by Robert W Malone, MD, MS
March 21, 2023
from
RWMaloneMd Website
The United Nations Charter
was signed in 1945 in San Francisco
Below is a image of
The Original Charter of the United Nations,
signed 1945
From its founding, the UN has sought to be more than just an
organization to to promote international peace and security after
the Second World WII.
The United Nations is a 'complex organization' that, in theory, is
tasked with world governance...
According to their
website, this is the breakdown of how they view their global
responsibilities now:
Due to the
powers vested in its Charter and its unique international
character, the United Nations can take action on the issues
confronting humanity in the 21st century, including:
The United
Nations was created in 1945, following the devastation of the
Second World War, with one central mission: the maintenance of
international peace and security.
The UN
accomplishes this by working to prevent conflict, helping
parties in conflict make peace,
deploying peacekeepers, and creating the conditions to allow
peace to hold and flourish.
These
activities often overlap and should reinforce one another, to be
effective.
The UN Security
Council has the primary responsibility for international peace
and security.
The General
Assembly and the Secretary-General play major, important, and
complementary roles, along with other UN offices and bodies.
(Note how the UN
has cunningly added "Promote sustainable development" to their
vision of how the charter is to be implemented in the 21st century).
What are these 17
"sustainable development" goals of the UN?
I have previously written
about the 17 Sustainable Development Goals and 169 targets. That
essay is
linked here...
So, who is running Agenda 2030 and
making sure these goals and targets are met?
The Secretary-General of the UN, is
essentially the director of the UN.
It is an elected position with a
five year term. But since its
founding in 1945-6, there have only been nine Secretary-Generals.
Generally, Secretary-Generals serve multiple terms, usually without
challenge.
The Role of the Secretary-General (António Guterres):
The Charter
describes the Secretary-General as "chief administrative
officer" of the Organization, who shall act in that capacity and
perform "such other functions
as are entrusted" to them by the Security Council,
General Assembly, Economic and Social Council and other United
Nations organs.
The Charter
also empowers the Secretary-General to bring to the attention of
the Security Council any matter which in their opinion may
threaten the maintenance of international peace and security.
These
guidelines both define the powers of the office and grant it
considerable scope for action...
...day-to-day
work that includes attendance at sessions of United Nations
bodies; consultations with world leaders, government officials,
and others; and worldwide travel intended to keep the
Secretary-General in touch with the peoples of the
Organization's Member States and informed about the vast array
of issues of international concern that are on the
Organization's agenda...
The
Secretary-General is also Chair of the United Nations System
Chief Executives Board for Coordination (CEB),
which brings together the Executive Heads of all UN funds,
programs and specialized agencies twice a year in order to
further coordination and cooperation in the entire range of
substantive and management issues facing the United Nations
System.
Frankly, the
Secretary-General may be the most important job in the world.
So how
come most people don't even know who occupies the post!
Secretary-General
António Guterres
has served in this
position since 2017.
In 2021, there was a resolution by the Security
Council and he was re-appointed unanimously.
His vision statement can
be found
here.
Ambassadors in
the assembly chamber burst into applause as Assembly President
Volkan Bozkir announced
Guterres' re-election by "acclamation," without a vote.
Born, raised,
and educated under the dictatorship, Guterres' views and ideas
were formed from the poverty of the Portuguese countryside he
visited during his early years and his later social work in the
capital city.
He attended the
prestigious Instituto Superior Técnico - part of the University
of Lisbon - where he studied physics and electrical engineering.
Upon graduating
in 1971, Guterres went into academia, becoming an assistant
professor.
However, this didn't
last long, and in 1974 he joined the Socialist party,
eventually leaving lectures behind and going into politics full
time.
Following the
Carnation
Revolution, Guterres held positions of leadership within the
socialist party, and in 1976, in the first democratic vote
following the revolution, he was elected as a socialist MP.
It was during
his time in parliament that Guterres made a name for himself as
an orator, thanks to his fiery speeches and fierce debates.
In 1992, he became
Secretary-General of the Socialist Party, a position he held
until 2002.
Guterres began
to "modernize" the party, in a similar fashion to much of the
"New Left" across Europe during this time (RWM:
Consider
reading about the foundations of Marist ideologies in the
formation of the New Left).
Additionally, he acted as vice
president, and then president, of the umbrella organization the
Socialist International.
In 1995,
Guterres was elected Prime Minister of Portugal.
In 2002, he lost
the majority vote.
Since then, he
worked his way up through positions at the United Nations.
As
Secretary-General, he delivered a report in 2021 entitled "Common
Agenda," where he laid out his vision for the next five years.
His summary and a
link to the full report can be found
here.
Here are quotes
from the Secretary-General's report:
Member States
agreed that our challenges are interconnected, across borders
and all other divides.
These challenges can only be addressed by
an equally interconnected response, through
reinvigorated multilateralism and the United Nations at the
centre of our efforts.
That is why Our
Common Agenda is, above all,
an agenda of action designed to accelerate the implementation of
existing agreements, including the Sustainable Development
Goals.
It should also
include updated governance arrangements to deliver better public
goods and usher in a new era of universal social protection,
health coverage, education, skills, decent work and housing, as
well as universal access to the Internet by 2030 as a basic
human right.
Now is the time
to end the "infodemic" plaguing our world by defending a common,
empirically backed consensus around facts, science and
knowledge.
The "war on science" must end.
I am calling for a global code of
conduct that promotes integrity in public information
(RWM: ergo censorship...?).
