Know Your NWO

Discussion in 'Politics' started by AlterCow, Mar 10, 2010.

  1. AlterCow

    AlterCow The Silver Cow

    38
    0
    We have been warned throughout the years that a New World Order was on its way. They are doing everything legally that they can to consolidate everything. It makes it all too easy to be a criminal without even knowing, just trying to go through your daily routine.

    "How I learned to love the New World Order" - By Joe Biden Quote

    How I Learned to Love the New World Order

    Biden, Joseph R Jr.
    Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Apr 23, 1992. pg.
    A13

    Abstract (Summary)
    Joseph R. Biden Jr defends his view that the Pentagon's new strategy which appoints the US as a sort of world monitor could render the US a hollow superpower. Biden explains why he reacted the way he did to the plan.


    ____________

    Counterpoint: How I Learned to Love the New World Order
    Biden, Joseph R Jr. Wall Street Journal. (Eastern edition). New York, N.Y.: Apr 23, 1992. pg.
    A13

    Imagine my surprise when a Wall Street Journal editorial appointed me dean of the Pat Buchanan school of neo-isolationism. My credentials? Believing that the Pentagon's new strategy -- America as "Globocop" -- could render the United States a hollow superpower. All agree we need the military capacity to defend our vital interests -- by ourselves when need be. The question is grand strategy. With the Journal's endorsement, the Pentagon has called for a Pax Americana: The U.S. should cast so large a military shadow that no rival dare emerge.


    American hegemony might be a pleasant idea, but is it economically, politically or even militarily wise? Bristling with weapons, we would continue our economic decline, while rising industrial and financial giants in Europe and Asia viewed our military pretensions with indifference or contempt.


    Defense Secretary Dick Cheney outdid even the Journal, dipping deep into the well of Cold War argumentation to accuse Pax Americana critics of thinking "America's world presence is somehow immoral and dangerous.
    " Why doesn't the Journal stop the namecalling, get its schools sorted out, and court an honest debate over America's proper role in the new world order?

    Pat Buchanan's "America First" preaches martyrdom: We've been suckered into fighting "other" people's battles and defending "other" people's interests. With our dismal economy, this siren song holds some appeal.


    But most Americans, myself included, reject 1930s-style isolationism. They expect to see the strong hand of American leadership in world affairs, and they know that economic retreat would yield nothing other than a lower standard of living. They understand further that many security threats -- the spread of high-tech weapons, environmental degradation, overpopulation, narcotics trafficking, migration -- require global solutions.


    What about America as globocop? First, our 21st-century strategy has to be a shade more clever than Mao's axiom that power comes from the barrel of a gun. Power also emanates from a solid bank balance, the ability to dominate and penetrate markets, and the economic leverage to wield diplomatic clout.


    Second, the plan is passive where it needs to be aggressive. The Journal endorses a global security system in which we destroy rogue-state threats as they arise. Fine, but let's prevent such problems early rather than curing them late. Having contained Soviet communism until it dissolved, we need a new strategy of "containment" -- based, like NATO, on collective action, but directed against weapons proliferation.


    The reality is that we can slow proliferation to a snail's pace if we stop irresponsible technology transfers. Fortunately, nearly all suppliers are finally showing restraint. The maverick is China, which persists in hawking sensitive weapons and technology to the likes of Syria, Iran, Libya, Algeria and Pakistan -- even while pledging otherwise.


    The Senate has tried to force China's leaders to choose between Third World arms sales (1991 profits of $500 million) and open trade with the U.S. (a $12.5 billion annual Chinese surplus). Even though we have convincing intelligence that China's leaders fear the use of this leverage, the president inexplicably refuses to challenge Beijing.


    Weapons containment can't be foolproof; and against a nuclear-armed North Korea, I would support pre-emptive military action if necessary. But let's do our best -- using supplier restraint and sanctions against outlaw sellers and buyers-to avoid having to round up the posse.
    Why not an anti-proliferation "czar" in the cabinet to give this objective the prominence it urgently needs?

