New World Order" a conspiracy or fallacy?

[Hills]

 "New World Order"   a conspiracy or fallacy?

At least, we all agree it’s a hypothetical concept referring to the end of the reoccurrence or better put reincarnation of past events and goalages .
Day after day, I relentlessly struggle to balance this most controversial ideology as a fact of substance or a misgiving. Again, be it that the latter is behest, at whose and what injunctions?

But then I say to myself ,maybe my perspective is myopic, oh no wait a minute…maybe bias…or where am I coming from, without first-hand info, am I in any right position to comment? oh shit I’m tearing my brain apart

Is it all about the establishment of an autonomous world government, a crypto-politics world ruler ship, evolutionary audacity or what?

Nah nah nah, it’s fallacious. Here is another idea; maybe those guys ‘world leaders” basically act for their usual reasons, such as profit-seeking motives and institutionalized roles as elected officials

Yeah,I am back to there same position. Hey people, any ideas?

[Aussie Mike]

This reminds me of the book I've just finished "The Whole Truth" by David Baldacci.
I could't put it down and finished almost 550 pages in 1.5 days.

It talks about Perspective Management and and Arms dealer creating a perspective truth
to create a new cold war and New World Order between China and Russia.

Great book!
I'm happy to lend it but it must come back to me.

Let's face it though, there is a new world order and the US isn't as high as it thinks...
Looking at perception management, they aren'y scoring well there either...

[tim]

try the so called economic crises now i believe there was and never had been a crises before hand all it is, is to make the other markets lower it self for that they can buy back at a lower cost while other worlds have shut their eyes and payed no close attention
as we know china has risen their prices and for that,
america had claimed to have some sort of crises yet why hasn't china felt this dilemma  yet?


all conspiracies are, are just Psychology     mixed with politics

when you think about history when the great depression happend in america in the year  1929 or when stocks were next to nothing
how did the people react with this?

then gradually the american financial statis worked their way up right before ww2 started
or when in 1960's when vietnam began claiming to have lost more soldiers than ww1 and ww2 put together

how will it end? how or when will people notice these events and which is so close in tune with each other..

the first depression in 1929 was clear to most that it was dooms day untill rich men had loaned a great deal of trust and money to the us government in return for a very high percentage with over due payments with any regards to this and how american government had borrowed million's/billions would i rather say from "yes" CHINA!
after all it was them who said the communists were bad and evil yet why would such a commie give an outlandish kind of people this trust of fortune.
now wasn't the government the ones who claim honor yet deceit not only towards their own people but the world
be crying to a country that they tell people lies about ?>>>>


and then eventually paying the chinese government off with full amount and past over due charges all at once yet to claiim they haven't any funds.




"people I love politics and I love conspiracy theory's "


you must understand that this had been played out from the beginning over time
they claim unbalanced check books and the whole world screams and fear!!
hahahaha
jokes on them

[Hills]

Yeah guys,

Starting to get out of the tumor. love to have a glance at your book Mike.

Nice one Tim ,it is evidently a bold-faced conspiracy. Ironically wrapping issues, thereby creating a frustrated dilemma. haha smart brainwashing scheme though

"How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think"Adolf Hitler,

 Guess this justifies the raison d’etre for

after all it was them who said the communists were bad and evil yet why would such a commie give an outlandish kind of people this trust of fortune.
now wasn't the government the ones who claim honor yet deceit not only towards their own people but the world
be crying to a country that they tell people lies about  ?>>>>  …Tim

Yeah come to think of it,

-the current global monetary crisis for example is all about control. Gains and loses are clearly orchestrated, manipulated and directed by a highly calculated scheme. They intend basically to institute a universal debt-based currency controlled by the International financiers and issued to individuals against biometric identification systems.

-Today religious sermons are based on a kinda pantheistic philosophy rather than divine or biblical supports

-Nowadays, we as individuals are becoming more and more subservient to the state.
Hear in Australia for example, farmers now require permission to farm the land they own,

how much deeper in a shit and fucked up can all this be

[Aussie Mike]

The crisis hasn't effected China as much as other large countries but the impact is still huge.
China's GDP has to increase by 5-7% just to hold the yuan value at it's current rate.
No mean feat. Of course things will get worse for China.  I know of many companies in dire straights and laying off many staff or paying the less just to survive.

[kaibo 开 博]

China's Position on Establishing a New International Political and Economic Order


2003/08/18   http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/wjdt/wjzc/t24883.htm

We are of the view that the establishment of a new international political and economic order should reflect the universal aspirations and common interests of the peoples of various countries and give expression to the demands of the development of history and the progress of the times. The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence, the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and other universally recognized norms governing international relations should serve as the foundation of the new international political and economic order. Specifically, this new order should adhere to the following basic principles:

First, Mutual respect of sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression and mutual non-interference in internal affairs.

Second, to persist in handling international disputes peacefully by opposing the use or threat of force at every opportunity through taking advantage of military superiority and to thoroughly abandon “Cold War” thinking and foster a new security concept with mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality and coordination as its core, furthermore, to enhance mutual trust through dialogue and promote common security through cooperation.

Third, all the countries in the world enjoy equal sovereignty. All the countries, strong or weak, rich or poor, are equal members of the international community and have the right to equally take part in world affairs. The peoples of various countries should be masters of their own affairs. International matters should be handled through equal consultations among the countries and global challenges addressed through cooperation among them.   

Fourth, to respect the national conditions of various countries and seek common ground whilst, shelving differences. Each country has the right to choose its own social system and road to development independently. Ours is an inherently diverse and colourful world; it is impossible, therefore, to have only one model for everyone. The differences in social systems and values between the countries should not become barriers for the development of normal state-to-state relations, even less a reason for interference in the internal affairs of other countries.

Fifth, to promote mutually beneficial cooperation and common development between nations, whereby all nations, particularly developed and developing ones, should cooperate with one another on the basis of equality and mutual benefit to realize common development. The old irrational international economic order should be reformed to serve the rights and interests of the countries of the world, especially the numerous developing countries.

China is ready, together with other countries in the world, to make joint efforts to facilitate the establishment of a new international political and economic order that is fair and rational and the creation of a new world of lasting peace and universal prosperity.

[kaibo 开 博]

China Wants Its Own 'New
World Order' To Oppose US Version
By Martin Sieff
UPI Senior News Analyst

MUNICH, Germany (UPI) - There was a cloud no larger than the size of a man's hand in the sky of U.S. global leadership at the annual NATO Security Conference, or Wehrkunde, in Munich, Germany, this weekend. But it will get bigger. It was the quiet emergence of China as the leader of a potentially global block dedicated to oppose the United States.

When Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Wang Yi addressed the prestigious annual forum of NATO defense ministers in this historic Bavarian city, he heralded the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, founded only last June, as the crucial "new security concept" necessary to guarantee peace and stability in Central Asia, and to lead the fight there against terrorism.

So important was this idea of a "new security concept" to Chinese policy that Wang used the phrase four times in his formal speech.

He also clearly identified what it was.

"The birth and growth of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization embodies the practice of the new security concept by China, Russia and some Central Asian countries," Wang told the conference of defense and political leaders from more than 40 countries.

The SCO was set up last June 15 at a summit in the southern Chinese city of Shanghai attended by Chinese President Jiang Zemin, Russian President Vladimir Putin and the leaders of several Central Asian nations. Its military cooperation structure was deliberately modeled in part on the old Soviet-led Warsaw Pact and it includes nations with more than a quarter of the human race with more than 2 million soldiers under arms.

Whether by fortuitous accident or deliberate design, the organization was set up the very same day President George W. Bush, speaking in the Polish capital, Warsaw, pledged to extend the NATO alliance to include all the nations of Central and Eastern Europe.

The Russian and Chinese leaders in Shanghai left no doubt that the SCO, also referred to as the Shanghai Pact, was a military cooperation organization devoted to preserve what they called "multi-polarity" in the world. "Multi-polarity" is a Russian and Chinese diplomatic word for opposing U.S. global domination which, by contrast, Moscow and Beijing both see as "uni-polar."

