I found another great video which helps clarify the global government agenda so we can recognise why so many drastic changes to our constitution have taken place. It also explains the latest Amnesty legislation.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2634703139474212867&q=united+nations
Please, if you are one of the people who routinely dismisses me as a ditz-brain, move on. I don't have time for you. The effort I put into assimilating this kind of material is worth more to me than that.
The idea of an entire world effectively controlled by the UN has been a long time in the making. It was first brought to the table by the Council on Foreign Relations back in 1921. The CFR has dominated every administration since then, but very much more has it been present in this one.
The goal was, and still is, to eventually remove all national sovereignty and have a complete monpoly on government rule, military and judicial power. It would have a permanent international court with no constitutional protections. It would declare that no state would have the power to usurp the One World Government rule. There would be no moral authority greater than the UN itself. No private group, (including nations,) would be allowed to resist authority. It would of course, mean total disarmament of all civilians and containment for any political dissenters. Universal membership would be mandatory.
The idea of the New World Order would be the ultimate freedom from wars. They said "Nationhood as we know it will be obsolete."
Since it was recognized that it would be difficult to obliterate national sovereignty without a fight, it was decided it should be implemented in pieces letting people experience the illusion that THEY were doing it for themselves. They would be persuaded through various propaganda techniques that the changes were for their own personal lives. NGO's sprang up, (non governmental organizations) which have become major players over the decades in introducing the concept of international development. White collar jobs are increasingly being outsourced to international institutions.
The UN Charter and the US Constitution can not co-exist. One encourages individualism, the other encourages conformity. That is probably why ours is disappearing. There are only two types of people according to the UN charter. There are the "Problems" and there are the "Assets". In order to be a good asset for the state, which is the only social status you will ever have, you must be sufficiently dumbed down through life-long indoctrination and fit into the expectation of being a "good worker."
Family unity is discouraged because the state wants to take a major role in the humans which are developing as their "assets" and to monitor them. David Rockefeller poured MILLIONS into the feminist movement in the seventies because he loved the idea of all those women bringing in more income tax, (twice the annual amount,) and also it would leave more of an opening for state infiltration of families. (Wellfare mothers for example.) Here is a short list of changes to be expected under the UN Global Ruling:
1. Population control, (ie limit of babies)
2.Euthanasia and assisted suicide encouraged
3.No home schooling
4.New global taxes
5.Massive Americans relocated where wildlfe areas are designated, trans-continental super highways are constructed.
6.Property ownership restricted and eventually eliminated7.American military replaced by the UN military
I find these names most often associated with it:
Rumsfield
Kissenger
Cheney
Wolfowitz
Perle
Kristol
Buckley
Clinton
Bush
Here is a list of some of the original players:
| Allaire, Paul Arthur Allison, Graham Tillery, Jr. Andreas, Dwayne Orville Bartley, Robert Leroy Bergsten, C. Fred Bowie, Robert R. Brademas, John Brzezinski, Zbigniew Clinton, William Jefferson Cooper, Richard N. Corrigan, E. Gerald Davis, Lynn E. Friedman, Stephen James Friedman, Thomas L. Foley, Thomas Stephen Gregen, David R.Graham, Katharine Greenberg, Maurice R. Hesburgh, Theodore Martin Hewitt, William Alexander Holbrooke, Richard C. Jordan, Vernon Eulion, Jr. Kissinger, Henry Alfred Lord, Winston McCracken, Paul Winston McNamara, Robert Strange Mondale, Walter Fritz Nye, Joseph S., Jr. Ridgway, Rozanne Lejeanne Robinson, Charles W. Rockefeller, David Scowcroft, Brent Sonnenfeldt, Helmut Whitehead, John Cunningham Zoellick, Robert B. | Xerox Corp Center for National Policy U.S Archer Daniels Midland Co Wall Street Journal Inst. for Int. Econ. U.S. Overseas Development Council Texaco Center for Strategic & International studies Former President of the USA Professor at Harvard University Goldman Sachs Under Secretary State Dep. U.S. Co-chairman Goldman Sachs & Co. Columnist New York Times House of Representatives U.S. Special assistant to President Clinton Chairman Washington Post Dep. Chairman Fed, N.Y. Former President of the Notre Dame University Ambassador Jamaica US Ambassador, peace negotiator Brookings Institute Former Secretary of States U.S., Kissinger Associates Assistant Secretary State Dep. U.S. Former Professor of University Michigan World Bank US Ambassador Chairman National Intelligence Council Co-chairman Atlantic Council Overseas Development Council, Brookings Institute Chase Manhattan Bank, Exxon Oil, etc. Former President Assistant, National Security Council Brookings Institute, Carnegie Endow. Man. Chairman Brookings Institute Federal National Morgan Associates |
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 6
I doubt that all the "policies" you list are what those favoring and facilitating the general push toward a "nation-less" world support, but that such a movement is underway, and has been for several decades, is obvious. I can remember many of these people speaking of this goal, and we all tended to think of it as a great big United States, far off in the future. Well, the future has arrived, and things have taken some ominous twists.
