Prabhupada

So that is the cause of world trouble: the crowlike men, the doglike men, the hoglike men

720820S2.LA                  Lectures  
So that is the cause of world trouble: the crowlike men, the doglike men, the hoglike men. So we have to create paramahamsas, good men. Then you can expect peace and prosperity. If you create cats and dogs, then how can you expect that there will be peace, there will be no war, there will be no disturbance? No. Paramo nirmatsaranam satam vastavam vastu vedyam atra. So this Krsna consciousness movement is trying to create a population of paramahamsa. That is our propaganda. We are not trying to create a class of men like crows or cats and dogs, but like the hamsas. Of course, it is very difficult. When you try to create some M.A. passed boys and girls, their number will be very little, because anything valuable, the customer is very little. If you want to see jewel, in the jewelry shop hardly you'll find one customer in a day, or two customer in a day. But in a beef shop or a meat shop you'll find hundreds of. You see?
   So as soon as the thing is valuable, the number of customers will be less. So don't consider the quality of the good by estimation of the number of customers. The customer may be very little, but you, in our Krsna consciousness movement, you will please try to understand what kind of things we are going to deliver. Don't try to understand that "These people have not very many customers." The customers will be less because we have so many restriction. So people do not like it. Everyone thinks, "Why I shall be restricted? I shall be free." But actually, he is not free. Just like the dog thinks that he is very free, but he's chained up, similarly, every one of us are chained up by the laws of material nature. We cannot go even an inch beyond the laws of material nature. You cannot eat more what you can digest. The law of nature immediately will try to inflict punishment upon you. This is practical experience. You have to eat as much as you require. If you eat more, then you get indigestion, and if you eat less, then you become weak. You have to eat exactly what you require. That is the law of nature. Similarly, these Krsna consciousness boys and girls, they are being taught not to eat more, not to eat less, not to enjoy senses more, not to enjoy less. Similarly, the paramahamsa life is a regulated life.

In these two wars God is the hero

660415BG.NY                  Lectures  
Now, there, there is another example. In India there were... Why India? In this world. As in the, within our memory, there are two great wars, world war number one, world war number two. We have experienced. So I think some of you or many of you have not experienced what is the war number one in 1914 it was started, and I think none of you were born in 19... (laughs) So I have seen I was a child at that time. The war was declared in 1914. So beyond these two world wars, there were, there were another two great world wars. That is mentioned in the history of the epics, epics of India, Ramayana and Mahabharata: the war between Rama and Ravana and the war between the two cousin-brothers, Kurus and Pandava. But you'll be surprised. In these two wars God is the hero, practically. In the war between Rama and Ravana... Rama is also the Personality of Godhead, incarnation of... And Krsna was also present... In two wars the God is present. You see? God is present. You see? And Hanuman. Hanuman, for the sake of pleasing the Lord, he set fire to the empire of Ravana, to the empire of the Ravana. And here also you find that Arjuna, he fought for the sake of the Supreme Lord Krsna. So fighting, fighting is not bad, provided it is fought for the, for pleasing the Supreme Lord. And fighting is also necessary sometimes. So we cannot make the world nonviolent. Everything will remain. In the laws of nature, everything will remain. The sex life will remain. The fighting will remain. And whatever we are seeing in our experience, everything will remain, will continue to remain. You cannot abolish a drop of it. But the whole process is that we have to purify, purify it.

This was also World War, this Battlefield of Kuruksetra

660307BG.NY                  Lectures  
So that is one theory. But here Lord Krsna says that "Myself, yourself, and all others who have come here..." There were about sixty millions of people assembled in that fight. It was not a small fight. In India there was... Of course, that was also great world, world war. Just like we had experience... I think in the First World War none of you had seen because you were all young men. And we were child. When the First World War was declared, we were all boys, schoolchildren. My age was at that time fourteen years old, in 1914, when there was fight declared between Germany and Belgium. So that was the First World War. Then Second World War was in 1939. That was also German and Englishmen, like that. But actually, this was also World War, this Battlefield of Kuruksetra, because all the kings of the world, they joined either this party or that party. So there were a great assembly of all worldly kings. Now, Krsna says that "Either Myself, either yourself, or these persons who have assembled here, they are individual. They were individuals in the past, they are now individuals, and they will continue to be individual even after annihilation of this body." Now, how you'll adjust? There are two theories, that after liberation all these souls, they become one. Just like all drops of water, if you put into the sea, they become one entity. There is no distinction. And the Lord Krsna says that "No, they keep their individuality. They do not mix." Now we are supposed... We are all laymen. We are ignorant, what is actually position, what is the actual position. But we have got our discretion also. Just like every one of you has some knowledge in the history. Now, in the history in the past... Suppose you are now thirty years old or thirty- five years old, and suppose two hundred years before, the history which you read, you find that all people were individuals. And at the present you are experiencing that all individual, they are. All living entities--either human being, or animals or birds, or anywhere--you can see that they are individual. Then why should you not believe that in future they will remain individual? Do you follow? In the past they were individuals, in the present they are individuals, and why not in future they'll remain individuals? It is naturally concluded that they will continue to be individuals. Even we do not have any sufficient knowledge in either of these two theories, mixing up or keeping individual, but by our own small reasoning we can understand that in the future history we have information that there were individual persons. At the present moment also, we are seeing that there are individual persons. So why not in the future? How it is that in the future they'll mix up and become one, homogeneous thing? It is quite reasonable. And this conclusion is like this: just like in two hundred years before, in the month of March, the climatic position was like this. And in 1966 we find in March the climatic position is exactly the same. And in future... Naturally I conclude that in future in March the same climatic condition will be there. In astronomy also, if you find that in March, in such and such date, the sun rising is like this, and actually in the present March, month of March, 1966, we see the same exact time... And the whole calculation of astronomy is made like that. They prepare hundred years' astronomical charts. Hundred years'. How they do prepare? By this calculation, that in the past it was like this, at the present it is like this, so naturally, in future it will be like this. Just like you are speaking of the imminent springtime, that the nature, how will be decorate, how springtime, it will be nice, because you had past experience. So you are foretelling. It is not foretelling. From past experience, you are telling that this will take place. This will take place.