The creation of the Shanghai Pact last June was virtually ignored in the American media, though national security adviser Condoleezza Rice was reported to have taken its creation seriously enough to seek to woo Russia with closer ties.

Later, Putin's rapid and controversial decision to fully support U.S. military operations to topple the Taliban regime in Afghanistan and to destroy the al Qaida terrorist organization the Taliban protected appeared to show Russia was not embracing China fully and still wanted to retain and develop strong ties with Washington.

But U.S. statements and moves to retain its military presence in Central Asia since the toppling of the Taliban have infuriated Russian officials and media pundits. Several of them have compared the move to the United States abandoning its 1990-91 pledge to Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev never to try and expand NATO to include former Soviet Warsaw Pact military allies in Central Europe. But at the 1997 NATO Madrid summit, the United States did just that, opening the way for the Visegrad Three states -- Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary -- to join the Atlantic Alliance.

At the Munich Wehrkunde, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov did not mention the Shanghai Pact in his own speech. Yet it was the centerpiece of Wang's.

Wang spoke in English, fluently but flatly. His speech and delivery lacked any rhetorical flourishes and journalists covering the conference paid little attention to it even while he was delivering it.

But Wang's speech marked an important diplomatic milestone. It marked for the first time the emergence of China on the world scene not just as a great power and rising potential superpower in its own right, but also as the clear leader of an international security organization which by its very nature revealed sweeping ambitions for regional hegemony ambitions comparable to NATO and the old Soviet-led Warsaw Pact.

The SCO, Wang said, already "played a positive role in maintaining peace and stability in the region (of Central Asia) and made (a) due contribution to the ongoing international cooperation against terrorism." Already, China and its fellow SCO members, he said "have taken joint steps to fight terrorism through closer regional multilateral cooperation."

Wang urged the need to close the global gap between rich and poor nations which, he said, created the breeding grounds of poverty, resentment and hatred from which terrorism sprang.

"Fighting terrorism needs to address both its symptoms and root causes" he said. "... An important prerequisite in this connection is to resolve the question of development and narrow the gap between the (global) North and the South."

He concluded his speech by making clear China did not believe the current world order could produce lasting peace and prosperity, and that it was ready to establish far-reaching ties with other nations to create a "fair and equitable new world order" that would.

"China is ready to strengthen its coordination and cooperation with all other countries in the conduct of international affairs, security included, and work vigorously toward a world that enjoys lasting peace and universal prosperity with a fair and equitable new international order," he said.

Readers of UPI Analysis should remember that final phrase "fair and equitable new international order" with which Wang ended his speech. It clearly indicates China finds the current world order neither capable of bringing peace and prosperity, nor maintaining either of them. Beijing, therefore, is determined to "work vigorously" toward creating such a "new international order" and is "ready to strengthen its coordination and cooperation" with any other country that feels the same way.

No major world power has used that kind of language since the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War before its last, mild spring period of détente.

Wang never raised his voice and did not bang any table like Nazis or many old Soviet leaders. And he never criticized the United States by name. As a result, no one paid any attention to what he actually said.

They should.

Copyright © 2002 United Press International. All rights reserved.

[kaibo 开 博]

There are no doubts as to the question about NWO existence. For one to deny the existence of the NWO in this current era, one would have to have a very poor understanding of the reality of time and space and life as we know it.

Perhaps, the questions are just where the winds of change are blowing and just which nations are heralding praise behind the scenes and are actively involved in the push and shove.  In reality, perhaps there are multipartite agendas and multiplicative biases driving this "heavily laden ship" we call our world. Most major policies and decisions are discussed and formulated at multinational events but there are also the private meetings of strategists and NWO planners or as some might say, "co-conspirators."

Perhaps, most cohabitators of planet earth are passive riders rather than active participants to bring about any change in directional momentum. There are conspiracy theorists, religious fanatics, environmentalists, nationalists, anti societal protagonists and a plethora of other social voices all seemingly radicalized by “status quo” and objectively written off and ostracized by the masses that are seemingly hypnotically stupefied and somewhat rendered powerless or motionless to even begin to follow any pattern of reformationist logic.

Remember, it was the likes of Martin Luther and others who challenged the status quo and brought about the reformation in middle-ages Europe. That was a period of political, religious and capitalistic domination of many European dominions and a time of trilogistic capitulation by the masses. Most accepted the norm but brave men and women bucked the trend and brought truth and reformist actions to bear for the benefits of many. There were many also for whom the bells tolled as they were martyred for their stand against the protagonists.
 
One can also consider the brilliance of Mao Ze Dong and his revolutionary mastery to take " Engel-Marxist" agendas and reforms and reverse the "Leninist" intent for enforced dominance through the "rich and powerful" to bring about, through "peasantry" one of the most successful accomplishments in the post BCE era. No doubt one can focus on some negative rhetorical propaganda initiated by western capitalistic mass-media dominators, as there were mistakes made and negative outcomes experienced eg. “The Great Leap Forward” ~ that led to his temporary demise from the leadership, but once Mao rose from the shadows to exercise his passionate domination again over ensuing political directives to steer China out of the midst of civil and world war, and inconclusively pave the way for masterminds like Deng Xiao Peng to take over at the helm. The overall results have produced a dramatical turn-around unrivalled by any nation in the modern era since the industrial revolution dominated proceedings in Western Europe.
One might ascertain that what fueled the passion and the drive in Mao for change, was his personal incensed accumulation of contempt for invasive capitalist domination at the hands of western European led G10 forces and instigators on the Eastern Chinese seaboard. It was a clear signal that unilateral cohesive control could not be trusted then and neither it seems can it be trusted now by current administrators. 

In a sense, most people just go with the flow or critically “blog” but there are few who actually get on the band wagon to be active participants to lobby for changes. It is only when the real emotions are stirred that multitudes stage public meetings and join the outcry of reformist leaders. Perhaps when any nation has a radical revolutionary change, such as Maoist Socialist reforms, resulting in radically new societal foundations, there are accolades and volumes written by supporters and followers and equal volumes from critics because that is not in keeping with the agenda of western capitalistic dominators and status quo logic.


Consider this: Do the NWO strategists have an antidote for cohesive forces of people led reform?

Before we consider the answer to this question, consider an example from the USA “Bill of Rights”
and then weigh that with current enforcement methods.

Bill of Rights (USA)

Amendment 1
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

Weigh that with an ensuing response to the Patriot Act

•  Lawyers Call for Patriot Act Oversight.
A letter  from the President of the American Bar Association to Members of Congress considering Patriot Act renewal states that the ABA is "concerned that there is inadequate Congressional oversight of government investigations undertaken pursuant to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act to ensure that such investigations do not violate the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments to the Constitution." See ABA Resolution on FISA and EPIC's FISA page for more information. (Nov. 10, 2005)


Consider the example of the American War of Independence from capitalistic British Commonwealth dominion. The liberationists led the people to an independent freedom from British economic oppression and supposedly won the battle with the help of the socialist French but were told by the capitalist British that they would have their own back on them and control them financially irregardless of their assumed triumph.

The question that remains unanswered conclusively is: Was the War and Declaration of Independence a farcical concession at the hands of strategists and do the British still control the USA as they purported they would?

The question then might also be; did the British have their way and are the British still heading major pushes as far as NWO strategies are concerned and controlling the US led NWO logic? You can if you like research those questions as I have done ( and continue to do) and decide for yourself if the British strategists are drivers and the USA are mere pawns and the "trumped card" that appears face up on the deck. Perhaps this logic has more merit than one could ever consider possible once one begins to delve into the realms of reason.

Napoleon said: "When a government is dependent for money upon the bankers, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes ... financiers are without patriotism and without decency..." Karl Marx said in the Communist Manifesto: "Money plays the largest part in determining the course of history."

Central Banking was initiated by international banker William Paterson in 1691, when he obtained the Charter for the Bank of England, which put the control of England's money in a privately owned company which had the right to issue notes payable on demand against the security of bank loans to the crown.
   
Paterson said: "The bank hath benefit of interest on all monies which it creates out of nothing." Reginald McKenna, British Chancellor of the Exchequer (or Treasury), said 230 years later: "The banks can and do create money ... And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of governments and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people."

The Bank of the United States was modeled after the bank of England and had a similar charter.

