|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
WORLD SUMMIT ON SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
by: Helene Bos
date: 9/1/2002
Category: Society
World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD), final report and analysis
During the days of the Summit I have reported on different aspects of and events related to the Summit.
In this, final, report I share about the spiritual developments that we can notice and that we will be confronted with in the future.
New Age religion is key to understanding this summit.
One of the important founders of the New Age movement, Alice Bailey, has had and still has a profound influence on many (top-) officials within the UN. They try to realize the goal of New Age, to establish a new, luciferian, world religion through the UN. Alice Bailey established several organizations, one of them being Brahma Kumaris World Spiritual University. This organization had organized a big exhibition at Johannesburg, called "Ubuntu-village," but it was not clear that this group was the one who had organized it.
We, my prayer-partner and I, had no urge to go there, as we had seen quite a number of booths already. Later we understood who had organized the Ubuntu- exhibition. Ubuntu= Sharing, (in an African language). The index of stalls mentioned booths with seemingly neutral goals, and many with "religious" goals. For example one booth was named "Faith." It was a place where the healing methods, rituals, of the many indigenous people groups were shown by their own shamans, medicine man and priests. Another place was "The sacred place." One stall had "Healing rooms" through art, based on eastern and African religions. No booth, of course, for any representative of the Christian faith, as Alice Bailey wanted to see exactly Christianity eliminated. "Ubuntu" then means, "translated": how the New Age ideas can be passed on to many curious but unprotected and uninformed people, who are not on guard spiritually. This U-village was an integrated part of the WSSD
Other New Age elements were brought in on different levels, not seldom in blasphemous ways. The logo of the conference was, as you can see, a dove that carries on its wings a twig that covers (part of) the world.
For a conference that tries to ignore Christian viewpoints as much as is possible, is this a remarkable association. Over the main entry to the convention center was a large sign, on which was a picture of Jo-burg. On it was written: "See the light … Jo’burg." At a big poster we read the command: "Earth…be green." An article in the "Africanwoman" (one of the daily newspapers, published especially by African feminists) had a headline "In the beginning there was….". We saw young people wearing a T-shirt with the slogan "Today I save the Earth." (G., my prayer-partner, and I changed these items into prayers and proclamations).
While I was writing the report on Saturday, 31/8, a video was shown, on a huge screen in front of me, of a dance choreography, called "La venue des hommes," danced at the Waterdome theatre. The "goddess," long blond hairs, in an exposing dress, with swaying movements of her long bare arms, standing before an altar with smoke, "sang into being" the earth, people, animals, musicians, warriors, and then "The children of the future." Pure blasphemy.
Another blasphemous thing we encountered was through an article in one of the summit-papers on "The Ark of Hope," (Positive News, Special Edition 2002, see last page of this report). In this chest, reminiscent of the biblical Ark of the Covenant, is placed a copy of "the Earth Charter," which is considered to be the Hope of the future for this planet. Though the carrying into the WSSD of this thing was not an official part of the summit, and though the Earth Charter was not officially on the agenda, there was on the opening day of the WSSD a four-hour-long conference entitled, "Educating for Sustainable Living with the Earth Charter." Steven Rockefeller, head of the Earth Charter Commission, U.S.A, addressed the crowd, packed into a tent.
Following the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio, the Earth Charter movement was taken up by Maurice Strong, head of the Earth Summit I, and Mikhail Gorbachev, former president of the U.S.S.R., together with Steven Rockefeller, as the driving force behind their efforts. Rockefeller, according to a journalist-friend of mine who was in his audience, now said that the Earth Charter incorporates the "wisdom of the world's religions." Claiming that we "must respect other persons and other life forms while putting special emphasis on peace, thus building peace on earth," Rockefeller announced that this inclusive, integrated and spiritual approach [the Earth Charter] was going to be presented during the WSSD meeting in an "Ark of Hope".
The Earth Charter, a constitution for a New World Order?
