Issue: S. 793 Organization of American States Revitalization and Reform Act. (Sponsor: Senator Robert Menendez, N.J.) Question: On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended (2/3 vote required).
Result: Passed/agreed to in House, 383 to 24, 25 not voting. Senate agreed to House amendments by unanimous consent. Became Public Law 113-41 (signed by president 10/2/13). GOP and Democrats scored.
Congressional Research Service Summary: Organization of American States Revitalization and Reform Act of 2013 — States that it is U.S. policy to: (1) promote democracy, the rule of law, and human rights in the Western Hemisphere; and (2) support the practices and principles expressed in the Charter of the Organization of American States, the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man, the Inter-American Democratic Charter, and other fundamental instruments of democracy. [Emphasis added.]
Expresses the sense of Congress that: (1) the Organization of American States (OAS) should be the primary multi-lateral diplomatic entity for regional dispute resolution and promotion of democratic governance; (2) the Summit of the Americas process should be formally and more effectively integrated into the work of the OAS, the Inter-American Development Bank, and other Members of the Joint Summit Working Group; (3) the OAS has historically accepted too many member state mandates creating unclear priorities and loss of institutional focus; and (4) it is in the interest of the United States and the OAS and its member states to move toward an assessed fee structure that assures financial sustainability and establishes, within five years, that no member state pays more than 50% of the organization’s assessed fees. [Emphasis added.]
Directs the Secretary of State to submit to Congress a multiyear strategy that: (1) leads to such assessed fee structure, (2) identifies a path toward the adoption of necessary reforms that prioritize the core competencies of the OAS, (3) outlines a results-based budgeting process to prioritize current and future mandates and transparent hiring and promotion practices, and (4) reflects the inputs and coordination from other executive branch agencies.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) carry out diplomatic engagement to build support for reforms and budgetary burden sharing among OAS member states and observers, and (2) promote donor coordination among OAS member states.
Analysis: This “bipartisan” measure reinforces the common, but false notion that the CFR-dominated U.S. State Department and OAS have been opposing Communism and promoting freedom throughout the world.
Although both have feigned opposition to Communism, their record is quite different. For decades, the Internationalists in Washington have supported Communism while ostensibly opposing it and while hamstringing U.S. military opposition, as in Korea and Vietnam. The threat of Communism served as a useful foil for building their multi-lateral and international institutions in a global power grab.
[Former Stanford University researcher, Antony C. Sutton, documents this perverse strategy in action with his aptly named 1986 book, The Best Enemy Money Can Buy. For a thorough exposition of internationalist aims and strategy, we recommend Masters of Deception published by the Freedom First Society.]
This “bipartisan” measure was introduced by Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, ranking member Bob Corker (R-TN), along with committee members Tom Udall (D-NM) and Marco Rubio (R-FL). The full Senate approved the measure by unanimous consent.
The Senate bill was subsequently amended in the House Committee on Foreign Affairs to require the Secretary of State to develop a plan to move toward an assessed OAS fee structure in which the United States would not bear more than 50 percent of the burden.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor placed the bill on the House Schedule for consideration under a suspension of the rules (this roll call). Following House approval, the Senate agreed to the House amendment by unanimous consent and the president signed the bill into law on October 4th.
This innocent-sounding measure primarily serves to give added legitimacy to the subversive internationalism of an Insider Establishment that has a grip on the federal government. Significantly, the measure did manage to become Public Law in a year when an unusually low number of bills made it that far.
The failure of most congressmen to oppose this foreign policy directive highlights the lack of backbone currently in Congress and the often-casual nature of voting when there are no obvious political consequences. Still the House roll call did offer those representatives with sufficient understanding and backbone the opportunity to stand up to the deceptions camouflaging the internationalist agenda. It is encouraging that 24 representatives did take the time to understand the measure and decided not to support it.
The overwhelming bipartisan support for revitalizing the OAS reminds us of another example of mindless support. In 1971, the Texas legislature unanimously passed a resolution honoring Albert DeSalvo [the Boston Strangler] for his innovative work in population control. The measure was introduced as an April Fool’s Day joke by one representative who sought to demonstrate that his colleagues were not putting due diligence into researching the legislation they were passing.
But whereas the Texas resolution/joke did no harm, this Act reinforces a very dangerous agenda. We will examine several of the Establishment deceptions in the OAS measure.
The Organization of American States (OAS) was formed in 1948 at a hemispheric conference in Bogota led by U.S. Secretary of State George C. Marshall. 21 American countries signed the charter for the OAS. Out of the meeting came a pledge by members to fight Communism in the Western Hemisphere. The meeting also adopted the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man (see below).
As Secretary of State, trusted Establishment Insider George C. Marshall had recently accomplished something similar in Europe. At the end of World War II, Congress approved the European Recovery Program (ERP) — a program of massive aid to Europe, popularly known as the Marshall Plan. The Marshall Plan was actually developed by a CFR study group — headed by Charles M. Spofford with David Rockefeller as secretary.
Recognizing American political sentiments, however, the foreign aid was cleverly sold as a means to help stop the spread of Communism. In general, American Insiders have used foreign aid to saddle recipient nations with socialist policies and governments. The ERP certainly followed that pattern. But in Europe the aid was also used to promote European unification. The same game plan is now being executed in the Western Hemisphere and the OAS and the American Inter-Development Bank are part of the plan.
