Tag: un

UN Is Accelerating The Three Outcome Documents For The Summit Of The Future, Namely The Pact For The Future; The Declaration On Future Generations; And The Global Digital Compact – Silence Is Consent

We have not heard anyone mention this yet, and think it’s very important that everyone is up to speed on the details right now, so we assembled this information for you all. We’re at your service!!!

The following information has been made available on the three outcome documents for the Summit of the Future, namely the Pact for the Future; the Declaration on Future Generations; and the Global Digital Compact:

Pact for the Future: 

It is expected that Rev 3 will be released on 26 August and will be put under silence until 29 or 30 August.

The delay is due to the Co-facilitators attempting to deconflict the silence process with those for the Global Digital Compact and the Declaration on Future Generations. 

Keep reading

Accusations of US Regime-Change Operations in Pakistan and Bangladesh Warrant UN Attention

Two former leaders of major South Asian countries have reportedly accused the United States of covert regime change operations to topple their governments. One of the leaders, former Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, languishes in prison, on a perverse conviction that proves Khan’s assertion. The other leader, former Bangladesh Prime Minister Sheik Hasina, fled to India following a violent coup in her country. Their grave accusations against the U.S., as reported in the world media, should be investigated by the UN, since if true, the U.S. actions would constitute a fundamental threat to world peace and to regional stability in South Asia.

The two cases seem to be very similar. The very strong evidence of the U.S. role in toppling the government of Imran Khan raises the likelihood that something similar may have occurred in Bangladesh.

In the case of Pakistan, Donald Lu, Assistant Secretary of State for South Asia and Central Asia, met with Asad Majeed Khan, Pakistan’s Ambassador to the U.S., on March 7, 2022. Ambassador Khan immediately wrote back to his capital, conveying Lu’s warning that PM Khan threatened U.S.-Pakistan relations because of Khan’s “aggressively neutral position” regarding Russia and Ukraine.

The Ambassador’s March 7 note (technically a diplomatic cypher) quoted Assistant Secretary Lu as follows: “I think if the no-confidence vote against the Prime Minister succeeds, all will be forgiven in Washington because the Russia visit is being looked at as a decision by the Prime Minister. Otherwise, I think it will be tough going ahead.” The very next day, members of the parliament took procedural steps to oust PM Khan.

On March 27, PM Khan brandished the cypher, and told his followers and the public that the U.S. was out to bring him down. On April 10, PM Khan was thrown out of office as the parliament acceded to the U.S. threat.

We know this in detail because of Ambassador Khan’s cypher, exposed by PM Khan and brilliantly documented by Ryan Grim of The Intercept, including the text of the cypher. Absurdly and tragically, PM Khan languishes in prison in part over espionage charges, linked to his revealing the cypher.

Keep reading

Peace is Just a Word

So I was watching the UN Security Council Emergency Meeting on the situation in the Middle East and I thought, “what is this?” Maybe the question “why” would have been more apt.

We see it time and time again, important well-paid people sitting in chairs making long-winded statements about peace and justice and more peace and eventually it all just turns into a jumbled jambalaya’d stew of predictable and usual opinions.

Some of these people are heart-felt in their pleas. Most are carefully diplomatic. Some seem reluctant.

And nothing ever seems to ever be achieved: Just words hollow in the hum of air-conditioning wafting into oblivion.

Peace is just a word.

And I was thinking, maybe if they brought in the drag queens?

I mean, if you think about it…. As we already know there are 17 reasons for everything happening in the world right now, i.e. the 17 WEF goals. One of those as we all know by now involves diversion, equity and inclusion (DEI) and thus the whole trans thing flaring up here and there. And that means any single thing that has the title of global, international, world or earth or nations or planet will bring out the drag queens to ensure social engineering is at the forefront. It is a given. But not this time? (Granted we’re not sure about the IMF but we can presuppose it is DEI inclined somehow.)

We don’t see drag queens at the UN Security Council meetings. And that is obviously not equal or inclusive and no wonder we have endless wars and everything. A drag queen performance done well would bring more communal enjoyment and conviviality to the proceedings and eventually would probably broker peace far better than the existing crew.

If there were only drag queens at these meetings then whenever China e.g. began to speak, some big-haired blonde could break into “I wanna be loved by you and nobody else but you….” Or whenever Israel and Iran begin sparring someone could start singing Shania Twain’s “I’m gonna getcha good”.

Turkey and Hungary could be “I wanna dance with somebody” and the Ukrainians could be doing “I will survive.” It would explain things splendidly and with style even! But that is not the point.

The point would be having more people watching the UN proceedings. Because it is a damn terrible life knowing what is going on in the world and have to discuss the weather with the vast majority of our fellow citizens.

