Habitat SymbolIsmail Seragelding
Plan For Human Settlements
"Land...cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice; if unchecked, it may become a major obstacle in the planning and implementation of development schemes. Public control of land use is therefore indispensable...." (Item #10 in the UN agenda at the 1976 Habitat I. American delegates supported this policy)
Bicycles instead of cars? Dense apartment clusters instead of single homes? Community rituals instead of churches? "Human rights" instead of religious freedom?
The UN Conference on Human Settlements (Habitat II) which met June 3-14 in Istanbul, painted an alarming picture of the 21st century community. The American ways-free speech, individualism, travel, and Christianity-are out. A new set of economic, environmental, and social guidelines are in. Citizenship, democracy, and education have been redefined. Handpicked civil leaders will implement UN "laws", bypassing state and national representatives to work directly with the UN. And politically correct "tolerance"-meaning "the rejection of dogmatism and absolutism" as well as "appreciation" for the world's religions and lifestyles-is "not only a moral duty, it is also a political and legal requirement."1
Hard to believe? Not for veteran UN observers who faced boos and hisses for expressing concern in open UN assemblies. Nor for pro-family members of NGOs (Non-Governmental Organizations) who faced exclusion from public dialogues for opposing feminist commander Bella Abzug and her radical agenda. And not for those who watched the ecstatic welcome given Fidel Castro and his anti-American diatribe.
Yet, our president and our non-elected American delegates, headed by U.S. Secretary Henry Cisneros, endorse this revolutionary plan, and our U.S. Department of Education is already establishing the framework for its local implementation. Why? What is happening?
"We are the world and the world does not yield to masters nor to suicidal policies," declared Castro, concluding his June 14 plenary remarks aimed at Western capitalist nations. "The world does not accept that a minority of selfish, insane and irresponsible people lead it to annihilation."
"Fidel, Fidel..." shouted the audience. The thunderous applause followed him all the way back to the Cuban section on the other side of the hall, where fans lined up to shake his hand.
Why are you so enthusiastic?" I asked some of his fans after the session.
"Because he stood up to America," someone answered.
"Because he is a living myth," explained another. "He was a simple guerrilla, fighting for the oppressed against the rich and powerful."
"Fighting for the oppressed..." The UN claims that mission, but third-world women who have faced its abusive birth control practices tell a different story. Like the Communist Manifesto, the alluring UN promises designed to win support cloak an agenda that shows little compassion once power has been won.
In fact, Communist ideology permeated major NGO (non-governmental organizations) workshops, official UN literature, and the organizational guidelines for local communities. Entering the massive "Best Practices" exhibition of model cities, visitors immediately faced wall-sized pictures and elaborate models of Chinese housing projects and community plans. Displays from the rest of the world shared the strips along the outer perimeter of the cavernous hall.
Behind the huge Chinese section, visitors watched Turner Broadcasting videos. Featuring Jane Fonda who once brought anti-American greetings to North Vietnam, each film taught a politically correct plan for personal empowerment: A roomful of men learn to use Singer sewing machines. Women are trained to run a collective construction company. A sad mother holding a crying baby brings a politically correct message: "Baby Miguel's life would be different if his mother was educated and working." A tough Jamaican supervisor at a women's collective shouts, "We don't want to make babies, we want to make money! We can become meaningful people to society without having children! WE MUST PRODUCE, NOT REPRODUCE!"
The Turner-Fonda message matches the feminist agenda. Former U.S. congresswoman Bella Abzug,2 who had led the onslaught on traditional values at the 1995 UN conference in Beijing, now helped engineer an official partnership between UN leaders, national delegates, and NGOs that support the UN gender agenda. Stationed around the world, her feminist troops promise to serve as watchdogs, making sure "civil society" implements their program for indoctrinating students with feminist ideology. Inspired by the spirits of earthy goddesses such as Athena and Ishtar whom they worshipped in Beijing, they have little tolerance for Christians and others who oppose their agenda.
"We want to change things," declared Abzug. "We'll be on executive boards. We want the participation of NGO's on the security council."
