The true theory of our Constitution is surely the wisest & best, that the States are independent as to everything within themselves, & united as to everything respecting foreign nations. Let the general government be reduced to foreign concerns only, and let our affairs be disentangled from those of all other nations, except as to commerce, which the merchants will manage the better, the more they are left free to manage for themselves and our general government may be reduced to a very simple organization, & a very inexpensive one; a few plain duties to be performed by a few servants.”
Thomas Jefferson
We have now joined several global organizations where we have a vote but the rules and regulations have been written by others but by which we have agreed to be controlled.
It is appropriate for us to examine these unelected bureaucratic organizations in detail to find why we joined and evaluate whether we should continue in them. The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank were established in 1944 at the Bretton Woods conference that was presided over by two communist soviet agents –Harry Dexter White and Virginius Coe. It‟s stated purpose sounds very good
– to promote faster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth and reduce poverty. However, as with all of these international organizations, they are controlled by socialists and the policies they promote are high taxes, more regulation and bigger governments. An article in the March 2005 issue of the Freeman states, “Many of the economic theories used by the IMF and World Bank are outdated and cause more harm than good.”
They obtain their funds from some 38 countries who contribute to them on a quota basis established by the IMF. Our quota is 17.6 % and since the total assets of the IMF are in excess of 300 billion dollars it is probable that we have contributed around $55 billion of that amount. That was true until the European Union collapse in 2009. The IMF has now contributed billions to Greece, Ireland and Portugal and Greece wants even more. Spain may be next and Obama has pledged $105 billion from the U.S.
The IMF is responsible only to the IMF which is a real formula for corruption. They are completely out of our control and alien to our idea of the way that governments should be regulated. (We do have a representative who is on their Board of Governors but his vote is dependent upon our quota which gives us 17% of the vote and we do not have veto power). There is now a movement to give more power to those who contribute less. The IMF functions by providing loans to irresponsible governments so that they can continue to be irresponsible instead of adopting the policies that will lead them to prosperity.
Then, when they continue to be irresponsible the IMF forgives the loan and the process is repeated.
UGH.
In 1976 the Senate Appropriations Committee investigated the World Bank‟s practices concerning their internal operations and concluded,” Our investigations have led us to the distressing conclusions that, rather than the rewards of a career of service, there is found in these banks a broad pattern of personal enrichment. The personnel management practices …are suggestive of institutionalized granting of lifetime sinecures where extraordinarily high salaries are commonplace and the pursuit of fringe benefits has been raised to a fine art.” That revelation did nothing to cause the World Bank to change. The head of the IMF receives around $225,000 plus expenses and perks and the average staff member is paid around $95,000 and they receive back whatever income taxes they have had to pay. Of the roughly 10,000 employees there are 1,396 who receive more than $180,000 in income which is tax free.
What should we expect from organizations which are not accountable to anyone but themselves and who are not restricted in obtaining funds for their operations? They have not been wise in their loans as is indicated by their recent decision to forgive 42.5 billion dollars in loans made to African dictators.
(Since the assets of the IMF will decrease by 42.5 billion it is expected that those countries who are contributors will replace those funds which means that this decision will cost us about 6 billion dollars.
President Bush has indicated that he is in agreement but did not say how much that would cost us. ) Maybe he would prefer that we not publicize that.).
That is not the first time for in 1996 the IMF forgave $33 billion in loans. The loans to dictators seems so senseless for it is obvious that those dictators will use part of the money to provide for their personal future and the other part to provide for an army to help them retain power. Nigeria‟s Economic and Financial Crimes Commission revealed that a succession of military dictators stole or squandered $500
billion over the past four decades from that country. The World Bank determined recently that around 40% of Africa‟s aggregate wealth has fled to foreign bank accounts.
