UN Five-Year Plan Is Globalist to the Core
UN chief outlines five-year action plan to build 'the future we want' ... Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon today outlined a series of actions he believes the global community must take over the next five years to build "the future we want." In a speech to the General Assembly last September Mr. Ban presented five imperatives – or generational opportunities – that must be addressed to ensure a better future for the world's people. These are sustainable development; preventing and mitigating conflicts, human rights abuses and the impacts of natural disasters; building a safer and more secure world; supporting countries in transition; and working to engage the talents of women and young people. – UN.Org/YouTube
Dominant Social Theme: How can anyone dislike the UN. Its goals are clear and laudable. Only a truly hateful individual couldn't wish it well.
Free-Market Analysis: Are we hateful here at the Daily Bell? Yes, we admit some of our surlier gnomes are a bit on the dislikeable side, and even a couple of elves. But when it comes to lovin' the UN we'll take a pass. This is one dangerous and increasingly totalitarian institution. It's gone well past the "joke" stage.
It's easy to believe that the UN doesn't have much clout when one watches little kids scrambling from house to house on Halloween with UNICEF boxes. But as we've pointed out many times about six years ago, the UN Security Council abrogated the Treaty of Westphalia – dooming the world to ever-escalating and perpetual bloodshed at the behest of the dominant Anglosphere powers.
The Treaty of Westphalia, ironically, was something of a product of the Gutenberg Press. As a result of the Gutenberg Press and what it revealed about the power elite of the day, a good deal of action was taken by the powers-that-be to reduce the impact of various structural revelations.
Then as now, the elites turned to copyright law, legal and regulatory tools and war to create the kind of chaos in Europe – and eventually in the US – that would make it more difficult for the larger mass of people to act on the recurrent enlightenment posited by the free-flow of books and periodicals.
In fact, the elites apparently started so many wars – such as the pan-European Peasant War – that ran for so many decades that the Treaty of Westphalia was finally declared in the 1600s to draw a halt to dozens of simmering conflicts.
The Treaty of Westphalia posited that all signatories had a proactive duty to avoid breaching the borders of a duly declared nation. The idea was that states couldn't gang up on each other to put leaders out of power on flimsy pretexts.
The Treaty of Westphalia was abrogated by the UN in 2005 without fanfare or notable announcements. There certainly weren't any movies made about it. No best-selling books. No hit songs.
The Treaty of Westphalia was replaced by something called R2P – Responsibility to Protect. The idea NOW is that when the "UN" determines as a body that a country's leader is putting his citizens in danger, the UN as a body must exercise "protection" – usually by employing NATO and various Western armies.
R2P was most notably declared in the case of Libya – where Muammar Gaddafi was said (suddenly) to have put his citizens at risk of domestic bombing and other violence.
The declaration of R2P was fairly subtle, and the UN was not really drawn into it. Instead, various Western politicos like Hillary Clinton simply settled for stating that Gaddafi was putting his own citizens at risk and that such activities were not to be tolerated by "civilized" nations.
In fact, as R2P was exercised in Libya, the results were even more ghastly than might have been expected, with thousands of civilians apparently bombed by NATO as part of UN "protection." Gaddafi and virtually his entire family was executed. R2P was ultimately a facilitator of regime change.
This would seem to be the point of R2P, in fact. The Anglosphere power elite that wants to create global governance – and counteract the effects of the Internet at the same time – is seemingly building an Islamic crescent in the Middle East.
It is doing so by destabilizing secular regimes and replacing them with moderate Islamic ones that can either be utilized within the context of propaganda to expand the phony war on terror – or can be used as examples of "moderate" Islamic democracies.
But the point of R2P is incontrovertibly to make war and military activities a part of the modern sociopolitical scene, and a legal one.
The UN, as we can see, has played a big part in this effort by providing the Anglosphere with legal cover. And with the UN's announcement of its latest agenda we can see that the UN is gearing up for MORE global activism.
Such activism draws the noose of global governance tighter around the world's nations, large and small. It also provides additional tools for the elites that can exacerbate internationalist trends. It is a malevolent and evident, appealing to people's better natures while exploiting the underbelly of human poverty and misery.
The five-year action plan, as listed above in the article excerpt includes "sustainable development; preventing and mitigating conflicts, human rights abuses and the impacts of natural disasters; building a safer and more secure world; supporting countries in transition; and working to engage the talents of women and young people."
It certainly is not what it seems.
"Sustainable development" means that the UN, by force, will attempt to mandate that certain forms of environmentalism are observed worldwide. This sets further precedents for globalism and increases the UN's clout as a seat of world power.
"Preventing and mitigating conflicts" involves a further implementation of R2P including employing NATO to enforce it. What R2P tells the leaders of developing nations is that if they don't observe the Anglosphere's dictates, it is perfectly possible they may soon be put out of power, or worse.
