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.
- PREVIOUS STORY:
“None dare call it fascism.”