Kakistocracy: noun, government by the worst persons; a form of government in which the worst persons are in power

Kakistocracy: noun, government by the worst persons; a form of government in which the worst persons are in power.

The old saying goes that even a blind squirrel finds a nut occasionally.  So you might think that during a 50-year political career, the odds would dictate that Joe Biden would, once in a blue moon, make a correct decision — just based on the odds.  But you’d be mistaken.  Biden has stumbled and bumbled from one disastrous decision to the next.  Disastrous, that is, for America.  Biden himself has prospered handsomely in spite of his glaring incompetence and corruption. 

Biden’s long Senate career was based on being the credit card companies’ man in Washington.  While crowing endlessly about the working class being “his people,” Biden sponsored bills allowing bank issuers to charge egregious interest rates and to make it harder for working men to escape the credit trap through bankruptcy.

When Biden chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, he turned the confirmation of Clarence Thomas into a political smear campaign that descended into a degenerate three-ring circus. In his first campaign for president, he failed to garner a single percentage point before having to withdraw when confronted with his past lies and blatant plagiarism. He literally stole a speech detailing a British politician’s life story. He ran again in 2008 but again failed to reach even one percent of the vote.

When Barack Obama took him off the primary trash heap to make him vice president, Biden first made a hash out of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, wasting hundreds of billions on boondoggles and giveaways to Democrat cronies. Little of the recovery billions was spent on anything useful to America. Biden went on to manage our relations with China and Ukraine, pocketing untold millions for himself and his family by selling out America’s security interests.

By the time he ran for president again in 2020 he was a spent husk of his former corrupt and incompetent self, delivering asinine performances in the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary. When the Democrat establishment propped him up to once again stop Bernie Sanders, Biden was set up for the strangest presidential campaign in modern history. While Donald Trump barnstormed the nation with packed, enthusiastic rallies, Biden cowered in his basement, occasionally venturing out to speak with a few dozen voters sitting in circles drawn on the floor.

For his vice presidential pick, he chose — if you can believe it — an even more buffoonish candidate than himself.

Had it not been for Mark Zuckerberg buying and staffing government election offices in swing states, and the media and Big Tech’s censorship of the Biden family’s corruption, Biden would now be enjoying his dotage in Delaware, creeping on unsuspecting children with yarns of Corn Pop and South African arrests.

Instead, the man with one of the most astonishing records of abject failure in Washington was installed in the White House, and he has remained true to form.  As one of a hundred senators and then as vice president, there was a limit to how much damage he could do.  But as president, the shackles have been removed.

His first agenda item was to throttle our oil and gas sector, offshoring tens of thousands of good paying jobs to Russia and the Middle East — along with our energy independence. He threw open our southern border and encouraged virtually unlimited illegal immigration — during a global pandemic.

He sponsored trillions of dollars in wasteful spending, pushing our national debt to over $31 trillion.  Were it not for two Democrat senators who had not yet taken leave of their senses, it would have been even worse.  As it is, Biden has sparked the largest one-year increase in inflation in 40 years.

Biden’s “defund the police” rhetoric delivered us soaring violent crime in Democrat-run cities, while he sicced federal law enforcement on parents who object too strenuously to their children being indoctrinated with anti-White racism and LGBTQIA+ ideology. 

It can truly be said that as president, Biden’s record of failure remains unblemished.  

But now comes what may be the capstone on Biden’s long history of buffoonery and corruption.  In Ukraine, we have an armed conflict that threatens to plunge the world into an economic depression and raises the specter of nuclear war.  Not only did Biden set the stage for this calamity when, as vice president, he was in charge of Ukraine policy and led Kiev to believe that NATO membership was in Ukraine’s future, but on the eve of the Russian invasion, he refused to admit that it was not.  Then Biden all but admitted to Vladimir Putin — on live TV, no less — that NATO would not defend Ukraine if Russia chose to invade. 

In the aftermath of Russia’s invasion, Biden and his administration have crafted sanctions that seem almost designed to boomerang on America’s and Europe’s fragile post-pandemic economies, while forcing Russia into a deeper alliance with China

With the U.S. over $31 trillion in debt, Biden seems totally oblivious to the perilous position of the U.S. dollar as the world’s reserve currency and the consequences should that privileged position end. 

Economists predict that food and gasoline will cost the average U.S. household an additional $3,000 this year, and inflation threatens to push millions of lower-middle income-earners into abject poverty.

