Saturday, January 31, 2009

New Religion for a New World

New Religion for a New World

By Lorin Smith

Founder of Christian Research Projects


Two developments have become obvious to observers of the rapidly changing geo-political landscape. We have entered a time of accelerated global transformation, and religion will play a major role in how this new world order will be configured. In short, a new world calls for the creation of a new world religion.

In the construction of this new world order, Christianity will face ideological challenges to the central tenets of its faith unlike anything it has experienced in the previous the previous two millennia. In this new world, all religions must be recognized and acknowledged as legitimate pathways to God. Religious exclusivity, absolutism and dogmatism will be viewed as potential threats to world peace and survival.

Hans Kung, director of the institute of Ecumenical Research at the University of Tubingen, makes this point emphatically in his book, Global Responsibility: In Search of a New World Ethic:

"All the religions of the world today have to recognize their share in responsibility for world peace. And therefore one cannot repeat often enough the thesis for which I have found growing acceptance all over the world: there can ‘be no peace among the nations without peace among the religions. In short, there can be no world peace without religious peace.”

At the 1999 annual meeting of The World Economic Forum, an international think-tank of political, business and academic leaders held in Davos, Switzerland, Dominic Peccoud, Advisor for Socio-Religious Affairs at the International Labour Office (ILO) in Geneva, speaking on the topic “Religion as a Global Phenomenon for the New Millennium,” asserted, “Fundamentalism is a worldwide threat.” The way it has to be countered, he maintained, is to change the view that salvation depends on playing by certain religious rules: everyone is saved.”

Denys Teundroup, Honorary President of the European Buddhist Union, speaking at the same Forum, claimed: “The world is fed up with dogmatic religion but starving for spirituality.”

The Prime Minister of Spain, Jose Maria Aznar shared his vision for a new world order that is free from the threat of religious fundamentalism in the September 21 edition of The Financial Times.

“Our system of values respects all ideas and beliefs. However, we cannot confuse this respect with conferring legitimacy on fanaticisms that prevent us from living together in a civilized manner...We must all contribute to building a system of peace and security without divisions: a system that is today more feasible than at any time in the past. Combating terrorism demands a stronger global order based upon respect for all beliefs."

Andrew Sullivan, writing in the October 7, 2001 edition of The New York Times Magazine, in an article entitled, “This Is A Religious War”, had this to say: “It seems as if there is something inherent in religious monotheism that lends itself to terrorist temptation.” By linking a belief in monotheism to inherent terrorist tendencies, he and other influential reporters make it easier to single out certain groups for espousing beliefs that are seen to be disruptive to world peace and security.

Leaders of transnational corporations also see the value of supporting a global ethic that counters the rise of religious fundamentalism in the new millennium. Reacting to claims that globalization devalues the dignity of the human personality by treating people primarily as commodities to be exploited -- and challenged by the inability of individual nation states to solve the myriad of socio-economic, health and environmental woes with which they are confronted -- both business and political leaders are anxious to forge closer ties with their religious counterparts to work for more equitable and humane solutions. After all, free trade fueled by globalization works best in a secure and peaceful world uninhibited by religious wars and conflicts.

As Patricia Mische, president emeritus of Global Education Associates, in a paper entitled “A World Order Focus for the Role of Religion," explains: "Up until now, antireligious dialogue has focused primarily on developing greater peace and understanding between people from diverse religious traditions, and also, in some cases, on promoting values of peace, social justice, human rights, and ecological integrity. There has not been much focus on the contribution of religions to the development of a more humane world order or more effective global systems. In a period of increasing globalization, such a focus becomes ever more urgent."

At this year’s annual meeting of The World Economic Forum, religious leaders in attendance expressed their desire to work more closely with their business and political counterparts in the building of a just and equitable world order.

"We enthusiastically endorse the project of initiating and continuing dialogue in order to create a framework that integrates leaders of religion, business, politics and civil society. Let us join forces to seize this opportunity.”

However, Alan Morrison, who heads Diakrisis International, a Christian apologetics ministry based in France, in analyzing these current trends, observes:

“What we have here is world governance and world religion beginning to come together in a common utopian purpose to establish a global order without the Christ of the Bible and without the missionary encumbrance of Christian evangelism. The purported reason behind these gatherings is the establishment of peace on Earth," Morrison points out, "but the real intention is the eradication of the Christian gospel."

Since Christianity is essentially evangelistic, there is bound to be an inevitable conflict between the Christian who takes seriously the claims of Jesus Christ that "I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no man comes unto the Father but through Me." (John 14:6) and those who believe that all religions are equally legitimate pathways to God.

In a world that is becoming increasingly globalized by the blending together of economies, peoples, laws, cultures, religions and social ethics, these types of dogmatic religious assertions will not be tolerated.

On the other hand, the misguided rhetoric and tactics of the religious right is about to bear its bitter fruit with its dominionist and "Kingdom Now" theology playing right into the hands of the architects of this new world order.

Suffering from the proverbial “head in the sand, don’t confuse me with the facts” approach to reality, especially when it upsets their comfort-zone, many are completely oblivious to the global developments that will profoundly affect the practice of their faith.

Jesus said to the Jews of his day: “You can discern the face of the sky, how is it that you cannot discern the signs of the times?” We are truly living in the times of prophetic fulfillment as we watch these global events unfold.


The Beast, The Second Beast, & The Dragon (The world shall worship him)

Revelation 13

1And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.

2And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.

3And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

4And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?

5And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.

6And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.

7And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations.

8And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

9If any man have an ear, let him hear.

10He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.

11And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.

12And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.

13And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,

14And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

15And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

16And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

17And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

18Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
There are only two groups
P.S. In Verse 8, it states:
"And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."
  • That implies without equivocation "that all shall worship him", except those whose names are written in the book of the Lamb.
  • Who is "him"? The Dragon, a.k.a. Satan. The one who gave 'his' power to the Beast who came out of the sea.
*Now a distinction has to be made between him, and Him.
him = Satan
Him = God
1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

2Who bare record of the word of God, and of the testimony of Jesus Christ, and of all things that he saw.
3Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time is at hand. .............Revelation 1:1-3.
As it states above in Revelation 1, instructions were given to the Apostle John by His angel to write them down to show "His servants the things which must shortly come to pass". That means that the ones who "keep those things which are written therein" (Book of Revelation) are those that obey His instructions (Keep His Commandments & the testimony of Jesus), and worship God.
And those "whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world", are those that worship Satan.
Henceforth, the people that will worship "him" (Revelation 13:8) are the wicked of the world, the same ones: that hear (will not) the words of this prophecy, and (will not) keep those things which are written therein.
May the Lord give you discernment to faithfully heed His warning, and worship 'only' God. Don't worship the Beasts or the Dragon.
Time is short. The enemy is advancing.

Anti-forum protest turns violent in Geneva

Anti-forum protest turns violent in Geneva

1 hr 20 mins ago

GENEVA – Riot police have fired tear gas at bottle-throwing demonstrators in Geneva protesting against the annual World Economic Forum meeting in the Swiss Alps.

