Welcome
Welcome to my blog. We hope to get your ideas on things important to the survival of The United States of America as well the world community. We value your response and your opinions. Though we may disagree with those opinions or agree with those opinions, we want to know what you think. It's important to remember the discussion is about the country that is generally considered to lead the Free World in the areas of economics, democracy, free market, open society among other things. We think your opinion in these matters can be of importance to those that are charged with the responsibility of representing you.
I find this an interesting topic seeing as how much we used to depend on American Made Products. It just appears that recently we depend on everyone else, anywhere else but America. I'm not sure how it all got started, but somehow we decided to do a deal with the Japanese People that allowed them to sell any amount of cars in the United they wanted in return we got an opportunity to sell 10,000 to them. If this wasn't enough we decided that NAFTA was a great idea, so great in fact we open up the transportation end of it to allow drivers from south of the border to drive to delivery destination. This offers some problems that I would like to discuss in my next post to this site. Hope someone reads this and tell me what they think about what I've said. Even if it's the owners of this blog.
Reply to this
The desire to obtain American made products ended a long time ago. There was a time when you were envied when you were able to show that your appliances were made in the USA. But we were so taken by greed and a certain amount of arrogance that we fell to recognize that the system was lacking fore site. Our inability to create and present to the rest of the world new and innovative products has led to our being in the position we are in today. I think that in our most innocent of thoughts to help other nations we forgot that we had to continue to help the inhabitants of our own nation. The old saying of "take care of home first", never entered into our minds. Where NAFTA was born with good intentions it has led our money hungry CEO's to shift their position from providing for the people to self promoting enrichment.
Thanks for this opportunity to vent.
RMD
Reply to this
I wonder if the desire to obtain American made products really ended. Is it at all possible that the manufacturers of formerly known "American Made" products decided that cheaper was better? If this is the answer then, it begs the question of why? I would think that the idea of taking jobs away from American workers would have entered into the equation somewhere, don't you? If there are less and less people employed in the United States of America, who will buy the product? Are these manufacturers depending on the off shore citizens to start buying these products? Do you really believe the idea that we no longer have the ability to create good products or rather, is the greed factor more prominent in the thought process? The idea that "we forgot we had to continue to help the inhabitants of our own nation appears to have credence in this writers opinion. If CEO's were to receive smaller compensation for their leadership where will the leaders come from, to lead these companies? Is it necessary to have high paying positions in Corporate America to get good leadership? What is a reasonable paycheck for a Corporate Leader? It's been said that the leader of product creation deserves more for his/her efforts. Conversely it's been said the people on the bottom that share in the "sweat labor" are the ones that deserve more because of their sweat. Whose decisions are these anyway? There are as I see it three (3) main ingredients to the workforce. (a) The Leader (b) The Investor(s) (c) The Employees. It is hoped that at some point all three entities will participate in the purchase of these products so more can be made and then sold. This insures every one keeps their JOB. In a colony of bees in their respective hives it is noted that there is the (a) Queen Bee (b) The Drone and the (c) Worker Bee. The Queen's duty is to produce eggs for future bees. When the queen grows old and can no longer produce this larva for more bees the workers get together and toss her out, if this does not happen the bee colony is subject to unrest when the old queen decides its time for her to swarm because she has felt the unrest of the worker members of the colony. (I'm sure I'll be corrected on this). It is the job of the Worker Bees to gather pollen and return it to the hive make honey to feed the larva which are the beginning of creation of the bee colony's future. The poor Drone has one purpose in life. Only one Drone will be lucky enough to mate with the Queen on her Maiden Flight, when this is completed the Queen returns to the hive and never leaves again. The Drone is forcefully removed from the hive and left to die if not killed by the worker bees. I'm sure this is not the best analogy but, if it were, where do we fit as employees of these Corporations for whom we sweat. Any Answers?