And bumbling, corrupt Joe Biden isn’t yet halfway through his first — and please God, last — term.

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.
Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.

Jim Daws is a recovering talk radio host at jimdaws.com.

Big Tech Censored Dozens of Doctors, More Than 800 Accounts for COVID-19 ‘Misinformation,’ Study Finds

Resource : https://www.bloomberg.com/press-releases/2022-02-08/merck-and-ridgeback-announce-that-3-1-million-courses-of-molnupiravir-an-investigational-oral-antiviral-covid-19-medicine-have

Big Tech Censored Dozens of Doctors, More Than 800 Accounts for COVID-19 ‘Misinformation,’ Study Finds

Ailan Evans / @AilanHEvans / February 09, 2022

Twitter, Google, Google+, Gmail, Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat are among the platforms arrayed on the screen of an Apple iPhone. Many of them have used their largely unregulated power to censor information they don’t approve of as “misinformation.” (Photo: Chesnot/Getty Images)

Major technology companies and social media platforms have removed, suppressed or flagged the accounts of more than 800 prominent individuals and organizations, including medical doctors, for COVID-19 “misinformation,” according to a new study from the Media Research Center.

The study focused on acts of censorship on major social media platforms and online services, including Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, Twitter, LinkedIn, Google Ads, and TikTok.


Instances of censorship included Facebook’s decision to flag the British Medical Journal with a “fact check” and “missing context” label, reducing the visibility of a post, for a study delving into data-integrity issues with a Pfizer vaccine clinical trial.

Facebook also deleted the page of the Great Barrington Declaration, an open letter led by dozens of medical professionals, including Dr. Jay Battacharya, a Stanford epidemiologist, and Dr. Martin Kulldorff, a former employee of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which advocated for less restrictive measures to address the dangers of COVID-19.

“Big Tech set up a system where you can’t disagree with ‘the science’ even though that’s the foundation of the scientific method,” Dan Gainor, MRC vice president of Free Speech America, told the Daily Caller National Foundation. “If doctors and academic journals can’t debate publicly, then it’s not science at all. It’s ‘religion.’”

Big Tech also scrubbed podcast host Joe Rogan’s interviews with scientists Dr. Peter McCullough and Dr. Robert Malone, the latter of whom was instrumental in pioneering mRNA technology. Twitter banned Malone from its platform permanently in late December over the virologist’s tweets questioning the efficacy and safety of the COVID-19 vaccine.

“We tallied 32 different doctors who were censored, including mRNA vaccine innovator Dr. Robert Malone,” Gainor said. “Censoring views of credentialed experts doesn’t ensure confidence in vaccines. It undermines faith in government COVID-19 strategies.“

In addition to medical doctors, the study examined instances in which members of Congress were censored by tech platforms.

These included an incident last August in which YouTube suspended Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., for posting a video arguing that “cloth masks” are not effective against the coronavirus, a view later echoed by many prominent medical commentators. Twitter also flagged a tweet from Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., in which he wrote “studies show those with natural immunity from a prior infection are much less likely to contract and spread COVID than those who only have vaccine-induced immunity.”

The study also examined Big Tech censorship of prominent media personalities, such as Rogan, Tucker Carlson, and Dan Bongino.

Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of this original content, contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.

Have an opinion about this article? To sound off, please email letters@DailySignal.com and we’ll consider publishing your edited remarks in our regular “We Hear You” feature. Remember to include the url or headline of the article plus your name and town and/or state.

Want to keep up with the 24/7 news cycle? Want to know the most important stories of the day for conservatives? Need news you can trust? Subscribe to The Daily Signal’s email newsletter. Learn more >>



The Conservative Treehouse
October 29, 2021

COVID Madness Down Under Continues –

State Now Confiscating Bank Accounts, Property, Licenses and Businesses if COVID Fines Not Paid While Unemployed Workers Locked Down

By Sundance

“During the lockdown if you were caught violating any of the lockdown rules, you were subject to a civil citation, a fine or ticket for your COVID violation.

“Several states stepped in to provide wage subsidies so people could purchase essential products and pay their living expenses.

“However, during the lockdown if you were caught violating any of the lockdown rules, you were subject to a civil citation, a fine or ticket for your COVID violation.”

“Get caught too far from home, outside your permitted bubble, and you get a ticket.

“Get caught spending more than the permitted 1 hour outside, get a ticket.

“Get caught without a mask, even by yourself – and yep, ticket.

“Enter a closed quarantine zone (park, venue, etc.) and you get a ticket.

