Most Americans are stunned when they find out that our
nation's military forays for the past 70 years have been controlled by the
United Nations. Some, of course, refuse to believe this even when presented
with the documents and facts proving the claim.
In brief, when the United States entered the Korean War in
1950, President Truman cited authority contained in the NATO Pact formulated in
1949. NATO has always been a UN stepchild, and the UN remains in control. Most
of the shooting in Korea stopped in 1953, but tens of thousands of U.S. forces
remain in South Korea as part of the United Nations overall command. There
never has been a formal termination of hostilities in the Korean theater. If
the UN doesn't want formal termination, it won't happen.
The success achieved by world planners with their creation
of NATO encouraged them in 1954 to create SEATO (Southeast Asia Treaty
Organization), another UN stepchild. It was with authority contained in the
SEATO pact that American forces went into Vietnam. Where the Korean War ended
as a stalemate, the Vietnam War was an utter defeat for the United States.
Authority to invade Iraq (twice!) appeared in separate UN
Security Council resolutions. The overall management of these wars came from
the UN. Furthermore, the Afghanistan conflict (now in its 14th year) is being
directed by NATO.
So no one should be surprised to learn that the settling of
refugees from several war-torn nations in Asia and Africa is a UN project. The
UN is steadily taking control of everything and everyone. It has an office known
as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). This UN agency tells UN
member countries, including the United States, how many refugees each nation
must accept.
Have recent refugees taken in by the United States worked at
assimilation by learning America's ways and language? No. Are there terrorists
and potential terrorists among these individuals? Yes. The Obama administration
assures us that there are none. But when some Somali refugees living in
Minnesota were found recruiting for ISIS, the assurance fell flat.
The United States is already leading the world in accepting
refugees. President Obama recently stated that the United States would take in
another 10,000. U.S. Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power stated that the number
of new entrants to the U.S. must expand in 2016. Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
wants the United States to accept 100,000 Syrian refugees. The many forlorn individuals
from Syria who have fled their country have wanted to get away from the civil
war designed to topple President Bashar al- Assad, a struggle now in its fifth
year.
At a recent citizen meeting in Spartanburg, South Carolina,
Governor Nikki Haley sought to assure worried residents that there would be no
terrorists among the Muslim refugees she intends to welcome. But the potential
for welcoming terrorists is not the only cause of citizen concern. They worry
about the cost for housing, medical care, and plenty more. And they worry about
the unwillingness of many of the refugees to adopt the culture of the nation
that has opened its doors to them.
UNHCR's Leader Has a Worrisome Past
Another problem with this resettlement program emerges when
the political attitude of the UN official overseeing the process is considered.
The UNHCR's leader happens to be Antonio Guterres, a political figure from
Portugal who is the former President of the Socialist International (SI). The
little-known SI has long proclaimed its "ultimate objective" to be
"nothing less than world government," boldly adding that
"membership in the United Nations must be made universal."
Guterres is joined in the further entangling of the United
States in UN projects by UNICEF leader Anthony Lake, a State Department veteran
whose commitment to the UN and world government is no secret. These two are
even working with officials from Communist China and other veterans of the SI.
William F. Jasper noted in a recent article posted by
TheNewAmerican.com that a recent "SI appeal does not call on China,
Russia, Turkey, or any of the nearby wealthy Muslim states of the gulf region -
Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates - to shoulder any of
the refugee burden." This deficiency is especially remarkable because so
many of the refugees fleeing Syria are fellow Muslims.
The Obama administration is determined to have the United
States accept thousands, even hundreds of thousands, of these refugees. It
seems as though the UNHCR will decide how many and where they will be
resettled.
What to do? Letters and calls to senators and
representatives protesting this latest undermining of our country by dilution
with refugees is an excellent idea. You could ask why the U.S. has to be the
recipient of refugees when nearby Muslim countries aren't helping. But
ultimately, forcing our leaders to withdraw the United States from the United
Nations continues to be the essential step in preserving our nation and our
freedom.
Please phone your representative (202-225-3121) and senators
(202-224-3121) in vigorous opposition to this undermining of our nation
through the excessive resettling of refugees throughout the United States by an
agency of the United Nations.
Please also email your U.S. representative and senators in
opposition to the UN's role in resettling refugees in the U.S.
Source:The John Birch Society
No comments:
Post a Comment