In 1791, Jefferson said: "To preserve our independence, we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. If we run into such debts, we (will then) be taxed in our meat and our drink, in our necessities and in our comforts, in our labor and in our amusements. If we can prevent the government from wasting the labor of the people under the pretense of caring for them, they, the people, will be happy."

George Washington signed it into law on February 25, 1791. When Jefferson (1801-09) became President, he opposed the bank as being unconstitutional, and when the 20 year charter came up for renewal in 1811, it was denied renewal by Jefferson.

Nathan Rothschild, head of the family bank in England and became the official European banker for the U.S. Government in support of the Bank of the United States, he threatened: her the application for renewal of the Charter is granted, or the United States will find itself in a most disastrous war." He then ordered British troops to "teach these impudent Americans a lesson. Bring them back to Colonial status." This brought on the War of 1812, our second war with England, which facilitated the re-chartering of the Bank of the United States. The war raised our national debt from $45 million to $127 million.

Jefferson wrote in January, 1815: "The dominion which the banking institutions have obtained over the minds of our citizens ... must be broken, or it will break us." In 1816, Jefferson wrote again: "If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation, and then by deflation, the banks and the corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their father's conquered ... I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies ... The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the Government, to whom it properly belongs."


Topic continued in next post

[kaibo 开 博]

The former articles I posted about NWO from news sources about Chinese perspectives of the NWO, may be somewhat outdated but if the NWO was a figment of theoristic imagination, then why would intelligent world leaders, such as the Chinese leadership, make such statements.

Perhaps the biggest suckers are those who ignorantly and blindly believe that the NWO system is all for the betterment of humanity and not for ultimate capitalistic control.

Perhaps idealistic human reasoning can never match the objectives of providential intelligence.

Perhaps the Chinese can clearly see the negative potential unilateral polarization by the current NWO strategists could bring and seek to balance objectively via the SCO but perhaps even that will not be enough to make the crooked places straight.
In fact, who is really to say just who and just how many “enlightened ones” are objectively involved in NWO and just where there spherical interests lie.

Consider this: perhaps the NWO is multi polarized – and there are many players with international objectives and there is no ultimately unilateral structure as of yet that can achieve all the NWO objectives. However, who is to say that the NWO won’t be able to achieve the ultimate target eventually by unilateral or multilateral cohesion and by presenting optional ideals that convince the nations to follow suit until the ultimate unilateral control mechanism takes effect.

The questions are, who will drive it and from which world sphere and what will be the deciding crux that will bring all nations into final and conclusive submission. Perhaps objectives will be met by a tripartite conglomerate activity and driven multi spherically around the globe with strategic control centres. Whatever the outcome, it might be considered that it is becoming increasingly clear that perhaps none shall stand in the way of their objectives, irregardless of the multi-spherical nature of the “beast”.
Only perhaps the Muslim extremists are the real kick-arse donkeys and a thorn in their side that refuse to buckle under in submission – or as some suggest – were they or are they a tool for the ultimate NWO objectives such as being the propagators for 9/11  and the ensuing resultant policy objectives such as the “Patriot Act.”

Marx, Hitler, Bush Snr. & Jnr. and Blair (amongst a host of others) were all Secret Society members and an all time great Aussie PM – Bob Hawke - a Rhode’s scholar – was a unionist and an informed society member.
In being a supporter and follower of “Hawkie” - does that mean one must have socialist leanings and leftist functions – maybe yes, maybe no! If one voted for “Hawkie” it may have been because he was an all-round “good bloke” and it is a perhaps a better thing to work in a unionized state rather than a capitalistically controlled state but then that depends on which side of the fence you are on.
Perhaps understanding Marx and Engels becomes paramount to draw logical conclusions because they rose up against the trilogy of capitalistic, political and religious dominance of the masses in Western Europe and perhaps they saw the need for a multi polarized front of resistance. However, even their calculated economic reasoning is a tool that has propagated the indifference between societal functions and hence made it easier to fund wars and send nations spiraling into deeper debt to international banking cartels. The rest is history. It is difficult to understand the logic of Marxism as “western propaganda” is somewhat anti socialist and tends towards liberalistic capitalism via democratic rights, which in latter times has become somewhat farcical as well.

With Hitler we can perhaps see how a leader can be polarized within international secret societal membership but then have individualistic non-polarized reasoning and hidden personal agendas for self-governance and the lust of self gratification for "power" from a patriotic and nationalistic front for the emancipation of mass control. But then it depends on which side of the fence you were on and just who drove the madness of the self proclaimed prophet - was it self proclamatory independence or was it strategic domination by funded extremists through a secret society?

The question remains, can any NWO objective override sovereignty of a societal network within nationalized parameters and in an internationally multi patriotic framework?

Perhaps, the only way they can do it is by unilateral enforcement and domination and control of all humankind to achieve those objectives. To facilitate that they would really have to “pull the wool over the eyes” of every world leadership and wipe out patriotic beliefs.

That is perhaps an impossible task, so therefore, perhaps from a logical perspective, total domination by any NWO is a somewhat misunderstood and a misconstrued potential phenomena. On the other hand, if the support base is multi lateral and acceptable under humanistic reasoning by a passive status quo and intelligently and gradually conditions the status quo with acceptable logic, then it becomes not only possible but perhaps highly probable.


The term "New World Order" has been used to refer to a new period of history evidencing a dramatic change in world political thought and the balance of power. The first publisized Western usages of the term surrounded Woodrow Wilson's Fourteen Points and call for a League of Nations following the devastation of World War I.
The phrase was also used at the end of the Second World War when describing the plans for the United Nations and the Bretton Woods system.

At the end of the “Cold War”, Presidents Mikhail Gorbachev and George H.W. Bush Snr. used the term to try to define the nature of the post Cold War era, and the spirit of great power and cooperation that they hoped might materialize via cohesive NWO strategy.

From a humanistic perspective that seems all very logical but then if the perpetrators, funders and protagonists of those wars were NWO strategists then perhaps there was a more sinister aim of reasoning from the outset. One then can see how that humanistic reasoning can be somewhat perplexed by propaganda and conditioned all too readily to choose the line that potentially leads to peace - or does it?

1990 - UN starts Gulf War. President Bush verbally announces a "NEW WORLD ORDER" on TV.

I can distinctly remember that brazen statement but not all the world supported the Gulf War.

Henry Kissinger stated in 1994, "The New World Order cannot happen without U.S. participation, as we are the most significant single component. Yes, there will be a New World Order, and it will force the United States to change its perceptions.  Then on January 5, 2009, he said on CNBC, "...a new world order can be created."

Former British United Kingdom Prime Minister and current British Middle East envoy Tony Blair stated on 13 November 2000 in his Mansion House Speech that "There is a new world order like it or not". He used the term in 2001, 12 November 2001 and 2002. On 7 January 2003 he stated that "... the call was for a new world order. But a new order presumes a new consensus. It presumes a shared agenda and a global partnership to do it."

The above statement clearly directs a multi faceted effort that is humanistic in perspective. Can that really objectively achieve positive aims for providential existence?

Current United Kingdom Prime Minister Gordon Brown, on 17 December 2001, stated that "This is not the first time the world has faced this question - so fundamental and far-reaching. In the 1940s, after the greatest of wars, visionaries in America and elsewhere looked ahead to a new world and - in their day and for their times -- built a new world order."
Brown, who called for a "new world order" in a 2008 speech in New Delhi, to reflect the rise of Asia and growing concerns over global warming and finance.
Brown said the new world order should incorporate a better representation of "the biggest shift in the balance of economic power in the world in two centuries.”

Read between the lines of Brownies' rhetoric: perhaps he was really saying - " we want to make sure we squeeze the Asian economic growth of every drop of independence and make sure that our buddies and funders from the NWO get the biggest share and dominate the market - even if we have to find an excuse for another war"

Perhaps the "bastards" want the objective indifference of "status quo" over Tibet as a knife with a twist. Look at the facts: the greatest push and shove for Tibetan independence is not only from the USA but from Western Europe. Look at the facts: with Afghanistan, Pakistan and Indian concerns mounting, as well as border disputes that remain unsettled, how difficult would it be to drag a war out of that one if the NWO financiers of UN led forces wanted to stamp a big sealed approval for interventionist strategies further east than Afghanistan. Objectively they probably won't, but to unsettle the whole region and perhaps drag India sceaming and kicking they might escalate the border disputes. Surmising the "what ifs" is not objective but obviously that economic shift will be reigned in by "Brownie" and his buddies somehow and brought subjectively into line by some means.

