UN Goals Unveiled: Peaceful Societies–Recovering from Conflict and Nurturing Peace

Do people notice hypocrisy any more? When, for instance, millionaire Bernie Sanders trots around the world in his private jet pimping Socialism and chastising the rest of us for causing climate change… does anyone bat an eye? Ditto for Al Gore and many others. What's missing is critical thinking, a skill no longer taught in government indoctrination centers. What they do teach under that name is a form of "social justice" thinking and "values clarification" that is nothing more than humanistic brainwashing.

In today's article we will learn about peace, love, and respect from the UN. What could go wrong?

Buzz Buzz Buzz
Once again, we must separate fact from fiction, and rhetoric from reality. In this Thematic Session description, as in all the others, fine language and emotional buzzwords are used to appeal to the non-critical thinker. But that's not us. Let's take this thing apart, shall we?

Let's start with the overall goal. The UN claims to be able to do something that has never been done in the history of the earth: bring peace to the world. On a similar note, here in Idaho we have signs all along the highway, with a picture of a seatbelt, proclaiming the slogan "Towards Zero Deaths." When I first saw these, I mentioned to my wife that "zero deaths" sounds like such a noble goal, but it is completely impossible without taking away our freedoms, because there is no freedom without risk! Likewise, there can never be absolute peace in the world without brainwashing a la 1984, and/or an absolute dictatorship that has removed all freedoms.

This is the "peace" promised by Communism. Real world examples include China, North Korea, the Soviet Union, Vietnam, and Cuba. You murder everyone who could theoretically pose a threat, and then keep everyone else under your boot. Hooray for peace!

The Definition Of A Nation
In this description, they also complain about "increasing skepticism regarding the viability and effectiveness of multilateral approaches to peacebuilding." Multilateral, according to my dictionary, is defined as something "agreed upon or participated in by three or more parties, especially the governments of different countries". To understand why this is a concern, we must understand what a country is. At its most basic, we could use the definition espoused by radio host Michael Savage, who says that a country is defined by its "borders, language, and culture." This makes sense because at some point in time a group of people claimed an area of land, ie, established borders, in order to have a distinct culture. Over time their language became distinct, as well. And so you have a country.

"We will no longer be governed by you," they said to their country of origin. "We will govern ourselves, instead!" This makes sense, as well, because a group only has the right to govern themselves, not anyone else. Each country has distinct borders, language, and culture, so their laws makes sense to them, but people in other areas may not understand why things are the way they are. They want to have things a different way. That's fine. Everyone should have the right to choose their own laws and leaders.

Of course, many countries have NOT chosen their laws or leaders, but have instead had these things forced upon them, and this includes most of the countries in the United Nations. The same ones that want to "multilaterally" approach "peacebuilding." Now do you see the problem? If everyone minded their own business, we would all be much happier.

I'm looking at you, America!

A TSA/CPS Agent's Dream Job
Of course, the United Nations also meddles everywhere, and that's just one point of irony. The other is that this Thematic Session is supposedly devoted to "Recovering from Conflict and Nurturing Peace" while the UN is anything but neutral when there is a conflict, and they bring anything but peace to the areas they infest! Taking another page out of 1984, the UN troops are referred to as "peacekeepers." But did you know that there is horrendous and widespread sexual abuse of women and children whenever they bring their "peace" into town? Here is an article from 2006 on the UN's own website, one from 2016 specifically mentioning "child rape" and discussing the 99 "allegations" from the year before (2015), and one from 2017 that points out that the "145 cases of [reported] sexual exploitation and abuse involving peacekeepers in 2016" came from "across all UN staff, not just peacekeepers." Well, that's comforting. This article, also from 2017, discusses many specific incidents, including "When at least 134 Sri Lankan peacekeepers were implicated in a child sex ring." This 2018 article informs us that "Few UN personnel have faced jail (the current number stands at 30), with even fewer being fined, demoted or removed from office." Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy. This is apparently how the UN "nurtures peace" in areas that are "recovering from conflict."

Did I mention that we are talking about THE RAPE OF WOMEN AND CHILDREN? Just wanted to throw that out there, as you ponder how seriously this is being taken by the UN.

The articles linked to above are not exclusive, and this issue unfortunately did not begin in 2006. This Human Rights Watch article from 2016 is the first of these to mention that "Exploitation and abuse by UN peacekeepers and personnel has been reported since the 1990s." 

From the first 2017 article, above, we learn:

Well, duh! It's the same problem with police in America, or the KGB in the Soviet Union! They see themselves as the top of the food chain! Who's going to stop them, other cops? Ha!

Safeguarding Our Future
We've all heard that "when the wicked rule the people mourn," (D&C 98:9, Prov. 29:2), but what should be of greater concern to us is the warning in the Book of Mormon that "ye cannot dethrone an iniquitous king save it be through much contention, and the shedding of much blood." (Mosiah 29:21) Who will you turn to when you are abused by a tyrannical world government? Where will you go? "The shedding of much blood," indeed.

Oh, and in case you were wondering, "An AP investigation earlier this year found around 2,000 allegations of sexual exploitation and abuse have been registered between 2005-2017." So there's really no reason people should be concerned about UN involvement in their area, is there? Notice that this number does not include anything from the 1990's up to 2005, nor explain why. We'll leave that to your imagination.

Usurpation Of Delegated Authority
Because a nation's borders keep their people safe, they are one of the top concerns of that nation's government. In America, this is one of the few Constitutional powers of the federal government–to protect our shared borders. Why would a nation care about the security of another nation's borders? It has nothing to do with them, especially when "protecting borders" means sending your own men and women to die. Yet, "The United Nations Charter gives the United Nations Security Council the power and responsibility to take collective action to maintain international peace and security." (United Nations peacekeeping", Wikipedia) This is the sovereign right of a nation, remember? If the UN was not already a de facto world government, why would they be involved? And why would nations let them?

Yes, our birthright has been sold, America, and unfortunately we aren't the only ones.

By now you should have a pretty good idea of the utter absurdity and hypocrisy of the United Nations condescending to tell the world how it might "have peace" and "recover from conflicts."

As the John Birch Society has long urged, it's time to "Get the UN out of the US and get the US out of the UN!" We have a Constitution so that we can govern ourselves.



UPDATE (2019-08-21): Please listen to the Defending Utah episode above! Ben touches on many other reasons the UN is not an entity of peace!