Although the Allies were apparently victorious, at least on paper, actually neither of them were victorious

SB 7.1.8       The Supreme Lord Is Equal to Everyone  
According to this statement of the Bhagavata-sandarbha, the Supreme Lord, being always transcendental to the material qualities, is never affected by the influence of these qualities. This same characteristic is also present in the living being, but because he is conditioned by material nature, even the pleasure potency of the Lord is manifested in the conditioned soul as troublesome. In the material world the pleasure enjoyed by the conditioned soul is followed by many painful conditions. For instance, we have seen that in the two great wars, which were conducted by the rajo-guna (passion) and tamo-guna (ignorance), both parties were actually ruined. The German people declared war against the English to ruin them, but the result was that both parties were ruined. Although the Allies were apparently victorious, at least on paper, actually neither of them were victorious. Therefore it should be concluded that the Supreme Personality of Godhead is not partial to anyone. Everyone works under the influence of various modes of material nature, and when the various modes are prominent, the demigods or demons appear victorious under the influence of these modes.

The Scent of Feminist Desperation

by Henry Makow Ph.D.

(Slightly revised from "Feminist at the End of Her Rope," July 11, 2008)

What better example of stupid, self-defeating behavior than this advice from  a veteran feminist?In an article entitled "Marry Him" (Atlantic Monthly, March 2008)  Lori Gottlieb advises her sisters to "settle"--marry anything  in sight...and fast.  This kind of abject surrender, while satisfying in an "I told you so" way, is also sad.

Millions of women who outsourced their common sense and trusted the media, their teachers, their leaders and their society are now high-and-dry. They were told they could have it all but most can't.

There are three times as many single women in their 30's now than there were in the 1970's. By the time these women have established their careers, many are too thread bare and hard bitten to marry, and the good men are all gone.

They are the victims of the most evil, most successful,social engineering program in history. It was  designed to give women career instead of family. But until feminists acknowledge that they are victims of a cruel hoax, they won't be able to salvage whatever is left.

I'll elaborate later but first Ill give you a taste of the wisdom of a woman who defines "pathetic."

MS The BOAT

Ms. Gottlieb begins by describing a picnic where she and a friend (both mothers of sperm donor babies) are not feeling "satisfied." Surprise. They miss not having husbands. No doubt the children will miss not having fathers.

"Ask any soul-baring 40-year-old single heterosexual woman what she longs for in life...what she really wants is a husband..." Gottlieb confesses.

While she and her friends "still call ourselves feminists and insist we're independent and self sufficient...every woman I know--no matter how successful and ambitious, how financially and emotionally secure, feels panic ..if she hits 30 and find herself unmarried."

Sounding very much like a Jewish hysteric, her advice is to "Settle!" Forget about true love, his annoying habits, his halitosis or abysmal sense of aesthetics. Marriage, she has discovered, is about having a team-mate, even if he's not the love of your life. She even recommends gays as possible mates.

How did she end up like this? Too much "education" I imagine. Too much feminist empowerment and Hollywood- fueled expectations of romance and men. Earlier in life, she dumped someone because, although they had "strong physical chemistry" and their sensibilities were similar,  they proved to be "a half-note off, so we never quite felt in harmony, or never viewed the world through quite the same lens."

Apparently, she was looking for a clone.

"Now, though, I realize that if I don't want to be alone for the rest of my life, I'm at the age where I'll likely need to settle for someone who is settling for me. .. We lose sight of our mortality. We forget that we, too, will age and become less alluring. ...Which is all the more reason to settle before settling is no longer an option."

"Take the date I went on last night. The guy was substantially older. He had a long history of major depression and said, in reference to the movies he was writing, "I'm fascinated by comas" and "I have a strong interest in terrorists." He'd never been married. He was rude to the waiter. But he very much wanted a family, and he was successful, handsome, and smart. As I looked at him from across the table, I thought, Yeah, I'll see him again. Maybe I can settle for that. But my very next thought was, maybe I can settle for better. It's like musical chairs--when do you take a seat, any seat, just so you're not left standing alone?

"But then my married friends say things like, "Oh, you're so lucky, you don't have to negotiate with your husband about the cost of piano lessons" or "You're so lucky, you don't have anyone putting the kid in front of the TV and you can raise your son the way you want." I'll even hear things like, "You're so lucky, you don't have to have sex with someone you don't want to."

"The lists go on, and each time, I say, "OK, if you're so unhappy, and if I'm so lucky, leave your husband! In fact, send him over here!"

"Not one person has taken me up on this offer."

Did I say Pathetic? 

