Following a recent United Nations (U.N.) Leaders’ Summit on Countering ISIL and Violent Extremism, U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch just announced that the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) would be collaborating with several U.S. cities to form “a global law enforcement initiative,” known as “The Strong Cities Network” (SCN).
The objective is to “strengthen community resilience against violent extremism.” Lynch and others argue that American cities “are vital partners in international efforts to build social cohesion and resilience to violent extremism.”
In order to build “global social cohesion” SCN states it will identify city-level practitioners and members of their respective communities to participate in a series of workshops. Chosen individuals will contribute to and utilize an online repository of municipal-level good practices and web-based training modules.
Yet, underlying all of SCN’s “collaboration” is a serious unconstitutional reality: sub-national authorities from “different regions” will attempt to enforce U.N. rules and laws on American soil to achieve SCN objectives.
Furthermore, while SCN’s stated goal appears to combat “violent extremism,” how it identifies and defines “extremism” and– what acts it seeks to criminalize– is critical to recognizing SCN as a genuine national security threat. A cursory look at those involved with SCN at its highest levels provides insight.
It is noteworthy that the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Prince Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein, gave opening remarks prior to Lynch’s keynote address at the U.N. Zeid is known for having long opposed the most basic of all human rights: free speech.
Foreign Policy writer Jacob McHangama points out that Zeid has consistently voted to force U.N. states to criminalize acts of “defamation of religion.” McHangama writes:
“From 1999-2010, member states of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) successfully tabled resolutions on “combating defamation of religion” as part of their campaign to implement a global blasphemy ban under human rights law, in the Human Rights Council (known as the U.N. Commission on Human Rights until 2006) and the General Assembly. During both of Ambassador Zeid’s periods as Jordan’s ambassador to the U.N., Jordan voted in favor of these resolutions when they were introduced at the General Assembly.”
Yet, “defamation of religion” relates specifically and solely to Islam. And, Zeid not only defines but also enforces criminality for violating such defamation– according to Sharia Blasphemy and Apostasy Laws.
Also noteworthy is SCN’s International Advisory Board, which is directed by the Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD). ISD’s links to George Soros’s Open Societies Institute are easily identifiable. Soros has made no secret about his efforts to create a worldwide government, worldwide police force, worldwide currency, and worldwide socio-economic policies.
One cannot discount the mayor of Montréal, Denis Coderre, who said of SCN: “This global network is designed to build on community-based approaches to address violent extremism, promote openness and vigilance and expand upon local initiatives like Montréal’s Mayors’ International Observatory on Living Together.” (The only American city to join Montréal’s network, is Atlanta, which is listed as part of the “World Association of the Major Metropolises.”)
Montréal’s stated focus is “inclusion and security in an era of radicalization and terror attacks.” Yet, closed door meetings allegedly included discussions focused on “creating diversity” and “taking a public stance against intolerance.” Again, “tolerance” is specifically and solely related to “minority” communities, which are allegedly being targeted for “so-called terrorist radicalization.”
Finally, and simultaneous to these U.N. events and announcements, on October 1, 2015 the National Assembly of the Quebec Legislature unanimously passed a motion condemning “Islamaphobia.” This also specifically and solely limits what can/cannot be said about Islam and Quebec’s Muslim minorities.
The common denominator among all of this “collaboration,” from the U.N. to Jordan to Canada, is the incremental implementation of Shari’a Blasphemy and Apostasy Laws. Initially, these laws impose limits on free speech and expression. Eventually, they make illegal freedom of speech and free exercise of religion– both of which are protected in America by the U.S. Constitution.
Further still, and even more troubling, is the head of the Department of Justice announcing that the United States will participate in a global plan subject to United Nations jurisdictional authority. The head of an agency allegedly committed first and foremost to enforcing the U.S. Constitution, is deliberately rejecting the very law she swore to uphold.
Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution specifies that any international agreements, including treaties, can only be agreed to after first being subjected to the authority of the U.S. Constitution. No federal government official, cabinet member, agency bureaucrat, not even the President, can enter into international agreements like the SCN Lynch just announced.
The Constitution is quite clear. Only a two-thirds majority of the U.S. Senate can approve of entering into such an agreement. Article 2, Section 2, Clause 2 specifies that 67 members of the U.S. Senate must first agree. It states: The President, “shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.”
It is doubtful if the U.S. Senate has even heard of SCN. It most certainly has not voted on it.
Yet the Attorney General of the United States decides to bypass them and the Constitution to implement a global initiative subjecting Americans to U.N. rules– and eventually Shari’a Blasphemy and Apostasy Laws.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com