"...a country does not have the right to place conditions on the
terms of its acceptance of the Court's jurisdiction."
Organization of American
States. [2]
"...we
are one human family and one Earth community with a common destiny. We must
join together to bring forth a sustainable global society founded on respect
for nature, universal human rights, economic justice, and a culture of
peace." The
Earth Charter.
[3]
Genesis 1:24
"I applaud the Organization's achievements under his [Secretary-General
Gaviria] stewardship in strengthening the inter-American human rights
system, monitoring elections, consolidating democracy, combating illegal
drugs, and promoting sustainable development."
Victor
Marrero, U.S. Permanent Representative to the Organization of American
States, 1998.
Consider this scenario: A boy lives with his divorced
mother and stepfather. Rude to his mother and jealous of new baby, he apparently
threatens
his little sibling with a knife. The stepfather spanks the boy. Angry, the boy tells his biological father, then sues
the stepfather in a British court. The case is dismissed. The boy, with his father’s help,
appeals to the European
Court of Human Rights. He argues that "Britain had failed to protect
his right to freedom from degrading punishment"
– and wins.
This actually happened.[4]
British law, with its emphasis on individual rights and freedom,
is drowning in a flood of international treaties aimed at reinterpreting “human
rights,” enforcing UN ideology, and replacing national sovereignty with
regional governance.
Could it happen in the USA, the land of the free? Yes,
it could. Some of the human rights treaties already ratified by Congress can be
interpreted in ways that will threaten the freedom of all who oppose the new
ideology. And it surely will happen if our U.S. Senate ratifies the
American
Convention on Human Rights, which we
signed
in 1977.
The USA is a member of the
Organization of American States (OAS) but has not officially yielded its legal rights to
this inter-American regional government answerable to the United Nations.
Since few are aware of this danger, a covert attempt to pursue ratification
might face little resistance. According to the Congressional record, only five
senators attended the ratification of the The
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights [5] late in the evening of April 3, 1992. As Dr. James
Hirsen explains in The Coming Collision, this
virtually private meeting chaired by Jay Rockefeller [6]
turned a a subversive treaty into a U.S. law that requires child registration "immediately after
birth" and sets open-ended limits on religious freedom and "peaceful
assembly."
While nations to
our South cheer the growing power of the OAS, the US media is strangely silent about
this rising giant of the Western hemisphere. Children don't learn about this regional government in their
schools. Few adults understand the power of its Human Rights Court, which is
casting a dark shadow over individual rights and sovereignty in South and
Central America. Consider a recent case
reported in the last OAS newsletter of 1999:
“The Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in decisions
on two pending cases involving the Peruvian government, has ruled that
Peru’s announced withdrawal from the Court’s compulsory jurisdiction is
‘inadmissible.’ The Court
said a country does not have the right to place conditions on the terms of its
acceptance of the Court’s jurisdiction. The only way for a state to
withdraw from its obligations would be to formally denounce the American
Convention on Human Rights, according to the Court.”[7] (Emphasis added)
When the Court ruled in May, 1999, that four convicted
terrorists from Chile be retried, Peru refused to accept its compulsory
jurisdiction. President Alberto Fujimori argued that Peru had the sovereign
right to fight terrorism. He
explained that the Court’s ruling would open the door to new trials for
thousands of prisoners, thus threaten national security.
In today's political climate, such national concerns draw little sympathy from
regional leaders. Many know well that national insecurity will strengthen
support for international controls. The Inter-American Court, based in San Jose,
Costa Rica, is currently made up of judges from Chile, Brazil, Ecuador,
Barbados, Venezuela, Mexico and Colombia. Some of these nations
have done little to stem their own government corruption and terrorist
forces.
The details of the
above case
-- as reported by the OAS or as argued by the Peruvian leader -- is not the
issue here. The main concern is the fact
that a regional, international Court has been granted jurisdiction over national
courts in sovereign nations. If we ratify this treaty, it will override the U.S. Supreme Court.
While the history of the Inter-American Court shows a far
more conservative record than the European Court for Human Rights,
that could change with the next selection of judges.
Human Rights legislation has become a political smokescreen for
enforcing a global ethic around the world. [8]
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights
(UDHR) -- the basis for the American Convention on Human Rights -- touts the hollow promises of the rising global reign.
Therefore it sounds good, as do all the intrusive UN human rights treaties.
Article 18 of the UDHR upholds "the right to freedom of thought, conscience
and religion..." Article 19 affirms "the right to freedom
of opinion and expression... and to seek, receive and impart
information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."