COMMENTARY

My advice to single women in their 30's-40's is -Do Not Panic. Do not "Settle." You are far better off alone than with a misfit. Also, whatever you do, do not have a child out-of-wedlock or from a sperm bank. That diminishes your chances of marriage big-time. Gottlieb is desperate to "settle" mainly because she has an infant on her hands.

The key thing to realize is that feminism was not spontaneous grass roots social change as portrayed. It was social engineering  designed to phase out gender, marriage and the nuclear family. There are half as many nuclear families now than there were in the 1960's. The destruction of the family is part of a larger agenda to destabilize and depopulate society in advance of a thinly veiled totalitarian world government.

Sexual liberation is part of this agenda. Men see no reason to marry now that unfettered sex is so plentiful. I advise women to consecrate sex for long-term loving relationships and end them in 6-8 mos. if marriage is not imminent. Don't waste time on window shoppers.

Feminists have been neutered by adopting the male role model and eschewing the feminine one. They need to rediscover their natural feminine instincts. This involves finding a man they can believe in, and nurture, and not settling for less. True love stems from the sacrifice that women make for the person they love. Let him lead and keep quiet about all his faults. But don't let him take you for granted and dump him if he doesn't love you back (i.e look after your interests and needs.)

Generally speaking, the people behind elite social engineering are satanists in the sense they want to override God (Truth) AND Nature. They deliberately do evil against humanity.

Women were designed to marry and have children in their late teens and early twenties. That's when they are irresistible to young men. They should marry men who have graduated and are starting their careers.

Raising children is not an afterthought. It is what married people do together, what they have in common. It's natural growth, both  biological and in terms of our personal development and fulfillment.

Nature doesn't give rain checks, as millions of women are discovering, the hard way.

Vedic Perspective

740115SB.HAW                 Lectures
                    Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.16.19
                                --
                     Hawaii, January 15, 1974

Pradyumna: (leads chanting, etc.)

                           dharma uvaca
                kaccid bhadre 'namayam atmanas te
                  vicchayasi mlayatesan mukhena
                   alaksaye bhavatim antaradhim
                  dure bandhum socasi kancanamba

Translation: "Dharma, in the form of a bull, asked: Madam, are you not hale and hearty? Why are you covered with the shadow of grief? It appears by your face that you have become black. Are you suffering from some internal disease, or are you thinking of some relative who is away in a distant place?"
Prabhupada: You can read the purport; it's small.
Pradyumna: "The people of the world in this age of Kali are always full of anxieties. Everyone is diseased with some kind of ailment. From the very faces of the people of this age, one can find out the index of the mind. Everyone feels the absence of his relative who is away from home. The particular symptom of the age of Kali is that no family is now blessed to live together. To earn a livelihood, the father lives at a place far away from the son, or the wife lives far away from the husband and so on. There are sufferings from internal diseases, separation from those near and dear, and anxieties for maintaining the status quo. These are but some important factors which make the people of this age always unhappy."
Prabhupada: So this age of Kali, we have discussed in the previous verses, is very degraded age. In the beginning, there is Satya-yuga; and next, Treta-yuga; next, Dvapara-yuga; and this is the Kali-yuga. The aggregate of all these four yugas is called yuga: sahasra-yuga-paryantam ahar yad brahmano viduh. The duration of Satya-yuga is 1,800,000's of years; and the next, Treta-yuga, roughly 1,200,000's of years; and Dvapara-yuga, 800,000's of years; and this Kali-yuga, 432,000's of years. So we are in this Kali-yuga. In this Kali-yuga we have passed only five thousand years. Out of 432,000's of years we have passed only five thousand. Since the Battle of Kuruksetra, which took place five thousand years ago, the Kali-yuga has begun.
   So this chapter is on the subject matter, "How Pariksit Received the Age of Kali." We are studying this chapter at the present moment. In Los Angeles we were studying, and again, after that, we are presenting. So Kali-yuga is not very good age, simply faults. We have several times discussed that in this age, people's duration of life, mercifulness, bodily strength and so many things, eight kinds of things, will be reduced. The age is reducing; the bodily strength is also reducing. Now you American generation, you are not as strong as your father or grandfather. You can understand that. You are not so luxuriantly grown up, bodily growth. There are so many reasons, but this is the symptom of age of Kali. And they're described in the Srimad-Bhagavatam, foretold, five thousand years ago, what will happen in this Kali-yuga. That is all explained in the Twelfth Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam, third, fourth chapter. So simply full of faults. Social life, political life, religious life--everything has been described there. And one thing I can see very practical, that in this age, lavanyam kesa-dharanam. It is stated there that people will think that by keeping long hairs they will become very beautiful. That is stated there. Dampatye ratim eva hi. Husband and wife's relation will depend on the strength of sex. These are described there. Svikara eva codvahe. Marriage will be performed simply by agreement.
   Now, this is sastra. Five thousand years ago, what was written, that is now becoming true. Now there is no marriage as it was taking formerly, Vedic marriage. The father (and) mother will select the bride, bridegroom, and there will be gorgeous ceremony and marriage. The father will spend... Both parties, the girl's father and the boy's father, will spend. Still in India, there are cases like that. They'll spend their hard-earned money during the marriage ceremony of their son and daughter. But in this age, gradually, it is said, svikara eva codvahe. Udvaha means marriage, taking the charge of the girl. The boy takes charge of the young girl from the custody of her father. This is marriage. Woman, according to Vedic civilization, they are not recommended freedom. They should be taken care just like children are taken care of. You cannot give independence to the children. That is not possible. Then it is not good for them. Similarly, woman also should be taken care of. They should not be given freedom. That is not good for them. They should be protected by the father in childhood, by the husband in youthhood, and by the grown-up children in old age. Three stages. But in this age, women are trying to take independence of father, husband or children. That is not good. That is described in the sastra.
   So so many symptoms are described, but at the end the remedy is suggested because sastra means it will guide you for the ultimate goal of life, for the perfection of life. So if the world condition is so bad, then how people will be saved? That is also suggested in the sastra: kaler dosa-nidhe rajann asti hy eko mahan gunah. Pariksit Maharaja was advised by Sukadeva Gosvami, "My dear King, I've described so many faults. It is like the ocean of faults. But there is one boon also. That is special prerogative, special advantage of this age." Kaler dosa-nidhe rajann asti hy eko mahan gunah. Kalau, kalau means "In this age of Kali, it is full of faulty things. But there is one boon." What is that? Kirtanad eva krsnasya mukta-sangah param vrajet. Kirtanad eva krsnasya: Simply by chanting the holy name of Krsna--Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna, Krsna Krsna, Hare Hare. Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare--simply by chanting the holy name...," kirtanad eva krsnasya, krsnasya, so, mukta-sangah, "he becomes free from all these contaminations, by one thing, simply chanting Hare Krsna." Kirtanad eva krsnasya mukta-sangah. There are so many contaminations, so many faults of this age, but simply by chanting Hare Krsna maha-mantra, one becomes kirtanad eva krsnasya mukta-sangah, he becomes free from the contaminated association.
   Just like if there is some epidemic, disease, and if you take vaccine, it is supposed that you are free from the contamination. So this vaccine of chanting Hare Krsna maha-mantra will keep you fit without any contamination of this age of Kali. And that is happening. All over the world people are chanting Hare Krsna maha-mantra. And practically we see, those who are chanting, they're becoming free from the contamination. If you follow the rules and regulations, very simple thing, and chant Hare Krsna maha-mantra... That is our only request. Then, in spite of this contaminated age of Kali, you'll be saved. You'll be saved. That we are... That is our... Krsna consciousness movement means that we are preaching this cult.

