GROUND ZERO, New York City, Feb. 10--What is going on?   Why is the United Nations dragging its feet over Iraq?   Why are the leaders of the world reluctant to issue a death warrant on Saddam Hussein, or, at the least, indict him for "conspiracy to commit crimes against humanity."   Or, worse yet, why are other nations siding with Iraq, and opposing a U.S. assault on Saddam Hussein's leadership?  Is it because of oil?  Or is it because the nations of the world don't want anyone to have the right to accuse them of being a bad "national parent" and waltzing into their nations in the future and telling them "how to run their country?"

      Globally, we are in a historic face-off between Terrorism and Vigilance.   Our current global Beasts of Terror(subject to change tomorrow) take the form of Saddam Hussein and Kim Jong Il (right).  They stand above the crowd, singled out as men who would--given the right provocation--unleash weapons of mass destruction with indiscriminate lust against all who might oppose their selfish goals of tyranny.  No one doubts that Saddam Hussein would do anything to maintain his power.  He's already proven his ability to kill his own citizens with deadly gas if they resist his will.  And Kim Jon Il is a noted playboy tyrant, who feasts while his people boil grass to eat while he opens nuclear reactor plants to stew up some nuclear cocktails.
         As the Vice of Vigilance squeezes on the Head of Middle East Terrorism (represented by Saddam Hussein), the World of Complacency (commonly known as the United Nations) argues that war and conflict is unnecessary until the Beast breaks out of his cage.  The U.N. says that until the Beast begins to rape, pillage and plunder those outside his national borders, the Beast enjoys certain sovereign rights to do what he wants to do, when he wants to do it, without interference.  

       This  "United Nations of Complacency," ducks behind the Shield of Sovereignty.   Unfortunately, the shield supports despots and tyrants as well as democratic benevolent leaders..  Governments, epitomized by the U.N. claim each national leader has to right to rule his people as he sees fit, including subjecting them to starvation, tyranny, economic depravation, and political and religious prosecution.   Well, there are some limits, but as far as the United Nations is concerned, it hasn't declared war against any of them, or pushed for a regime change to remove leaders who abuse their people and insult civilization by depriving their people of certain inalienable rights.
           This is a sad state, of course, for the Children and the Children's Children's Children.
       Under such Rules of Sovereignty, the Children must surrender to the will of their leaders.
       They must conform or be punished if their leader's rules deny them Liberty and Freedom of expression.
        Most nations don't offer the individual unbridled human rights of expression.  To do so would threaten the leaders grip on the people.  It would allow dissent among them and invite revolution against policies and principles they might find detrimental to the leader's future.
         Communism, for example, gives the state power over the people.  It assumes the people aren't capable of managing their own affairs, much as children fall under the guardianship of their parents until they reach a legal age.   Communism, however, offers no legal age, no graduation from being a servant to the state.

         Despots and tyrants rule by the sword.  They impose Fear, Intimidation and Complacency as tools of parenting their citizens, who, are truly not citizens in the sense they have a Voice in the future of their state.   Despots control the state by force, offering one agenda--that of the leader as he perceives the future.   If he wants to starve the people while he amasses power to maintain his rulership, so be it.  The world of government--expressed by the United Nations--nods or turns its head.   It has no teeth to tell another how to run his or her country.  And most who are members of the United Nations, do not offer their people unbridled liberty or freedom.  They rule with some variation of tyranny and terrorism, often disguising themselves as "democracies in the making."
        North Korea, for example, carries the official name, the Demo cratic People's Republic of North Korea (DPRNK), but, in truth, is far far far away from offering the people of the nation--the mothers, grandmothers, fathers, uncles, aunts, cousins, nephews and nieces--the right to vote and rule the nation through individual Voices combined as one representative government.
          Given a choice of feeding their children or building nuclear weapons, it is unlikely the citizen of the DPRNK would opt for turning fuel rods into plutonium.
         This brings us to the United Nations of Complacency, ruled by mostly men who hold firm grips on the leadership of their countries through systems one would say have miles to go to approach the purity of democracy.  China, one of the strongest of all Voices in the U.N., is one example.   It gained membership by promising to become more humanitarian.   The world is still waiting for their actions to approach their promises.
        In most nations, Political, Religious, Racial, Ethnic and Cultural difference serve as walls dividing Children from the Rights of Innocence--the rights of democracy. 

        Nations expect a child to grow up believing in one viewpoint, not to think for himself or herself, or to have the right to believe whatever he or she chooses, but to make the state, the nation and its goals, more important than their own.   What the state or nation doesn't teach the child, however, is that often the state or nation's goals change with each regime.   Citizens in Afghanistan can be bowing to a tyrant one minute and then dancing in the streets with boom boxes the next.   Children brought up in nations of "sovereignty" are taught that their duty and obligation is to fight to the death to protect their nation's rights, or, their religious rights.  They are not told to fight and die for their Children's Children's Children's rights, and that those rights are not subject to dogma or dictate by any human being, but are inborn rights granted to each and every human being equally on all four corners of the earth.       
      Tyrannical leaders wave their nation's flag in front of the people's faces.   They don't hoist up a newly born child and shout:  "We fight for this child's Children's Children's Children to be free to do what he or she wishes to do or believe.  We fight for the innocence of all to be preserved!"
        Nope.