An Associated Press reporter on the scene says the protest was largely peaceful until police blocked the protesters from walking to the center of the city.

Some in the crowd of about 1,000 people threw bottles and police responded with tear gas.

Geneva authorities had denied the anti-capitalist crowd a permit to hold their demonstration Saturday.

Police were attempting to corral protesters into a tight area near Geneva's train station.

The forum is an annual gathering of the world's business and political elite. It is taking place on the other side of Switzerland in the elegant resort of Davos.



by Phillip D. Collins
January 30, 2009

Arguably, all Weltanschauungs are unavoidably religious in character because all of them must proffer a core metaphysical claim. Metaphysical claims have traditionally been the province of religions. The same holds true for the various anti-theistic movements that have sought to create a radically secular Utopian world. This series shall demonstrate the religious character of sociopolitical Utopianism, particularly the revolutionary faith that enshrined science as the chief means for ontologically transplanting heaven within the physical universe and apotheosizing man.

It is with Gnosticism that one finds the proximate origins of sociopolitical Utopianism. The Gnostic trappings of early sociopolitical Utopian movements are demonstrable in the various ideas promoted by Enlightenment luminaries. One case in point is Condorcet's "doctrine of a coming Utopia, where indefinite progress would bring forth a 'natural salvation' of plenty and immortality" (Goeringer, "The Enlightenment, Freemasonry, and the Illuminati"). Condorcet's doctrine of "natural salvation" merely reiterated the Gnostic doctrine of self-salvation.

Another case in point is Enlightenment luminary Voltaire. Linda de Hoyos elaborates on the Gnostic elements of Voltaire's Weltanschaaung:

...Voltaire's own anti-Christian beliefs are exposed in his 1756 short piece, Plato's Dream, where he embraces the ancient gnostic doctrine of the universe. In this exercise, Voltaire not only peddles the complete separation of the material and spiritual world, but upholds the gnostic doctrine that all material reality is inherently evil. The corollary to this doctrine, of course, is that man is thereby excused from all compunctions to be moral, since he is a helpless victim trapped in an evil universe not of his own making. This doctrine was likely the source of Voltaire's world view since as early as 1711, when he was introduced into the Temple of Taste, a secret society of debauchees who then forwarded him to England for further indoctrination in buggery. ("The Enlightenment's Crusade Against Reason")

The Enlightenment also shared Gnosticism's veneration of God's chief opponent. In The Hypostasis of the Archons, an Egyptian Gnostic text, the serpent in Eden is portrayed as humanity's benevolent "Instructor" and "incognito savior" (Raschke 27). Of course, Revelation 12:9 and 20:2 identifies the serpent as Satan, the Adversary of both God and man. Meanwhile, the Hypostasis caricatures Jehovah as "the archon of arrogance" (27). Likewise, the Enlightenment depicted the Devil as man's liberator and God as the oppressive force of superstition. However, the sociopolitical Utopians of the Enlightenment would exalt Satan under his original appellation, Lucifer. Conrad Goeringer elaborates:
If the bible was the holy book of the Christian enlightenment, then the Encyclopedia was the inspiration of the Enlightenment. Here was a compendium of human knowledge dealing with arts, sciences mechanics and philosophy which swelled to some 36 volumes by 1780. Begun by the Atheist Diderot in 1751, the Encyclopedia bore the imprints of Voltaire, Montesque, Rousseau, Buffon, Turgot and others. Gracing the title page of Diderot's compendium in the first edition was a drawing of Lucifer, symbol of light and rebellion, standing beside the masonic symbols of square and compass. ("The Enlightenment, Freemasonry, and the Illuminati")

This veneration of the Devil under his original angelic title constituted the religion of Luciferianism. Like some varieties of Satanism, Luciferianism did not depict the devil as a literal metaphysical entity. Lucifer only symbolized the cognitive powers of man. He was the embodiment of science and reason. It was the Luciferian's religious conviction that these two facilitative forces would dethrone the "superstitious" institutions of God and apotheosize man. This re-conceptualization of Lucifer reiterated the theme of Gnostic immanentization. Lucifer, whom traditional Christianity regards as a spiritual entity, was rendered purely immanent. Now, Lucifer was ontologically transplanted within the human mind, which Enlightenment adherents believed to be a purely corporeal entity.

Diderot's inclusion of Masonic symbols on the title page of Encyclopedia was quite appropriate. Luciferian thought permeated the early Masonic Lodge. In Morals and Dogma, 33rd Degree Freemason Albert Pike expresses unabashed praise for Lucifer:

LUCIFER, the Light-bearer! Strange and mysterious name to give to the Spirit of Darkness! Lucifer, the Son of the Morning! Is it he who bears the Light, and with its splendors intolerable blinds feeble, sensual, or selfish Souls? Doubt it not. (321)
Freemasonry, which enjoyed a certain degree of prominence during the Enlightenment, would play a significant role in disseminating Luciferianism on the popular level as secular humanism. Basically, secular humanism qualifies as an anthropocentric religion and its central precept is synopsized by the Protagorean dictum: "Man is the measure of all things." Whittaker Chambers, former member of the communist underground in America, provides an eloquent summation of secular humanism:

"Humanism is not new. It is, in fact, man's second oldest faith. Its promise was whispered in the first days of Creation under the Tree of the knowledge of Good and Evil: 'Ye shall be as gods.'" (Qutd. in Baker 206)
Indeed, the only logical conclusion that a secular humanist can arrive at is that man is becoming god. It is interesting to note that Diderot, who was ostensibly an atheist, would select religious personages such as Lucifer to adorn his "compendium of human knowledge." Diderot's appropriation of the "symbol of light and rebellion" as a core icon for the title page of Encyclopedia suggests a conception of human knowledge that parallels the fallen angel's hubristic belief that he would make himself "like the Most High" (Isaiah 14:14). Atheism provides the philosophical segue for the enthronement of man as the Most High. This enthronement begins with the recognition of a logical contradiction inherent to atheism. Christian apologist Ravi Zacharias delineates the logical contradiction of atheism:

[Atheism] is not saying, "I do not think there is a God." It is not even saying, "I do not believe there is a God." It is affirming the nonexistence of God. It affirms a negative. It affirms the nonexistence of God... anyone with an introductory course in philosophy recognizes that it is a logical contradiction. How can you affirm a negative in the absolute? It would be like me saying to you, "There is no such thing as a white stone with black dots anywhere in all of the galaxies of this universe." The only way I can affirm that is if I have unlimited knowledge of this universe. So, to affirm an absolute negative is self-defeating because what you are saying is, "I have infinite knowledge in order to say to you, 'There is nobody with infinite knowledge.'" ("Why I am Not an Atheist, Part one," Let My People Think)

The only way to affirm the nonexistence of God is to lay claim to one of his core attributes: omniscience. Philosophically and conceptually, the claimant is already on a slippery slope towards to the belief in self-deification. Ron Carlson and Ed Decker reiterate:

It is philosophically impossible to be an atheist, since to be an atheist you must have infinite knowledge in order to know absolutely that there is no God. But to have infinite knowledge, you would have to be God yourself. It's hard to be God yourself and an atheist at the same time! (17)

Indeed, to conclude with all certainty that there is no transcendent God outside the ontological plane of the physical universe, one must first claim omniscience. However, omniscience is a trait reserved exclusively for deities. Therefore, the claimant must conclude that he or she is a god. In this sense, atheism is not the rejection of a deity. Atheism is but a philosophical segue for the ontological relocation of God within man himself. Herein is the occult conception of man as an emergent deity.

