New World Order Factions Struggle for Control
WORLD AFFAIRS BRIEF
February 4, 2000 Copyright Joel
Skousen. Quotations with attribution
permitted.
YEAR 2000 PUSH FOR
GLOBALIZATION BEGINS IN EARNEST
I wrote
at the end of 1999 that US citizens have been deeply probed about how much
resistance they would offer to a variety of global agendas. By and large Americans have failed to
provide any meaningful resistance.
Already we are beginning to see the results. The NWO crowd is moving ahead with major proposals in earnest and
aren’t even bothering to be subtle about it.
They are on a roll and the tidal waves of change are sweeping in from
multiple directions. Let me summarize
what is happening.
THE NEW REPUBLIC FLAUNTS AMERICA’S LOSS OF SOVEREIGNTY AND CHEERS!
The
front cover of the January 17th issue of The New Republic, an old left
publication turned politically chic, dramatically proclaims, “America Is
Surrendering Its Sovereignty To A World Government. HOORAY!” The editors
correctly assume that Americans know nothing about the devastating
effects that such a loss of sovereignty would have on taxes, personal liberty,
court procedures, property rights, religious liberty and defense (both national
and personal). The establishment is
learning fast that as long as they shield Americans from any direct effects of
UN rule until after the US is
irreversibly integrated into global legal structures there will be no resistance.
The inability of Americans to foresee the results of globalization and
project the theory into practice is a direct result of a public education
system that systematically denies essential information about how liberty is
maintained and how majority rule in a democracy must be chained to
constitutional limitations by tight legal language.
BRITAIN’S PM TONY
BLAIR PLANNING A EUROPEAN SUPERSTATE
Even
though Conservative Party leader William Hague is no trustworthy opponent of
globalism, he let loose a barrage this past week against the secret agenda of
Tony Blair’s Labor Party. He charged
that Tony Blair, in league with Brussels’ EU leadership, is pushing ahead with
plans to create a European superstate, without openly presenting the key
sovereignty issues for a vote. Mr.
Hague revealed that a series of European Commission proposals published last
week not only would further Britain’s integration into the European Union, but
would limit a member state’s right to use its national veto. Hague loudly denounced Blair saying, “They
are pushing for a European Union with its own government, its own army, its own
taxes, its own foreign policy, its own criminal justice system, its own
constitution, as well as its own currency - in other words, a single European
state....The submission is an integrationist wish-list - the blueprint for a
single European state." Hague
also correctly pointed out that the EU’s strategy is to eliminate national veto
powers gradually by only applying the limitations to carefully chosen “safe”
issues, so as to get the people used to the idea. He said: "The national veto would be abolished in areas of
social security, social policy, industrial and transport policy, financial
regulation and the spending of the multi-million pound structural and cohesion
funds." Now, if you think this is
only of concern for Europe, consider what the globalists have in store for the
US at their upcoming New York Summit Conference.
THE UN’S YEAR 2000
“CHARTER FOR GLOBAL DEMOCRACY”
The
United Nations will convene a special millennium global summit on the future of
the world in September 2000. This
summit will be the culmination of 10 years of planning and maneuvering, and is
intended to initiate the implementation phase of numerous structural UN changes
aimed at breaking the UN loose from voluntary participation. The basic document outlining the new
objectives was published by the UN Commission on Global Governance in
1995. The latest document, called, “The
Charter for Global Democracy” was published on UN Day, October 24th, 1999 and
signed by influential leaders in 56 nations as well as most of the “private”
Non-Government Organizations (NGO).
NGOs are, for the most part, contingencies of leftist lobbies formed to
give the appearance of grass roots support, pressuring the UN to continue
locking up the world for the sake of environment, human dignity and other
euphemisms advocating population and property control. In reality this document is a charter for
the abolition of individual freedom and all national sovereignty. Here are the principles enunciated:
Principle #1 calls for the consolidation of all international agencies
under the direct authority of the United Nations. This initiative targets a
number of the real international power centers which have never been under direct UN control--the powerful Bank of International Settlements (BIS),
World Trade Organization (WTO) Office of Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), The World Bank
and the International Monetary Fund
(IMF). The European left, who controls
a majority of the votes in the UN General Assembly knows the UN is only a
global government on paper unless it can harness these secret organs of power. I will go into more detail on this EU vs. US
battle for power among the NWO elite in the next issue.
Principle #2 calls for regulation by the UN of all transnational
corporations and financial institutions, requiring an "international
code of conduct" concerning the environment and labor standards. I’m betting these controls will not be
limited to labor and environment. After
implementation, there will be no more safe financial havens to park money
privately overseas. Every international
financial institution will be regulated and controlled. Also, say good-bye to private corporate
rights. Any business crossing national
borders will be automatically brought under the powers of international law on
labor and environment. All of our
“right to work” laws will be overturned within major corporations and the Kyoto
treaty will be forced upon US corporations without going through Congress.
Principle #3 demands an independent source of revenue for the UN,
such as taxes on internet transactions, taxes on aircraft and shipping fuels,
and licensing the use of the global commons (outer space, the atmosphere,
oceans, and any crucial environment space that supports human life--what a
catch-all!) The worst thing about this
proposal is that once the nations assent to giving the UN the power to tax (and
this power will, like all evil forms of taxation, begin with very small rate)
the UN will have power to raise rates
without going back to the original member nations for approval. Like our income tax, its growth will be
inevitable.
Principle #4 eliminates the veto power and permanent member status on the Security
Council. This is the big
issue. It is aimed exclusively at the
US, even though it will be sold to Americans on the basis that it will stop the
Russians and Chinese from stonewalling on human rights issues, like
Chechnya. Without a veto power, the
only recourse for the US to protest any UN decision is total withdrawal from the UN.