“Tickets were being handed out by police on the street as well as during random checkpoints on the roadways.

“Additionally, people returning to Queensland were put into a system of involuntary quarantine.

“The costs for that quarantine, mostly hotel rooms, were to be paid by the people being involuntarily captive and not allowed home.

“Citizens were required to have their physical location scanned via a QR code on their phone.

“These checkpoints were to assist in controlling the COVID spread and were used for contact tracing throughout the past two years.

“However, the checkpoints and gateway compliance scans also registered your physical location; the consequence was an increased ability for police and COVID compliance officers to catch people violating the COVID rules.

“Ex: If you checked in at the grocery store, they knew how far from home you are, and the police could figure out if you violated your one hour of time outside the home at the next checkpoint.

“The result of all this compliance monitoring was thousands of fines, civil citations for violating COVID rules.

“Thousands of people given thousands of fines that would need to be paid.

“Now the state is requiring all of those civil citations get paid, or else.

“And the enforcement actions to collect these fines from the State Penalty and Enforcement Register are quite extreme.

“Citizens who have outstanding tickets are finding their driver’s licenses suspended; bank accounts are being frozen and seized; homes and property are are being confiscated, as well as business licenses suspended for outstanding citations.

NIH Quietly Edits Section of Website on Gain-of-Function Research

NIH Quietly Edits Section of Website on Gain-of-Function Research

NIH Quietly Edits Section of Website on Gain-of-Function Research

The National Institutes of Health edited a section of its website explaining gain-of-function research this month as scrutiny over the research the NIH funded in Wuhan, China intensified.

The original page, seen on the Wayback Machine, displays several sections including Potential Pandemic Pathogens, Gain-of-Function Research, U.S. Government Funding Pause, HHS P3CO Framework, Research Within P3CO Scope, Research Outside P3CO Scope, and a Timeline.

The Gain-of-Function section stated:

The term gain-of-function (GOF) research describes a type of research that modifies a biological agent so that it confers new or enhanced activity to that agent. Some scientists use the term broadly to refer to any such modification. However, not all research described as GOF entails the same level of risk. For example, research that involves the modification of bacteria to allow production of human insulin, or the altering of the genetic program of immune cells in CAR-T cell therapy to treat cancer generally would be considered low risk. The subset of GOF research that is anticipated to enhance the transmissibility and/or virulence of potential pandemic pathogens, which are likely to make them more dangerous to humans, has been the subject of substantial scrutiny and deliberation. Such GOF approaches can sometimes be justified in laboratories with appropriate biosafety and biosecurity controls to help us understand the fundamental nature of human-pathogen interactions, assess the pandemic potential of emerging infectious agents, and inform public health and preparedness efforts, including surveillance and the development of vaccines and medical countermeasures. This research poses biosafety and biosecurity risks, and these risks must be carefully managed. When supported with NIH funds, this subset of GOF research may only be conducted in laboratories with stringent oversight and appropriate biosafety and biosecurity controls(link is external) to help protect researchers from infection and prevent the release of microorganisms into the environment. (NIH)

Now the page lists only Potential Pandemic Pathogens, ePPP Research, and Oversight.

The edits come as Sen. Rand Paul is calling for Dr. Anthony Fauci to resign for lying about gain-of-function research.

“He should be fired,” Paul told “Axios on HBO” in an interview that aired Sunday. 

“The thing is, is just for lack of judgment of nothing else, and I, you know, he’s probably never going to admit that he lied, he’s going to continue to dissemble and try to work around the truth and massage the truth,” he added.

While Paul has been making this case for awhile, the sentiments were renewed after Lawrence Tabak, the principal deputy director at the NIH, revealed new details in a letter about an NIH grant to EcoHealth Alliance, which conducted research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.


Beware of the Strong Cities Network

Beware of the Strong Cities Network

It all sounds so reassuring and reasonable! Acting for the Obama administration, the nation’s attorney general has placed the United States into an international grouping of cities whose advertised purpose involves combating violent extremism. Some of the cities in the new group will even be in other countries where terrorism has occurred or is surely a threat. All of the members of this new group will share their experiences and planning. Everyone should be most grateful that the Strong Cities Network (SCN) has been created.

Let’s take a closer look because when you actually look deeper at this network reveals some problems.

The first is that U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch decided to announce U.S. participation in the SCN at the United Nations. Then, in her speech before the world body last September, Lynch noted that SCN would have an International Steering Committee and an International Advisory Board “run by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, a leading international think-and-do tank” based in London, whose members include veterans of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission.