Sources Cited:
1 - Baker, Jeffrey. Cheque Mate: The Game of Princes. Springdale, PA: Whitaker House, 1995.2 - de Hoyos, Linda. "The Enlightenment's Crusade Against Reason." American Almanac 8 Feb.1993.3 - Goeringer, Conrad. "The Enlightenment, Freemasonry, and the Illuminati.” American Atheists 2006.4 - Pike, Albert. Morals and Dogma. 1871. Richmond, Virginia: L.H. Jenkins, Inc., 1942.5 - Zacharias, Ravi "Why I am Not an Atheist, Part One." Let My People Think

© 2009 - Phillip D. Collins - All Rights Reserved


World Social Forum tells Davos to fix crisis -- or else

A nun cheers Paraguay's President Fernando Lugo during a conference with members of Brazil's Landless Movement

World Social Forum tells Davos to fix crisis -- or else
2 hours ago

BELEM, Brazil (AFP) — Leftwing leaders and groups attending the World Social Forum in Brazil have dealt an ultimatum to political and corporate chiefs meeting at the same time in the Swiss resort of Davos: fix this crisis -- or else.

Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said at the event in Belem that it was urgent for the rich nations "to resolve this crisis so the poor countries can develop."

But he warned against worrying signs of protectionism, saying: "It's not fair that, now that the rich countries are in crisis, they forget their talk about free trade."

The presidents of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and Paraguay echoed his comments putting the blame for the worldwide turbulence on developed nations, particularly the United States.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez also urged the forum's 100,000 particpants to "go on the offensive" to counter free trade pacts and other US-sponsored neoliberal economic initiatives in Latin America.

Unions needed no encouragement. They said capitalism was on the ropes and that government efforts around the world to revive it were misguided.

Mass lay-offs were likely to lead to street violence that could presage a fundamental shake-up of society, they said.

"It's obvious the effects of this crisis will be large-scale social conflicts," Martha Martinez, the Americas director for the World Federation of Unions, told trade unionists.

Many of the labor, environmental, religious, indigenous and charity groups represented at the World Social Forum felt emboldened by the shifts being felt around the globe.

The more optimistic said they expected a fairer world would emerge, one where wealth was more evenly distributed.

"I think the future of the planet is socialist," said Sonia Latge, the political science director for Brazil's Workers' Central of Brazil.

Others, though, acknowledged that the changes were unpredictable -- and brought their share of pain.

"There is a very important risk of a cut in public aid," Jean-Louis Vielajus, the head of a French NGO umbrella organization called Coordination SUD, told AFP.

"There is a sense of injustice" that so many billions were being spent on shoring up the battered world financial system while so little was going to fight poverty, deforestation, hunger and sickness, he added.

Taciana Gouveia, the head of the Brazilian Association of NGOs (ABONG), said Brazil's associations were not yet in need, "but we will probably see problems in 2010 or afterwards -- especially if things get worse."

Seen as key to the direction of the world's future economic policies was new US President Barack Obama, who is hastening another massive bail-out for his country, which was at the epicenter of the crisis.

"He still has to prove himself. But what he's said in his speeches, his actions -- up to now, it's a very good sign," Cassandre Blier of the World University Service of Canada, an international development organization, told AFP.

The World Social Forum was to wrap up Sunday after a final round of talks, shows and meetings among participants.

Despite its sprawling, semi-organized nature, participants lauded the opportunity it presented to coordinate strategies and build partnerships, especially in this time of upheaval.

"It's positive that the forum exists and continues to exist," said Gouveia.

World Economic Forum's Religious Leaders Community calls for Middle East Peace

World Economic Forum's Religious Leaders Community calls for Middle East Peace
Mark Adams, Managing Director, Head of Communications,

Tel.: +41 (0)22 869 1212;

• Religious Leaders Community of the Forum urges end to conflict in the Middle East

• They call on political leaders to include the voice of religion in the peace process

• Learn more about the Forum’s Community of Global Religious Leaders

• Follow the Annual Meeting online at

– join the Davos Debates, watch webcast sessions, read session reports, download photos, twitter, participate in press conferences

Davos-Klosters, Switzerland, 30 January 2009 − The Community of Religious Leaders associated with the World Economic Forum has issued a statement at the Annual Meeting 2009 calling for peace in the Middle East. The statement reads:


The Community of Religious Leaders associated with the World Economic Forum, committed to justice, dignity and mutual respect for all, expresses its deep distress at the pain of innocents suffering everywhere.

In particular, the land that is holy to the Abrahamic religions has recently seen great death and destruction. While this conflict is a territorial conflict, all too often religion has been exploited and made part of the problem.

Therefore, the Community believes passionately that religion must be part of the solution. Indeed, no solution will be possible without such engagement.

Accordingly, the Community of Religious Leaders calls on the political leadership to engage the religious representatives of the three Abrahamic faiths – specifically the Council of the Religious Leaders of the Holy Land – as partners in a search for a settlement which will lead to two independent states living in peace and free from violence, incitement and terror.

The Community supports all initiatives to bring peace to the Middle East, the most recent of which is President Obama’s appointment of a special envoy, Senator George Mitchell, for whose success we pray.”


The World Economic Forum is an independent international organization committed to improving the state of the world by engaging leaders in partnerships to shape global, regional and industry agendas.

Incorporated as a foundation in 1971, and based in Geneva, Switzerland, the World Economic Forum is impartial and not-for-profit; it is tied to no political, partisan or national interests (

He that denieth me before men shall be denied before the angels of God.

8Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God:

9But he that denieth me before men shall be denied before the angels of God.

10And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not be forgiven.

11And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye shall say:

12For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour what ye ought to say.

Luke 12:8-12.

Friday, January 30, 2009



By Chuck Baldwin
January 30, 2009

In my last column, I attempted to wake up my fellow Americans, who are either currently slumbering through the collapse of our constitutional republic or in a protracted state of denial regarding a very real--and very dangerous--burgeoning New World Order. The information that I need to disseminate on this matter is so plentiful that it is extremely difficult to condense into one column. Therefore, I must at least attempt to provide a little more information on this subject. I will use this column to do just that.

I already quoted former President George Herbert Walker Bush in my previous column. Here are more of his quotes. In 1991, Bush, Sr. said, "My vision of a New World Order foresees a United Nations with a revitalized peacekeeping function." In 1992, he said, "It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegiance."

Wow! I thought U.S. Presidents, as well as all civil magistrates and military personnel, swore an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution. Not in Bush's mind, obviously.

On January 25, 1993, Warren Christopher, the new Secretary of State under Bill Clinton, told CNN: "We must get the New World Order on track and bring the U.N. into its correct role in regards to the United States."

