Welcome to Global Go vernance Image via Wikipedia Author : Henry Lamb . " For this system of" governance "wo...
Welcome to Global Go
vernance
Image via Wikipedia
Author: Henry Lamb.
"For this system of" governance "work, there must be a procedure to create laws and rules, an independent source of revenue, and amechanism for the enforcement of the laws. The procedure for creating rules is well established. The International Criminal Courtprovides the basis for enforcement. However, the lack of anindependent source of revenue, prevented the UN to become theworld government that is planned for so long. the current economic crisis is the excuse you need to create a global mechanism to control global economy and institute an independent source of revenue for world government. "[Excerpt of that article].
"Very few people realize that there is a massive effort to createglobal governance - a euphemism for world government - whichdramatically affect every man, woman and child on planet Earth. Asa leading expert on the subject, Henry Lamb provides a uniqueinsight into the emergence of global governance, and potentiallyvery serious consequences for humanity. "- Dr. Michael S.Coffman, president of Environmental Perspectives, Inc.
3].
For over a century that continues the idea of a world government.Since Cecil Rhodes's vision of a global British Empire, through the vision of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson's League of Nations and then, during the Roosevelt administration with the creation of the United Nations, this dream of a world government continues toforward. In Berlin, Barack Obama announced that he is a 'world citizen'. He and his government are about to offer tribute to this global citizenship.
The people who created the League of Nations for President Wilson advisers were operating behind the scenes. In the U.S., Wilson's aides were known as "The View" Colonel Edward Mandell House. In England, the government was advised by Alfred Milner group, known as "Chatham House crowd," created by Cecil Rhodes in 1891.
These two groups drafted the Treaty of Versailles that ended World War I - and created the League of Nations.
During the final days of negotiations on the treaty, these two groups met at the Hotel Majestic in Paris, and decided to formalize their organizations. The European group became the Royal Institute of International Relations and the American group, Colonel House, became the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). These two groups are the sustaining power that was behind the idea of world government throughout the 20th century.
[NT: To learn more about the CFR, read the articles "The Future Is Calling - Part 2: Secret Organizations and Hidden Agendas" and "The Future Is Calling - Part 3: Days of Infamy"].
Franklin Roosevelt served in the administration of President Wilson and knew the Consultation, Colonel House, and the Council on Foreign Relations. The Roosevelt administration was filled with CFR members. In fact, the economic recovery program "New Deal" set in the Depression years, was a product of the CFR.
The Roosevelt's son in law wrote:
"For a long time, I felt that FDR had developed many ideas that were for the benefit of this country. Most of his thoughts, his political ammunition, as they were known, were carefully manufactured for him in advance by the group's money CFR-A One World. [Curtis Dall, FDR: My Exploited Father-In-Law, 1967].
Most of the Roosevelt committee that drafted the UN Charter was formed by members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Since then, all administrations since the Roosevelt administration, were dominated by members of the CFR. During the Clinton administration, the Washington Post writer, Richard Harwood, said the Council on Foreign Relations is "... the closest thing we have to a ruling system in the United States" and identified dozens of CFR members in the House White. (Washington Post, October 30, 1993, A-21).
The members of the CFR dominated both Bush administrations.Richard Haass has served in both.
By June 2003, he was Director of Planning at the State Department. He resigned to become president of the CFR, in July 2003.
Haass continues to promote the idea of a world government. In an article published in the Taipei Times, he wrote: "... States must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to the agencies for a global international system can work." [Taipei Times, February 21, 2006].
Here's the crux: National sovereignty and global governance are mutually exclusive. The two can not exist at the same time. A country is sovereign or not.
The League of Nations failed because the United States were unwilling to cede their sovereignty to an international system. The UN continues for countries that continue to cede sovereignty, as Haass said, "to global bodies."
The Council on Foreign Relations, and most European governments are convinced that the only way to survive the world is through some form of global governance. They advocate the view that:
"Governance is not government - is a structure of rules, institutions and practices that set limits on the behavior of individuals, organizations and businesses." [UN Report on Human Development, 1999, pg. 34.].
Any authority that can "constrain the behavior of individuals, organizations and enterprises" - is a government.
For this system of "governance" work, there must be a procedure to create laws and rules, an independent source of revenue, and a mechanism for the imposition of laws. The procedure for creating rules is well established. The ICC provides the basis for enforcement. However, the lack of an independent source of revenue, prevented the UN to become the world government that is planned for so long. The current economic crisis is the excuse you need to create a global mechanism to control the global economy and institute an independent source of revenue for world government.
