21 October, 2021

Here Comes the End of Sovereignty and Therefore the End of the White World

Posted by Socrates in NATO, sovereignty, treaties, UN, UN Charter, UN founders, UN Security Council mandates at 2:06 pm | Permanent Link

(Above: the UN godfather, and Jewish state department official, Leo Pasvolsky)

“That brings us to Agenda 2030. This Agenda puts forward a plan for a new soft world government by the year 2030. It was a plan adopted unanimously by the U.N. on September 25, 2015, and has 91 sections. The Agenda covers every aspect of human experience and thus is a government without using the word government.”

Well, well. “That little rat Pasvolsky’s UN” is at it again! (to quote former Secretary of State Dean Acheson [1893–1971]). Leo Pasvolsky was a Jewish Marxist and globalist, and was originally from Russia. He wrote the UN Charter. It took him 6 years to complete. Note that NATO sprang from Chapter VII of the UN Charter. So Pasvolsky birthed two major globalist entities. Pretty impressive for a little, bald zhid [1].

The UN is an illegitimate organization because its policies interfere with the natural sovereignty of all countries. “Natural sovereignty” means: the individual countries make all of the decisions regarding what does, and doesn’t, occur within the boundaries of their countries. Under such sovereignty, outsiders — like the UN — cannot make decisions for the sovereign countries. Globalism kills sovereignty like poison kills ants [2][3]. The UN’s Agenda 2030 must not be allowed to happen. The White Western world will cease to exist if it happens. Agenda 2030 is completely against America’s national interests. Indeed, why have an “America” after you agree to a global government? Global government will cancel out America.

[Article].

.
.

[1] Pasvolsky’s New York Times obituary is subtitled “Wrote Charter of World Organization.”

[2] Globalism means, for example: being involved with the UN, UNESCO, UNICEF, NATO, the EU, WHO, The Trilateral Commission, The Council on Foreign Relations, the IMF, the World Bank, Organization of American States (OAS) and WTO. There are currently about 25 major globalist groups (i.e., groups with multi-million-dollar yearly budgets) and about 1,000 minor globalist groups.

[3] the UN Security Council routinely violates the sovereignty of countries, e.g., by creating “no-fly zones” in those countries. That’s a direct violation of natural sovereignty. Unless treaties have been incorporated into domestic laws by federal laws, then treaties are not binding and so the UN’s Agenda 2030, which is a treaty (an international agreement) is total crap. Also, a treaty has to serve the national interests of a country. How does “giving up our sovereignty to globalism” serve America’s national interests? IT DOESN’T!


  1. Similar posts:

  2. 08/08/19 Natural Sovereignty vs. Global Government: Which One Will Win? 78% similar
  3. 08/16/21 Thoughts on Globalism and the One-World Movement 68% similar
  4. 12/08/17 The Comintern: Not Dead. Very Much Alive. Or, a World Parliament is Almost Here 67% similar
  5. 08/31/13 Syria, America, the UN and Global Government 63% similar
  6. 06/16/20 What Sovereignty Means at the UN 56% similar
  7. Comments are closed.