 Consider this: if the British were so incensed at Tibetan issues then why are there British approved JV mining operations in Tibet with Chinese companies at this current time. Perhaps because the "bastards" want the gold they are digging up to give to their NWO financier buddies to pay off their mounting debt. Has one ever considered why the Brits never surrendered the Pound Sterling? Could it be because they can absolutely squeeze the Euro with procreant dominance but at the same time remain high and dry, separate and aloof.

The facts are clear: Tibetans are a damn sight better off than they were under trilogistic domination of Lamism and Mao was a liberator of sorts who paved the way for the current administration of Democratic Socialist reforms in the PRC to be infinitely objective liberators allbeit at the cost of social integration for Tibetan peoples.

With a little due respect for the British, the push and shove for NWO actually began in Frankfurt, Germany by Zionists and spread globally through the ranks. Jewish are blamed but don't forget the Jews were decimated by NWO cronies as well. Are they still made scapegoats as the perpetrators of NWO strategies? Well they are deep in it but "you can't throw the baby out with the bathwater" just because some diasporic Jews are tainted with the blood of deceit. The diasporic Zionists controlled Russia and most of Europe as well.

The question remains: just what does the western media want by stirring world opinion and creating indifference towards the PRC by generating negative opinions? Clear cut reasoning perhaps is that they want the mineralized resources in Tibet, they want the "the biggest shift in the balance of economic power in the world in two centuries.” to remain right where they strategically planned it " two hundred years ago" - in the coffers of the NWO banking cartels.

What exactly was the shift two hundred years ago "Brownie" was referring to? Could it be the fact that the Brits got their own back on the US Independence shove?

Note also: rhetorical " global warming" - perhaps environmental concerns are the crux to break the back of every resistance and from a humanistic perspective, if they can convince the status quo from this logical perspective then they can achieve their aims more objectively. Global temperatures were much higher some 50,000 years ago but that did not cause the end of the world as we know it, therefore, why should it now!

 He also called for the revamping of post-war global institutions including the World Bank, G8 and International Monetary Fund. Other elements of Brown's formulation include spending £100 million a year on setting up a rapid reaction force to intervene in failed states. (I suggest that “failed states” refers to nations that do not incorporate cohesively into NWO objectives)


The hardest thing one might find is to put the picture together and really know just how much they all know and just who really is driving each shift in time. They are all in bed together at some point but perhaps there is also a measure of blindness and genuineness of belief on other points, whereby, “great” world leaders and politicists accept humanistic reasoning as justifiable. There are also of course some personal and nationally incorporated agendas as well.

At the end of the day, one might consider that humanity is imperfect, in that, "there is none good - no not one" – perhaps the dead will bury the dead and those who have life will yet live providentially by acceptable reasoning.

Many idealists and strategists have come unstuck throughout history and the lust for control and power by both syndicated and individualistic ruling authorities has brought many a dynastic and synergistic hold undone. It is difficult to predict or ascertain just what lengths NWO strategists will be able to achieve but you can be sure of one thing - the ultimate objectives are not for the liberation of humankind but for the subjective denigration of liberalized independence and free will choice. They seek a level playing field of subjective reasoning which includes the abolition and decorporatization of independent lands management.
Australia is reasoning in such strategic anomalies even today, as outlined by our “blog” initiator, in that, “Aussie” farmers must have permission for working the land.
An associate of  mine, who worked for many years as a councilor in local parliament in Australia, recently told me that the lands management issues are conclusively being eroded, whereby all lands management issues are being dissolved into federal hands and progressively, responsibility is being taken from state control as well.

Whilst there is life there is hope and whilst we have light we have the day.

We can be thankful for one thing - "the Russians love their children too" (“Sting” – lyrics) and so too do the Chinese as evidenced in Wenchuan County, Sichuan. Mr Rudd has his heart open for the fire-devastated Sth Eastern Australians and maybe Obama can give back some of what was lost in the "Bush."

There will never be anything perfect in this world in this era but we can be thankful that some leaders love the children of the world and we can always hope that truth and light will shine to maintain some balance and momentous equilibrium to ensure some measure of peace and a somewhat balanced perspective of humanistic achievements.

We as members and individuals of an ever increasingly multinationalized and incorporatised society have but one responsibility, that of social duty to uphold both the law of the land and to do no human person harm in the course of sensible reasoning, be they from any race, creed or social status. There are of course exceptions to those conditions in that there are soveriegn nation states that have soverereign rights to protect their borders and maintain a balanced social equilibrium and individual rights to protect one's family and property.

Perhaps one should welcome the SCO interventionist strategies to make sure there are somewhat balanced perspectives and differing reasons by providential intelligence on the international table of discussions. What the world needs now is leadership with "Father hearts" who truly love the children of the world and who seek to balance social and moral responsibilities for the future generations.

Freedom is ...? The ability to give thanks in every situation come rain or shine - not thanks for the bad but thanks through both the good and the bad.
Maybe that is idealistic but then maybe that is reality. Make no mistake about it, there are those who seek internationally polarised dominance and control of sovereign nation states and control of status quo reasoning and if they polarise the polarists unilaterally, either by congressional dominance or enforced applications, then they could have all power and control to bring forth their hidden agendas.

Can that - will that - bring about a better state for humanity?

You be the judge!

[kaibo 开 博]

Alan Greenspan:
"In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. ... This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard."

James Madison:
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance."

Abraham Lincoln:
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country; corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in High Places will follow, and the Money Power of the Country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the People, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war"

James Paul Warburg:
"We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent."

Barry Goldwater:
"Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders. The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside of the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States."

G. D. McDaniel:
"If, as it appears, the experiment that was called 'America' is at an end ... then perhaps a fitting epitaph would be ... 'here lies America the greatest nation that might have been had it not been for the Edomite bankers who first stole their money, used their stolen money to buy their politicians and press and lastly deprived them of their constitutional freedom by the most evil device yet created --- The Federal Reserve Banking System."

Louis McFadden:
"The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is eager to enter into close relationship with the Bank for International Settlements.... The conclusion is impossible to escape that the State and Treasury Departments are willing to pool the banking system of Europe and America, setting up a world financial power independent of and above the Government of the United States.... The United States under present conditions will be transformed from the most active of manufacturing nations into a consuming and importing nation with a balance of trade against it."

[kaibo 开 博]

I got on this bandwagon again as a result of an initial quest.

I have been down this path on NWO issues many times and it becomes a dark tunnel leading to the abyss.

Masses of hopeful souls, who want to believe that the best is yet to come for our terrestrial existence, are like sheep without shepherds at times.

The whole concept of NWO is a very complex and difficult subject because there are many opinionists and many voices.  Basically, for one to understand the ruling of this "kosmos" one must have education in truth without one ounce of religiousity to sort the factual evidence fom the hearsay and then have providential intelligence  - "sofia"  ie. wisdom and insight to judge according to the true nature of things. What happens on the surface may not be reflective of the  concepts behind the scenes.

Those who are counted as researchers, public speakers and writers, who dare voice their opinions against exposed perpetrators of social injustices are branded radicals, fruitcakes, religious nuts, fear mongerers etc. and written off by most. Most normal people don't want to focus and believe all the hype and negative info surrounding a sinister conspiratorial plan. Fear is a powerful tool of manipulation and most of us have inherent faith and hope in the future of humankind.

If you want to have a nice day and enjoy life - don't research NWO conspiracies without just cause.

Enter the real world if you dare - take a ride on the projected media images of the "conspiratorial" NWO (not so merry) merry-go-round.