Does no one else see this?

Keep reading

The UN’s Green Agenda Will Spark Famine

“We The Peoples of the United Nations determined…to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,” — United Nations Charter Preamble (1945)

This is the second part in a series looking at the plans of the United Nations (UN) and its agencies designing and implementing the agenda of the Summit of the Future in New York on 22-23 September 2024, and its implications for global health, economic development, and human rights. Previously the impact on health policy of the climate agenda was analyzed.

The right to food once drove UN policy towards reducing hunger with a clear focus on low- and middle-income countries. Like the right to health, food has increasingly become a tool of cultural colonialism – the imposition of a narrow ideology of a certain Western mindset over the customs and rights of the ‘peoples’ that the UN represents. This article discusses how it happened and the dogmas on which it relies.

The Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the farming equivalent of the World Health Organization (WHO), was founded in 1945 as a specialized United Nations (UN) agency with a mission to “achieve food security for all.” Its motto “Fiat panis” (Let there be bread) reflects that mission. Headquartered in Rome, Italy, it counts 195 Member States, including the European Union. The FAO relies on more than 11,000 staff, with 30% being based in Rome.

Of its US$3.25 billion biennial 2022-23 budget, 31% comes from assessed contributions paid by Members, with the remainder being voluntary. A large share of voluntary contributions come from Western governments (US, EU, Germany, Norway), development banks (e.g. World Bank Group), and other lesser-known publicly- and privately-funded entities set up for assisting environmental conventions and projects (including the Global Environment Facility, Green Climate Fund and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation). Thus, like the WHO, most of its work now consists of implementing the dictates of its donors.

The FAO was instrumental in implementing the 1960s and 1970s Green Revolution, associated with a doubling in world food production that lifted many Asian and Latin American populations out of food insecurity. The use of fertilizers, pesticides, controlled irrigation, and hybridized seeds was considered a major achievement for hunger eradication, despite resulting pollution to soil, air, and water systems and facilitation of the emergence of new resistant strains of pests. The FAO was supported by the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR) founded in 1971 – a publicly funded group with the mission to conserve and improve seed varieties and their genetic pools. Private philanthropies, including the Rockefeller and Ford Foundations, also played supportive roles.

Successive World Food Summits held in 1971, 1996, 2002, 2009, and 2021 have punctuated the FAO’s history. At the second summit, world leaders committed themselves to “achieving food security for all and to an ongoing effort to eradicate hunger in all countries” and declared “the right of everyone to adequate food and the fundamental right of everyone to be free from hunger” (Rome Declaration on World Food Security).

Keep reading

‘Terrorist Organization’? What’s Behind the Israeli War on UNRWA

Targeting a school during a war could be justified or, at least, argued to have been a mistake. But striking over 120 schools, killing and wounding thousands of civilians sheltered inside, can only be intentional and horrific war crimes.

Between October 7 and July 18, Israel has done precisely that, targeting with total impunity, United Nations infrastructure in the besieged Gaza Strip.

The price has been horrific. According to UNRWA estimates, at least 561 internally displaced people in UNRWA shelters have been killed and 1,768 injured since the start of the war.

In fact, within a period of ten days, between July 8 and July 18, at least six UN-run schools which have served as makeshift shelters for displaced Palestinians have been targeted by the Israeli army, resulting in the killing and wounding of hundreds.

Historically, UN-linked organizations seemed to be somewhat immune from the impact of war on local populations. The privilege of being neutral outsiders to the conflict, allowed those affiliated with such organizations to carry out their duties largely unhindered.

The Israeli war on Gaza, however, is the primary exception among all modern conflicts. According to UN sources, 274 aid workers and over 500 healthcare workers have been killed.

These figures are consistent with all other numbers produced by the ongoing Israeli genocide in Gaza. Indeed, not a single category of people has been spared: neither doctors nor civil defense workers, nor mayors or even traffic police.

It was obvious from the very start of the war that Israel wanted to criminalize all Palestinians, not only those affiliated with Hamas or other groups, but the very civilian population and any international organization that came to their aid.

Blaming and dehumanizing all of Gaza was and remains part of an Israeli strategy that would allow the Israeli army to operate without any restraints, and without even the most minimal threshold of morality or respect for international law.

But the Israeli attacks on the UN, all its institutions, but particularly the UN agency responsible for the welfare of Gaza’s refugees (UNRWA), serve a different purpose than that of mere ‘collective punishment’.

Israel does not attempt to mask or justify its attacks on the organization as it did during previous Gaza wars. This time around, the Israeli war was accompanied, from the very start, with the outlandish accusation that UNRWA members had participated in the October 7 assault by Hamas and other Palestinian groups.