"Mitigating the impact of natural disasters" seems like an innocent and worthwhile emphasis. In fact, it will merely reinforce various UN globalist activities and create further precedents for creeping world government.
"Building a safer and more secure world" probably involves R2P yet again and implies that those who arbitrate what a "safer" world looks like will have little compunction in using military force to define it.
"Supporting countries in transition" probably refers to encouraging agencies like the International Monetary Fund in its various lending and financial activities. This would be laudable except that the IMF and other such facilities have the reputation for making problems worse not better.
The final point – "working to engage the talents of women and young people" – actually involves pitting gender and "youth" against cultural and civil traditions that may have survived for thousands of years. While civil progress – and increased freedom – is certainly laudable, the use of various demographic groups to create social discord in pursuit of a globalist agenda is both transparent and despicable.
"Waves of change are surging around us," Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the Assembly. "If we navigate wisely, we can create a more secure and sustainable future for all. The United Nations is the ship to navigate these waters ... We are the venue for partnerships and action. Now is our moment. Now is the time to create the future we want," he stated.
Of course, it doesn't seem to occur to Secretary Ban that it is not what WE want – but what the Anglosphere power elite has decided is "good" for us. And what's good for us invariably aligns itself with their own global self interest. Funny how it works that way. Or, more likely, tragic.
(From Unitednations's YouTube user channel.)
Posted by EUbrainwashing on 02/08/12 12:24 PM
Looks like the UN has edditied the end off this video perhaps? After Ban Ki-moon says "The United Nations is the ship to navigate these waters" the screen goes blank with no sound for the last few moments "We are the venue for partnerships and action. Now is our moment. Now is the time to create the future we want" is not to be heard. Funny thing that!
Posted by Bowman on 02/04/12 04:17 PM
What was just a ripple a few short months ago is now a wave that will eventually become a Tsunomi of opposition here in the united states to "Agenda 21", which is a major part of the sustainable growth plan of the UN. Although the MSM is now beginning it's attempt to discredit the motives of those leading the opposition and after having failed in their attempts at denying that such a program as Agenda 21 even exists, they are now engaged in ridiculing all who join in the opposition. But, in spite of the MSM the grass roots movement has grown to a size where state legislators are now beginning to sponsor and get passed legislation protecting propertty rights and eminent domain legislation. Many groups are calling for and winning concessions from local zoning/planning commissions and board of supervisors at the county levels. More and more county governments are holding townhall meetings and forums in accessible locations that are open to the public. It will undoubtably get pretty intense,when the demands include that the federal governments agents be banished from the local and state boards.
Posted by Christianrealist on 02/02/12 07:35 PM
As a child in the 50's, I attended an Episcopalian (State) church here in the US... they would hand out "mite" boxes for us to drop our little coins in for the poor suffering kids in other parts of the world... the program was sponsored by UNESCO, as I recall...
But, they forgot to add that the money was really going into some slush fund for the NWO
Posted by Christianrealist on 02/02/12 04:24 PM
Forgot to add, I keep subscribing to your daily email updates, but Xfinity is blocking my emails from you. I guess I should make a fuss, but it'll probably add many pages to my dossier...
Posted by Christianrealist on 02/02/12 04:23 PM
Unfortunately, the Treaty of Westphalia leaves real Christians out in the dark. Baptists of that day (known as 'Anabaptists' and brutally slain by the "Holy sic Roman Empire" during the Inquisition)did not subscribe to John Calvin's doctrines which were mostly warmed over Catholocism. I believe the Pope controlled the world in that day and still does today. Fortunately, he will meet his just rewards one day...
Posted by Spiritof1776 on 01/31/12 11:28 PM
I remember UNICEF boxes as a kid going door to door until our mom found out the money was being used to buy weapons for third world dictators and that ended that as they say.
Posted by Agent Pete 8 on 01/31/12 07:27 PM
Ship this Moon Dude.
Click to view link
Posted by alexsemen on 01/31/12 04:51 PM
Kammerad Ban( South Korean puppet of USA and global PTB) used the Majestic WE, he refered not at us as we but he speaks as the former "great leaders of the "Stalin- Mao-Hitler"'s gulag non Communism.
He refered at "Them", the paires of him ,... . they've decided all about and said to us : "We... ... ... .."
It is the same as our former socialist prime-minister Kok, who told us : "De Euro wordt van ons allemaal!! " - something more idiotic never I've read- but the Kok forgot to tell to us who is "we". For such a syntagmatic tautology , now our socialist receive from the PTB hundreds thousands Euro /year just doing "act of presence"by multiple Corporations .
The Communism has become for the Communists the "best wild casino robbery capitalism the man could whishies " as well for the Western Socialists they created the best Fascist Corporations who have them now on the paylists.Doing nothing !! Just sitting !!