe pre-Summit ceremonies. "[T]he changes in behavior anddirection called for here," said Strong, "must be rooted in ourdeepest spiritual, moral and ethical values."68 According to thedeclaration, the ecological crisis "transcends all national, reli-

256

Tnp UN's ONr-Womo RelrcroN

gious, cultural, social, political, and economic boundaries.... Theresponsibility of each human being today is to choose betweenthe force of darkness and the force of light. We must thereforetransform our attitudes and values, and adopt a renewed respectfor the superior law of Divine Nature." 6e

However, in the twisted theosophic theolory of MauriceStrong, Robert Muller, Sri Chinmoy, and other occultists whodominate the United Nations, "light" is darkness and "darkness"is light. Their "light" comes not from Jesus Christ ("I am theLight of the world," John 8:12), but from Lucifer, "the Light bear-er." The Earth Summit was a non-stop orgy of pagan, Gaia-wor-shiping ceremonies, ritgals, sermons, eulogies, declarations,manifestos, and celebradions. It not only marked the introduc-tion of the radical NGO legions as an emerging superpower, butbrought the occult nature of the UN out in the open.

Not entirely into the open, however. The controlled U.S. medianever gave the Americanpublic at large an accurate view of thisclamorous chorus. Mos! frequently, the media presented them asnob1e, if sometimes eccentric, idealists. The viewing and readingpublic had no way of knowing the extent and depth of the specif-ically and rabidly anti-American, anti-Christian animus of thevast majority of the official delegates and NGO radicals. Norwere they made aware of the overtly pagan and communisticemphasis of the entire Earth Summit program and the conven-tions, declarations, and treaties that came out of it.

American television viewers did not see the ubiquitousCommunist flags, posters, and gxaffiti that festooned the NGO'sGlobal Forum at Rio's Flamengo Park. Nor did they see the evenmore plentiful pagan, occult, and Wicca symbols, exhibits, semi-nars, and programs that could not be avoided at the Summit.They did not see the incredibly gross homosexual pornographydisplay that was allowed to daily assault the eyes of thousandsof Brazilian families who visited Flamengo Park. This FordFoundation-funded70 exhibit of life-size photographs would havebeen illegal in most cities inAmerica, but it was a welcome addi-tion at the UN celebration.

257

Tnr UNrmo NrrroNs Exposno

Quite the opposite of the image of peace, brotherhood, and tol-erance presented by the U.S. media, the Earth Summiteers werealmost universally venomous, foul, blasphemous, and profane intheir constant verbal attacks on the United States, the middleclass, capitalism, technolory, Christianity, and Christian leaders,viciously attacking Dr. James Dobson, Rev. Jerry Falwell, andmost especially Pope John PauI II. When Fidel Castro arrived atthe Summit, however,

-the NGOs and official delegates alikeerupted in ecstasy.

Since Rio, the NGOs have become more emboldened, aggres-sive, sophisticated, professionally organized, and lavishly fund-ed. But it hasn't tempered.their fury and ranting; in fact, theyhave gotten worse. Having sat amongst the NGO leaders andcadres in their strategy sessions, and having interviewed, dinedwith, and mingled with top IIN officials and delegates at UNvenues around the world, I cannot help but arrive at the conclu-sion that these "peace people," these "civil servants" and self-appointed representatives of "global civil society," are the mostpathetic and concentrated collection of pompous, privileged,pampered, hateful, t5rrannical, hypocritical, morally revoltingspecimens of humanity one is likely ever to encounter.

Even more outrageous than the behavior of these miscreants,however, are the arguments of elected American officials that wemust continue participating in and supporting this dangerouscharade. The UN is elevating, legitimizing, and popularizing allof the demonic inlluences that are pushing our civilization intothe dark abyss. The Pratt House one-worlders and theirCommunist allies have energetically embraced the H. G. Wellsprescription for sustaining their desired society. In their vision,the human community must be suitably subservient to the UN.Religions advocating loyalty to a higher authority must give wayto a "new" mandated orthodoxy demanding that all worship theone-world socialist state. In the emerging new world order, theUN superstate will tolerate no other god before it.

The average American has become so inured to the neo-paganinfluences that are saturating our culture that he is apt to sim-

258

[."-= '="" -

Ttrp UN2s Orn-Woruo Rur,rcrow

ply shrug his shoulders at each new offense, and figure there isnothing that can be done. It's all just part of our inevitable,downward moral spiral, he sadly reasons. But there is somethingthat can be done about this. The American taxpayers and votershave it within their power to change that. We will explain thatin detail in our final chapter.

259

Chapter 13

The UN Declares Total TYaron the Family

Abolition of the family!.... Do you charge us with wantingto stop the exploitation of children by their parents? To thiscrime we plead guilty.l

- Karl Marx, The Communist Manifesto,1848

The kindergarten or infant school has a significant part toplay in a child's education. Not only can it correct many ofthe errors of home training, but it can prepare the child formembership ... in the world society.... As long as the childbreathes the poisoned air of nationalism, ed,ucation in world-mindedness can produce only rather precarious results. Aswe haue pointed out, it is frequently the family that infectsthe child with extreme nationalism. The school should there-fore use the means described earlier to combat family atti-tudes that fauor jingoism.2

- United Nations Educational, Social, and CulturalOrganization (UNESCO), 1949

The people who haue taught us to belieue whateuer theywere told by their parents or their teachers are the people whoare the tnenace to the world.B

- Dr. G. Brock Chisholm, Director General of the [IN'sWorld Health Organization, speech of September 11, 1954

If we want to talk about equality of opportunity for chit-dren, then the fact that children are raised in families nleansthere's no equality.... In order to raise children with equality,

261

Tup Uxrrpo NrtroNs Exposnn

we must take them away from families and communallyraise them.a

. - Dr. Mary Jo Bane,U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,

Clinton administration

Euery child is our child.s

- motto of the United Nations Children's Fund(UNICEF)

One of the most terrifuing features of totalitarian society is thecontrol and brainwashitg of children and youth by theOmnipotent State. The 20th centuqy's experiments with such"education" must never be forgotten, for they produced mon-strosities of unimaginable evil: the Hitler Youth; Mao's RedGuard; the Young Pioneers of Madimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin, andFidel Castro; and the cold-blooded murderous youth of theCambodian Khmer Rouge.

Children were "transformed" through a "reshaping of con-sciousness." They were taught to publicly denounce (and evenexecute) their parents, to reject all tradition, to renounce theirreligion and embrace atheism (or, in the case of Nazi Germany,to embrace Hitler's Teutonic paganism), and to betray theircountries.

Matt Cvetic, who for nine years was an undercover agent inthe Communist Party USA for the FBI, attended a secret meet-ing of top-level Communists in 1948, at which a Soviet agentrelayed a speech that Stalin had given directing the AmericanCommunists to put new emphasis on the recruitment of youth.Here is part of Stalin's speech:

Comrades, Hitler gained control of the Youth in Germany beforehe was able to wage a successful Nazi Revolution in Germany. WeCommunists gained control of the Youth in Russia before we wereable to wage a successful Communist Revolution in Russia, andComrades, we must gain control of the Youth in the United States

262

TEp UN Drcunps Torar, Wan oN ruu Farvrrly

if we are to wage a successfirr communist Revolution in thatnation. For this purpose, we are ordering our Comrades to set up anew Communist Youth group in the enited States.6

As cvetic pointed out, "within a few short months after thismeeting, more than 6,000American students were recruited intothis new communist,Youth movement known as the LaboryouthLeagus."zThis youth apparatus has gone through various struc-tural and name changes over the years, but its purpose hasremained unchanged. In 1983, it was reorganized and renamedthe Young communist League (ycl,), the name under which itstill operates. ,

However, t}ne primary danger to American children and youthat that time emanated not from the ycl, or other groups overtlyassociated with the communist party. Those efforts that wereopenly Communist only reached tens of thousands of young peo_ple. Far more dangerous were the pro-Communist, pro_UN,internationalist programs in our schools that were reaching tensof millions of students. Thanks to generous funding from thecarnegie Endowment, the Rockefelrer and Ford Foundations,and the other Insider foundations, subversive textbooks and cur-riculum materials were flooding our schools. Thousands of teach-ers rr/ere being programmed at college to serve as .changeagents." Change agents like Lydia Shchevchenko. In his mem_oirs, former soviet dictator Nikita Khrushchev told of the lastinginfluence of this childhood teacher on his life:

I suppose you could say my political education began during myboyhood in the little village of Kalinovka where I was born. Myschoolteacher there was a woman named Lydia shchevchenko. shewas a revolutionary. she was also an atheist. she instilled in memy first political consciousness and began to counteract the effectsof my strict religious upbringing. My mother was very religious,likewise her father - my grandfather.... when I think back to mychildhood, I can remember vividly the saints on the icons againstthe wall of our wooden hut, their faces darkened by fumes from the

263

Tre UNrrno NnuoNs Exposno

oil lamps. I remember being taught to kneel and pray in front of theicons with the grown-ups in church. When we were taught to read,we read the scriptures. But Lydia Shchevchenko set me on a pathwhich took me away from all that."8

Where did that path lead? Nikita Khrushchet's subsequentcareer was detailed rn a seven-part study, The Crimes ofKhrushcheu, published by a congressional committee in 1959.eDuring Stalin's bloody purges, the report notes, Khrushchev, "asthe Number 1 Communist offcial in the Moscow area ... sentthousands to their death, scores of thousands to hideous slave-labor camps." 10 When Stalin was ready to launch his plannedgenocide of the people of the lIkraine, Khrushchev "was sent in1937 as Stalin's trusted killer.... When his two-year Ukrainianpurge was over, an estimated 400,000 had been killed and terrorgnpped the whole population."rl Late\ he added to his infamy,gaining the title of "the Butcher of Budapest" for his ruthlesssubjugation of Hungary. 12

State-of-Mind MarxistsHow many would-be and wanna-be Khrushchevs have been cre-ated by Lydia Shchevchenko's m5rriad counterparts in America?The thought is frightening; the number is certainly far greaterthan mostAmericans would ever imagine. Khrushchev was bornin 1894 and the time period of his revolutionary formationreferred to above was probably around 1900-1910, before theCzar was overthrown and Lenin came to power. Khrushchev didnot say whether Lydia was actually a member of one of theCommunist organizations in Czarist Russia.

The important point is that it is not necessary for someone likeLydia to be an actual disciplined Party member in order to be aneffective "change agent" in carrying forward the Communist rev-olution. As Lenin said, "We must build Communism with non-Communist hands." 13

Lydia Shchevchenko was, at the very least, a "state-of-mindMarxist." She had consciously rejected God and countr5l

264

Trr UN Dncr,nnps Torer, Wen oN mrp Faurr,y

embraced the "revolutionary faith," and dedicated herself to itspropagation. Like Lydia, there are many thousands ofAmericaneducators who have imbibed of the "revolutionary faith," and, tovarying degrees, have adopted and propagated its tenets. Manyare "state-of-mind Marxists,, without even knowing it. Some ofthese consider themselves Democrats, Republicans, liberals, oreven conservatives and libertarians, but they are transmittingthe Marxist contagion nonetheless. They are greatly assisted inthis subversion, as we shall see, by the major teachers unions,the cFR-dominated tax exempt foundations, and the variousagencies of the United Nations.

Equally important tqthis subversion process is the massivedisinformation and moral corrosion provided by the Insider-runmass media and pop culture, most especially the so-called *enter-tainment" aimed at youth. Over the past two generations, wehave seen these educational and culturar elements carr5ring for-ward a massive, coordinated program of conquest through ,,aslow reshaping of consciousness,, as prescribed by ItalianCommunist theorist Antonio Gramsci. 1a

"In a developed society, 'the passage to sociarism'occurs nei-ther by putsch nor by direct confrontation,,, Gramsci maintained,%ut by the transformation of ideas, which is to say _ a slowreshaping of consciousness." "And the stake of this war of posi-tions is the culture, that is - the source of values and ideas,"said Gramscil "The seizure of politicat pouter is not possible untirafter the seizure of cultural potDer.,, rs (Emphasis added.)*

Dumb Down, Bum Down, Numb Down, Scum DownThe Pratt House thought cartel has been doing all within itspower to speed this "seizure of cultural power." Like their Fascistand communist brethren, the cFR one-worlders realize full wellthat for their global totalitarian vision to succeed, they must

*For the most complete exposition of the Gramsci stratery for "the seizure of cul-tural power2 in America, see the special "Gramsci issue" of rhe New Am,erican,?risoners of the Total State," July 5, 1ggg.

265

Tnp Uurpo Neuoms Exposno

take control of the children and youth. For their New WorldOrder to triumph they must have obedient, subservient masses

- an unthinking, goose-stepping lumpen proletariat.In order toachieve this goal they know they must destroy, or "decortstruct,"what they refer to as "mass thought patterns" and "conscious-11gss" - most especially in children and youth - so they can"reconstruct" and "reshape" the thought patterns and conscious-ness according to their own designs.

Through their dominant influence in education, the massmedia, and the centers and instruments that produce our popu-lar culture, the Insiders'change agents are aggressively pursu-ing this destruction-decqnstruction/reshaping-reconstructionprocess. This process contains several components, which werefer to as the dumbing down, bumming down, numbing down,and scumming down ofAmerican society and culture.

The dumbing down ofAmerica has been the subject of intenseconcern and gteat debate for several decades. The alarming 1983report A Nation At Risk, by the National Commission onExcellence in Education, warned that "the educational founda-tions ofour society are presently being eroded by a rising tide ofmediocrity that threatens our very future as a nation and a peo-ple."1e That report and dozens of others before and since havecataloged the grim results of this dumbing-down process: wide-spread illiteracy, high student dropout rates, continuous declinein scores in all areas of academic achievement, the plummetingof the U.S. to last or near-Iast place on test scores, etc.

These results should not surprise: Tbaditional academic coresubjects have been replaced with "politically correct," multi-cul-tural programming; phonics instruction has been supplanted byvarious look-say, whole-word "reading" programs; and evolution-ary dogma, sex education, and enviro-Leninist propaganda havereplaced real science.x

The bumming down of America is proceeding on many fronts,but the attack through the schools is especially pernicious. Thepublic (i.e., government) schools have trained several genera-tions of children to look to Big Brother in Washington for the

266

THo UN Dpcr"a,nns Tornr, Wln oN rup Faurr,y

"solution" to every problem, whether real or contrived.Responsibility, initiative, pride of workmanship, self-sufficiency,and independence are being replaped by the irresponsibility,sloth, slovenliness, and dependence of the welfare state. The gov-ernment schools are being transformed into socialist cradle-to-grave, womb-to-tomb "community centers" that also serve asdaycare centers, medical clinics, senior citizen centers, andproviders of"Iifelong learning" for adult education.

The numbing down and scumming down of America, likewise,are proceeding on many fronts, the educational system workingin tandem with the CFR-controlled mass media and the "enter-tainment" industry to d6troy every vestige of decency, honor, andvirtue. Since fomenting the social upheavals of the 1960s, thesesame forces have been accelerating their attack, promoting alien-ation, rebellion, cSmicism, hedonism, promiscuity, paganism, andfalse idealism. They are pressing on to destroy the residualChristian culture ofAmerica and the values system it upholds inorder to clear the way.for their planned "reshaping' process.**

Attack From WithinThe aforementioned studyA Nation At Risk ominously noted: "Ifan unfriendly foreign power had attempted to impose onAmericathe mediocre educational performance that exists today, wemight well have viewed it as an act of war. As it stands we haveallowed this to happen to ourselves.... We have, in effect, been

*For one of the most informative expos6s of this scheme to intellectually crippleand subvertAmerican children and youth, see: The Deliberate Dumbing Down ofAmerica by Charlotte Iserbyt (Ravenna, Ohio: Conscience Press, 1999). This 750-page, telephone book-size opus is a masterpiece of research and educationaldetective work by one of America's top education experts. Other important worksalong these lilres ate Educating for the New World Order by Beverly K. Eakman(Portland, Ore.: Halcyon House, 1991) arrd Arnerica 2000 lGoals 2000 - Mouingthe Nation Ed,ucationally to a "New World Order,'compiled and edited by JamesR. Patrick (Moline, Ill.: Citizens for Academic Excellence, Lgg4). DeliberateDumbing Down is available from American Opinion Book Serwices, P.O. Box8040, Appleton, WI 54912.

267

Tun UNrrno NarroNs E:rposno

committing an act of unthinking, unilateral, educational disar-mament." 17

The statement is both true and false at the same time. Whileit is true that no foreign nation has "irnposed" (in the militarysense, that is) our educational disaster upon us, it is not alto-gether true that we have "done this to ourselves." A close exami-nation of the subversive educational 'reforms" of decades pastthat produced our present catastrophe shows that the individu-als and organizations most responsible do indeed constitute apower "foreign" to - and militantly hostile to - our constitu-tional and spiritual heritage. And they have indeed been carrSr-ing out unrelenting, total garfare against American society.

