The United Nations – With Friends Like These . . .

Sixty-five years ago, in 1945, there was much to be thankful for. The Axis powers had been defeated, World War II was effectively over (the cleanup would take a while) and the United Nations Charter had just come into effect.  So, how's that whole UN think working out for the USA?

Fallacy #1: The United Nations Charter is a blueprint for peace. 

Yes, that's what they told us back in 1945. Unfortunately, it simply isn't true (and never was) according to Ambassador J. Reuben Clark, Jr., one of America’s foremost scholars in the field of international law.  After careful study, he concluded the UN Charter "is a war document not a peace document" and that it "is built to prepare for war, not to promote peace."  The Ambassador further noted:

[T]here is no provision in the Charter itself that contemplates ending war. It is true the Charter provides for force to bring peace, but such use of force is itself war. . . . Not only does the Charter Organization not prevent future wars, but it makes practically certain that we shall have future wars, and as to such wars it takes from us the power to declare them, to choose the side on which we shall fight, to determine what forces and military equipment we shall use in the war, and to control and command our sons who do the fighting.

In fact, the so-called Korean and Vietnam Wars used to be called "UN Police Actions" and were conducted with the blessing of, and under the auspices of, the United Nations.
 

In more recent news:

1990 — Pres. GHW Bush went to the UN for authority to invade Iraq.
1992 — Pres. GHW Bush got a Security Council resolution to send U.S. forces into Somalia
1993 — Pres. Clinton received UN authorization to send troops into Haiti.
1994 — Pres. Clinton responded to a UN resolution and attacked Bosnia.
2001 — Pres. GW Bush said his Afghanistan attack plans "have been defined by the United Nations."
2003 — Pres. Bush gets Security Council resolutions 678 and 687 to re-invade Iraq.
Even the US involvement in this year's Libya troubles was a UN decision.
 

Fallacy #2: In the UN forum, nations can talk and work out their differences.

Yeah, there's a lot of talk in the UN.  What has it gotten us?  Well, the fact of the matter (to cite one example) is that Iraq under Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.  How do we know this? Because he used them – on the Kurds in his war of genocide and against the Iranians in his war against them.  When a UN-authorized coalition finally went into Iraq to get rid of this madman, we found nothing.

Of course we found nothing!  The UN had debated the invasion option for something like a year and a half and passed resolutions that laid out the whole UN plan of attack. Those resolutions gave Saddam a year and a half to hide said weapons of mass destruction, and he did.  (I think he hid them in Syria, but that's another story.)

The point — the UN telegraphed its blow and Saddam pretty much sidestepped it, making the USA look like the warmongering, imperialist bad guy.  Personally, I don't think either Iraq conflict was justified but, if you're going to fight a war, for heaven's sake — well, let's put it this way:  If you're going to mug someone, do you sent the victim an engraved invitation to the event?

Fallacy #3:  All the money the USA gives away in foreign aid has won us friends in the UN.

You know the old saying, "You get what you pay for"?  Well, the UN is clearly the exception. Take a peek at the voting records of a few nations and the money we (the American taxpayer) are giving them:

Nation	Votes*	Foreign Aid**
Egypt	79%	$1,216,000,000
India	81%	$1,781,000,000
Jordan	71%	$560,814,000
Lebanon	80%	$119,000,000
Morocco	70%	$226,000,000
Pakistan	75%	$390,000,000

*In opposition to positions taken by the US.

**From official US sources (Census Bureau, AID, etc.).

So, we're paying people to oppose us.  That's like the Republican National Committee raising money to re-elect Barack Obama.

Fallacy #4:  The UN was created by people who believed in freedom.

Lloyd Bailey of Gainesville.com says:

The UN was located in the United States at Stalin’s insistence, and the land was donated by the Rockefeller family.  Immediately following the UN establishment, top military secrets were lost by convicted Russian spies that operated under UN diplomatic immunity.  Russia [actually the USSR] was granted 3 votes on the general assembly, while all other nations received one vote.  When Communist China was admitted, original founding member, free China in Taiwan was removed.
The UN was created by the globalist, Council on Foreign Relations, where 21 of its members were involved in the creation . . . the first secretary general of the UN was Algier Hiss, a convicted Soviet spy and CFR member.

The bottom line:

It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world; so far, I mean, as we are now at liberty to do it; for let me not be understood as capable of patronizing infidelity to existing engagements. I hold the maxim no less applicable to public than to private affairs, that honesty is always the best policy. I repeat it, therefore, let those engagements be observed in their genuine sense. But, in my opinion, it is unnecessary and would be unwise to extend them. [George Washington, Farewell Address, 17 September 1796, emphasis added.] 

President Washington was right, as usual.  The United Nations isn't pro-republic; it is pro-socialist, anti-gun and anti-religion.  It isn't an organization dedicated to peace; it wants its own military to enforce its decrees.  UN diplomats have spied on the USA since Day 1, and are working toward eradicating US sovereignty in favor of a one world government. Make it your business to elect true conservatives on November 6, 2012 and you will have much to be thankful for on November 22, 2012. 

Thanks for listening, tune in next week for another rant.