Rule Five United Nations Friday

From a long list of stupid things to emanate from the United Nations, this has to be one of the dumbest.  Fortunately for the United States, I think we have an out.

In September 2024, less than two months before the next U.S. presidential election, the United Nations will host a landmark “Summit of the Future,” where member nations will adopt a Pact for the Future. The agreement will solidify numerous policy reforms offered by the U.N. over the past two years as part of its sweeping Our Common Agenda platform.

Although there are numerous radical proposals included in the agenda, perhaps none are more important than the U.N. plan for a new “emergency platform,” a stunning proposal to give the U.N. significant powers in the event of future “global shocks,” such as another worldwide pandemic.

So, what powers, you ask?  And how will the UN enforce those powers?  I’d remind you that the UN has no armed forces of its own, depending instead on member nations for enforcement.  But they do have a list of triggering events.

As difficult as it might be to believe, the story gets even worse from here. Although the duration of the emergency platform would initially be set for a “finite period,” at “the end of that period, the Secretary-General could extend the work of an Emergency Platform if required,” according to the United Nations’ own policy proposal.

That means the secretary-general would have the authority to keep the emergency platform in place indefinitely, all without reauthorization from member nations.

What kind of “global shock” would trigger the emergency platform? The U.N. provides several possible examples in its formal proposal, including a “major climatic event,” “future pandemic risks,” a “global digital connectivity disruption,” “major event in outer space,” and, my personal favorite, “unforeseen risks, (‘black swan’ events).”

In other words: Almost anything.

I can’t see anything good coming out of this; not anything good for American sovereignty, that is.

Fortunately, unless I’m missing something dramatic here, this would only be able to be enforced by treaty obligation, meaning that the Senate would have to ratify something.  Given the current make-up of the Senate, I just don’t see that happening.  I suppose the Security Council could throw some shade at us, but depending on who is in the White House – assuming it’s not President Biden(‘s handlers) – hopefully it is someone who will tell the UN where to head in.

The emergency platform proposal might be the biggest attempted power grab in the history of the United Nations, but as shocking as it is, it pales in comparison to the Biden administration’s treatment of this extremist proposal.

Rather than assert America’s independence and sovereignty, the White House has expressed its support for the emergency platform. U.S. Ambassador Chris Lu noted in at least two March 2022 speeches that the Biden administration backs the emergency platform, along with numerous other proposals included in “Our Common Agenda.”

The emergency platform would centralize an immense amount of power and influence, giving the United Nations greater control over the lives of Americans than it has ever had before. And rather than stand up for Americans’ rights, President Biden has already agreed to sell us out.

I wish I could say that’s a surprise.  But it’s not.

The answer, of course, I already noted above.  The UN is an organization that has outlived its usefulness, and it has been decidedly unfriendly towards the U.S. for quite a while.  So, yes, let’s tell the UN where to head in.  Kick them out of that posh New York building, tell them to sod off to Belgium, Belize or Baluchistan.  The only time they smile at the U.S. is when they need something paid for, or need a few thousand young men to go die in some third world shithole for a brush-fire that’s none of our business.  We don’t need that, and we don’t need the UN.