And the man with the cigar in his hand said, " Any more riders - step right up, don't be afraid sonny - any more riders?"
The little boy replied, "Please sir, I feel sick. I don't need another ride, I just wanna know how to get off this merry-go-round"
Blowing smoke in the little boys face he replied, " Outta my face son, I gotta business to run, get on home to Mama"

[Hills]

Yeah Kaibo,
Your high intellectual contribution and in-depth analysis on this issue is quite commendable and has act as a succor to my long nightmare  demarcation search between the principles of democracy and economocracy

I’m  still going through  the referred websites for first hand information. Won’t take me long though, but as you mention ,one thing  stands out clear

if the children of this "kosmos" were to suddenly awaken and were to suddenly be enlightened, then and only then does this present world system have hope. If not, then this present world system is all but doomed.

Nice job mate

[kaibo 开 博]

New World Order Quotes

 Members of the Elite:
•   B = Bilderberg
•   CFR = Council on Foreign Relations
•   TC = Trilateral Commission

Andrew Jackson
President Andrew Jackson 1829-1837: “you are a den of Vipers! I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God I will rout you out. If the people only understood the rank injustice of our money and banking system, there would be a revolution before morning.”"It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes.”

George Washington
1798: “It is not my intention to doubt that the doctrine of the Illuminati and the principles of Jacobism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more satisfied of this fact than I am.”

Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr.
“This Act [the Federal Reserve Act, Dec. 23rd 1913] establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President [Woodrow Wilson] signs the Bill, the Invisible Government of the Monetary Power will be legalized… The worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency Bill.”

Thomas Jefferson
“Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing us to slavery.”
“If the American people ever allow Private Banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

Mayer Amschel Rothschild
1828: “Allow me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who writes the laws.”

Walter Cronkite
Former CBS anchorman, Waltor Cronkite receives an award from the WFA (World Federalist Association): “Today we must develop structures on a global level, to deal with problems, we need a system of enforcible world law, a democratic federal World Government.”

Hillary Rodham Clinton
(B)
In a close circuit hookup, Hillary Clinton congradulated Waltor Cronkite for receiving a WFA award for pushing World Governance: “For decades you told us the way it is, but tonight we honor you for fighting for the way it could be.”

Robert Wright
Senior editor of the New Republic writes: “Much power now vested in the nation-state is starting to migrate into international institutions.” World government he claims “…Is probably in the cards, and whats more, it’s a good idea.”
“America is surrendering its sovereignty to a World Government, Hooray.”
“World Government is coming. Deal with it.”

CNN
“Woolsey is of the group of conservatives that have considerable influence in the Bush Administration, like; Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, his Deputy Paul Wolfowitz and Defense Policy Board Member Richard Pearl. Some of them urged President Bill Clinton in 1997 to goto war with Iraq, 9/11 made their case for a New World Order based on the predominance of American power and the superiority of American values…”

Kenichi Ohmae
Title of article by, political reform leader in Japan, in the Wall Street Journal (August 1994): “New World Order: The Rise of the Region-State”

A. M. Rosenthal
(CFR)
Columnist for the New York Times writes in January 1991: “But it became clear as time went on that in Mr. Bush’s mind the New World Order was founded on a convergence of goals and interests between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, so strong and permanent that they would work as a team through the U.N. Security Council.”

George Stanley McGovern
(CFR)
Former Senator of South Dakota writes in the New York Times (February 1991): “I would support a Presidential candidate who pledged to take the following steps: … At the end of the war in the Persian Gulf, press for a comprehensive Middle East settlement and for a ‘New World Order‘ based not on Pax Americana but on peace through law with a stronger U.N. and World Court.”

William Safire
Excerpt in the New York Times (February 1991): “… it’s Bush’s baby, even if he shares its popularization with Gorbachev. Forget the Hitler ‘New Order‘ root; F.D.R. used the phrase earlier.”

Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
Article by Senator for Delaware Joseph R. Biden Jr. in the Wall Street
Journal (April 1992): “How I Learned to Love the New World Order“

Brent Scowcroft
(B, CFR, TC)
Statement in August 1990, quoted in the Washington Post (May 1991): “We believe we are creating the beginning of a New World Order coming out of the collapse of the U.S.-Soviet antagonisms.”

Richard Andrew Gephardt
(CFR)
Richard Gephardt, Congressman of Missouri and Minority Leader, in the Wall Street Journal (September 1990): “We can see beyond the present shadows of war in the Middle East to a New World Order where the strong work together to deter and stop aggression. This was precisely Franklin Roosevelt’s and Winston Churchill’s vision for peace for the post-war period.”

Richard A. Falk
(CFR)
Richard Falk, Professor of Princeton University, in an article entitled “Toward a New World Order: Modest Methods and Drastic Visions,” in the book “On the Creation of a Just World Order” (1975): “The existing order is breaking down at a very rapid rate, and the main uncertainty is whether mankind can exert a positive role in shaping a New World Order or is doomed to await collapse in a passive posture. We believe a New Order will be born no later than early in the next century and that the death throes of the old and the birth pangs of the new will be a testing time for the human species.”

Richard Newton Gardner
(CFR, TC)
Former State Department and US Ambassador to Italy in Foreign Affairs (April 1974): “If instant World Government, Charter review, and a greatly strengthened International Court do not provide the answers, what hope for progress is there? The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple solutions to complex problems, but it comes down essentially to this: The hope for the foreseeable lies, not in building up a few ambitious central institutions of universal membership and general jurisdiction as was envisaged at the end of the last war, but rather in the much more decentralized, disorderly and pragmatic process of inventing or adapting institutions of limited jurisdiction and selected membership to deal with specific problems on a case-by-case basis … In short, the ‘house of World Order‘ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion,’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

Richard Nixon
In Foreign Affairs (October 1967): “The developing coherence of Asian regional thinking is reflected in a disposition to consider problems and loyalties in regional terms, and to evolve regional approaches to development needs and to the evolution of a New World Order.”

Nelson Rockefeller
Gov. Nelson Rockefeller of New York, in an article entitled “Rockefeller Bids Free Lands Unite: Calls at Harvard for Drive to Build New World Order” — New York Times (February 1962): “The United Nations, he told an audience at Harvard University, ‘has not been able–nor can it be able–to shape a New World Order which events so compellingly demand.’ … The New World Order that will answer economic, military, and political problems, he said, ‘urgently requires, I believe, that the United States take the leadership among all free peoples to make the underlying concepts and aspirations of national sovereignty truly meaningful through the federal approach.’”

Ralph W. Page
Excerpt from article by Ralph W. Page in the Philadelphia Bulletin (May 1944): “He [John Foster Dulles] stated directly to me that he had every reason to believe that the Governor [Thomas E. Dewey of New York] accepts his point of view and that he is personally convinced that this is the policy that he would promote with great vigor if elected. So it is fair to say that on the first round the Sphinx of Albany has established himself as a prima facie champion of a strong and definite New World Order.”

Norman Thomas
In his book “What Is Our Destiny” (1944): “There are some plain common-sense considerations applicable to all these attempts at world planning. They can be briefly stated: 1. To talk of blueprints for the future or building a World Order is, if properly understood, suggestive, but it is also dangerous. Societies grow far more truly than they are built. A constitution for a New World Order is never like a blueprint for a skyscraper.”

Philadelphia Inquirer
Text of article in the Philadelphia Inquirer (June 1942): “Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles tonight called for the early creation of an International Organization of anti-Axis nations to control the world during the period between the armistice at the end of the present war and the setting up of a New World Order on a permanent basis.”

The Tablet Newspaper
Title of article in The Tablet (Brooklyn) (March 1942): “New World Order Needed for Peace: State Sovereignty Must Go, Declares Notre Dame Professor”

World Federation
The Declaration of the Federation of the World, produced by the Congress on World Federation, adopted by the Legislatures of North Carolina (1941), New Jersey (1942), Pennsylvania (1943), and possibly other states.: “If totalitarianism wins this conflict, the world will be ruled by tyrants, and individuals will be slaves. If democracy wins, the nations of the earth will be united in a commonwealth of free peoples, and individuals, wherever found, will be the sovereign units of the New World Order.”