But Article 29 states that "these rights and freedoms
may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles
of the United Nations." In other words, these "rights"
or "freedoms" don't apply to conservatives who refuse to conform to
UN policies. The UN,
with its regional hierarchies, has shown zero tolerance for those
who oppose its goals. Even so, President Clinton, with a stroke of a pen, made
Executive
Order 13107 (The Implementation of Human Rights Treaties) the law of the
land. Based on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it gives the Federal Government
authority to establish a massive management system that would implement all human rights
treaties whether ratified or not. (See Trading U.S. Rights for UN Rules
)
Look again at the "human
rights" agenda of the
European
Council. With the technology to manipulate minds and
monitor every family -- and with the European Court to prosecute
non-compliance -- genuine freedom is far more endangered than the
spotted owl. "Towards a Child-Friendly Society," the theme of the
1999
Conference
of European Ministers Responsible for Family Affairs, may sound good to
Europe's diverse citizens. But its final report offers a preview of the
worldwide shift from individual rights to collective responsibilities --
ordained, monitored, and enforced by the state -- for every family. It
would...
-
Encourage
women to work outside the home:
"Most women would like to have a choice of whether to continue working
after their child is born. In many families two incomes are necessary to
attain a decent standard of living."
-
Train
parents and children for 21st Century
solidarity. "Gender
equality is a prerequisite for the parents’ shared responsibility for
their children. Although great strides have been made towards equality in
the work-place, the pace of change has been significantly slower in the
allocation of the domestic tasks associated with child-rearing in the
family. In many families, the result can be that the father works very long
hours in his place of employment, whilst the mother has in effect two jobs,
her paid employment and housework....This situation can mean that neither
parent can devote enough time to their children...."
-
Set new standards and
monitor every family: "Ministers
agreed on the need for a broad family agenda to meet the challenges
preventing the realization of a child-friendly society. This agenda might
include a system of indicators for family policy...."
-
Intervene and remediate before problems occur --
before children learn the uncompromising beliefs and attitudes of their
parents. "...
this positive agenda should go hand in hand with effective preventive
policies.... An important goal of child policies is to break the
inter-generational cycle of social exclusion...." (25-26).
(Social
exclusion refers to the sin of separatism. See Clinton's War on Hate Bans Christian Values)
-
Gather
more personal information for regional databanks: Ministers
noted that much research into questions concerning families and
children does not have adequate data …"
-
Promote
"coherent and integrated family and child policies," including
"local
and national knowledge and information centers which could be linked
together in a Europe-wide network;
"community
networks covering the fields of social welfare, child day care, education
and health for young children;" [See The UN Plan for Your Mental Health]
"preventive
policies for action against social exclusion …."
-
Force
everyone to conform: "The
framework of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child provided an
important guideline …. Major changes in the attitudes of adults and
authorities are a prerequisite for fulfilling the principle of the best
interests of a child...."
-
Base education
standards on compliance with the UN vision for social solidarity. "The
principal aims of education should be to prepare for democratic citizenship,
and to facilitate social inclusion." (Remember, the goal is solidarity -- the
opposite of what President Clinton and Al Gore decry as separatism. As Al
Gore said:
"Seeing ourselves as
separate is the central problem in our political thinking."[9]
-
Support
"the current process of change in attitudes among adults"
fostering the dialogue between the generations" and "giving
children the right to participate in the planning and delivery of care
services, including the right to complain about quality" and
participate in "community based leisure time activities..."[10]
While
"the Americas"
trail behind the EU in implementing this revolutionary social agenda, its
regional legal
system, like that of Europe, is almost in place. Like the EU, the OAS has based
its human rights agenda on UN treaties. The net has been cast. The uninformed
masses will surely be caught
in this web -- a tangled network of globalist managers that would regulate
child-raising and squeeze family values into the new mold.
Biblical Christianity won't fit. A visit to the United Nations House in Belize
(formerly British Honduras) shows the UN influence over this little country south of Mexico. Its
United Nations Development Programme works with the OAS, and its UNICEF office provides the latest
information and propaganda on children rights. Schoolchildren, who are taught a
politically expedient version of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, are
trained to share and discuss their "rights" and feelings with others.
Ignorant of the agenda behind their promised rights, they become eager
accomplices of globalist change agents determined to train children in the new
ideology .
"I
think my country should build more youth enhancement centres," said
12-year-old Errol, whose statement was quoted in a UNICEF book called Caribbean
Children's Opinions Concerning Their Rights. [11]
"I
think there needs to be a youth U.N. with two children from each country, a boy
and a girl, who will discuss the problems of their countries and seek for
solutions... and bring these solutions into reality," added 13-year-old Ferranto.