Integral to this total war is the rooting out of individualismand all loyalties that compete with supreme loyalty to the omnis-cient, omnipotent, omni-benefrcent state - in this case, theworld state. Thus the traditional family is viewed by these aspir-ing global overlords not just as a competitor, but as a mortalenemy. Philosophers as varied as Aristotle, Cicero, John Locke,and G.K. Chesterton have noted that the family is ordained byGod and Nature to raise and educate children. That truth isplainly obvious. But the one-worlders will have none of that. Theparents and the family must be supplanted by agents of the glob-al state: the school and other social agencies.

This is basic Tlranny 101; it follows the statist, textbook dog-mas of Rousseau, Marx, Lenin, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and others oftheir totalitarian ilk throughout history. The Hitlerian UNESCO**Some of the most important works exposing this war on America's moral foun-dations are: JudithA. Reisman, Kizsey: Crirnes and Consequences (Arlington, Va.:Institute for Media Education, 1998); Samuel Blumenfeld, Is Public EducationNecessary? (Boise, Idaho: The Paradigm Co., 1991); Balint Vazsonyi, Amerira'sThirty Years Wor (Washington, D.C.: Regnery Publishing, 1998); Berit Kjos, BraueNew Schools (Eugene, Ore.: Harvest House Publishers, 1995); Barbara Morris,The Great Am,erican Con Gazz (Escondido, Cal.: Image FX, 1997); Paul C.Vrtz,Faith of the Fatherless: Thc Psychology of Atheism (Dallas, Tbxas: SpencePublishing Company, 1999); Brenda Scott, Child.ren No More (Lafayette, La.:Hnntington House Publishers, 1995); and Claire Chambers, Th.e SIECUS Circl,e:AHutnanist Reuolution (Belmont, Mass.: Western Islands, 1977).

268

Tnp IIN Dpcr,erns Torer, W.m oN rrm Flurly

screed quoted at the head of this chapter, charging the familywith "infecting" the child with bad attitudes, is taken from aUNESCO program for teachers, published in 1949 under theheading Towards World Understanding. ln this 10-part series,UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and CulturalOrganization) complained that "before the child enters school hismind has already been profoundly marked, and often injurious-ly, by early in{luences" - most particularly by parents, of course,who are deemed hopelessly ignorant and insuffrciently "world-minded." 18 Parents are seen by UNESCO as retrograde influ-ences who tend to teach their children love for God and country,which UNESCO conderyned as "infecting" the minds of childrenwith "nationalism," "chauvinism," arrd "sclerosis of the mind." 19

This pernicious one-world, anti-parent, anti-family, anti-patri-otism sentiment was already being spread through the schoolsmany years earlier by the radical National EducationAssociation (NEA), the nation's largest teachers union. When theUnited Nations was created, the NEAbecame (and remains) oneof its biggest promoters.2o

For the NEA, the United Nations became the hope of theworld. In January 1946, Joy Elmer Morgan wrote in the NEAJournal:

In the struggle to establish an adequate world government, theteacher has many parts to play. He must begin with his own atti-tude and knowledge and purpose. He can do much to prepare thehearts and minds ofchildren for global understanding and cooper-ation.... At the very top of all the agencies which will assure thecoming of world government must stand the school, the teacher,and the organized profession.2l

The NElt's ardor for the UN and a global school board hasintensified over the years. In 1993, the militant teachers uniontook a major step in its push for one-worldism by launchingEducation International (EI), a worldwide federation of teachersunions.22 Mary Hatwood Futrell, the NEAs radical-left former

269

Tnp Ulnrno NeuoNs Exposno

president, moved to Brussels, Belgium (headquarters for theEuropean Union) to head EI's new global union operation.2sFutrell, ever the darling ofthe CFR coterie, had proven her one-world bona fides by serwing on many Carnegie panels and com-missions and reliably promoting the big government, globalistline. The Insiders knew she could be entrusted with the task ofspearheading this new global initiative.

Education International, which now claims 24 million mem-bers through its 304 affrliate organizations, serves as an impor-tant teachers auxiliary to the Socialist International, dependablysupporting just about every socialist scheme imaginable. EIboasts of its "privileged" stEfius with UNESCO: "At I-INESCO, EIis one of 1-6 organisations worldwide holding the coveted statusof NGO in formal associate relations."24 With Futrell holding thereins at EI, it is not surprising that the union behemoth followsthe NEA lead, supporting every move to empower the IIN, par-ticularly in the area of education.

The NEAs 2000-2001 Resolutions include this paean to theIIN:

The National Education Association recognizes the interdepend-ence of all people.... The Association urges all nations to developtreaties and disarmament agreements.... The Association furtherbelieves that the United Nations (tIN) furthers world peace andpromotes the rights of all people by preventing war, racism, andgenocide.25

The NEA and EI support increased funding for the IIN,increased authority for the World Court, creation of theInternational Criminal Court, ratifrcation of most UN treaties,and expansion of UN power in virbually all areas.26 The NEA-EIeducation mafia is tailor-made for the Insiders'one-world pur-poses. With tens of millions of dollars in dues forcibly taken frommembers'paychecks, the union is a cash cow for revolution. Withtens of millions of teachers worldwide as members, it can exertenorrnous influence in classrooms, as well as local, state and

270

Trm IIN Dpcunns Torel Wan oN rnn Farvru.y

national elections.27The NEA one-world subversives arso affect the classrooms and

national and state education policyihrough think tanks like theNational Tbaining Laboratory NTL) in Bethel, Maine. The NTLwas set up by the NEA in the 1940s to reeducate teachers alongpolitically correct liles. NTL says it works "to change teachers,inflexible patterns of thinking."2sAn NTL teachers manuar saysof children: "Although they appear to behave appropriately andseem nonnal by most cultural standards, they may actuallybe inneed of mental health care in order to help them change, adapt,and conform to the planped society in which there wil b".ro

"orr-flict of attitudes or beliJfs-" zs

Another NEA-created and -supported think tank is the Asso-ciation for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD),one of the leading educational purveyors of .,global think.,, At a1985 international-curricurum symposium in Enschede,Netherlands, ASCD officials told participants of the need for a"world core curriculum" to meet the needs of our ',increasinglyglobal interdependercy.'30 ASCD executive d.irector GordonCawelti told symposium participants that the proposed worldcore curriculum would be based on IrN guru Robert Muller,sbook Nezr Genesis: Shaping a Global Spirituality.zl

At the beginning of hisworld, core cu*iculum Manuol Mullerstates that "the underlying philosophy upon which [his] schoor isbased will be found in the teaching set forth in the books ofAliceA. Bailey by the Tibetan teacher Djwhal Khul..." and M.Morya.32 This is quite an admission considering that Mrs.Bailey's exalted position in the occult theosophicar firmament issecond only to that of Theosophy founder and high priestessMadame Blavatsky. Bailey, who alleged that Khul urrd Mory.communicated with her terepathicaly, was a rabid Luciferianand founded the Lucifer pubrishing company and the theosoph-ical journal Lucifer.ss

So we are not engaging in hyperbole at all when we refer to theInsiders'attack on families and children as devilish, demonic,diabolic, or satanic. The totaritarian threat to the family posed

271

Tlre Umrpo NarroNs Exposno

by UNESCO, NEA, EI, NTL, ASCD, Carnegie, et al., is real andis thoroughly evil. The threat presents itself in three significantways:

o The Rule of Law. The militant shock troops first lobby forratifrcation of UN treaties, such as the Convention on theRights of the Child. O4ce ratified (or even before ratifrcation),they fraudulently assign these treaties the exalted status of"international law," which, they asserb, overrides all federal,state, and local authority. In order to show our respect for the"ruIe of law," they and their prostitute "legal scholars" say, wemust "harmottize" our l3ws and policies with those of the"international community." They know that most local offi-cials, school board members, state legislators, and congress-men are unfamiliar with, and unable to muster an effectivedefense against, the supposed authority of "international law."Thus the IIN treaties provide the homegrown revolutionarieswith the weapons to undermine our laws and transform ourgovernment and institutions into subservient instruments ofthe LIN to enforce global political correctness.

o The Global School Board. Through LINESCO, NEA, EI, andhundreds of other organizations and think tanks, the globalstructure bureaucracy is already being established for a world-wide socialist system that is intended to provide school teach-ers with indoctrination and certification, schools with accredi-tation, and students with the subversive materials and pro-grams they "need" for graduation.

o The New Faith. In our "interdependent" world, the IIN pro-vides the new focal point to teach children about our global"oneness." Loyalty will be transferred from the family to thestate and from the nation to the UN. Children will be (or arealready being) taught to be "citizens of the world." They arebeing prograrnmed to reject "narrow,' "divisive," "bigoted,""dogmatic" Christianity and to adopt pagan and occult beliefs.

