
=============================================================================
    File Name:      whosside.txt

    Description:    Whose Side Are They On?


    Original copies of this material may be ordered from:

                    The John Birch Society
                    Post Office Box 8040
                    Appleton, Wisconsin 54913
                    (414) 749-3780
=============================================================================

                        Whose Side Are They On?
                          by John F. McManus

    In the interest of peace, many Americans have been persuaded to
    support disarmament programs and to create as a substitute for each
    nation's military a United Nations Peace Force. Most feel certain
    that their own rights and the independence of their nation would in
    no way be placed in jeopardy. But there is a vital question few
    seem willing or able to ask: Who would be left to restrain the
    all-powerful United Nations?

    For his Secretaries of State and Defense, President John F.
    Kennedy selected Dean Rusk and Robert S. McNamara.  Each was a
    member of the New York-based Council on Foreign Relations, a
    private organization formed in 1921 for the purpose of bringing
    about a one-world government.

    Only nine months into his administration - on September 25.  1961,
    to be precise - Mr. Kennedy travelled to UN headquarters in New
    York to present a proposal entitled Freedom From War: The United
    States Program For General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful
    World. The work of the Rusk-led State Department, with the willing
    acquiescence of the McNamara-led Defense Department, the proposal
    was published as "Department of State Publication 7277."

    In his remarks before the UN, President Kennedy asked for a
    commitment from all nations "not to an arms race, but to a peace
    race - to advance together step by step, stage by stage, until
    general and complete disarmament has been achieved."  He did not
    get any such commitment, yet the United States embarked on the
    Kennedy-launched program.

    Freedom From War (or "7277" as it was frequently called) proposes
    three stages of disarmament ending with the transfer of the armed
    forces of our nation to the United Nations.  As Senator Joseph
    Clark of Pennsylvania approvingly reminded his colleagues in a
    Senate speech on March 1, 1962, this program is "the fixed,
    determined and approved policy of the government of the United
    States."

    A reading of the document itself confirms that disarmament "would
    proceed to a point where no state would have the military power
    to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force...."
    In other words, the only significant military power left in the
    world would be the United Nations.

    The provisions of the treacherous proposal would actually leave our
    nation defenseless before the UN, and before any other nation that
    didn't similarly disarm.  And it would place the UN's superior
    military power in the hands of the UN's Undersecretary for
    Political and Security Council Affairs, the overseer of all UN
    military activity.  This post, by virtue of a secret agreement
    concluded at the founding of the UN (an arrangement later confirmed
    by an astonished former UN Secretary General named Trygve Lie), has
    always been held by a communist. The man who holds it today, the
    14th communist in succession, is Vasiliy S. Safronchuk of the
    Soviet Union.  Unless our leaders are stopped, they will succeed in
    turning over our military forces to the United Nations where they
    will be controlled by a communist.

    +------------------------------------------------------------------+
    |   Since the UN was created, there have been 14 Undersecrtaries   |
    |   for Political and Security Council Affairs.  All have been     |
    |   communists, and all but one have come from the Soviet Union:   |
    |                                                                  |
    |           1946-1949  Arkady Sobolev         (USSR)               |
    |           1949-1953  Konstantin Zinchenko   (USSR)               |
    |           1953-1954  Ilya Tchernychev       (USSR)               |
    |           1954-1957  Dragoslav Protitch     (Yugoslavia)         |
    |           1958-1960  Anatoly Dobrynin       (USSR)               |
    |           1960-1962  Georgy Arkadev         (USSR)               |
    |           1962-1963  E. D. Kiselev          (USSR)               |
    |           1963-1965  V. P. Suslov           (USSR)               |
    |           1965-1968  Alcxei E. Nesterenko   (USSR)               |
    |           1968-1973  Leonid N. Kutakov      (USSR)               |
    |           1973-1978  Arkady N. Shevchenko   (USSR)               |
    |           1978-1981  Mikhail D. Sytenko     (USSR)               |
    |           1981-1986  Viacheslav A. Ustinov  (USSR)               |
    |           1987-      Vasiliy S. Safronchuk  (USSR)               |
    +------------------------------------------------------------------+


    Subverting Our Sovereignty

    Are our leaders really implementing this plan? Yes, they are! The
    Nuclear Test Ban Treaty is part of it; the treaty banning the use
    of outer space for nuclear weapons is part of it; the Nuclear
    Non-Proliferation Treaty is part of it; and so is the Intermediate
    Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, signed by President Reagan and Soviet
    leader Gorbachev and formally ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1988.

