Enter Stage Right
December 13, 1999
There was not a blip on the main-stream news media radar when Hillary Clinton introduced Walter Cronkite to the World Federalist Association (WFA) on October 19. Not until the Washington Times reprinted the Cronkite speech Friday, December 3, did Americans discover that both Hillary and Walter are avid advocates of world government.
Cronkite says “democracy, civilization itself, is at stake,” unless the “basic structure of our global community” is changed in the next few years. Cronkite’s appeal for world government came only five days before the release of the Charter for Global Democracy which embodies the version of world government preferred by the United Nations Association (UNA).
Both the UNA and the WFA have been promoting world government for years. Cronkite’s group, the WFA, prefers a “federalist” system which would create a weighted system of voting in the U.N. General Assembly to create a legislative body roughly akin to the American Congress. The UNA prefers a “consensus” process that takes into account recommendations offered by civil society (non-government organizations accredited by the U.N.).
Both organizations want to elevate the U.N. to world government status and empower the U.N. to enforce all international law. In fact, in 1986, the WFA filed suit against the United States over U.S. foreign policy, arguing that Article VI of the U.S. Constitution made the U.N. Charter as well as other U.N. treaties, the “supreme law of the land.” The courts ruled against the WFA in 1989.
Hillary’s presence at the WFA meeting, and her introduction of Cronkite, directly aligns her with the world government movement, and particularly with the WFA’s world government aspirations.
Cronkite called for the “revision” and limitation of the veto power of permanent members of the U.N. Security Council. The Commission on Global Governance and the Charter for Global Democracy, call for the elimination of both the veto and permanent member status on the Security Council. This latter recommendation will be presented as the needed “reform” to the Millennium Assembly next September. Cronkite’s more timid approach, as well as his “federalism” ideas have been overwhelmed by the U.N.’s “consensus” process now on a fast track toward adoption.
Cronkite called for the immediate ratification of a laundry list of U.N. treaties, including the infamous Convention on the Rights of the Child; the Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW); and “most important,” Cronkite says, the International Criminal Court, which empowers the U.N. to prosecute American citizens whether or not it is ratified by the Senate.
Hillary made her support for these positions clear when she attended the U.N. Beijing Conference on Women in 1995.
Cronkite said in order to achieve world government, “Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty.” He said “the notion of unlimited national sovereignty means international anarchy.”
Under the world government scheme embodied in the Charter for Global Democracy, any individual nation could wield only the power assigned to it by the U.N. National armies would be disarmed to the level of a national police force. The U.N. would maintain a “directly recruited” standing army under the direct authority of the U.N. Secretary-General. Private citizens would be disarmed, and the U.N. would control the manufacture, sale, licensing and distribution of all fire arms.
To finance this expanded world government, the U.N. would be given the authority to impose taxes on the exchange of currency, on the use of resources, including the air, outer space, and the seas. Taxing authority is seen not only as the source of unlimited revenue, but also as a way to force a reduction of natural resources, especially fossil fuels, water, trees, and minerals.
Like the Clinton administration, and other world government advocates, Cronkite demeans opponents. He says that like America’s rejection of the League of Nations, current opposition to world government is “led by a handful of willful Senators who choose to pursue their narrow, selfish political objectives at the cost of our nation’s conscience.”
He goes even further to single out the “Christian Coalition and the rest of the religious right wing” as the culprits who have kept the world in a state of sovereign anarchy and prevented the emergence of a “civilized force of law” administered by the United Nations.
The fact that people of the stature of Hillary Clinton and Walter Cronkite are now willing to publicly advocate world government is an indication of their confidence that the world is now ready to accept their plan. World government is no longer the exclusive domain of the “black helicopter crowd.” Finally, the sinister plans to rule the world are being exposed by those who expect to rule.
The time line is, indeed, short. After decades of silent and denied preparation, the United Nations has made public the millennium year agenda which is crowned by the largest gathering of heads of state in the history of the world next September.
World government, called “global governance” by the U.N., will not occur on a day certain. It is a process that has been underway for years. The Millennium Assembly and Summit next September, with the adoption of the Charter for Global Democracy, is seen to be the point from which there is no turning back.
The only way to stop world government at this late date, is for the American people to send a government to Washington in the next election that can muster the courage to just say no.