News

Monday August 14, 2000


Millennium Summit to Accelerate UN Control Over Nations

LifeSite has been working on the following report for the last week and due to its serious subject matter we are presenting it alone in today’s broadcast.

The issues raised are of very serious consequence to life, family, democracy, and the sovereignty of nations.

We urge you to take careful consideration of this report and act accordingly – contacting your government and other political and religious leaders. Urge them to immediately review this material and to take actions to prevent your country from becoming part of the on-going attempt to impose an unjust new world order on the nations of the world.

This may sound like wild fiction, as we wish it were. We urge you to investigate the documentation. The developments are actually occurring and the perpetrators are dead serious and very highly connected.

MILLENNIUM SUMMIT TO ACCELERATE
UN CONTROL OVER NATIONS

Largest Single Gathering Of Heads Of State/Government Ever Held

UNITED NATIONS, Aug 11 (LSN.ca) – The United Nations Millennium Summit, which according to the UN will be “the largest single gathering of Heads of State/Government ever held in the world”, is a mere 22 days away and has not yet received significant mention by media or government. The agenda of the historic meeting, to be held Sept 6-8 at UN headquarters in New York, is stacked with alarming proposals seeking to strip national autonomy and to ensure UN world governance. The Summit entitled, “The Role of the United Nations in the twenty-first century” is officially “to articulate and affirm an animating vision for the United Nations in the new era.”

What the Summit expects to accelerate:

1. Placing the UN in oversight of all international agencies, financial institutions, commerce, trade and labor relations, human rights (including abortion) and education.
2. Abolishing veto power and permanent status on the UN Security Council.
3. Establishing a permanent UN standing army.
4. Making registration of all arms mandatory.
5. Forcing countries to comply with “Human Rights” treaties.
6. Establishing a global Environmental Protection Agency and create an international EPA court to enforce treaties on the environment.
7. Creating a commission to set limits on economic activity by allocating carbon emissions based on equal per -capita rights.
8. Strengthening the International Court and make its jurisdiction compulsory.
9. Implementation of global taxation to fund the UN.

HOW IT CAME TO BE

Most of these initiatives are outlined in the various UN treaties the Summit is pushing but many of these goals were also reiterated by the various lead up events and conferences to the Summit. On April 3, 2000, the Secretary-General presented his report “We the peoples: The role of the United Nations in the twenty-first century” calling for a revamping of the role of the United Nations as outlined in the Charter of the United Nations. In his report, Kofi Annan recommended a “strengthening” of powers of the UN describing the UN’s role to “set and sustain global norms” and calling for the enforcement of those norms by “the rule of law.” And in a thinly veiled reference to removing veto power from the Security Council, Annan says there must be a “reforming of the Security Council so it can both work effectively and enjoy unquestioned legitimacy.” He also hints strongly at the creation of a UN standing army. He stresses countries must ratify the International Criminal Court. (See the report at: https://www.un.org/millennium/sg/report/full.htm)

Millennium Forum Prepares The Way For The Summit

“Civil society organizations” (NGO’s), in response to the Secretary General’s recommendation, organized a Summit companion event on May 22-26, 2000 at the United Nations called a “Millennium Forum”. NGO’s are unaccountable, non-elected, independent organizations, such as International Planned Parenthood, that promote special interest objectives. Governments, foundations, corporations and individual donors often fund them.

The Forum adopted the Millennium Forum Declaration and Agenda for Action. The Declaration reflects the wishes of Secretary General Annan but goes further in specifying that UN human rights treaties must have “Universal ratification, without reservations.” Already acting as a global authority, the Millennium forum demands the “repeal of all discriminatory laws” under which they include discrimination on the basis of “sexual orientation.” With regard to the Security Council the Declaration calls for “Complete veto abolition should be sought as a step towards the elimination of permanency.” The group also called for a UN “standing Peace Force” and “UN discussion of global taxes and fees. . . (to) vigorously explore the possibilities of alternate funding from such sources.” (see the Declaration at: https://www.millenniumforum.org/html/papers/mfd26May.htm)