Reply to this
I have been going over in my mind just how best to address the many issues that are presented in admin's blog. To address political thought processes in decisions regarding the people (all of them) of this country has long been thought to be so severely damaged that it cannot be conceived just where to begin. I will state that big business does not get a pass on this issue because where the money goes so does the politician. Much of what is going on in our country has been orchestrated by big business, co-signed by the politician, and further endorsed by us the unsuspecting voter. As we noted earlier that our capitalistic system lends credence to this type of politics/big business. If we look at the example of our leaders we find that they have led the way in mis-appropriation of government contracts therefore funds. But all the time vowing that they had given up all their financial affiliation with the company. But once again I refer back to the beginning of the fatal error by stating that all business above the level of paper boy/girl do what is called a business plan noting where they expect to be at what time in the process. What did our companies do that was so miss leading that an unsuspecting population was left both blind and deaf to what was going on. I can't begin to understand nor rationalize the reasoning behind sending all of our good paying jobs overseas. But to be sure this leads back to what I said above GREED!!!!! Under our present system we have no legal precedence to attempt to regulate the wages of out top execs. I will say that if the company loses money the execs that were/are in charge must suffer the same penalty as all employees. Just because you are the CEO does not, or should not, eliminate you from fall out. CEO'S receiving these large bonuses but still getting my little tax money just doesn't seem just right. If they don't get the bonus nor the other perks that come with the company doing good or above average then maybe the company would not require help from me. Just which one of these big companies that have received bail out money would or is helping me? NONE!!! We have to remember that what is happening in our society is something special. We the "worker bees" have suddenly become the backbone, (or should I say recognized) backbone of big business. The problem with that is that big business receives all the benefits of this relationship while the worker bee has to suffer the reduction in pay, the reduction of education for their children, the loss of status in the community, we can and must go further in saying even to losing your job. I feel that to address the issues further would take up more time than I have and also more space than what is alloted. But given that, I would like to say that someone must recognize the fact we are and have for some time been going in the wrong direction. We must turn around and see where this has left us and use some foresight to see where this is taking us.
Reply to this
Free trade is not fair trade. If America were to reciprocate all the restrictions/tariffs/ limits that other nations impose there would be drastic reduction of foreign goods flowing into this country. Additionally, if imported products had to adhere to American quality and production standards foreign goods would not be as cheap, nor would they poison our children with lead and our pets with dangerous chemicals.
Our leaders have been bought and paid for by foreign interests. The Congress no longer sees its job as representing the American people but to see that they get re-elected. As an individual, you cannot gain their attention, as you do not have enough money to finance a re-election campaign.
Reply to this
I'm not sure the American Department that handles this type of thing for the safety of Americans really understands their job. Then it may not be the entire responsibility of the government to insure the proper manufacturing of products for the American market. Perhaps we should look at the companies that authorized the off shore production of these goods to take a better look at what they order. There are some companies that allocate a majority of their manufacturing off shore because of "reduced manufacturing cost" for cheaper delivery to the American People. I must agree that the United States as a whole endorsed a very high quality standard and, it's hoped the off shore manufacturers adhere to but, without a good and in depth examination of the products the quality standard is null and void. I would certainly appreciate if you could indicate exactly how the Representative of the People of the United States has "been bought and paid for by foreign interests". I can see where you would say that the representatives appear to sustain their own personal interest than that of the constituency they are elected to represent, goals and views of the community locally and, as a whole. Do you think putting together a network of people like President Elect Obama did to bolster his election chances would have the power to gain the attention of the elected officials?
Reply to this
I believe in democracy. I believe we have made ourselves a great country. I believe in capitalism; the system has brought us immeasurable wealth. We are now broke financially. It isn`t democracy that is the cause nor is it capitalism for the bottomless financial pit our lawmakers are trying to fill. The blame can be seen in our subscription to greed. Those who have led us down this miserable trail of tears deserve punishment and exile, in my book. Maybe in the book of a lot of people. It seems as though that is not happening. The lawmakers are in such confusion because they see we are in free fall and they are frightened. There is no assurance in place at this moment that when and if we stumble out of the woods we will not simply repeat the same mistakes. How terribly important it is to seek help at this moment that some sign of recovery will soon be seen. I am speaking of miracles. We are in it deeper than most people realize and only those of us that went through the debacle of the 1929 depression have heard the weeping and gnashing of teeth. I suggest we rethink the "Greed is Good" idea--and start asking for miracles.
