Is The New World Order Dying?

Comments Off on Is The New World Order Dying?

Everyone who remembers my radio show remembers that I talked about the New World Order, the Bilderbergs, the NAFTA Highway and even the Illuminati. Gosh, no one wanted to talk about such stuff. No one wanted to believe that our leaders were selling us down the road. Here’s a great article from Pat Buchanan about it…could the push to Euro-ize us be over? Could this be a path to recovery? Can we go back to thinking national instead of global?

The first step to admitting you’re an addict is to admit it. Once again, vilification…

Is the New World Order unraveling?

Pat Buchanan, from World News Daily

With Greece on the precipice of default and Portugal and Italy approaching the ledge, the European monetary union appears in peril.

Should it collapse, the European Union itself could be in danger, for economic nationalism is rising in Europe. Which raises a larger question.

Is the New World Order, the great 20th century project of Western transnational elites, unraveling?

The NWO dates back as far as Woodrow Wilson’s League of Nations, which a Republican Senate refused to enter. FDR, seeking to succeed where his mentor had failed, oversaw the creation of a United Nations, an International Monetary Fund and a World Bank.

In 1951 came the European Coal and Steel Community, love child of Jean Monnet, which evolved into the European Economic Community, the European Community and the European Union. A European Central Bank and a new currency, the euro, followed.

The hidden ultimate goal of economic union was political union – a United States of Europe as model and core of the 21st-century world government.

With the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the EU expanded to the east. And the New World Order, formally proclaimed by George H.W. Bush in 1991, was out in the open and seemingly the wave of the future.

Progress was swift.

A North American Free Trade Agreement, bringing the United States, Mexico and Canada into a common market that George W. Bush predicted would encompass the hemisphere from Patagonia to Prudhoe Bay, was signed in 1993.

A World Trade Organization was born in 1994. U.S. sovereignty was surrendered to a global body where America had the same single vote as Azerbaijan.

The Kyoto Protocol, brought home by Vice President Al Gore, set up a regime to control the worldwide emission of greenhouse gases.

An International Criminal Court, a permanent Nuremberg Tribunal to prosecute war crimes and crimes against humanity, was created.

A doctrine of limited sovereignty had been asserted. Elites claimed a higher law than national sovereignty; “a responsibility to protect” enabled them to intervene in countries where human rights violations were egregious.

Serbia, bombed by Bill Clinton for 78 days for fighting to hold its ancient province of Kosovo, was the first victim.

Suddenly, however, the progression has stalled. Indeed, the New World Order seems to be unraveling.

Emerging powers like China, India and Brazil are demanding they be exempt from restrictions developed countries seek to impose. The follow-up summits to Kyoto – Copenhagen in 2009, Cancun in 2010 – ended in failure. The Doha round of world trade negotiations ended in failure.

China refuses to let her currency float lest she lose the trade surpluses that have enabled her to amass $3 trillion in cash reserves.

Protectionism is rising. Americans chafe at a new world economic order that has led to deindustrialization of their country. Congress is talking of defunding the U.N. as anti-Western and anti-Israel.

Why is the New World Order suddenly going in reverse?

A primary reason is the resurgence of nationalism. Nations are putting national interests ahead of any perceived global interests.

A second reason is the decline of a West whose project this was. We no longer dictate to the world, and the world no longer marches to our tune. The deficits and indebtedness of Western nations preclude more of the big wealth transfers in foreign aid that once bought us influence.

A third reason is demography. Not one European nation has a birth rate sufficient to replace its population. Europe’s nations are aging, shrinking, dying. A depopulating Germany cannot carry forever the deficit-debtor nations of Club Med. The oldest nation, Japan, is on schedule to lose 25 million people by 2050, as is neighbor Russia.

Militarily, America remains the most powerful nation. But Iraq and Afghanistan have bled the country and left us without the certain attainment of our goals. Old allies like Turkey go their separate ways.

