Home Living Security Council Resolutions

Security Council Resolutions

img src: https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/


I’m not one for political activism concerning election meddling. However, it’s apparent that a regime is intent on distorting both media presentation to the public, covering up wrong doing, and weaponizing government departments to rid themselves (limit competitive capability) of their competition for election wins.

This is nothing new the world over. Can U.S. governing entity, meaning certain offices and directors, really be considered for election meddling for the first time? I think not.

The notion that the U.S. is now a “bananna republic” is a ridiculous meme by foreigners engaged in propaganda to be sure.

Russian politicians cannot possibly point the finger at U.S. politicians and call the kettle black, nor French, or any European factions to say the least.

If you want to throw in Belarus, Venezuela, Brazil, and Pakistan to the mix, well, what’s the pont?

The fact the Super Powers, i.e., U.S., China, Russia, EU are vying for “votes” to either install their puppet regimes or control governing office in some format is obvious and negates the need of mentioning. It’s called global chess and the adage that “if you don’t do something, the other guy will” applies.

Every government wants to win a competitive advantage over their enemey or in general as this is human relations in life and sport  – win. It’s why we have both athletic and academic competition. You’re never going to stop humans from trying to be the best and winning at all costs.

The difference is how far will an entity go to win at the cost of ethics, morality, cheating (illegal activity), and any other bad injection of adverse action to win.

We cleary see that those who remain in office, somehow re-elected for decade after decade is illegitimate – duh.

And we see why they are destroying sports competition with transgender athletes to make a population not want to be competitive at all. It’s a tactical way of getting Americans to stop athletic competition, taken over by the Gestapo and then eventually disbanded to eliminate any type pf nationalism.

No different than a gun grab. A simple tactical erosion at every level: sports, religion, politics, morality, ethics, small business, medical, gender confusion, food production, climate manipulation, resource hegemony.

Yet it seems the U.S. population has yet to grapple with this advanced stage of evil intent election fraud, while other countries have already been dealing with this hard truth for a century.

To put it lightly those doing the cheating have invested vast amount of resource to gauge whether there will be a rebellion psychoanalytically while at the same time re-working societal brains to accept such a defeat or loss of “freedom” through many forms of indignity: marijuana, transgendering, confusionism, mischling, energy wave patterns, nanoparticles, poison products, video games, social media addiction, religious erosion.

U.S. governing bodies have not “sunk down” into the swamp as we are told by Trump, who by the way signed the executive orders causing mass vaccination, death, and carnage for Pharma $$$, but in effect are catching up to the rest of the worlds politicians corruption as globalism becomes a realisitic borderless reality.

Americans seem to have no understanding that the United Nations Security Council and the 5 permanent members (U.S., U.K., Russia, France, China) determine global policy, law, and adherence of each members standing. Constitutional law is secondary to Security Council resolutions quite honestly and we can diagnose some articles to understand this broadly.

In June 2008, fifteen years go, the Security Council put out a report explaining to YOU how countries must do what the permanent members say regardless of your nations laws, constitution, or whatever legal drafts are made by citizens, judges, or governing bodies.

You can read the full pdf: Special Research Report No. 1: Security Council Action Under Chapter VII: Myths and Realities

You can also go to the website link to read the data: https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/research-reports/lookup-c-glkwlemtisg-b-4202671.php

In the report one will find astonishing data that explains how your country and YOU the citizen have your decisions made for you by those elected to the Security Council.

“The list of Council specific powers in
article 24 (2) is structured more like a
non-exhaustive list than a restrictive one.
And it is also the case that the Charter
grants powers to the Council in other
chapters, such as:
n formulating plans for the establish-
ment of an arms control system (article
26, Chapter V); and
n deciding “upon measures” to enforce
ICJ judgments under article 94 (2).” (page 6 pdf)

“A NON-EXHAUSTIVE LIST OF POWERS.”

“Article 25 says that membersagree to
accept and carry out the decisions of the
Security Council in accordance with the
present Charter.’ The word “decisions”
in article 25 is not expressly limited to
Chapter VII.” (page 6 pdf)

Now of course the United Nations must be given the green light to use NATO for acts of war based on Security Council “voting” to keep the peace. How well these demands work for compliance can be examined with nations such as North Korea concerning nuclear dismantling.

