Thursday, 15 September 2016


Graham Williamson
September 2016

Foreign Minister Signs United Nations 2030 Agenda

In September 2015 Julie Bishop signed the United Nations 2030 SDG agenda, an agenda which represents a continuation and expansion of Agenda 21, and an agenda which aims to “transform” the world. In April 2016 GregHunt also signed the COP21 Paris Climate Agreement. The United Nations would assume the role of redistributing global wealth and resources, ensure all climatic problems are ‘fixed’, and ensure all countries and people live ‘sustainably’. Australia also participated in the Addis Ababa Action agenda to plan the best means of supplying the required sum of $2-$3 trillion annually to finance this agenda. This UN global agenda has bipartisan support in Australia although both major Parties like to keep this issue off the electoral agenda and refuse to give the people any democratic choice.

United Nations Announces 2030 SDG Agenda is Part of their Plan to Build a New World Order

On 20th July 2016 the UN reported that the three 2015 global agreements, the 2030 SDG agenda signed by Julie Bishop, the Paris climate change conference signed by Greg Hunt, and the Addis Ababa Action agenda, all feed into (see A/71/168) their long term new world order agenda, as initiated by the 1974 Declaration on
the Establishment of a New International Economic Order (see A/RES/S-6/3201). As the report summarises:
“the participatory process through which the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) were formulated, the emphasis on North-South technology transfer in the Addis Ababa Action Agenda (AAAA), and the acknowledgement of the need for financial assistance by developed countries to developing countries in the Paris Agreement on climate change are signs of progress toward the NIEO.”
Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order

On the 1st of May 1974 the United Nations unveiled their plan to restructure the global economic order with two foundational documents, the Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order (NIEO), and the Programme of Action on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order. The New Order was driven by third world countries, which dominated the UN, in a reaction against the Bretton Woods system which was dominated by Western Nations. Developing nations wanted to become more dominant and achieve preferential treatment from successful Western nations by central planning and direct transfer of financial aid, technology, and resources, by expansion of favourable global laws and treaties, and by favourable trade terms and investments. However, because of opposition from the West, many considered the NIEO dead and buried only a decade later.

The UN’s New World Order Continues Through the 2030 SDG Agenda Signed by Julie Bishop

The influence of anti-Western socialist developing nations and theocracies within the UN has continued however, as manifested by the linking of the NIEO to the UN's sustainability agenda in the recent Report of the Secretary General. According to the Report:
More than 40 years ago, on 1 May 1974, the General Assembly, in its resolutions 3201 (S-VI) and 3202 (S-VI), adopted the Declaration on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order and the Programme of Action on the Establishment of a New International Economic Order, respectively. In those outcome documents, the United Nations pledged to correct the inequities in the international system; redress the injustices; eliminate the gap between developed and developing countries; ensure steadily accelerating economic and social development; and secure peace and justice for the present and future generations...... The Declaration called for an even greater role for the United Nations in the establishment of the New International Economic Order (para. 6)........Continuing in that spirit, the Sustainable Development Goals, the Addis Ababa Action Agenda and the Paris Agreement all call for a greater role for the United Nations.
The Report continues to emphasise the continuation of the NIEO through the Addis Ababa Action Agenda and the2030 agenda, which has been described as a roadmap to global socialism”:
“An important issue that the New International Economic Order emphasized was the reform of the Bretton Woods institutions in order to give more voice to developing countries. The Declaration called for a “reformed international monetary system..... The Addis Ababa Action Agenda carries forward many of the above-mentioned ideas and suggestions of the New International Economic Order. In the Agenda, the world community urges IMF to continue its efforts to provide more comprehensive and flexible financial responses to the needs of developing countries”
But the Paris Climate agreement is also part of the attempt to restructure the world by taking down the richer western nations:
“Greater attention to adaptation in the Paris Agreement goes together with a stronger call for financial assistance from developed to developing countries. Article9 (1)) clearly states that developed countries shall provide financial resources to assist developing country parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention....... The emphasis in the Paris Agreement on technology transfer, capacity- building and necessary support from developed to developing countries in those respects is in agreement with the New International Economic Order, which also emphasized those issues, as previously noted.”
The Report underlines the fact that the UN is continuing its goal of creating a new world order in which the richer western nations are no longer dominant:
“The three outcomes, namely the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement, have been supported by the leadership and persistent work of the United Nations. The future success of those outcomes also depends crucially on the role of the United Nations....... At present, the United Nations is devising the work modalities of the new forums and processes that have been created by the Addis Ababa Action Agenda, the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement. Increasingly, the United Nations is enlisting in its work the participation of non-State actors, such as civil society organizations, non-governmental organizations and the business community...... The enhanced role of the United Nations was already envisaged in the New International Economic Order”
Understanding UN Strategies & Goals