In 2001, William Easterly, one of the World Bank‟s top economists, exposed some information in his book, The Elusive Quest for Growth. He stated, ”Contrary to conventional wisdom, aid to the developing world has been a big disappointment. The one trillion dollars spent on aid since the 1960‟s, with the efforts of advisers, foreign aid givers, the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank have all failed to achieve the desired results.”
The result of $28 trillion (yes, trillion) spent on infrastructure in the developing countries from 1968 to 1990 is that the GDP shows no improvement. During Mexico‟s financial crisis in 1994 -1995 World Bank officials insisted that Mexican banks improve their inadequate deposit insurance rules. Mexico refused and the World Bank asked them to write a report and loaned them the money.
This is not a recent problem for in an editorial in Barron‟s (April 10.1989) Robert M. Bleiberg wrote this about the World Bank ,” …beneath the glittering lending statistics and the triple A credit rating lurks a swamp of ill-conceived, badly executed credit transactions to profligate borrowers who couldn‟t command an unsubsidized plugged nickel in the global capital market.”
In 1988 Paul Craig Roberts reported in Business Week,”… that much of the loans to other countries has been used to pay overdue interest to commercial banks in the U.S. and Europe. So, the money is not used to help these countries but is used to pay banks which then encourages them to loan more money to incompetent dictators.
To bring this up to the present an article in “The Economist” (March 4, 2006) reports that the new World Bank president, Paul Wolfowitz, considers that battling graft is his top priority. (That probably explains why the World Bank was so desirous of having him removed and he has been removed). As should be expected with these unelected, uncontrolled governmental bodies fraud and corruption are rampant. The World Bank says it has uncovered more than 2000 instances of fraud, corruption and other misconduct related to its projects since 2001.
Wolfowitz objected to loans to the Republic of Congo because of their past record and only agreed after receiving assurances that audits would be performed of their oil company. He placed more than 800
million dollars for Indian health on hold, axed a 35 million dollar loan to Bangladesh and suspended a project to boost Argentina‟s social safety-net. Five loans to Kenya have been suspended, all loans to Chad have been stopped and the Bank‟s Department of Institutional Integrity has been expanded to help identify and stop corruption.
The past is no better. In the 1994 to 1997 period the IMF provided the Philippines with $1 billion, Thailand with $17 billion, Indonesia with $ 43 billion, South Korea with $57 billion and $22.8 billion to Russia. As they did this they started a real crisis in the Orient. They forced Thailand to devalue their currency and that led to the devaluation of currencies in Malaysia, then the Philippines, then South Korea and even Taiwan devalued its currency. That led to massive financial problems in all of the countries involved. The citizens of those countries then saw prices for the items they purchased increase by 30% to 50%.
Their people suffered from this but our bankers did not. The amounts advanced to those countries was partially used to pay back loans to American banks – Citicorp for $60 billion, Chase Manhattan for $32
billion, J.P. Morgan for $23 billion and Bank America for $16 billion. Those banks had loaned money at high rates but did not suffer any losses from the bad loans. This has been going on for a long time and as long as they are dealing with dictators and politicians and bankers it will continue.
Due to the collapse of the European governments (Greece, Ireland and Portugal ) our assessment has increased to $105,353.8 billions per year since 2009. We have to borrow that money to give it to them and it is probable that we will soon add Spain and possibility and even more money.
William Simon, former Secretary the Treasury said,” Because the IMF has no legitimate function in our present system …we can eliminate it, and safely rely on private institutions… We should therefore have the courage to close it down- and the most effective way to accomplish this goal would be to withdraw U.S. funding.” Let them do the best they can without us. Let‟s take our money and our representatives out. That will still leave them with 3000 employees and many other countries that contribute to them and they can continue on their past incompetent practices without us.
United Nations
There is one other organization to be considered. The United Nations has been left to the last because it is the biggest, the worst, the most corrupt and the most dangerous and in some way or other it includes all of the above.
