Stiff Right Jab – UN Racist Race Summit - Why the Surprise?

Steve Montgomery & Steve Farrell
Monday, Sept. 12, 2001

Jesus Christ taught that "a corrupt tree cannot bringeth forth good fruit." Or, in rebuttal to Karl Marx and co., 'you're dead wrong - you thugs - the ends do not justify the means. Honorable ends must be achieved by honorable means. Liberty is not won at the end of a barrel held by brutal, power grasping murderers.'

The establishment of the United Nations Organization to save the world from poverty, war, prejudice, genocide, and global environmental catastrophes represents the consummate model of turning to the mob for protection, the tyrant for liberty, the idiot for intelligence, and the atheist for religion. From the start the UN was a blueprint for global thugocracy.

So here's a brief reminder of a few historical facts regarding the UN, its advocates would rather none of us knew.

Of the 17 individuals identified by the US State Department as having helped shape US policy leading to the creation of the United Nations, all but one were later identified as secret members of the Communist Party USA. (1)

Joining them at the UN's founding conference were 43 members of the ultra influential, ultra pro-socialist, Globalist think-tank the Council On Foreign Relations (CFR), (6 of the 43 CFR members having the additional distinction of membership in the Communist Party USA). (2) Importantly, the UN's first Secretary General and orchestrator of the San Francisco conference was the man later convicted, and exposed as a Soviet agent - Alger Hiss. (3)

Following in the footsteps of that unhallowed class of '46, the ideological makeup of the UN's leadership has been constant. In its 54 year history all eight Secretary Generals of the UN have been either dedicated socialists or communists (4), all 15 of the UN Under-Secretary-Generals for Political and Security Council Affairs (the UN's military boss) have been communists (all but one from the Soviet Union/Russian Federation) (5), and two thirds of the membership in the General Assembly, the Security Council, and in the World Court have always been representatives of socialist and communist nations.

The collection of US employees at the UN have not fared well either. Besides the scandal of having American communists Alger Hiss and company as the creators of the UN, a 1952 official Senate investigation into the then 6 year old United Nations revealed, "extensive evidence indicating that there is today in the UN among the American employees there, the greatest concentration of Communists that this committee has ever encountered." (6) And these were high officials.

No wonder then, Earl Browder, general secretary of the Communist Party USA admitted in his book Victory and After, that:

the American Communists worked energetically and tirelessly to lay the foundations for the United Nations which we were sure would come into existence," and that, "the United Nations is the instrument for victory [the victory of communism]. (7)

Browder wasn't alone in this confession. Former top Communist Party member Joseph Z. Kornfeder, in sworn testimony before Congress in 1955, revealed:

"I need not be a member of the United Nations Secretariat to know that the UN "blueprint" is a Communist one. I was at the Moscow headquarters of the world Communist party for nearly three years and was acquainted with most of the top leaders . . . I went to their colleges; I learned their pattern of operations, and if I see that pattern in effect anywhere, I can recognize it . . .

"From the point of view of its master designers meeting at Dubarton Oaks and Bretton Woods, and which included such masterful agents as Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, Luchlin Currie, and others, the UN was, and is, not a failure. They and the Kremlin masterminds behind them never intended the UN as a peace-keeping organization. what they had in mind was a fancy and colossal Trojan horse . . . Its [the UN's] internal setup, Communist designed, is a pattern for sociological conquest; a pattern aimed to serve the purpose of Communist penetration of the West. It is ingenious and deceptive." (8)

A pattern for sociological conquest is exactly right. The Charter's powers are so open-ended, that anything is possible. But what makes this intended conquest even easier is the delusional belief that the charter supports democracy, when there are no democratic features in its Charter, or more importantly, no republican features in its charter.

The Truth

1. Not one official is democratically elected. Only the Security Council possesses lawmaking powers. The 185 national delegates to the General Assembly may only "consider . . . discuss . . . advise . . . or make suggestions to the Security Council." (9) Simply, there is no representation and no separation of powers - the very definition of tyranny.

2. The UN version of the Bill of Rights (10) does not recognize rights as coming from God, but from government, or as they say, they exist only "according to the law." What then if the law changes? What the government gives, it can take away.

The rest of their Bill of Rights, proves the point. Consider what "rights" the UN grants:

• The right to adequate housing, a living wage, rest and leisure, medical care, social services, employment security, sick pay, disability pay, old age security pay, and widow's pay. These all negate the right to private property by default.
• The right for children to possess "freedom of thought, conscience, and religion," and the right to privacy (i.e. the right for a child to seek an abortion without parental consent.) These negate freedom of religion, the sanctity of the family, and assault the right to life.
• The right for humans to immigrate and receive welfare services in whatever nation they choose. These assault national sovereignty - listed as a natural right in the Declaration of Independence, and again assault property.
• The right for "students" to learn the "principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations." This destroys free speech.
• And the right for the UN to eradicate any and all "rights and freedoms… exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations (11)," A carryover from the Old Soviet Constitution, a catch all for the government to eradicate any right it sees fit. (12)

You get the idea.