It is possible to respect the earth, even to call it mother earth in a non-idolatrous way, I learned that from a committed Christian chief of an Indian tribe. However, we need to take careful notice of this Earth Charter, as this is a document that the promoters, and among them presidents, (former prime-) ministers, portray as a constitution for a New World Order. In the preamble we read: We urgently need a shared vision of basic values to provide an ethical foundation for the emerging world community. Therefore, together in hope we affirm the following interdependent principles for a sustainable way of life as a common standard by which the conduct of all individuals, organizations, businesses, governments, and transnational institutions is to be guided and assessed."
(www.earthcharter.org). The charter now only mentions "Earth." But during the times of preparation the promoters also spoke about "Mother Earth," in a revering, so idolatrous way. (In Greek mythology she is also known as Gaia, an adaptation of the queen of heaven). They believe Earth is a living entity with her own personality, with desires, emotions, and outbursts of anger. In "the way forward," added to the document, we read: "In order to build a sustainable global community, the nations of the world must renew their commitment to the United Nations, fulfill their obligations under existing international agreements, and support the implementation of Earth charter principles with an international legally binding instrument on environment and development."
The goal of the Earth Council is to seek endorsement of the Earth Charter by the UN General Assembly in this year, 2002. If that happens and if nations ratify it, we all have to submit to all the demands that are considered, by a group of Gaia-worshipers, necessary "ethical values" for the survival and health of mother earth. Also religious and cultural values are made subordinate to these demands!
The charter is an idolatrous, spiritual but humanistic document that expresses the conditions and hope for "a new beginning for our common destiny," which "requires a change of mind and heart." Ratification of this Charter through our governments, once it is endorsed, will challenge Christians to behavior of civil disobedience. The International Criminal Court has been put in place for dealing with just that!
Understanding "Sustainability."
The Earth Charter is key to the understanding of the word "Sustainability." And "sustainability" was what this conference was all about. May I here shortly explain that concept?
The word sustainable has been a common word in many languages, (Dutch: duurzaam), in use for many years. But it has been taken and "redefined", by the Brundtland commission which was accepted by the UN. When we use it in the context the UN is using it, we need to be aware of this new content. If we want to use it in the previous meaning we better say so.
"Sustainability" is a holistic concept that by the UN (at the previous Earth summit, in Rio, ’92) is defined as consisting of three elements. (But also these three elements have many facets, which make it a very difficult concept to grasp.) When you leave out one of these elements you are not talking about sustainability. (Many people, media, policy-makers and also government leaders (!) ignore or have no understanding of this fact. Many Christian leaders do not know the true meaning). These elements are:
a. - A controlled economy (The consequences of globalization in this respect have a deep impact on our lives. It is related to the goals of socialism). Because of this element the topics about trade, debt, finances were on the agenda of the summit. The outcome was appreciated very differently by the different parties. Several developing nations were indignant about the demands of the global financial institutions. Venezuela verbalized it, and its ambassador received a warm applause.
b. -A controlled flow of resources. Contrary to what many people think and to what environmentalist action groups suggest, and with which they manipulate the public opinion, this has nothing to do with the finiteness of the resources. "The total amount of each resource is sufficient to satisfy human needs for many millions of years, although we can only produce a tiny fraction economically with today’s technology." When scientists speak about "reserves they mean that part of all the resources that are the least costly to remove and that usually are removed next. Reserves comprise in all cases less than one-millionth of the total amount of the mineral resource (such as petroleum or iron) that is known to exist." (Handbook on Population, Robert L. Sassone, sixth edition, ISBN: 1-890712-08-6). Our God has not been "stingy," but "true to His type", He has provided abundance for what we need. So, in a certain sense it is the technology that controls the outflow of the resources. But behind it is the rationalization of the UN agenda that, in order "not to usurp the resources of the earth" (which is not even possible), they need to control the number of the people on this planet, how much they may use and how we should live. This idea means that it is directly related to production and consumption, in a socialist (Marxist/Leninist) way. This explains why Gorbachev exerts himself to the utmost to make the concept acceptable even for monarchs and presidents of western nations. At a press conference one UN-spokesman told that the plans to link the rights for consumption to the fact whether we are productive or not, are ready, but that these plans have to wait for another ten years!
