As America's attention was riveted on the Middle East last week, another floor was being quietly added to the superstructure of the World Government that is rising to rule over our grandchildren.
With 60 nations having ratified it, the International Criminal Court -- crafted in Rome four years ago -- will come into being in July. Modeled on the Nuremberg Tribunals that prosecuted the Nazis, the ICC will have the power to prosecute the soldiers and civilians of any nation it decides has engaged in genocide, war crimes or crimes against humanity.
In his last hours in office, President Clinton briefly interrupted his issuing of presidential pardons for convicted felons to sign us on to the ICC treaty. Now the Bush folks may be going wobbly, as well.
"U.S. Softens Its Stance as World Court Is Ratified," ran the headline over a Financial Times' story last week. It went on to report: "Though the Bush administration deeply opposes the world court, Pierre-Richard Prosper, U.S. ambassador at large for war crimes, yesterday took a surprisingly conciliatory position. He did not rule out cooperating with the United Nations Security Council in sending cases of war crimes, genocide, or crimes against humanity to be tried at the world court."
Previously, Prosper said, "The U.S. is not and will not be a part of the ICC." He even suggested the president might "unsign" the treaty. Indeed, with America fighting a war on terror, with U.S. troops in 100 countries, with anti-Americanism rampant among the global elites who will dominate this ICC as they do all the other international institutions in which we are ensnared, it is imperative that we behead this baby rattlesnake in its crib.
For the real target of this ICC is the sovereignty and independence of the United States. Its very creation is a statement by the "international community" that human rights trump national sovereignty, that the U.N. has the moral and legal right to intervene in nations to end human rights abuses as it defines them, and to try, convict and imprison national leaders.
Given that slavery is a serious human-rights abuse, under the ICC, Europe's monarchies would have had the moral and legal right to destroy the federal Union of Washington, Adams and Jefferson.
Under the ICC, Churchill could have been prosecuted for the fire-bombing of Dresden; Truman for Nagasaki. Nixon and Kissinger would have been hauled before the ICC for the "Christmas bombing" of Hanoi, which enraged elite opinion worldwide, though it effected the release of our POWs. Bill Clinton might have faced a war crimes trial for his 78-day bombing of Serbia.
A few years back, a Spanish judge showed what the future holds when he ordered the Brits to seize octogenarian Gen. Augusto Pinochet and transport him to Spain for trial for what had happened in Chile two or three decades ago. The court's first big splash may be the trial in absentia of Ariel Sharon for alleged war crimes in Jenin.
Americans seem unable to understand that there exists today in the dreams of internationalists and globalists a plan for a world government, the rise of which requires an end to the independence, sovereignty and liberty of the country we love and to which we have sworn allegiance.
Now, the institutions of world government -- the U.N., WTO, IMF, World Bank, World Court, ICC -- were created for high-sounding goals: World peace, to facilitate free trade, to rebuild war-torn Europe, to ensure justice is done to the Pol Pots and Idi Amins and their victims. But as each of these global institutions grows, it evolves, and assumes more and more power. None is ever shut down; none ever disappears.
They are all made to accrete power and last forever.
And just as the United States government grew in power to where it asserted a right to crush in a civil war and dominate the states that had created it at Philadelphia, so the goal of the coming world government is to supersede and one day rule the nations that midwifed its first-born institutions in the closing days of World War II.
When the United States assumes the chairmanship of the U.N. Security Council in August, President Bush should unsign the Rome Statute creating the ICC, and sever all connections to it. Though he will be accused of unilateralism, of "isolating" America, the isolation of America from world government is a duty that presidents must perform to remain faithful to the Constitution and their oaths of office.