           harer nama harer nama harer namaiva kevalam
        kalau nasty eva nasty eva nasty eva gatir anyatha

Without this, there is no other way of saving you from the contamination of Kali.
   So here another question is... The dharma uvaca. Personified dharma, he's inquiring from the cow. He's addressing cow, amba. Amba means mother. So cow is our mother. Why mother? Because from practical point of view, we drink milk. So how mother... How cow is not mother? She's mother. We are taking her milk. There are seven mothers according to Vedic civilization:

                      atma-mata guroh patni
                      brahmani raja-patnika
                    dhenur dhatri tatha prthvi
                     saptaita matarah smrtah

Real mother, from whose womb we have come to this world, real mother, atma-mata. Then guroh patni, wife of the teacher or spiritual master, guroh patni. Brahmani, the wife of a brahmana. Atma-mata guroh patni brahmani raja-patnika, and the wife of the king, or the queen. She's also mother. Dhenu, the cow. Cow is also mother. And dhatri means nurse. Nurse is also mother. Tatha prthvi, and the earth, the earth is also our mother. That we say in country, in the country which we take birth, we say desa-matrka. In Sanskrit it is called desa-matrka. That is also mother. Mother land, mother language. So this... So many mothers we have got, out of which, cow is also mother. Therefore she's addressed as amba. Amba means mother. Still in Gujarat province, they call amba. And in U.P., United States, er, United Province, in India, they also call amba, or in a broken language they call amma. Still... That is from very long time, mother is... Amba-devi. There is a... From Amba-devi, there is a big temple of Mother Durga, Kali, in Bombay. So this Amba-devi was pronounced by the Englishmens as Bamba-devi, and from Bamba-devi it has come to "Bombay." Actually, there is a big temple of Amba in Bombay. From that name, instead of Amba, they have become Bamba. Just like from Sindhu, they have called, they have designated the inhabitants of Sindhu-desa as "Hindu." The Muhammadans, they pronounce s as h. So from "Sindhu," it has come to "Hindu." Otherwise, this "Hindu" name is not mentioned in any Vedic literature. It is given by the... This name is given by the other foreigners. Especially the Arabian countries, they used to call this nation, Bharata-varsa...
   Actually, Hindu is not a religion. Hindu is a name given by the foreigners. The religion is, of India, varnasrama-dharma, following the institution of four varnas and four asramas. That is varn... Or sanatana-dharma. Sanatana-dharma means eternal, eternal religion. Religion of human being is one. That is called sanatana. A living entity is described as sanatana. Mamaivamso jiva-bhuto jiva-loke sanatanah. In the Bhagavad-gita you'll find sanatanah, and Krsna is also addressed in the Eleventh Chapter as sanatanas tvam. And there is another place, or spiritual world, which is also called sanatana. In the Bhagavad-gita you'll find, paras tasmat tu bhavo 'nyo 'vyakto 'vyaktat sanatanah. So this sanatana term is very important. The living entity is sanatana and God is sanatana and the spiritual world is sanatana, and the process by which your lost relationship with God established and you go back to home back to Godhead, that is called sanatana-dharma. Sanatana-dharma. That is our eternal relationship with God. And there is a place. So the system which makes these two sanatana, God and the living entity, meet again and they go back to enjoy life in the spiritual world, that system is called sanatana-dharma. Therefore sanatana-dharma is not meant for any particular class or particular country or particular nation or community. No. It is meant for the whole human being, especially human being; otherwise, all living entities.

