VOLUME 7, NUMBER 3 - APRIL 15, 2002

ON THE ROAD TO TYRANNY

You may recognize the verse above as a stanza from a poem by Rudyard Kipling, a poem we recall from our school days. There's also the "Yellow Brick Road" from the Alice in Wonderland fantasy, and Bing Crosby and Bob Hope made a lot of movies that began with "On the Road to..."

Most of these "on the road" memories are pleasant ones, recalling good times from our younger days, but the road we are on now, and which we have been on for several decades, we fear will not be fondly remembered by ourselves or our progeny.

This road to tyranny, which the United Nations has been paving with their Conferences, Conventions and Treaties, we fear will be a road remembered with great regret.

Most Americans can recall the development of the Interstate road-building that was initiated under the Eisenhower presidency. It took many, many years to put the system into place and, in fact, development is still going on. There were various segments of the system that were all being constructed at the same time in the various states, but the opening of much of the system had to wait until some final "links" could connect all the parts.

The same process might be said to be true for the road to tyranny, to which most Americans still seem to be oblivious. Unlike the Interstate system, about which we were kept well informed, there has been hardly any attention given by major media sources to the construction of this highway, particularly as to its final destination. The tragic thing is that we may be very near to having those final "links" put into place. Once they are in place our journey to tyranny may be quite swift.

We, here at the Mustard Seed, have been trying to shine some light on the true agenda of the United Nations movement through pointing to the organization's own documents. Most Americans still seem to desire blindness rather than the light. The old adage, "we see what we want to see," is apparently holding true.

Our first newsletter, published April 30, 1996 (under the name "Just Say No to the UN") warned about the movement to create a global tax with which to fund UN activities. Just last month there was a UN conference in Monterrey, Mexico for the purpose of designing a world economic system. Henry Lamb, a long-time observer of UN activities, gave George W. Bush credit for stopping the global tax at that conference. It may be, however, that the plan was never to go for the global tax in Monterrey, only to lay a few more paving stones on the highway.

Joan Veon, another long-time UN observer, made these comments in an article published on worldnetdaily.com on March 26, 2002:

The Financing for Development Conference has just ended in Monterrey, Mexico, and to most nothing happened since nothing of great substance was reported. Yet nothing could be further from the truth! ...

The CEOs of multinational corporations submitted "11 Business-Driven Proposals on Financing for Development." They include "Establishing a Global Information Clearinghouse," "Investment Guidelines for Least Developed Countries," "Establishment of a World Development Corporation to Fund Regionally-Based Operating Companies," "Increasing the Number of Viable Water Projects in Developing Countries" and "Making Public-Private Partnerships Work with Business Management and Oversight."

In conclusion, you and I have become nothing more than a means to an end. In short, feudalism has returned with a vengeance. Unfortunately the United Nations could not accomplish anywhere near what it has if it was not for the support of the United States....(emphasis added)

THERE'S ANOTHER CRITICAL LINK
in the UN's highway that might be completed very soon. Just before he left the White House, Bill Clinton signed-on to the UN INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURT. When 60 nations have signed, this UN court will claim world-wide jurisdiction. The latest number we have heard is that there are only four more signatures needed!

Efforts have been under way to get president Bush to undo what Clinton did. They have thus far been unsuccessful. Just as proposals that he revoke a number of Clinton's executive orders have been met with inaction. Did we really think we were electing a conservative nationalist to the presidency?

General coverage of the ICC (International Criminal Court) in the major media has played it up as a court in which to try war criminals. Actually, the court could try any citizen of any country under almost any pretense. We already have the World Court in the Hague that has been ceded jurisdiction to try war criminals. It is here that Slobodan Milosevic (former dictator of Yugoslavia) is being tried for his so-called crimes against humanity.

The general tenor of world opinion is that international law supersedes national law, and that if a conflict exists between a nation's laws and the international law (as defined by the UN), the international law would be controlling. Considering much of the writing that has come out of the UN, it is easily conceivable that an American citizen could be charged with an environmental crime against humanity because of some pollution action he might have taken, willingly or unwittingly, or with some crime against the state because of some criticism made against UN policies. He would not have the protections provided by the Constitution of the United States, he would not be tried by a jury of his peers but by a UN tribunal, he would not be able to face his accuser and he would have no recourse of appeal to a higher court. He could also be tried over and over until convicted.

An article by Wes Vernon that appeared on NewsMax.com on April 6, 2002, said:

WASHINGTON - President Bush has only a few days to decide whether to "unsign" a treaty that enables strangers in far-off lands to try Americans on any number of charges.

This time bomb against the constitutional rights of American citizens is one of many booby traps the lame-duck Clinton administration left behind for President Bush.

The Bush administration has rhetorically rejected the so-called International Criminal Court. The State Department's Ambassador Pierre Prosper has said the U.S. "is not and will not be part of the ICC."

All very reassuring. But it's not official until the president takes the next step and removes the U.S. signature from the treaty.

By the time this newsletter goes to press, the remaining four signatures the UN says it needs for the ICC to become the law of the world may have already been given. [On April 11, 2002, enough nations ratifed the treaty to bring the number to 66...an appropriate number, just one shy of 666.]

As we all know, it is much easier to stop something than to undo it after it's done... ergo, the late action by Bill Clinton. It is our opinion that Clinton was working more for the UN than for the U.S. from the moment he took the office of the presidency. We also believe his ambition is to be the next Secretary General of the UN... but there are others waiting in line for that one.

RIO + 10

The next major UN event will be the Rio plus ten conference to be held in late August and early September. In a worldnetdaily.com article, January 5, 2002, Henry Lamb wrote:

This year is the 10th anniversary of the UNCED, the event through which the concept of "sustainable development" officially entered the world in the form of "Agenda 21." The celebration, labeled World Summit on Sustainable Development, is scheduled for Aug. 26 through Sept. 4, 2002, in Johannesburg, South Africa. Early estimates say more than 50,000 people will attend.

Preparatory Committees have been meeting for years, developing the agenda and planning for the huge celebration. The last three days are to be devoted to "world leaders," who will adopt the various documents presented at the meeting. Like the Millennium Summit held in New York in 2000, this body of world leaders has no official authority, but its actions are taken by the U.N. as moral authority to move the U.N. agenda forward.

The U.N. agenda is an action plan for the implementation of global governance. The events scheduled for this year are designed to give meaning, definition and enforcement authority to a worldwide system of governance which has no tolerance for the principles of freedom on which the United States was founded. This could well be the year history will record as the point in time when world government became a reality.

With Henry Lamb and Joan Veon, both veteran UN watchers, saying that the one world government may be just around the next bend in the road, we feel confident in saying that the final links connecting the New World Order's highway to tyranny may be nearing completion. Decisions made at the next conference could even open the gate and usher us onto that highway.

Still, we need to continue efforts to block the opening of that gate and save the sovereignty of our nation for future generations. Just because the trend is for countries to accept UN edicts as international law does not necessarily mean we have to do the same. We still have a Congress and a Constitution. Maybe many in our Congress lack a back-bone and need a transfusion of integrity, but sufficient pressure from the electorate can help those conditions. We still have a voice at the polls, exercise it!

Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) has sponsored the American Sovereignty Restoration Act (HR-1146) in Congress for several years running, but we need thousands of American citizens to write to their congressional representatives urging them to join with Representative Paul in this effort. It may be our final chance to salvage the great American experiment in self-government short of another bloody revolution.