272

Tun UN Dnclenrs Tomr, Wen oN rum Farurr,y

LINESCO SubversionIn the early 1950s, as the UNESCO programs began workingtheir way into school textbooks and curricula, and as the trulysubversive nature of the programs i"".-" known, a signifrcantnumber of parents and educators became alarmed. They pre-vailed upon elected officials, who began to challenge and con-demn the UN's perfidious insinuation of collectivist propagandainto the schools.

In 1953, Senator William Jenner (R-Ind.), the courageouschairman of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee,attacked the TINESCO subversion head-on, challengrng hisSenate colleagues in t}ryse words:

How many of you Senators know what the UN is doing to changethe teaching of the children in your own home town? The UN is atwork there, every day and night, changing the teachers, changingthe teaching materials, changing the very words and tones -changing all the essential ideas which we imagine our schools areteaching to our young folks.

How in the name of Heaven are v/e to sit here, approve these pro-grams, appropriate our own people's money - for such outrageous"orientation" of our own children, and of the men end women whoteach our children, in this nation's schools?34

Some of the one-worlders were audacious and zealous enoughcandidly to admit the subversive agenda of IINESCO, thoughthey praised it as a necessaqr and righteous subversion. Such,for instance, was the case at the Saturday Reuiew, which, in1952, published a wildly pro-UNESCO editorial which declared:

If UNESCO is attacked on the grounds that it is helping to pre-pare the world's peoples for world government, then it is an errorto burst forth with apologetic statements and denials. Let us faceit: the job of UNESCO is to help create and promote the elementsof world citizenship. When faced with such a"chatge,,, let us by allmeans affiru it from the housetops.Ss

273

Tnp UNImn NauoNs E>eosuo

More astute Insiders realized, however, that the time was notyet ripe for open confrontation on such fundamental and emo-tionally charged issues. The wiser course was to ease up anddrop back for awhile, and cloak their tiue aims in more noble-sounding and less threatening verbiage about "world peace,""collective security," "ending world hunger," etc. Which is whatthey did.

Now, however, after decades of softening up the American pub-Iic with one-world propaganda, calculatedly undermining ourmorality and religious fervor with carnal and irreligious "enter-tainment," and destroying patriarchal authority and responsibil-ity and family ties throuqlr welfare statism, the totalitarianinternationalists are pressing forward with fresh audacity.

They are rapturously pushing on toward the dystopic vision ofthe developing cradle-to-grave socialist world state outlinedyears ago by UNESCO director-general Julian Huxley. ln 7947,Huxley announced that UNESCO would be exploring "the appli-cation ofpsycho-analysis and other schools of'deep'psycholory toeducation." 36 The use of such techniques to cultivate a sense ofworld citizenship, said Huxley, "would mean an extension of edu-cation backwards from the nursery school to the nurseryitself." 37

This Huxleyite conception of lifelong, womb-to-tomb, UN-driv-en indoctrination (and re-indoctrination, repeated as often as theUN mandarins deem necessary) has been integral to theUNESCO drive over the decades. It has come frighteningly closeto fruition in many current UN programs, declarations and pro-posals, such as the UN's Millennium Forum Declaration of May2000, which states that "education will be universal and life-long, and will nurture a sense of world citizenship."ss

"The Rights of the Child"In 1989, the UN General Assembly adopted the United NationsConvention on the Rights of the Child (CROC), which, shorn ofits pretended concerns for the welfare of children, is a blatantstatist attack on the family and parental authority and respon-

274

Tnr UN Docr"enps Totnr- Wen oN mm Feunv

sibility. It proposes a massive intrusion of government into fam-ily matters. Implementation of the CROC would radically alterthe parent-child relationship, interjecting government-appointed"child advocates" between parents ahd children. Ultimately, itaims at stripping parents of their traditionally recognized rightsto control the upbringing and education oftheir children and topass on to their childten their religious values and beliefs. If thepeople of the United States allow the conspirators in our govern-ment to subject us to the supposed authority of the CROC, wewill soon see UN-approved government child "experts" assumingcomplete control over our children and parental rights complete-Iy destroyed.x D

In March 1990, representatives from more than 150 countriesmet in Jomtien, Thailand, for a five-day World Conference onEducation for All (WCEFA).3e Official sponsors of this Insider-run event included UNESCO, UNICEF, UNDP (United NationsDevelopment Program), the World Bank, other UN agencies, andone-world NGOs. Out of this major agenda-setting palaver cametwo documents: The World Declaration on Education forAll, andThe Framework forAction to Meet Basic Learning Needs.a0 TheFramework set forth six education goals, which just happened tobe virtually identical to the controversial Outcome-BasedEducation (OBE) program set out by then-President GeorgeBush (CFR) in his "America 2000" education plan.al

In order to facilitate coordination of U.S. OBE policies withthose of the UN globocrats, a U.S. Coalition for Education for All(USCEFA) was launched at a meeting held on October 30-November 1, 1991 in Alexandria, Virginia. a2 Gathering underthe banner of 'Learning for All: Bridging Domestic and

*For a more detailed analysis ofthe dangers posed to families, parents, and chil-rlren by the CROC and other related IIN schemes, see: this author's book, Global\ranny, Chapter 8; William Norman Gigg, Freedom on the Altar: The UN'sCrusad.e Against God and Faruily; and the following articles posted on ourInternet website: "Your Chikl, the Global Citizen," July 21, 1997; 'A HigherWarfare,"April 17, 1995; and "IIN Takeover ofthe Child,"August 8, 1994. For acomplete text of the LINCROC, see www.unicef.org/erclcrc.htm.

275

Tlrr Umrtun NerroNs Exposoo

International Education'were movers and shakers from the gov-ernment and private sector. Conference cosponsors includedApple Computer, IBM, the National School Board Association,the American Federation of Teachers, the National EducationAssociation, the U.S. Department of Education, the CollegeBoard, USAID - and the usual tax-exempt foundations.asHeading up the USCEFA as president was Janet Whitla, direc-tor of the Education Development Center, Inc., infamous for itspro-homosexual, pornographic, promiscuity-promoting sex edu-cation programs and globalist curricula.4 The Coalition is push-ing to make UNESCO the global school board which will dictateeducational policy for the yorld.

For the past decade, unbeknownst to American parents, theConvention on the Rights of the Child has been in the process ofimplementation through the USCEFA programs. One indicationof the frightening progress of this subversion is the increasingacceptance, especially in political and academic circles, of totali-tarian sentiments. Among those promoting dangerous new stateauthority, we point to Professor Jack C. Westman of theUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison, Professor David Lykken of theUniversity of Minnesota, and Connecticut Superior Court JudgeCharles D. Gill, a co-founder of the National Task Force forChildren's Constitutional Rights (NTFCCR). Dr. Westman, Dr.Lykken, and Judge GiIl are leaders in the despotic drive to man-date government licensing of all parents.

"The United Nations Convention fon the Rights of the Child]clearly declares that the state has a role in child-rearing," saysDr. Westman, approvingly. "Because the consent of children isnot required for the exercise of parental power, it is in the priva-cy of their homes that their civil rights are least assured."4s

In a 1991 law journal article, Judge Gill wrote: "The [IIN]Convention makes a total break from previous approaches tochildren's rights. Previous'rights' were paternalistic, whereasthe Convention makes the state directly responsible to thechild."a6 Westman, Lykken, Gill, et al., view the family and par-ents with outright hostility, while idolizing the state and its sup-

276

Tnn UN Dpcr,anns Toul, Wen ox rnp Feuu,v

posed capacity to raise better children.These extreme, totalitarian sentiments have been made

"respectable" in influential circles thanks to help from the PrattHouse one-world elites. These statist nostrums have moved foomthe stage ofadvocacy by socialist fringe groups to acceptance by"mainstream" Democrat and Republican politicians. The forcespushing this agenda have enormous financial resources at theirdisposal, and they are geared up for major, continuous, offensiveaction. Ifthey are not aggressively exposed and opposed by a sig-nificant, growing, and increasingly determined constituency ofparents, grandparents, and concerned citizens, anAmerican ver-sion of the Hitler Youtlr or Red Guard - under the rubric ofnational service, of course - will not be long in coming.