In 1958, Cleon Skousen, a former FBI agent (a man I was fortunate enough to get to know before his death), wrote a book entitled "The Naked Communist." In it, he outlined the long-term communist agenda. Since then, the movers and shakers of the New World Order have successfully achieved many of these goals within the U.S. Here are some samples of those goals:

* Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
* Provide American aid to all nations regardless of Communist domination.
* Promote the U.N. as the only hope for mankind.
* Capture one or both of the political parties in the United States.
* Get control of the schools.
* Infiltrate the press.
* Gain control of key positions in radio, TV, and motion pictures.
* Break down cultural standards of morality.
* Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with social religion.
* Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.

Is there anyone who cannot see that the purveyors of the New World Order have largely achieved most of their goals? All they need to do now is tie it all together under one governmental umbrella.

One of the organizations that is at the forefront of promoting the New World Order is the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). In my last column, I showed how the CFR dominates the Presidencies of both Republican and Democratic administrations (including the current one), as well as the Federal Reserve. I would even go so far as to say that the CFR is a very "clear and present danger" to the sovereignty and independence of the United States.

For example, CFR member and UN spokesman, Walt Rostow, said, "It is, therefore, an American interest to see an end to nationhood."

The American people need to wake up to the fact that the international banking interests that dominate our political and financial entities are working tirelessly to "see an end to nationhood." I am talking about the Rothschilds and Warburgs of Europe, and the houses of J.P. Morgan, Kuhn, Loeb, Schiff, Lehman, and Rockefeller.

Rear Admiral Chester Ward, who was the Judge Advocate General of the Navy from 1956-1960 and a former member of the CFR who pulled out after realizing what they were all about, warned the American people about the dangers of this and similar organizations (such as the Trilateral Commission). He said, "The most powerful clique in these elitist groups have one objective in common--they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the national independence of the United States. A second clique of international members in the CFR . . . comprises the Wall Street international bankers and their key agents. Primarily, they want the world banking monopoly from whatever power ends up in the control of global government."

Admiral Ward also said, "The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all powerful, one world government."

Remember, the CFR was incorporated in 1921 and is currently comprised of only about 4,000 members. The CFR was co-founded by Edward Mandell House and John D. Rockefeller. Colonel (an honorary title--he was not a military colonel) House had been the chief advisor of President Woodrow Wilson. Historians often call House "Wilson's alter ego" due to the powerful influence he held over the President. House was a rabid Marxist, whose goal was to socialize the United States. In his book, "Philip Dru: Administrator," House said he was working for "socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx."

House's stated goals were to incorporate a gradual income tax upon the backs of the American people for the purpose of establishing a state-controlled central bank. Both of these goals were accomplished in 1913, the very first year of the House-dominated Wilson administration.

House's blueprint became the foundation for the CFR. What was not accomplished by the proposed League of Nations at the end of World War I was realized with the formation of the United Nations at the end of World War II. Not by accident, much of the original funding for the CFR came from Rockefeller and J. P. Morgan. President Franklin D. Roosevelt gave CFR members much authority in his administration, and they have pretty much dominated the foreign and financial policies of the United States ever since.

In the April, 1974 edition of the CFR publication, "Foreign Affairs," Columbia University Professor and CFR member Richard Gardner wrote a column entitled, "The Hard Road to World Order." In it, he called for "an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece." He named the following organizations that would help fulfill that objective: the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the Law of the Sea Conference, the World Food Conference, the World Population Conference, and of course, the United Nations. I would also include NAFTA, the World Trade Organization (WTO), the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), CAFTA, etc.

The CFR has a sister organization called the Trilateral Commission (TC). This group was co-founded by the Marxist, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and David Rockefeller. Like Gardner, Brzezinski calls for a piecemeal "movement toward a larger community of the developed nations . . . through a variety of indirect ties and already developing limitations on national sovereignty." (Source: Brzezinski, Between Two Ages, p. 296)

Brzezinski is also a major proponent (along with CFR member Robert Pastor) of the North American Community (or Union), whose construction began during the second term of President George W. Bush and continues today under President Barack Obama.

Here is a sample list of the notable dignitaries in and out of government who hold (or held) membership in the CFR or TC (and sometimes both):

George Herbert Walker Bush. Bill Clinton. Sandra Day O'Connor. Dick Cheney. Les Aspin. Colin Powell. Robert Gates. Brent Scowcroft. Jesse Jackson, Sr. Mario Cuomo. Dan Rather. Tom Brokaw. David Brinkley. John Chancellor. Marvin Kalb. Diane Sawyer. Barbara Walters. Cyrus Vance. Paul Volcker. Henry Kissinger. George Schultz. Alan Greenspan. Madeleine Albright. Roger Altman. Bruce Babbitt. Howard Baker. Samuel Berger. Elaine Chao. Dianne Feinstein. Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Chuck Hagel. Gary Hart. John McCain. George Mitchell. Bill Moyers. Jay Rockefeller. Donna Shalala. Strobe Talbott. Fred Thompson. Robert Zoellick. Richard Nixon. Hubert H. Humphrey. George McGovern. Gerald Ford. Jimmy Carter. John Anderson. Walter Mondale. Michael Dukakis. Al Gore. John Kerry.

It is absolutely essential that we stop looking at potential leaders as either Democrats or Republicans, or as conservatives or liberals. Those monikers mean very little today. We must start identifying people as either Americans or globalists. Either they believe in an independent, sovereign, self-governing United States of America, or they believe in supranational government and internationalism. Either they believe in devotion to the U.S. Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence, or they believe in the goals and objectives of the United Nations. We must rid ourselves of the propensity to support those who classify themselves as "conservatives," and we must stop blindly supporting the GOP "because it is a 'conservative' party." If they do not understand AND OPPOSE the New World Order, they do not deserve our support or our vote!

George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George H.W. Bush laid the foundation for everything that Barack Obama is doing to facilite the New World Order. That two of these Presidents are Democrats and two are Republicans only proves my point: both the Democratic and Republican parties have succumbed to New World Order ideology.

There is more that we can do, of course, but I will save the bulk of that discussion for another day. In the meantime, we need to realize that the New World Order exists, to understand that both major parties are collaborating to facilitate its creation, to start looking at leaders as either Americans or globalists, and to refuse to support the latter in any shape, manner, or form.

Pastors need to start warning their people about the New World Order (and the Biblical principles relating to it) from their pulpits--loud and often! People need to start warning their family members and friends. We need to start searching out like-minded patriots--who understand what's going on--for information and encouragement. And remember this: WE CAN DEFEAT THE NEW WORLD ORDER. Yes, we can!

The fatalistic view that we are helpless is a bunch of baloney! Our forefathers defeated the New World Order in their day. The globalists have been stymied many times through the years. The fact that they have not yet totally achieved their globalistic objectives shows us that it is possible to stop them, or at the very least, set their agenda backward.

I also urge my Christian brothers and sisters to rid themselves of the propensity to say, "This is God's will; there is nothing we can do about it." That, too, is hooey!

