-Caveat Lector- The New American - Embellishing the UN Threat - October 9, 2000http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2000/10-09-2000/vo16no21_uncharter.htm The UN threat needs no exaggeration, yet some well-intentioned activists have done just that. Embellishing the UN Threat by William Norman Grigg The recent furor over the so-called "Charter for Global Democracy" offers a perfect illustration of how "gilding" the UN threat can undermine the credibility of the movement to restore U.S. sovereignty. "To gild refined gold, to paint the lily, to throw perfume on the violet . or to add another hue unto the rainbow," observed Salisbury in Shakespeare's King John, "is wasteful and ridiculous excess." It is similarly pointless and counterproductive to exaggerate, to the point of caricature, genuine dangers, such as that posed by the United Nations to the national sovereignty of the United States. The UN menace is real, tangible, and growing, and sufficiently ominous without the spurious ornamentation of contrived or exaggerated threats. The recent furor over the so-called "Charter for Global Democracy" offers a perfect illustration of how "gilding" the UN threat can undermine the credibility of the movement to restore U.S. sovereignty and sow defeatism among those who are properly alarmed over the UN's activities. Charter 99 (the actual name of the "Charter for Global Democracy") is the work of a private organization based in London. The document, which was inspired by the 1995 Commission on Global Governance report entitled Our Global Neighborhood, describes itself as an "open letter" to the heads of state participating in the UN's Millennium Summit. However, it was neither funded nor officially approved by the UN. Charter 99 is organized around 12 proposed measures for strengthening the UN and expanding the world body's jurisdiction, including a global taxing authority, a standing UN army, a fully functional International Criminal Court, and so on. These are UN proposals of long-standing, and THE NEW AMERICAN has reported extensively upon these and other dangerous initiatives that are underway at the world body - with the support of the U.S. government. In substance, Charter 99 is no different from scores of similar broadsides that clutter the tables at the non-governmental organization (NGO) forums at UN conferences and summits. Forests have been denuded to create the documents that have been generated by pro-UN NGOs, all of which energetically support the escalating empowerment of the body as an actual world government. Most of these documents are little more than activist ephemera, written with great passion, distributed by their authors with great sincerity, and forgotten with great alacrity. Charter 99 is no exception - or, in any case, would have been, had it not been thrust into the spotlight by a well-intentioned but misguided campaign by a group of UN critics. Is It the End? The June edition of Insider's Report, the newsletter of the Virginia-based American Policy Center (APC), described Charter 99 as "The 'Final Solution' For American Independence." According to the newsletter, at the Millennium Summit "Global Governance under the control of the United Nations will be established. World leaders will vote to give the UN oversight of international conflicts. They will give the UN the power to be judge and jury over violators of international law." The vehicle for this dramatic development, according to the newsletter, is "The UN's Charter for Global Democracy [which] has been created to essentially replace the UN's fifty-year-old Charter." "The Millennium Assembly [sic] is the final act in a UN drive for power that began a decade ago," continues the APC report. Referring to the 1995 Commission on Global Governance report Our Global Neighborhood, the APC asserts: "That report detailed UN plans that will now be placed into action through the Charter for Global Democracy which will be voted on and approved by world leaders at the Millennium Assembly [sic]." Under the grim scenario sketched out by the APC, the Millennium Summit sets the stage for the abolition of U.S. independence by executive decree. "In 1776, with the stroke of a pen," concludes the newsletter, "the Declaration of Independence marked the beginning of the greatest experiment in national government ever conceived. Today, however, unless Congress stands united - determined to block not only the UN Charter, but also every effort to implement it - it will take only the stroke of Bill Clinton's lame-duck pen to change our nation, and history forever." An APC fax alert disseminated on September 5th urged Americans to participate in a "phone-in" timed to coincide with a press conference scheduled for the morning of Thursday, September 7th. "If you do nothing at noon Thursday, the mechanism will be in place for: a standing UN army; UN global taxation; a UN International Criminal Court; UN gun control," warned the fax alert. The purpose of the press conference and "phone-in" is to support passage of H.R. 1146, the "American Sovereignty Restoration Act," sponsored by Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), who was scheduled to address the press conference. The legislation is indeed valuable and worthy of support, and public pressure upon Congress toward that end is vitally necessary. However, it must be asked: How will Congress react to a wave of telephone calls prompted by concerns over the supposed threat posed by the "UN Charter for Global Democracy," when the document, under its proper name of Charter 99, has absolutely nothing to do with the Millennium Summit, or any formal proposal presented therein? Apocalypse - Not! When asked on September 6th if the Charter was going to be signed at the Millennium Summit, Tom DeWeese, president of the American Policy Center (and author of the Insider's Report newsletter quoted above) backed away from the apocalyptic language that had previously characterized his organization's treatment of the issue. Rather than a "mechanism" that would bring about the definitive end of U.S. sovereignty and "establish," at one fell swoop, "Global Governance under the control of the United Nations," DeWeese told THE NEW AMERICAN that "the Charter for Global Democracy is essentially presented as a wish list by NGOs . taken from all these ideas that have rattled around the [UN] Building" for several years. "Ideas from that [Charter] will be included in the official Declaration that will be presented to heads of state," DeWeese continued. "They've sort of been included in the general mish-mush of official language, and it's not as straightforward as the [language in] the Charter. But once the Declaration is signed, the UN will take that as authorization to move on that