c. -Social equity and equality. In this context it means that for the five genders (that the feminist and homo-lobbies "discern"), hetero- and homosexual men and women and the transsexual, absolute social and economic equity is believed to be possible; all are considered to be equal and all are supposed to have the same rights. This means removal of all expressions of "discrimination," and it also means recognition of same-sex "marriages" and " family"-forms, right to child-adoptions etc. The idea behind this is also from Marxist origin. Negation of the "principle" of social equity and equality will be considered as a crime against the human rights.
a+b+c: We need to grasp the strategy that is beneath the definition of the concept "sustainability", in order to understand the (evil) brilliance of this approach. The above-mentioned three elements cover together many areas that, together, form a very substantial part of our public and private lives. The Programs of Action that came out of the UN-conferences of the last decade control those areas. Together they steer the world, our nations and our lives towards submission to mother earth.
At the Jo-burg summit the demand was uttered that a fourth component (d) should be added: "power for the "civil society'" (read: interest-groups). Is an elitist group "speaking for the people" not a concept that was familiar in USSR-speeches? The feminist and homosexual lobby-groups, supported by the UN, EU and Canada emphasize this element strongly. In their desire for gendered cities and societies the feminists want to get rid of the institutions of marriage and families, worldwide. Children should have equal rights, and parents are seen as the enemies of the children. Parental rights have to be removed, according to several pressure groups, influential in the UN. In the demand for power for civil society we can see the hunger for power in groups that will not have that power through democratic ways, but yet want to force society into their molds.
Influence of the feminist movement.
The feminist movement has strongly been inspired by Friedrich Engels, who believed that the last stage of the civil battle was going to be fought in marriage, with the end result, he believed, that that institution will disappear. Through CEDAW (Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women) the UN has been working to accomplish that. Also when a nation does not want to give in to their pressure, ratification of the treaties that speak about binding sustainable principles does not leave it a way out. So, beneath the concept "sustainability" is a rebellion against the institutions as the Lord has given them for our lives, and for the ordering of society. When Christians, ignorant of the meaning of the concept embrace it, they are, in fact, unknowingly embracing this rebellion.
Since 1994 the UN strengthened the influence of the feminist movement in the "empowerment of women." The women’s caucus demands that every government provides free abortion facilities. The wording "reproductive health" has, in UN-speak, come to mean "right to abortion on demand." In all the conferences of the last ten years these issues, summarized in the term "women’s rights" took most of the discussion and negotiation times. It is almost always the topic on which the heated debates continue till the end. You may have read that the discussion about the final document of the WSSD was about health. I mentioned in my previous e-mail the attempts of the Women’s Caucus, voiced by Canada and the EU, to re-open a certain paragraph and to have some phrases removed and other phrases added. This was not just about health in general. It was about abortion. The women, Canada and the EU wanted to remove the possibility for governments, according to their religious and cultural values, NOT to provide abortion-facilities; they wanted to see added to the paragraph that health services have to be provided according to the human rights. Pro-abortionists, of course, will use this as a crowbar to manipulate governments into providing health services (again: read abortion-clinics). The last try succeeded, the first not. This, again, was a battle till deep into the last night. (The item of "reproductive health" or "reproductive rights" almost always has to be decided upon at the last moment, as they postpone and postpone. This is also a UN-policy, because by that time regularly opposing delegates have left.) It is important to know that the so-called "women’s rights" are NOT human rights (yet), though the UN and the feminists suggest that over and over again. This too is a strategy. By mentioning it every time in many nations, at many conferences, it will, according to (UN!) international law, become a human right!!
The dark goal of this conference: "SUSTAINABILITY IS THE FULFILLMENT OF THE LAW"!
In my last on-site report I mentioned that the Lord spoke to me about what was happening at the WSSD through Jeremiah 32, 33. There is a strategy of strangling the nations, especially those who cannot support the goals of the UN, and forcing them to worship the earth. In Jeremiah 32 the prophet speaks to the Lord about the siege of Jerusalem, by the king of Babylon. To me there is a parallel between the siege of Jerusalem at that time and what happened at the Summit.
