What The U.N. Doesn't Want You To Know The father of the U.N. was an American communist

A young American diplomat was the leading force in the designing of the United Nations. He was secretary of the Dumbarten Oaks Conversations from August to October of 1944 where most of the preliminary planning for the U.N. was done. He was Roosevelt's right-hand man in February of 1945 at Yalta where the postwar boundaries of Europe were drawn (Roosevelt was a dying man at the time. His death came only ten weeks later). At Yalta it was agreed that the Soviet Union would have three votes (one each for Russia, Ukraine, and Byelorussia) in the U.N. General Assembly, even though the United States had only one. At Yalta much of Europe was placed under the iron heel of communist rule. At Yalta, Churchill, Roosevelt, and Stalin appointed this young diplomatic shining star to be the first Secretary-general of the U.N. for the founding conference held in San Francisco,April/June of 1945.

All of this seemed well and good until three years later. Alger Hiss was exposed as a communist spy and sent to prison. Only then did people understand why the emblem of the United Nations looked so much like the emblem of the Soviet Union. It now made sense that the Soviet Union, at Yalta, was given control over all of Eastern Europe. Then everyone understood how the Soviet Union managed to capture three votes in the U.N. General Assembly compared to one for the United States. Then it became clear why a secret deal had been struck stating that a communist would always hold the office of of head of the U.N. military.

The U.N. charter was authored by a communist, the first U.N. Secretary-general was a communist, and the U.N., from the beginning, was designed to be a Union of World Socialist Republics.

On a recent tour of the U.N., not one mention was made of any of this by our guide. Hiss' name was not mentioned one time. When pictures of the founding conference contained his picture, our U.N. guide avoided telling us who it was.

I'm sure everyone was taught about the United Nations and its importance in school, but I'm also sure that the above information was conveniently omitted from your textbooks!

Secret agreement: U.N. military to always be commanded by a communist
One of the most important positions within the entire United Nations—if not the most important—is that of Undersecretary-general for Political and Security Council Affairs. Most Americans have never even heard of this position, much
less anything about the man who holds the job. The undersecretary-general for political and security council affairs has three main areas of responsibility. They are:

  • Control of all military and police functions of the United Nations peacekeeping forces.
  • Supervision of all disarmament moves on the part of member nations
  • Control of all atomic energy ultimately entrusted to the United nations for peaceful and “other purposes”.

In view of the fact that these three functions may soon constitute the ultimate power of life and death over every human being on the face of the earth (once national disarmament is achieved and all military is under the control of the U.N.), there would appear to be some minor justification for us to be more than passingly curious over who wields this power. Since the United Nations was created in 1945 there have been fifteen men appointed to the position of undersecretary-general of political and security council affairs. Astonishingly, every single one of them has been a communist!

Communists appointed to the position of undersecretary-general

  • Arkady Sobolev--USSR (1946-1949)
  • Konstantin Zinchenko—USSR (1949-53)
  • Ilya Tehernychev—Ygoslavia (1954-1957)
  • Anatoly F. Dobrynin—USSR (1958-1960)
  • Georgi Ptrovich Arkadev—USSR (1960-1962)
  • Eugeny Dmiterievich Kiselev—USSR (1962-1963)
  • Vladimir Pavolovich Suslov—USSR (1963-1963)
  • Alexie E. Nesterenko—USSR (1965-1968)
  • Leonid N. Kutakov—USSR (1968-1973)
  • Arkady N. Shevchenko—USSR (1973-1978)
  • Mikhail D. Sytenko—USSR (1978-1981)
  • Viacheslav A. Ustinov—USSR (1981-1986)
  • Uasiliy S. Safronchuk—USSR (1987-1992)
  • Vladimir Petrovsky—Russia , “former USSR (1992-)
  • James O. C. Jonah—Sierra Leone (Co-chairman)

Some observers feel that fifteen Communists out of fifteen appointees constitutes a trend of sorts. But whatever we call it, Trygve Lie, the first secretary-general of the United Nations, revealed that this pattern was no mere coincidence. In his book In the cause of Peace Lie wrote: "Mr. Vyshinsky (of the USSR) did not delay his approach. He was the first to inform me of an understanding which the Big Five had reached in London on the appointment of a Soviet national as assistant secretary-general for political and security council affairs...

"Mr. Stettinius (U.S Secretary of State) confirmed to me that he had agreed with the Soviet delegation in the matter...