Reply to this
After reading the comments on this very interesting blog, it appears that GREED is the common cause for a large portion of our economic woes. I believe that one of the big questions facing Americans is, what are we going to do to prevent greed from destroying our economic system and our prosperous way of life? How do you limit GREED in this regard? Some say "regulations". Sure it may work but how do "regulations" face with free trade and open markets? Some people argue strongly against regulations, thus relying on trust factors. Can you imagine Las Vegas casinos without the gaming commission regulations or without the eye-in-the-sky cameras and relying on trust! Where there is significant potential for abuse, we need to implement mechanisms to reduce or eliminate because of the greater harm to the whole. Do we as Americans have what it take to really come about CHANGE? That is the question.
Reply to this
We heard a significant amount of talk during the Presidential campaign about how lobbiest affect politicians. We heard a lot of promises regarding reducing the impact of lobbiest on our politicians. Perhaps the bird-dog groups are keeping an eye on this stuff. When the lobbiest abuse their privilege or do something that adversely affects the lives of Americans, something should be done about it and the politician involved should be leading the way to help, don't you think?
Reply to this
Question: Have we learned a lesson? Is it too late, no matter what we do? I think there`s gotta be a lot more movin and shakin before we zoom up--I don`t think the perpetrators of this tragedy are the ones to lead us into a zoom up--!!!!
Reply to this
I think the issue we have is that the system is backwards. We send someone to Washington and call them our "leader", they should follow what "We the people" say. "We the people" are supposed to be the leaders instead we have become sheeple following blindly the doctrine of any well spoken, charismatic that claims to have our best interest at heart. How many of you vote for a person because they belong to a party, their ideals never even come into play. Many an elections is determined by voting for the lesser of the two evils ( who's gonna screw "me" the least). I don't blame the politician or the lobbiest; its our fault. We quit caring because, " my vote don't matter", or "what difference does it make". its that attitude that gives them the ability to do what they do. I see no difference from one political party to the next, each does just enough for its minions to them feeding from the trough and keep them dependent. No politician wants his followers to have free thought for if we did, we would surly dump more tea into the harbour.
Thats some of what I think, thanks for giving me a moment of your life I hope I didn't waste it.
Reply to this
Does anyone know whether or not NAFTA as well as other trade agreements can be renegotiated?
Reply to this
Like any agreement, the terms can be renegotiated--unless we contracted definite terms otherwise which is unlikely. (I have not read the terms--has anyone?) It seems to me that Nafta may be a good idea---But Like the invasion of Iraq---nobody saw the problems involved in executing the ideas. So we have large problems. The change was too much too soon. Unemployment resulting from the agreement has caused and is causing major problems for us. Was that foreseen? Could we not have taken a step at a time and avoided the mass layoffs? Who was responsible for this dive into icy water who did not have a thermometer ready to help in easing the pain? Our leaders were again led by the ring-in-the-nose, it seems.
Reply to this
Good Morning to all.
I'm sitting today in front of my television watching history unfold. This is the beginning of a new day in America. As I sit here and ponder over the last few years, I wonder what's all about. I'm totally engrossed with the proceedings just to see all the former Presidents and their wives march in carries it's own place in history. To watch the hundreds of thousands of people line the parade route is an exhilarating experience that will never be repeated. To see the tremendous unfolding of ordinary Americans indicates the strong desire of people like you and me,endorsing the idea that maybe a change is really taking place. The fact that President elect Barack Obama is the first African American President offers in its own way that indeed some change has already taken place. I'm not sure what it means to the outgoing president but it appears that even he is watching and waiting the proposed change. I've no doubt that the new administration will have some difficult times ahead and that the vaunted change will not come easy nor will it come fast. The thought and ideas that it will come eventually in the not so distance future gives us all a reason to pause for a moment to reflect on our past and what this change means to all of us. What does this really mean to all of us. Do the smiles, tears, hopes and dreams have a chance? I'm watching the jubilation of the masses cheer, jumping up and down in adulation of this promised change. As has been spoken numerous times by those in "know" that there will be mistakes but how this president handles all of trials and tribulation will be the most difficult of any president taking office.. A friend of mine just called and talked about how amazing she thought it was and how elated she was. She said it brings tears to her eyes with thought of what it promises to the world as well as the United States of America. She was overwhelmed with emotion. Can you imagine the act of allowing and requesting a gay Pastor to give the invocation. As we all know this could not have happened without some kind of change. This of course will contested for a long time to come. Can this be a show of the force of change? I look at the faces of the audience in attendance and wonder what their thoughts are with the prayer being offered to God we claim to serve, honor and obey. I listen to the fabulous voice of Aretha Franklin as she sings God Bless America and I too am overwhelmed with thoughts of our past as a nation as well as what the future brings to us. Let freedom ring is repeated many times throughout the song is this the hope of America? Is freedom what we're looking for?. It appears that the word freedom brings in and of itself a sense of change. Is this really true? We now have a new Vice President the time is 11:59EST. Is the real beginning of change now happening? The sounds of the violin being played by Violinist Itzak Perlman brings me to moment of hope and decision to do I can to promote the ideals of America. It's now 12:04EST an Barack Obama is being sworn in it's now 12:06 EST and we have a new President. President Barack Obama. THE CANNONS AND THE PEOPLE SEEM TO SHOUT IN HOPE THAT THIS IS THE START OF THE CHANGE WE'VE ALL HOPED AND DREAMED OF. "We the People" spoken by the President. What does it mean? We the people have requested and demanded a change. What is our responsibility to insure that this change comes to pass? What do you think? If anything the President has spoken is true then it's time for us to go to work America and make change happen.
