Additional Titles









How Communism and The U.N. Set Out to Destroy America








Part 2




By Jill Cohen Walker, J.D.

March 218, 2005

Not long after Part 1 of this series was posted on NewsWithViews, I received e-mail from many concerned, intelligent and insightful readers. One was from a gentleman who shared what it was like to return to the United States after WW II. Somehow that e-mail and several others were lost in the folds of my mail server. Lloyd’s surfaced a few days before the total crash of my computer. It deserves mentioning.

He said my column took him back to the signing of the UN Treaty in San Francisco on June 26, 1945. Our returning soldiers were thinking about living a decent life “with no threats of war or governance by tyrants.” Instead they saw “many nations forming a coalition that would force us into a One World Government.” While he knew political leaders were involved in the deception, he didn’t believe it could happen without the corporate takeover of America, which he said would lead to the “Communization of America.”

His viewpoint makes sense if we understand Hitler’s Third Way—a hybrid of communism and capitalism that commercializes the government and allows its coffers to be filled with tax revenues even though it produces nothing. The government maintains control over what appear to be privately owned companies (and even non-profits), places their people in charge of them, continues to provide government grants and corporate welfare, which allows CEOs to earn prohibitive salaries and bonuses. And guess who’s footing the bill? But I digress.

For decades Lloyd watched the erosion of the America of our Founders. At some point, he was in contact with Maj. Roberts’ program, which came into being “so the people of this nation could have the Constitution returned to them.” He said the effort was good but it “requires the will of many people [for it to happen]. That’s the hard part.”

He’s right. It is hard to fight multi-layered factions of the powerful and greedy who believe they have been chosen to create utopia—one that fits only their beliefs and worldview. It's hard to fight the agenda of the secularists, the globalists, the fascists, and the communists. How do you fight those who believe there is no God, no heaven, no hell, and all religions should be abolished in favor of an agreed-upon world religion that’s based on fables, fairytales, and even the diabolical? How do you reckon with those who claim national boundaries should be obliterated and ethnic identities denied in order to eliminate world poverty (as if that would really happen)? What that mankind would understand that his machinations are for naught and all is not so well in his rebellious little corners of the world.

This, in part, was what Maj. Arch E. Roberts understood when he revealed the plans of government leaders and internationalists who wanted nothing less than to rule a world government with its own currency, military, laws, and religion. The government’s efforts to silence military men from speaking out against communism were of prime importance if our military was to serve (unbeknownst to most Americans) under the new supra-national government. Even the mechanisms for making it happen were well concealed so the “Nimrodites” could continue their quest to build another Tower of Babel complete with their own Nimrod. Look at the facts . . .

The Strange Case of Dr. Vasiliev

Maj. Roberts wrote about what he called “The Strange Case of General Vasiliev” because he believed it was an excellent example of “international deceit.” Most of us never heard of the man, but who he was and the position he held in the early UN told volumes about the intent of that organization. This also validates that our own government was knee-deep in the global quagmire long before “global” became a household word.

Lieutenant General Alexandre Ph. Vasiliev (hereinafter, Vasiliev) was the Soviet Union’s representative to and chairman of the United Nations Military Committee from 1947 until the Soviets withdrew from that committee in 1950. When the UN ordered him to North Korea, he obeyed and “commanded all movements of the Chinese Communists across the thirty-eighth parallel.”

According to Maj. Roberts, the “deceit” started with US State Department Bulletin Number 442A (August 3, 1947). Titled “Arming the United Nations,” page 239 documented the movements of Vasiliev in relation to the powers that were newly vested in the UN. The State Department wasn’t just aware of Vasiliev’s mission; it supported it by citing a report from his committee that he sent to Secretary-General Trygve Lie on April 30, 1947, then to the Security Council. The report contained “recommendations on the general principles governing the organization of the armed forces made available to the Security Council by Member Nations of the United Nations.”

Within the bulletin were also significant mentions of Article 43 of the UN Charter (Chapter VII, “Action with Respect to Threats to Peace, Breaches of the Peace, and Acts of Aggression”). Article 43 referred to efforts assumed by member nations to provide the Security Council with military forces. After citing the relevant text from Article 43, the State Department noted that the Security Council had authorization to use military forces as outlined in Article 42 of the Charter.

This obvious shift of American military power to the communist-style UN by the State Department went largely unreported by the media, which meant the media was in favor of it and most Americans were kept in the dark. In fact, most still believe our military plans are the brainchild of high-ranking American military personnel, their efforts shaped on the battlefields or “in war rooms at the Pentagon at the direction of Congress.” With regard to Korea and Vietnam, this was far from true. State Department documents prove that after the signing of the UN Charter, “war plans for the employment of American soldiers [were] prepared by foreign generals under the direction of Soviet Communists at the United Nations military headquarters.”

Maj. Roberts considered “the spectacle of a Red Army general drawing up plans for the assignment of American soldiers in an ‘Armed United Nations’” the most glaring proof of our government’s duplicity and its “gross violations of the US Constitution.” He was also intelligent enough to stay on Vasiliev’s trail—one that shows how he “applied his plans for ‘Arming the United Nations.’ From there, the trail led straight to the Pentagon.”