United Nations Sits on Hill of Evil Counsel

"The escalating scandal of unpunished atrocities committed by UN 'peacekeepers' illustrates that the planetary police are beyond accountability."
- William Norman Grigg

    There is a hill in Jerusalem just south of the ancient walled city and across the Hinnom Valley. It is called, the Hill of Evil Counsel. Crowned with a thin stand of pines, ironically named the Peace Forest, it is historically believed to be the place where Judas held his last meeting with the Pharisees to finalize his covenant to betray Christ. In a twist of even greater irony it is also the site of the United Nations headquarters in Israel.

    The center of operations for UNTSO--the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization--is the UN entity tasked, since May of 1948, with oversight of the truce between the five contending nations of the region: Israel, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt.

    For the sole purpose of general information gathering, The WINDS recently visited the UN installation in Jerusalem, formerly the British Government House during the period Great Britain governed Palestine. In the course of an interview with the Senior Political Advisor for UN Israel, Milos Strugar, The WINDS, almost inadvertently, was informed concerning a rapidly growing movement within the General Assembly of UN member nations "to assign emergency powers to the UN Secretary General." These emergency powers would enable the Secretary to deploy a "'Rapid Response Force' [1] while the Security Council makes up its collective mind" concerning any perceived crisis occurring within the borders of a given nation that they may regard as requiring a peacekeeping contingent.

    Considering that neither the Secretary General nor the UN General Assembly but, rather, the Security Council alone holds ultimate authority within the UN, this takes on somewhat the image of an embryonic dragon which would have tacit and autonomous authority to violate the sovereign borders of any country by the express will of a single man--the Secretary General of the United Nations. Currently, the Secretary can only report to and advise the Security Council which possesses sole authority to make political decisions and deploy "peacekeeping" forces.

    This desire of the UN to exercise NATO military authority over even non-NATO member countries is currently being testified to by events unfolding in the Serbian province of Kosovo. The international body is under pressure by the United States to commit NATO troops to quell what they say is becoming a precursor to more ethnic cleansing. The U.S. stands alone in its desire for immediate NATO intervention, though not alone in the intent.

    National Public Radio reported this month that several nations are willing to commit NATO forces to internal Serbian matters if only the Security Council would issue a resolution to that effect. What this says is that, to others than the U.S., all that is stopping an invasion of a sovereign nation, tending to what it sees as internal threats to its security, is a mindless piece of paper issued by the UN Security Council.

    The movement for a Rapid Response Force resulted, according to Mr. Strugar, from the inordinate length of time it took the Security Council to respond to the 1994 Rwandan genocide when, in the course of 100 days, Hutu tribesmen slaughtered over half a million Tutsis.

    Several nations, foremost among them the Netherlands, Canada, Australia and the Scandinavian countries, have presented as necessity the granting of such powers to the Secretary General as a short-term solution to the "two to three months required to organize and deploy a peacekeeping contingent." [ibid]. These new powers would strongly resemble U.S. presidential authority under the War Powers Act to engage American military forces in hostile action for up to six months before any accountability to Congress is required.

    The UN Senior Political Advisor shared with The WINDS that the primary and virtually only reason some member nations are "dragging their feet" in the creation of this Rapid Response force, is for the establishment of "rules of engagement"--a term heard most frequently in this country in connection with the Waco and Ruby Ridge incidents. One major result of those two watershed markers of American shame was to clearly illustrate that the presence of "rules of engagement" within FBI and BATF documents are, at best, ornamental.

    The question could be asked as to what would prevent other nations from treating "rules of engagement" as equally meaningless and arcane decorations included merely for public consumption. It appears that those countries who are eager to incorporate such literary cosmetics into the charter of any proposed UN Rapid Response Force would be served well by taking into consideration the United Nations' past record.

    The international body has notoriously endowed its "peacekeepers" with an appalling level of documented UN accountability in the discharge of their duties. This has been painfully illustrated in Somalia and many other places where they've been deployed.

THE LEGACY

    The barbarity displayed by the blue-hatted, peacekeeping contingents is not only well documented, but fairly well known by those who care to look. Notably the most infamous occurrence known to most would be the incident, caught on film, of two Belgian soldiers, Privates Claude Baert and Kurt Coelus, "roasting" a Somali child over a campfire. They were, according to a report in the The Village Voice acquitted by a military court which ruled that the incident -- described by the soldiers as a punishment for stealing -- was "'a form of playing without violence,' according to prosecutor Luc Walleyn.'"[2] Did that Somali child experience fun during this "play" and is this some strange new definition of the term "without violence" with which the world is yet unfamiliar?

    When asked by Jennifer Gould, the reporter originally breaking the story for The Village Voice, to comment on the acquittal of Baert and Coelus, a UN spokesman passed it off with the portentous remark that "the UN is not in the habit of embarrassing governments that contribute peacekeeping troops." [ibid]. If the UN will not "embarrass" its member governments and those governments do virtually nothing to punish their citizens who perpetrate such crimes, who is left to impose justice?

    A September '97 article in The New American entitled "Beasts in Blue Berets" [3] describes other photographs in the series depicting "UN soldiers kicking and stabbing a Somali and another soldier apparently urinating on the Somali's dead body; yet, another shows a Somali child being forced to drink salt water, vomit, and worms. A second group of photos published in the July 15 th Village Voice shows the dead bodies of bound Somalis -- what appears to be the work of a death squad.