The UN tries to make Sustainability the criterion for all decision-making and activities. All the different topics that were dealt with at this conference, or were touched at, were as it were x-rayed against the criterion of Sustainable Development. Water, sanitation, energy, air, agriculture, business, bio-diversity, trade, debt, financial systems, government, governance, climate, biotechnology, (indigenous) belief systems, etc, name it, everything was screened on sustainability. Already in 1996 were religions screened on this by the UN. (To inform you: Orthodox Christianity is not sustainable). Then there are topics that are not on the official agenda, but that are supposed to be related: population, health, reproductive rights, education, medicine, fiscal dimensions, and debt release. Every area of our life is (in the process of being) subjected to laws that are "environment-related," every area has to serve "sustainable development."
We can summarize it as "Since Johannesburg "Sustainability" is the fulfillment of the law". That is, for those who love the earth more than the Lord.
Enforcement of laws that serve idolatrous goals.
Prior to the WSSD a hundred and twenty-four High Court and Supreme Court judges from all over the world drew up an "action plan to strengthen the development, use and enforcement of environment-related laws" in "a move that signals a new era in the quest to deliver sustainable development." At the Global Judges Symposium, organized and sponsored by the UNEP with the help of NGO-money, the so-called Johannesburg Principles on the Role of Law and Sustainable Development were adopted. UNEP stands for United Nations Environment Program. It describes itself as "The Environmental Conscience of the World." (It was established by Maurice Strong, the secretary-general of the Earth Summit in Rio. He is reported to be an Earth (Gaia) worshipper, and wants to see the UN become the one-world government.) In their news release the UNEP stated: "Senior Judges adopt ground-breaking action plan to strengthen world’s environment-related laws." We may assume that these judges favor the International Criminal Court (ICC), now established in The Hague. It may be helpful to quote here a commentator, an American lawyer: "Previously, treaties bound only those who signed them. In contrast, the ICC claims jurisdiction in every country unable or unwilling to act, even in the US, which has not ratified. This in effect means that the ICC can act as an international supreme court regardless of the wishes, laws, or constitutions of any country, which gives it potential power similar to that of a world dictator." The possible and probable financial and political influence by wealthy left-wing NGO’s on the selection of ICC prosecutors, judges and employees is scary. Opponents of the ICC have warned for many years, that the ICC will be the instrument for the UN to behave as the one-world government.
When we "translate" the judges’ action plan, it means that we will be confronted at every side of our life with laws that are based on the idolatry of the worship of mother earth, and that we can be persecuted if we do not submit to her hunger for world-wide power. The judges believe that a key to "improving the adoption and implementation of environment-related laws hinges on improving the capacity, training, funding and education of legal experts particularly in developing nations." I touch on this later.
The ICC is meant to persecute those individuals who commit crimes against humanity. The language of the descriptions of the violations in the Statute of the ICC is often irresponsibly vague. That the judges see it as their responsibility to implement, (or: enforce!) environment-related laws is not surprising. It will (at least come to) mean that those who do not submit their religious and ethical values to the new (Earth Charter-) values that the service to "Mother earth" demands, may in the future have to face persecution through their own courts or otherwise through the ICC. Christians need to become aware of this fact, that persecution (which is taking place already in many nations) may be around the corner in the nations where there is still freedom of religion.
In Jeremiah 32 the people of Jerusalem could not leave the city. Every route out of Jerusalem was blocked. If one yet tried to leave the city one was caught. The Lord then speaks through Jeremiah that this siege by the Chaldeans under the king of Babylon is due to the worship of idols by the inhabitants of Jerusalem. The people of Judah burned incense on the roofs of their houses and brought drink offerings to other gods. These were exactly the gods who strengthened Nebuchadnezzar, because of which he could lay a siege around Jerusalem. The UN is a Babylonian power. The time is coming soon that we will find the laws of the UN surrounding us on every side, as a siege, in whatever area of our life we will try to live a still and quiet life, loving and serving the God of Israel, being a disciple of Jesus. Through what "exit" you will try to escape these laws, in every area there will be laws based on the requirement of sustainability, which means submission to the service to mother earth, in fact idolatry. I felt, I feel, that we have to search our own heart, that the church needs to search herself: did we serve other gods, did I serve other gods? Gods that gave more and more power to the global institutions, that now will strangle us by their laws?