Ethno-nationalism also explains a disintegrating world order. Aspiring nations like Scotland, Catalonia, Padania, Flanders, Ingushetia, Dagestan, East Turkestan, Kurdistan and Baluchistan seek a place in the sun, free of the cloying embrace of the mother country.

The desire of peoples for nations all their own, where their own language, faith and culture predominate and their own kind rule to the exclusion of all others, is everywhere winning out over multiculturalism and transnationalism.

Through history there have been attempts to unite the world.

The Roman Empire. Catholicism. Islam. The West that ruled much of mankind from Columbus to the mid-20th century. Communism, which conquered half of Europe and Asia but arose and fell in a single century.

With the death of communism and the decline of the West – in relative population and power – Islam has become the largest religion, China the world’s emerging superpower and Asia the continent of the future.

Could this still be the Second American Century?

Not the way we are going.

CNN contributor Fareed Zakaria : Dump the Constitution

Comments Off on CNN contributor Fareed Zakaria : Dump the Constitution

CNN contributor Fareed Zakaria argues that the Constitution is outdated and its principles should be “debated and fixed” to conform with the modern era. He suggests “a set of amendments to modernize the Constitution for the 21st Century.”

It should come as no surprise Fareed Zakaria wants to do away with the Constitution. He is a darling of the Council On Foreign Relations and a Bilderberg member. He also sits on the board of the Trilateral Commission. He is a serious globalist and as such an avowed enemy of the Constitution and especially the Bill of Rights.

Zakaria’s rants about the Constitution have little to do with updating an old document perceived to now be irrelevant and dysfunctional. Zakaria and his globalist coconspirators are determined to destroy the Constitution and the Bill of Rights because the document stands in the way of establishing a one-world  government.

House Passes the Disclose Act: The Greatest Assault on Free Speech Ever

Comments Off on House Passes the Disclose Act: The Greatest Assault on Free Speech Ever

Here we have the Dems stealing more of our liberty again and for us in West Tn, our great  representative John Tanner voted Yes for the Disclose Act. See how your representative voted here.

The Disclose Act is the Democrats response to a Supreme Court decision that came down in January allowing corporations to sponsor election-related ads.

This new, and obviously unconstitutional, bill would require corporations, unions and nonprofit groups to disclose their top five donors if they participate in political activity, and to agree to other disclosures related to expenditures before elections.

The Supreme Court ruled that restrictions on the ability of Corporations to donate to political candidates was unconstitutional . And, that should end the matter.

But, now you are redressing that unconstitution law and passing your new unconstitutional version of that unconstitutional law !!!!!

When are the Democrats & Obama going to obey what the Supreme Court has laid down as the new Rule-Of-The-Land ?

Maybe after November they will be forced to obey our “rule of law”, the Constitution.

Democrats ‘Within Striking Distance’ on Disclose Act

House Democrats now claim to be “within striking distance” of the votes they need to sharply restrict the rights of organizations to participate in election campaigns — despite a recent Supreme Court finding that such legislative restrictions are unconstitutional.

Heritage Foundation legal scholar Hans A. Von Spakovsky, a former member of the Federal Election Commission, tells Newsmax that the timing of the legislation indicates its true purpose is muzzling groups that otherwise might freely voice their opposition to Democratic policies in campaign ads.

The Disclose Act, also known as H.R. 5175, is written so that it takes effect 30 days after passage — just in time to impact the November midterms.

“That’s just crazy,” Von Spakovsky tells Newsmax, “because whenever a new statute gets passed on campaign finance reform, the FEC has the job of creating the regulations needed to implement the statute. There is just no way the FEC, which I served on for two years, could in two months come up with regulations to enforce this law.”

Instead, he says, Democrats “just seem to be intent on creating a legal morass,” the uncertainty of which would discourage organizations from trying to voice their views at all.

Former Federal Election Commission Chairman Bradley A. Smith, chairman of the Alexandria, Va.-based Center for Competitive Politics, recently told Newsmax the Act is “one of the most partisan pieces of legislation to come down the pike.”