Representatives of Norway’s Oslo and Canada’s Montreal joyfully announced membership in the new SCN during the world body’s confab. And the UN’s high commissioner for human rights, Jordan’s Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, added his enthusiasm for the new organization.

Boiled down to its essence, the SCN is actually a new law-enforcement body whose laws will govern participating cities, including New York, Atlanta, Denver, and Minneapolis, that have already signed on as members. Law-enforcement measures for these cities will dovetail with or emanate from the Institute for Strategic Dialogue and the United Nations, not from the U.S. Constitution and locally elected officials and the laws governing them. In her remarks at the unveiling of this new organization, Attorney General Lynch claimed that the new arrangement would work toward being “an alliance of nations” and would aspire to be “a global community.”

The Strong Cities Network, therefore, should be known as a nascent global police force controlled by the United Nations. Where central or global authority doesn’t govern police power, it is controlled locally. When it is controlled by a national or international governing body, as it was in the hands of Germany’s Gestapo, the Soviet Union’s KGB, or the ruling body in a communist-led country, tyranny reigns.

In the United States, attacks against the very concept of local control over police power have been varied, with campaigns regularly complaining about treatment of rioters and protesters. This style of lawlessness customarily includes calls for replacing local control with state or even national oversight. What’s important to understand is until the unveiling of the SCN and its Institute for Strategic Dialogue, however, there were no calls for global oversight over police.

In her speech at the UN praising the creation of the SCN, Attorney General Lynch used the word “global” five times. She also employed the terms “international” and “world” while at the podium. Then she closed her remarks by introducing Sasha Havlicek, the CEO of the Institute for Strategic Dialogue.

Widespread understanding of the slogan “Support Your Local Police and Keep Them Independent” has never been more needed. It reminds all who encounter it that trading the American system of local control over police to any national or international governing body is suicidal. Unfortunately, the Obama administration and its attorney general seem determined to destroy America’s long-standing police policy and, by doing so, deliver our independent United States of America into the steadily growing power of the United Nations.

This is something all decent Americans must oppose. 

Contact Congress today with our pre-written alert to let them know of your opposition!

The Strong Cities Network, a global police force controlled by the United Nations?

What is the Strong Cities Network?

Launched at the United Nations in September 2015, the Strong Cities Network (SCN) is the first-ever global network of mayors, municipal-level policymakers and practitioners united in building social cohesion and community resilience to counter violent extremism in all its forms. 

Led by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD) and comprised of more than 140 cities across 45 countries, the SCN builds collaboration between mayors, political actors and frontline teams to tackle polarisation, hate and violence in local communities in every major global region.  

The Global Parliament of Mayors is a governance body of, by and for mayors from all continents with a vision to the world in which mayors, their cities and networks are equal partners in building global governance.

They state “local communities” are uniquely placed to counter violent extremism and create stronger and safer cities. Their “programming” spans training, research, project implementation, capacity-building and learning resources aimed at enriching the understanding of and enabling more effective local responses to the challenge of violent extremism.

The SCN’s Fundamental Principles?

  1. A commitment to address violent extremism in all its forms;
  2. A recognition that violent extremism and prevention efforts should not be associated with any particular religion, nationality or ethnicity group;
  3. A commitment to work in partnership with local communities on an inclusive, collaborative, and non-discriminatory basis and in compliance with international human rights standards.

Strong City Network Members – UK 

  • Birmingham
  • Derry/Londonderry
  • Leicester
  • London
  • Luton
  • Manchester


Mayor Sadiq Khan features on the Strong Cities Website


Who runs the Strong Cities Network?

ISD is a global organisation dedicated to powering solutions to extremism, disinformation, and polarisation.

For 10 years, ISD has responded to the rising challenge of extremist movements and the ideologies that underpin them, delivering cutting-edge programmes built from world-leading expertise in communications and technology, grassroots networks, knowledge and research, and policy advice.

Alongside its flagship programmes across education, research and communications and grassroots networks, ISD provides strategic advice to over 15 governments and 100 cities worldwide.  

ISD also provides high-level strategic advice to the tech sector to harmonise efforts with governments and civil society.

Setting an annual course for the network’s activities, engagement and objectives, the SCN International Steering Committee ensures that city leaderships and the needs of members are at the core of what we do. 

Who funds the SCN? 

