Additional Titles

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other
Veon
Articles:

Global Taxation And Tax Harmonization

Does The
Global Economy Need a Global Currency?

 

More Veon Articles:

 

 

 

 

 

 

IS THE FOURTH OF JULY A RUSE FOR “WE THE PEOPLE”?

 

 

 

By Joan Veon
July 4, 2008
NewsWithViews.com

The 232nd 4th of July celebrations are soon to be over for another year. We might even smirk at our good fortune, but are we really free of them? The research that I have done over the last 15 years continues to show that we have been brought back under British rule. While I thought the reunion began in 1944 with creation of the IMF/World Bank and 1945 with the United Nations, I recently found the charade goes back to 1794. While it appears that we are independent, we are not. My first inkling that something was amiss began when I discovered Prince Charles supported the population reducing environmental philosophy of sustainable development. I found he was a major player behind the scenes to get this diabolical agenda to “go down” at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. He also organized a major meeting in Charleston two years earlier in 1990 to bring together CEO’s from the world’s most powerful companies to help lobby for Agenda 21 in Rio and then for them to help change the structure of government through public-private partnerships.

As I researched the United Nations and started working on my first book, Prince Charles the Sustainable Prince, I realized that the British were the power behind that organization. I have yet to change my mind. If anything, the evidence starts to compound. In 2004, while covering the World Trade Organization meeting in Cancun Mexico, I interviewed three officials from different British Commonwealth countries. In separate interviews I asked them the same questions and received the same responses: They are poor and starving and even though they are members of the Commonwealth, there is no help from Britain. When asked why they don’t withdraw from the Commonwealth, each of them looked at me with great fear and said, “We can’t.” To which I replied, “Then you are not free.” I went home upset because something was wrong.

As I started to research the Commonwealth, I found the Treaty of Westminster signed in 1931 put in place the Commonwealth structure as a way for the monarch to create the illusion that her colonies had independence when in fact it was a plan devised in the 1920s by the Royal Institute for International Affairs, now called Chatham House. The 1926 Balfour Declaration established Britain and its dominions were “equal in status, in no way subordinate to one another in any aspect of their domestic or external affairs, though united by common allegiance to the Crown and freely associated as members of the British Commonwealth of Nations.” While colonies were given legislative independence, it automatically set the basis for continuing the relationship through the Commonwealth in which they share allegiance to the monarch! Therefore, the Queen is not only Queen of Canada, but Queen of 12 other colonies in our hemisphere which include: The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Jamaica, and Trinidad and Tobago. Today at the international level, the U.S. is outvoted by the Commonwealth at all global institutions: the United Nations, the World Bank, the World Trade Organization, the G8, the G7, the Free Trade Areas of the Americas, etc. To our one vote, the Commonwealth has the potential of 54 votes.


Advertisement

If that were not enough, I have long suspected that when all the countries of the world signed on and became part of the international infrastructure: the United Nations, the World Bank, etc. that they were also signing on to some form of allegiance to the Crown. Providing me with a major link is a book I recently came across a book, Dispute Settlement in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea by Natalie Klein, published in 2005 by Cambridge University Press. To my shock, Ms. Klein writes,

“The Jay Treaty was a precedent for the settlement of the Alabama claims.”

I recently became acquainted with the never discussed and somehow forgotten Jay Treaty which every red-blooded American should know about. During the Civil War, ships owned by the state of Alabama were damaged by a British frigate. A Commission of Inquiry was set up so England could settle the damage dispute with Alabama. Interestingly enough, the procedure for the formation for International Commission of Inquiry go back to the Jay Treaty of 1794. It appears that all U.S. foreign policy comes out of the Jay Treaty and that all UN legal policy goes back to it. From www.yale.edu, we find,

The Jay Treaty. Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and navigation, signed at London November 19, 1794, with additional article Original in English. Submitted to the Senate June 8, Resolution of advice and consent, on condition, June 24, 1795. Ratified by the United States August 14, 1795. Ratified by Great Britain October 28, 1795. Ratifications exchanged at London October 28, 1795. Proclaimed [only kings proclaim] February 29, 1796.

Treaty of Amity Commerce and Navigation, between His Britannick Majesty; and the United States of America, by Their President, with the advice and consent of Their Senate. (Emphasis added)

Furthermore, the Jay Treaty incorporates the concept of the Commission of Inquiry which evolved out of the negotiating framework that established the 1794 Jay Treaty negotiations. According to historian Pitman B. Potter who wrote An Introduction to the Study of International Organizations, published in 1922,

The commission of inquiry originated in the ‘mixed commission,’ which had been extensively used since 1794, when the institution was adopted by Great Britain and the United States for conducting certain arbitrations provided in the Jay Treaty.

He further states on page 206, that a Commission of Inquiry is “[A] body of persons acting as a unified international governmental institution.” What?? That then means anytime we discuss or have a meeting on the international level that a Commission of Inquiry is being set up. He goes on to explain,

“A great improvement has since been made by the United States in this regard in concluding some thirty-five treaties with different nations providing for commissions of inquiry to be appointed in advance of the occurrence of any dispute between parties.” (Potter, p.209)

Potter goes on to explain that the 1794 Jay Treaty established the world’s first recognized international government,

“The year 1794 is frequently taken as a date from which the history of modern international arbitration is to be traced. In a sense this is accurate, for the Jay Treaty of that year, between Great Britain and the United States, made provision for three arbitrations and thus inaugurated that Anglo-American practice of arbitration which has been the leading factor in promoting the development of arbitration since that time.” (Page 225)

According to Potter, as a result of the Hague Peace Conference of 1899, the Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes was signed in July 1899 at The Hague. From 1899 to 1921, “arbitration assumed the proportions of an international fad with the United States and Great Britain still leading the movement but with all of the world joining in vogue (page 226).” This is the legal basis for the Commission of Inquiry which President Wilson convened to settle World War I.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!


Enter Your E-Mail Address:

Interestingly enough the Versailles Peace Treaty which established the League of Nations which came out of the Commission of Inquiry. Furthermore, the Council on Foreign Relations-CFR came out of the Commission of Inquiry, "The vision that stirred the Inquiry became the work of the Council on Foreign Relations over a better part of the century." It should be noted that the CFR has the same objective as Chatham House—bringing the world under British rule. What Ms. Klein was explaining in her book is that the Commission of Inquiry is part of the Law of the Sea Treaty! Is it as possible as it looks that the entire global infrastructure comes from the Commission of Inquiry process and the Jay Treaty of 1796? In other words, we never broke with Britain as they created other ways to keep us in the fold. Using multiple techniques, the British created the international level of government they control. Tea anyone?

2008 Joan Veon - All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

Order Joan Veon's book;
"The United Nations'
Global Straitjacket"



 



Joan Veon is a businesswoman and international reporter, who has covered over 100 Global meetings around the world since 1994. Please visit her website: www.womensgroup.org. To get a copy of her WTO report, send $10.00 to The Women's International Media Group, Inc. P. O. Box 77, Middletown, MD 21769. For an information packet, please call 301-371-0541

E-Mail: t7w7g7@aol.com

Website: www.womensgroup.org


 

Home

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

As I started to research the Commonwealth, I found the Treaty of Westminster signed in 1931 put in place the Commonwealth structure as a way for the monarch to create the illusion that her colonies had independence when in fact it was a plan devised in the 1920s by the Royal Institute for International Affairs, now called Chatham House.