A new threat, especially for the developing nations.
Over the years the strategies coming out of the UN, and the plans of many UN-agencies were aiming at a reduction of the world-population. The developing nations were/are the nations on which the pressure for population-control activities, exerted by the UN and her allies, was the most heavy. In the philosophies of Alice Bailey and Margaret Sanger, two women who have had a strong influence on the UN, the contempt or even hate for the black people (and the Jews) was evident. Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, was outspoken in her conviction that the black people had to be eradicated from the earth.
The peoples of Africa have suffered immensely over the centuries. The population policies of the UN were/are a new form of western imperialism. Through this conference the pressure will increase. Every time that I read the (consistently formulated) statement that the number of people that "have not enough food, "no clean water," " not enough medical facilities" must " be halved in 2015", I cannot help to wonder: do they mean that one half has to die?
World-population down to 300.000.000?
Over the years several influential officials at the UN have indicated that the earth cannot hold more than 1 billion people. And they have given the impression that they were working towards that goal. Of course, war alone cannot accomplish that; a number of strategies are necessary. Official population policies in many nations have over the last 30 years set in motion many factors that influence the fertility rate. There are about 20 factors, all of which are now influencing the replacement-level of populations. Only a few of them (4 or 5) can be controlled by government policies. The fertility-rate in already many nations has now fallen far below replacement level, which will have catastrophic consequences. Also the United Nations Statistics chief Dr.Joseph Chamie issued warnings regarding the soon-to-be-felt high toll of the low birth rate in developed countries, mentioned the New York Times of August 20. And The Economist of August 24-30 had a cover story about the demographic ruin in Europe. The decline in (world) population cannot be stopped. I cannot go into all of that now. The forced sterilization in a number of nations, the forced abortions in e.g. China, all with the knowledge and help of the UN, have added to a decrease in world population growth. There are 50 million abortions a year, the UNFPA yet wants to increase the numbers...
Recently a new group has been formed of UN-officials and their earth- worshipping friends, called Leadership for Environment and Development (LEAD), stating that Earth can only hold 200.a 300.million people!
How can that ever happen?
One way is by (creating) hunger and famine. There is hunger now, through natural circumstances. Famine can be created by groups who have the power to do that. What I wrote before about the terminator-seed has to do with that goal. Implementing the Kyoto-protocol is another way. The increase of CO2 has led to a greener earth, (also satellite-photo’s show that), more harvests, more increase per harvest. Reduction of CO2 will decrease the yields of food, while the increase is necessary because the world population will still grow for a number of years. Linking consumption to sustainable production will be a strategy. Linking development aid to providing abortion facilities is a strategy (since ’94). If nations do not provide abortion facilities and do not acknowledge the homosexual lifestyle, they are considered to be violating "the human rights," and they will not receive (much) development aid. Organizations who aim at providing real health care, like birth trauma clinics with good gynecological help, for poor women in poor countries or developing nations, are blocked from subsidies under the influence of the UN, if they refuse to do abortions. Propagating homosexuality (since "74 the US has done so, the UN followed) is a strategy. Sending loads of condoms, many or all with failures, to nations where the family planning consultancies stimulate teenagers to have sex as entertainment, by websites, and by overexposure to sex through "sex education" is another. The increase of STD’s, the increase of incurable STD’s among teenagers, will kill them or make them infertile. And what can we still say about HIV-Aids? Africa suffers under it, China will lose many people, and the illness is everywhere.
The goal of this group is inspired from hell. I must add that several agencies of the UN also see it as their duty to bring relief to suffering people. Because of their operations it is difficult to see the lines of strategy within the UN. The conflicting goals create confusion about the true nature of the UN, and leave the real plans in obscurity.
"The earth mourns and fades away," Isa. 24: 4
On the last day of the conference G. and I had a, second, time of prayer with a ministry of intercessors. I shared about the conference. The leader then prophetically saw a connection between what I shared about the push for abortions and what she knew about developments that are happening in the earth today. I will try to explain.