    When Freedom From War was first made public, many startled
    Americans tried to obtain a copy. It was quickly declared "out of
    print' by federal authorities. Then, it was superseded in April
    1962 by a "more precise" statement of the U.S.  disarmament policy
    in a document entitled Blueprint For the Peace Race: Outline of
    Basic Provisions of a treaty on General and Complete Disarmament in
    a Peaceful World.

    Presented formally to an 18-nation UN Committee on Disarmament
    meeting in Geneva, the foreword to the Blueprint states that it
    doesn't cancel the plans given in Freedom From War. It merely
    "elaborates and extends the proposals of September 25," the date
    that Freedom From War was unveiled at UN headquarters by President
    Kennedy. In complete accord with Freedom From War, the Blueprint
    spells out its overall goal in the third of its three stages: "The
    Parties to the Treaty would progressively strengthen the United
    Nations Peace Force established in Stage II until it had sufficient
    armed forces and armaments so that no state could challenge it."

    When questioned about the commitment of the United States to the 
    Blueprint, A. Richard Richstein, General Council of the U.S. Arms 
    Control and Disarmament Agency, stated in a May 11, 1982 letter 
    that "the United States has never formally withdrawn this 
    proposal." In January 1991, William Nary, the official historian of 
    the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, confirmed again that "the 
    proposal has not been withdrawn." Mr. Nary also confirmed that 
    "certain features of it have been incorporated into subsequent 
    disarmament agreements."

    In summary, the plan to disarm the United States in favor of an
    all-powerful United Nations Peace Force is unfolding. It calls for
    relinquishing virtually all of our nation's military forces to a UN
    command whose leader, by agreement between the U.S. and the USSR
    during the founding sessions leading to the creation of the UN,
    will always be a communist.  In the end, "no state could challenge"
    the communist-led military power of the United Nations.

    This supposed "disarmament" program, therefore, is not as much
    about weapons elimination as it is about weapons distribution and
    control. If the program succeeds, only the UN and those nations
    skirting UN weapons prohibitions will be armed. It is remarkably
    similar to the drive that would outlaw private ownership of
    firearms. If that drive should ever succeed, only the government
    and those who are outlaws would possess guns. Law-abiding citizens
    would be at their mercy in the latter case; law-abiding nations
    would be at the mercy of the UN and outlaw nations in the other.


    Background To This Situation

    How did we get into such a situation?  Who are the individuals
    promoting such a suicidal proposal? Why is Congress going along
    instead of repudiating this dangerous program? How do we get out of
    it before it's too late?

    At the founding of the United Nations in 1945, the delegation from
    the United States included a young State Department official named
    Alger Hiss. Widely acclaimed for both his ability and his
    enthusiasm for the world organization, he rose to become the acting
    secretary general of the founding UN conference. As a member of the
    steering and executive committees of the conference, he played a
    major role in drafting the UN Charter. He also helped to staff the
    U.S.  delegation and was chosen by his peers for the prestigious
    task of personally transporting the Charter to the President and to
    the Senate for ratification.

    Alger Hiss, however, was later found to have been a secret
    communist, more loyal to a foreign power than to the nation of his
    birth. A 1950 State Department document named 15 other key U.S.
    government officials who were responsible for planning the creation
    of the UN. They, too, were subsequently named as secret communists
    by official agencies.


    Not only was the U.S.  represented by a sizeable number of
    communists, our nation's delegation also contained 43 individuals
    who were then or soon would be members of America's leading
    Establishment organization, the privately-run Council on Foreign
    Relations. Alger Hiss himself was both a communist and a CFR member
    as was another U.S. member of the UN planning team, Lauchlin
    Currie.  As communists, and as CFR members, they worked diligently
    to bring the world government into existence, and they labored just
    as hard to have the United States a part of it.

    There were, of course, delegations from the USSR and the other
    founding nations. These were made up of communists, socialists,
    one-worlders, and easily manipulated starry-eyed dreamers. All were
    committed to world government at the expense of national
    sovereignty.  All wanted the United Nations to be supreme. There
    was to be no more war as soon as the United Nations was given
    sufficient power, especially unchallenged military power, to keep
    the peace.