Christians are to be the "salt of the earth." Salt is a preservative, a retardant against decay. We are instructed to be faithful "unto death." In Romans chapter 3, the Apostle Paul made it clear that we must never support evil that good may come. I would remind my brethren that refusing to resist evil is the same as supporting it. Sitting back complacently and saying, "This must happen so Jesus can come," borders on blasphemy. It runs counter to everything the Bible teaches. We Christians have a duty, an obligation to do right with no regard to outcome or consequences.

When asked when He would establish His Kingdom on the earth, the first thing out of Jesus' mouth was, "It is not for you to know." Yet, many Christians presume to know the times and seasons of Christ's return. But let's be honest with ourselves and admit that we do NOT know. To sit back and say that we have full understanding of Bible prophecy and can say for certain what God does or does not want to accomplish in and through our country is the height of arrogance and pride. Only God knows those things. It's time we let God be God and start doing what is ours to do.

What we do know is any attempt at establishing global government is as wicked now as it was at the Tower of Babel. As Christians, we are instructed to resist the wicked one. We must oppose him and his work. We are told to "occupy" until Christ returns, whenever that is. To "occupy" means to "take care of business." God expects us to follow His teaching and do what is ours to do. To use Christ's coming as an excuse to not "take care of business" is itself inexcusable!

As John Quincy Adams said, "Duty is ours; results are God's." If we would truly do our duty, who knows what God would do to help us defeat (for the sake of our children and grandchildren) this devilish New World Order?

As for me and my house, we will fight for a free, independent and sovereign United States--so that we might walk, work, and worship in freedom--as long as we have breath in our being. How about you?

P.S. Several readers informed me that Michael Savage began acknowledging the New World Order on his radio show last year. Some said he has even spoken against it. This is good news. If only the rest of the so-called "conservative" talking heads would do the same thing--but in a more aggressive fashion: you know, like America's freedom depended on it, because it does.

P.P.S. Dennis Cuddy wrote a good chronological history of the New World Order, which covers its progression through the twentieth century. It can be viewed here.

© 2009 Chuck Baldwin - All Rights Reserved

Thursday, January 29, 2009

The death of cash = the death of liberty



The death of cash = the death of liberty

Posted: January 29, 2009
12:56 am Eastern

© 2009

Recently, I upgraded my wireless phone. My previous PDA, which I had replaced once already when the touch screen mysteriously stopped responding, developed a serious problem: The USB port through which the charger connected suddenly broke, leaving me with what would be a dead phone as soon as the battery discharged. At lunch time, I hurried to my wireless carrier's nearest outlet and signed up for an upgrade, leaving me with a stylish Blackberry in my pocket and the promise of a fairly significant rebate from the company.

When the rebate finally arrived, I opened the envelope expecting a check. Already, in my head, I was making plans to go to the bank and cash it. You can imagine my surprise, then, when what I found inside the envelope was a Visa card.

Whether the rebate I was to receive was specified up front as coming in this form, I don't recall. The immediate reason for sending a Visa card rather than cutting me a simple check is abundantly clear. I'm quite sure the company hopes some small portion of my card's available balance will be left over when I make a purchase. No doubt there is someone at the accounting department at my wireless provider who is even now ticking off in his head the leftover dollars and cents from various balances that will never be spent. Think about it: If you know your "promotional Visa card" has a balance of $100, and you purchase something worth almost but not quite that much, are you really going to ask the clerk to charge, say, $2 and change to one card, then pay the remainder of the overage some other way?

Especially in today's tough economy, this type of maneuver is not surprising. The average retailer counts on some percentage of gift cards sold at the holidays never to be used, or never to be used fully. Those unused funds are pure profit. I don't think any of us really blames a commercial entity for trying to make a few extra dollars where it can, though in the case of my "rebate" it feels particularly cheap and annoying.

There is a much more insidious reason for issuing such cards, however. It is the same reason many stores issue magnetic-strip or even RFID shopper's cards and key tags, trading price reductions and store promotions for the use of that card or tag. That reason is control.

Information is power. The ability to track your purchases, to build a database of what you buy, to compile a profile of information about you, what you do and what you like is the establishment of some amount of power over you. I remember how disturbed I was when I learned, years ago, that my video rental store kept a running database of every movie I had ever rented from them. I use a shopper's club card at my local grocery store; that chain compiles a list of my purchases and sends me targeted coupons accordingly. Somewhere, floating in the ether of some credit card company's computers, is a list of every hotel chain I've ever visited, and every car I've ever rented. Don't like it? You don't have much choice. Try renting a car or paying for a hotel room with cold, hard cash. They'll gladly take your money when you check out or return the vehicle, but they insist on a "major credit card" when securing or reserving your purchase for you.

The death of cash represents the death of freedom in our society. Where previously those who wished to buy goods or services without a record of the transaction could always pay cash, it is now increasingly difficult to do so. We are willful participants in this trend toward tracked, electronic commerce, too: Very, very few of us even pay with actual cash anymore. I spent some time watching the checkout at a Starbucks not long ago, and every single person who bought coffee paid with a card. Not one of them had actual cash. Whether using credit or debit, every last one of them waved a magnetic-strip-equipped piece of plastic at the clerk.

The widespread use of electronic commerce creates increased vulnerability to hacking, identity theft and cybercrime. Your credit card is protected against unauthorized transactions, often at no expense to you. Let's hope your debit card, linked to your actual checking account, is similarly protected. ChannelWeb reported recently that Heartland Payment Systems, a credit card processing company, had experienced a "breach" of its computer systems thought to be the work of an "international cybercime ring." More than 100 million accounts were compromised, or at least potentially so, in what could be the worst security breach of such a data system in history.

The Heartland breach was high-profile and made national news. Much smaller but similar incidents occur every day. I've had a couple of cards canceled and replaced after they were compromised at a "third party location." My father had a few mysterious items like electric guitars and other musical instruments show up at his house, unsolicited – after a hacker got his card data and started sending purchases to the billing address in the account. I worked at a firm not that long ago whose credit card account was hacked and used to purchase computers that were then shipped to Ireland, of all places. We've all experienced it or we know someone who has. The problem is only going to become more common.

The threats of increased tracking (and therefore control) over your consumer behavior, coupled with the increased security risks of electronic commerce, make using cash more attractive an option than ever before. Society, however, is conspiring against those of us who seek to pay with real money rather than virtual zeros and ones. The death of cash is the death of liberty. We must all fight this particular aspect of technological "progress" unless we wish to attend the funeral for our financial freedom.

New Legislation Authorizes FEMA Camps In U.S.

A new bill introduced in Congress authorizes the Department of Homeland Security to set up a network of FEMA camp facilities to be used to house U.S. citizens in the event of a national emergency.

The National Emergency Centers Act or HR 645 mandates the establishment of “national emergency centers” to be located on military installations for the purpose of to providing “temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster,” according to the bill.

The legislation also states that the camps will be used to “provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations”.

Ominously, the bill also states that the camps can be used to “meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security,” an open ended mandate which many fear could mean the forced detention of American citizens in the event of widespread rioting after a national emergency or total economic collapse.

Many credible forecasters have predicted riots and rebellions in America that will dwarf those already witnessed in countries like Iceland and Greece.