The United Nations was formed in 1945 after the end of the second World War and was primarily to be the way to end wars. Our representative on the forming of the UN was Alger Hiss who later was convicted of perjury for denying he was a spy of communist Russia. Naturally, his voice was very important since he represented the USA and the UN he helped design was a dictatorial, socialistic organization and with his influence there is no reference to God. Since that formation in 1945 it has developed into an unbelievable, mammoth, bloated organization with over 200 different Organizations, Committees, Boards, Panels, Commissions, Advisory Committees, Ad Hoc Committees, Working Groups, Open Ended Committees, Councils and Open Ended Ad Hoc Committees (those titles are taken from their organization chart).
They also have regional offices throughout the world to assist these groups. Some of these are meaningless but many are important. The International Monetary Fund, the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, The International Court of Justice and the International Criminal Court are listed as being part of the UN.
Other significant functions are the World Health Organ, UNESCO, UNICEF, the Atomic Energy Comm., and Commissions on population, labor, food and agriculture, environment, habitat, civil aviation, trade, drug control, relief and work, maritime and peacekeeping. With all that it is not surprising that they employ over 65,000 people and have a yearly budget of $1.2 billion.
We have pledged to pay 22% of that amount ($264, million) plus 25% of the peacekeeping costs plus special assessments from some of their agencies. Our total contribution for 2005 was $2.2 billion for there are many other assessments beyond and above the published budget. Underdeveloped countries are charged $13,000 per year and Russia contributes 1.1% of the UN budget and China only 2.05%. That can‟t all be blamed on the UN since we have agreed to that. Japan is assessed 19% and Germany 8%
even though those two do not have a permanent seat on the Security Council nor do they have veto power.
UN employees in New York are very well paid receiving an average salary of $122,571 each year plus $1936.00 allowance per child and a $17,000 per year education stipend per child. A rent subsidy is available of 40% of the rent and there is a 41% cost of living adjustment on top of their salary. Kofi Annan, former Secretary General, made $220,968 and has $73,052 added to that for living costs and an entertainment supplement of $25,000 plus a luxury town house. Employees are eligible for retirement after 5 years of service, a six weeks vacation and a free trip home every two years. All of that explains why 80% of the UN‟s expenses are on personnel and personnel related costs. UN personnel have been allowed to accept gifts up to $10,000. Employees are chosen based on race and nationality rather than ability.
There are 191 countries in the UN – everyone except Taiwan who was expelled to make room for China in 1971 who was then given Taiwan‟s seat on the Security Council with a veto power. About 90% of those 191 countries are a motley crew favoring big government and socialism. Nearly one third of them are ruled by dictators and over half of them are rated as “mostly unfree” by the Index of Economic Freedom. Nearly one third of the time is spent in the General Assembly discussing and condemning the attempt by Israel to remain free. We really don‟t fit into this bunch.
In 2003 there were 85 yes or no votes taken in the UN. The results are as follows: the Arab League voted against us 88.7% of the time. The Asean members voted in opposition 84.5%; the Islamic Conference opposed us 84.1%; the Agean members were against us 83.8% of the time; the non-aligned nations were opposed 82.7% and our “friends” in the EU were opposed 54.5%.
We represent a very real problem for these socialistic, dictatorial regimes for they don‟t like the free enterprise system with small governments and if it wasn‟t for us they could tell their people that their system is best. Our Constitution that protects our freedoms and brings us prosperity is there for everyone to see and they wish we would stop being prosperous and making them look bad. I have traveled several times in Europe and in Turkey, Egypt and Israel and have found those people to be very friendly to Americans. Their government leaders and their left wing news media are against us because our success proves them wrong and those governments don‟t like us as a result.
Our left wing news media tells us that the rest of the world does not like us but if that is so why are the lines to immigrate to our country so long. It would seem that the people in the rest of the world (except for Muslims) like us but that the leaders of the world do not like us. The UN is composed of the representatives of those countries and we thus find ourselves in an organization that really doesn‟t like us. They vote for socialism and big government and for us to contribute more money to them. They will never be converted for it would mean losing their reason to exist and the best solution for us is to get out of the UN.