The United Nations adopted the first time a "New International Economic Order" in 1974 (A/RES/S-6/3201). She proposed a socialist economic system and global under UN auspices.Fortunately, the United States ignored the idea and she was gone, but not dead.
In 1995, the UN-sponsored Commission on Global Governance published its final report, entitled "Our Global Neighborhood" (Our Global Neighbourhood). Among the many recommendations made for effective global governance was a proposal for the creation of a new Economic Security Council. Its jurisdiction include:
"... Long-term threats to security in its broadest sense possible, as shared ecological crises, economic instability, rising unemployment, mass poverty ... ... and the promotion of sustainable development."
Adele Simmons was the American representative at the Commission on Global Governance, she was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Before leaving office, President George W. Bush convened a meeting of the G20 to set the agenda for a meeting in London in April 2009. They hoped to create a global system to ultimately control the global economy. Whatever the structure that will leave the meeting, she will probably get the power to control the global economy and the actions connected with the economic and also ecological issues of social justice - exactly as prescribed by the Commission on Global Governance.
The creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO) went a long way to give an "international body" the power to regulate commerce. The U.S. gave a meaningful sovereignty when they agreed to adapt their laws and regulations to the provisions of that UN agency.
The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the Bank for International Settlements does not operate by consensus of the boards indicated arbitrarily by the UN. Moreover, so far, the UN was unable to find a way to establish a source of revenue on transactions involving foreign exchange currency. But that could change from the G20 meeting in London in April.
European leaders are already making noise for a more rigid international control over the global economy. Among the ideas advanced in the past are the licensing and regulations even more stringent UN on international trade, putting UN representatives at meetings of directors of multinational companies, and international taxation on the privilege of conducting business globally.
Who controls the flow of money controls the activity of those who have money and those who want to make money. For example, whatever the international economic framework that may appear, a nation may be forced to adopt the objectives prescribed global warming by the UN in order to participate in economic transactions. This new international economic framework may set tax rates, set interest rates and conditions for granting credit.
This international economic framework proposal could undermine the last vestige of U.S. sovereignty. With the exception of Congressman and former presidential candidate Ron Paul and Glenn Beck, Fox News Channel, the media or the politicians did not express concern about these issues.
Global governance is already at the gates of the world. Gustav Speth, who served on the transition team of Bill Clinton before being appointed to head the UN Development Program, said the following in a global conference in 1997:
"Global governance is here to stay, and driven by economic globalization and the environment, it will inevitably expand."
Strobe Talbott, Deputy Secretary of the State Department during the Clinton administration, told Time magazine:
"... Within the next hundred years ... nationality, as we know it today will be obsolete, all states will recognize a single global authority.".
Both of these individuals are members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Timothy Geithner, the current Treasury secretary, and Lawrence Summers, chief economic adviser of President Obama will represent the U.S. at the G20 meeting in April. Both are members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State, publicly endorsed world government when Walter Cronkite praised for his work, with which he was awarded the "Global Governance", the World Federalist Association.
In all the years of the Clinton administration and also during the Bush years, members of the Council on Foreign Relations promoted the advancement of global governance. The opposition in the House of Representatives and the Senate and sometimes a stubborn opposition from President Bush, blocked U.S. participation in the Kyoto Protocol, the International Criminal Court, the Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Convention on the Rights the Child and the imposition of a UN tax on currency exchange.
Today, opposition to global governance in Congress declined and disappeared in the White House. With eyes wide open, giving the U.S. is welcome to global governance. The current administration, with the approval of most of Congress will cede sovereignty to an international system that is accountable to no one and has no morality. The UN is eager to fund their adventures with the evil money placed at their disposal for those who bought the promise of hope and blindly voted for change.
Since the UN to get an independent source of revenue to finance its forces for "peace", which may impose treaties and decrees of the International Criminal Court, no force on earth can defeat them.When realizing the true cost of global governance is too late. The UN will control the flow of money and energy available for each country.
President Obama and the current majority in Congress have already left the scene long ago, leaving the next generation curse the stupidity of their parents and only imagine what it was like to live in freedom.
Author: Henry Lamb - original article in http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/009/sovereignty/global-gov.htmReview: http://www.TextoExato.comThe Sword of the Spirit: http://www.espada.eti.br/govglobal.asp
vernance
Image via Wikipedia
Author: Henry Lamb.