With active duty military personnel already being stationed inside the U.S. under Northcom, partly for purposes of “crowd control,” fears that Americans could be incarcerated in detainment camps are all too real.

The bill mandates that six separate facilities be established in different Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions (FEMA) throughout the country.

The camps will double up as “command and control” centers that will also house a “24/7 operations watch center” as well as training facilities for Federal, State, and local first responders.

The bill also contains language that will authorize camps to be established within closed or already operating military bases around the country.

As we have previously highlighted, in early 2006 Halliburton subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root was awarded a $385 million dollar contract by Homeland Security to construct detention and processing facilities in the event of a national emergency.

The language of the preamble to the agreement veils the program with talk of temporary migrant holding centers, but it is made clear that the camps would also be used “as the development of a plan to react to a national emergency.”

As far back as 2002, FEMA sought bids from major real estate and engineering firms to construct giant internment facilities in the case of a chemical, biological or nuclear attack or a natural disaster.

Leaders Seek Global Financial Regulator

Europe January 9, 2009, 8:23PM EST

Leaders Seek Global Financial Regulator

Angela Merkel and Nicholas Sarkozy call for a new economic body similar to the U.N. Security Council—and warn the U.S. not to stand in the way

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicholas Sarkozy have warned the US not to block attempts to build an international financial regulator, calling for a new economic body similar to the UN's Security Council.

"I've always in my political life been a supporter of a close alliance with the United States but let's be clear: in the 21st century, a single nation can no longer say what we must do or what we must think," said Mr Sarkozy at an international symposium in Paris on Thursday (8 January), shortly before US president-elect Barack Obama enters office.

The French leader had originally called the Paris meeting – "New World, New Capitalism" – a global "summit," but limited his ambitions after few international leaders deigned to attend.

"We'll take our decisions on 2 April in London," he went on, referring to an upcoming meeting of the G20. "Perhaps the United States will join us in this change."

Ms Merkel, also in attendance at the conference, echoed the French president's warning to Washington.

"No country can act alone in this day and age, not even the United States, however powerful they may be," she said, Deutsche Welle reports.

She said that hopes that out of the economic crisis, governments can construct a new architecture for managing global capitalism.

"Our response [to the economic crisis] must be more than a few rules," she said. "The crisis is an opportunity to create an international architecture of institutions."

Global economic charter

The chancellor said the world needs an "economic council" in the United Nations as well as the existing body that deals with security matters.

"It is possible that alongside the [UN] Security Council, we could also have an economic council," she said, adding that alongside the UN Charter, an economic sustainability charter "for a long-term reasonable economy" should be drafted establishing rules for global financial governance.

"Our response must be more than a few rules," she added. "The crisis is an opportunity to create an international architecture of institutions."

The centre-right German leader also warned businesses there was no returning to laissez-faire approaches by governments once the crisis has passed.

"Once everything is going better, the financial markets will tell us: 'you politicians don't need to get involved because everything is working again'," she said, according to the Guardian. "I will stay firm, we must not repeat the mistakes of the past."

Mr Sarkozy warned that capitalism could collapse if it is not restructured. "Either we re-found capitalism or we destroy it," he said. "Purely financial capitalism has perverted the logic of is amoral. It is a system where the logic of the market excuses everything."

Former UK prime minister Tony Blair, a co-sponsor of the symposium, echoed the European leaders: "what is unavoidable in the longer term is a recasting of the system of international supervision."

"We have mid-20th-century international institutions governing a 21st century world," he added. "The reform of the IMF, the World Bank, the financial regulatory system [is] long overdue."

The meeting came as Germany announced it is to inject a further €10 billion into Commerzbank, in return for a 25 percent stake in the bank, while France offered another €10.5 billion for its six main banks.

Provided by EUobserver—For the latest EU related news

How realistic is a North American currency?

How realistic is a North American currency?

Commentary: Uniting U.S., Canada, Mexico money could result from crisis

By Todd Harrison

Last update: 6:12 a.m. EST Jan. 28, 2009
"World, hold on. Instead of messing with our future, open up inside." -- Bob Sinclair

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Thomas Jefferson once said: "When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hang on." As the global financial system pushes on a string, investors are desperately trying to hold tight.

The New World Order is upon us, full of hope, promise and a fair amount of fear. In our recent discussion regarding the direction of our country, we noted the risks of catering to conventional wisdom and the implications for the U.S. dollar.See MarketWatch column on New World Order.

The Minyanville mantra is to provide financial news you need to know before you know you need it. That's a fine line to walk, as foresight often flies in the face of mainstream acceptance.

In 2006, it seemed counterintuitive to forecast a "prolonged socioeconomic malaise entirely more depressing than a recession." See Minyanville column.

For years, the notion of an "invisible hand" was conspiracy theory until we learned that the Working Group on Financial Markets was a central policy tool. See Minyanville column.

And now, as we gaze across our historically significant horizon, we must open our minds to thoughts and ideas that may seem foreign to folks conditioned by the past and stunned by the present.

Currency crossroads
As governments take on more risk -- as they price assets on behalf of the market and transfer debt from private to public -- the common denominator, or release valve, becomes the currency.

If our economic condition is allowed to take medicine in the form of debt destruction, the greenback will appreciate, and asset classes as a whole will deflate. If we continue to inject drugs that mask symptoms rather than address the disease, the likelihood of a seismic readjustment increases in kind.

The deflationary forces in the marketplace are pervasive, and the "other side" of our current equation, hyperinflation, may be years away. Given the magnitude, breadth and pace of the global financial epidemic, however, we must explore each side of the twisted ride.
Years ago, the Federal Reserve wrote a "solution paper" regarding the need to combat zero-bound interest rates. The concern was the flight of capital from the U.S. and an option discussed was a two-tiered currency, one for U.S citizens and one for foreigners.

Canadian economist Herbert Grubel first introduced a potential manifestation of this concept in 1999. The North American Currency -- called the "Amero" in select circles -- would effectively comingle the Canadian dollar, U.S. dollar and Mexican peso.
On its face, while difficult to imagine, it makes intuitive sense. The ability to combine Canadian natural resources, American ingenuity and cheap Mexican labor would allow North America to compete better on a global stage.

Experience has taught us, however, that perceived solutions introduced by policy makers and politicians don't always have the desired effect.
Unintended consequences
I've long contended that, much like the Internet prophecy proved true -- but not before the tech crash -- so too would globalization, albeit not without painful-yet-necessary debt destruction.
To get through this, we need to go through this. If we're not allowed to go through it, foreigners will seek alternative avenues. Remember, for holders of dollar-denominated assets, seeds of discontent have been sowing under the surface for years, with the greenback off 30% since 2002.
More likely than not, global leaders will watch how our new administration attempts to tackle the financial crisis before taking drastic steps. They understand that co-dependent risk exists as a function of the derivatives that interweave our financial infrastructure. If they could disassociate from our economic ecosystem without inflicting massive damage on themselves, they would have done so long ago.

If forward policy attempts to induce more debt rather than allowing savings and obligations to align, we must respect the potential for a system shock. We may need to let a two-tier currency gain traction if the dollar meaningfully debases from current levels.