The UN, having spent more than half a $trillion in 70 years, is an undemocratic, unaccountable international policeman that is in the business of inventing ‘global problems’ which can only be ‘solved’ by a transfer of power and money from nation states to the UN. It has been elevated to this status by cooperative national governments. Most western nations have accepted the burden of guilt placed upon them by the third world countries, theocracies, and dictatorships, which dominate the UN.

According to Doug Bandow in his article, “Totalitarian Global Management: The UN's War on the Liberal InternationalEconomic Order”:
the UN has become "a center of agitation against the democratic order."... Under the control of the numerous Third World nations, the UN has been actively promoting a comprehensive and totalitarian system of global management........The overriding UN ideology is one of international control of natural, financial, and informational resources, as well as the global regulation of economic and even cultural activities......In addition to providing a forum for the ideology of global management, the UN also helps underwrite the development and spread of redistributionist ideas......Thus, as a wellspring for the ideology of global management, the UN is posing a serious threat to the liberal international economic order, as well as to the basic political values underlying the democratic nations of the West.
As Bandow prophetically notes (even back in 1985), the UN seeks to expand its global power base by redistribution of natural resources”, redistribution of financial resources”, “redistribution of technological resources”, “regulation of speech and culture”, and by increased “foreign aid”. This strategy is facilitated by what Bandow describes as “A Guilty West” and an attack on the “moral under-pinnings of the liberal international economic system”.

Bandow summarises:
The UN is at the forefront of a global assault on the United States and the liberal international economic order. Repeated Third World demands for a NIEO are more than just rhetoric; they are part of a concerted effort to impose global management over a host of natural, financial, and technological resources, as well as to regulate world business activities........Extending regulatory systems to the international level that have failed at the national level is not an act of compassion.........Western nations should place the blame for poverty and stagnation where it primarily belongs--on ill-conceived, foolish indigenous economic policies. Third World leaders who knowingly stifle economic incentives, confiscate private wealth, deter foreign investment, and oppress their people should not be allowed to get away with blithe assertions of Western guilt. For it is they, not American taxpayers and businesses, who bear the moral responsibility for a stagnant and impoverished Third World.

Most conspicuously, there is apparently unanimous agreement that the final goals, in terms of cost, freedom, democracy, and global power structure, are unmentionable.

In Australia we urgently need to answer the question:
Do we truly wish to address the causes of global poverty, or are we happy to continue to increasingly disenfranchise the people by enriching and empowering global power mongers? 


  1. This is undemocratic. We do not want to belong to the United Nations, We do not want Julie Bishop to speak for us. Senator Malcolm Roberts from Pauline Hansons One Nation, should be scrutinising this. I hope someone will make him aware of this,.

  2. Total Tyranny. War Criminals as well.

  3. You understand that 'you' don't speak for all of Australia, right? Bishop received 70.7% of the vote in her electorate, and has served the Australian public well throughout her career. Roberts, on the other hand, received 77 personal votes in the entire state of Queensland. I think the Australia which accepts that UN membership is a positive, and that climate change is legitimate, might outnumber 'you'.

    1. 70.7% in HER Electorate. Not in the Australian vote.