"For this system of" governance "work, there must be a procedure to create laws and rules, an independent source of revenue, and amechanism for the enforcement of the laws. The procedure for creating rules is well established. The International Criminal Courtprovides the basis for enforcement. However, the lack of anindependent source of revenue, prevented the UN to become theworld government that is planned for so long. the current economic crisis is the excuse you need to create a global mechanism to control global economy and institute an independent source of revenue for world government. "[Excerpt of that article].
"Very few people realize that there is a massive effort to createglobal governance - a euphemism for world government - whichdramatically affect every man, woman and child on planet Earth. Asa leading expert on the subject, Henry Lamb provides a uniqueinsight into the emergence of global governance, and potentiallyvery serious consequences for humanity. "- Dr. Michael S.Coffman, president of Environmental Perspectives, Inc.
3].
For over a century that continues the idea of a world government.Since Cecil Rhodes's vision of a global British Empire, through the vision of U.S. President Woodrow Wilson's League of Nations and then, during the Roosevelt administration with the creation of the United Nations, this dream of a world government continues toforward. In Berlin, Barack Obama announced that he is a 'world citizen'. He and his government are about to offer tribute to this global citizenship.
The people who created the League of Nations for President Wilson advisers were operating behind the scenes. In the U.S., Wilson's aides were known as "The View" Colonel Edward Mandell House. In England, the government was advised by Alfred Milner group, known as "Chatham House crowd," created by Cecil Rhodes in 1891.
These two groups drafted the Treaty of Versailles that ended World War I - and created the League of Nations.
During the final days of negotiations on the treaty, these two groups met at the Hotel Majestic in Paris, and decided to formalize their organizations. The European group became the Royal Institute of International Relations and the American group, Colonel House, became the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). These two groups are the sustaining power that was behind the idea of world government throughout the 20th century.
[NT: To learn more about the CFR, read the articles "The Future Is Calling - Part 2: Secret Organizations and Hidden Agendas" and "The Future Is Calling - Part 3: Days of Infamy"].
Franklin Roosevelt served in the administration of President Wilson and knew the Consultation, Colonel House, and the Council on Foreign Relations. The Roosevelt administration was filled with CFR members. In fact, the economic recovery program "New Deal" set in the Depression years, was a product of the CFR.
The Roosevelt's son in law wrote:
"For a long time, I felt that FDR had developed many ideas that were for the benefit of this country. Most of his thoughts, his political ammunition, as they were known, were carefully manufactured for him in advance by the group's money CFR-A One World. [Curtis Dall, FDR: My Exploited Father-In-Law, 1967].
Most of the Roosevelt committee that drafted the UN Charter was formed by members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Since then, all administrations since the Roosevelt administration, were dominated by members of the CFR. During the Clinton administration, the Washington Post writer, Richard Harwood, said the Council on Foreign Relations is "... the closest thing we have to a ruling system in the United States" and identified dozens of CFR members in the House White. (Washington Post, October 30, 1993, A-21).
The members of the CFR dominated both Bush administrations.Richard Haass has served in both.
By June 2003, he was Director of Planning at the State Department. He resigned to become president of the CFR, in July 2003.
Haass continues to promote the idea of a world government. In an article published in the Taipei Times, he wrote: "... States must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to the agencies for a global international system can work." [Taipei Times, February 21, 2006].
Here's the crux: National sovereignty and global governance are mutually exclusive. The two can not exist at the same time. A country is sovereign or not.
The League of Nations failed because the United States were unwilling to cede their sovereignty to an international system. The UN continues for countries that continue to cede sovereignty, as Haass said, "to global bodies."
The Council on Foreign Relations, and most European governments are convinced that the only way to survive the world is through some form of global governance. They advocate the view that:
"Governance is not government - is a structure of rules, institutions and practices that set limits on the behavior of individuals, organizations and businesses." [UN Report on Human Development, 1999, pg. 34.].
Any authority that can "constrain the behavior of individuals, organizations and enterprises" - is a government.
For this system of "governance" work, there must be a procedure to create laws and rules, an independent source of revenue, and a mechanism for the imposition of laws. The procedure for creating rules is well established. The ICC provides the basis for enforcement. However, the lack of an independent source of revenue, prevented the UN to become the world government that is planned for so long. The current economic crisis is the excuse you need to create a global mechanism to control the global economy and institute an independent source of revenue for world government.