In the late 1970s, the OAS joined the Carter State Department in helping to topple the government of Nicaragua under President Anastasio Somoza and usher in the pro-Castro Sandanista regime.
Nicaraguan President Anastasio Somoza was one of our most friendly allies in Latin America, having been educated in the U.S. since early childhood and having graduated from West Point. Moreover, Nicaragua was a constitutional republic patterned after the U.S.
However, during the late 1970s, the Cuban- and Soviet-backed guerilla forces of the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) targeted the Somoza government. Concurrently, media reports began depicting Somoza as a corrupt dictator and gross violator of human rights.
The OAS voted to recognize the FSLN as the legitimate government of Nicaragua. In doing so, the OAS stripped the government of Anastasio Somoza of its legitimacy
The overthrow of Somoza brought to power the brutal regime of Daniel Ortega, which immediately received substantial U.S. aid. The Ortega regime declared itself “a revolution without borders,” and began to support guerrilla forces in neighboring El Salvador.
Inter-American Development Bank
“With the full approval and concurrence of the U.S. government, money from a variety of sources poured into Nicaragua to aid the Sandinista regime. A gift of $500,000 was immediately forthcoming from the Organization of American States. The Inter-American Development Bank quickly granted the Sandinista government $107 million in grants, and pledged to extend another $120 million over a four-year period. By the end of 1979, the government of Daniel Ortega had been given a total of $89 million in gifts and offered $490 million in international loans.” — The New American, July 20, 1987.
The Inter-American Development Bank has been heavily subsidized by U.S. taxpayers, and many of its officers have been members of the Insiders’ Council on Foreign Relations.
In a November 29, 1993 memo to President Bill Clinton, National Security Adviser Anthony Lake suggested: Hemispheric institutions, including the OAS and Inter-American Development Bank and now the NAFTA institutions, can be forged into the vital mechanisms of hemispheric governance.
American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man
The international-socialists regularly promote their schemes under cover of terms they know to be popular with most Americans. The American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man is a good example. It was adopted by the nations of the Americas at the same 1948 international conference in Bogota that created the OAS.
The civil and political “rights” described in Chapter 1 of the Declaration would certainly have been anathema to our nation’s Founders. For example, Article XII states:
“Every person has the right to an education, which should be based on the principles of liberty, morality and human solidarity.
“Likewise every person has the right to an education that will prepare him to attain a decent life, to raise his standard of living, and to be a useful member of society…..
“Every person has the right to receive, free, at least a primary education.
And Article XVI reads: “Every person has the right to social security which will protect him from the consequences of unemployment, old age, and any disabilities arising from causes beyond his control that make it physically or mentally impossible for him to earn a living.”
But Chapter 2 should raise even greater alarm. Chapter 2 lists the duties of the individual corresponding to the “rights” identified in Chapter 1. While we need government to protect the rights of all, there is no place in a legitimate Bill of Rights for a collectivist prescription of the duties of man.
A similar principle was incorporated in the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the largely socialist UN general assembly a few months later. Contrary to the U.S. view of rights as inalienable, coming from God, not government, the UN’s Universal Declaration proceeds from the concept that government grants rights (and so can take them away).
Article 29, paragraph 3 of the UN’s Universal Declaration (referring to the supposed rights and freedoms specified elsewhere in the document) states: “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.”
The Summit of the Americas
The Summits of the Americas are a series of meetings bringing together the leaders of the countries of North America, Central America, South America, and the Caribbean (except Cuba) ostensibly under the overall leadership of the Organization of American States.
In 1994, the formerly ad hoc summits were established as regular summits ostensibly to promote democracy and free trade throughout the hemisphere.
In reality, these regular summits were organized to promote the internationalist goal of merging nations into regional governments, a la the European Union, as a steppingstone to world government. As with the EU, the first steps toward political merger were misleadingly presented as mere free trade agreements.
The 1st (1994) Summit of the Americas was held in Miami a year following the U.S. ratification of NAFTA. The Miami Summit was entirely a David Rockefeller show. Out of this Summit came the proposal for expanding NAFTA to a 34-nation Free Trade Area of the Americas.
Each Summit would produce a Declaration and Plan of Action, committing the signatories to implementing UN treaties, conventions, and programs. The UN family of multilateral lending institutions — the IMF, World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank — as well as the U.S. government would offer financial incentives (read bribes) to the poorer nations to go along with the process.
Joint Summit Working Group
A “Joint Summit Working Group” chaired by an agency of the OAS coordinates the support of twelve Inter-American and international institutions to help implement the Summits “process.” Among the 12 members of the Working Group are the principle internationalist players organized to promote the long-term goal of political merger of the nations in this hemisphere. Much of the leadership for organizing this deceptive plan comes from members of the inner core of the Council on Foreign Relations.
The 12 participating organizations include: the OAS itself, the Inter-American Development Bank, the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC) — one of the five regional commissions of the United Nations, the Central American Bank for Economic Integration, the World Bank, the International Organization for Migration, the UN’s International Labor Organization (ILO), and the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), an agency that has supervised gun collection programs in scores of nations.
We have assigned (good vote) to the Nays and (bad vote) to the Yeas. (P = voted present; ? = not voting; blank = not listed on roll call.)