If this dynamic plays out -- and I've got no insight that it will -- the global balance of powers would fragment into four primary regions: North America, Europe, Asia and the Middle East. In such a scenario, ramifications would manifest through social unrest and geopolitical conflict.

This particular path isn't something one would wish for, but the cumulative imbalances that steadily built in our finance-based economy must be resolved one way or another. Therein lies the critical crossroads we together face as our wary world attempts to find its way.

Scary? Yes. Probable? Not so much, at least for the time being. Possible? Certainly, although I'll again offer that it could take years before the pieces of this prickly puzzle fall into place.
Effective money management dictates weighing the entire probability spectrum of potential outcomes and factoring them into our decision making process. While the notion of a seismic currency shift may seem obscure, we must respect the possibility long before it becomes front-page news.

For if we've learned anything through the last few years, proactive thought provocation is a necessary precursor to effective preparedness.

Towards a Canada-EU Economic/Trade Agreement and Beyond

Towards a Canada-EU Economic/Trade Agreement and Beyond

By Dana Gabriel

After dodging a bullet and almost being defeated late last year, Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government recently tabled their much anticipated budget. It included a massive $85 billion deficit over the next five years. The Liberals have proposed an amendment that would hold the government more accountable, in order to ensure that budgetary funds are being used accordingly. If expectations are not met, the Liberals have said that they are prepared to bring down the Harper minority government. It came out during the election in October of 2008, that the Conservatives were set to begin negotiations with the European Union (EU) on deeper economic integration. In spite of the current global economic uncertainty, Canadian and EU officials are busy laying the groundwork for an economic and trade agreement, and negotiations could begin in the next several months.

It is expected that an economic and trade agreement with the EU could be massive and far-reaching, dwarfing NAFTA in size and scope. It would not be limited to the exchange of goods and services and could include labour mobility, as well as harmonization of standards and regulations. On a North American front, harmonization of regulations is being achieved through the Security and Prosperity Partnership. A principal demand by the EU is that Canadian provinces open up their procurement programs to European bidders. This would allow EU companies to bid as equals on government contracts. There has been some resistance from the provinces on this issue, which could put any such agreement in jeopardy. Stockwell Day, Canadian Minister of International Trade, stated that he is confident that the provinces will commit to such demands. The EU is also looking for a bilateral securities agreement. Canada currently does not have a national securities regulator, but one is expected to be in place before any negotiations would be completed. Many believe that Canada has been too fixated with U.S. and even Mexico initiatives, and as a result, not enough attention has been spent trying to partner up with the EU.

The annual Canada-EU Summit is set for May and will be held in Prague, Czech Republic and at that time formal negotiations for an economic and trade agreement could begin. It is also expected that the recently concluded Canada-EU Air Transport Agreement will be signed at the summit. It is set to be implemented in different phases and does not immediately include further raising foreign ownership limits in the airline sector. At a later time this agreement could even allow Canadian and European carriers to fly domestic routes in each other’s markets. It is believed that this deal is meant to put further pressure on the U.S. to agree on upgrading its own open skies agreement with the EU. A Canada-EU economic and trade agreement that goes beyond NAFTA, could later include the U.S. and Mexico. This is a scenario whereby the NAFTA model could be expanded and extended across the Atlantic. The current economic turmoil has seen a rise in European protectionism, but there still appears to be a desire by some, to further push trade liberalization initiatives.

In April of 2007, the U.S.-EU reached a deal on a new Transatlantic Economic Partnership. They agreed to work towards eliminating non-tariff barriers and increasing trade and investment, thus further laying the foundation for a U.S.-EU single market. In an effort to help streamline harmonization on regulations, the Transatlantic Economic Council was also created at the same time. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, a known globalist and one-worlder, has been calling for more trade liberalization in the form of a transatlantic free trade zone. It is important to understand that economic integration was the first step in the creation of the EU. With a new American president, there is a move to further strengthen transatlantic ties.

Many believe that Barack Obama’s presidency is a turning point in not only American, but world history, one that could signal a new era of international cooperation. Jose Barroso, the President of the European Commission, envisions a more ambitious globalization agenda and a ‘New Deal’ between the U.S.-EU. This would further foster multilateralism in areas of trade, security and climate change. EU officials have also proposed a global system for trading carbon credits. They are calling on developed countries and most notably the U.S. to sign on in an effort to curb greenhouse gas emissions. Others like British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy are calling for a new global financial order. Recently, former U.S. Secretary of State and perpetual government insider, Henry Kissinger said that under Obama, there is an opportunity for a New World Order.

The global elite are making their move and they will pose as our loving saviours and offer their solution. World leaders, pundits, hacks and minions, are busy calling for a new global financial order and a New World Order. They recognize that the people are waking up to their lies, so they are accelerating plans for world government. Globalization and free trade, as well as IMF and World Bank loans, have been used to enslave the population and destroy national sovereignty. The notion of real choice is now more of an illusion. Minus the rhetoric and petty squabbles, it’s the same policies, same agenda, and the same team. Obama could be used to pitch a New World Order to the masses. This might not be the change that many had envisioned.

Rule by Secrecy

Rule by Secrecy:

Hidden History That Connects the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, and the Great Pyramids,


Publisher: HarperCollins Children's Books
Pub. Date: March 2001
ISBN-13: 9780060931841
Sales Rank: 11,401
Series: Harper Perennial

What secrets connect Egypt's Great Pyramids, the Freemasons, and the Council on Foreign Relations? In this astonishing book, celebrated journalist Jim Marrs examines the world's most closely guarded secrets, tracing the history of clandestine societies and the power they have wielded – from the ancient mysteries to modern–day conspiracy theories.

Searching for truth, he uncovers disturbing evidence that the real movers and shakers of the world collude covertly to start and stop wars, manipulate stock markets, maintain class distinctions, and even censor the news. Provocative and utterly compelling, Rule by Secrecy offers a singular worldview that may explain who we are, where we came from, and where we are going.

Award-winning journalist Jim Marrs is the New York Times bestselling author of Rule by Secrecy, Alien Agenda, and Crossfire—which served as a basis for the Oliver Stone film JFK. He lives in Texas.

Archdiocese responds to reports of federal sex abuse probe

updated 4 hours, 3 minutes ago

Archdiocese responds to reports of federal sex abuse probe

LOS ANGELES, California (CNN) -- Federal prosecutors have launched an investigation into whether leaders of the Los Angeles archdiocese committed fraud by failing to properly deal with charges of priests molesting children, two law-enforcement sources told CNN.

The archdiocese said it has been contacted by the U.S. attorney's office for information on individual priests.

The Los Angeles Times and Wall Street Journal on Wednesday reported that Cardinal Roger M. Mahony is specifically targeted in a grand jury investigation -- citing unnamed government sources.

U.S. Attorney Thomas P. O'Brien is personally involved in the probe, according to the reports.

In a written statement, the Catholic archdiocese on Wednesday defended its actions. It said the archdiocese has been contacted by the U.S. attorney's office for "information about a number of individual priests" -- two who are dead and none of whom are active in the clergy.