Belize
held its First Children's Election in 1998. Students across the country voted on
issues, not politicians. But their voice -- reflecting the views of their
teachers -- was heard and heeded by their politicians. The children had their
way, or so it seemed. They had become useful puppets in the hands of their
facilitators. Trained to tear down the old ways and to build the new world
order, the children had become partners in the cultural demolition of Biblical
faith and family life.
This
process is changing children around the world. God's age-old warning fits us
well: "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge." (Hosea
4:6) Our rights and freedoms -- two precious gifts from the God who
blessed our nation -- will fade unless His people wake up, see what is
happening, warn others, and pray for guidance to the only One who can save
us.
"If
My people who are called by My name
will
humble themselves, and pray and seek My face,
and
turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven,
and
will forgive their sin and heal their land."
2
Chronicles 7:14
[1] The "United Nations
House" in Belize works with the regional government of the OAS and the
national government to coordinate the implementation of various facets of the
fast-growing global management system. We gathered much of our information
for this article in the UNICEF and UNDP (United Nations Development Programme)
offices.
[2] OAS News, November-December
1999.
[3]
The Earth Charter outlines the goals of the global management system being
implemented in the name of peace, unity and sustainable development. It shows
the new global absolutes that would replace Biblical absolutes. Everyone must
learn -- and live with -- three basic beliefs: evolution (everything is
constantly evolving and changing), pantheism (everything is sacred or joined to
a universal spirit), and monism (all is one). However, the wording of this last
draft is more ambiguous than earlier drafts. These three beliefs provide a
useful justification for the planned totalitarian controls behind this system of
world socialism. The regional governments such as the OAS and the EU are part of
this vision. "Human rights" legislation will be a major
strategy for changing the way people think, believe, a live together. (See
The UN Plan for Your Mental Health)
[4]
See Europe
Turns Against Smacking. Some of
the details are provided in The Coming Collision by James L. Hirsen, PhD.
(Lafayette, Lousiana: Huntington House, 1999), page 156. Since the EU doesn't offer access to decisions of its Court, we cannot
supply a link to the court's decision. But its statutes and conventions state the laws
concerning family life and "social cohesion." For example,
in 1990, the Council of
Europe, declared that “under the terms of Article 15.b of the Statute of
the Council of Europe ... bearing in mind the proceedings of the Council of
Europe's 4th Criminological Colloquy..." and "considering the need for a change in the
consciousness of the whole of society, whereby everyone would recognize the
unacceptability of the phenomenon of violence both in the family and in society
as a whole..." it "recommends that governments of member States... encourage...
-
"The general condemnation of corporal punishment and other forms of
degrading treatment as a means of education, and of the need for
violence-free education should be emphasized .
-
"Particular attention should be paid by the social and health services to
individuals and families known to be particularly at risk as far as violence
against children is concerned.
-
"The specific problems that may be encountered in families where there are
step-children, or foster children or disabled children should be taken into
consideration." [Section B, V,
14-16]
[5]
The
International
Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which implements specific elements
of the Earth Charter, includes:
Article
20:“Any
advocacy of national, racial or
religious
hatred that constitutes incitement
to discrimination… shall be prohibited by law.”
Article
21:
“The right of peaceful assembly
shall be recognized. No restrictions may be placed…
other
than those imposed in conformity with the law and which are necessary…
in
the interest of national security or public safety,
public
order, the protection of public
health or morals or the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”
Article
24:
“Every
child shall be registered immediately after birth….”
[6]
Hirsen,
page 25-26.
[7]
OAS News, November-December
1999.
[8]
See Trading U.S. Rights for UN Rules
[9]
Corinne McLaughlin and Gordon Davidson, Spiritual Politics
(New York:
Ballantine Books, 1994),147.
[10]
http://www.coe.fr/cm/files/1990/90r2.html
[11]
During his White House Conference on Hate Crimes (November 10, 1997), President
Clinton said, "There would almost have to be some sort of club or
organization at the school -- because if you think about it, your parents are
still pretty well separated... Most neighborhoods are still fairly segregated.
Most houses of worship are still fairly segregated. ...We have to find a
disciplined, organized way out of this so that we reach every child in an
affirmative way before something bad happens...."
Clinton's War on Hate Bans Christian Values
Home |
Articles
|
Quotes and Excerpts | Persecution | Symbols |
Books
.jpg)