When the NRA threatened to mobilize its legislative juggernaut to oppose the Disclose Act, Democrats offered the group a special “carve out,” or exception. Any longstanding organization with a million or more members that also met other criteria, would be exempted.

That exception provoked howls of outrage from groups on the left, as well as from smaller groups that complained the NRA was acting to protect its own narrow interests. Van Hollen responded by lowering the threshold for the exemption to 500,000 members, thereby broadening the exclusion.

The NRA said Monday it does not support the law, but also won’t marshal its considerable political might against it as long as it is exempted.

In a recent interview, Smith told Newsmax the bill would shackle the political activities of corporations and associations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, while leaving unions largely free to influence political outcomes.(no surprise here…Obama loves the unions)

He said the bill contains numerous “absurd” regulations, such as requiring as many as six disclaimers in a 30-second ad regarding who paid for it.

The Disclose Act also requires leading donors to actually appear in the ads to state their involvement — whether the money they donated went to produce that particular ad or not. Nonprofits and companies would have to disclose the names of their top five donors, as well as face other restrictions.
Such provisions, opponents of the bill say, are less about transparency than intimidating the corporate and association donors to stop promoting conservative candidates.

Other indications that the Disclose Act battle continues unabated:

The U.S. Chamber rolled out an ad campaign on Monday that warns the Act would “limit the speech of businesses and the associations that represent them in order to prevent them from expressing their political views.”
Rep. Dan Lungren, R-Calif., released a statement saying Democrats were making “backroom” deals to try to salvage a defective bill. “They’re auctioning off the First Amendment with zero regard to the dire consequences of their actions,” he stated.
House members received a letter signed by over 232 organizations opposing the Disclose Act, saying it imposes “onerous restrictions on corporate free speech while ignoring unions’ immense political influence.”
The NRA’s Chris W. Cox issued a news release Monday stating: “The NRA has never supported — nor would we support — any version of this bill. Those who suggest otherwise are wrong. The restrictions in this bill should not apply to anyone or to any organization.”

Von Spakovsky predicts Democrats who try to justify the Disclose Act to constituents over the July recess are in for a big surprise.

He tells Newsmax: “The Democrats are making a mistake because actually, when you explain to folks what’s really in this act, and you explain to folks what the Supreme Court actually did, as opposed to what the media portrays, a majority of American believe in the First Amendment and they come out saying, ‘This is a bad law because it infringes on people’s right to speak politically.'”

Leading Republicans tell Newsmax they believe that even if the bill passes the House (which it did today), they have the votes to block it in the Senate.
NewsMax.com

Michael Savage on the New World Order~World Government

Comments Off on Michael Savage on the New World Order~World Government

This needs no commentary, Michael Savage says it pretty plainly.

What Part of No….

Comments Off on What Part of No….

I don’t get it…the ClimateGate debacle, and yet, we’re still going to hold meetings on climate change?  We’re still expected to fund this nonsense?  Well, I guess so…since we’re still expected to fund the nonsense called ObamaCare.
IMF suggests how to raise climate change funds

By TOM MALITI (AP)

NAIROBI, Kenya — The head of the International Monetary Fund on Monday proposed a plan for the world’s governments to pool together to raise money needed to adapt to climate change, a rare step for an organization that normally does not develop environmental policies.

IMF Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn said the Fund is concerned about the huge amount of funding needed and the effect that will have on the global economy. He added that the proposal may help efforts to reach a binding agreement on climate change later this year.

Strauss-Kahn proposed that countries adopt a quota system similar to the one the Fund uses to raise its own money, which could bring in money faster than proposals to increase carbon taxes or other fundraising methods. He only provided a broad outline of the plan, as the organization will release a paper later this week with full details. It is unclear how the proposal will be received.

The IMF raises funds from its 185 members mainly through a quota system that is based broadly on each country’s economic size. The United States is currently the largest shareholder.