Since, in the beginning of the sixties, sexual intercourse was disconnected from the possibility of conception through the use of the pill, sexuality became unrestrained. "Liberated" called the feminist movement this. The "sexual revolution" also led to the pressure to legalize abortion, and, once this happened, to many abortions. Abortion means: killing a human being, a baby, in the womb. Countless women started to use the pill. However, the steroids that operate in contraceptives are designed to influence the body of the women who use the pill (while many of them are ignorant about the damage that is done to their body and soul), but in time residues are leaving the body, and get into the sewerage system. There where the sewerage comes into the water supply of a city or an area, from which fresh drinking water is fabricated, without eliminating all the residue’s, and this does happen in a number of places, I was told, there strange changes have taken place in animals. Male fishes have developed female characteristics, but, of course, without the possibilities of spawning roe. Male crocodiles have developed female characteristics, but, of course, they cannot produce eggs. But, not only have male fish in an important river in a western nation developed outward female characteristics, in another place a number of men have similar problems. They have grown breasts, lost hair, and their virility has decreased. (The names of the river and that city are known to the author.)
The prophetic connection is this: when humanity starts to idolize the earth, and worships "Mother Earth," and for that reason stimulates sexual licentiousness, and demands blood sacrifices (which are the sacrifices the queen of heaven always demands from her worshipers), death not only kills the fruit in the wombs of mothers who are with child, but death also kills life in "the womb" of that idolized "mother." This also applies to the effect of sterility of the terminator-seed. As I have explained in a former e-mail report from Jo-burg, this is the name given to genetically modified seed that produces harvests with sterile seed, and that through cross-pollination also sterilizes the fertile seed on neighboring fields. Farmers become dependent on the seed-producing businesses. Some varieties of seed poison the soil; nothing can grow on it after a few harvests. Also, in a number of cases harvest yields decrease, till there is nothing to harvest anymore. It is an ordinance of the Lord that through "seed" life continues. But there is hardly any "original", not modified, seed anymore.
Through our rebellion against the One who has given these ordinances, the blessing of the ordinance itself is attacked. In abortion babies in the womb of the mother are killed. The residues of steroids and the genetic modification cause the "seed" itself, in "the womb" of the (idolized) earth, to die.
Reflecting over these things Isaiah 24 came into my mind. In that Scripture, which is an end-time prophecy, the prophet laments about the condition of the earth. The curse that is coming over the earth applies to everyone.
"The earth mourns and fades away,
The world languishes and fades away;
The haughty people of the earth languish.
The earth is also defiled
Under its inhabitants,
Because they have transgressed the laws,
Changed the ordinance,
Broken the everlasting covenant" (Isa 24:4-5)
Are we coming in the time that the prophet saw in the spirit? In idolatry many peoples have broken the covenant God made with them. Through the New Age teachings of Alice Bailey, among others, a whole generation considers themselves to be their own authority. This attitude has also defiled many Christians. Now we are transgressing God’s laws and changing ordinances a.o. by despising the institutions of marriage and family that God has ordained. The guilt of enormous blood shedding through abortion (and in an increasing number of nations through euthanasia) weighs very heavy on a nation. If we do not repent regarding these issues, the process will continue. In Isa 24:1 it is the Lord who empties the earth and makes it waste. All the protests of groups like Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth will not help. These groups themselves commit idolatry with the Earth, so their attempts to "save the earth" will be in vain.
We need to bring these things in prayer, confess our personal and national guilt, walk in obedience and share where we can about these issues.
Do not read UN information naively.
After the prayer time with the intercessors we returned to the conference, and walked, like the day before, into the hall where the plenary was held. We were in time to hear the prime minister of Norway give his speech. He is a Christian. But he was pledging loyalty to every concept that the UN has brought into the world the last ten years, and especially to the concept of sustainability. This concept was concocted by one of his predecessors, Gro Harlem Bruntlandt, for many years prime- minister of Norway, and chairman of the Socialist Internationale, now director of the WHO. So, he should have known the far-reaching meaning of that word. To me it was obvious that he did not realize that he was not only giving his nation away, but neither that he was binding his nation to an idol. I was upset. It is a clear example of leaders of governments who naively trust the information that the UN supplies. But a lot of the information that comes from the UN needs to be understood in the context of from whom it came. You cannot depend on it. They use many authors who serve the goal of creating "consensus" regarding the main topics that were the focus of the conferences of the last ten years. Through the treaties that came out of these conferences a whole set of international laws has been created that touch, as I mentioned before, on every area of our lives. Governments have regularly filed reservations on some subjects, thus making that aspect "soft international law" for their nation. But, by stating again and again the objectives of the UN as the desired outcome, through authors or NGO’s who are in one line with the UN, "soft international law" will change into "hard" international law. And then nations have to subordinate their national laws to the international laws.
