Jasper-Global-Tyranny-Step-By-Step-The-United-Nations-and-the ...

often that people assume it must be true. However, only by some tortured application of Orwellian
"Newspeak" can the UN be referred to as a "peace" organization.
During the summer of 1945, Ambassador J. Reuben Clark, Jr., one of America’s foremost scholars in
the field of international law, prepared an analysis of the UN Charter. His learned appraisal and cogent
remarks fly in the face of popular platitudes and conventional "wisdom" concerning the "revered"
document. Ambassador Clark’s examination led him to conclude that the Charter "is a war document not
a peace document," and that it "is built to prepare for war, not to promote peace." The Ambassador
noted:
[T]here is no provision in the Charter itself that contemplates ending war. It is true the
Charter provides for force to bring peace, but such use of force is itself war.33
Moreover, said Ambassador Clark,
Not only does the Charter Organization not prevent future wars, but it makes practically
certain that we shall have future wars, and as to such wars it takes from us the power to
declare them, to choose the side on which we shall fight, to determine what forces and
military equipment we shall use in the war, and to control and command our sons who do
the fighting.34
The Ambassador’s predictions were soon borne out — first in Korea and then in Vietnam, the first two
wars America fought with UN involvement and the only two which the United States has ever failed to
win.35
Dr. J. B. Matthews, former chief investigator for the House Committee on Un-American Activities and
one of America’s outstanding scholars on Marxist-Leninist theory and practice, was but one of many
leading Americans who exposed the UN-as-peace-dove myth. Dr. Matthews was not one to mince
words. "I challenge the illusion that the UN is an instrument of peace," he said. "It could not be less of a
cruel hoax if it had been organized in Hell for the sole purpose of aiding and abetting the destruction of
the United States."36 Senator William Langer (R-ND), one of only two senators with enough courage
and foresight to vote against the UN Charter, said "I feel from the bottom of my heart that the adoption
of the Charter ... will mean perpetuating war."37
The UN’s monstrous war against the people of Katanga should forever lay to rest any reference to the
UN as a peace organization. The UN and its supporters may persist in the charade of calling the UN’s
warmaking powers "peacemaking" or "peacekeeping," but no sensible person of goodwill should give
the slightest credence to such patently deceitful abuse of language.
We cannot have peace as long as the world is divided into warring countries and
armaments continue to proliferate. Only a disarmed world under some world authority
offers an answer.
Observing that wars are most often between nations, many people mistakenly believe that nationhood
itself is the cause of war and have thus fallen for the fallacious argument that an "end to nationhood"
would mean an end to war. But what are the causes of war
The Apostle James asked this same question, "From whence come wars and fightings among you" And
he answered, "Come they not here, even of your lusts that war in your members Ye lust, and have not;
ye kill and desire to have, and cannot obtain; ye fight and war...." (James 4:1-2). His answer points us