There are lots of reasons to withdraw. The UN has existed for 60 years and we can now look back and evaluate it based on its actions. The UN was formed after the second World War and everyone was wanting to stop wars. One of the primary purposes of the UN was to do everything possible to avoid future wars. It was thought that having everyone in one organization would permit debate and discussion and mediation and thus avoid conflict. However, that has not happened. The chart below presents the recent history:
Years / ongoing wars / new wars.
1956 to 1965 / 8 / 9
1966 to 1975 / 15 / 20
1976 to 1985 / 30 / 15
1986 to 1995 / 40 / 17
1996 to 2004 / 32 / 11
Not only was the UN not successful in stopping or preventing wars, there were some that the UN
completely ignored and did not object to or mention.
The UN also likes communists for when China took over Tibet that was ignored. When the North Vietnam communists invaded South Vietnam after we abandoned them and killed over a million people there was no complaint from the UN. When the communist Khmer Rouge massacred over a million Cambodians the UN did not acknowledge that this was taking place. In 1995 the UN tried to get the Tutsi in Africa to disarm and were partially successful which really helped the Hutis to murder around a million of them and that was not discussed at the UN.
In 1991 the UN investigated the murders that were occurring where the Islamic government of Sudan was trying to exterminate the black people in Darfur. The UN decided it was an internal matter and that genocide was not happening. Now the Sudanese government has requested that all humanitarian groups leave Darfur and the logical conclusion is that the problem there will be eliminated by eliminating all of the people left. Already nearly 200,000 have escaped into Chad which really doesn‟t want them. Maybe this problem will go away as have all the others when the aggressive force wins.
The UN has been involved with two wars and the results from that are not very good. In Korea the UN
helped negotiate an armistice that prevented victory on our part. In the history of wars there had not been one where the two sides agreed not to invade each other but to remain behind their property lines and kill the soldiers on the other side. That guaranteed that North Korea would remain a country and not suffer defeat and they are still there today as a result. That can not all be blamed on the UN for our politicians accepted that and could have prevented it. The war with Vietnam was fought under the SEATO group which is listed as part of the UN. It is not clear how much the UN was directly involved but we again had a situation where a boundary line was established and which we honored and did not invade North Vietnam. We fought the war on South Vietnam territory since the North Vietnamese did not obey the rule. Once again it is hard to completely blame the UN or SEATO since our politicians agreed to the deal.
The first Gulf War was fought under the UN and even though we had invaded and defeated Saddam Hussein‟s army we did not depose him or try to remove his government from power. That led to 12
years of inspections, of our repeated bombing of Iraq and finally in our invading Iraq without the approval of the UN (although President Bush claimed we were doing it to honor UN directives, Kofi Annan referred to the invasion as illegal on several occasions).
So, the UN has not been successful in preventing wars through discussion and negotiation for we can not identify one war that has been averted. The obvious conclusion is that the UN has not prevented wars and in many cases has not tried. They do not have an army but there is a “peacekeeping” force of 60,000
that must be involved in keeping the peace.
The record of the Peacekeepers is not very good. In fact, it is lousy. It is better known for immoral acts than for keeping the peace. In keeping the peace they are not really to use force for Secretary General Kofi Annan has stated, “Peacekeepers must never again be deployed into an environment in which there is no cease – fire or peace agreement.” They must just keep the peace by their presence.
They also participate in other activities which led to Kofi Annan apologizing to the UN in November of 2005 after Congo-based UN peacekeepers had been found sexually abusing women and children. Kofi just found that out but it is not new. A December 1996 UN study documented that “peacekeepers” had been involved in child prostitution in six of the twelve countries studied. In Mozambique, girls as young as twelve had been actively recruited to serve as prostitutes. A February 26, 2002 report by the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) described wide spread sexual exploitation of children at Western African refugee camps.