A paper released on May 15, 1954 by the Office of Public Information, Department of Defense supported Maj. Roberts’ claims. Titled, “The Truth about Soviet Involvement in the Korean War,” this “intelligence digest” contained information regarding the increased flow of Russian equipment into Korea just prior to the initial attack. Equipment was followed by teams of Russian advisors. This information came from a “Major of North Korean engineers” who stated, “Many Russian advisors were attached to the North Korean Army advance headquarters that was set up in June, 1950. They did not wear uniforms and were introduced as ‘newspaper reporters’ even though they had supreme authority.” The report also revealed that the out-of-uniform Russians treated the heads of the North Korean military like “servants or children.”

Two of those military “‘advisors’” were “identified as Vasiliev and Colonel Dolgin.” Another prisoner identified Colonel Yun, “a Russian who spoke Korean haltingly, as advisor to the Tank Command of North Korea in 1950.” That prisoner also claimed it was Vasiliev who ordered the attack on June 25th and eventually “directed the Chinese hordes who were let loose to murder UN soldiers in Korea,” including thousands of Americans. Many were “killed or captured by the Chinese, then tortured in Chinese prison camps located in North Korea.”

Forget all the violations of the US Constitution that such a war permitted. Forget the media campaigns of fear regarding communist aggression against the United States during the alleged Cold War. That our government leaders would send American soldiers into such a well-planned cauldron of destruction is beyond treason. Maj. Roberts believed that American soldiers who fought in Korea have a deep and lawful grievance against this nation, but their real cause of action should be, as he suggested, against the Security Council of the United Nations.

To Maj. Roberts, the Korean War a “savage example of United Nations ‘non-wars,’ in which scenario and stage management are under the exclusive direction of professional internationalists operating behind a ‘front’ of national militarists.” It was, he wrote, “engineered by the United Nations and the State Department so the supreme military authority of the UN might be established by force of arms and endorsed before the world.” He considered the war and Vasiliev’s actions as proof of UN “cynicism,” and what should have been an “indictment” against the US military and our government leaders.

Adding insult to massive injuries, Vasliev also violated the UN Charter, Chapter XV, paragraph 1, which prohibits the Secretary-General and his staff from seeking or receiving instructions from authorities external to the UN. They were also forbidden to engage in any action that could affect their roles in the organization. Vasiliev played a dual role by acting as an “‘advisor’” to the Chinese Communists and was never punished for his crime against the American soldiers who were slaughtered in Korea.

Do we need more evidence that many American politicians view the UN Charter as “supreme” over the US Constitution? Didn’t we see the world body tremble in its collectively angry pants when President Bush went to war in Iraq. Without a thumbs-up from the Security Council, and without their foreign generals involved in the war planning, internationalists and world leaders must have gone into little global tirades. From that point forward, the “world” went after the United States through massive media campaigns and propaganda that was geared to wear down our support for the war. (Remember Vietnam?)

We now know that much of the opposition was insincere, especially from the “oil-for-food” and “rape of young African girls” perspectives. No doubt many UN officials, ambassadors, and some “peacekeepers” quaked in their pricey leather loafers that the organization would be totally exposed (no pun intended) and discredited—as if it wasn’t already to a majority of Americans. It’s also possible that we’ve been duped again. We may never know what deals were made, or who silenced who, but would it be a surprise to find out the UN has been running the show in Iraq from day one just like it did in Korea and Vietnam? If this is true, the low number of American casualties (compared to Korea and Vietnam) must have them terribly baffled when they seem to enjoy mass casualties during their little wars of attrition.

United States Senate Resolution 32

While the war in Korea took place five decades ago, it’s increasingly obvious that the same conditions that existed then exist today. By the middle of the 1960s, Maj. Roberts believed the conditions were worse and Americans were in grave danger. He noted two points of evidence that supported his claims. On April 8, 1965, Sen. Joseph S. Clark (D-PA) introduced Senate Concurrent Resolution Number 32 (89th Congress). That proposal requested that the President of the United States quickly create “clear proposals” that would set into motion “the foreign policy objectives of the United States regarding the establishment of an international authority to keep the peace under conditions of general and complete disarmament.” That meant no nation could bear arms. The second piece of evidence was the Vietnam War.

Resolution Number 32 also allowed Congress to consider enacting into federal law the same provisions found in the UN Charter, which might explain six decades of congressional logjams and egregious decisions by the US Supreme Court. According to Maj. Roberts, provisions of Resolution 32 would include an organization for international disarmament (this has been bandied about for years); a permanent World Peace Force (UN “peacekeepers” instead terrorize young women and children in Africa and elsewhere); settlement of all international disputes by a World Tribunal (the International Criminal Court operates in Brussels and wants to expand into a global legal system); creation of international institutions needed to enforce world peace (really to orchestrate turmoil all over the world until everyone caves in); and funding for all of the above (most of the money comes from the taxpayers of the US).

Of prime importance to the UN is population control . . . no matter how it’s accomplished. Infanticide, genocide, torture, rape, to name a few UN methods, have had fatal short- and long-term consequences on various people groups around the world. Just ask the Christians in Sudan and now in Nigeria. The UN’s goal is a world population of 500 million on a planet that God prepared for at least 35 billion.