Initial funding for the Strong Cities Network comes from the U.S. Department of State, with additional funds from the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs for the delivery of a specific programme of learning exchange between municipalities in Denmark and those in Jordan, Lebanon and Tunisia.

Before we move on to an alternative view from US media networks I felt it pertinent to share the following posted on the SCN’s Frequently Asked Questions page…..

“I am sceptical of the intentions of the Strong Cities Network. How can I be assured that it doesn’t have other motivations or covert operations?”

Unfortunately, there has been some negative and misleading reporting around the Strong Cities Network and its aims, activities and supporters. Thankfully, these remain relatively isolated and the majority of mainstream press around the network has been very positive.

If you have read or heard something about us which causes you to doubt our intentions or activities, please do read our ‘Myth-busting’ document, which we hope provides important clarifications in a clear and transparent way.

The Strong Cities Network, a global police force controlled by the United Nations

‘Strong Cities Network was announced in the US in 2015 by Loretta Lynch before the United Nations.  


https://www.justice.gov/opa/speech/attorney-general-loretta-e-lynch-announces-launch strong-cities-network-united-nations

In her remarks at the unveiling of this new organization, AG Lynch claimed that the new arrangement would work toward being “an alliance of nations” and would aspire to be “a global community.”

Boiled down to its essence, the SCN is actually a new law-enforcement body whose laws will govern participating cities, including New York, Atlanta, Denver, and Minneapolis, that have already signed on as members.

Law-enforcement measures for these cities will dovetail with or emanate from the ISD and the UN, not from the U.S. Constitution by-passing locally elected officials and the laws governing them. 

In Europe, ISD has gained a reputation for being committed to the identification and targeting of “far right extremists”.


It’s not just any old alliance that is behind the ISD. A quick search of the group’s website reveals the identity of its Board of Trustees: a cadre of internationalists that is second to none.

The four major American metropolises have handed over control of their law enforcement policy and practice to the ISD, who in turn is controlled by a who’s who of top tier globalist, one-world government, CFR, Trilateral, Bilderberg, Rothschild power brokers.

And, in its various reports, the ISD has made clear that the disarmament of civilians, particularly those found in the “right wing,” is the only sure way to safeguard the world.

As is so often the case, the group identifies right-wing extremism with ownership of guns and ammunition.

This move toward international integration of global law-enforcement agencies runs in unequivocal opposition to the locally controlled police that are a part of and accountable to the community they serve. 

The Strong Cities initiative will prove likely be another brick in the wall of enmity between police and people that grows higher with every encounter.


The UN’s Agenda 21 has its own Local Agenda 21 plan (global to local) initiated through a network of public/private partnerships, NGOs, Civil Society, Common Purpose and the Global Parliament of Mayors. 

The Strong Cities Network appears to be the law enforcement arm of this agenda.  But who will fall into the crosshairs of this UN law enforcement body? 

What constitutes “far-right”? – could this label include citizens who DO NOT COMPLY to state diktat? or those with “wrong think”.

I believe the answer to that question is starting to unfold before our very eyes in the US and UK.

BLM’s defund the police narrative seems to slot in rather nicely with this agenda, doesn’t it?

The million-dollar question is will their plan succeed – more to follow ….











Strong Cities, Strong Communities


Over the past 50 years, federal and state governments have relied on local governments as the principal entity to implement federal and state programs and policies. In this series of web pages and policy report, we document one of the most recent models of collaborative federalism: The Strong Cities, Strong Communities (SC2) Initiative (2011–17). As part of a suite of place-based urban policies and programs designed to assist a diverse typology of communities confronting dramatic economic and demographic change, SC2 experimented with how the federal government engages with local government and how to facilitate greater cooperation among and across federal agencies.

At the time of its design, federal leaders did not have sufficient political capital for launching a traditional federal capacity-building initiative. They did not have the luxury of supporting a new program with large federal grants or elaborate federal technical assistance and training. SC2’s leaders had to devise new models and approaches for helping local governments that relied heavily on federal resources and staff. For example, a core SC2 principle and strategy was to embed federal government staff for designated periods of time within the offices of mayors and other local government agencies (the Community Solution Teams -CSTs) to ensure that any federal actions taken would be driven by and responsive to local priorities. Once priorities and potential federal resources or actions were identified, the CSTs could also help local government policymakers, directors, and their staffs navigate the vast federal bureaucracy and its processes and procedures.

The timeline graphic below outlines the major federal milestones for the SC2 initiative.

Above: In total more than 120 participants from 38 countries attended the UN General Assembly side event on 30 September

September marked two important occasions for the Strong Cities Network.