Paul Nolan of Save the Children describes such sexual predation as “widespread, quite possibly endemic and which also included people who were actually in place to provide those refugee children with the care and protection they were entitled to…” The Inter Press Service reported ”six out of 48 UN agencies operating in the field have received reports of new cases of sexual exploitation or abuse mostly by blue helmeted UN peacekeepers during 2003. Ruud Lubbers, the UN High Commissioner for Refugees resigned after being accused of sexual harassment in February 2005. Didier Bourget, on the UN staff in the Congo is on trial in his native France for organizing a pedophile ring stretching from Asia to Africa.
Sex scandals have been recorded in Kosovo, Sierra Leone, Liberia and Cambodia and 150 different cases are under investigation in the Congo. In Liberia, UNESCO, an organization for educating children has been established for educating abandoned children of UN peacekeepers. The UN has tried to reduce the number of illegitimate children by issuing five condoms per week to each peacekeeper (reported in The Economist April 23, 2005).
UN peacekeepers are obtained from various countries and the UN pays the countries for their recruits which enables the UN to have a mercenary force. Those recruits aren‟t necessarily the best as indicated by those from Bulgaria who have become notorious for drunken rampages, brawls, shootouts and mistreatment of women. The Bulgarian government offered inmates in prisons and psychiatric wards freedom if they would serve as peacekeepers for six months in Cambodia. They say that truth is stranger than fiction and the above is hard to believe but it is so wide spread and pervasive that this must be accepted as true.
This is what happens to an organization that is not subject to some restraint and control by an electorate.
They are responsible only to themselves and their conduct is then determined by the kind of people in charge. From this we can conclude that the people in charge are rotten. The UN has been requesting that an army be developed and assigned to them and after their management of the Peacekeepers it is impossible that we or anyone would agree to let this outfit have that kind of power to exert over anyone or anything.
The UN has many, many agencies and it is appropriate to review them.
UNESCO, the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization has a very spotted background. It is natural that an organization involved with education would try to persuade others that it is part of an excellent organization and that it should be supported and funded. That means it would state that a super national entity, or one world government, should be developed and that individual countries should be reduced and become irrelevant. In the words of its founding director Julian Huxley, “The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent…It can stress the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world political organization.”
Pursuing that agenda led to many complaints about the organization. The culminating act was when UNESCO proposed a New World Information Order (NWIO) which would have led to licensing and controlling all journalists, broadcasters, and news media personnel world wide. IN 1956 the Senate Judiciary Committee concluded that “by far the worst danger spot, from the standpoint of disloyalty and subversive activity among Americans employed by international organizations is UNESCO…”
As is normal with these unelected organizations their leaders act as dictators and in 1985 our Congress reviewed the report from our General Accounting Office and concluded that director Amadou Mahtar M‟Bow had created a fiefdom without a trace of accountability, financial or otherwise. That confirmed the wisdom of the decision made by President Reagan to withdraw from UNESCO in 1984.
However, in 2002 President Bush decided that UNESCO had reformed and placed us back in that organization where we fund about 25% of its budget. Has the UNESCO really changed? Is it possible it has renounced its goal of doing away with individual nations and their replacement by a world government? Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas) expressed doubts about that when he asked, “Are we to believe that after nearly two decades of mismanaging itself things have changed so much in just two years? Is it worth spending $60 million per year on an organization with such a terrible history of waste, corruption, and anti – Americanism?” Rep. Paul then stated in Congress, “Mr. Speaker even if UNESCO has been
„reforming‟ its finances over the past two years, its programmatic activities are still enough to cause us great concern among those of us who value American sovereignty and honor our Constitution.”