    Third, Pax Americana is a direct slap at two of our closest allies -- Japan and Germany -- and a repudiation of one of our panel1. Rather than denigrating collective security, we should regularize the kind of multilateral response we assembled for the Gulf War. Why not breathe life into the U.N. Charter? great postwar triumphs. For years, American leaders argued that building democracy in Europe and Asia would guarantee stability because democracies don't start wars. Now the Pentagon says we must keep our military large enough to persuade Japan and Germany "not to aspire to a greater role even to protect their legitimate interests.
    "

    How has our success suddenly become a threat? It hasn't, but the Pentagon plan could become a self-fulfilling prophecy. By insulting Tokyo and Berlin, and arrogating to ourselves military stewardship of the world, we may spark the revival no one wants.


    Secretary Cheney says he wants the allies to share the burden on defense matters. But Pax Americana puts us on the wrong end of a paradox: Hegemony means that even our allies can force ever greater U.S.
    defense spending the more they try to share the burden!

    Fourth, collective security doesn't rule out unilateral action. The Journal says I'm among those who want "Americans . . . to trust their security to a global committee." But no one advocates that we repeal the "inherent" right of self-defense enshrined in Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.


    Secretary Cheney says his plan wouldn't undermine support for the U.N. Who would know better than the U.N.'s usually understated secretary general? If implemented, says Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the Pentagon's strategy would spell "the end of the U.N." Rather than denigrating collective security, we should regularize the kind of multilateral response we assembled for the Gulf War. Why not breathe life into the U.N. Charter? It envisages a permanent commitment of forces, for use by the Security Council. That means a presumption of collective action -- but with a U.S. veto.


    Rather than defending military extravagance, the Bush administration should be reallocating Pentagon funds to meet more urgent security needs: sustaining democracy in the former Soviet empire; supporting U.N. peacekeepers in Yugoslavia, Cambodia and El Salvador; and rebuilding a weakened and debt-burdened America.


    If Pentagon strategists and their kneejerk supporters could broaden their horizons, they would see how our superpower status is best assured. We must get lean militarily, revitalize American economic strength, and exercise a diplomatic leadership that puts new muscle into institutions of collective security.


    ---

    Sen. Biden is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's European Affairs Subcommittee.


    ----------------

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rc7i0wCFf8g]YouTube - George Bush New World Order[/ame]

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CV8Xt2VWvc]YouTube - Obama Calls For New World Order In Berlin[/ame]

    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMVrxgvR_Xw]YouTube - Kissinger talks more about Obama and the New World Order[/ame]

    The New World Order, an Overview

    Trilateral Commission | New World Order
     
  2. Boris

    Boris Active Member

    33
    0
    it is coming...

    and may even be at the door. be ready.
     

  3. kyfarmer

    kyfarmer Well-Known Member

    638
    0
    The dang door has been open right in front of us for year's. It's only now that they don't give a crap that it's right out in the open. With who they have in the whitehouse now, you see what's going on in the open, they will force so much gov. controll over us we are so roto rooted. It's not coming it is here.
     
  4. sailaway

    sailaway Well-Known Member

    1,922
    0
    Our rights as USA Americans are slowly being meadiocratized into some form of controled global citizen rights. Slowly passing laws that slowly relieve us of our basic freedoms. It's probably too late.:eek:
     
  5. Songbird

    Songbird Member

    13
    0
    It's not to late--I will never believe that. That's why I'm here to prepare for some hard times. We will get thru this because I didn't raise 5 kids to be slaves to a bunch of elite pukes!! I can only hope that the same group who exposed the global warming fraud is also in the wings, will expose the fraud who is running our Country. If not--WE THE PEOPLE--will be ready.
     
  6. Raven348

    Raven348 Active Member

    31
    0
    I am a member of the Bilderberg Group and there really isn't that much too it. When you join you have to do a lot of crap work for other members and once you've been there you just sit and pretend to be important. We also have new members do things that could be used against them to prevent them from revealing anything of importance about the organisation.

    A politician (no I will not reveal the politicians name) joins and he has to kill a puppy and it's filmed, the film is stored and is held against him. He then had to do a lot of degrading services to other members (cleaning other peoples houses and things like that, even though he is a somewhat high up politician). After all of this is done he now just attends the meeting and pretends to be a part of an important organisations.

