Establishment forces from around the world are exploiting the threat posed by the terrorist group styling itself the “Islamic State,” often referred to as ISIS or ISIL, to advance globalism and to further empower the United Nations. Indeed, the barbaric terror organization, which Vice President Joe Biden recently admitted was created, armed, and funded by the Obama administration’s supposed “anti-ISIS” coalition, is now being paraded around by globalist extremists to push a dizzying array of longtime establishment goals. Without a massive public outcry, they may succeed.
From a UN war on “non-violent extremism” and international restrictions on speech to a UN-led global terror war and more power for the global “criminal court,” the self-styled “Islamic State” has become a convenient and widely cited pretext for advancing a broad range of attacks on liberty and national sovereignty. Quietly and largely under the radar, some of those efforts have already succeeded in recent months. However, the international establishment has even more ambitious plans underway as its own operatives stir up hysteria about ISIS barbarism to push more internationalism.
Last week, for example, the 15-member UN Security Council, which contains multiple brutal regimes, voted unanimously to approve a far-reaching resolution purportedly dealing with ISIS. In reality, though, the controversial measure, combined with other UN and globalist schemes, aims to drastically expand the role of the dictator-dominated organization into a planetary regime involved in everything from supposedly “fighting terror” and “crime” to waging a propaganda war against what it considers to be “extremism” in “all forms.”
For instance, the resolution adopted by the Security Council at the November 19 summit on “International Cooperation in Combating Terrorism and Violent Extremism” touts the alleged “continued need to improve the visibility and effectiveness of the UN’s role in countering the spread of violent ideologies.” Because the UN as an entity was sold to the masses as a tool for preserving “international peace,” the resolution also claims that terrorism “in all forms and manifestations constitutes one of the most serious threats to international peace and security.” Ironically, numerous UN members and even agencies have been implicated in terrorism.
In his remarks to the UN Security Council, however, UN boss Ban Ki-moon celebrated the “unity of purpose” among UN member governments and dictatorships in supposedly combating ISIS. Unsurprisingly, he failed to mention the well-documented role of prominent UN member regimes — Sunni Islamic dictatorships in particular — in creating the ruthless terror group to begin with in an effort to overthrow the “apostate” autocracy ruling Syria. But for Ban and other fellow globalists, ISIS — like climate alarmism — is almost certainly just a convenient excuse to boost UN power, as his own words revealed.
“We are increasingly seeing terrorism, drug trafficking and transnational crime grow in intensity and feed off each other,” Ban told the Security Council, implying that the UN’s job now includes global law enforcement. “The international community and the UN must ensure the full implementation of our many tools for action — including Security Council resolutions and the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy.”
Ban touted, among other developments, efforts by the UN Office on Drugs and Crime — a widely ridiculed outfit led by a former diplomat for the mass-murdering Soviet regime who recently blasted the United States for not complying with “international law” — in foisting UN demands on the world. He claimed UNODC was working to “strengthen the legal and criminal justice capacity of Middle East and Northern African countries to address the threat posed by foreign fighters.” The UN also works with brutal regimes to disarm law-abiding citizens under the guise of “criminal justice” and “peace.”
Now it is in the business of countering “ideologies” and “extremism,” too. “Violent extremism is a multi-dimensional challenge that needs to be effectively addressed at the grassroots level,” the UN boss continued, touting the planetary outfit’s self-proclaimed mission of addressing the supposed “socio-economic roots” of the “scourge” of extremism. “We must continue to think more deeply into the fundamental conditions that allow extremism to thrive. Looking at these challenges solely through a military lens has shown its limits.”
The latest UN schemes purporting to deal with ISIS come on the heels of the previous UN Security Council meeting that took place in September. Unsurprisingly, as The New American reported at the time, that gathering, too, featured shameless exploitation of the ISIS threat to empower the dictator-dominated organization. Among other victories for globalism under the guise of battling ISIS, the supposedly “binding” UN resolution approved a new global “terror” regime that purports to control travel — essentially a global “no-fly” list. It also demands that national governments pass “terror” laws demanded by the UN.
That scheme was pushed primarily by the Obama administration — increasingly infamous for its role in funding, arming, training, and supporting the very same jihadist forces that the UN resolution purports to target (See Libya). “I called this meeting because we must come together as nations and as an international community to confront a real and growing threat of foreign terrorist fighters,” Obama said, referring to “nations” when he really meant the governments and dictatorships ruling over nations. “The historic resolution we just adopted enshrines our commitment to meet this challenge.”