“2. Demands that the DPRK suspend all
activities related to its ballistic missile
programme, and in this context re-
establish its pre-existing commitments
to a moratorium on missile launching;

3. Requires all Member States, in
accordance with their national legal
authorities and legislation and consis-
tent with international law, to exercise
vigilance and prevent missile and mis-
sile-related items, materials, goods
and technology being transferred to
DPRK’s missile or WMD programmes;”

North Korea didn’t listen or comply and no action other than sanctions/embargo occurred based on public knowledge.

So although the Security Council acts as the police force of the world, it still takes an act of brazen war to invade a nation using NATO to fulfill it’s need and whether or not the U.S., France, Russia, England, and China (the permanent members) are willing to agree and commit to such endeavor.

The threat humanity face is whether these permanent bodies (until ceased) agree upon a solution for humanity and unilaterally carry their policies out using force. In books of the Bible and Talmud tractate this can be referred to as the one world governing body taken over by the anti-Christ or Tzadik who becomes Moshiach, depending on what religion and opinion you believe.

“The UK representa-
tive stressed thatthe Democratic
People’s Republic of Korea and all States
concerned must now comply with these
obligations.’ The representative of Japan
also emphasised that the resolutionis
strong in its message and binding on
Member States under the United Nations
Charter on measures related to the main-
tenance of international peace and
security.’ And the representative of Rus-
sia stated that “we believe that the
decision sends an appropriate signal to
the Democratic People’s Republic of
Korea on the need to show restraint and
to abide by its obligations regarding
missiles” (S/PV.5490).” (page 10 pdf)

“The UK representative stated that
his government considered that “the
Security Council can take decisions
generally binding on member states
only when the Security Council has
made a determination under article 39
that a threat to the peace, breach of the
peace or act of aggression exists. Only
in these circumstances are the decisions
binding under Article 25” (S/PV.1589).”

So how do we determine what threatens the peace? Can we say under the broad powers, which are non-exhaustive to the council, that conservatives the world over are a threat to peace? That Christians, Jews, or Muslims, religion in general is a threat to peace? One can imagine what the broad powers can define when there is no limit to such power of “declaration”.

Historically we can evaluate that the Security Council is overlord to the “smaller” countries and determines their fate based on internal decisions and squabbling over what resources should be levied and disbursed to the members who have particular interest or connections to internal political regimes that dominate or have infrastructure consolidation.

Peace is a word to describe what screws up profit sharing and in many regard is the tool wielded to determine what actions must take place and in which Security Council member deems a profitable or unprofitable venture.

North Korea was deemed an unprofitable venture, thus, lack of war interest. Ukraine is deemed a profitable, resource rich venture. Thus, a united agreed upon war effort. Security Council members must provide and enact “resolutions” for peace and security, but if one of the members is the one doing the “war” certainly the resolutions enacted to provide peace or war by NATO will be for their personal interest, or vice versa.

Reading the Security Council special research report, one can conclude that permanent members determined resolutions by drafting their opinions of what should be done with, for example, Angola, South Africa, or Lebanon by submitting documentation of what they wished to occur and then voting on what was submitted to enact as legally binding as by military enforcement or sanctions to get the results desired.

I’m not suggesting each case is nefarious and that in many regard the Council was seeking peaceful resolutions to a situation, but not in every aspect. As pointed out if a faction takes over the Council what then will be pressed as ideology or enforcement by permanent members as a global initiative?

“No agenda is ever
adopted under the Council’s Provisional
Rules of Procedure. Consultations are
informal gatherings of members in their
individual capacity of which no official
records are kept and, as such, state-
ments agreed in those sessions are
technically not decisions. Reflecting this,
press statements do not have official
symbols, and some of them are not even
publicised in writing through UN press
releases.25″ (page 13 pdf)

And in this day and age the press is weaponized to influence policy decisions or sway the public to believe simple propaganda hammered out 24/7.