That is a terrifying prospect, but even that does not begin todepict the futl extent of the anti-family agenda the Insiders andtheir UN lackeys envision for their global police state. Space per-mitting, we would detail the UN programs for global:

o Forced abortion;4?o Proliferation of chemical abortions (RU486);4o Coercive population control and eugenics programs;aer Forced mass population relocation;o Mandatory school "sexual orientation" programs promoting

homosexuality;o Outlawing of independent home schooling and independent

private and religious schools;o Euthanasia and assisted suicide.

The piecemeal Manrist abolition of the family is a fact, and theUN is the instrument through which the one-world Insidersintend to carry out their abolition program worldwide.

277

Chapter 14

What Must Be Done

When bad men combine, the good must associate; else theywill fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptiblestruggle.r

- Edmund Burke (April 23,7770)

[I]t does not requiroa majority to preuail, but rather anirate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people'sminds.2

- Samuel Adams

If we wish to be free ... we must fight! I repeat it, sir, wetrlust fight!!3

- Patrick Henry (March 23,1775)

In the preceding chapters, we have painted, we admit, a veryalarming picture of reality. It was entirely our intent to do so. Webelieve, like Founding Father James Madison, that it is properand prudent to sound the alarm, wake the town, and tell the peo-ple when danger is threatening. In fact, it would be immoral zofto warn others about an imminent peril. Madison wisely advised,as we have noted previously:

[I]t is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liber-ties. We hold this prudent jealousy to be the first duty of citizensand one of[the] noblest characteristics ofthe late Revolution. Thefreemen of America did not wait till usurped power had strength-ened itself by exercise and entangled the question in precedents.They saw all the consequences in the principle, and they avoidedthe consequences by denying the principle. We revere this lessontoo much, soon to forget it.a

279

Tns UNrrpo Nauows E:rpospo

Thagically, most Americans haue forgotten this important les-son. We are long past "the first experiment on our liberties." Weare rushing headlong to destruction, t5n'anny, and slavery.

Some will say that our concerns ard wildly exaggerated, thatthe IIN, while often obnoxious and corrupt, is toothless and canpresent no real danger to the mighty United States. And besides,they will aver, it still represents mankind's noblest aspirationsfor peace. We can reform it and use it to good purpose. We cantrust oar president and Congress to watch out for our interests.

Others will react in the opposite direction, asserting that theInsiders'new world order and their plans to empower the UNhave proceeded too far to fe stopped now. The enemy is too richand powerful, too well organized and deeply entrenched.Resistance is futile; we have already lost.

Both of these attitudes - blind, senseless optimism and hope-less defeatism - should be equally repugnant to free peoples. Weassure you there is nothing exaggerated about the dire threatposed by the UN in anything we have written. But it is not nec-essary for anyone to rely on our word. We have quoted exten-sively from UN and U.S. documents and copiously cited thestatements of many of the key players in this drama. We havegone to considerable lengths to make many documents availableon our Internet website and to provide links to many other pri-mary sources. Any person of ordinary intelligence, with an open,honest mind, can read the literature and compare it with readi-ly verifrable facts concerning the rapidly growing "empower-ment" of the UN in all of the areas we have discussed.

Let us take a lesson from the patriots who founded our nation.In the summer of 1775, these courageous souls faced a situationnot dissimilar from our own. Some argued that, in spite of theCrown's tyrannical acts, things were not all that bad and thatthe prudent conrse was to continue entreating England for fair-ness and justice. Others warned that it would be futile and fool-hardy to dare to challenge the British military might.

In his famous oration at St. John's Church, Patrick Henryaddressed the faulty arguments of both the Panglossian opti-

280

Wrur Must Bo DoNo

mists and the defeatists. He eloquently and forcefully expressedthe position that full and complete information, even thoughunpleasant, was the necessary basis for a proper decision:

[I]t is natural for a man to indulge in the illusions of hope. Weare apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth - and listen to thesong ofthat siren till qhe transforms us into beasts. Is this the partof wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty?Are we disposed to be ofthe number ofthose who, having eyes' see

not, and having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concerntheir temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spiritit might cost, I ** vrilliBg_to know the whole truth; to know theworst and to provide for it.b

Mr. Henry then spoke words that are as relevant today (if notmore so) as they were in that desperate time:

They tell us, sir, that we are weak - unable to cope with so for-midable an adversary. iiut when shall we be stronger? Will it be thenext week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally dis-armed, and when a British [or a UN] guard shall be stationed inevery house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction?Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by ly,ng supine-ly on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom ofhope, untilour enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are notweak, if we make a proper use of those means which the God ofnature hath placed in our power. Three millions of people, armed inthe holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which wepossess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can sendagainst us. Besides, sir, we shall not frght our battles alone. Thereis a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and whowill raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is notto the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave'Besides, srr, we have no election. If we were base enough to desireit, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat,but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged, their clank-ing may be heard on the plains of Boston!...

287

Tnp UNmro NArroNs Exposno

Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the priceof chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not whatcourse others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give medeath! 6

The submission and slavery the American colonists faced wasa very real and dire prospect, but was nothing compared to thatwhich we will face under a fully empowered lIN. The Britishgovernment was autocratic, abusive, even tyrannical at times,but not outright totalitarian The organized one-worlders, how-ever, intend to transform the UN into the global governinginstrument of their ruthless, totalitarian "New World Order."

Projecting the LinesLet us summarize the case we have made and, from what isalready known, project the lines concerning what we can expectin the future - if, that is, by "irresolution and inaction" we allowthe Insiders'plans for tlre UN to come to fruition. Those plansinclude:

o Creating a United Nations Military, with army, navy, air force,and nuclear weapons.

o Dispatching U.S. military personnel on ever-increasing UNmissions throughout the world.

o Gradually disarming all nation states, including the U.S., sothat the UN military forces will be unchallengeable.

o Establishing the International Criminal Court and rapidlyexpanding its jurisdiction.

o Establishing a global IIN police force and bringing all localpolice under its control.

o Outlawing private ownership of firearms and disarming citi-zens.

o Imposing global draconian regulations on all human activityunder the pretext of protecting the environment.

o Drastically restricting and, ultimately, destroying propertyrights.

282

Wrur Musr Br Doxr

o Forcing vast relocations of human populations in order to cre-ate "Wildlands" for UN-designated animal species.

o Imposing global "carbon taxes" on all fuels, a "Tobin tax" onfrnancial transactions, and myriad other tax proposals.

o Placing a vast regulatory regime on all labor, business, andemplo5rment policies.

o Imposing population controls, including mandatory abortion t)la Red China's lIN-approved-and-funded "one child policy."

o Accelerating UN subversion in our schools and bringing alleducation under the jurisdiction of UNESCO.

o Subjecting all parents to licensing and claiming UN "protec-tive" authority over alfchildren.

o Striking down all laws against homosexuality and pedophil-ia./pederasty.

o Greatlyexpandingthe practice ofeuthanasia and assisted sui-cide.

o Promoting paganism, "New Age" spirituality, the occult, andSatanism under the guise of promoting peace, brotherhood,and a "Global Ethic."

The list above is far from exhaustive. Anyone willing to studythe facts will be able to readily verify that the Pratt House mafiapromoting the UN is pushing for all of these insidious programsand more. All of these incredible grabs for power are, in fact,already in various stages of implementation.

So what will be the consequences of inaction? What will an all-powerful IIN government mean to life as Americans know it?Isn't it possible that our would-be slavemasters will be morebenevolent than old-style Communist dictators? Surely Amer-icanleaders would not want to preside over bloodletting, torture,and genocide.

That is a dangerous assumption. First of all, while many of theInsiders of this one-world cabal are American citizens, they arenot, Americans; they are internationalists, with loyalties to nocountry. Many of them hold, or have held, public office and havesworn to uphold and defend the Constitution - while doing

283

TIrn Umrpo NarroNs Expospo

everything in their power to subvert and destroy it. Secondly,while no one c€rn predict with absolute certainty what otherswould do given the power and opporturrrity, nonetheless there arecompelling principles we dare not ignore. Let's look first at thelessons ofhistory regarding the consequences ofpower.

