If we, as a free republic, need another reason to leave the United Nations and kick this world organization out of the united States, we should look no further than UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres’ New Year’s proclamation.
In his annual address to all nations, Guterres declared all nations in the world should unite to “fight nationalism, xenophobia, and climate change.”
According to Guterres, this was not an appeal, but a red alert.
As we begin 2018, I am issuing a red alert for our world. I call for unity – our future depends on it. pic.twitter.com/fWtTa1irM3
— António Guterres (@antonioguterres) December 31, 2017
Dear friends around the world,
Happy New Year.
When I took office one year ago, I appealed for 2017 to be a year for peace.
Unfortunately – in fundamental ways, the world has gone in reverse.
On New Year’s Day 2018, I am not issuing an appeal. I am issuing an alert — a red alert for our world.
Conflicts have deepened and new dangers have emerged.
Global anxieties about nuclear weapons are the highest since the Cold War.
Climate change is moving faster than we are.
Inequalities are growing.
We see horrific violations of human rights.
Nationalism and xenophobia are on the rise.
As we begin 2018, I call for unity.
I truly believe we can make our world more safe and secure.
We can settle conflicts, overcome hatred and defend shared values.
But we can only do that together.
I urge leaders everywhere to make this New Year’s resolution: Narrow the gaps. Bridge the divides. Rebuild trust by bringing people together around common goals.
Unity is the path.
Our future depends on it.
I wish you peace and health in 2018. Thank you. Shokran. Xie Xie. Merci. Spasiba. Gracias. Obrigado.
Now, if this doesn’t sound like a world-wide call for governments to bear down upon their people if those people are not on board with the vision of one world government, what does?
And, with his issuing of the statement, Guterres placed himself as the “go to” man for the solution, saying, “Narrow the gaps. Bridge divides. Rebuild trust by bringing people together around common goals.”
Well, thank you, Mr. Guterres, for exposing the complete idiot that you are.
Guterres recognized that world conflicts have deepened and “new dangers have emerged”; however, he listed conflicts and dangers that he considered paramount.
The global anxiety over nuclear weapons heightened with the assertion of Kim Jong Un’s North Korea flexing its “nuclear bicep” threatening an unleashing of nuclear devices upon the united States and the US territory of Guam, while poking South Korea into a nervous twitch.
Kim Jong Un had no provocation from any other nation to warrant his “nuclear bicep” flexion.
And, if tweets by Donald Trump are considered provocation for unleashing nuclear devices, Kim Jong Un exposed his insecurities, pension for war and warmongering, and extreme personality disorders.
Since former president Bill “Slick Willie” Clinton forged the deal with North Korea to deter the unstable nation the ability to obtain nuclear weapons (joke, that it is), the attainment of the ability to create a nuclear device and the responsibility to refrain from using it rests now in the hands of a narcissistic, self-absorbed, mentally ill, tiny man.
This summed up the eight years of Hussein Soetoro as well.
As a by-product of “Slick Willie’s” deal, North Korea exchanged nuclear technology with Iran, prompting Obama to enter a “deal” with Iran that almost mimicked the North Korea deal made by Clinton in the 90s.
Yes, new dangers emerged and conflicts deepened for many reasons, but not because of the reasons Guterres cited. Conflicts have deepened because of the growing push toward globalism – one world government – by the United Nations, unelected European bureaucracies, individual European governments filled with ideologists instead of realists, certain entities inside the US government, and those seeking to line their pockets through wealth redistribution under the farce of combating climate change.
Guterres listed growing inequalities, horrific human rights violations, and increased nationalism and xenophobia as some of these conflicts and new dangers.
Yet, he applied this to an entire world of nations when some of these conflicts and new dangers are specific to certain nations.
Looking closer and reading a bit between the lines, as one needs to do when dealing with globalists, one could say Guterres targeted the united States in his chastisement of refusing to relinquish sovereignty to the UN, leaving the climate “church” of Al Gore, and exercising our patriotism and protection for our culture in enforcing our immigration laws.
One cannot take Guterres identification of growing inequalities seriously because there always has been and will be inequalities among people of different nations and within a nation itself.
The reason growing inequality made the list is the desire of Guterres to bring wealthy nations down to the level of third world poverty while retaining poverty in the third world nations.
Individuals possess varying levels of intelligence, skill, talent, and education, meaning there will be individuals who attain more than others and those who will attain less.
Nations are composed of individuals coalescing into one group for a common purpose.
Industrialized nations have very different purposes than non-industrialized nations.
To make all nations equal, as well as individuals, it requires lowering standards to the lowest common denominator bringing down wealthy nations to a poverty state while maintaining the poverty state in poor nations.
In Guterres’ fantasyland, the United Nations would govern all nations, which would exist in a poverty state.
While mentioning human rights violations, Guterres omitted the specific nations where human rights violations are part and parcel of the law – Islamic nations and totalitarian oppressive regimes like North Korea.
Considering that “democracies” are the minority of represented nations within the United Nations, Guterres generalized human rights violations as a problem/conflict/danger for all nations, which it technically is; however, much of this surfaced with the “war on terror” in the US and Europe, continuing through to the Islamic invasion of the western world.
Plainly, nations governed by the theocracy of Islam violated human rights on a massive scale, particularly where women and girls are concerned, and communist/socialist nations engaged in human rights violations to control the population.
Moreover, only through additional human rights violations can one world government exist and retain power and control.
Guterres somehow thinks that “global unity” will stop all of this (highly unlikely).
However, he cited nationalism and xenophobia a conflict/new danger in order to identify this attitude as a stumbling block to a unified world under one government.
The protection and preservation of one’s culture – nationalism – is natural in the face of invasion as Europe experienced and will continue to experience with the influx of individuals who do not share the same values and common goals.
When nations exert their sovereignty to determine who should be admitted into that nation to live in order to avoid conflicts and social unrest, globalists labeled the populations of these nations and their government xenophobes.
So, national sovereignty became problematic for Guterres; so problematic, he listed xenophobia and nationalism as stumbling blocks to the fantasy of one world government.
One can surely bet Guterres means to manipulate gullible individuals in the varying nations’ governments to silence opposition to the fantasyland of one world government, subjugating all to the overwhelming majority of oppressive, totalitarian regimes and theocracies disguised as religion.
Basically, one could say Guterres called for governments to engage in further human rights violations, as well as dissolution of the sovereignty of nations, to form a one world government in a New Year’s address disguised as a message of “hope.”
Now that President Trump has shortened the US purse strings to the UN, the rest of the maneuver should be completed – deny the UN all US funding, remove the UN from American soil, and remove the US from the UN.
For a body created to lessen conflict between nations to avoid world wars, the UN failed miserably since there is more conflict among nations, as well as within, since its creation.
It is long overdue for this farce of an organization, which sucks money from US taxpayers and other nations, to be dissolved – nations should not through good money after bad.