Welcome to the White House President Obama.
Reply to this
I want to ensue that the context of what I'm writing doesn't sound too critical but at the same time give one a moment to think just a little outside of the box. We have to remember that the political system, regardless to who is in office, the "fervor" of the people, the dreams we have of "significant" change, remains the same. You vote for a representative to government that you "hope" will try to convey to government some of the things that you would like to see accomplished. We need to look at just how many of the things do we see that have been addressed? If we are to look for change if the U.S. then we have to look for a change in the way that our politics is outlined. The
Republican, the Democrat, and the Independent parties do nothing or say anything that the other party doesn't say. So then where does the change come from? The "people" that vote have to change! While we continue to accept the inept ability of our appointed representatives we consent to the inept responses the we receive. When a contractor is hired to do a job he either performs the job as requested or he is fired and some one that will do as requested replaces him. You may say that this is what you try to do each voting period. I would say that not one of the voted in members of our government does what he/she promises while begging for your vote. We turn a deaf ear and blindfold ourselves to this calamity by saying "oh that's just politics". But should not politics be what/who we are voting for to carry out or address the issues we presented to them? I mention these things because we can be very happy that our country "appears" to be taking a NEW and, hopefully, a continued new approach to the purification of the "putrid" political system we have been forced to live in for so long. What could have caused such a pathetic political agenda to grow? Why should the people of this country have to suffer when we have so much? Once again we go back to the greed of the one versus the need of the many. Greed has been shown to be the strongest. If "we the people" that was so magnificently referenced in the constitution demand that our representatives represent us with the needs of our communities foremost in their minds we will and must see change. When they do things we don't like or think is not for the best of all, we must let them know, either you fix it or out you go. We must ensure that we look deeply at all things and be not impressed by the cover of the book nor beautifully spoken words. What is required for my family to subsist? What is required for my city/township/neighborhood to survive? How does this and the welfare of the Nation compare? I think that if we look at where the Nation is we will find that our past Representatives have not only failed the local community but the Nation as well. So goes the local community so goes the Country.
Reply to this
Question for the admin,
is it possible to have the latest comments at the top so that when the window opens I don't have to scroll down?
Reply to this
Well, so far I've seen the New President moving in a direction of change. He appears to be delivering (or attempting) to deliver on his promises and his sincerity seems to be apparent. He has asked all of us in America to do the things necessary to bring about a better life for us all. If he is doing his part, I think all of us Americans should do our part. If that means a renewed patriotism, so be it.
Reply to this
The need for American products and services is greater now than ever. Economically, it is the surest way to rebound now and in the future. Impact on spending, jobs and economic growth is what this would mean. I am more than willing to pay the price for made in USA products ...are you???
Reply to this
Yes, well, we`ve run out of credit with the Chinese and other nations so the future is in sight. We will be tradng more with fellow Ameicans for awhile until the Nafta fever subsides. Nafta is not a dead issue but it has dire need for adjustment. In part our problems have to do with Nafta--minor part as compared to the financier-hoodlums have wrought.
Reply to this
A Very Real New World Order
By Chuck Baldwin
January 27, 2009
This column is archived at
http://www. chuckbaldwinlive. com/c2009/cbarchive_20090127. html
It is hard to believe, but a majority of Americans (including Christians and
conservatives) seem oblivious to the fact that there is a very real, very
legitimate New World Order (NWO) unfolding.