Consider the following list of UNESCO‟s ongoing highly questionable activities: UNESCO meddles in the education affairs of its member-countries and has sought to construct a UN based curriculum for American schools. UNESCO has been fully supportive of the UN‟s Population Fund (UNFPA) in its assistance to China‟s brutal coercive population control program. UNESCO has designated 47 UN
Biosphere Reserves in the United States covering more than 70 million acres without Congressional consultation. UNESCO effectively bypasses Congressional authority to manage federal lands, by establishing management policies without Congressional consultation or approval.”
UNESCO sees itself as the World School Board and would control education throughout the world. It is unrealistic to think of changing UNESCO or even influencing it. The only solution to stopping it is to stop funding it and withdrawing from it and the UN.
UNICEF is the UN organization involved with children. It seems peculiar that the UN would have such an organization since children are the responsibility of their parents but the UN does not see it that way.
UNICEF has been involved in developing sex education material for children and has been responsible for distributing condoms to children. For some strange reason they have also contributed money to Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist group. They have used UNESCO material to promote educating children to accept the UN as a one world government.
At a UNICEF sponsored convention in 1989 on “The Rights of the Child” some of their conclusions were: Article 5, “states are empowered to permit parents to raise their children… Article 7 requires states to register all children. Article 14 limits children‟s rights to freedom of worship if such worship is contrary to the UN‟s charter (which has no reference to GOD) and article 29 states,” the education of the children shall be directed to …the development of respect for …the principles enshrined in the Charter of the United Nations.” UNICEF and the UN Family Planning Agency helped fund the campaign being waged against the Tibetan women to reduce their population. In 1987 , Joseph Verbeek, a Belgian who headed the Belgian office of UNICEF was arrested and charged with using the UNICEF facilities for child prostitution and the production of child pornography.
Conventions are held by all of the organizations of the UN and the usual procedure is that the organization holding the convention will write up
the conclusions prior to the meeting and then have all of the attendees vote on the conclusions.
Naturally, they are always accepted. These conventions are always held at places where the delegates are comfortable and the expenses are all paid for by the UN. Estimates of expenses at the 1986 meeting of the IMF and World Bank which included 10,000 delegates and 700 social events was $10 million.
In 1987 at the Montreal Protocol the conference decided that Freon should be banned and President Bush (41) put that into effect and ended production in 1996. A federal task force announced indictments against 12 individuals for smuggling Freon into our country. The state of Arizona fixed all of that by passing a law that said Arizona would not honor the Montreal Protocol so we still have Freon.
In 2001 the Durban World Conference on Racism concluded that Israel was racist and that the Holocaust did not occur. The UN Population Fund along with the International Planned Parenthood Federation is highly supportive of China‟s one child per family program which is accomplished through abortion.
They are also promoting that program in third world countries. The UN‟s 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro presented the Convention on Biological Diversity which developed the Global Biodiversity Assessment which has led to the Wildlands Project which proposes to convert one half of the land area of the USA to a preserve. That preserve would be controlled by the UN.
That is in line with the 1976 Habitat Conference which stated, “Private land ownership is also a principle instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice….Public control of land use is therefore indispensable.”
The World Health Organization is best known for its solution to Aids which is to distribute condoms. In 1998 they started its Roll Back Malaria program and have tried to stop malaria through the use of an anti malaria drug, Coartem, and have ignored the use of DDT to kill mosquitoes. By 1965 malaria had been eradicated from most of the world except for Africa by killing mosquitoes (using DDT) which are the main carrier of the disease. Over one million people die each year from malaria but the results of their program so far is a failure.
The record of the Human Rights Commission is unbelievable. We were expelled from it for complaining about the commission and its members which included Zimbabwe, Sudan, Cuba, Saudi, Arabia, China, Nepal, Libya and Russia. It (as well as the General Assembly) has been unable to define the word
“terrorism” because that might offend the suicide bombers from the Islamic areas. Even Kofi Annan has pointed out, ”…states have sought membership of the commission not to strengthen human rights but to protect themselves against criticism or to criticize others.” The main target has been Israel.
Due to the complaints the Human Rig