    "One atrocity not caught on camera involved the 'punishment' of a Somali child by placing him in a metal container and withholding water from him for two days; predictably, the relentless African heat killed the child. One Belgian UN soldier testified that it was a regular practice to use metal boxes as prison cells, and that other Somalis probably died similarly gruesome deaths."

    The author of The New American article makes an interesting point in contrasting the dearth of U.S. publicity received by the UN peacekeeper's atrocities to the media overkill of the Rodney King incident. This seemingly overlooks the fact that one of the Globalist's central themes for moving their program to its desired end is the generation of racial hatred which was, of course, admirably served by Mr. King and the attendant video recording. It does not, however, serve those world powers in the least to have themselves exposed as the ultimate racists and terrorists.

    "Village Voice reporter Jennifer Gould came across the accounts of the Belgian atrocities while doing an earlier story about sexual harassment of female employees at UN headquarters. 'When I spoke with people at the UN, time after time I was told, "If you think it's bad here, you ought to see what happens in peacekeeping operations;"...'I started looking into that issue and found that the abuses I reported were well-known and easily documented. They were all over the media abroad, and I was really surprised it hadn't been written about over here."[ibid].

    "Photographs have now emerged showing Italian, Canadian and Belgian soldiers engaged in alleged acts of torture, murder and sexual violence against adults and children.... Germany was also tarred by a peacekeeping scandal, with officials admitting that German soldiers in Bosnia staged mock executions and rapes of civilians."[2]

    "Several years ago, according to Gould, 'Belgian soldiers were also accused of holding mock executions for Somali children and forcing them to dig their own graves; though their officer was given a suspended sentence, the soldiers were acquitted.' It is thus firmly established in Belgian military jurisprudence that service in the new world army is a license to commit barbarities with impunity."[3]

    A consummate example of the kind of duplicity and conflict of interest that will assuredly result from giving the United Nations its own permanent standing army, is found in the "prosecutions" of the Belgian peacekeepers. The farcical investigation into the crimes, on which the prosecutor based his case, was conducted "by a general who once headed the country's elite paratroop unit that he was later responsible for investigating."[2]

    Had the soldiers been convicted, according to The Village Voice, the Belgian prosecutor Luc Walleyn would have asked for a sentence of only one month. Does it seem possible that Prosecutor Welleyn's case against his countrymen was less than vigorously pursued?

    Under the headline "Even peacekeepers are looting", USA Today reported that "the last vestiges of stability are crumbling in the war torn west African nation [of Liberia], as even peacekeepers join gun-toting street thugs in widespread looting and destruction."[4]

    "U.S. and Bosnian officials," reported The Washington Times, "suspect that high-ranking UN officials from Jordan based in the central Bosnian towns of Bugojno and Travnik have routinely provided UN vehicles to help smugglers get contraband past checkpoints."[5]

    Why this recitation by The WINDS of UN atrocities and lawlessness? Are there not innumerable other such brutalities committed each day in the world--many more than those committed by UN peacekeepers? The answer, of course, is yes, there are--but not by an organization that aspires to be the world's police force; not by an internationally empowered body from whose decisions there will ultimately be no appeal and who will be answerable to no higher authority--whose virtual silence on the matter renders tacit approval of those atrocities as a means to an end.

    When in armed conflict or policing actions there is no accountability, atrocities become a commonplace activity to gain the desired objective. How is it that so-called "rules of engagement" could possibly restrain the Secretary General's use of his new powers should he decide to engage them in a manner outside the scope of such rules? Would the Security Council invoke such restraint, keeping in mind that there are only twelve members in that body and only four of them permanent and having veto power?--they who actually play the music to which the Secretary General dances?--they whose "peacekeeping" forces are responsible for an astounding legacy of atrocities wherever they are deployed? Is there any supervising authority that could be entrusted to exercise such integrity? It seems that the UN's philosophy is that the fox actually can guard the hen house--if the fox owns it.

    What possible form could any effective accountability take when an invasion force only forty-eight hours in the making lands on a "foreign" shore? And what nature would atrocities assume in the environment of such an invasion when performed by men at the height of a short-notice-combat-adrenaline rush when the objects of their assault are "foreigners", not their own countrymen?

    It does not take the intellect of the proverbial rocket scientist to determine that those chosen by the UN to "police" a given emergency within the borders of a sovereign nation cannot, in practicality, be citizens of that nation. An instinctive gut level "conflict of interest" would make it quite impossible for commanders to depend on a soldier turning a weapon upon his fellow countrymen.

    Imagine a scenario where the UN orders conscripted members of the U.S. Army or National Guard to fire upon largely unarmed American citizens--commanding American to kill American. While it is true that this has happened in some isolated cases (excepting the Civil War) mutiny would rapidly become the norm as the majority of the young men would openly refuse to obey. Now -- imagine a UN contingent of Somalis deployed to the U.S. under the same order. The image begs no description.

THE MEANS OF ACCOMPLISHMENT

    To achieve their goal of becoming the world's police force the UN must logically make the task even attainable and, at the same time, ensure the safety, as far as possible, of their "policemen". How can this be accomplished with countries whose civilian populations are armed with private weapons?