In the face of overwhelming evidence, most Americans not only seem totally
unaware of this reality, they seem unwilling to even remotely entertain the notion.
On one hand, it is understandable that so many Americans would be ignorant
of the emerging New World Order.
After all, the mainstream media refuses to
report, or even acknowledge, the NWO.
Even "conservative" commentators and
talk show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Michael Savage, or Joe
Scarborough refuse to discuss it.
And when listeners call these respective
programs, these "conservative" hosts usually resort to insulting the caller
as being some kind of "conspiracy kook.
" One host even railed that if anyone
questions the government line on 9/11, we should "lock them up and throw
away the key. " So much for freedom of speech!
This is an area--perhaps the central area--where liberals and conservatives
agree: they both show no patience or tolerance for anyone who believes that
global government (in any form) is evolving.
One has to wonder how otherwise
intelligent and thoughtful people can be so brain dead when it comes to this
issue.
It makes one wonder who is really pulling their strings, doesn't it?
The list of notable personalities who have openly referenced or called for
some kind of global government or New World Order is extremely lengthy.
Are
all these people "kooks" or "conspiracy nuts"? Why would world
leaders--including presidents, secretaries of state, and high government
officials; including the media, financial, and political elite--constantly
refer to something that doesn't exist? Why would they write about, talk
about, or openly promote a New World Order, if there is no such thing?
Many of us recall President George Herbert Walker Bush talking much about an
emerging New World Order. For example, in 1989, Bush told the students of
Texas A&M University, "Perhaps the world order of the future will truly be a
family of nations.
"
Later, Bush, Sr. said, "We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future
generations a new world order . . .. When we are successful, and we will be,
we have a real chance at this new world order,
an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to
fulfill the promise and vision of the U.N.'s founders.
"
Bush, Sr.
also said, "What is at stake is more than one small country, it is a big idea--a new world order.
"
Bush, Sr.
further said, "The world can therefore seize the opportunity to
fulfill the long-held promise of a new world order . . .
"
What was President G.
Reply to this
Bush, Sr.
further said, "The world can therefore seize the opportunity to
fulfill the long-held promise of a new world order . . .
"
What was President G.H.W.
Bush talking about, if there is no such thing as
an emerging New World Order? Was he talking out of his mind? Was he
hallucinating?
England's Prime Minister, Tony Blair, said, "We are all internationalists
now, whether we like it or not.
" He continued saying, "On the eve of a new
Millennium we are now in a new world.
We need new rules for international
co-operation and new ways of organizing our international institutions.
" He
also said, "Today the impulse towards interdependence is immeasurably
greater.
We are witnessing the beginnings of a new doctrine of international
community.
"
In 1999, Tony Blair said, "Globalization has transformed our economies and
our working practices. But globalism is not just economic.
It is also a
political and security phenomenon.
"
What is Tony Blair talking about, if there is no emerging New World Order?
What does he mean by "a new doctrine of international community"? What does
he mean by "new world"? How can one have globalism, which includes "a
political and security phenomenon," without creating a New World Order? Is
Tony Blair hallucinating?
Likewise, former President George W.
Bush penned his signature to the
Declaration of Quebec back on April 22, 2001, in which he gave a "commitment
to hemispheric integration and national and collective responsibility for
improving the economic well-being and security of our people.
"
By "our people," Bush meant the people of the Western Hemisphere, not the
people of the United States. Phyllis Schlafly rightly reminded us that G.W.
Bush "pledged that the United States will 'build a hemispheric family on the
basis of a more just and democratic international order.
'"
Remember, too, that it was G.W.
Bush who, back in 2005, committed the United
States to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), which is nothing
more than a precursor to the North American Community or Union, as outlined
in CFR member Robert Pastor's manual, "Toward a North American Community.
"
If there is no such thing as an emerging New World Order, what was G.W.
Bush
talking about when he referred to "a hemispheric family" and an
"international order"?
The public statements of notable world leaders regarding an emerging New
World Order are copious.
Consider the statements of former CBS newsman,
Walter Cronkite.
In his book, "A Reporter's Life," Walter Cronkite said, "A system of world
order--preferably a system of world government--is mandatory.