        The United Nations endorses the right of nations to continue to apply whatever rules and restrictions it elects upon its people, even if those rules include a female can't go to school, or that a leader of a nation has the right to unilaterally declare war on anyone he or she chooses without conferring with his or her citizens and getting their approval.  Despots and tyrants own the guns and the butter.
        To preserve and protect the rights of Leaders of Tyranny who promote one way of thinking, the United Nations stands in defense of them.   It is not composed of Leaders of Democracy, Freedom and Liberty.  It is, instead, a collection  of Leaders of Tyranny, primarily men who oppose the right of another nation to impose its will on another nation's right to treat its Children as it sees fit.
       It is an Old Man's Club that has one goal--to let any nation do what it wants so long as it doesn't wholly endanger other nations.  
       By charter, the United Nations is alleged to be a Peace Keeping body.  
       In other words, it will do anything to avoid war, including putting up with the worst of atrocities until the final moment when such atrocities are so vile and corrupt it is forced to act.
      If the leader of a nation makes decisions that impose poverty, starvation or threatens the security of the Children within that nation, the United Nations will not declare war upon it or demand it change its policies to protect the future generations with anything more than a hand slap or some sanctions.   Only if the "bad nation" attacks another will the U.N. rise out of its seat and thump its shoe on the table.   
         Like Pontius Pilate, the U.N. washes of its hands of such things as regime change.  It considers such a policy a despicable intrusion on the rights of all National Leaders.   Only when the blood of the children flow in rivers does it act.  Only when the tyrants of humanity attack another nation does the United Nations rise up in protest to stop the Beast of Terror.  Only when the world hears the children's screams does it awaken to the role of Vigilance.

       Otherwise, it sleeps.
       It buries its heads to the tyrants and despots to whom it has granted sovereign rights to rule nations as it leaders "see fit."  It imposes no global standards on what the Rights of the Children's Children's Children's Children are, or sharpens its teeth to insure that tyrants and despots do not starve, murder, abort, or abuse the rights of their Children to live in freedom and enjoy the fruits of equal Liberty that other more advanced nations enjoy.
      The reason the United Nations hides behind the Right of Sovereignty is because it is composed of the henchmen of all nations.  Its members are the tyrants and despots who rule their countries as they see fit, under selfish guidelines they believe are more important than the Universal Rights of Children to live free to become whatever their imaginations allow.
      So it is no wonder that America is being attacked by Complacency within the United Nations over the issue of going to war in Iraq.

     The United States is forcing the United Nations to be a Keeper of the Beast of Terror, not a Peace Keeper.
      A Peace Keeper doesn't like confrontation.  A Peace Keeper thrives on Complacency.  
      Peace Keepers will do anything to avoid confrontation, including allowing a neighbor to abuse his or her Children for a Peace Keeper believes that entering another's house and pulling a parent away from beating a child is a violation of that parent's right of sovereignty.  After all, a home is a man's castle, the U.N. says, and a nation is nothing more than a combination of many castles.
      The only time the U.N. will act is when the parent in one house crosses the street and starts beating up on another child in another house, and then, it acts reluctantly.
      The U.N. would rather stand in front of the abusers house and use a megaphone and talk to the abuser inside the house, asking that abuser to stop beating on his children.   The U.N. likes it when the abuser comes out of the house with blood on his hands and sits on the stoop and says, "O.K.  I'll stop.  But in my own time.  Under my own schedule.   Is that Okay with you?"

      "Sure," the United States says.  "That's fine with us.  But would you sign this piece of paper promising to stop."
      "I will.  Of course I will.  But, I have to get back.  The kids need me."
      Now, if the abuser is a really big bully who has a lot of weapons in his house, maybe the U.N. will ask him if it's okay for the U.N. to send in some inspectors to check the house out."
      "Sure, you can come in.  You can look around.  Just give me some time to clean up the mess I've made."
      So the abuser goes in and wipes up the blood and buries his whips and chains in nooks and crannies around the house.
      "Oh," says the U.N., "Is it okay for me to talk to your children too, just to make sure they're Okay?"
     "Absolutely," says the abuser, "But, since I'm the father and have rights over my children, I have to be present when you talk to them.  I wouldn't allow such conversations unless I, the guardian, were present."
    "Of course," says the U.N., "After all, you are the father. We wouldn't want to insult you by talking outside your presence.  I'm sure your child will be honest and forthcoming with us in your presence."
     "Yes," says the abuser, "My Children are very polite.  I'll remind them to tell you the whole truth and nothing but the truth. And, I'll be there with them to insure they do."
      So the United Nations comes in and takes a look around.   It finds some things out of order--an old bloody whip here, a pair of brass knuckles there.  Yes, the children have a few bruises on their faces, but they say they got them falling down the stairs.   In the backyard is a number of graves of the abusers previous children he said died because they didn't mind him.    It was back when, the abuser said, the children were being punished because they revolted against the abuser, but he vows he has changed his ways.   And, he says, a father has a right to punish recalcitrant Children.   Yes, he admits, he went too far back then, but he says he's learned his lessons.   The U.N. inspectors agree with him.  They are not here to wage war.  After all, they are Peace Keepers.  After all, the tyrant has the right to be a tyrant.   It is his castle."
       "You know," the Peace Keepers say, "There is this country called America that wants to punish you if you continue to threaten them.  They claim you are manufacturing weapons here that you might use to attack their house across the street.  Are you creating weapons that can be used to abuse other children?"

