Volume 2, Number 7 -- September 15, 1997

HOW did an organization that was supposedly created as a forum for nations to come together to negotiate problems that might lead to armed conflict become involved in the internal affairs of nations to such an extent that it is dictating (or proposing to dictate) how sovereign nations may use their natural resources, what parental rights parents may and may not exercise, what kind of housing must be erected, how citizens may use their private property, what schools need to teach, which religions are permissible and which need to modify their teachings, and so on and so on?

If you think there may be some exaggeration in the question above you need to get a copy of the UN's publication Agenda 21, which outlines plans for all nations for the twenty-first century, or a copy of the UN sponsored publication Biodiversity Assessment, which offers the world two options: reduce the global population by two-thirds or revert to the feudal agricultural lifestyle of four or five hundred years ago. (These publications are available from the UN Bookstore, Concourse Level, 46^thStreet and 1^st Avenue, New York, NY 10017)

Many of the proposals outlined in these two publications are already being implemented in this country even though we have never officially ratified the Biodiversity Treaty. Nor have we ratified the "Convention on the Rights of the Child," the "Treaty on the Rights of Women," nor some of the other treaties the Clinton Administration is pushing. But again, many of the provisions of those agreements are being implemented through executive edicts and bureaucratic regulations or they are being incorporated into other programs. In most instances the United Nations origin is never mentioned but is purposely omitted.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been used extensively to implement New World Order (UN) thinking regarding our use of resources. The recent presidential designation of ten river systems in the United States as Heritage Rivers effectively takes control of these rivers and the land bordering them away from the states and gives it to the federal government. It will be up to a federal bureaucracy as to how such control is administered. Anyone remotely familiar with how federal bureaucracies tend to feed upon themselves and grow exponentially should be able to see the handwriting on the wall.

What is being touted as a means of preserving our natural heritage for the benefit of future generations is really nothing but a federal land (power) grab.

Perhaps the following quotation from a speech made by Robert Welch at the founding of the John Birch Society will give you cause to ponder. Remember the predictions he was making were being made in 1958, then look at what has happened since then.

Here are the Communists' aims for the United States...(1) Greatly expanded government spending, for missiles, for so-called defense generally, for foreign aid, for every conceivable means of getting rid of even larger sums of American money - as wastefully as possible. (2) Higher and then much higher taxes. (3) An increasingly unbalanced budget, despite the higher taxes. (4) Wild inflation of our currency.... (5) Government controls of prices, wages, and materials, supposedly to combat inflation. (6) Greatly increased socialistic controls over every operation of our economy and every activity of our daily lives. This is to be accompanied, naturally and automatically, by a correspondingly huge increase in the size of our bureaucracy, and in both the cost and reach of our domestic government. (7) Far more centralization of power in Washington, and the practical elimination of our state lines. There is a many-faceted drive at work to have our state lines eventually mean no more within the nation than our county lines do now within the states. (8) The steady advance of federal aid to and control over our educational system, leading to complete federalization of our public education. (9) A constant hammering into the American consciousness of the horror of "modern warfare," the beauties and absolute necessity of "peace" - peace always on Communist terms, of course. And (10) the consequent willingness of the American people to allow the steps of appeasement by our government which amount to a piecemeal surrender of the rest of the free world and of the United States itself to the Kremlin-ruled tyranny.

(The fact that the former Soviet Union is now seemingly in pieces should not deceive anyone into believing that world communism is no longer a very real threat to every freedom-loving nation on the planet.)

An examination - even a cursory one - will quickly reveal that every one of the ten predictions has to some extent already come to pass. Some are further along than others. Some are very near total fulfillment and others are well under way. The price and wage controls implemented in the Nixon administration did not have the desired effect and were discontinued, but the establishment of ten regional districts during the Nixon years is just now coming into focus as a means of erasing state boundaries.

An article in the Sept. 1997 issue of Media Bypass Magazine, "FEMA: Blueprint for Tyranny (Part III)," by Roland C. Eyears, points out some disturbing facts. What these mean may be subject to varying interpretations, but they do raise questions that need to be answered.

Why would the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act specifically provide that a contingent of 100 foreign nationals may be hired as advisory members of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) command structure?
Why should FEMA be involved in an organization called the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCen) which maintains the largest, government-owned, artificial intelligence data base of financial activity in existence?
Why would FEMA be involved in the distribution and placement of hundreds (if not thousands) of containment cells? These are 25' x 25' and 12' x 12' reinforced concrete cell blocks. The smaller blocks each contain one door and one small, barred window. The larger blocks are configured somewhat differently.

FEMA was Nixon's excuse for establishing a regionalization plan in which the United States is divided into ten regions. All federal agencies except the Department of Defense now conform to these regions.

Regionalization tends to break down local identities and loyalties and at the same time allows power to flow upward. We are seeing various forms of regionalization throughout the nation. Here in Alabama there are a number of "Regional Planning Commissions" scattered across the state. The Birmingham Regional Planning Commission is even now involved in "working with" Blount County officials on future "land use planning" for the county, and with the city of Oneonta.