  4. Your kidding right? Serves us well, like she served asbestos victims?

    1. I agree with the above comment .. Bishop has not served well .. any one that takes someone who was entitled to compensation for being poisoned by asbesto's, away from their family & stress them & their family when they are on their death beds is disgusting.
      Remember how Bishop use to ridicule the U.N .. Funny how now she is a fan of them ..

  5. To Anonymous comment Oct 12 2016 @ 18.30.......She doesnt speak for me, nor all the people i have spoken to, just because you think she has done a good job so far, does not make this horrific mistake ok

    1. she has done a good job for the elite that pay her, thats it. she lied about russia on MH17. she lied about Ukraine. She lies about Syria. she lies to us to keep her owners happy. There are people who think the government have their best interests at heart and then theres those people who THINK.

  6. Socialists with dreams of a Utopian world & drunken brainwashed uni students would be the ones considering Bishop's & the UN's role as being for the good of mankind. It is an undemocratic takeover by the elite who consider only themselves as capable to rule & worthy to share the wealth of the planet. NWO is an abomination, civilization has progressed, except in islamic controlled countris, to throw off the shackles of serfdom, but Bishop, along with other addlebrained opportunists in the UN, hope they will be offered an elite position in the fantasy world they envisage as reward for their traitorous efforts. The ostrich crod are the only ones taken in by this.

  7. The sooner we have a major war the better, the survivors will go on to create a far better World

  8. Another politician used as a chessice in the game of UN agendas for a One World Order. It was prophesied over 2000 years ago so not a surprise just disapointing at the naive ones being used as pawns to make it happen.

  9. Why wasnt the Australian People consulted on this commitment. We do not want to be in the United Nations, any longer.
    Thrown this rotten Government out.

    We want Pauline Hansons One Nation to Govern us. Ine Nation is the only Political Party that has the best interests of Australia, the others are trying to ruin Australia and the Australian way of life.

  10. She has no rights in signing our lifes away to anything fucken parasite that she is,Are we going to let this happen this is our life she is playing with we have to stand up to these arseholes that keep everything a secert and sign away as they please if we let this happen you might as well kiss your arse goodbye because they own you now and you have no more rights left.

    1. I would like to be in charge for 10 minutes I would g
      charge the whole lot of these germs selling Australia off to the highest bidder with treason

  11. Makes sense of all the unbelievable decisions piling on top of one another.....time for "AUXIT".

  12. rip up this agreement ASAP

  13. I hope all you who read these comments realise who is REALLY behind all this NWO garbage. Don't you?

    The Rothschild internaional banking cartel, that's who.

    The world's wealthy elite are the real reason for world poverty, various wars, the intentional Islamisation of western society, the unlawful corporatisation of western governments (USA, Canada, UK and Australia to mention a few).

    All these country's corporate governments are registered as American businesses based in Washington DC, USA; rendering all except the USA as being run by foreign corporations, which is both unlawful and illegal under international law. Who recommended the establishment of this? Rothschild and company, the wealthy elite. Don't believe me? Google it.

    We desparately need to route out the IMF and The Federal Reserve Bank of Australia (other nations need to do this in their own countries) and make our governments abdicate their corporate affiliations with Washington DC. Then ee may be able to start "draining the swamp" and clean up our societies, nut not until. IMHO.

    1. Yep... one world order here we come, covered up by world peace lies... Emma Rothschild was chair woman of United Nations... Susan Rothschild worked with Accenture... the recent company with WorldBank to bring the 2030 biometric ID that is to be made mandatory for evey man, woman and child... this rothschild family along with rockerfeller and other members date back to 7th century with their hands in everything starting with the skulls and bones aka freemasons... venturing out owning all banks, media and government. Their blood line is so extensive i wouldnt be surprised if our politicians are also related some where along their inbread blood lines....

      If you really want to know how the rothschild own the UN and brining in one world order through false peace watch this...

  14. It's ok because there will be NO Government left very soon.The King Of All Kings Yeshua Ha'mashiach is Coming! They all get destroyed in the End :)


All serious comments published after moderation.
Comments should be polite, and respect all views.
No bad language. Spam never makes it!