"The preservation of international peace and security was the organization's highest responsibility, and it was to entrusting the direction of the Secretariat department most concerned with this to a Soviet national that the Americans had agreed." (From The Fearful Master by Edward Griffin)

Every U.N. Secretary-general has been a socialist
No wonder someone said that the truth is stranger than fiction! This incredible saga of the United Nations just goes on and on. Perhaps the most revealing fact of all concerning the powers that control the United Nations is that every single Secretary-general since the U.N.'s formation has been a socialist.

Trygve Lie from Norway was the first elected head of the U.N. He was chosen by the fifteen-member U.N. Security Council and ratified by the U.N. General Assembly on February 1, 1946.

Lie, at the age of twenty-three, was appointed secretary in charge of administration of the Norwegian Labor Party. The socialist lawyer served as Minister of Justice until June 1939, when a Cabinet reorganization made him Minister of Commerce. In April 1945, Lie was chosen to head the Norwegian delegation to the United Nations Founding Conference at San Francisco. At the conference itself he was chosen chairman of Commission III which was charged with drafting the charter of the Security Council of the United Nations, "the organ...which would have the power to act against aggressors."

Dag Hammarskjold of Sweden was elected Secretary-general of the United Nations on April 7, 1953. At the age of thirty, Hammarskjold became Undersecretary of the Swedish Ministry of Finance. At the Ministry
he worked under the Fabian socialist economist Ernst Wigforss, whom he once said considered his second father. Sweden has long been the leading socialist state of Western Europe, taxing its citizens at a 75% rate.

U Thant of Burma was elected Secretary-general of the U.N. on November 30, 1962. According to Current Biography 1962, U Thant considered himself a democratic socialist.

Kurt Waldheim of Austria took office as Secretary-general of the United Nations on January 1, 1972. Waldheim had been Austria's U.N. ambassador from 1964 to 1968. When the Austrian Socialist party won the March 1970 elections, Waldheim again became Austria's U.N. representative. After serving two terms as U.N. Secretary-general, Waldheim became the head of Austria. It was revealed that Waldheim had lied about his role while serving in the Nazi forces of Adolf Hitler. Facts that were made known resulted in Waldheim being banished from the United States, even though he was the head of Austria.

Javier Perez de Cuellar became U.N. Secretary-general on December 15, 1981. In his address to the General Assembly after being sworn in, Perez de Cuellar called the disparity in wealth between rich and poor nations a violation of "the most fundamental human rights." During his administration, some third-world spokesmen complained that Perez de Cuellar had not been sufficiently outspoken in promoting the massive transfer of resources from rich to poor nations on a global scale (Wealth redistribution has always been the central plank in the platform of international socialism). "I am a third-world man," the Secretary-general replied. "But first of all I am a representative of 157 countries. I have to act in a way so that I am not only the representative of the third world."

read more:

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/un_doesnt_want_you_t...

Views: 589

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

We The People need to know this stuff

All the more reason to remove the U.N. from our shores, and ourselves from the U.N.  What a waste of MONEY.  Get them OUT and the traffic problems in New York will be relieved immediately.  No more cars parking three abreast on a narrow street with 'diplomat' plates on them.

RSS

LIGHTER SIDE

The cartoonist's homepage, indystar.com/opinion/varvel

ALERT ALERT

Clinton Donor And Tax Cheat Tied To Russia

“Do as we say, not as we do.”

That seems to be the slogan for Hillary Clinton and her political allies, and it’s especially apt in light of new information about one of Clinton’s largest campaign donors.

While the left is still trying to attack President Trump and his family over unproven business dealings and largely debunked connections to Russia, a new report indicates that it was Hillary Clinton’s team who were doing those exact things.

“Fox News has learned that one of the top donors to the ‘Hillary Victory Fund’ (HVF) in 2016 was a Los Angeles-based attorney who is alleged to have misused company funds to create his own $22 million real estate portfolio,” that outlet reported on Thursday.

“He has also been considered by California to be one of the state’s biggest tax cheats, and allegedly has ties to the (Russian) Kremlin,” Fox continued.

The man’s name is Edgar Sargsyan. His deep pockets greatly benefited Clinton’s campaign, with contributions of at least $250,000 to the Hillary Victory Fund in 2016.

He was also in charge of an elite fundraising dinner to benefit Clinton, where donors paid $100,000 per couple just to attend the ritzy event. But in true Clinton fashion, the money apparently went missing.