The Media Bypass article points out that Massachusetts, as it pushes for regionalization, has just implemented provisions of a bill that will, according to Lt. Gov. Celluci, "abolish Middlesex County government this year, and Worcester and Hampton counties next year. We see county government as a vestige of colonial (perhaps prehistoric) times that serves little purpose other than as a repository for patronage."

Regionalization was used by Joseph Stalin in Russia as a prelude to the dissolution of national identities.

How is it that such plans can be implemented throughout the nation without alarming the citizenry? Simple. The citizenry is never allowed to see the total picture. Each incremental step, in-and-of-itself, seems very plausible, even desirable. It is sold to the public as being necessary to ensure the continued well-being of the planet, of the nation, of the state or of the community. But with the implementation of each step a little more individual sovereignty, a little more freedom is given up.

Often the rights that are given up are never mentioned, only the "advantages" of the proposal are discussed. And the citizenry, as a whole, has been so divorced from the workings of government by the dumbed-down education system that they feel ill prepared to even try to understand what such projects involve. The only times they sit up and take notice is when someone says they are raising taxes.

Those of us who are over fifty can easily remember when times were much better. We realize that something really bad has happened to the country but we can't quite put our finger on the problem. Of course, we're making more money now, and we have a lot more "stuff," but we still feel a little uneasy about things.

And well we should. There are many, many issues in which the United Nations is involved and which are being used to entangle the nations of the world into a web of treaty-law from which it will be virtually impossible for them to extricate themselves. THIS IS THE NEW WORLD ORDER IN THE MAKING.

And the United States is in the forefront of the movement. Our own government is pushing the agenda as rapidly as it can.

But there are still a few in Congress who are willing to resist what is happening. Ron Paul (R-TX) has offered house bill H.R. 1146, the "American Sovereignty Restoration Act" which would take us out of the United Nations. We urge all who might read this newsletter to write your Congressmen and get your friends to write asking the Congressmen to support this legislation and even sign on as a co-sponsor. Disentangling ourselves from this tool of world socialism would be one of the greatest gifts of liberty we could bequeath to our descendants.

Representative Helen Chenoweth (R-ID) introduced House Joint Resolution 83, a proposed constitutional amendment that would state in no uncertain terms that treaties and executive agreements cannot supersede the Constitution. This amendment would be named the "Bricker Amendment" in honor of the Ohio Senator who offered a similar amendment in 1954. His effort failed by one vote. We in the Alabama Committee to Get US Out of the United Nations support Congresswoman Chenowethís effort and encourage readers of this newsletter to lend their support by encouraging their Senators and Congressmen to join with Representative Chenoweth in promoting this amendment.

It will likely take a good deal of pressure from the public to make headway with both of these efforts, and we are unlikely to see a ground swell of support from the mass media. If they get any press at all it is likely to be negative.

Washington can be very hard on those who try to swim against the tide. Letters of encouragement to those few statesmen who have the courage to stand in the gap should be one task every true patriot undertakes.

We may tend to think the great battle we have ahead of us is to dethrone the UN and solve all our problems. Not so. The poison of falsehood that has been pouring out of that body for fifty years has so corrupted the thinking of opinion molders and leaders in education, politics and even business that we can find it almost everywhere we turn.

As an example of this we would like to offer some quotes from a textbook, Principles of Conservation Biology, second edition, that is being used across the country and right here in Samford University. Some of the phraseology is so similar to that found in UN documents that one might think the same people wrote both.

One of the many species suffering the consequences of ecological destruction is Homo sapiens,the perpetrator of it all.
Achieving equity will involve convincing some to accept lower standards of living so that others may climb out of desperate poverty, with the result that all will have a lesser impact on biodiversity. This will not be an easy task. It will also involve attention to a number of other issues, such as birth control, revised concepts of land ownership and use, education, health care, empowerment of women, and so forth.
...to assume that voluntary compliance for the common good will preserve systems is at best naive, given the fact, as already noted, that regulation became necessary in the absence of voluntary compliance.
Because changes in the underlying value systems of human societies are critical to achieving conservation goals, religious values and teachings can play a vital role in creating a new human relationship with the earth. However, those teachings must move beyond the self-salvation for an afterlife to incorporate planetary salvation now. (emphasis added)
Unless humanity acts quickly and in a significant way, the next generation will not have this opportunity. We are "it," and conservation biology is, in every sense of the word, a "crisis discipline."
The "new" conservation biology views all of nature's diversity as important and having inherent value.

This "crisis management" is standard procedure for those who would lead us down the road to loss of freedom. After all, if we're in a crisis mode we don't have time to stop and analyze all the claims being made, we have to accept them on faith.

We've no doubt that those teaching this class believe what they are teaching. It has been drilled into them for many years now.

Go to next newsletter