"The archdiocese is not aware of any fact or set of facts that would support a responsible federal investigation of the archdiocese or of Cardinal Roger Mahony," said the statement.

Don't Miss
Pope outrages Jews over Holocaust denier

While calling the Catholic church's history of sex-abuse "regrettable," the statement said abuse reports have served as a catalyst for reforms in the L.A. archdiocese.

"Under Cardinal Mahony's leadership, the archdiocese has become a model for organizations nationwide in the education, training and detection of every aspect of abuse," it said.

Advocates for victims of clergy abuse, however, were welcoming news of a possible probe.

Esther Miller, spokeswoman for Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, called an investigation long overdue.

"Cardinal Mahony's cover up record was well documented; there is a lot of evidence out there ... ," she said. "People thought they were getting good priests, and indeed they were not. Cardinal Mahony knew this.

"Something has to change in order to protect kids at all costs."

For years, the Los Angeles district attorney's office has had an open investigation looking into sex abuse against children by members of the clergy. But Sandi Gibbons, of the district attorney's office, told CNN that the office has run into "statutory problems and corroboration issues," because many of the alleged crimes happened so long ago.

The archdiocese, with 288 parishes in 120 cities throughout southern California, serves more than 4 million Catholics, according to its Web site.

Mahony has dealt with accusations he covered up sex-abuse cases for years. Two years ago, the archdiocese agreed to pay $660 million to 508 people who claimed they were victims of abuse by priests.

The archdiocese criticized unnamed government sources for apparently leaking news of an investigation to the media.

"The leak by the government is unprofessional and violates Department of Justice guidelines concerning on-going investigations," Michael Hennigan, an attorney for the archdiocese, said in a written statement.

The archdiocese is calling for an investigation "to determine the extent and depth of misconduct by those who were responsible for the leak," according to the statement.



By Patrick Wood
January 29, 2009

[Ed. note: For clarity, members of the Trilateral Commission appear in bold type.]

As previously noted in Pawns of the Global Elite, Barack Obama was groomed for the presidency by key members of the Trilateral Commission. Most notably, it was Zbigniew Brzezinski, co-founder of the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller in 1973, who was Obama's principal foreign policy advisor.

The pre-election attention is reminiscent of Brzezinski's tutoring of Jimmy Carter prior to Carter's landslide election in 1976.

For anyone who doubts the Commission's continuing influence on Obama, consider that he has already appointed no less than nine members of the Commission to top-level and key positions in his Administration.

According to official Trilateral Commission membership lists, there are only 87 members from the United States (the other 337 members are from other regions). Thus, in less than two weeks since his inauguration, Obama's appointments encompass more than 10% of Commission's entire U.S. membership.

Is this a mere coincidence or is it a continuation of dominance over the Executive Branch since 1976? (For important background, read The Trilateral Commission: Usurping Sovereignty.)

1- Secretary of Treasury, Tim Geithner
2- Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice
3- National Security Advisor, Thomas Donilon
4- Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee, Paul Volker
5- Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis C. Blair 6- Assistant Secretary of State, Asia & Pacific, Kurt M. Campbell
7- Deputy Secretary of State, James Steinberg
8- State Department, Special Envoy, Richard Haass***
9- State Department, Special Envoy, Dennis Ross
10- State Department, Special Envoy, Richard Holbrooke

There are many other incidental links to the Trilateral 12- 12- Commission, for instance,

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is married to Commission member William Jefferson Clinton.

Geithner's informal group of advisors include E. Gerald Corrigan, Paul Volker, Alan Greenspan and Peter G. Peterson, among others. His first job after college was with Henry Kissinger at Kissinger Associates.

Brent Scowcroft has been an unofficial advisor to Obama and was mentor to Defense Secretary Robert Gates.

Robert Zoelick is currently president of the World Bank

Laurence Summers, White House Economic Advisor, was mentored by former Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin during the Clinton administration.

There are many other such links, but these are enough for you to get the idea of what's going on here.

Analyze the positions

Notice that five of the Trilateral appointees involve the State Department, where foreign policy is created and implemented. Hillary Clinton is certainly in line with these policies because her husband, Bill Clinton, is also a member.

What is more important than economic recovery? Paul Volker is the answer.

What is more important than national intelligence? Thomas Donilon and Adm. Dennis Blair hold the two top positions.

What is more important than the Treasury and the saving of our financial system? Timothy Geithner says he has the answers.

This leaves Susan Rice, Ambassador to the United Nations. The U.N. is the chosen instrument for ultimate global governance. Rice will help to subvert the U.S. into the U.N. umbrella of vassal states.

Conflict of interest

Since 1973, the Commission has met regularly in plenary sessions to discuss policy position papers developed by its members. Policies are debated in order to achieve consensuses. Respective members return to their own countries to implement policies consistent with those consensuses.

The original stated purpose of the Trilateral Commission was to create a "New International Economic Order." Its current statement has morphed into fostering a "closer cooperation among these core democratic industrialized areas of the world with shared leadership responsibilities in the wider international system." (See The Trilateral Commission web site site)

U.S. Trilateral members implement policies determined by a majority of non-Americans that most often work against the best interests of the country.

"How," you say?

Since the administration of Jimmy Carter, Trilaterals held these massively influential positions:

1. Six out of eight World Bank presidents, including the current appointee, Robert Zoelick
2. Eight out of ten U.S. Trade Representatives
3. President and/or Vice-President of every elected administration
4. Seven out of twelve Secretaries of State
5. Nine out of twelve Secretaries of Defense
6. Is this sinking in? Are you grasping the enormity of it?

Endgame is at hand

For the Trilateral crowd, the game is about over. The recent reemergence of original members Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Brent Scowcroft and Paul Volker serves to reinforce the conclusion that the New International Economic Order is near.

The Trilateral Commission and its members have engineered the global economic, trade and financial system that is currently in a state of total chaos.

Does that mean that they have lost? Hardly.

As I recently wrote in Chorus call for New World Order, they are using the crisis to destroy what remains of national sovereignty, so that a New World Order can finally and permanently be put into place.


The Obama presidency is a disingenuous fraud. He was elected by promising to bring change, yet from the start change was never envisioned. He was carefully groomed and financed by the Trilateral Commission and their friends.

In short, Obama is merely the continuation of disastrous, non-American policies that have brought economic ruin upon us and the rest of the world. The Obama experience rivals that of Jimmy Carter, whose campaign slogan was "I will never lie to you."

When the Democrat base finally realizes that it has been conned again (Bill Clinton and Al Gore were members), perhaps it will unleash a real political revolution that will oust Trilateral politicians, operatives and policies from the shores of our country.

If the reader is a Democrat, be aware that many Republicans and conservatives are still licking their wounds after finally realizing that George Bush and Dick Cheney worked the same con on them for a disastrous eight years of the same policies!

© 2009 Patrick Wood - All Rights Reserve

Very Important Awareness:
Richard Haass--State Department--Special Envoy;
Dr. Richard Haass is president
of the Council on Foreign Relations, a position he has held since July2003. The Council on Foreign Relations is an independent, nonpartisan membership organization,think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries.
My conclusion with the revelation above: Double Trouble!