|
UN Master Plan
WHISTLEBLOWER MAGAZINE
Revealed: U.N.'s plan
for world government
WND probe unearths plot for global taxation, gun control, standing army.
The United Nations and the United States are engaged in a major battle
over
American sovereignty - the last major impediment to global governance --
according to the May edition of WND's acclaimed monthly magazine,
Whistleblower.
The U.N.'s plan, dubbed "Our Global Neighborhood," is a 410-page final
report of the Commission on Global Governance, and was first published in
1995 by Oxford University Press. That 28-member "independent commission,"
created by former German Chancellor Willy Brandt, developed the following
strategy, as reported in the EcoSocialist Review: "To represent a
shot-across-the-bow of George Bush's New World Order, and make clear that
now is the time to press for the subordination of national sovereignty to
democratic transnationalism." Then-U.N. Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali endorsed the
commission,
and the U.N. provided significant funding. The plan calls for
dramatically
strengthening the United Nations, by implementing a laundry list of
recommendations, including these:
* Eliminating the veto and permanent member status in the
Security
Council;
* Authorizing global taxation on currency exchange and use of the
"global commons;"
* Creating an International Criminal Court;
* Creating a standing army under the command of the
secretary-general;
* Creating a new Economic Security Council;
* Creating a new People's Assembly;
* Regulating multinational corporations;
* Regulating the global commons;
* Controlling the manufacture, sale and distribution of all
firearms. None of the recommendations in the report is new; all have been proposed
in
a variety of documents for decades. This report, however, is the first
time
the comprehensive plan for global governance has been published with the
approval and funding support of the United Nations, according to
Whistleblower. To justify the sweeping changes proposed by the commission, a new concept
of
"security" was offered. The U.N.'s mission under its present charter is
to
provide "security" to its member nations through "collective" action. The
new concept expands the mission of the U.N. to be the security of the
people
and the security of the planet. Thus, in their speeches to the U.N.'s Millennium Assembly in 2000, both
Secretary General Kofi Annan and President Bill Clinton made reference to
this new concept, saying national sovereignty can no longer be used as an
excuse to prevent the intervention by the U.N. to provide "security" for
people inside national boundaries. To provide security for the planet, the plan calls for authorizing the
U.N.
Trusteeship Council to have "trusteeship" over the "global commons,"
which
the plan defines to be: "... the atmosphere, outer space, the oceans
beyond
national jurisdiction, and the related environment and life support
systems
that contribute to the support of human life." Private land ownership under attack. Actually, the U.N. has been working to achieve this goal for more than
two
decades, reports Whistleblower, but the work has been pursued as a part
of
the environmental agenda. A first glimpse of the environmental agenda's
magnitude came in 1992, when the U.N. Conference on Environment and
Development presented for adoption a 300-page policy document called
Agenda
21. This document made clear that the only way to protect the environment
is
to control the activities of the people who use it. Each of the nations that endorsed Agenda 21 agreed to create a national
council to implement its recommendations. Bill Clinton issued Executive
Order 12852 on June 29, 1993, which created the President's Council on
Sustainable Development. This 28-member council included the heads of the
government departments concerned with the environment and commerce, the
heads of major environmental groups, and four representatives from
business,
one of whom was Ken Lay of Enron infamy. This group worked through the end of 1999 to implement the
recommendations
of Agenda 21 throughout the United States, primarily by rewriting and
refocusing the rules of implementation for existing legislation, and by
encouraging state and local governments to implement the recommendations
at
the local level. With the coordinated assistance of the Sierra Club, the
Nature Conservancy and the National Wildlife Federation -- all of whose
executives sat on the President's Council on Sustainable Development --
the
message of "sustainable development" and "sustainable communities" spread
rapidly across the country. Among the many goals of the President's Council was to change the way
public
policy is made in the United States. Its "Belief Statements" include
this:
"We need a new collaborative decision process that leads to better
decisions, more rapid change, more sensible use of human, natural, and
financial resources in meeting our goals."The new collaborative decision process is the same consensus process used
by
the United Nations. It is a process that uses trained "facilitators" to
assure a predetermined outcome. Every department of government has trained facilitators to transform
public-input meetings into "consensus-building" sessions. With the
support
of various environmental groups, virtually every community in the country
began to see "visioning councils" and "stakeholder councils" appear, to
develop plans for a "sustainable community" for the 21st century.
These plans are remarkably similar, whether in Santa Cruz, Calif., where
they call the process "Local Agenda 21," or in "Yourtown 2020," they all
end
up with the recommendations set forth in Agenda 21. When examined from a national perspective, the local plans, arrived at by
consensus, are elements of the broader plan to "provide security for the
planet" by controlling the activities of the people. To achieve this objective, private property has to be effectively
eliminated. This U.N. policy was first adopted in 1976 at the U.N.
Conference on Human Settlements in Vancouver, British Columbia. Its final
report says:
"Land ... cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by
individuals
and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private
land
ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and
concentration
of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice. Public control
of
land use is therefore indispensable." Three years later, the U.S. State Department entered into a Memorandum of
Agreement with the United Nations Education, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization to launch a Man and the Biosphere Program, which designated
vast stretches of land as wilderness. The Convention on Biological
Diversity
began its life in 1981 and evolved until 1992, when it was formally
adopted
by the U.N. in Rio de Janeiro.
This international law requires the creation of wilderness areas, all
connected by corridors of wilderness and surrounded by buffer zones, in
which human activity is regulated by the government, while the population
is
forced to move into "sustainable communities." There are more than 400 of
these wilderness areas, called U.N. Biosphere Reserves, throughout the
world; 47 are in the United States, with another proposed for the Chicago
area and yet another proposed for the Bay of Fundy on the Maine/Canada
border.
Remarkable progress has been made toward transforming the United States
into
this United Nations vision of a "secure planet." Because each plan
element
operates at the local level, it is difficult to see the ultimate outcome.
A
picture of the dream is suggested, however, in the United States
Department
of Housing and Urban Development report authored by Andrew Euston for the
U.N. Conference on Human Development meeting in Istanbul in 1996.
The report describes in considerable detail how "sustainable" communities
of
the future will be bounded by growth limits, surrounded by open space,
with
housing provided by public/private partnerships that require both
economic
and ethnic integration, and feature live-over shops and services.
Transportation in these communities will feature light rail and bicycle,
since automobiles will be unnecessary; people are expected to work within
walking distance of their employment. Each complex in the community is a
"neighborhood" that provides schools and day care, governed by a
"neighborhood council." Agriculture and light "sustainable" industry will occur in the buffer
zones
between the communities and the Biosphere Reserves, under the direction
of
the government, in public/private partnerships with non-government
organizations that oversee day-to-day operations.
Policy decisions are to be made by the council closest to the people
governed by the policy, providing that the policy is consistent with each
of
the councils in the hierarchy. The ideal system of governance in this
utopian vision would see the government selecting a non-government
organization, or NGO, for a particular neighborhood project. The majority
of
the neighborhood council would consist of board members of the NGO, with
a
few additional representatives selected by the NGO. The neighborhood
council
would choose a representative to sit on the community council, which
would
choose a representative to sit on the watershed council, which would
choose
a representative to sit on the bioregional council, which would choose a
representative to sit on the national council, which would choose a
representative to the People's Assembly at the United Nations. Sound familiar? This system parallels the old Soviet system in Russia, in
both design and function. It has been under development in the United
States
since launched in 1993 by the President's Council on Sustainable
Development. Progress so far has been mostly voluntary, "to comply with
international obligations." But success will come for the U.N. only when
it
has the power to enforce its international law. That's the next step.
|