It is, however, rather doubtful to me that what is happening in our country today, is fully explainable by these "someday" concepts and the steps taken under previous Administrations toward the "New World Order". I can well imagine a far less brutish final political world state than the one here described, being acceptable to large numbers of leaders and policy planners. What is going on right now, is not at all conducive to the overall need to move the populations of the world in this direction, and I believe we are witnessing a "renegade" splinter group in action. Unfortunately, it is a most amoral and radicaly authoritarian bunch.
Many in our government are clearly not in agreement with this sort of "right-less" society, and just as clearly, such matters are still very much in play. Like many steps toward international cooperation, increased institutional and legal "harmonizing" can be a very good thing. But in order to proceed to an appropriate level of unity, which is certainly far short of the vision you've revealed here, we simply MUST stop this hardcore neocon insanity as soon as possible.
There is no "just right" with these creeps. they seek absolute power and immunity from culpability. I believe this is why so much of the "world" leadership, and our own, are far from quiet about this regime. They may have dreams of a New World Order, but this has gone off into nightmare territory. This "right-less society" aspect is going nowhere, since virtually all thinking people know that is insane and unnecessary to achieve global cooperation. This current crowd is pure evil.
"4.New global taxes"
There were actually debates about a U.N tax (its been a while but i mean if i remember talk of this came straight from the UN it self). I believe the climate change carbon tax is partly meant to fulfill this.
"5.Massive Americans relocated where wildlfe areas are designated,"
We saw this GBA in 1996 (or was it 95'), they had maps(as in future plans) of these out there. Other crazy stuff out there too (theres some stuff on climate change too).
" trans-continental super highways are constructed."
I think this is visible with the north american union.
"6.Property ownership restricted and eventually eliminated
Back to the GBA, the tranference of national parks to the UN somewhat under the guise of "conservation programs". I think this may also be related to any sort of colletarel payable against federal reserve debt by the US govt, not all that certain about that though.
The Less visible/explicit ones in my opinion.
"1. Population control"
I know theres been talk of population reduction by the elite, but im sure i can remember anything more concrete in this regard, apart from the GBA once again. They talk about ideal population numbers, but if im right they arent too explicit about reduction in population. They do however mention what they call improper agricultural processes & how ferterlizers may be a problem(a pollutant or something if i still remember). But they also fail to state that its discontinuence would mean a great deal to farming, livelyhood and lives of many human beings.
"7.American military replaced by the UN military "
Oh well, many american troops are out of their country and their may be exchange programs for foreign troops in america, but beyond that i cant remember anything right now which indicates that they would eventually be replaced. I think i might remember something else thugh. I think, in a terrible crisis, the president does have the power to transfer power to the UN,(also not sure whether he has the power to impose martial law). I believe i had long ago watched a video, looked like the 70' where there were these group of senators (much like after 9/11) questioning a military general/officer about this very same issue (as in whether what he had heard about this transference of powre was true and i think his reply was something like, i cant answer that its a matter of national security.
There's definitely ome weight to all of this, but since i havent looked it up recently, i'm not able to back it all up here (also am kind of in a hurry) but i think its worth taking a look at a little more in detail. Oh yes before i leave, do llok up the COSCO deal during clintons time. Its further proof of corruption. Got to go now
I've seen this kind of nonsense before, so it only makes sense it would eventually migrate from the corner of Sixth and Pine to the internet.