“We all know that (carbon taxes and other fundraising methods) will take time and we don’t have this time. So we need something which looks like an interim solution, which will bridge the gap between now and the time when those carbon taxes will be big enough to solve the problem,” Strauss-Kahn said. “And that is exactly what the IMF proposal is dealing with.”

He said a climate change accord reached last December estimated $100 billion a year will be needed by 2020 to fund programs, including those to help poor nations deal with droughts, flooding and food shortages expected to be caused by climate change.

Nations failed to reach a binding deal in Copenhagen in December, but agreed on a voluntary plan to control greenhouse gas emissions which are blamed for the gradual heating of the Earth that scientists predict will worsen weather-related disasters. The accord, however, included collective commitments by rich countries to provide billions of dollars to help poor countries adapt to climate change, a major demand the poor nations had made.

The more than 190 nations will reconvene in Cancun, Mexico, later this year for another attempt to reach a binding agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol, which sets emissions targets for industrial countries and expires in 2012.

PM Gordon Brown wants global constitution for financial system

Comments Off on PM Gordon Brown wants global constitution for financial system

Just ran across this that goes right down the line that the Grant Jeffrey video goes I just posted.

PM wants global constitution for financial system

Prime Minister Gordon Brown called on Friday for a world constitution to regulate the financial system and said he hoped for agreement on a range of regulation issues at G8 and G20 meetings in coming months.

Speaking at an international conference on progressive politics, Brown also said now was not the time to put a fragile economic recovery at risk by withdrawing fiscal support, but to make 2010 a year of growth.

Brown said a global solution was required to transform financial services, which he defined as follows:

“Common rules for capital and liquidity, common standards for supervision, common rules for bonuses and a shared way of assessing the contribution banks should make to society, free of the unfair and disproportionate use of regulatory and tax havens which penalise countries doing the right things.”

Referring specifically to discussions with the International Monetary Fund and with other countries on the idea of a global levy on banks, Brown said he hoped for agreement at an upcoming G8 meeting in Canada and a G20 meeting in South Korea.

Read entire article at UK Reuters.com

Is the Global Warming Agenda Leading to World Government

Comments Off on Is the Global Warming Agenda Leading to World Government

I don’t usually post things like this here on the blog, but earlier this week I was watching a program I watch occasionally that had as his guest Grant Jeffrey. The program is called Inspiration Today on the Christian Television Network and they were talking about the the Bilderberg group, the G-20, Copenhagen, Kyoto and the global warming agenda.  If your not familiar with Grant Jeffrey, he is a highly  intelligent man that I love to hear speak. He has a new book entitled Shadow Government, which you don’t hear much people that teach about the Bible talking about that topic. Probably because of lack of knowledge or awareness. But anyway I thought the things Grant Jeffrey talks about would be very interesting to a lot of our readers as well. Whether you believe in the Bible or not and if you don’t believe we’re getting close to the last days spoken about in the Bible I think you’ll still  find these two videos interesting because of the subject matter.  At the end of Part 1 of this video Grant Jeffrey makes a comment that is almost cut off by a commercial, so I’m going to emphasis what he said here before you see the video. Grant Jeffrey explains if the restrictions on Carbon Dioxide are implemented as these world leaders want,  it will send us back to around 1870 in the way we live.  He also documents everything in his new book for those who think it sounds a little bit crazy and off the deep end. His book as I said is entitled Shadow Government for those interested. Either way I think you’ll find these two videos interesting. I know I did.

THE HIGH-TECH SURVEILLANCE TRAP HAS BEEN SET

Security cameras, surveillance of your financial transactions, radio frequency spy chips hidden in consumer products, tracking of your internet searches, and eavesdropping on your e-mail and phone calls. Without your knowledge or consent, every aspect of your life is observed and recorded. But who is watching the watchers?

An ultra-secret global elite, functioning as a very real shadow government controls technology, finance, international law, world trade, political power, and vast military capabilities. Those who hold power are invisible to all but a few insiders. Those unrivaled leaders answer to no earthly authority, and they won’t stop until they control the world.

Older Entries