agenda." One problem with this analysis is the fact that heads of state will not sign the Millennium Summit Declaration. UN Information Officer Pragati Pascale explained to THE NEW AMERICAN that although the Declaration will be "adopted" by consensus on September 8th, "that document won't be signed by the heads of state." A much more significant problem with DeWeese's analysis is the fact that the Declaration, according to Ms. Pascale, is "based on [Secretary General Kofi Annan's] Millennium Report," rather than any "Charter for Global Democracy." Asked by THE NEW AMERICAN about the Charter, Pascale replied, "The 'Charter for Global Democracy'? What's that?" When told that the document's original title was Charter 99, Ms. Pascale recognized it immediately, at least in broad outline. "It's not a UN document," Pascale informed THE NEW AMERICAN. "It's not being considered here in any formal way; it's not part of the Millennium Summit. I have seen copies of it, but I couldn't tell you of any of its specific proposals. I didn't realize that the document was receiving any significant publicity, much less that it was controversial, since it is not under official consideration in any way." While some might object that Ms. Pascale could be engaging in a cover-up, her statement that the Declaration draws upon Kofi Annan's Millennium Report is a significant admission against interest. As we have previously reported, Annan's document - which, unlike Charter 99, is an official statement of UN policy, seeks to propel the world body into the position of global lawgiver and hegemon. (See "Building World Order," our report from the May UN "Millennium Forum," in the July 3, 2000 issue of THE NEW AMERICAN.) In brief, there was never a plan to present a "Charter for Global Democracy" for signature by heads of state at the Millennium Summit. As Ms. Pascale pointed out to THE NEW AMERICAN, the Declaration - in keeping with long-established UN practice - had been drafted well in advance of the meeting, and Charter 99 had nothing to do with the creation of that document. There are quasi-official blueprints for "empowering" the UN that are worthy of attention, among them the previously mentioned Our Global Neighborhood. The Hague Agenda for Peace and Justice in the 21st Century, which is endorsed by Kofi Annan, is regarded by many heavyweights in the UN-controlled NGO community to be an important framework for "empowering" the UN. The UN's Earth Charter, a "people's treaty" created under the direction of former Soviet Dictator Mikhail Gorbachev and Canadian eco-radical Maurice Strong, is a detailed guidebook for a UN-dominated global eco-regime. If the UN's current timetable is followed, the Earth Charter will be presented to the General Assembly in 2002, and then presented for ratification in nations around the world - a process that would have been redundant if, as the APC's June newsletter insisted, the UN had planned to implement global governance by decree via the "Charter for Global Democracy" at the Millennium Summit. Credibility the Key The supposed "UN Charter for Global Democracy" has been much discussed in the talk radio circuit, as well as various Internet forums and other independent media networks. Literally millions of Americans, many of whom are relative newcomers to UN-related issues, have been understandably alarmed over the prospect of our national sovereignty being abolished by the stroke of a pen. Yes, there is ample cause for intelligent concern, and even anger, over the steady betrayal of our national independence. But we must return to a question asked above: How effective will such concern be in influencing Congress if it is focused upon a documentably non-existent threat like the "Charter for Global Democracy"? APC's Tom DeWeese emphasized to THE NEW AMERICAN that "we're not talking about reforming the UN. We want the UN out, and we're using this issue [the Charter for Global Democracy] to bring pressure and a bright light to bear upon the UN and its activities." Moreover, DeWeese indicated that the call-in had been scheduled for September 7th with the specific intention of putting the issue before Congress on the first full day of its fall session. But it is not difficult to predict how congressmen would react to wave after wave of phone calls from UN opponents agitated about the "Charter for Global Democracy" - once those congressmen learn that the UN document that provoked the tsunami of phone calls, faxes, e-mails and other urgent messages is utterly inconsequential. In the effort to restore American sovereignty, credibility is the most precious currency. In economics, "Gresham's Law" dictates that "bad currency drives out good"; in the freedom fight, the equivalent law dictates that bad or defective information drives out reliable reporting. Some activist groups are eager to seize upon new "threats" as fodder for campaigns that are designed not to address existing problems, but instead to earn what is now called "brand awareness" for the groups in question. The notorious Y2K non-crisis generated more than a few examples of this sort. The "Charter for Global Democracy" scare, like the Y2K issue, is a case of embroidering upon an existing problem in ways that will ultimately diminish the credibility of the anti-UN movement. It is also important to remember that the UN, as ambitious as its masters may be, enjoys a very precarious existence. During an August 1995 Washington, D.C. meeting of the United Nations Association of the United States of America, Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott, a recipient of the "Norman Cousins Global Governance Award" from the World Federalist Association, warned that public opposition to the UN was growing, and that this opposition was beginning to have an impact in Congress. "The bipartisan consensus in support of the UN has frayed badly," Talbott warned his globalist confreres, his ample forehead furrowed with concern. "If we further reduce our payments to the UN, others will surely follow.... And if Congress pulls the plug on basic UN activities such as conflict resolution [that is, "peace-keeping"], as some of its members wish, then the UN might very quickly join the League of Nations on the ashheap of history." As Talbott indicated, the UN's chief vulnerability is the U.S. House of Representatives, which can choke off funding to the world body. This can be accomplished only when a sufficient portion of the electorate understands the threat the UN represents, and can convey that understanding forcefully - and, most importantly, with iron-clad credibility - to its representatives in Congress. Order this issue . © Copyright 1994-2000 American Opinion Publishing Incorporated <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