Can you imagine MSNBC being the only news allowed at military bases as retired United States Army lieutenant Colonel Alexander Vindman suggest? Total indoctrination and a break down of American society is what these traitors want. I don’t know if you’re familiar with the propaganda bait click machine of MSNBC which commands less than a million viewers daily, the majority of which are over 60 years of age. https://www.statista.com/statistics/742225/frequency-of-watching-cable-news-in-the-us-age/

A small percentage of the population is still innundated with MSNBC drivel and they are grouped with the “moon landing” lack of intelligence crowd. By the way, as usual the name Vindman is old German and means “crooked,”

As you will always note there will be a GERMAN lineage name representing just about every government institution or large public corporation out there. From Big Pharma, to the DOJ, DOD, Blackrock, to Klaus Schwab’s WEF. Including former President Donald Trump, you will find that they all have German backgrounds. The majority of those complaining on forums will tell you their “Jews,” but they’re not.

It’s just a trick to get you to blame a small religious community for what atheist German bad guys have been doing since WWII and now they’re about to start WWIII. Many claim to be atheist same sex marriage or transgender Jews to hide behind antisemitism in case anyone comes after them.

“Win the hearts and minds of the people” can be translated to confuse the minds of the people or keep them stupidly ignorant of reality. Security Council members are engaged in the business of breaking nations and governing bodies using articles and resolutions to get what they want all under the guise of “peace and security,” a similar phrase used in both the Book of Revelation and the Book of Daniel.

Who can be bound by a Security Council decision? Member states.

 

“Member states have the responsibility under
international law to implement Council
decisions whether general or specific.
Articles 25, 48 and 49 indicate that states
have the obligation not just to tolerate
binding Council decisions, but, depend-
ing on the specific content of those
decisions, to carry them out and join in
offering mutual assistance.” (page 13 pdf)

“It is important to note that the Charter
refers tostates’, and not simply
‘governments.’ This suggests that not
just the executive, but that the state as a
whole is responsible for ensuring that
the legislative and judiciary at all levels
(local and national) observe and imple-
ment binding Council decisions.

What this means is Security Council resolutions are binding to the United States government and that the United States government is to ENFORCE foreign decisions upon their own States and supplant both legislative and judiciary as obligation.

In the end it’s up to Congress and the President to enforce obligations through both law and Executive Orders. Every citizen should be monitoring Security Council resolutions and what any President is doing in conjunction with these foreign decisions concerning enforcement by Federal governing bodies.

It’s a choice to enforce Security Council decisions regardless of what their members say must be done. There is a long history of nations completely ignoring the Council and getting by just fine in doing so. In other instance, the UN has been used to keep the peace but we can see abuse at every level since the Council’s enactment.

The condition of man is corruption to be sure. Political power insures corruption.

“During the 1970s the Council expanded
the ambit of its reach and began the use
of “all states” as opposed to “all states
members.” In resolution 418 (1977), the
Council imposed an arms embargo on
South Africa in which “all states” were
required to comply.”

“the obligations of the Member States of the United Nations under the Charter of the United Nations clearly prevail over every other obligation of domestic law or of international treaty law,” 29 (page 16 pdf)

Just say no to drugs and the charter kids.

“Article 25 says that members agree to accept and carry out the decisions of the Security Council in accordance with the present Charter.’”

The question to legal advisors, has the Constitution become secondary to Security Council resolutions and Executive Orders by a President seeing it takes years to sue in a court of law?

Once you understand the answer legally then you can define “freedom” and who actually controls politics and law in the nation you reside. Certainly the data funneled to you through puppet media parrots concerning the constitution and international law is incorrect.

The real threat to the American way of life is inept crime lords who abuse their power and bring a nation to the brink of nuclear war. I have a no-confidence vote in President Biden, which is my personal opinion, and reflects the national polls and the majority of American citizens. It’s obvious he has too many handlers guiding his decision making. Whether Security Council members or his loyalty to the Rhodes Scholar agenda as speculation matters not.

With former President Trump indicted, who are your options, RFK Jr., Governor DeSantis? I don’t think a day goes by without MSNBC doing a negative hit piece on DeSantis which is an attempt to alter viewers decisions on voting for him – election meddling. The most important vote is that of senior citizens and that is definitely the majority of the viewers with the click bait machine known as MSNBC.

In either selection or installment of a President as we understand as elections now, the main attribute is whether the individual can be coerced by economic factors driving and adhering to Security Council resolutions. And apparently reading cue cards correctly without going off script…

And that my dear reader is a part of what determines elections per “member and non-member states.”