Without providing any evidence, Tel Aviv launched an international campaign of vilification against the UN organization which has, for decades, provided educational, medical and humanitarian services to millions of Palestinian refugees.

Keep reading

Leaks reveal Israel killed 366 UN staffers, family members in Gaza: Report

Hundreds of UN staff members and their family members have been killed by the Israeli army in Gaza, according to an unreleased UN report obtained by the Drop Site news outlet on 24 July. 

At least 195 UN staff and 172 of their dependents had been killed by Israeli forces by the end of June, the unreleased UN report states. The UN defines dependents as persons belonging to a staff member’s family who are formally recognized as financially reliant on that staff member.

The UN Crisis Coordination Centre found that five UN Development Program dependents, four UNICEF dependents, three World Food Programme (WFP) dependents, two World Health Organization (WHO) dependents, and 158 UNRWA dependents have been killed by Israeli forces. 

It had been reported in May that Israel had killed 188 members of UNRWA. UNRWA regularly releases situation reports detailing Tel Aviv’s targeting of staff members and facilities. 

UNRWA facilities have been the sites of numerous massacres committed by Israeli troops. 

However, these are the first numbers indicating the extent to which Israel has targeted the families of UN staff members. 

According to Drop Site, the report was circulated internally at the start of this month. The UN did not respond to a request for comment.

Over the weekend, on 21 July, a UN convoy came under heavy fire by Israeli forces despite prior coordination with the army. 

An Israeli airstrike on the UNRWA-run Abu Oreiban school in central Gaza’s Nuseirat Camp a week earlier, on 14 July, killed at least 15 people, just a day after the strike on southern Gaza’s Al-Mawasi that killed at least 90 and injured hundreds on 13 July. 

Tel Aviv has accused UNRWA members of involvement in Operation Al-Aqsa Flood on 7 October but has yet to provide evidence for its claims. 

Keep reading

UN Cybercrime Draft Convention Dangerously Expands State Surveillance Powers Without Robust Privacy, Data Protection Safeguards

As we near the final negotiating session for the proposed UN Cybercrime Treaty, countries are running out of time to make much-needed improvements to the text. From July 29 to August 9, delegates in New York aim to finalize a convention that could drastically reshape global surveillance laws. The current draft favors extensive surveillance, establishes weak privacy safeguards, and defers most protections against surveillance to national laws—creating a dangerous avenue that could be exploited by countries with varying levels of human rights protections.

The risk is clear: without robust privacy and human rights safeguards in the actual treaty text, we will see increased government overreach, unchecked surveillance, and unauthorized access to sensitive data—leaving individuals vulnerable to violations, abuses, and transnational repression. And not just in one country.  Weaker safeguards in some nations can lead to widespread abuses and privacy erosion because countries are obligated to share the “fruits” of surveillance with each other. This will worsen disparities in human rights protections and create a race to the bottom, turning global cooperation into a tool for authoritarian regimes to investigate crimes that aren’t even crimes in the first place.

Countries that believe in the rule of law must stand up and either defeat the convention or dramatically limit its scope, adhering to non-negotiable red lines as outlined by over 100 NGOs. In an uncommon alliance, civil society and industry agreed earlier this year in a joint letter urging governments to withhold support for the treaty in its current form due to its critical flaws.

Keep reading

UN’s Antonio Guterres unveils global game plan for surveillance, control and censorship

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres recently released a framework program titled “Global Principles for Information Integrity,” which outlines key recommendations on population control, surveillance and censorship.

The said project promotes the globalist rhetoric of ending “harmful misinformation, disinformation and hate speech” online. It claims to make information spaces safer while “upholding human rights such as the freedom of speech.”

“At a time when billions of people are exposed to false narratives, distortions and lies, these principles lay out a clear path forward, firmly rooted in human rights, including the rights to freedom of expression and opinion,” Guterres said, addressing the media at the UN headquarters in New York.

Guterres urged governments, tech companies, advertisers and the public relations (PR) industry to take responsibility for spreading and monetizing content that results in harm. He also demanded that the media and advertisers take control and establish official narratives while suppressing opposition.

For SHTF Plan‘s Mac Slavo, the international organization is building an information surveillance and control system that crafts authoritarian narratives that limit access to the truth. These will not only censor but will dictate and will police people on what to say and think and how to behave.

“The UN wants to create a world of simps who surrender their sovereignty and bow down to manipulative and abusive entities and false authorities,” Slavo said.

He added that Big Tech’s algorithms or automated review processes will be programmed to filter and remove content deemed objectionable or politically sensitive, including blocking websites, social media posts or entire platforms that would criticize their chosen stakeholders. Slavo further predicted possible internet shutdowns or access restrictions to specific websites in times of political unrest or during manufactured crises.

