-
- From where do our rights descend? The
Bill of Rights? No. The Constitution? No. The Federal government? No. The
United Nations? Certainly not. But, apparently, that's what Bill Clinton
thinks. For earlier this month, Dec. 10 to be exact, he issued another
one of his infamous executive orders -- this time on "the implementation
of human rights treaties." In Executive Order 13107, Clinton sets
up a new federal bureaucracy for the purpose of implementing U.N. treaties,
whether ratified by the U.S. Senate or not. And that federal bureaucracy
will implement the treaties on the U.N.'s terms.
-
- Sound like a deal? It gets worse.
-
- Though President Clinton said he issued
the order to further his goal of promoting human rights around the world,
it's important to understand exactly how the U.N. defines "human rights."
-
- That definition is offered in the Universal
Declaration of Human Rights, which talks about the right to freedom of
thought, conscience, religion, opinion, and expression. All good stuff,
until you realize whom the ultimate authority is. Who is the sovereign
that imparts such blessings upon the populace of the world?
-
- The answer to that question is stated
unequivocally in article 29 of the U.N. document, which states: "These
rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes
and principles of the United Nations."
-
- That pretty much explains who the "massa"
is and where the plantation boundaries end. What a stark contrast between
the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, and the founding documents of the
United States of America. The Declaration of Independence and Constitution
both make it clear that basic human rights are inalienable, meaning they
descend from the ultimate Sovereign, the Creator, God. Therefore, no human
authority, no government, no criminal, no individual can abrogate or abridge
those rights.
-
- Remember, any right government can bestow
upon a people, it can just as easily take away. This is a profound principle
Americans have forgotten. The day they accept the principle that rights
descend from government authority is the day they lose their freedoms.
It's as simple as that.
-
- In effect, that is what Executive Order
13107 decrees. It's an attempt by Bill Clinton to persuade Americans that
human rights descend not from God but from worldly government authorities
-- with the ultimate authority represented by the United Nations.
-
- In other words, the U.N. believes people
have the right to dissent, unless it's a dissent against the United Nations.
It reminds me of the old Soviet model. There it was even more bluntly stated:
"There can be no place for freedom of speech, press, and so on for
the foes of socialism." Basically, the U.N. has rewritten that maxim:
"There can be no place for freedom of speech, press, and so on for
the foes of the United Nations."
-
- The U.N. practices what it preaches,
too. In Bosnia, the U.N. forces have seized control of radio and TV stations
broadcasting pro-Serbian news and propaganda. In fact, U.S. troops participated
in those raids. How does one justify such actions under the U.S. Constitution,
which explicitly recognizes the rights of all people -- not just Americans
-- to speak their minds and express themselves freely?
-
- Welcome to the Brave New World of U.N.
doublespeak. And President Clinton is dragging the U.S. deeper into this
quagmire than has any other president in history.
-
- Not only does Executive Order 13107 promote
an unworthy and dangerous goal, but the road to that objective, namely
the executive order itself the way Bill Clinton has employed it, is a corrupt
and unconstitutional process.
-
- Executive orders are supposed to be a
presidential tool for running the executive branch of government. Clinton
has used them freely during his terms in office to make policy affecting
other branches of government, the states, and individuals. Now, with 13107,
he's attempting to implement international treaties! Executive orders were
never intended to be used as imperial orders.
-
- Once again, though, the only people with
the authority to curb the misuse of executive orders are the members of
Congress, who have 30 days from the issuance of an order to reject it by
majority vote. Trouble is, they seldom bother to read them. And the press
seldom bothers to cover them -- even when they represent sweeping new interpretations
of human rights and compromises of U.S. national sovereignty.
-
- It's time for Congress not only to reject
Executive Order 13107, but also to review, in the context of the ongoing
impeachment process, all of President Clinton's more than 200 executive
orders. In both substance and in intent, they represent one of the worst
abuses of power in an administration characterized by abuse of power.
-
- A daily radio broadcast adaptation of
Joseph Farah's commentaries can be heard at http://www.ktkz.com/
|