Resolutions, though, “will not be enough,” Obama added. “The words spoken here today must be matched and translated into action, into deeds, concrete action.” True to his word, shortly after that, the Obama administration announced broad new powers for Interpol, a self-styled international law-enforcement agency once controlled by the National Socialists (Nazis) that even recently has reportedly been used by Islamic dictatorships to hunt down converts to Christianity. Obama’s outgoing Attorney General Eric Holder claimed that “Interpol — as the world’s largest international police organization — has a vital role to play in safeguarding our homeland and protecting the American people.”
In response to the September Security Council resolution, the UN is now “helping” its member governments and dictatorships to “analyze” the extremism phenomenon, to “develop policy responses,” and to “address the multi-dimensional challenges of extremist ideologies,” Ban told the Security Council last week. The UN is also “examining how best to strengthen the counter-terrorism capabilities of UN Special Political Missions, Peacekeeping Operations and UN Country Teams,” declared the controversial UN boss. “People need equality and opportunity in their lives.”
Apparently the UN’s military, war-making forces outlandishly described as “peace” armies, are preparing to impose those goals — as if ISIS fighters just needed some more “equality.” Indeed, as The New American reported last month, the Obama administration, working with a wide array of brutal autocracies, is currently working on overdrive to expand the power and resources of the UN’s “peacekeeping” military — the very same UN forces responsible for slaughtering, raping, terrorizing, and abusing civilians around the world with impunity. Efforts to empower the controversial global military are being justified largely by pointing to ISIS.
Even while globalist schemes to radically expand planetary military and “law enforcement” outfits gain traction under the guise of fighting terror and extremism, the UN is also seeking to boost its controversial kangaroo “court” known as the International Criminal Court. Again, the excuse is ISIS. Just this week, UN “High Commissioner for Human Rights” Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, who presides over a gaggle of dictators, governments, and serial human-rights abusers styling themselves the UN “Human Rights Council,” argued that ISIS members should be prosecuted at the pseudo-“court” in The Hague. While the U.S. government is not a member of the body, which recognizes none of the constitutionally protected rights enshrined in the Constitution, the ICC purports to have “jurisdiction” over every person on Earth for a wide range of vague and undefined “crimes” such as “aggression.”
For some globalists, though, even the fast-accelerating empowerment of the UN to “fight” ISIS is not proceeding quickly enough. “Although a concerted effort is now clearly visible in this direction, the United Nations has yet to sufficiently leverage the expertise of many of its own departments and agencies with relevant and valuable experience on core elements of countering violent extremism, including development, education and strategic communications,” claimed Global Center on Cooperative Security Executive Director Alistair Millar in a recent piece published by the Baltimore Sun. “A special representative would be essential for getting this job done, optimizing the resources and focusing the attention of the vast U.N. bureaucracy on a threat that is likely to shape many of the key conflicts of our time.”
Of course, calls to empower the UN and a “special representative” to wage war on “extremism” have been growing quickly. As The New American reported last month, U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron wants the autocrat-dominated global body to appoint a “special representative” in charge of countering “non-violent extremism” — which he said includes everything from doubting official storylines about terror attacks to believing in “nonsense” religious prophecies about the end-times.
“We must be clear: to defeat the ideology of extremism we need to deal with all forms of extremism — not just violent extremism,” Cameron explained to the UN’s largely autocratic member regimes, acknowledging that the machinations would not be entirely “compatible” with free speech and intellectual inquiry. “We shouldn’t stand by and just allow any form of non-violent extremism. And we need the strongest possible international focus on tackling this ideology — which is why here at the United Nations, the United Kingdom is calling for a new Special Representative on extremism.”
As the globalist establishment continues hyping the threat of ISIS to justify its anti-freedom and anti-sovereignty plotting, that same establishment continues to coddle and even arm Islamists and jihadists across the Middle East — and especially in Syria right now. Biden, U.S. Gen. Martin Dempsey, and virtually every credible analyst who has commented on the subject acknowledges that ISIS was armed and funded by Obama’s supposed “anti-ISIS” coalition, even as the administration continues to shower U.S. weapons and support on terrorist groups seeking to overthrow the Syrian dictatorship. Rather than further empowering the UN to wage a “global terror war,” a much more sensible approach would be to start by ending weapons shipents to terrorists.