    After having been a member for 12 years I know that the organisation thrives on the image of being powerful while really having no power at all other than that of it's members. It's just a bunch of people of various origin and power (world wide membership with politicians, businessmen, union leaders etc.) doing nothing. The businessmen can't give special business deals to members because that's not how the market works, the politicians can't pass any laws for someone else since it would show up immediately, the union leaders can't screw over the union members since they would leave the unions.

    I get how some people might think it's sick killing a puppy, but that's generally how it works, you have to do something you don't want to come out to the public and then you can be trusted.

    The meetings are just for people to rub their egos. Sort of like "you're a member of an organisation who's members control 70% of the worlds wealth and 55% of the positions in politics", but in the end it's irrelevant since you will never benefit from it.
     
  7. kogneto

    kogneto The Skeptic

    280
    0
    REALLY? REEAALLYY? You're a member of the Bilderberg Group?

    Pics or it didn't happen
     
  8. Raven348

    Raven348 Active Member

    31
    0
    Had you read my text you would have understood it's not that big of a deal to be a member. And no, hauling up a camera would not be appreciated.
     
  9. kogneto

    kogneto The Skeptic

    280
    0
    :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

    I don't think I could roll my eyes more at this nonsense

    Also I'm Barack Obama, I just like browsing forums in my spare time. I can prove it because I just said it, see?
     
  10. kyfarmer

    kyfarmer Well-Known Member

    638
    0
    Many will still have their heads in the sand, won't matter the jack boot's will only shootem in the azz. :D Nothing to see here folk's move along, move along.
     
  11. Raven348

    Raven348 Active Member

    31
    0
    I suspect you are thinking of the annual conference of around 130 of the most important members. Of course I am not a participant, nor have I ever attended any of those meeting. This is not the entire organisation, the entire organisation have tens of thousands of members.

    Did you really think the entire organisation consisted of nothing but 130 members and some security? The goals of the organisation are to open borders and make the world more global, that's hardly something 130 people can do on their own, regardless how powerful they may be.

    The general goals are branched out to members just like any other organisation.
     
  12. kogneto

    kogneto The Skeptic

    280
    0

    sounds to me like you got conned into killing a puppy under the guise of joining an elite society
     
  13. Raven348

    Raven348 Active Member

    31
    0
    I never killed any puppy, it was a new member who had to do that.

    On the less important meetings (not the annual with 130 most important members world wide, but the smaller meeting with more local people) I have seen known members like the finance minister of Sweden.
     
  14. pdx210

    pdx210 Well-Known Member

    320
    0
    where where the last few meetings held in the usa ?
     
  15. kogneto

    kogneto The Skeptic

    280
    0
    ARE YOU KIDDING ME? THAT'S SUPER-SECRET PUPPY-KILLING-PRIVILEGED INFORMATION!

    What are you trying to do expose them?
     
  16. Raven348

    Raven348 Active Member

    31
    0
    You people are retards for thinking secret organisations are trying to take over the world. All they do is being secret and deny other access.

    And yes, read a book about secret organisations and you will see that it's common for them to force new members to do things that could be used against them if they decide to talk to much.
     
  17. bunkerbob

    bunkerbob Supporting Member

    1,733
    6


    OK guys and gals lets not get personal with the jabs, eveyone has their own opinions and feelings about their beliefs.:surrender:
    Lets get back to sharing our goals of improving our preps and preparing.:)
     
    Last edited: Apr 2, 2010
  18. Magus

    Magus Scavenger deluxe

    6,674
    17,679
    Somebody has been listening to Alex Jones and Coast to Coast....LLOL


    Yes,Ginger.there is a NWO,and yes,its far too late.go back to sleep or the Gray aliens will anal-probe you.
     
  19. kogneto

    kogneto The Skeptic

    280
    0
    the only NWO I'm concerned about is Anonymous of which I'm already a member...or am I?:sssh:
     
  20. pdx210

    pdx210 Well-Known Member

    320
    0
    i know someone that knows someone who's a member and there was a meeting a in the USA several years 2-3 years ago in the USA i want to see if he knows where it was held cuz i do