The proud
nations someday will see the light and, for the common good and their own
survival, yield up their precious sovereignty . . .
" Cronkite told BBC
newsman Tim Sebastian, "I think we are realizing that we are going to have
to have an international rule of law.
Reply to this
If there is no emerging New World Order, what is Walter Cronkite talking
about? Can there be any doubt that Cronkite is talking about global
government? Absolutely not!
Now, when Bush, Sr.
talks about fulfilling "the promise and vision of the
U.N.
's founders," he was talking about the same thing former UN
Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali was talking about when he said, "The
time for absolute and exclusive sovereignty . . . has passed.
"
The United Nations has been on the forefront of promoting the New World
Order agenda since its very inception.
In 1995, the UN released a manual
entitled, "Our Global Neighborhood.
" It states, "Population, consumption,
technology, development, and the environment are linked in complex
relationships that bear closely on human welfare in the global neighborhood.
Their effective and equitable management calls for a systematic, long-term,
global approach guided by the principle of sustainable development, which
has been the central lesson from the mounting ecological dangers of recent
times.
Its universal application is a priority among the tasks of global
governance.
"
If there is no emerging New World Order, what is "global governance" all
about?
"Who are the movers and shakers promoting global government?" you ask.
Obviously, it is the international bankers who are the heavyweights behind
the push for global government.
Remember, one cannot create a "global
economy" without a global government to manage, oversee, and control it.
In a letter written to Colonel E. Mandell House, President Franklin D.
Roosevelt said, "The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a
financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S.
since the days of Andrew Jackson.
"
"Old Hickory" did his best to rid the United States from the death grip that
the international bankers were beginning to exert on this country.
He may
have been the last President to actually oppose the bankers.
In discussing
the Bank Renewal bill with a delegation of bankers in 1832, Jackson said,
"Gentlemen, I have had men watching you for a long time, and I am convinced
that you have used the funds of the bank to speculate in the breadstuffs of
the country.
When you won, you divided the profits amongst you, and when you
lost, you charged it to the bank.
You tell me that if I take the deposits
from the bank and annul its charter, I shall ruin ten thousand families.
That may be true, gentlemen, but that is your sin! Should I let you go on,
you will ruin fifty thousand families, and that would be my sin! You are a
den of vipers and thieves.
I intend to rout you out, and by the eternal God,
I will rout you out.
"
Reply to this
Unfortunately, the international bankers proved themselves to be too
formidable for President Jackson.
And in 1913, with the collaboration of
President Woodrow Wilson, the bankers were given charge over America's
financial system by the creation of the Federal Reserve.
Ever since the CFR and Trilateral Commission were created, they have filled
the key leadership positions of government, big media, and of course, the
Federal Reserve.
In his book, "With No Apologies," former Republican Presidential nominee
Barry Goldwater wrote, "The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the
vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking
interests by seizing control of the political government of the United
States.
The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort
to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power-- political,
monetary, intellectual and ecclesiastical. What the Trilateral Commission
intends is to create a worldwide economic power superior to the political
governments of the nation-states involved. As managers and creators of the
system, they will rule the future. " Was Goldwater a prophet or what?
And again, the goals of the global elite have been publicly stated.
Back in
1991, the founder of the CFR, David Rockefeller praised the major media for
their complicity in helping to facilitate the globalist agenda by saying,
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine
and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and
respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. . . .
It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we
had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years.
But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world
government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world
bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in
past centuries."
How could Rockefeller be any plainer? He acknowledged the willful assistance
of the major media in helping to keep the elitists' agenda of global
government from the American people. To this day, the major media has not
deviated from that collaboration. And this includes the aforementioned
"conservative" talking heads. They know if they want to keep their jobs,
they dare not reveal the New World Order. The NWO, more than anything else,
is the "Third Rail" to the national media.
Reply to this
Is it any wonder that President Barack Obama has stacked his government with
numerous members of the CFR? Among these are Robert Gates, Janet Napolitano,
Eric Shinseki, Timothy Geithner, and Tom Daschle.
Other CFR members include
CFR President Richard Haass, CFR Director Richard Holbrooke, and founding
member of the Trilateral Commission and CFR member Paul Volcker.
Obama even asked a CFR member, Rick Warren, to deliver the inaugural prayer.