Sargsyan is now “being sued by his former company for allegedly diverting those funds to start his own real estate company,” according to Fox.

Now, people are asking hard questions about Clinton’s buddy Sargsyan, including whether his contributions were part of a pay-to-play scheme and if he had shady connections to foreign governments.

“Nobody gave to the Hillary Victory Fund out of the goodness of their heart or some generalized desire to help 33 random state parties,” pointed out attorney Dan Backer from the Committee to Defend the President.

“They did so to buy access and curry influence — something the Clintons have been selling for nearly three decades in and out of government,” he continued.

Trying to buy political influence is sadly common, especially when it comes to the Clintons. What is raising more red flags than normal, however, is the evidence that Sargsyan is no run-of-the-mill campaign donor.

“The really scary question is, what did this particular donor with this strange web of connections hope to buy for his quarter-million dollars?” Backer asked Fox News.

That web of connections is strange indeed.

The Committee to Defend the President is now alleging that SBK, a major Sargsyan-linked company “is an investment firm that is affiliated with United Arab Emirates president, Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nahyan, and its international affiliate has business interests in Russia,” according to Fox.

“Among its dealings was a bid to finance $850 million for a major bridge project to connect Crimea with Russia,” the group claims.

“He worked for SBK, and SBK appears to have bid on some Crimean/Russian bridge project,” Backer said. “That’s usually an indicator of political favor and connections.”

It raises several chilling questions: Was Sargsyan paying a quarter million dollars to Clinton for political favors, and — more disturbingly — was that money actually from sources in Russia in order to smooth the way for its construction plans?

Nobody knows for sure. What is clear, however, is that there is a pattern of dirty money surrounding the Clintons, with the “Uranium One” and “Clinton Foundation” scandals just two of the most well-known examples.

“It reinforces how fast and loose the Clinton machine was when it came to ‘Hoovering up’ these megadonor checks, not just from questionable Hollywood and Wall Street elites but potentially from foreign influence peddlers using who knows what money,” Backer told Fox News.

“It reinforces the need to take a long hard look at not just the unlawful money laundering process, but the way in which they were solicited as well,” he continued. “The Clintons have never shown a great deal of concern for whomever it was cutting the checks — whether it’s foreign influence peddlers or Hollywood smut peddlers like Harvey Weinstein.”

If those claims are even partially true, then America dodged a bullet in November of 2016 — and it’s worth keeping the pile of foreign-connected Clinton scandals in mind the next time the left tries desperately to tie Donald Trump to Russia. Perhaps they should look in the mirror.

SLAVEHOLDER??

Washington Post Compares
Jeff Sessions To Slaveholder’

The Washington Post compared Attorney General Jeff Sessions to “slaveholders” after he quoted the Bible on Thursday while discussing his department’s policy of prosecuting all illegal immigrants who cross the border.

Sessions made the statement during a speech to law enforcement officers in Fort Wayne, Indiana.

WaPo ran a story entitled “Sessions cites Bible passage used to defend slavery in defense of separating immigrant families” by general assignment editor Keith McMillan and religion reporter Julie Zauzmer on Friday.

Rather than detailing the statistics Sessions cited in the speech that explain the immigration policy, the story quoted John Fea, a history professor at Messiah College in Pennsylvania.

“This is the same argument that Southern slaveholders and the advocates of a Southern way of life made,” Fea said.

Sessions spent much of the speech discussing the numbers behind current immigration policy, including separating families at the Southwest border.

“I would cite you to the Apostle Paul and his clear and wise command in Romans 13, to obey the laws of the government because God has ordained the government for his purposes,” Sessions said.

“Orderly and lawful processes are good in themselves. Consistent and fair application of the law is in itself a good and moral thing, and that protects the weak and protects the lawful.”

“The previous administration wouldn’t prosecute aliens if they came with children,” Sessions said.

“It was de-facto open borders if you came with children. The results were unsurprising. More and more illegal aliens started showing up at the border with children.”

Sessions laid out the numbers in the speech.

“In 2013, fewer than 15,000 family units were apprehended crossing our border illegally between ports of entry in dangerous areas of the country,” he said.

“Five years later, it was more than 75,000, a five-fold increase in five years. It didn’t even have to be their child that was brought, it could be anyone. You can imagine that this created a lot of danger.”

The U.S. has the “opportunity” to fix its broken immigration system now, Sessions said.

“I believe that’s it’s moral, right, just and decent that we have a lawful system of immigration,” he said. “The American people have been asking for it.”

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service