New York Times
Excerpt from article entitled “New World Order Pledged to Jews,” in the New York Times (October 1940): “In the first public declaration on the Jewish question since the outbreak of the war, Arthur Greenwood, member without portfolio in the British War Cabinet, assured the Jews of the United States that when victory was achieved an effort would be made to found a New World Order based on the ideals of ‘justice and peace.’”

American Institute of Judaism, excerpt from article in the New York Times (December 1942): “The statement went on to say that the spiritual teachings of religion must become the foundation for the New World Order and that national sovereignty must be subordinate to the higher moral law of God.”

Excerpt from an article in the New York Times (February 1972): “He [President Nixon] spoke of the talks as a beginning, saying nothing more about the prospects for future contacts and merely reiterating the belief he brought to China that both nations share an interest in peace and building ‘a New World Order.’”
Part of full-page advertisement by the government of Morocco in the New York Times (April 1994): “The Final Act of the Uruguay Round, marking the conclusion of the most ambitious trade negotiation of our century, will give birth - in Morocco - to the World Trade Organization, the third pillar of the New World Order, along with the
United Nations and the International Monetary Fund.”

Protestant Episcopal Church
Excerpt from A Memorial to be Addressed to the House of Bishops and the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in General Convention (October 1940): “The term Internationalism has been popularized in recent years to cover an interlocking financial, political, and economic world force for the purpose of establishing a World Government. Today Internationalism is heralded from pulpit and platform as a ‘League of Nations’ or a ‘Federated Union’ to which the United States must surrender a definite part of its National Sovereignty. The World Government plan is being advocated under such alluring names as the ‘New International Order,’ ‘The
New World Order,’ ‘World Union Now,’ ‘World Commonwealth of Nations,’ ‘World Community,’ etc. All the terms have the same objective; however, the line of approach may be religious or political according to the taste or training of the individual.”

Dr. Augustus O. Thomas
President of the World Federation of Education Associations (August 1927), quoted in the book “International Understanding: Agencies Educating for a New World” (1931): “If there are those who think we are to jump immediately into a New World Order, actuated by complete understanding and brotherly love, they are doomed to disappointment. If we are ever to approach that time, it will be after patient and persistent effort of long duration. The present international situation of mistrust and fear can only be corrected by a formula of equal status, continuously applied, to every phase of international contacts, until the cobwebs of the old order are brushed out of the minds of the people of all lands.”

M. C. Alexander
Executive Secretary of the American Association for International Conciliation, in a subscription letter for the periodical International Conciliation (1919): “The peace conference has assembled. It will make the most momentous decisions in history, and upon these decisions will rest the stability of the New World Order and the future peace of the world.”

Nicholas Murray Butler
In an address delivered before the Union League of Philadelphia, Nov. 27, 1915: “The old world order changed when this war-storm broke. The old international order passed away as suddenly, as unexpectedly, and as completely as if it had been wiped out by a gigantic flood, by a great
tempest, or by a volcanic eruption. The old world order died with the setting of that day’s sun and a New World Order is being born while I speak, with birth-pangs so terrible that it seems almost incredible that life could come out of such fearful suffering and such overwhelming sorrow.”

Sewren Bailer
A polish communist leader, who defected to the west, charged that in April, 1955 Khrushchev said this to a group of Warsaw Communists: “We must realize that we cannot co-exist eternally. One of us must go to his grave. We do not want to go to the grave. They do not want to go to the grave, either. So what can be done? We must push them to their grave.”

Dimitry Z. Manuilsky
A speech made in 1931 before Lenin School of Political Warfare (He became an officer of the U.N. Security Council in 1949): “War to the hilt between communism and capitalism is inevitable. Today of course, we are not strong enough to attack. Our time will come in 20 or 30 years…The Bourgeoisie will have to be put to sleep. So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record. There will be electrifying overtures and unheard of concessions. The capitalist countries, stupid and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. They will leap at another chance to be friends. As soon as their guard is down, we shall smash them with our clenched fist.”

American Jewish Committee Magazine
Nov. 1958, Pg. 376: “The International Government of the United Nations, stripped of it’s legal trimming, then, is really the International Government of the United States and the Soviet Union acting in Unison.”

American Mercury Magazine
December 1957, pg. 92: “The Invisible Money Power is working to control and enslave mankind. It financed Communism, Fascism, Marxism, Zionism, Socialism. All of these are directed to making the United States a member of a World Government…”

[kaibo 开 博]

George W. Malone
U.S. Senator (Nevada), speaking before Congress in 1957. “I believe that if the people of this nation fully understood what Congress has done to them over the last 49 years, they would move on Washington; they would not wait for an election….It adds up to a preconceived plan to destroy the economic and social independence of the United States!”

Charley Reese
“If a nation values anything more than freedom, then it will lose it’s freedom; and the irony of it is that if it is comfort and security that it values, it will lose that too. Unknown Americans must decide; Are we to be governed by Americans or by an International Organization? I, for one, owe no allegiance to the United Nations nor will I give it any. I obey only the U.S. Constitution. You had better think about this issue, for if the U.N. can violate the Sovereignty of Haiti, Iraq and other countries, it can violate ours… The United States may not be the top dog 15 years from now. U.N. security council resolutions, backed by say Chinese soldiers, could be aimed at us.”

Janet Reno
Associated Press, 12/10/93: “Gun registration is not enough.”
“Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms is the goal”

Peter Hoagland
Senator of Nebraska speaking on radio in 1983: “Fundamental Bible-believing people do not have the right to indoctrinate their children in their religious beliefs because we, the state, are preparing them for the year 2000, when America will be part of a One-World Global Society and their children will not fit in.”

Harry Truman
“For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the government… I never had any thought that when I set up the CIA that it would be injected into peacetime cloak and dagger operations.”

General Douglas MacArthur
“I am concerned for the security of our great nation; not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insidious forces working from within.”

Bill D. Moyers
(B)
“David Rockefeller is the most conspicuous representative today of the ruling class, a multinational fraternity of men who shape the Global Economy and manage the flow of its capital. Rockefeller was born to it, and he has made the most of it. But what some critics see as a vast international conspiracy, he considers a circumstance of life and just another day’s work… In the world of David Rockefeller it’s hard to tell where business ends and politics begins.”

Henry Alfred Kissinger
(B, CFR, TC)
“Today, Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow, they will be grateful! This would especially be true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated that threatened our very existence. Is is then that all people of the world will please to deliver them from this evil. The one thing man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to then by a World Government.”
Kissinger at the World Affairs Council Press Conference, Regent Beverly Wilshire Hotel , April 19th 1994: “The New World Order cannot happen without U.S. participation, as we are the most significant single component. Yes, there will be a New World Order, and it will force the United States to change it’s perceptions.”
Title of book excerpt by Henry Kissinger, in Time magazine (March 1994): “How to Achieve The New World Order“
“The United States — a country which really doesn’t understand foreign policy very well in terms of its public, because its public is not all that engaged in the world, nevertheless the United States is in a key position to shape this so that the problem of a Bush presidency will be the emergence of a New International Order…”

Charles De Gaulle
“Nations must unite in a World Government or perish.”
In address before the General Assembly of the United Nations, October 1975): “My country’s history, Mr. President, tells us that it is possible to fashion unity while cherishing diversity, that common action is possible despite the variety of races, interests, and beliefs we see here in this chamber. Progress and peace and justice are attainable. So we say to all peoples and governments: Let us fashion together a New World Order.”

Bertrand Russell
“There are three ways of securing a society as regards population. The first is that of birth control, the second that of infanticide or really destructive wars, and the third that a scientific world society cannot be stable unless there is a World Government. . .Unless. . . one power of group of powers emerges victorious and proceeds to establish a single government of the world with a monopoly of armed force, it is clear that the level of civilization must continually decline. . .”

Julian Huxley
“The implications of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a World Organization. . .Political unification in some sort of World Government will be required. . .Even though. . . any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.”

The Brandt Commission
The Commission defines the New World Order as: “A supra-national authority to regulate world commerce and industry; an international organization that would control the production and consumption of oil; an international currency that would replace the dollar; a world development fund that would make funds available to free and communist nations alike; an international police force to enforce the edicts of the New World Order.”

