Wretched hive of
scum and villainy
By Frederick B. Meekins
web
posted May 28, 2001
Students of political science would be forced to conclude that the field
of international relations is a discipline fraught with bizarre irony
and stunning contradiction. This is no where as evident as it is at the
United Nations. Both American policymakers and the general public fell
victim to this reality in the controversy surrounding the expulsion of
the United States from various UN panels such as the Commission on Human
Rights and the International Narcotics Control Board.
One almost doesn't know whether to laugh or cry being that these decisions
are both a blessing in disguise and a cause for concern all at the same
time. For too long, the United States has drifted along in a state of
blissful denial or outright complacency as to the maniacal hootenanny
taking place under the auspices of the United Nations.
The United States has been booted off these international bodies largely because of this nation's refusal to submit fully to the yoke of the globalist agenda and for mustering some courage with the advent of the Bush administration to stand up to this planetary nonsense to a limited degree.
It has been speculated that the U.S. is being punished for challenging UN initiatives regarding issues such as the International Criminal Court, the effort to abolish landmines, and the Kyoto global warming treaty --- all of which the United States has rational grounds for opposing.
Yet this dispute between the United States and the United Nations runs deeper than these significant but peripheral policy disputes. These disagreements merely scratch the surface of the ideological chasm festering between these two geopolitical powerhouses. Increasingly, freedom lovers everywhere find two opposing interpretations as to the nature of human rights competing for prominence in the world at large.
On the one hand can be found the traditional Western view held by the
majority of decent upright Americans adhering to the worldview that fundamental
rights and liberties are granted to the individual as an inherent protection
against the intrusive tendencies of governments as well as other individuals.
Those holding an opposing standard contend that rights --- or rather social
privileges --- are granted by government and are subject to modification,
curtailment, or even outright abolition in pursuit of a regime's particular
agenda.
It is this conflict between the differing conceptions of personal liberty that has gotten the United States kicked off the UN panels where the statist interpretation of human rights have come to predominate. A rundown of the Commission's membership will bear this assertion out. Perusing the Commission's rolls is like taking a tour down Dick Tracy's Rogue's Gallery on an international level.
The primary power wanting the U.S. off the Commission was none other than our esteemed "strategic partner" Red China, a nation renowned for its overwhelming devotion to the welfare of the individual. The Communist government there has slaughtered millions in pursuit of dubious ends as epitomized by that county's Great Cultural Revolution. Forced abortions and religious persecution of believing Christians continues in that nation to this very day.
Another paragon of inalienable rights guiding the Commission to ever
higher plateaus of individual emancipation is Saudi Arabia. In that particular
land of opportunity, women aren't even allowed to drive cars and those
who convert from Islam to another faith are rewarded by having their heads
lopped off.
One will realize just how ludicrous the decision to remove the United
States from the Commission really is once they learn that the seat belonging
to the beacon of hope to the world in this life was given to Sudan. Thus
a nation where children are sold into the bondage of slavery for simply
belonging to the "wrong" religion has been elevated as a better
example to the world than the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Even the more enlightened and civilized nations on the Human Rights Commission
leave something to be desired in their interpretation of fundamental rights
and liberties.
For example, in Canada one can run afoul of the law for speaking out against
homosexuality and a number of Evangelicals have been subject to criminal
prosecution there for distributing literature critical of other religions.
Other industrialized democracies on the Human Rights Commission such as
France, Germany, and even the United Kingdom have laws unduly hampering
religious and individual expression.
A number of those opposed to the controversial agenda being pursued by
the United Nations have suggested that now is the perfect time to get
out of this planetary bureaucracy in light of this slap across the face
of the United States since the UN largely pursues an anti-American agenda
at the expense of U.S. taxpayers.
Rather it is the time to rally goodhearted people to the side of our cause
rather than to run from the fight. Edmund Burke is credited with saying
that all it takes for evil to win is for good men to do nothing.
The only thing protecting the people of the world from the full wrath
of the diabolical intentions of the United Nations is the love of freedom
and concern for justice found at the heart of the American spirit. Without
this influence, such evil would know no bounds. Without an American presence
to temper its decisions, the Human Rights Commission has continued its
downward spiral of propagating policies inimical to a true understanding
of human rights.
Soon after banishing the United States, the Commission proceeded to bar
nongovernmental organizations such as the Family Research Council and
the Simon Weisenthal Center from providing input regarding the work of
the Commission because of the practice of these associations to speak
out against atrocities around the world.
According to the May 17, 2001 Washington Times, it is becoming increasingly
difficult for such watchdog organizations to get the bureaucratic clearance
necessary to participate in UN forums and meetings. Joanna Weschler of
Human Rights Watch points out in the article that repressive governments
have been emboldened to deny the right petition to organizations opposed
to the totalitarian style of administration since Sudan successfully banished
the abolitionist Christian Solidarity International from participating
at UN functions nearly two years ago.
Unless America stands its ground, things will only get worse. According
to the radio news program "Point of View with Marlin Maddoux",
UN "peacekeepers" in Sudan threatened to use helicopter gunships
on missionaries trying to deliver Bibles to Christian refuges in that
beleaguered country. Perhaps such military force should be brought to
bear against Sudan's radical Islamic government when that regime decides
to drop bombs as it has done in the past on Samaritan's Purse hospitals,
the relief organization administered by Billy Graham's son Franklin.
These outrages are nothing compared to what the UN has in store for the
world in general and America in particular if the institution could ever
avail itself of such an opportunity.
For example, it is the ultimate goal of the United Nations to establish
an independent standing army financed through taxation extracted from
all international commercial transactions. And with the threat of force,
even nations who might otherwise oppose such globalist nonsense could
eventually be forced to comply or face military occupation, with their
citizens subject to the same kinds of laws governing the most brutal nations
of earth.
It is therefore imperative for the United States to remain active within
the United Nations for the time being if for no other reason than to try
and hold this Hobbesian leviathan at bay along with its proposals of perdition.
It would do good indeed for the United States to disentangle itself from
the snares set by these world bodies whose intentions stretch far beyond
the aversion of global war and the maintenance of amicable relations between
nations. However, the United States must not leave the table with its
back turned to such a den of cutthroats and vipers. The United States,
not the United Nations, must be the last one standing on the world stage
in reference to this planetary showdown.
In the movie "Star Wars", immediately prior to entering the
scene in the sleazy bar Obi-Wan Kenobi said, "You'll never find a
more wretched hive of scum and villainy. We must be cautious." Such
words of wisdom are quite apropos regarding America's relationship to
the United Nations. 
(c) 2001 by Frederick B. Meekins
Other related articles: (open in a new window)
- The tide is turning against
the UN by Tom DeWeese (May 28, 2001)
When someone like A. M. Rosenthal condemns the United Nations, you know that organization is serious trouble, says Tom DeWeese - Interesting
choices for UN Rights Commission by W. James Antle III (May 7, 2001)
W. James Antle III thinks it's rich that the United States would be thrown off the UN Rights Commission but a brutal slave state like Sudan is welcomed - The
Un-American United Nations by Steve Farrell (August 23, 1999)
The UN continues to be marketed as an international version of American ideals; but a study of its founders, charter, and history reveals quite a different picture, says Steve Farrell