That would be preferable except that the deeper America gets into
participation with the UN, the less likely this becomes, politically. In short, removal of the veto will make the
US hostage to UN law without ever having to amend the US Constitution. Our leaders will continually promote the
line that we must sacrifice some sovereignty to the UN in order to have world
peace. Trouble is, there is no such
thing as partial sovereignty. Either
you have it or you don’t. Once we start
down this road where we “must comply” with UN mandates, our own judges will
begin enforcing UN law.
Principle #5 authorizes a standing UN army. The UN wants this in place before the next
war so that the structure is there to build a huge army quickly, without
relying on US control as in past conflicts.
Principle #6 requires UN registration of all arms and the
reduction of all national armies "as part of a multilateral global
security system" under the authority of the United Nations. Whatever the rhetoric, this means gun
control to be imposed upon US citizens and unilateral disarmament nationally.
Principle #7 requires individual and national compliance with all
UN "human rights" treaties and declarations. You’d have to read all the fine print to
know the full extent of this threat. In
short, it’s nothing but a social rights agenda to mandate socialist
redistribution policies, worldwide health care, and to ensure that
contraceptives and abortions are available on demand worldwide.
Principle #8 activates the International Criminal Court, making the
International Court of Justice compulsory for all nations, and gives
individuals the right to petition the courts to remedy social injustice. The right to petition means right to sue any
other person or group, causing them to spend huge amounts of money on lawyers
in foreign countries to defend themselves against a stacked legal deck.
Principles #9, 10, and 11 are all part
of the huge environmentalist agenda. #9
calls for a new institution to establish
economic and environmental security by ensuring "sustainable
development." #10: calls for the establishment of an International Environmental Court. # 11: calls for a
declaration that climate change is an essential global security interest that
requires the creation of a "high-level action team" to allocate
carbon emission based on equal per-capita rights. This wordage forces the Kyoto Treaty upon all nations. As in all Fascist systems, you and I will
still own property but they will control it and we will pay for the privilege
of implementing their phony science mandates.
Principle #12 calls for the cancellation of all debt owed by the
poorest nations, global poverty reductions, and “equitable sharing of global resources," as allocated by the
United Nations. Won’t they have a
heyday redistributing wealth worldwide with this language!
Summary: They won’t get all this wish list in 2000,
but if they even get one or two key principles enacted into law (#4,5 or 8)
they can get the rest by edict and majority rule.
THE GROWING RIFT
BETWEEN US AND EUROPEAN GLOBALIST LEADERS
Charter99.org, the British Internet cheerleaders for the
UN’s Charter for Global Democracy (discussed in last week’s brief) made some
sour comments about the lack of influence the UN has in world affairs.
“In many ways we now have world
government. [However] It is not to
be found at the United Nations. Rather, the UN has been sidelined, while the
real business of world government is done elsewhere. Global policies are
discussed and decided behind closed doors by exclusive groups, such as the G8, OECD, the Bank of International
Settlements, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the World Trade
Organisation and others. These agencies are reinforced by informal
networks of high officials and powerful alliances. Together they have created
what can be seen as dominant and exclusive institutions of world government.
All too often they are influenced by transnational corporations which pursue
their own world strategies.”
ANALYSIS: These cogent comments highlight the visible rift developing
between leftist organizations and the US globalist leaders (who have misled
European socialists and Communists into thinking they share the same goals). Indeed, the two groups share the same goals
about global socialism, but the European left is fast awakening to the
realization that NWO leaders have a lock-hold on ultimate power and
aren’t about to share any of that power with ideological Marxists and
Communists. We will watch closely the
negotiations at the UN Millennial summit on Global Governance in September
where we will see how the Europeans (who have a majority of allies in the UN
general assembly) will fare at implementing their 12 strategic objectives that
we discussed last week. About half of
these objectives are focused on bringing the powerful independent globalist
organs (IMF, World Bank, BIS, and WTO) under direct UN control. In this way, the Europeans can use their
majority allies in the General Assembly to wrest power from the US. That is why the Europeans must eliminate the
Security Council’s veto power, so that the General Assembly votes (almost all
pro-Communist) will prevail.
I don’t
think the Europeans will succeed, but this is a source of underlying tension
between the NWO leaders in the European Union and those in the US. British leaders participates in both camps:
the Tories have been long aligned with the US faction of the NWO and the Labor
Party has been allied with the European Marxists. At the present, Labor PM Tony Blair is trying to pull Britain
into the European camp, while the Tories under William Hague are beginning to
resist. Remember that the European
socialist leaders are aligned with the Socialist International--a Communist
front, directed from Moscow. That is
why Russia’s secret leadership (i.e.:Boris Berezovsky) keeps a physical
presence in Paris.
Europeans,
being ideological Marxists, rather than simply power conspirators like the US
faction, are hostile towards private business.
On the other hand, the US faction of the NWO, which currently holds most
of the power, is willing to court big business and use those relationships to
extend their base of power and financial control. It is this strategy of harnessing and corrupting the corporate
financial world that has given the US faction the upper hand in controlling the
world’s money. In addition, this split
in NWO power may also explain why the Russians are targeting only America and
Britain for a nuclear first strike and not Europe. The Russians are, perhaps, much more confident about the level of
control and influence they have with European socialist leaders. They don’t trust the Americans, despite American
aid and its willingness to unilaterally disarm. Both Russia and China view war with the US as inevitable. What almost everyone else fails to realize,
as well, is that China views war with Russia as inevitable too.