    In a UN document on the prevention of crime[6] it becomes quite clear that, contrary to the organization's claims, they have every intention of imposing their domestic arms control agenda within the borders of sovereign nations. In that document they stress "the urgent need for effective strategies to ensure the proper regulation of firearms at both national and transnational levels;" [emphasis supplied].

    It must be kept in mind that when these documents refer to "national" (as opposed to transnational) they are speaking of the realm within a given nation and a situation that may not extend beyond its borders. The UN, in its expanding capacity in the emerging world government, is quite intent upon penetrating every national border with impunity. When they presume to regulate anything on a national level, they effectively nullify the sovereignty of that nation and set an international precedent that can be repeated at will.

    The following is from a UN press release entitled UNITED NATIONS GLOBAL STUDY BEGUN ON CIVILIAN-OWNED FIREARMS, SMALL ARMS TRAFFICKING, FIREARMS REGULATIONS:

With the passing of the cold war era and a shift from inter-State military conflicts to insecurity resulting from violent crime, the United Nations is turning its attention to a class of armament that is killing more people than major weapons -- namely, small, civilian-owned firearms. Such arms are increasingly associated with crime, accidents and suicides, and form a major source of illicit profits for transnational criminal networks.[7]

    This sounds as if their goal is to assure that "major weapons" (theirs perhaps) must have exclusive right to killing the most people.

    An interesting note is that one of the coordinators of the UN's civilian-owned firearms study is "Stewart Allen, Chief of the Intelligence Division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms of the United States Department of the Treasury." Is it not portentous that the UN has chosen as an integral part of their thrust to control private weapons a high official of a U.S. organization of which a former BATF official said, in reference to their actions in the Waco raid, that they were worse criminals than those they were attempting to arrest?

    Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, in a speech to the Stimson Center said, "I am proposing that we broaden our efforts to crack down on illicit firearms trafficking." [8] It has been recognized that terms like "illicit" when used in such a context by government takes on a sliding definition to mean whatever they desire at any given moment.

    When the average American hears the President or Secretary of State use that term, do they picture the hunting rifle in their gun closet or the handgun they have for personal protection? Or is it the "file footage" of AK-47 assault rifles they believe their government is referring to? This conditioned response is precisely what is intended. "Of course, they're not referring to MY guns."

    In a document, drafted in May of last year by the United Nations Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice[9] is "a strongly worded text by which the General Assembly would urge States to move decisively...." Very clearly delineated are the things in which States would move "decisively."

"The growing use of handguns and other firearms in crime, suicide and accidents," the press release says, "prompted this...resolution on firearm regulation, under which the Commission urged States to consider regulatory approaches to civilian-owned firearms that would cover their storage, transport, licensing, import and export....

"Before the Commission was a 137-page first-ever United Nations study of how countries deal with civilian firearms issues. The preliminary draft contains the results of a 14-month survey of 46 countries, covering gun ownership, regulation and penalties...."

    They also have a plan for "a licensing system, including the licensing of firearm businesses and a recordkeeping system." [UN Press Release SOC/CP/198].

    It has been put forth in previous WINDS articles (and a multitude of other sources) that the United Nations' unexpressed but transparently obvious purpose is to establish itself not only as the moving force, but also as the enforcement arm of a one-world government. It is also well known that governments in general know that the best and most efficient way of creating acceptance of a totalitarian state is to manufacture a crisis of such magnitude that people are willing to give up whatever rights they have left in order to gain security from the artificial crisis. One can rightfully ask if Rwanda were not more than just a convenient (created?) excuse for the establishment of something that the UN has wanted for years. To paraphrase J. Robert Oppenheimer, the principle architect of the atomic bomb, it presents a politically "sweet solution". The authors of the New World agenda want everyone to know that there is a problem. They just don't want them to know who is the real cause of it.

    For those who still may entertain doubt as to the global, one-world government intentions of those behind the scenes who are running the agenda for the United Nations, let us look at a summary of just the facts submitted in official UN documents.

    It is plain that they are already acting in the capacity of an international police force, regarding the "peacekeeping operations" being carried out around the world. They are also planning reforms within and among many nations. Those reforms are in the form of "26 new project proposals for technical cooperation projects, including":

• "a master plan for the criminal justice system of Albania;"

• "reform of the prison system in United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders;"

• "advice on combating corruption and organized crime in the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia..."

• "improvements in the criminal justice system in Angola"[ 9]

    Does anyone get the impression that they are using Third World countries for practice before moving up the scale?

    To complete the scenario of a totally sufficient world government there is also the UN proposal for an International Criminal Court (ICC) which would be far-reaching in its apparent ability to violate national borders. As Senator John Ashcroft (R-Mo) put it, in a June 12th press conference attended by, among others, former Reagan Attorney General Edwin Meese, "In its current form, the proposed ICC neither reflects, nor guarantees, the protections of the Bill of Rights. Americans could be dragged before this court and denied their very rights as citizens of our free country." Apparently, Senator Ashcroft has not awakened to the fact that the Bill of Rights has little or no more current efficacy than all those treaties we signed with the American Indian nations.

