Three documents the UN is hoping will be adopted by 193 nations at a summit in 10 days lack transparency and use ambiguous language.
The ‘Pact for the Future’ dilutes the paramount importance of human rights.
The ‘Declaration on Future Generations’ raises questions about who can legitimately represent the interests of hypothetical future generations.
And the ‘Global Digital Compact’ is an attempt by the UN to place itself in the driver’s seat to manage and control the digital revolution for all nations.
With these three documents, the UN is pushing for centralised global governance with itself at the helm.
The Summit of the Future being held on 22-23 September, was initiated by Secretary-General Antonio Guterres through his 2021 report entitled ‘Our Common Agenda’; an agenda to “forge a new global consensus on what our future should look like.”
The UN’s aim is that the Summit will adopt the Pact for the Future with its annexes the Declaration on Future Generations and Global Digital Compact.
The following is a precis of an article written by David Bell and Thi Thuy Van Dinh and published by the Brownstone Institute. You can read the full article HERE.
In the draft Pact for the Future, the UN describes global crises that call for global governance. But can we trust the scriptwriter who is the only contestant for that governor’s seat?
The trust in the UN was seriously undermined in 2020, as the UN’s World Health Organisation’s policies led to mass impoverishment, loss of education, child marriage, and rising rates of preventable diseases. The response has been to blame the virus, not the unscientific approach.
While covering up these crimes against humanity and avoiding accountability, the UN and world leaders intend to approve a set of 3 political, non-binding documents:
- a Pact for the Future,
- a Declaration on Future Generations, and
- a Global Digital Compact.
All were placed under “silence procedure” and were planned to be approved with little discussion.
The latest version of the Pact for the Future (“Pact”) was released on 27 August 2014. The co-facilitators, Germany and Namibia, proposed to place it under “silence procedure” until 3 September. This meant that without objections, the text was declared adopted. Currently, there isn’t enough publicly available information to know whether it happened.
Paragraph 9 of the Preamble marks a major break from, and a misunderstanding of, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“UDHR”) and the underlying tenets of modern international human rights law:
By equating “sustainable development” and “peace and security” with “human rights,” this is a dangerous slope even for a non-binding text as it has removed human rights from being paramount for the UN and good governance.
2 comments:
USA does not need UN, kick them all out, problem solved, IMO! Trump wanted to do this, wish had, and now we all know why, IMO
“United” nations. Hardly. If the entire organization was shut down tomorrow, very few would notice the difference. They certainly are trying very hard to make themselves relevant in coordination with WHO at the behest of the satanic order of those behind the WEF.
Post a Comment