Lincoln Palmer Bloomfield
(CFR)
MIT Professor in a Confidential 1961 Study Commissioned by the US State Department ‘A World Effectively Controlled by the United Nations’ states: “It is World Government we are discussing here — inescapable.” also states “A world effectively controlled by the United Nations is one in which World Government would come about through the establishment of supranational institutions characterized by mandatory universal membership.” “National disarmament is a condition — for effective U.N. control.”

‘Freedom from War Blueprint’ The United States program for general and complete disarmament, presented to the U.N. General Assembly by President John F. Kennedy, the document calls for a transfer of national armaments to U.N. control in three stages; Stage 2: “The U.N. Peace Force shall be established and progressively strengthened.” Stage 3: “… Where no state would have the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force.”
“Arms Control and World Government. . . The notion of a World Government is today — and perhaps for all time — a fantastic one.”

Michael Deaver
On June 14th, 1992 on ABC’s ‘This Week with David Brinkley, ex-Reagan advisor Michael Deaver said:“In five years we’re going to have a World Parliament.“

George Cabot Lodge
(CFR)
CFR member George C. Lodge wrote in a book Managing Globalization in the Age of Interdependence, which called for “World Convergence and integration.”
Nehru
“We have arrived at a stage where the next step must comprise a world and all its states, each having economic independence, but submitting to the authority of World Organization.”

The Second Humanist Manifesto
The 2nd Humanist Manifesto has said: “We deplore the division of humankind on nationalistic ground. We have reached a turning point in human history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and World Order based upon transnational federal government.”

David Rockefeller
(B,CFR,TC)
Here is Founder of the Trilateral Commission, David Rockefeller in a private June 1991 Trilateral Commission meeting: “We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine, and other great publications who directors have attended out meeting and respected their promise of discretion for almost forty years. . . It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards World Government. The supra-national sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

Quoted from a page in Mr. Rockefellers’ book ‘Memoirs’ published in 2002, page 405, Chapter ‘Proud Internationalists’: “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as internationalists and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure, One World if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty and I am proud of it.”

Walter Bigelow Wriston
(B)
“A truly Global Economy will require concessions of national power and compromises of national sovereignty that seemed impossible a few years ago and which even now we can partly imagine.”

James A. Baker III
(CFR)
“The stability of the New World Order and the new global challenges require cooperation between all global players.”

James P. Warburg
James Paul Warburg, an active United World Federalist had this to say before the United States Senate on Feb. 7, 1950: “We shall have World Government whether or not you like it. . . by request or consent.”“A World Order without world law is an anachronism; and that, since war now means the extinction of civilization, a world which fails to establish the rule of law over the nation-states cannot long continue to exist. We are living in a perilous period of transition from the era of the fully sovereign nation-state to the era of World Government. . .”

Richard Newton Gardner
(CFR, TC)
“The hopeful aspect of the present situation is that even as nations resist appeals for ‘World Government‘ and ‘the surrender of sovereignty,’ technological, economic and political interests are forcing them to establish more and more far-ranging institutions to manage their mutual interdependence.”

Kofi Annan
Kofi Annan on Global Security measures: More broadly, he urged the European Union and the United States to work more closely as “the backbone of a New World Order in the 21st century.”

Pope John Paul
Excerpt from John Paul II’s Address to New Israeli Ambassador to the Vatican. . . June 2nd, 2003: “It is precisely this hope and this concept of solidarity that must ever inspire all men and women — in the Holy Land and elsewhere — in working for a New World Order based on harmonious relations and effective cooperation between peoples.”

Pope Benedict
In his first Christmas address, on Sunday urged humanity to unite against terrorism, poverty and environmental blight and called for a “New World Order” to correct economic imbalances.

Senator Alben Barkley
“The time is not yet mature for what we mean by World Government. . .We must strengthen the United Nations before we can achieve our goal of World Government.”

Rowan Gaither
In 1954 Rowan Gaither, head of the Ford Foundation, told Norman Dodd, a senator on the Reese Committee: “We operate here under directives which emulate from the White House. The substance of the directives under which we operate are that we shall use our grant making power to alter life in the U.S. so that we can comfortably be merged with the Soviet Union.”

John Foster Dulles
CFR founder John Dulles has said “The UN represents not a final stage in the development of World Order, but only a primitive stage. Therefore its primary task is to create the conditions which will make possible a more highly developed organization. . .Then, perhaps, a World Police Force could work.”
In 1942, Dulles while chairman of the Federal Council of Churches Commission, issued a report calling for “a World Government, strong immediate limitation on national sovereignty, international control of all armies and navies, a universal system of money, world-wide freedom of immigration, progressive elimination of all tariff and quota restrictions on world trade and a democratically-controlled world bank.”The report went on to say “a New Order of economic life is both imminent and imperative.”

United World Federalists
After the UN was formed the United World Federalists (UWF) got a 27 state legislatures to pass resolutions supporting a constitutional convention to change the U.S. Constitution to join a world government, but voters got most of these resolutions repealed. The North Carolina general assembly rescinded, by a 92-11 vote a 1941 resolution supporting participation in a “Federation of the World,” a “New World Order,” and an international convention to create a world Constitution.

David Spangler
“No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian initiation.”

George W. Bush
“We have confidence because freedom is the permanent hope of mankind, the hunger in dark places, the longing of the soul. When our Founders declared a New Order of the Ages, when soldiers died in wave upon wave for a union based on liberty, when citizens marched in peaceful outrage under the banner ‘Freedom Now’ — they were acting on an ancient hope that is meant to be fulfilled.”

[kaibo 开 博]

Time Magazine
“The Bush administration would like to make the UN a cornerstone of its plans to construct a New World Order.”
“We know in the not too distant future, a half dozen corporations are going to control the media. We took this step to ensure we were one of them.”

George Herbert W. Bush
(CFR, TC)
March 6th, 1991 Bush Sr. Talks To Congress: “Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective - a New World Order - can emerge. . . Now, we can see a New World Order coming into view. A world in which there is a very real prospect for a New World Order. . .A world where the United Nations, freed from a Cold War stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders.”On February 1st, 1992 Bush Sr. says “My vision of a New World Order forsees a UN with a revitalized peacekeeping function. It is the sacred principles enshrined in the UN charter to which we henceforth pledge our allegiance.”

President George Bush (January 1991): “If we do not follow the dictates of our inner moral compass and stand up for human life, then his lawlessness will threaten the peace and democracy of the emerging New World Order we now see, this long dreamed-of vision we’ve all worked toward for so long.”

H.G Wells
“The Ethical system which will dominate the World State, will be shaped primarily to favor. . .beautiful and strong bodies, clear and powerful minds. . . and to check the procreation of base and servile types. . . The new ethics will hold life to be a privilege and a responsibility. . .and the alternative in right conduct between living fully beautifully, and efficiently will be to die. . . The men of the New Republic (one world government) will have little pity and less benevolence. . . They will hold. . . that a certain portion of the population exists only in sufferance. . . and on the understanding that they do not propagate, and I do not foresee any reason to suppose that they will not hesitate to kill when sufferance is abused… Men of the New Republic will not be squeamish either in facing or inflicting death. . .They will have an ideal that will make killing worth the while;. . . They will have faith to kill. . . If deterrent will be good scientifically caused pain.”
In his book entitled “The New World Order” (1939): “… when the struggle seems to be drifting definitely towards a World Social Democracy, there may still be very great delays and disappointments before it becomes an efficient and beneficent World System. Countless people … will hate the New World Order… and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to evaluate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people.”

Alan Cranston
(TC)
Fmr. Senator of California “The more talk about World Government the less chance of achieving it, because it frightens people. . .”

Dan Quayle
Quayle says on CNN, that “This is the best time to establish the New World Order.”

Gary Hart
(CFR)
Fmr. Senator for Colorado on C-SPAN: “There is a chance for the President of the United States to use this disaster to carry out … a phrase his father used … and that is a New World Order. . .”