Now is the time
for a stronger, more networked
and inclusive multilateral system, anchored within the United
Nations.
Effective
multilateralism depends on an effective United Nations, one able
to adapt to global challenges while living up to the purposes
and principles of its Charter.
For example, I
am proposing a new agenda for peace, multi-stakeholder dialogues
on outer space and a Global Digital Compact, as well as a
Biennial Summit between the members of the Group of 20 and of
the Economic and Social Council, the Secretary-General and the
heads of the international financial institutions.
These goals, not
surprisingly, dove-tail nicely with the
World Economic Forum's
vision for the future.
The United Nations
has morphed into a global monster...
In the
United States, 94% of all international agreements are NOT approved
by Congress but instead are signed by the Presidential executive
order.
In
the United
States, there are two categories of agreements that are binding
under international law:
-
treaties,
which require the formal
consent of a two-thirds majority of the Senate
-
executive agreements, which the president can be authorized
to conclude on a variety of grounds...
These grounds
may include the consent of the Senate to a prior treaty to which
the agreement is pursuant, the enactment by Congress of a
statute to which the agreement is pursuant, or the president's
independent constitutional authorities.
Despite popular
understanding, executive
agreements are a well-established means of entering
international agreements and account for the overwhelming
majority - 94 percent - of international agreements in the United
States in the modern era.
They are also on par with
treaties in force and weight under international law, as both
can create international legal obligations for the United States.
The Authority
for U.S. Participation in the Paris Climate Agreement entered by
the United States from 1985 through 2014 - illustrates that
executive agreements have been used in almost all areas of
international law, in matters of both great and minor
significance, and throughout both Republican and Democratic
administrations and congresses.
The above rationale
was used for the Paris Agreement, which was signed by President
Obama and never approved by Congress...
It is this "agreement" that
affirmed Agenda 2030.
The Paris agreement
(image from the UN below):
But when is an
agreement, not an agreement?
When the agreement is a treaty...
The Paris Agreement
is a treaty
From the United
Nations Climate Change Office.
The Paris
Agreement is a
legally binding international treaty on
climate change.
It was adopted by 196 Parties at the UN
Climate Change Conference (COP21) in Paris, France, on 12
December 2015. It entered into force on 4 November 2016.
When the executive
office made the case through the progressive think tank, the Center
for American Progress, that the Paris Agreement could be signed by
the Executive office with out the 2/3 approval by Congress, they
slyly forgot to mention that the UN considers the Paris Agreement
a
TREATY...
This is the TREATY
that President
Trump withdrew from and President
Biden re-joined.
It is the Paris
agreement treaty, with its closely linked
Agenda 2030, that gave
rise to the "Inflation Reduction Act" that was signed in 2022.
This
law, labeled as the "Climate Change Bill," put in place many of the
UN's sustainability goals outlined in Agenda 2030.
So this treaty was
both entered into and withdrawn without approval from Congress.
Yet the United States
Constitution is
very clear.
The United
States Constitution provides that the president "shall have
Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make
Treaties, provided two-thirds of the Senators present concur" (Article
II, section 2).
Treaties are
binding agreements between nations and become part of
international law.
Treaties to which the United States is a
party also have the force of federal legislation, forming part
of what the Constitution calls ''the supreme Law of the Land.''
The Senate does
not ratify treaties.
Following
consideration by the Committee on Foreign Relations, the Senate
either approves or rejects a resolution of ratification.
If the
resolution passes, then ratification takes place when the
instruments of ratification are formally exchanged between the
United States and the foreign power(s).
The executive
office under both Democratic and Republican control is not following
the Constitution.
We all know about
the World Health Organization's IHRs, which could potentially place
the WHO in control of public health emergencies (the final draft has
not been released yet).
We are fearful of the reality that they
could be signed into existence by the Executive office, without
Congressional oversight or approval.
U.S. Sen.
Ron Johnson
(R-Wis.),
"introduced the
'No WHO Pandemic Preparedness Treaty
without Senate Approval Act', in May, 2022.
This legislation would require any convention or
agreement resulting from the work of the World Health Organization's
(WHO) intergovernmental negotiating body be deemed a treaty,
requiring the advice and consent of a supermajority of the Senate".
This bill has not received Congressional support.
A bill introduced
by
Rep. Lauren Boebert:
H.R.376 - Paris Agreement Constitutional
Treaty Act would,
"prohibit taking any action to carry out the
goals of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate
Change - commonly known as the Paris Agreement - unless the Senate first
ratifies the agreement.
Further, the bill prohibits the use of any
funds to advance the agreement".
Unfortunately, this bill never had
Congressional support and never made it out of committee.
The reality is that
the USG executive branch is out of control and in breach of the US
Constitution on multiple fronts, not the least of which are the role
of Congress in approving treaties and constitutionally protected
free speech rights.
There is a solution
to executive overreach.
Congress must step
in and re-affirm their right to approve or reject treaties, even
those masking as international agreements.
The easiest way to do
this is by a stand-alone bill or a rider to a bill re-asserting the
power of Congress alone to approve or disapprove of all
international agreements that meet the criteria of a treaty.
Such
legislation could be upheld in the courts, if vetoed by President
Biden.
It is also important for the Supreme Court to reassert the
proper separation of powers and to confirm the primacy of both the
first and second amendments to the US Constitution.
Furthermore, the
unconstitutional assertion that the executive branch can employ
international agreements as a work around for a treaty otherwise
requiring congressional approval needs to be challenged and
clarified by Congress.
|