We have previously invoked Lord Acton's famous maxim,"Power tends to cormpt and absolute power corrupts absolute-1y." 7 This principle was accepted as an undisputed truism by theAmerican Founding Fathers. They were so frrmly convinced thatthe best of men, regardless of character and intentions, could notbe trusted with unrestrained power that they designed our gov-ernment to thwart the rmbitions of men. Thomas Jeffersonexpressed it this way: "In questions of power, then, let no morebe heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischiefby the chains of the Constitution." s

The situation is even worse when the system encourages theworst of men to gravitate to the top as happened so often in somany nations in the last century. Then we are no longer talkingabout "mischief with our liberties. Our lives, the lives of ourfamilies and neighbors, and the lives of billions of others are atstake.

John Locke warned centuries ago that "he that thinks absolutepower purifies men's blood, and corrects the baseness of humannature, need read but the history ofthis, or any other age, to beconvinced of the contrary."e The history of the spectacularlybloody 20th century offers a definitive rebuke to those whobelieve that a world government would be a blessing.

In his important book Death by Gouernment, Professor R.J.Rummel documents that the case for global government restsentirely upon an essentially superstitious belief in the benevo-Ience of government as an institution. 10

Rummel, a professor of political science at the University ofHawaii, is perhaps the world's foremost authority on the phe-nomenon of "democide" - the systematic murder of humanbeings by governments. oDemocide is committed by absolutePower; its agency is government," Rummel declares, and the

284

Wrur Musr Bo Dorn

death toll of democide is nearly incomprehensible: "In total, dur-ing the first eighty-eight years of this [20th] century, almost 170million men, women, and children have been shot, beaten, tor-tured, knifed, burned, starved, ftozett, crushed, or worked todeath; buried alive, drowned, hung, bombed, or killed in anyother of the myriad ways governments have inllicted death onunarmed, helpless citizens and foreigners. The dead could con-ceivably be nearly 360 million peop1e." 11

Although "the common and fundamental justification for gov-ernment [is] that it exists to protect citizens against the anarchicjungle that would otherwise threaten their lives and property," inthe era of the total state "government has been truly a cold-blooded mass murd"."., ? global plague of man's own making."The supposed "wisdom" of academic elites who depict govern-ment as a benign institution, says Rummel, ignores a "preemi-nent fact about government" - llspsly "that some of them mur-der millions in cold blood. This is where absolute Powerreigns." 12

One of Professor Rummel's most important insights is that"peace" under a tyrannical government is actually more lethalthan war. "Putting the human cost of war and democide togeth-er, Power has killed over 203 million people in this centur5/,"Rummel points out. 13 However, *even if all to be said aboutabsolute and arbitrary Power was that it causes war and theattendant slaughter of the young and most capable ... thiswould be enough. But much worse [is the fact that] even with-out the excuse of combat, Power also massacres in cold bloodthose helpless people it controls - in fact, several times more ofthem." 14

If this has been the record of death and desolation caused bythe exercise of unrestrained power by totalitarian governmentsof nation-states, can we expect the horrors of unrestrainedworldgovernment to be less? Remember, it is the same perpetrators ofthese unspeakable crimes (or their totalitarian successors) whomthe one-world Insiders insist we must join in cornmon cause for'peace." The "respectable" CFR elites have always been comfort-

285

THo Uxrrpo NarroNs Exposno

able with mass-murdering thugs like Stalin, Mao, Tito, Castro,Sukarno, Nkrumah, Kenyatta, Lumumba, Ben Bella, Ceausescu,Aristide, Mandela, Arafat, et al.

As we have noted, David Rockefellet', one of the most powerfuldrivers of the Establishment agenda during the 20th century,has praised "the social experiment in China under ChairmanMao's leadership" as "one of the most important and successfulin human history." 15 HL made this incredible statement in spiteof the well-known fact that Mao Tse-tung's "social experiment"had by that time (1973) cost the lives of as many as 64 millionChinese at the hands of their Communist masters!

Rockefeller and his fellow one-worlders share with "Mao theMaster Butcher" the addictive lust for absolute power. Again,Patrick Henry has provided us the proper attitude toward arecord of tyranny. He said, "I have but one lamp by which my feetare guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no wayofjudging the future but by the past." "And judging by the past,"he declared, "I wish to know what there has been in the conductof the British ministry for the last ten years to justify thosehopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace them-selves...?"tG

What has there been in the conduct of the CFR-UN cabal inthe last fifty years to justify any hopes of benign intent on theirpart? Patrick Henry's exhortation is echoed today by the FBI'sfamous profiling pioneer John Douglas, who has written exten-sively on the criminal mind and obstacles to criminal rehabilita-tion.17 From his extensive studies, Douglas maintains that thebest predictor of human conduct is previous conduct.ls Whilemany violent criminals may perform weII and give indications ofrehabilitation under the restraints of prison, when they arereleased and confront the same opportunities and pressures thatgave rise to their original offenses, they repeat their crimes.What would be the crimes of such men if they attained sufficientpower that they did not have to fear being caught or brought tojustice? That is the near reality we face today.

What could we expect from men with proven amoral character

286

WHAr Musr Bp Domr

who would gain unrestrained power and the opporbunity to doevil? Moreover, can anyone imagine that a Hitler could, Iet alonewould, turn his back on the evil forces that propelled him topower?

Some may seek comfort in the illusion that tyranny is strictlya foreign phenomenon - that domination and exploitation ofone's fellow man are not in the heart of American leaders. Afterall, these men are cuitured, genteel, and highly educated. Theyare sof,re of the most famous political, business, and academicleaders. Some of them kiss babies, smile convincingly, and talk ofGod, patriotism, and family values. Some of them give millionsof dollars to hospitals, schools, and charitable causes. They arecourted and praised by the media and responsible, respectablemembers of society. Surely these eminent men are not capable ofthe criminal activities we suggest.

This naivet6 and inability to judge by objective facts instead ofdeceptive appearances have always been the boon of criminalsand the bane of their victims. Even the worst of criminals do notalways openly display their wickedness. In fact, most of the timethey disguise their evil beneath unctuous charm.

Adolf Hitler is universally recognized today as having beenone of our planet's premier criminals. Yet, during his rise topower (and even after he attained power) prominent Americanand British "liberals" and Insiders were singing his praises.leThey pointed to the schools, hospitals, roads, and social projectshe had built, and they belittled or denied his well-known crimi-nality and totalitarian aspirations. We all have seen innumer-able documentaries in which Hitler is maniacally ranting to hisNazi hordes. However, he was very capable of presenting anentirely affable, congenial image as well, and was frequentlyfilmed hugging children, petting dogs, visiting war veterans, orchatting amiably with foreign dignitaries.

Al Capone, perhaps America's most notorious criminal, like-wise, knew how to turn on the charm at strategic moments andto posture as the champion of "the little guy." According to theWorld Encyclopedia of Organized Crime:

287

TIrn Uxrrro NarroNs Exposro

Capone was a murderous thug without remorse.... He wasresponsible for perhaps as many as one thousand or more murders,certainly hundreds. Worse, for a decade the city of Chicagoembraced this bragging, boasting, strutting killer, its newspaperspayrng homage to him and quoting his every cretinous statement,its citizens - a goodly portion ofthe population - nodding toler-antly, ifnot approvingl), in his direction.2O

aWith the fabulous wealth gained from his criminal enterpris-

es, Capone bribed cops,judges,jurors, prosecutors, and reporters

- and "gave generously to charity." Notes the Encyclopedia:

Capone spent money lavishly on himself and those about him,projecting the image of generosity, of a philanthropist to the com-mon man. Old-timers in Chicago still pay his bloody memory off-hand compliments about the so-called soup kitchens Capone estab-lished in Chicago during the Depression to feed the hungry, littlerealizing that the crime boss did this at the suggestion ofattorneysattempting to improve his horrible reputation when he was beingtried for income-tax evasion.2l

Much of the public and many politicians were willfully blind,refusingto believe that Capone was in fact the evil crime lord hisaccusers made him out to be. Public offrcials, such as ChicagoMayor William Hale Thompson, Chicago Police Chief JohnGarrity, and Illinois Governor Len Small, who should have beenprotecting the public from the likes of Capone, were actually inleague with the Capone mob.22 So it was also with the crimebosses who followed after him.