So why all the surprise and disgust over last weeks UN Racist Race Summit? A summit, which not only was filled with hatred for Israel as the perpetrators of genocide - but which, even in its toned down declaration targeted the American enslavement of Africans, and the economic interests which motivated that enslavement (capitalism) as the cause of all the hatred, racism, racial discrimination, and xenophobia in the world. This they stated in black and white - or was it in red? (13)

Plain and simple. Down with the US! Down with capitalism! Up with Communism. And up with foreign aid and reparations. By no coincidence, not a word was mentioned about slavery and religious persecution in China, in Russia, throughout Asia, in the Arab world, and in communist Africa. This is what the UN is and always has been about, an instrument of blatant - un-Americanism by clumsy, Athiestical, thugs in suits. No surprise.

The only surprise, here, is our lack of outrage over the Bush Administration's belief that the conference could have been productive if the rhetoric had only been toned down. Or in other words, "you Marxists and terrorists shush! - lest the American conservative awakes from his slumber!"

History You May Have Missed

Speaking of vigilant outrage over foreign treaties, our forefathers were not afraid to express theirs. After President George Washington proposed to sign a treaty (with a few provisos) that many American's thought too compromising with the British, we read:

The whole country was immediately in a blaze. Beside the opposition party, a portion of the cabinet was against the ratification . . . The attack upon it was vehement and sustained . . . Meetings to oppose the ratification were held in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore and Charleston. The smaller town throughout the Union followed their example. In New York a copy of the treat was burnt before the governor's house. In Philadelphia it was suspended on a pole, carried about the streets and finally burnt in front of the British minister's house amid the shoutings of the populace. The whole country seemed determined, by prompt and clamorous manifestation of dissatisfaction, to make Washington give way. (14)

Washington was, in fact, against the provisions the people were angered over - but you get the point.

Constitutional Corner

Does treaty law have the right to over-ride the US Constitution, under the supremacy clause? What was meant by the word supreme? Hamilton, in Federalist 33, answers:

"A LAW, by the very meaning of the term, includes supremacy . . .But it will not follow from this doctrine that acts of the larger society which are not pursuant to its constitutional powers, but which are invasions of the residuary authorities of the smaller

societies, will become the supreme law of the land. These will be merely acts of usurpation, and will deserve to be treated as such."

Wary Eye

Is a body like the UN indispensable, as even so many "conservative" Republicans claim?

The late American Patriot, former two-time Secretary of Agriculture, and LDS Church President, Ezra Taft Benson, in his 1969 famous speech, "The United Nations - Planned Tyranny," asked:

What is wrong with the traditional methods of maintaining contact between nations through the use of ambassadors, envoys, and diplomatic corps? The United States has such contacts in all the major capitals of the world. Why not use them? Quiet diplomacy always has been and still is far more conducive to real international progress than diplomacy on the stage. (15)

Thanks to modern telecommunications, i.e. satellite com links, Benson's argument is even more persuasive. In a crisis, Presidents can meet face to face, instantaneously. Who needs the busy body UN?

Solution

Support H.R. 1146, The American Sovereignty Restoration Act. Let your congressman, your Senators, and your President know.

Look for Stiff Right Jab Monday, Wednesday, and Friday in NewsMax.com Contact Steve & Steve at StiffRightJab@aol.com

If you haven´t already, read Part VI of Steve Farrell´s Democrats In Drag, and Part 9 of Missing the Mark With Religion or access his NewsMax archives.

Footnotes

1. Postwar Foreign Policy Preparation, 1839-1845, US State Department; Interlocking Subversion in Government Departments, US Senate Internal Security Subcommittee report, July 30, 1953.

2. Jasper, William F. Global Tyranny Step By Step: The United Nations and the Emerging World Order (Appleton, WI: Western Islands 1992) pp. 47-48.

3. Ibid., pp. 47-48

4. Ibid., pp. 67-71

5. Ibid., pp. 16-17

6. Activities of US Citizens Employed by the UN, hearings before the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, 1952, pp. 407-408.

7. Browder, Earl. Victory and After, New York: International Publishers, 1942, p. 110

8. Griffin, G. Edward. The Fearful Master: A Second Look at the United Nations, Appleton, Wis.: Western Islands, 1964, p. 88

9. UN Charter, Articles 10, 11, 13, 14, 15, and 18.

10. The United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, and the UN Conference on the Child. See also, the assortment of resolutions and addendum's found at the UN's Webpages which have been added over the years.

11. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 29, Verse 3. Verse 2 also utilizes the tactic of the old Soviet and "new" Russian Constitution when it states: "in the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law" - which rights are inalienable in the US system.

12. Griffin, G. Edward. The Fearful Master: A Second Look at the United Nations (Boston, MA, Western Islands, 1964) pp. 126-127

13. World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance, August 20, 2001, Draft Declaration, http://www.unhchr.ch/huridocda/huridoca.nsf/(Symbol)/A.conf.189.4.En/$file/0115581.doc?OpenElement

14. Irving, Washington, George Washington: A Biography, abridged and edited version of the 1856-1859 edition - by Da Capo Press, NY, New York, 1994, pgs. 694-695

15. Benson, Ezra Taft. An Enemy Hath Done This, Salt Lake City, Utah: Parliament Publishers, 1969, p. 197

Steven Montgomery

HOME