House Concurrent Resolution 64 Quote

“Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that it should be a fundamental objective of the foreign policy of the United States to support and strengthen the United Nations and to seek its development into a world federation ...with defined and limited powers adequate to preserve peace and prevent aggression through the enactment, interpretation, and enforcement of world law...”

~ House Concurrent Resolution 64

House Concurrent Resolution 64, "To Seek Development of the United Nationns into a World Federation."
House Committee on Foreign Affairs Hearing, 81st Cong., 1st Sess. 10/12-13/1949 - Congressional Record, NOVEMBER 12-13th, 1949
Introduced by REP. BROOK HAYS of Arkansas, had over 100 co-sponsors, including two future Presidents - REP. GERALD FORD of Michigan and REP. JOHN F. KENNEDY of Massachusetts - and a future Presidential candidate - SEN. HUBERT H. HUMPHREY

Ratings and Comments

Jonathan Liem, Singapore

Just as it would be beneficial to the Union if it were to remove itself from the UN, WTO, LOST, NAFTA, IMF, etc. States should take back their independence and demand that the federal government respect Tenth Amendment rights or face secession. We would all be much better off.

Brian D. Pickett, Tampa, Florida

I can see but little diferrence between those who sponsored, those who co-sponsored, and any who voted for this bill, and the height from which they should be hanged should be in accordance with the degree of treason they each demonstrated.

Jack Stanley, Green, Ohio

If only the US had continued the support for the UN that was expressed in 1949 they would not find themselves in the quagmire they are in today and seem to be unable to find a way out.

Anonymous, Reston, VA US

If only the GOP of 2005 could see the power and benefit of not playing the role of the world's bully and would learn the kindergarden lesson to 'play nice with others'...

  • Reply
PM    5/26/05
Senor Reek, Corozal, Belize, Central America

Brooks Hays was a dupe of the one-world-order nuts. He was betraying the "states rights" democrats who made up the bulk of the southern congressmen. Ultimately, after 7 terms, he was defeated. The idea that we should surrender our rights to a government which then calls them "privileges" is bad enuf in the US. How could anyone think that bigger is better?

Rodney Porter, Abernathy, TX

Tenth Amendment YES. New World Order NO.

Anonymous, Atlanta, GA

The US set up the UN as a place to vent world grievances and solve global problems. We need a system such as this in the world today. The misguided souls who refuse to see the wisdom of this body, imperfect as it is, will doom us to repeat WWI and WWII.

Damon Porter, Washington, DC

In spite of its flaws, one of the greatest forces for peace in the world today. Certainly something the US should support, especially considering how it, through veto power, is a strengthening force for the United States in world politics today.

E Archer, NYC

Name one war the UN has stopped. Name one 'peace' the UN has kept. Nonsense! The UN is the tool of the central banks under which all the UN countries are beholden via their declared bankruptcy. The UN is a tool for world socialism and has subverted the US every step of the way towards world peace. One day the UN will assert authority over the US very much like Washington D.C. asserts authority over the several States -- that is the goal, one world government with the UN as the 'Congress', the IMF/World Bank as the central bank, the International Court as the Supreme Court, and a host of 'World' organizations designed to monopolize trade, health, communications, taxes, EVERYTHING! A permanent feudal society under an unelected body of bureaucrats/politicians making decisions that funnel money into their pockets. The UN is a CON, and will be the cause of endless war in the world -- which is its intent.

Mike, Norwalk

The UN's demonic smoke screen, as shallow and transparent as it is (that of being a uniquely benevolent world peace keeping omnipotent loving parent), is a lie told often enough that the major network media believing, light and fluffy, duped students from public propaganda cesspools (schools) having no concept of freedom/liberty and the personal responsibility thereof, have never researched what measures are passed in the UN (from abortion to zoology), heard the politics/religion of the patrons, or seen the full effect of what the UN has/is done/doing (it is an immoral special interest's wonderland). The little good the UN has done has been far out weighed by the death, devastation, and mayhem it has caused. The freedoms and liberties set forth by the founders of this Great Republic, are the biggest obstacles in the way of the UN's world dominance. I may have sugar coated my comments here a-bit, but the message is clear.

  • Reply
    Anonymous    3/18/08

    Top 10 UN Slogans:
    1.If an impotent bloated bureacracy can't solve it, then its best left festering.
    2. You can't spell UNethical without U.N.
    3. Genocidal dictators beware our non-binding resolutions.
    4. Bringing peace to our world. (actual results may vary)
    5. Tomorrow's corruption today.
    6. Raising pointless squabbling to an art form.
    7. We take bribes so you don't have to.
    8. Try our world famous cheesy fries.
    9. When troubles abound we'll be nearby doing nothing.
    10. If this is an emergency please hang up and dial America.