Keep reading

The UN Smothers the Peoples with Compassion

The United Nations (UN) Secretariat will hold the next Summit of the Future in New York on 22-23 September 2024. It is a vast political program covering the noblest of causes including poverty reduction, human rights, environment, climate change, development, and the welfare and rights of children, youth, and women. World leaders are expected to endorse a declaratory Pact for the Future, and commit to act toward its realization.

It all looks wonderful. As in days of old, the rich, powerful, and entitled are coming to rescue us from ourselves and make us live better lives. Freedom, after all, is intrinsically unsafe.

This is the first in a series that will look at the plans of the UN system designing and implementing this new agenda, covering implications for global health, economic development, and human rights.

Climate and Health at the WHO: Building the Authoritarian Dream

Amidst all the hype and posturing regarding the negotiations on pandemic texts at the recent 77th World Health Assembly (WHA) in Geneva (Switzerland), perhaps the most consequential resolution before the WHA slipped through, approved, but virtually unnoticed. The Resolution WHA77.14 on Climate Change and Health was approved without debate, opening the door for the World Health Organization (WHO) ─ a UN specialized agency ─ to claim a broad swath of normal human activity as a potential threat to health, and therefore coming under the purview of the WHO’s detached business-class bureaucrats.

It was highlighted by a Strategic Roundtable on “Climate change and health: a global vision for joint action,” where speakers, moderated by the Lancet’s Editor-in-Chief Richard Horton, included WHO Director-General (DG) Tedros Ghebreyesus, former US Vice President Al Gore (by video message), and CEO of the 28th Climate Conference of States Parties Adnan Amin. 

The Resolution was proposed by a coalition of 16 countries (Barbados, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador, Fiji, Georgia, Kenya, Moldova, Monaco, Netherlands, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Slovenia, United Arab Emirates, and the UK) and passed without changes, mandating the DG to: i) develop a “results-based, needs-oriented and capabilities-driven global WHO plan of action on climate change and health,” ii) serve as a global leader in the field of climate change and health by establishing a WHO Roadmap to Net Zero by 2030, and iii) report back to future WHA sessions.

United Nations System’s “Newspeak” on Climate Change

There is little surprise in this. It is another predictable move on the global climate chessboard. In the last decade, activities and documents from the UN system have increasingly included climate change as a “newspeak” to signal full compliance with the official narrative. 

The head of the UN system, Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, is known for pushing the narrative further. In 2019, he posed in water for a picture for Time Magazine’s coverage on “Our sinking planet.” Last summer, he announced that “the era of global warming has ended…the era of global boiling has arrived.”

On 2024 World Environment Day (5th June), he doubled down on his rhetoric: “In the case of climate, we are not the dinosaurs. We are the meteor. We are not only in danger. We are the danger.” We are, it appears, a poison on our planet.

Keep reading

UN Human Rights Experts Say Counties Should Legalize Drugs To ‘Eliminate Profits From Illegal Trafficking’

Dozens of United Nations (UN) human rights experts are championing a less-punitive approach to global drug policies, urging member nations to focus less on punishment and criminalization and more on harm reduction and public health while specifically calling for “decriminalisation of drug use and related activities, and the responsible regulation of all drugs to eliminate profits from illegal trafficking, criminality and violence.”

“The ‘war on drugs’ has resulted in a range of serious human rights violations, as documented by a number of UN human rights experts over the years,” says the statement from UN special rapporteurs, experts and working groups. “We collectively urge Member States and all UN entities to put evidence and communities at the centre of drug policies, by shifting from punishment towards support, and invest in the full array of evidence-based health interventions for people who use drugs, ranging from prevention to harm reduction, treatment and aftercare, emphasizing the need for a voluntary basis and in full respect of human rights norms and standards.”

The statement is not a defense of drug use but instead an insistence that nations’ overzealous fight against substances has failed to address health problems while creating harms of its own.

“These widespread abuses have included compulsory drug detention in the name of ‘treatment’, over incarceration and related prison overcrowding, the ongoing use of the death penalty for drug offences, killings, enforced disappearances and the ongoing lack of, and unequal access to treatment, harm reduction and essential medicines,” it says.

“The international community must seek to address and reverse the damage brought about by decades of a global ‘war on drugs,’” it says. “We note that states of exception and the militarization of law enforcement in the context of the ‘war on drugs’ continue to facilitate the commission of multiple and serious human rights violations… [W]e collectively call for an end to the militarisation of drug policy, overincarceration and prison overcrowding, the use of the death penalty for drug offences, and policies that disproportionately impact marginalised groups.”

Keep reading