Regarding the final document.
In this conference were so many competitive interests that we are not amazed that there are many disappointed parties, from UN-officials to Heads of State, from scientists to activists. In the papers it was acknowledged in general that only water and sanitation was dealt with in a satisfactory way. Many issues were not dealt with in ways that could satisfy the majority of both delegations and interest groups.
But the pro-lifers were thankful. The WSSD document does not mention abortion, nor does it include language that can be used to advance an abortion-rights agenda. The phrase "reproductive and sexual health" was here included only within a paragraph on basic health care and the prevention of diseases, thereby making it nearly impossible for the phrase to refer to abortion. It was also agreed that healthcare would be promoted "consistent with national laws and cultural and religious values," which provides individual nations substantial protection from any international pressure to liberalize abortion laws. Though delegates from Canada and Europe tried to have the document reopened on the paragraph concerned, they did not succeed in that. But they had a few words added, that, they said "were needed to guarantee women's rights to contraception, safe abortion and other reproductive services." However the pro-lifers were unanimous in claiming that the document guarantees no such "rights."
We are thankful for that.
A crack in the stronghold of population control?
There is also a small indication of a (not yet, but maybe coming) breakthrough regarding population control. That topic was not on the official agenda, to the dismay of an UNFPA official. But some pro-life/pro-family delegates expressed guarded optimism that their opponents may now be lowering their own expectations for such UN meetings, or even moderating their positions. The IPPF, the world's largest abortion provider, for instance, noted that it was because a new consensus is beginning to emerge that population growth is not the root cause of development problems. "Silence on population was a recognition that more people do not always mean more poverty," IPPF said in a press release. "A virtual silence on rapid world population growth at the Earth Summit reflects a change in the way governments and society view the question of how to tackle poverty and protect the planet," other delegates have said. This item, population control, has dominated so many conferences, have caused so much damage, pain and guilt, that we may really be thankful if there is a change in attitude regarding it. It seems to me that there is a crack in a very strong stronghold. And we need to pray that the crack will lead to the coming down of that 20th century stronghold.
However, we yet need to keep in mind the opinions of LEAD, a group that is influential within and outside the UN. The promoters of the idea that the world cannot hold more than 200-or 300.million people will do every thing they can to build up this idea as a new stronghold. Then the argument for "population control" will not be the reduction of poverty, but what mother earth is able to bear. One lie will replace another. The need for intercession will never stop.
Yet, we believe that the Lord has answered the prayers that were prayed now in quite a number of nations. For G. and me it was obvious that the Lord was in control over our own circumstances. Even in, for the eye, small details He was caring for us. We KNOW that He is in control over this whole, big, complicated, heavy, issue.
And now?
The UN is not satisfied. We asked you to pray that many influential people would be prevented from coming. I do not know how many of those did not come, but at least many expected people never showed up. We heard about hotels who were "fully booked," but who had not many guests. This conference was announced as huge, with an expected 60-70.000 people, but I guess there were probably only between 10.000 and (maximum maybe) 20.000 people. Yet the UN have voiced that these "huge" conferences are out-dated. Future conferences need to be with smaller groups, more area-wise, they say. I believe that there is a trick behind this. They need this story in order to switch their tactics. Of course the UN knew in advance that there would not be 60.000 people coming. They knew that ultimately the convention center could hold all those who were coming, though on the first day there was created a queue.