Still not convinced? Just a few days ago, when asked by a reporter what he
thought the most important thing was that Barack Obama could accomplish,
former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger said, "I think his task will be develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a New World Order can be created.
It's a great opportunity; it isn't just a crisis."
This is the same Henry Kissinger, you will recall, who said back in 1991,
"Today, America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to
restore order. Tomorrow, they will be grateful! This is especially true if
they were told that there were [sic] an outside threat from beyond, whether
real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence.
It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil.
The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government."
Even Gideon Rachman, the chief foreign affairs commentator for the Financial
Times, wrote an editorial expressing his support for world government.
In his column he said, "I have never believed that there is a secret United
Nations plot to take over the US. . . .
But, for the first time in my life,
I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible.
"A 'world government' would involve much more than co-operation between
nations.
It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a
body of laws.
The European Union has already set up a continental government
for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a
currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability
to deploy military force.
"So could the European model go global? There are three reasons for thinking
that it might."
Rachman then goes on to explain the reasons why he believes world government
is plausible.
Do you now see why it does not matter to a tinker's dam whether it is a
Republican or Democrat who resides at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? For the most
part, both major parties in Washington, D.C., have been under the dominating
influence of the international bankers who control the Federal Reserve, the
CFR, and the Trilateral Commission.
And this is also why it does not matter
whether one calls himself conservative or liberal.
For the most part, both
conservatives and liberals in Washington,
Reply to this
Presidents Bush, Sr., Bill Clinton, and Bush, Jr. have thoroughly set the
table for the implementation of the NWO, as surely as the sun rises in the
east.
All Obama has to do is put the food on the table--and you can count on
this: Barack Obama will serve up a New World Order feast like you cannot
believe!
That a New World Order is emerging is not in question. The only question is,
What will freedom-loving Americans do about it? Of course, the first thing
they have to do is admit that an emerging New World Order exists! Until
conservatives, Christians, pastors, constitutionalists, and others who care
about a sovereign, independent United States acknowledge the reality of an
emerging New World Order, they will be incapable of opposing it.
And right now, that is exactly what they are not doing.
Reply to this
I would first like to send a warm and heart felt Hello to my very dear friend and to his family. I am very happy to know that he is sharing his knowledge and understanding of what is happening to this country. Thanks Mr. Alvarado.
I would like to say that this article reminds me that self education is so very important, that to continue upgrading our understanding as to what is happening to our country, is not a sudden happening but a long very well planned action.
When we look at where we "perceive" ourselves to be we will find that we are not there at all but in a prescribed "Niche" identified and conceived by a Group known as the "Illuminati". This entity has within its grasp and control all "Secret" society groups, known and not known, within our political and judicial system. I am placing quite a bit of time on this area because a lot of what was stated by the author of this article was written for us that know and understand where he's at with this information. The root beginning of this initiation into the Secret societies begins with our college students, our children, being inducted in the college fraternities. Not knowing that the pledge they took was a swearing in to a compliance of wills as directed by the Illuminati. The New World Order (NWO) (founded and directed by the Illuminati) has been effectively able to establish its will and direction of flow by and with the willful assistance of these groups. Looking at the membership, as noted by Mr. Alvarado, we see that all of our top "leaders" (even the ones that we hold dear to our hearts) are members of one group or another. Minorities have to know that there representatives (duly elected by them) does not have there interest at heart. You may well ask why would a person go through what they have to go through to get elected and the great amounts of money spent for known benefits. Its not the paycheck but the filling of being a part of what is going on and what is to come. I have not known or seen one politician to have the will of the people forefront in his ambitious fight to get elected. We speak of the different political parties as if they were different. If you take the time you will see that the objective of each of them is formation of a group that can will and enforcement of that group to make you submit to there will. The New World Order is well on it's way to establishing it's Order. With the election of each political figure you will see the blocks of its structure being placed in place and the structure becoming stronger and stronger. What will the "new" regime do for you. NOTHING!! If this is what you are waiting for then forget it. Politics is not for us but for those that have something to loose. In the sight of our leaders we on the bottom have nothing to loose because we are already on the bottom. The ones where there is remotely some concern are those that have the means to survive a billion dollar loss and continue to support the system.