Although now largely forgotten, during the 1970s and '80sPablo Escobar Gaviria was one of the most feared organizedcrime bosses in the world. As head of Colombia's infamousMedellin drug cartel, he was also touted as one of the world'srichest men. His thugs unleashed a reign of terror that includedthe assassination of dozens ofjudges, prosecutors, presidentialcandidates, governors, police officials, and journalists. Many

288

Wnar Musr Bo DoNs

more were bribed into complicity with his criminal operation. Yethe showered millions of dollars on churches, clinics, hospitals,and schools; provided college scholarships to many students; andfunded many public works and charitable institutions.2s Wasthis "bad guy'' just misunderstood? Did he really have a heart ofgold underneath a rough exterior? That's what his defendersclaimed, including some members of the press. Of course thatwas a lie. Escobar wai just doing what all smart bad guys do: buyprotecf,on in the form of public relations. He bought the loyaltyof thousands of people, and was elected to the ColombianCongress, in spite of his murderous record.

The point is that hiding behind a patina of false respectabilityis standard modus operandi for "smart" criminals. If relativelyuneducated street thugs like Capone, Escobar - and the infa-mous John Gotti, the "Teflon Don," as he was glamorized in thepress - can figure this out, isn't it foolish to think that that les-son has escaped the notice of our fabulously wealthy Insiderswith their Ivy Leagqe pedigrees and hordes of think-tank"experts" at their beck and call? Just because these "respectable"leaders do not pull the triggers does not absolve them from cul-pability an)rmore than a "respectable" Mafra boss is innocent ofthe killings perpetrated by his underlings.

With more space, we could credibly demonstrate that U.S.Insiders (direct forebears to the current new world order cabal)orchestrated the rise of Communism to a world power in theUSSR and in China and supplied these criminal regimes withWestern technology and the means for nuclear weapons.24

It is also true that they willingly sent U.S. sons to die in no-win wars to build their new world order. They betrayed friendly,anti-Communist allies into Communist tyranny. They used U.S.foreign aid to further communize and socialize nations underpetty despots.25 They supported brutal terrorist groups andCommunist-directed wars of "national liberation."26 They havefacilitated the Communist drug offensive against the UnitedStates and frustrated all genuine efforts to expose and opposeit.27 They have then turned around and offered dangerous, total-

289

Tnp Ururno Nerroxs Exposnn

itarian proposals disguised as a "War on Drugs," but which, inreality, are aimed at making war on our freedoms. They havepromoted the destruction of morality and the family. They havesought the destruction of private property and the middle class.They have worked to subvert the influence of monotheistic reli-gions. They have encouraged teaching methods that promoteilliteracy, conformity known as political correctness, and worshipof the Almighty State as God.

Theseqnd a host of other crimes too numerous to mentionshould leave no doubt that top leaders of the Pratt House pre-sidium are out to create the kind of absolutist, all-pervasive,mind- and soul-destroying, Big Brother dictatorship depictedwith such horrifying force in George Orwell's 1984.

In case your memory of that nightmarish world has dimmedsince you read Orwell's classic in high school, it may help torecall commissar O'Brien's hideous colloquy with the torturedprotagonist, Winston Smith. After delivering an excruciatinglypainful electric shock to Smith, who is strapped to a bed, O'Briencasually explains:

Obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you besure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is ininflicting pain and humiliation. Power is in tearing human mindsto pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of yourown choosing. Do you begin to see, then, what kind of world we arecreating? It is the exact opposite of the stupid hedonistic Utopiasthat the old reformers imagined. Aworld of fear and treachery andtorment, a world of trampling and being trampled upon, a worldwhich will grow not less but more merciless as it refines itself.[Emphasis in original.] Progress in our world will be progresstoward more pain. The old civilizations claimed that they werefounded on love and justice. Ours is founded upon hatred. In ourworld there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph, and self-abasement. Everything else we shall destroy - everything. Alreadywe are breaking down the habits of thought which have survivedfrom before the Revolution. We have cut the links between child

290

Wnm Musr Bp Dorr

and parent, and between man and man, and between man andwoman. No one dares trust a wife or a child or a friend any longer.But in the future there will be no wives and no friends. Childrenwill be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from ahen.... There will be no loyalty, except loyalty toward the Party.There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will beno laughter, except the laugh oftriumph over a defeated enemy.28

IThe brutish O'Brien then matter-of-factly continued his expla-

nation to the helpless and supine Winston Smith. "But always -do not forget this, Winston - always there will be the intoxica-tion of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing sub-tler. Always, at every moment, there wiII be the thrill of victory,the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If youwant a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on ahuman face - forever."29

A Call to ActionA ruthless, tyrannical, Orwellian world state is precisely whatthe top Insiders plan to have. Like Orwell's O'Brien, they areintoxicated with power. They crave absolute power. And if theyshould ever attain it, we will experience a murderous "plague ofpower" such as this planet has not seen before. We will knowdemocide on a scale not previously imagined.

The moral man who fully realizes the terrible consequences ofallowing such a future to come to pass by default will be highlymotivated to join the battle against the forces of evil and oppres-sion. The moral person who understands what is at stake - forhimself, his loved ones, and the incredible heritage of freedomwith which we have been blessed - will be imbued with a highlevel of commitment to stopping these would-be tyrants.

But how does one go about such a daunting task? Those com-mitted to this IIN world-government goal enjoy, as we haveshown, enormous influence and prominent positions throughoutour institutions, especially in the media. They are able to createthe appearance ofuniversal support for their agenda. As the late

29t

Tnp Ulurno N,crroNs Expospo

Admiral Chester Ward, a former longtime member of the Councilon Foreign Relations, observed: "Once the ruling members ofCFR have decided that the U.S. Government should adopt a par-ticular policy, the very substantial research facilities ofCFR areput to work to develop arguments, intellectual and emotional, tosupport the new policy, and to confound and discredit, intellectu-ally and politically, any opposition."s0

Clearly, anyone who dares to sound the alarm or question theglobalisf agenda invites well-orchestrated attacks and ridicule.In shorb, Americans face a very perilous situation: the majorpower centers and safeguards on which they depend to protecttheir interests have either been compromised or are secretlyworking to enslave us. With the major channels of communica-tion in internationalist hands, alerting other Americans to thissituation is a formidable challenge. Yet, as we shall see, the sit-uation is not hopeless if a core of responsible Americans willorganize and act in pursuit ofa sound plan.

A Commensurate ResponseWhat needs to be done commensurate with the seriousness of thedanger? Our answer: Enlist nxdny more citizens to follow a soundprogranx to get the United States out of the United, Nations com-pletely.

With the IIN as a foundation, the globalists are wagingassaults on our sovereignty on an incredible number of fronts.And they have equally incredible resources at their disposal fordoing so, including the support of now more than 1,000 NGOsIobbying for the UN agenda. We cannot expect to obtain theresources to defend against all ofthose attacks. Moreover, such apurely defensive stratery is always doomed to defeat. The onlysensible strategy is to put the globalists'gains up for grabs bygoing after the foundation for their assaults - the UnitedNations itself.

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil," saidHenry David Thoreau, "to one who is striking at the root." 31

Rather than hacking at the ever-proliferating branches of the

292

Wnar Musr Bp Doun

IIN program, we must concentrate our forces where it counts. Wemust wield a sharp axe to the root and trunk of the UN tree -by forcing the U.S. to withdraw from the UN. U.S. withdrawalbefore the UN acquires real, independent power would condemnthe UN to the ash heap of history. Without U.S. support, theUnited Nations would share the same fate as its predecessorLeague of Nations. When the U.S. Senate wisely refused to havethe U.S. join the League following World War I, the League soonfaded irto oblivion.

The UN is not the only program or assault on the U.S. systemthat has been mounted by the Establishment one-worlders. Butit is a cornerstone of their plans - an investment of over fivedecades. As a mechanism to destroy our sovereignty, it threatensto take many other battles in resisting the collectivist assault outof the hands of Congress and the American people. Depriving theConspiracy ofits creation, the LIN, is essential to the preserva-tion of liberty and accomplishing this would be an incredible set-back to the Insiders'plens.

Of course, we are not claiming that convincing Congress totake such a step will be easy. It will not be. We are not minimiz-ing the difficulty in the least. But, with an effort commensurateto the danger, Congress canbe persuaded. It will take enormouseffort, planning, and organization by thousands ofconcerned cit-izens in order to overcome the momentum and influence that themany powerful proponents of the new world order have builtthrough labor, subversion, and deceit. But just as America afterPearl Harbor had to work to catch up, we shouldn't expect toovercome a tough opponent who has the initiative with easy,half-way measures.