    J Carlton, Calgary

    World Federation = World Slavery

    • Reply
    RobertSRQ    3/18/08

    It’s Amazing!!! I give this six stars: The US more or less kicks out the UN when they invaded Iraq. The UN said Iraq had no WMD – the UN had over the years disarmed Iraq (easy prey for any aggressor), The US then got themselves into an almighty mess – no one could speak Arabic there were no executive personnel with combat or foreign policy experience; Bremer, who made three calamites decisions (actually it was more like 12) asks Sergio Vieira de Mello (a top UN diplomat) for advise gets it then Sergio gets killed by a truck bomb for which no one claims responsibility (very suspect). The UN does an incredible job considering they are not the friend of despots and tyrants, which makes me wonder what we are. Thank you Damon and Reston for some sanity in this blog. Archer as much as I have agreed with your pasts posts this I am afraid is way off base. The job of the UN is to help the peace it is the those you say they comspire with who are the real culprits, them and ignorant governments - The UN are not the subverters WE ARE... The UN has many wonderful success stories, alas us humans like to concentrate on the negaitve side of effort. The US ops our of treaties when its suite the bankers and corporate enterprise. The UN is backed by 192 countries and fights not only for peace but also against poverty and hunger. China our big trading partner kills innocent protesters in Tibet - "The Chinese military is shooting Tibetan demonstrators "like dogs," creates slave labour, creats a pollution problem that may cost us the globe, is communist, has WMD and the fabulous and moral and ethical America does zilch – give me a break – we are just, well, you name it! P.s. watch a documentary "No End in Sight" for the truth about Iraq and I'm sure there's a lot more we don't know. What is a CON is the GOP

    My Name, Your Town,USA

    This is a hard one to rate. In one aspect, it gives me the chills to read and visualize it but from another perspective, it appears beneficial for some. I am undecided. I lean more towards being wary of the implications of this quote. Cautiously wary.

    Paul, Union, WA

    Why should we trust the UN to restrain itself to "defined and limited powers" when the US govt itself habitually mocks, ignores, and abuses this concept? How many foreigners are there that truly understand LESS govt is BETTER?

    Mike, Norwalk

    Robert, the GOP is a con but, so is the big D, both accelerating unconstitutional tyranny. Setting in on some of the UN's special committees or policy forums is extremely enlightening. The UN is equal in the con game to the 'R's' and 'D's' and is not what it's face says it is. The UN is rotten to its core as compared to true freedom, liberty, peace and prosperity without a measuring stick or limitation, such as a sovereign person's republican Constitution. The united states under the UN have no 10th Amendment or real governmental limiting Bill of Rights. If people would come in out of the nebulous ethos and look at the whole of what the UN is, with no ability to change it, all rational people would demand we get out of the UN.

    E Archer, NYC

    Robert, I do understand your feelings on the matter, and I believe you have a good heart. I grew up believing in the UN, too -- of course, I only knew what I was taught. I see that shiny building nearly everyday on the East side, and it is held in high esteem here in the City. But I have spent some time researching its origins, reading its charters, following its activities, and I must say that its roots lead straight to the New World Order ruling class -- the Rockefeller banking dynasty among others. All the UN member countries MUST be bankrupt and using fiat currency issued under the auspices of the International Monetary Fund/World Bank. (That is one of the reasons countries like Switzerland never joined -- they still retained control of their hard currency.) The UN charter is a treasonous document that officers of the US government CANNOT sign without violating their oaths to defend the US Constitution. The UN military is indeed commanded by what was once the Soviet Red Army (which was the USSR's requirement for joining the UN) -- and the tragedies of the Korean and Vietnam wars were in a large part due to the efforts of the UN passing on secret information to the communist Chinese. The intent truly is to subvert American Common Law and the freedoms that we claim as natural and inalienable. If America can be made subservient to this body that recognizes only a set of 'civil' rights (granted by the UN's authority) then America's Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Bill of Rights are essentially no longer the Law of the Land. Globalism, unification, centralization -- all put too much power in too few hands at the expense of our rights and those of our progeny. Peace without Justice is no peace at all -- it is slavery at the hand of whomever holds the reins to world power. How dare we even consider joining such a body politic and creating a seat of power so immense that sooner or later a Stalin will grab hold of it and doom us all. Don't be fooled -- what if GWB was the 'king of the world'? Nothing short of WW3 and the laying waste of the Earth will follow -- and don't think the UN doesn't want that, they DO! Their policies are killing off MILLIONS every year -- and they want a 2/3 reduction in population -- any volunteers? The UN is the death knell for billions of people. Do not let these devils con you, Robert! Respectfully,

    Waffler, Smith, Arkansas

    Congressional laws are second only to the words of our current president in being totally without literary merit. However the sense of Congress and thus the American people is what is important here. If the Republican Congress had done the same thing in supporting Wilson's League of Nations we would not have had the Second World War. Archer you don't listen and obviously you don't read. Numerous commnetors here have stated the benefits of the United Nations. Your failure to read and listen is no ones fault but your own.