Even in 1965, instilling so much power in the UN and dismantling the United States caused intense concern to Americans who knew the truth. Resolution 32 created the legal mandate for total UN control over American atomic weapons and “national defensive armaments.” It also gave the UN authority to declare war or peace, command American military personnel, control of the world’s resources (including people), and directly tax Americans in order to finance “a one-world United Nations government.”

Resolution 32 was a prime example of elected officials acting in contravention to the US Constitution. That the authors of such resolutions and ensuing legislation were not charged with and tried for treason is incomprehensible. As Americans, we do not derive our rights from the government. Rather, the Articles set forth in the Constitution enumerate the very limited and “delegated” powers of the branches of the federal government (which the UN Charter tears to shreds). Even with war making power, court jurisdiction, and law-making powers enumerated so well, “and methods for amending those powers,” the end result of the game played by politicians was the elevation of the UN Charter over our Constitution. Perhaps America’s sovereignty is already lost in a sea of international agreements, treaties, and other unconstitutional deals. Perhaps, however, the Charter cannot trump our Constitution . . . unless we say it can . . . and we haven’t said it.

The Founders knew not to “entangle” the United States in what George Washington called “permanent alliances with the foreign world.” He knew we had to remain in a “defensive posture” and only temporary alliances could be trusted. Thomas Jefferson stated in his First Inaugural Address, “Peace, Commerce, and Honest Friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none.” Under the Monroe Doctrine, which the left calls the evil model for American isolationism, it was okay to have “amiable relationships” with foreign nations, but it was dangerous to national peace and safety for them to “try to extend [their systems of vastly different governments] to any portion of this hemisphere.” Then the Soviets were welcomed into Cuba, the Chinese into Panama, and the US was loaded with illegal immigrants who use our system of government (now largely misinterpreted by oligarchic courts) to gain more and more power over patriotic Americans.

Those with global stars in their eyes have deliberately ignored those warnings, much to the peril of the nation they swore to protect and defend. How can they swear on a Bible to uphold our Constitution unless the oath they take is really a promise to uphold all the treaties as the “supreme law of the land”? That’s the only explanation for the imposition of foreign laws in domestic cases, i.e., overturning Texas’ laws against sodomy. And Roe v. Wade was decided based on the laws of the long-defunct Greek Empire, destroyed by those twin enemies of real freedom, tolerance and ecumenism.

An article by Joseph Farah titled “Supreme Court internationalists” documents the increasing level to which liberal judges have ignored the Constitution as “the supreme law of the land.” No law from any other nation should be relevant, but to create their global society, they’ve been doing it for decades and with exponentially greater speed today.

Was Maj. Roberts correct in his assertion that Resolution 32 arose out of the treaty we signed with the UN? You bet he was! While that treaty was sold to the American people as a promise of world peace, in reality it was enacted to “strip away the public pretense that the UN Charter is merely a ‘treaty.’” It was the intent of its supporters to declare it the “‘supreme law of the land’ by congressional statute.”

This should make those who’ve voted over the past five decades wonder who they voted for, regardless of whether the person was running for federal, state, or local office, and regardless of party affiliation. And it should make us all wonder if we’re living in a nation that was recreated by two generations of manipulators and evildoers, or if we’re living in the nation our Founding Fathers had in mind when they prayed for God’s guidance at the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia. Ask yourself if we’re still “the heaven-rescued land.” It’s not mandatory, but would it hurt to “praise the power that made and preserved us”? Is this still “the land of the free and the home of the brave?”

At this time I would like to thank Major Arch E. Roberts for conviction, excellent work, and willingness to fight for this nation. I pray the rest of this series will do his efforts justice. Meanwhile, let those who value what America once was—a nation with a heart and soul for God that was free of entangling treaties—stand up and carry on where Maj. Roberts and others left off. Do we have the courage?

Part 1, Part 3,

Part 3 of this series will reveal additional plans for stealing the US and some of the political and non-political leaders who were more than willing to sell us out to the United Nations and global tyranny.

© 2005 - Jill Cohen Walker - All Rights Reserved

Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts

E-Mails are used strictly for NWVs alerts, not for sale

Jill Cohen Walker earned a BA from Goddard College in 1977, a JD from Franklin Pierce Law Center in 1980, and an MS in journalism at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville in 1999. A freelance writer for fifteen years, she has written numerous articles for tech magazines and newspapers, and co-authored a book on hiring practices in the printing industry.

She taught Social Studies for one year in a northern middle school, and medical-legal and bio-medical courses in the Allied Health division of a local community college for four years. A student of legal history and the US Constitution, she began to study current events and Bible prophecies in March 1985. Her deep interest in and awareness of American politics started during the 2000 elections when she realized the prophetic time clock was ticking fast. She is the co-author of the novel "The Call to Prayer". (











The Founders knew not to “entangle” the United States in what George Washington called “permanent alliances with the foreign world.” He knew we had to remain in a “defensive posture” and only temporary alliances could be trusted.