    For the past 45 years, intense pro-UN propaganda has convinced many
    Americans (and many others as well) that the words "peace" and
    "United Nations" are virtually interchangeable. Anyone who opposes
    the UN risks being labelled a warmonger. Those who support the UN
    customarily find themselves showered with accolades.

    Peace is so universally desired that almost anything seems
    reasonable to achieve it. Proposals to empower the UN with the
    world's dominant military capability have received widespread
    support. At first glance, the idea may seem to have some merit. A
    world police force formed to keep the peace.  Wouldn't it be
    wonderful!

    Suppose, however, that the unchallengeable power of the United
    Nations fell into the wrong hands? Suppose it ended up at the
    disposal of Alger Hiss and his comrades? Couldn't it be used to
    impose a tyranny on the rest of mankind? Wouldn't any would-be
    tyrant gravitate to the organization?

    Even if the UN were not run by communists, socialists, and
    one-worlders who despise nationhood, wouldn't the awesome power we
    are talking about be sufficient to corrupt anyone? Who would be
    able to bridle any UN leaders who had been given greater power than
    anyone else on earth?

    +------------------------------------------------------------------+
    |   Five years after the 1945 founding of the United Nations,      |
    |   official records released by the State Department* identified  |
    |   the individuals listed below as key U.S. contributors to the   |
    |   planning for the world organization. Each of the 16 was        |
    |   subsequently identified in sworn testimony before U.S.         |
    |   government agencies as a secret communist:                     |
    |                                                                  |
    |           Alger Hiss                                             |
    |           Harry Dexter White                                     |
    |           Virginius Frank Coe                                    |
    |           Noel Field                                             |
    |           Laurence Duggan                                        |
    |           Henry Julian Wadleigh                                  |
    |           John Carter Vincent                                    |
    |           David Weintraub                                        |
    |                                                                  |
    |           Nathan Gregory Silvermaster                            |
    |           Harold Glasser                                         |
    |           Victor Perlo                                           |
    |           Irving Kaplan                                          |
    |           Solomon Adler                                          |
    |           Abraham George Silverman                               |
    |           William K.Ullman                                       |
    |           William H. Taylor                                      |
    |                                                                  |
    |   * Postwar Foreign Policy Preparation, 1939-1945,               |
    |     U.S. State Department                                        |
    +------------------------------------------------------------------+


    Don't Discard Americanism

    It can't be said too often that America is unique. Our nation began
    with the thunderous assertion in the Declaration of Independence
    that "men ... are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
    rights." According to the founding premise of this nation, rights
    come from God, not from government. And the Declaration then
    declared that governments are formed solely "to secure these
    rights." That's all!  Secure God-given rights, not provide for
    wants, redistribute the wealth, or make dependent serfs out of the
    people.

    With the marvelous foundation laid in the Declaration, the men who
    formed this unique and wonderful nation then wrote a Constitution
    whose sole purpose was to govern the government, not the people.
    America was expected to be a nation where the government was
    limited by law and the people were limited by freely accepted moral
    codes such as those found in the Ten Commandments.

    Nothing like America had ever existed in all history. And did this
    nation prosper! Millions left the old world to come here penniless
    - not to be cared for but to enjoy freedom and opportunity. America
    became the hope of the world - even for those who were not
    fortunate enough to live within our borders.

    The United Nations, on the other hand, has no place for God. If
    rights don't come from God, the presumption is that they are
    granted by government. The UN actually fosters such a presumption,
    as can be discovered in its International Covenants on Human
    Rights. What must be understood is that a government that presumes
    to grant fundamental rights - which is what the UN does - is a
    government that can suspend them at will. If the "self-evident"
    truths in the Declaration of Independence are canceled or forgotten
    in favor of the UN's ways, all rights given us by our Creator will
    exist only at the pleasure of the United Nations.

    The reality here is that the UN turns the entire American system on
    its head. To consider submitting our nation to the dictates of the
    anti-American, pro-communist and Godless United Nations is
    suicidal. Yet, this is exactly what our leaders have been working
    towards for several decades.  Sad to say, it is perfectly obvious
    that this is precisely what President Bush is talking about when he
    repeatedly expresses his desire to create a "new world order."