The trick is that when the conferences are less public, the UN and/or their allies can much easier exert pressure or manipulate delegations. Already during this conference the most important meetings were behind closed doors, not open for the media or the Ngo’s. Only special, privileged, Ngo’s were allowed to take part in the discussions behind the closed doors. And there were many meetings. (This was one reason why it was difficult to find the information of what was happening.) But in order to convince the world that these conferences have to be replaced by smaller meetings, they first have to complain about the size as it was now. Jan Pronk, a Dutch former minister, who was a special envoy for Kofi Annan, already voiced his opinion after the prep-com at Bali that these huge conferences are outdated. Before the conference in Jo-burg he already was disappointed about the result.
Withdrawal from the public eye.
So, now the UN goes "into hiding," and that is more dangerous. It will be difficult to get true information about what is going to be discussed, and afterwards, about what really was discussed and agreed upon. If every delegation and/or prime minister is as naďve as the Norwegian prime minister was, the new one world-government will soon be a fact.
Not only the conferences will take place in "darkness," also a number of important figures will "withdraw" from a public spot and do their work in the background. That means: try to accomplish the goals of the UN (a new one-world government, and a new world-religion.) An example is Mary Robinson. She will head a new project to force governments to meet their 'legal' obligations stemming from U.N. treaties. Mrs.Robinson, who in her U.N post pushed acceptance of abortion and homosexuality as human rights, takes her new post as the head of the "Ethical Globalization Initiative (EGI)" effective October 1. "For the past number of years, I have been very focused on seeking to implement the legal framework of human rights commitments made by governments. I now want to further this work by taking this formative framework into the debate on globalization." She will certainly support the action plan that came out of the meeting of the judges at Jo-burg.
According to pro-life leaders on the international scene Mary Robinson abused to the very end of her former job as UNHCHR, her power to urge countries to bow to abortion. The EGI was launched by the Aspen Institute (Maurice Strong is one of its Trustees), the State of the World Forum (founded by former Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev) and the Switzerland-based International Council on Human Rights Policy. We should not expect much positive from this EGI, as the new ethics have to serve mother earth. Mrs. Robinson especially wants to serve Africa, I read in the papers, by bringing together civil society (read: especially feminists) and governments. This means for African governments that the heat is up. The, un-elected, civil society will be given much influence opposing the elected government and parliamentarians.
Also in The Netherlands we have quite a number of seasoned politicians who are serving or hope to serve in international politics. Some are invisible, others not. One of our former Christian-democratic prime ministers, Ruud Lubbers, now serves as the High Commissioner for Refugees. He is also a member of the steering committee of the Earth Charter, but that fact hardly anybody knows.
What are the implications of these developments for us?
We need to be on guard. Most of the developments in the world will go unnoticed for us. Of course, in UN-circles, the strategies of how to pursue their plans, now the WSSD is finished, are already being discussed. Also influential people "from the past" are still involved in these strategies.
I believe that it is important to keep these issues up in prayer, also when we have no clue of what is happening behind "the closed doors." The Lord can expose strategies and He can deal with them.
More important than being on guard, however, is that we learn to trust in the Lord. He knows everything and He IS in control. In Jeremiah’s time it was no problem for the Lord to cause Nebuchadnezzar to withdraw from Jerusalem. But when Judah did not repent he, N., returned with his army (Jer.37). Then, again, there was no exit possible out of Jerusalem. Those who tried to flee were caught. But the Lord was faithful to those who had been faithful to Him. Even the captain of the guard of the Chaldeans, Nebuzarradan, knew that the disaster of the siege was due to the disobedience of the people in Jerusalem. "Because your people have sinned against the Lord, and not obeyed His voice, therefore this thing has come upon you" (Jer. 40:3). Nebuzarradan had mercy on Jeremiah, because the Lord had mercy on Jeremiah.
Let us pray that the Church will repent of the worshiping of idols, of sacrificing to the gods of this age, of living as if there will never be a last generation that has to leave Babylon. We need to say "no" to the worship of "mother earth," and we need to say it now. And when our nation ratifies the laws that require "sustainability" as a criterion for all our activities and decisions, we have to spiritually separate ourselves from that act, because we need to declare (in the heavenlies) that we will not bow for the abominable idol "mother earth."
We cannot discern things from ourselves. We need revelation. We need to know the Word. We need to know our God, and we need to love Him dearly.
[^ top]