The United Nations adopted the first time a "New International Economic Order" in 1974 (A/RES/S-6/3201). She proposed a socialist economic system and global under UN auspices.Fortunately, the United States ignored the idea and she was gone, but not dead.
In 1995, the UN-sponsored Commission on Global Governance published its final report, entitled "Our Global Neighborhood" (Our Global Neighbourhood). Among the many recommendations made for effective global governance was a proposal for the creation of a new Economic Security Council. Its jurisdiction include:
"... Long-term threats to security in its broadest sense possible, as shared ecological crises, economic instability, rising unemployment, mass poverty ... ... and the promotion of sustainable development."
Adele Simmons was the American representative at the Commission on Global Governance, she was a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.
Before leaving office, President George W. Bush convened a meeting of the G20 to set the agenda for a meeting in London in April 2009. They hoped to create a global system to ultimately control the global economy. Whatever the structure that will leave the meeting, she will probably get the power to control the global economy and the actions connected with the economic and also ecological issues of social justice - exactly as prescribed by the Commission on Global Governance.
The creation of the World Trade Organization (WTO) went a long way to give an "international body" the power to regulate commerce. The U.S. gave a meaningful sovereignty when they agreed to adapt their laws and regulations to the provisions of that UN agency.
The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund and the Bank for International Settlements does not operate by consensus of the boards indicated arbitrarily by the UN. Moreover, so far, the UN was unable to find a way to establish a source of revenue on transactions involving foreign exchange currency. But that could change from the G20 meeting in London in April.
European leaders are already making noise for a more rigid international control over the global economy. Among the ideas advanced in the past are the licensing and regulations even more stringent UN on international trade, putting UN representatives at meetings of directors of multinational companies, and international taxation on the privilege of conducting business globally.
Who controls the flow of money controls the activity of those who have money and those who want to make money. For example, whatever the international economic framework that may appear, a nation may be forced to adopt the objectives prescribed global warming by the UN in order to participate in economic transactions. This new international economic framework may set tax rates, set interest rates and conditions for granting credit.
This international economic framework proposal could undermine the last vestige of U.S. sovereignty. With the exception of Congressman and former presidential candidate Ron Paul and Glenn Beck, Fox News Channel, the media or the politicians did not express concern about these issues.
Global governance is already at the gates of the world. Gustav Speth, who served on the transition team of Bill Clinton before being appointed to head the UN Development Program, said the following in a global conference in 1997:
"Global governance is here to stay, and driven by economic globalization and the environment, it will inevitably expand."
Strobe Talbott, Deputy Secretary of the State Department during the Clinton administration, told Time magazine:
"... Within the next hundred years ... nationality, as we know it today will be obsolete, all states will recognize a single global authority.".
Both of these individuals are members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Timothy Geithner, the current Treasury secretary, and Lawrence Summers, chief economic adviser of President Obama will represent the U.S. at the G20 meeting in April. Both are members of the Council on Foreign Relations. Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State, publicly endorsed world government when Walter Cronkite praised for his work, with which he was awarded the "Global Governance", the World Federalist Association.
In all the years of the Clinton administration and also during the Bush years, members of the Council on Foreign Relations promoted the advancement of global governance. The opposition in the House of Representatives and the Senate and sometimes a stubborn opposition from President Bush, blocked U.S. participation in the Kyoto Protocol, the International Criminal Court, the Convention on the Law of the Sea, the Convention on the Rights the Child and the imposition of a UN tax on currency exchange.
Today, opposition to global governance in Congress declined and disappeared in the White House. With eyes wide open, giving the U.S. is welcome to global governance. The current administration, with the approval of most of Congress will cede sovereignty to an international system that is accountable to no one and has no morality. The UN is eager to fund their adventures with the evil money placed at their disposal for those who bought the promise of hope and blindly voted for change.
Since the UN to get an independent source of revenue to finance its forces for "peace", which may impose treaties and decrees of the International Criminal Court, no force on earth can defeat them.When realizing the true cost of global governance is too late. The UN will control the flow of money and energy available for each country.
President Obama and the current majority in Congress have already left the scene long ago, leaving the next generation curse the stupidity of their parents and only imagine what it was like to live in freedom.
Author: Henry Lamb - original article in http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/009/sovereignty/global-gov.htmReview: http://www.TextoExato.comThe Sword of the Spirit: http://www.espada.eti.br/govglobal.asp
Nenhum comentário