    Unfortunately, the desire for peace has clouded the vision of many
    otherwise clear-thinking Americans. Many have been persuaded to
    think only of the concept of "peace," but not what kind of peace.
    No one should ever forget that there is the peace of the grave, the
    peace of submission, and the communist peace that consists of no
    opposition to communism. Peace with justice, the goal of anyone
    possessing good will, is as likely under UN domination as is the
    chance that water will flow uphill.

    Whenever thoughts such as these are brought to the attention of
    sensible Americans, enthusiasm for UN-style peace diminishes.
    "Let's keep our independence!" is a common response. "Why should we
    trust others to look after our well-being?" is another.  But too
    few are aware of the dangers inherent in an all-powerful world
    government. And too few, therefore, have been guarding against
    transferring U.S. military forces and U.S. sovereignty to the
    United Nations.


    The "New World Order"

    In an exclusive interview published in the December 31, 1990 / 
    January 7, 1991 issue of U.S. News & World Report, President Bush 
    called for "a reinvigorated United Nations" that he hoped would 
    bring about the "new world order." What should be reinvigorated 
    instead are the U.S.  Declaration of Independence and the 
    Constitution.

    During a January 9, 1991 press conference. Mr. Bush said that the
    crisis in the Middle East "has to do with a new world order [that]
    is only going to be enhanced if this newly activated peacekeeping
    function of the United Nations proves to be effective." Obviously,
    he considers our forces in the Middle East to have been under the
    UNs peacekeeping jurisdiction. And isn't it curious that this
    supposed "peace" organization's authority was used to start the
    Persian Gulf war?

    Then, in his January 19,1991 speech to the nation, the President
    again touted the "new world order," describing it as "an order in
    which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to
    fulfill the promise and vision of the UN's founders. " He didn't
    remind anyone that the UN s founders were communists. socialists,
    one-worlders, and starry-eyed dreamers who would happily tear down
    the unique foundations of the United States and replace them with
    the UN Charter.


    What To Do To Save America

    Answers to some of the questions we have already raised, and to
    others that anyone reading this pamphlet surely must have, begin
    with an understanding of the grip on America held by the Council on
    Foreign Relations.  Mr. Bush, a member of the CFR s Board of
    Directors as recently as 1979, can point to more than 350 CFR
    members currently serving as U.S.  Government officials. A similar
    CFR dominance prevailed during the Reagan years and in several
    previous administrations.

    Current U.S. officials holding membership in the CFR include
    Secretary of Defense Cheney, National Security Advisor Scowcroft,
    Joint Chiefs Chairman Powell, CIA Director Webster, and Deputy
    Secretary of State Eagleburger. Don't expect any to block further
    entanglement of the United States in the UN.

    There are also 16 U.S. senators and a like number of U.S.
    representatives who hold membership in this organization.  Don't
    expect them to protect our nation from UN domination.

    Realize too, that practically every nationally important organ of
    the news media is led by a CFR member.  Any senator or
    representative who wishes to receive favor from the media goes
    along with subverting America to internationalists goals.  Any
    senator or representative who tries to keep our nation independent
    runs the risk of having the media make him seem like a lunatic.

    The great majority of the American people who value their freedom
    and their nation's independence have to become informed and alarmed
    about the path down which we are being taken. There will be no
    change without a rising tide of indignation. And there will be no
    rising tide of indignation until the frightening details about the
    ongoing subversion of this nation have been placed in the hands of
    a great many more Americans.

    Happily, there are reliable sources of information both about
    President George Bush's commitment to his "new world order" and
    about the Council on Foreign Relations itself. We highly recommend
    two books:

        1. The Establishment's Man, by James J. Drummey. A tastefully
        written yet devastating expose of the political career of
        George Bush.

        2. The Shadows of Power, by James Perloff.  A history of the
        Council on Foreign Relations taken from its own papers and
        publications.

    The enemy is within the gates of our great land. Those who would
    deliver our nation to a UN-controlled "new world order" have
    achieved great power and influence. Whether they are stopped in
    time is up to individuals who will read a pamphlet like this one.
    books like those recommended above, and a great deal more
    information that is available to anyone. Once informed, an
    American worthy of the name will work with others to throw the
    rascals out of office, and, in the words of George Washington, "put
    none but Americans" in charge of guarding this nation.