She serves the globalist purpose well. Mobilizing worldwide rebellion against Christian values, pushing birth control and gender-role equality for every family, demanding sex education for every student, and requiring international surveillance to monitor compliance, her followers are speeding the global revolution. Like countless other UN partners, they are winning by propaganda, intimidation, and growing popular consent.
Note that population control means controlling people, not merely births. Regarded as international law, the Habitat Agenda negotiated in Istanbul includes all the intrusive action plans outlined at former UN world conferences. "We want to ensure that previously endorses language [from former UN conferences] is upheld and incorporated into this document," declared Henry Cisneros, U.S. Secretary for Housing and Urban Development (HUD) who led the US delegation.3
This "international law" would limit not only the size of the world population but also housing, production, consumption, parenting, communication, and religious expression.4 Its alarming resemblance to the USSR Constitution5 implies far greater restrictions than those specifically stated in the Habitat Agenda. Since many specifics were detailed at previous UN conferences, it cannot be fully understood outside the context of the progressive plan for global governance as outlined in all the documents.
Training in global citizenship would begin with the universal education system outlined at the 1990 UN World Conference on Education for All. It matches Goals 2000, America's version of the international education system. Already molding minds around the world, the UN plan for "lifelong learning" indoctrinates young and old with the socialist ideology and earth-centered spirituality designed to create solidarity, an essential element to the envisioned world of peace.
Traditional beliefs simply don't fit the UN vision for 21st Century communities. To find more universal values, Habitat leaders convened a day-long "Dialogue" on the meaning of Solidarity at the elegant Ciragan Palace in Istanbul. The official list of 21 panel members included former Jerusalem mayor Teddy Kollek, historian Arthur Schlesinger, Jr, and Maurice Strong6 who led the 1992 UN conference on environment.
"I have gathered leaders with tremendous wisdom and prestige," began Habitat Secretary-General Wally N'Dow. "They are bringing the spiritual dimension-the only ingredient that can bind societies together." He had chosen an American moderator who would add credibility to the discussion: Robert MacNeil (of MacNeil-Lehrer), "one of the spiritual lights of the media industry today."
This hand-picked "interfaith group" left little doubt that solidarity meant a universal shift to the new globalist-New Age paradigm (or world-view). "Change your whole way of thinking, because the new order of the spirit is confronting and challenging you," said Millard Fuller, President of Habitat for Humanity.
"Citizenship for the next century is learning to live together," said Federico Mayor, Director General of UNESCO. "The 21st Century city will be a city of social solidarity.... We have to redefine the words... [and write a new] social contract."
"We should stop bemoaning the growth of cities. Itís going to happen and itís a good thing, because cities are the vectors of social change and transformation. Letís just make sure that social change and transformation are going in the right direction.... The media must act as part of the education process that counters individualism."
Later he added, "The media must act as part of the education process that counters individualism."
The heart of lifelong education would be spiritual training. "What's needed is an interfaith center in every city of the globe," said James Morton, dean of the Episcopal Cathedral of St. John the Divine, who organized the panel. "The new interfaith centers will honor the rituals of every... faith tradition: Islam, Hinduism, Jain, Christian [a cross-less version that blends with other beliefs]... and provide opportunity for sacred expressions needed to bind the people of the planet into a viable, meaningful, and sustainable solidarity."
The guiding principle of the new universal education system is "sustainable development." People everywhere must be taught "facts" about environmental "risks" that are sensational enough to scare them into compliance. They must be persuaded to accept unthinkable limits on consumption, land use, transportation, and family size. Everyone must protect resources for future generations, say UN leaders, but they agree that the real meaning of sustainability is based on the E's: Environment, Economy, and Equity, which point to a redistribution of the world's resources-money, energy, water, and people-in order to create global equality.
History has shown the emptiness of these promises. Long ago the Communist Manifesto announced a proletarian revolution which would empower the poor by redistributing wealth. Everyone would be equal. Men and women alike would join the socialist workforce, and children would be trained by the state.
It happened! All but the leaders became equally poor, and all the children were indoctrinated with an anti-Christian socialist philosophy. Morally and economically, the masses sank to the level of the lowest common denominator.
The similarities between the Communist Manifesto and the UN agenda (outlined in the Beijing Declaration and incorporated into the Habitat Agenda) should be a call to action. Both revolutions--