    Logan, Memphis, TN

    ..laughs.. Of all the people who promote democracy and praise the UN!! Waffler?! Mr. Democracy himself?! Mr. "Democracy all of the time without exception"--- praising the UN?! Am I reading this correctly? Waffler?! You once criticized me for supporting a system of government where the states (government) appointed delegates to a higher government (federal) without the consent of the people directly! Now you stand here to defend the largest non-Democratic international organization on the earth-- where not even one person is elected by the voice of the people?! Waffler? Tell me this isn't so! ..laughs.. This really seems too good to be true-- you're not being hypocritical now, are you?! Of all the people on this blog, I thought for sure that you would be the one person to condem the UN right out of existence, because of its non-Democratic structure!!

    Mike, Norwalk

    Robert, I read over my statement directed at you and it now reads much more harsh than I intended and I apologize with the utmost respect. Logan, Waffler can't really believe what he rights most of the time because he disagrees with himself so often. He just writes that stuff to get a rise.

    Waffler, Smith, Arkansas

    Logan if you condemn the UN for its non-democratic structure why do you praise your mythical or mystical "republic" for its non-democratic structure. I am no more Mr. Democracy than you are, I and you have agreed that we are both Mr. Majority Rule. Why not leave it at that and have a real discussion about real things.

    Logan, Memphis, TN

    What are "real things"? Current news concerning economic conditions, political actions, or the latest prostitution scandal in New York? To simply talk about the actions of the world around us is rot, unless there is a basic and fundamental understanding to the perceived foundations and origins whereon the structures discussed are built. This fundamental understanding of the structures discussed is not simply measured by institutions, groups, and organizations, but on thoughts, ideas, beliefs, and creeds. The Greeks called the daily commotion of life's actions the "flux." They were smart enough to realize that the day-to-day mundane activities of politicians and government, businessmen, average citizens, etc. are largely irrelevant. Why? Because the "flux" of one arbitrary economic conditions will lend way to another arbitrary economic condition; the "flux" of one arbitrary political action will give way to another arbitrary political action... They did, however, see that discussion of the fundamental principles upon which everything is governed is the most sure way of finding a static and concrete understanding to how everything interacted with each other. They sought to find universal constants by which they could measure the mundane day-to-day life cycles accurately. Now the Greeks weren't perfect in their quest, but they left a foundation that we, if we are wise, can use to determine the world around us. Our founders built upon these ideas to find uniformity and a concrete resolution towards a foundation of government-- they called this natural law. Why then do I argue against Democracy? Because the premise of Democracy (as a form of government) violates natural law and unalienable rights. If we are going to talk about "real" things, then lets talk! = ) But current events is the last "real" thing out there to discuss.

    Waffler, Smith, Arkansas

    Logan you are correct that the UN is not founded on democratic principles but on political or historic reality in 1946. How else can you explain that Norway and Paraquay each get one vote in the General Assembly just like the US, China, and Russia do? The idea of the UN is simply that the world like our towns, states, and nation has somethings in common and upon the notion that secret agreements among various nations lead to conflicts etcetera. The Greek philosophes were men of leisure who lived off a slave economy. They had nothing better to do than sit around and debate philosophy. I to enjoy the "joy of philosophy" but with a purpose towards real or actual life and events.

    Logan, Memphis, TN

    As with the Greek philosophers, so as to our own founders. What, exactly, did our founders give us? Philosophy is so readily dismissed as a beauty had to the men of leisure, wasted time, and debauchery! Such is the sad course of our nation. We have transformed our society from a generation who knew HOW to think to a people who can only argue WHAT they think (as based on no substance. You cannot properly discuss "real or actual life and events" without discussing the reasons of why. It's the differentiation between qualitative and quantitative data. People can sit around all day and find a correlation between the actions of one man against another (quantitative), but you can never find causation until you know "how the knower knows." The establishment of the UN in 1946 is an empty and basically worthless historical fact-- as are all perceived "real or actual life and events," unless there is legitimate understanding of what philosophies (life experience, understandings, perceptions of the world, etc.) brought men to make the decisions they have.

    warren, olathe

    Robert you idiot. The UN was mad at us for loosing track of WMD's at Al QaQaa ammo dump. They claimed they were there and tagged and we said they were already missing when we got there. Looters were said to have taken much of the explosives and nuclear triggers. No way of knowing how much was left behind by Sadam before the bunker was cleaned out to "keep it out of US hands". The UN was active in condemning Iraq for its WMD's. One of the few things the UN got right.

    • Reply
    Anonymous    3/22/11

    The UN has outlived its usefulness, and it is a dangerous threat to the liberty of the US to continue its involvement in such an organization.


    Get a Quote-a-Day!

    Liberty Quotes sent to your mail box daily.