Reply to this
Are we hypocrites? I just read an article in the Saturday's Oakland Press, Pontiac Michigan which said (I'm paraphrasing), "We make a big deal about driving foreign vehicles in America but go out and purchase a $3,000 television (Made in Japan), wear everytype of clothing made anywhere except the U.S. I wonder if the autoworkers even think about the components that they install in the vehicles... any guesses as to where the componets (that make up 68% of the vehicle)are made??
Reply to this
Does anyone care about the recent news that $18 Billion in bonus money was given to the banking people.... the ones we, the taxpayers had to bail out!!
It's actually OUR money that was given to them. Does anybody care? At least our new President has the balls to comment on it, calling it shameful. I haven't seen or heard one Republican speak out on this.
Reply to this
Chuck did not say I am opposed to NWO or I am all for it. For sure NWO when instituted will mean the end of our government and all nation-states governments even as city-states were replaced with nation-states. Then are the proponents of world government patriotic people or the opposite? Are we betraying our belief in our national government by opting for NWO? With what I know about government in general I am, myself opposed to NWO. We have a system that is imperfect nationally. What chance will we have to effect changes if government goes global? For or Against, Mr Baldwin? NWO is not yet established.
Reply to this
Does anyone care about the recent news that $18 Billion in bonus money was given to the banking people.... the ones we, the taxpayers had to bail out!!
It's actually OUR money that was given to them. Does anybody care? At least our new President has the balls to comment on it, calling it shameful. I haven't seen or heard one Republican speak out on this.
Reply to this
Were we to enter into any NWO soon we could easily be delegated to the lower legislative part reserved for third world nations. We are getting weaker by the minute. From this fact emerges a question--is that why we have suddenly been wounded and left bleeding by the financial hoodlums? Was United States too strong to be considered a good candidate for the creators of the global government? We should be concentrating now on gaining strength and healing our wounds before we are sucked into the conspiracy. We had better concentrate now on being better patriots. Do you begin to feel us slipping and sliding into hell?
Reply to this
Willie, 2-22-09
You are right on the mark. Instead of having such an inbalance of trade with Japan, we have created a worse inbalance of trade with China. Not many of our products are sold in China because the Chinese place high tariffs on our products which is all very poor business! I think the current economic crisis that poor leadership and greedy high profile businessmen encourages has placed Americans in a very poor financial situation at present. Perhaps as we crawl out of this mess that the Middle Class will pay for, such a situation will teach us to be more mindful of how we help our selves. We are a generous people but we are blind and stupid. We do indeed need to take care of our own and be more mindful of how we conduct ourselves within the international market of trade. I don't encourage isolationism but I also feel strongly that we need to become more mindful of some solid business practices abroad and in our own country.
Reply to this
Hello Katie. Welcome to the Buy America Blog
Your comment is appreciated. Your thoughts about the imbalance in trade with the Asian countries is well thought out. About protectionism and isolationism, How do you see this working? It would appear that in times like these it will be hard to distinguish the difference. The fact of the matter is, we do not manufacture the products the American Public demand. It appears that the cost of manufacturing in the United States is too high a price for Americans to pay. The thought of still getting what we want for the price we can afford strikes a note of compliance with whats happening in the market place as it now exist. With the economy in the shape it's in today how do you suggest we compromise? I readily agree with the synopsis you've made but there must be an answer as to how we correct this unfortunate course of events.
Reply to this
I agree with Katie to the extent that our trade agreement with China is not equitable however our agreements are contractual by law and very difficult to change. I do believe that our current political players recognize the errors of the past and will fix it if the opportunity exist. One thing that Katie said that spoke volumes to me. It was, "We do indeed need to take care of our own and be more mindful of how we conduct ourselves within the international market of trade". I think that this is one of the answers that the Admin. of this blog was asking... what is the answer to correct this unfortunate course of events? We as Americans must become more aware of what has American impact on jobs. For example, suppose a person wants to purchase a door. A door a a major retailer is $79.99 (great deal made in Indonesia). A similar door sold at a small hardware store charges $84.99 (a good quality door made in N. Carolina). The worker that made the door in N. Carolina also buys groceries, automobiles, etc.). This is the kind of awareness that we Americans need. This in and of itself can offset bad trade agreements that may not be able to change. I believe this is a part of the answer.
Grumpy
Reply to this