Summit 25-pack of Treaties to be Signed by World Leaders

At the Millennium Summit a key event will be having the world’s leaders agree to a 25-pack of UN treaties, which would achieve the above-mentioned goals. In a letter sent by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to “all Heads of State and/or Government” dated May 15, 2000 he notes that at the Summit “special facilities would be provided at the Millennium Assembly for Heads of State or Government to add their signatures to any treaty or convention”. The letter asks the leaders to “sign, ratify or accede” to “a list of twenty-five core treaties representative of the Organization’s key objectives” and to let Annan “know by 1 August 2000 of your intention to sign, ratify or accede to any of the treaties.” (see Annan’s letter: https://www.un.org/millennium/law/sgletter.htm)

The treaties in the 25-pack include some of the most notorious anti-life, anti-family proposals, including the “Optional Protocol to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women” (OPCEDAW). Other contentious treaties among the 25 include the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (for a critique see https://www.lsn.ca/ldn/2000/mar/000314a) .html) , the Convention on the Rights of the Child (for a critique see https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/1999/sept/990924a) .html) and the Kyoto Protocol (for a critique see https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/1999/oct/991026) .html

Deadly CEDAW Optional Protocol

For anyone concerned about abortion (in addition to many other matters), OPCEDAW would be of utmost concern. After it is ratified by a country, it would mandate abortion in that country. While the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women calls for the right to “reproductive health” (which includes abortion by UN definition), countries signing on to CEDAW may include reservations to the treaty and agree to disagree with those provisions of the covenant. Further, while CEDAW would be a signed treaty it would have no formal mechanism of enforcement if the signing government chose not to uphold the treaty. The Optional Protocol would legally bind countries to uphold CEDAW giving the CEDAW Committee the power of a court, to require nations to bring all of their laws in compliance with CEDAW. The Protocol also does not permit any reservations to the treaty and includes “a right of petition for individual women to appear before the Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women.” Thus an individual woman who felt her “right” to an abortion was compromised by a pro-life organization’s very existence could bring her case forward to the UN. (see https://www.lsn.ca/ldn/1999/dec/991208. .html

Since the optional protocols set up permanent legal constraints, outgoing liberal governments may view the protocols as a strategy to ensure continuance of their policy should their citizens vote in or demand more conservative governments. Democracy would be severally damaged by the implementation of the protocols as well as by many of the other Summit objectives.

The Final Act in a UN Drive for Power that Began a Decade Ago

The American Policy Center (APC) has pointed out that the Millennium Forum Declaration and its sister report Charter 99, which are both directions for the UN by “civil society organizations”, are the final act in a UN drive for power that began a decade ago. APC notes that “the UN has been preparing for global governance over those ten years through a series of international conferences, treaties and reports.” APC points out that the Charter for Global Democracy outlined by the Charter 99 group and echoed in the Millennium Forum declaration were merely repetitions of the UN’s blueprint for global governance laid out in a 1995 report called “Our Global Neighborhood.”

See the Our Global Neighborhood https://www.cgg.ch/contents.htm)

The 1995 report was a product of the Commission on Global Governance co-chaired by Canadian Maurice Strong, a top advisor to Annan and the architect of UN “Reform” which led to this scheme of UN governance to replace national sovereignty. In its report on the Millennium Summit, APC includes a well-known quote by Strong: “It is simply not feasible for sovereignty to be exercised unilaterally by individual nation-states, however powerful.”

The State of the World Forum (SWF), another large gathering of one world minded prominent leaders, has this year been timed to also take place in New York to compliment the Millenium Summit. See LifeSite’s recent report on the SWF at:
https://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2000/aug/000804at.html
https://www.lifesitenews.com/waronfamily/stateofworld/worldselite… .

The SWF Forum receives grants from some of the world’s most militant promoters of population control. See the SWF home page at https://www.worldforum.org/

(with files from the American Policy Center https://www.americanpolicy.org)

If you have questions or comments contact LifeSite at [email protected] LifeSite will continue to follow-up on this story.


SHARE THIS STORY: E-mail Print Newsvine Digg Reddit Del.icio.us Facebook


Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

0 Comments

    Loading...