       "Certainly not!"   The abuser lights a cigar.  "I am a leader of great stature.  I've been in charge of my children for twenty-three years.  My Children are happy and content.  Sure, we have our family problems.  Why, don't you?  Would you like someone challenging your authority as a father?  I should think not.  Why, if we allow these Americans the right to impose their will on me, God knows whose house they'll stick their big fat capitalistic Christian noses into next.   Doesn't that gripe your butt thinking some righteous nation just a couple of hundred years old has the temerity to think it's in charge of how you run your nation or how I run mine?  What arrogance!   Why, just think.  America is trying to impose global standards on the world.   It's trying to shove down our throats, and your throats, its concept of how the world should be run.   Is that a violation of ancient law or what?   For eons the world has operated on my right to rule as I see fit.  As you see fit.   As Kim Jong Il sees fit.   So, Mister Inspector, look around.  Maybe you'll find a few things, but I assure you, I'm just doing what any father would do to protect my Children.  I'm keeping them safe from the likes of America.   Those Western bullies!  Why, they would have us all think we are bad and they are good.  Where do they get off trying to tell me or you or anyone how to run a nation?   How to be the father of future generations?   They are the real Terrorists, Mister U.N.  Don't forget it."
          So when the U.N. inspectors go back to present their findings, they decide they want much more time to inspect.  They are gentlemen of Complacency.   They do not want to rock the boat.  They do not want to change the status quo of Complacency as the United States has done.
          In fact, they resent the idea that the United States has decided not to wait until the "smoking gun" has fired.  They don't like the idea that Vigilance--the offensive protection of the future--is more important than Complacency.   Complacency--waiting for Terrorism to strike--is much safer.  It doesn't force judgment over others.  It doesn't open the door for all other nations to be "inspected."
           The United  Nations is a farce.
           It has no power to stop violence or war or oppression because it is hell-bent on protecting sovereignty.  It will go the ends of the earth to protect the right of each nation from being accused and attacked by another nation for what it does behind closed doors.
           It is just like the neighbors who listen through the wall to the screaming of the children next door and do not pick up the phone and dial 911.   They fear by doing so someone might call 911 on them when they beat their kids, and the fear of their own privacy being invaded overpowers the duty to protect the innocent.
           That's why the world must change.
           The United Nations today is gasping its last breath.

          Its reluctance to act against Iraq is a sad example of its leadership.
           It is proof its leadership is despotic, tyrannical in nature.
           Why would a group of fathers allow other fathers to abuse their children unless whey wanted to reserve that right to abuse their own children with impunity?
           The United Nations is such a group.
           It sits and talks to one another about the "rights of nations," and, if one were to interpret such discussions, one would translate the discussions simply to:  "Let's not rock the boat on sovereignty.  Let's not let America open the door to imposing another nation's will on a tyrant. Let's let the tyrant be, because, in the final analysis, most of us are tyrants.  We like to tell our people how to think, how to act, and we like to punish them if they don't do what we want.  If we give up that right, we'll all lose our power."
            No.  The United Nations is dead. 

            It will, however, be replaced. 
            It will become the Untied Nations of Vigilance.   Its membership will change eventually to elected Parents of Vigilance, a husband and wife from each nation will become its representation.   These Parents of Vigilance will be the ones who vote on whether a nation is abusing its children or not, and, if it is, they will act swiftly to protect those children.
            Men won't rule the United Nations of Vigilance.   Women won't either. 
            The Children's Children's Children will rule.
            In the future, a tyrant such as Saddam Hussein or Kim Jong Il will not reach power.   The children won't allow them to because they will grow up under the Principles of Vigilance.  Their parents will have been Parents of Vigilance, and their grandparents will have been Grandparents of Vigilance.
           They will have generations who subscribe to and believe in the Pledge of Vigilance.
           Complacency will have no room in the future.

           Neither will the Beast of Terror.
           Unlike today, he'll be in a cage in the middle of the Security Council, in opposition to today where he sits in the seats around the Security Council's table.
           And, by the way, the word "Security Council" will cease to exist.  The table in the future will be called the "Vigilance Council."  It will act offensively, not defensively.  It won't wait until the blood flows.