    The subheadings of the UN press release delineating the categories of intended action by the world body have the "look and feel" of the makings of an international constitution, or at least the basis of a legal foundation for one. Those subheadings are:

• Corruption

• Violence against Women

• Trafficking in Children

• United Nations Crime Congress

• Firearms Regulation

• Technical Cooperation

• Juvenile Justice

• Organized Transnational Crime

• Trafficking in Stolen Vehicles

• Smuggling of Migrants

• Environmental Crime

    This all comes under the aegis of the "United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders."[6] Note that the categories of offence are not war crimes which has been traditionally the only "law enforcement" role previously afforded the United Nations and the World Court. These are criminal violations that have been formerly handled strictly by the countries in which they were committed. Here is a world organization, little by little, usurping the role of lawmaker, judge and executioner of sentence in jurisdictions formerly reserved to the nations individually. National sovereignty is an endangered species on the brink of extinction.

    So utterly invasive are the tenets of the UN's Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders that it should be understood that when they address the subject of children they are talking about YOUR children--NOT children in another country over there somewhere. The United Nations is a fair and equal opportunity organization. They intend to plunder the liberties of all without regard to race, creed, religion or nationality.

    Hillary's Global Village is, as they used to say of an artillery barrage in Viet Nam: "Incoming!"

    At the outset of this article it was mentioned that the United Nations headquarters for Israel sits atop the ancient hill where Judas finalized his contract to betray Christ. It might also be noted that somewhere along the bottom of the north face of that same hill lies the Potter's Field--the site where Judas hanged himself. It would seem that there is a very real sense of poetry involved with universal justice.

    An apostle of the One Whom Judas betrayed once proclaimed, "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man [nation, world] soweth, that shall he also reap." Galatians 6:7.

    Paul Harvey once said after relating a news story of a particularly heinous crime involving the sexual abuse and murder of several young children, that if this world is, as some think it to be, an experiment to illustrate whether or not man is capable of governing his own affairs--"don't you think the angels have seen enough?"

    The answer to that question, Mr. Harvey, is a resounding "Yes". What we are witnessing is the end of a six-millennium trial that began when mankind decided to go it alone and One of great mercy is about to terminate the experiment.

"The end is not coming--it has arrived." [10]

REFERENCES:

1. GENERAL ASSEMBLY, SECURITY COUNCIL, Forty-ninth session, Fiftieth year, Agenda item 79,

COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF THE WHOLE QUESTION OF PEACEKEEPING OPERATIONS IN ALL THEIR ASPECTS

.

2. The Village Voice, June 24, 1995

3. The New American, "The Beasts in Blue Berets", September 29, 1997.

4. USA Today, August 12, 1996.

5. The Washington Times, August 9, 1996.

6.

Implementation of the resolutions and recommendations of the Ninth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders

.

7. Press Release SOC/CP/178, "UNITED NATIONS GLOBAL STUDY BEGUN ON CIVILIAN-OWNED FIREARMS, SMALL ARMS TRAFFICKING, FIREARMS REGULATIONS".

8. Remarks to the Stimson Center, Washington, DC, June 10, 1998.

9. United Nations Press Release SOC/CP/198, COMMISSION ON CRIME PREVENTION AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE...SIXTH SESSION, VIENNA.

10.

Shillum

Vedic PerspectivePrabhupada: And then, now they have manufactured United Nations. But for the last twenty years or more than that, they are endeavoring to be united, but when I go New York, I see flags are increasing, no united, disunity. You see? And war is going on. Therefore, on this material platform this so-called unity is impossible. Unity is possible only on the spiritual platform.
740523rc.rom              Conversations

In stupidity we trust

In this sense Russia has always differed from the West. Western countries regarded themselves as more developed and generally more advanced, while Russia was seen as backwards, barbaric and foolish. In spite of this negative view of Russia, our approach has proved surprisingly effective over the centuries. But what happens when stupidity doesn't face cunning tricks, but the same stupidity? It's well known that just as opposites attract, like forces repel each other - and that's exactly what has happened in Russia's gas dispute with Ukraine. This time, unsually, it was Russia's turn to play the sophisticate against their supposed country cousins in Kiev. But two slavic nations share the same unpredictable heritage, so how would they cope going head-to-head in a crisis?

The regular gas war between Russia and Ukraine lasted longer than usual this year, despite a colder January than in the past couple of years. Isn't that a symptom of stupidity? With Europe used to this annual wrangle, Ukraine opted for a show of strength and dug in. Prolonged negotiations left families shivering before an unsatisfactory deal left neither side able to claim victory.

In the end the quarrels merely undermined the reputations of both sides. Opinions differ as to who won and lost, but in essence nobody comes away with much to show for their efforts. Demonstrating an inability to negotiate in front of the watching world helps neither side. Following the latest sage, Russia can't be regarded as a reliable partner, while Ukraine's bold and contentious ambitions to join NATO and the EU are unlikely to be fulfilled any sooner. Meanwhile, in the teeth of an economic crisis, Gazprom lost billions of dollars in vital gas sales to Europe.

One obvious flaw in the negotiations was the lack of planning. The difficulties have long been evident, yet talks did not begin until the old contract expired and the gas taps had been turned off. Back on December 26 Gazprom warned of a possible problem ... but no further action followed.

Deputy Chairman of the State Duma Valery Yazev insists the conflict has been settled now. But with Europe stepping up its search for alternative energy routes and Russia's reputation taking another hit, what have we gained? Of course there are always circumstances which make ‘common sense' impossible. But our national unpredictability seems to be stronger in every sphere of our lives. We are Russians, and Bismarck knew what he was talking about. The latest gas row supports his claim and the countries involved have shown their underlying character. As Ukraine's Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko swallows her passionate support of the Ukrainian language to speak Russian in Moscow, Russia itself is in danger of losing trading partners.

By Daria Chernyshova