One very signifrcant advantage we have on our side in thismonumental effort is truth and the natural, God-given, humandesire to be free. Another is the considerable freedoms and pro-tections that still exist under what remains of our badly tatteredconstitutional system. There are many layers of strength not yetrotted and corrupted. One very important indication of that real-ity is the fact that the Insiders still must resort constantly to

293

Tne Umrpn Narroxs E:rposno

massive lies and deception to sell their fraudulent, totalitarianprograms. If the fight were already over, as the defeatists claim,our enemies would not be going to such lengths to deceive; theywould be flying their colors openly.

But they cannot promote their agenda openly. As dumbed-down, numbed-down, bummed-down, and scummed-down as agrowing segment of the American public is, there is still suffi-cient residual morality ind intelligence to force the conspiratorsfor worldityranny to cloak their schemes in noble-sounding rhet-oric and extravagant charades. This means they must investhundreds of times (even thousands of times) more in labor andresources to sell their lies than what it takes to offset their liesby promoting the truth.

The architects ofthe new world order have not yet been able toentirely erode the republican form of government that ourFounding Fathers established and that has been passed on to usthrough the sacrifrces of so many dedicatedAmericans who havegone before us. Concerned Americans just need to inform them-selves and use the rights, freedoms, and blessings we enjoy inorder to reverse our course.

Most Americans are not aware of what already has beenaccomplished in this stniggle. In 1997, 54 representatives votedfor the first measure ever to come before the full House callingfor the temination of our membership in the United Nations.s2TWo years later,74 representatives voted to kill all funding forthe LIN, which, if successful (218, a majority, would be required),would effectively stop our participation in this traitoroussham.33 And blocking all funding is an easier legislative stepthan outright withdrawal, for the House alone can refuse to fundUN operations (whereas withdrawal would require Senateaction, and the president would likely claim the constitutionalpower to veto such action).

Even though there is growing legislative support for with-drawal from the UN, at the moment there is not nearly enoughsupport to accomplish the task. The involvement of concernedcitizens who inform themselves and then inform others is the

294

Wrrar Musr Br Doxn

only route to generating sufficient political pressure that willforce Congress to vote to terminate U.S. support for the UN. Thisinformed pressure will be required to offset the enormousEstablishment pressure that would be brought to bear to preventCongress from taking such a step. Unfortunately, with so muchat stake, it is not suffrcient to sell politicians on the merits of ourcase. Instead, success will take clout. Realistically, most repre-sentatives will bow tb pro-tlN pressure until there is sufficient,well-itformed outrage to force them to quit making excuses andact! The vast majority will not budge until they see that they mustif they want to remain in offi.ce.

What we are talking about is a plan to rebuild a higher stan-dard in Congress. The defense offreedom requires that principlemust govern our affairs, else pragmatism, dictated by theConspiracy for a global collectivist order, will destroy us. Whilewe would like to see more statesmen gain offrce, this is only asmall part of the solution. In today's climate even statesmen,who act on principlq rather than political pragmatism, willrequire the support of an informed electorate if they hope toremain in office. And that same informed electorate is also thekey to holding a1l politicians accountable for actions in defense offreedom. So the real challenge is building and leading thatinformed electorate.

Sound Organization RequiredBuilding sufficient understanding in time will require organiza-tion under extremely tough, responsible, and knowledgeableleadership. Taking on the IIN means taking on the power andin{luence of the Establishment, and in particular the Council onForeign Relations (the UN's creator and sponsor) as well as all ofthe politicians and media moguls the CFR has in its pocket. Thisbattle can't be carried through to success without leadership thatunderstands the wiles of politicians and the pressures that theCFR can bring to bear.

For example, as public understanding grows that the UN isnot our friend, inevitably new proposals to "reform" the UN will

295

Tnn UNrrnn NerroNs Exposro

be offered - which politicians will be tempted to support. This isnot only a bad idea, but also a dangerous trap. No reforms willchange the nature of the beast. The UN was designed from thebeginning to promote global tyranny.. But politicians love tochampion "compromise" because they see a chance to pacifyuninformed constituents while not risking the wrath of the glob-alists. Which also means that freedom loses. These politicianslove to posture with calls for "reform" in order to deflect mount-ing pressare that would force them to take real action with realpolitical consequences. Unfortunately, many conservative groupsthat oppose most of the IIN's agenda have already been co-optedto adopt the "reform the LIN" agenda. That is a prescription fordefeat.

To force serious political action (and keep politicians from wig-gling, stalling, and doing nothing in the face of enormous pres-sure and deception from the Establishment) requires a well-informed, well-organized action group under sound leadership.And that's why we recommend The John Birch Society (JBS) asuniquely qualifred to servb that role.

The JBS has a track record ofover four decades ofprincipledleadership, of taking tough stands including working to exposethe influence of the Conspiracy we have been discussing in thisbook. For more than 40 years, it has been courageously fightingthe good fight, blocking or slowing down many dangerous pro-grams of that Conspiracy, and, most importantly, surviving theheat directed at anyone who takes the point in this fight.

And the Society has the plan and organization to get the jobdone. In countless battles great and small, in cities and ruralareas, the challenge comes down to reaching enough Americanswith the problem and a workable solution in time. This book ispart of that plan. But success requires the wise and committedhelp of many more like yourself. We encourage readers to contactthe Society for more information or the individual from whomthe reader got this book. *

*The John Birch Society, P.O. Box 8040, Appleton, WI 54912. Phone: (800) JBS-USA1 (800) 527-87211. Or contact us through our website: wwwjbs.org.

296

Wsm Musr Bo Doup

We also urge readers to get informed and to contact their con-gressman insisting that he support measures to Get tlS out!Tlnename of the game is to be effective. Ee firm, but don't insult or bestrident. And most importantly, gain muscle by getting others tohelp. Membership in the Society helps enormously with thatchallenge.

The variety and extent of UN agencies and programs can bebewildering. When one first comes to understand the incredibleorganization the enemy has built to confuse, confound, anddeceive Americans into giving up their inheritance of freedom, itis easy to become discouraged. But that reaction, if allowed tostand, only serves the enemy. One of the key strategies of thiscabal is to create the "illusion" of overwhelming support - sothat Americans see no leadership for sanity. The Establishmentone-worlders want to demoralize good Americans so that theygive up any idea ofresistance. And so these conspirators fear -and try to capture, corrupt, discredit, or isolate - any leaderswho would give Amet'icans hope that there is resistance, thatthere is sound leadership to follow.

For more than four decades, members of The John BirchSociety have been educating their fellow citizens concerning thedangers of the United Nations. Their work has been largelyresponsible for the disfavor that befell the IIN for many years. Ittook major deception and planning by the new world order advo-cates, including new "threats" and the "collapse" of Communism,to dust off the IIN and put their plans on a fast track. We nowface the looming threat of world tyranny - a danger greaterthan our nation has faced at any previous time in its history- Thedanger is great because it is neither seen nor understood by mostof our citizens. And so The John Birch Society has created a newdrive to meet this challenge. We are all fueled by the urgency tocapture the attention of our fellow citizens and finally put an endto the creature on the East River. We respectfully ask for yourhelp. sa

We are asking for your help in an epic educational battle.Thankfully, the primary challenge is not a military one. In fact,

297

Tnp Uxrroo NarroNs Expospo

for today's problems a call to arms would only serve the cause ofour enemy most powerfully and help him consolidate and acquirethe unrestrained power he seeks.

Our enemy's success all stems frorrr the ignorance, delusion,and lack of understanding of the American people. If goodAmericans gain a proper understanding of what is happening,our problems can be resolved within the institutions that GeorgeWashington and othersYought to give us.

If the people don't gain the understanding to choose betterleaders and hold their politicians accountable to theConstitution, they cannot expect to improve their governmentthrough revolution. In fact, just the opposite would happen.What is needed instead is to use the resources and the freedomswe have to inform our fellow citizens and put the government ourFounding Fathers gave us back on track.

But for success in the educational battle ahead, we do need tofrnd the same spirit of patriotism and determination that PatrickHenry captured so well in his previously mentioned "Give MeLiberty or Give Me Deatfrj' oration: .,'

If we wish to be free - if we mean to preserve inviolate thoseinestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending

- if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which wehave been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselvesnever to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall beobtained - we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fightllAn appealto arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!

.. .Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the priceof chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not whatcourse others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give medeath! 35

'.-,,298