Mikhail Gorbachev
“…Why the world has changed so much, and why the world had burned so much for a New World Order, and a new kind of civilization”
Speaking in Missouri in May, 1992, Gorbachev said: “This is a turning point on a historic and worldwide scale and signifies the incipient substitution of one paradigm of civilization for another. . . An awareness of the need for some kind of Global Government is gaining ground, one in which all the members of the world community can take part. . . Many countries are morbidly jealous of their sovereignty, and. . . of their national independence and World Order will not be fully realized unless the UN and its Security Council create structures. . . authorized to impose sanctions and make use of other means of compulsion. All members of the UN must recognize the acceptability of international interference (in all nations internal affairs). . . Under certain circumstances it will be desirable to put certain national armed forces at the disposal of the Security Council, making them subordinate to the UN military command.”in 1993 Gorbachev said: “This has been a period of international transition.” he spoke about the need for“international institutions act on behalf of all. . . Clinton will be a success if he manages to use American influence to accomplish this transformation of international responsibility and increase significantly the role of the UN.” While many feel this would limit U.S. independence “accepting the aegis of a higher institution that operates on a consensus such as the UN, would have many advantages. . . Clinton . . . will be a great president — if he can make American the creator of a New World Order.”
In an address at the United Nations (December 1988): “Further global progress is now possible only through a quest for universal consensus in the movement towards a New World Order.”

Zbigniew Brzezinski
(B, CFR, TC)
“Finally, i have no illusions about World Government emerging in our lifetime. . . We cannot leap into World Government though one quick step. . . The precondition for eventual and genuine Globalization is progressive Regionalization because by that we move towards larger, more stable, more cooperative unites.”
“The Technotronic Era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities.”

Norman Cousins
“World Government is coming, in fact, it is inevitable. No arguments for of againsts it can change that fact.”

Gennadi Zyuganov
“We (Russians) are the last power on this planet that is capable of mounting a challenge for a New World Order — the global cosmopolitan dictatorship. We must work against our. . . destroyers, using means as carefully thought-out and as goal-oriented as theirs are.”

Vladimir Zhirinovsky
“There has long been a hidden agenda to merge America and Russia under the New World Order.

William (Bill) C. Graham
(TC)
In 1992, broadcast across the US on Graham’s radio program “Embrace America 2000,” after Bush Sr. gave his now infamous New World Order Speech, the Rev. Billy Graham said that we should “embrace” this “New World Order.”

Winston Churchill
London press in 1922: “From the days of Sparticus, Weishaupt, Karl Marx, Trotski, belacoon, Rosa Luxenberg and Ema Goldman, this world conspiracy has been steadily growing. This conspiracy played a definite recognizable role in the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the 19th century. And now at last, this band of extraordinary personalities from the under-world of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their head and have become the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”
“Unless some effective World Super-Government, for the purposes of preventing war, can be set up and begin the reign, the prospects for peace and human progress are dark and doubtful. . .Without a United Europe there is no prospect of World Government.”
Elsewhere, Churchill said: “The creation of an authoritative World Order is the ultimate aim toward which we must strive.”

World Federalist Association
On December 4th, 1985, World Federalist Association (WFA) vice-president John Logue told a subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee: “It is time to tell the world’s people not what they want to hear but what they must hear. What they ought to hear is that if we really want to have peace and promote justice, we must. . . strengthen the UN. . . The UN must have taxing power. . . It must have a large peacekeeping force. . . It must be able to make and enforce law on the individual.”

Owen J. Roberts
Former Justice Owen Roberts in 1943, in the may 2nd issue of The Philadelphia Inquirer, Roberts said:“An International Government, with police power over every individual citizen in the nations belonging to it. . .is the only way. . .”

World Affairs Council
On January 30th 1976, 124 members of congress signed a Declaration of Independence: “Two centuries ago our forefather brought fourth a new nation; now we must join with others to bring forth a New World Order. . .”

Strobe Talbott
(CFR, TC)
In Time Magazine, July 20th, 1992, Strobe Talbott, Fmr. U.S. Deputy Sec. of State and Clinton’s roommate at Oxford, said: “In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single Global Authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.”
He also said that the GATT and IMF are the future world government’s “Proto-ministries of trade, finance and development for a United World.”

Bill J. Clinton
(B, CFR, TC)
“We had a World view, Republican and Democratic presidents alike; from Harry Truman to George Bush. . .stood for freedom. . .and stood for certain propositions that would make America strong and healthy and grow the middle class and shrink poverty and stand against Communism. . .and after 1989 President Bush would (say) a phrase i often use myself that we needed a New World Order.”
Bill Clinton wrote to the WFA expressing his congratulations. He said: “Norman Cousins (past head of the WFA) worked for world peace and World Government. . . Best wishes for an enjoyable reception and for future success.”
USA Today, 3/11/93, page 2a: “We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans..”
Former President’s remarks on MTV’s “Enough is Enough”, 3/22/94: “When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of freedom to Americans…” “And so alot of people say there’s too much personal freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it. That’s what we did in the announcement I made last weekend on the Housing Projects, about how we’re going to have weapon sweeps and more things like that to try to make the people feel safer in their communities.”
“There is no longer a clear division between what is foreign and what is domestic, the World Economy, the World Environment, the World Aids crisis, the World Arms Race. . .They effect us all. Today as an Old Order passes the New World is more free, but less stable.

Vladimir Lenin
The Western corporate elite have long worked closely with the communist to promote world government. In 1916 Lenin said:“The aim of socialism is not only to abolish the present division of mankind into small states and all-national isolation, not only to bring the nations closer to each other, but also to merge them.”

Benjamin Disraeli
First British Prime Minister Benjamin has said: “The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes. The governments of the present day have to deal not merely with other governments, with emperors, kings and ministers, but also with Secret Societies which have everywhere their unscrupulous agents, and can at the last moment upset all the governments’ plans.”

Woodrow Wilson
“Since i entered politics, I have chiefly had men’s views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.”
“I have unwillingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by it’s system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the most ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated government in the world. . .no longer a government of free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and vote of a majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of small groups of dominant men.”

Henry Ford II
(B)
President of the Ford Motor Co.: “It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.”
“The one aim of these financiers is World Control by the creation of inextinguishable debts.”

John F. Hylan
Mayor of New York (1918-1925): “The real menace of our republic is this Invisible Government which is like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen. At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as International Bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties.”

Robert F. Kennedy
Former U.S. Attorney-General in 1967: “All of us will ultimately be judged on the effort we have contributed to building a New World Order.”
Joseph Kennedy
“Fifty men have run America, and that’s a high figure.”

Curtis Dall
FDR’s son in law, Curtis Dall, had this to day quoting from a book of his called ‘FDR: My Exploited Father-in-law’: “For a long time I felt that FDR had developed many thoughts and ideas that were his own to benefit this country, the United States. But he didn’t. Most of his thoughts were carefully manufactured for him in advance by the Council on Foreign Relations-One World Money Group. The United Nations is but a long range, international banking apparatus clearly set up for financial and economic profit by a small group of powerful One World revolutionaries, hungry for profit and power. The One World government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve bank.”

Franklin Delano Roosevelt
In a letter written Nov. 21, 1933 to Colonel E. Mandell House: “The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson.”
“In politics nothing happens by accident; if it happens, you can be sure we planned it that way.”

Felix Frankfurter
“The Order’s working and involvement in America is immense. The real rulers in America is immense. The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes.”

William Fulbright
“The case for government by elites is irrefutable.”

Barry Goldwater
“The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States. . .they will rule the future.”

Carroll Quigley
Here is an excerpt from Mr. Quigley’s book ‘Tragedy and Hope’ (1966): “The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less that to create a World System of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.”
“The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is the American Branch of a society which originated in England … (and) … believes national boundaries should be obliterated and One World rule established.”

Arthur Meier Schlesinger Jr.
(CFR)
In Foreign Affairs (July/August 1995): “We are not going to achieve a New World Order without paying for it in blood as well as words and money.”

Nelson Mandela
In the Philadelphia Inquirer (October 1994): “The New World Order that is in the making must focus on the creation of a world of democracy, peace and prosperity for all.”
Hosni Mubarak

President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, in the New York Times (April 1995):
“The renewal of the nonproliferation treaty was described as important for the welfare of the whole world and the New World Order.”
John Stedman

Article by Stephen in Foreign Affairs (May/June 1995): “Alchemy for a New World Order“

[/color]