On 22 September, mayors and other representatives from some 20 cities around the globe participated in a meeting to revitalise the SCN’s International Steering Committee, which forms its leadership and decision-making body. During the course of the event, participants discussed the various challenges facing cities in preventing and countering violent extremism, as well as ensuring the SCN is fit for purpose. A short summary of the proceedings can be found here.

On 30 September, the SCN hosted a virtual side-event on the margins of the 76th United Nations General Assembly on The Role of Cities in Advancing Global Efforts to Prevent and Counter Violent Extremism. Co-sponsored by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, North Macedonia and the United States Department of State, participants included mayors and other local leaders from around the globe as well as representatives of national governments, the United Nations (UN) and other multilateral bodies. You can watch a recording of the event on our YouTube channel here, and read a full summary here.

During these events, we also presented two documents for review:

The first highlights 10 steps that cities can take to prevent and counter violent extremism and is intended to help raise awareness among multilateral bodies, national governments and even cities who may not fully appreciate the range of P/CVE contributions they can make as part of a ‘whole of society’’ approach.

The second is an updated SCN fact sheet outlining the network’s mission, objectives and structure – to include the new 

Revitalising the International Steering Committee: Summary

The International Steering Committee is the SCN’s leadership and decision-making body. Its role is to provide strategic direction to the SCN, promote the SCN’s mission, and ensure that the SCN remains driven and guided by its members. On 22 September, a meeting was held to revitalise the International Steering Committee and to discuss how to strengthen the network and further enhance its impact. You can read the short summary below.

UN General Assembly Virtual Side Event 2021: Full Recording

Watch the full recording of the SCN’s virtual side-event held on the margins of the 76th United Nations General Assembly. The event, The Role of Cities in Advancing Global Efforts to Prevent and Counter Violent Extremism, was co-sponsored by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, North Macedonia and the United States Department of State, with speakers including Uzra Zeya, Under-Secretary of State for Civilian Security, Democracy, and Rights (United States), Vladimir Voronkov, UN Under-Secretary General for Counter-Terrorism, and Mayors Naheed Nenshi of Calgary (Canada), Bill Peduto of Pittsburgh (United States), and Andy Burnham of Greater Manchester (United Kingdom)

More on Strong Cities Network

Read more

Get US Out! of the UN

Get US Out! of the UN

JBS YouTube Video Why Did the U.S Join the UN?

Surrendering Sovereignty for “Peace”

Following the horrific devastation of World War II, Americans were open to new ideas in the hope that it would prevent another world war and bring world peace. Foisted on them by the Deep State was the idea for the United Nations. The United States enlisted as a founding member of the United Nations when the U.S. Senate approved the UN Charter on July 28, 1945. After only six days of formal deliberation, the Senate voted 89 to 2 in favor of joining the world body. The two patriots who voted against ratifying the Charter and UN membership were Senators Henrik Shipstead (R-Minn.) and William Langer (R-N.D.).

Charter for World Government

The UN Charter contains a Preamble and 111 Articles in its 19 Chapters. Although being approximately the same size as the U.S. Constitution, the two founding documents could hardly be any more different. Whereas the U.S. Constitution creates a government with strictly limited and defined powers, the UN Charter establishes the framework for expansive global governance towards one world government.

Article 1 of the UN Charter states that its purpose is: “To maintain international peace and security.” The word “peace” appears a total of six times in Article 1. As a result, UN officials and supporters contend that the world body is a “peace organization.” However, in 1971 the peace organization ousted the free, anticommunist Republic of China – a founding member of the UN – and replaced it with the communist People’s “Republic” of China, whose leadership has killed over 60 million Chinese.


Where is the UN Heading?

From the Arms Trade Treaty intended to regulate and trace the flow of conventional weapons, including handguns, around the world to the onerous environmental controls of the UN’s Agenda 21/2030, which are designed to curtail every individual’s consumption of natural resources (i.e. clean water, coal, oil, natural gas, and food), the UN is a recipe for global despotism.

The ultimate goal for the United Nations is to create a unified one-world government. Consider learning more about the UN’s threat to U.S. sovereignty and freedom using our educational links, videos, and other JBS.org resources. This being one of our longest standing Action Projects our society has some of the most useful UN education tools. Click through the menu on the left to continue learning more about the UN plans for your Second Amendment rights, a one-world government, and the infamous Agenda 21/2030.

%d bloggers like this: