SANANDA / HATONN: ONE STEP CLOSER TO THE NWO
AANANDA / HATONN
One step closer to the NWO
SANANDA / HATONN 12/25/91 #1
How many of you realize that in July Mr. Bush issued and signed an Executive Order, No. 12770? On the surface, it really wouldn't seem like much as it had to do with weights and measures and metric systems confusion--or is it much? Well, this "pair" of measures moved the merging of the United States into the vision of an internationalist New World Order right smartly along the path of integration whether or not you-the-people like it. He told the UN all about it at his Sept. 23rd address.
The measures were an executive order implementing the metric system in the government, and an international human rights agreement that would supersede the Constitution. The order, in effect, forces the agencies of the federal government to go metric. It is aimed at implementing "the metric system of measurement as the preferred system of weights and measures for U.S. trade and commerce".
Attempts have already been made to encourage "voluntary compliance" with the Metric Conversion Act in 1975. Federal officials said then the country would adopt metric policies within a decade. The general public, however, never warmed to the idea and chose to ignore it.
Currently Bush is also prompting the Senate to pass the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The pact would supersede rights guaranteed in the Constitution. The UN human rights covenant is a treaty that would, in effect, override several provisions of the Constitution, impede law enforcement, and, worst of all further diminish the national sovereignty of the United States. The covenant would, in fact, limit the ability of Americans to be governed by the laws you have within the Constitution.
This treaty drafted and issued by a foreign body--the United Nations--that is neither elected by nor responsible to American citizens, seeks to tell you what your internal criminal laws should be and what civil and political liberties Americans should have. Well, it may be easy to see why Jimmy Carter signed the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. It eludes me, however, as to why the United States should ratify it.
Squash the move
SANANDA / HATONN 12/25/91 #1
Bush's men have been frantically trying, since September, to quash newly raised fears that the Constitution and your national sovereignty are at risk. In the speech, for instance, Bush characterized a world in which UN forces, through "international cooperation", would work for the "collective settlement of disputes". He also promised to quell rebellions by upstart nationalists in long-oppressed and subsumed (to possess as an integral part of a whole) countries (like you are soon going to be): Bush declared no one "can promise today's borders will remain fixed at all times, and that UN force should be used to settle 'nationalist passions'." Unfortunately, I find that more 'passions' remain focused in the seat of the pants than in the "nationalist attitude".
Next, Bush made a most confusing statement as he projected that he saw "an order in which no nation must surrender one iota of its own sovereignty". I suppose that is so if the nation in point has no sovereignty with which to begin. It was also "an order characterized by the rule of law rather than the resort to force; the cooperative settlement of disputes rather than anarchy and bloodshed and an unstinting belief in human rights". Shudder now because it is coming!
The last time Bush spoke of "international cooperation" for the "collective settlement of disputes", he amassed an international force, which comprised more than 500,000 U.S. military personnel, to attack Iraq. Actually, it was over a million in force--your government can't count well--it must be due to the new metric conversion system.
The internationalists behind the President's drive to a New World Order hired old-hand Henry Kissinger to quell the critics' fears. With his extensive access to the media, he penned a nationally distributed column aimed at merging Bush's international policies and domestic affairs, the latter of which Bush is charged with neglecting. Now, dear ones, you knew Kissinger was alive and kicking--he simply goes underground to do his work when the heat is on.
Kissinger reasoned the West relied on American protection throughout the Cold War period and U.S. capital during the reconstruction period following World War II, and thus, the United States is already, like it or not, engaged and committed beyond the point of no return.
Hope for the U.S. taxpayer
SANANDA / HATONN 12/25/91 #1
There is, however, according to Mr. Kissinger, hope for the American taxpayer currently bearing the burden of "world leadership". Yes, I too, think so--it is called total bankruptcy of the American taxpayer, the nation, and the spirit. Note herein that Kissinger says it will be through "world leadership". That would be to let the economic superpowers of Europe and Asia take on a reasonable share of the responsibility for maintaining global order. Which countries might those be?
"The ideological conflict of Capitalism vs Communism lent plausibility to the American penchant for crusaders," Kissinger wrote. "But the dependence of our allies on American protection has declined.
"They will prove less and less willing to subordinate their judgment automatically to Washington's," he added. "Europe and Japan in particular will develop increasingly autonomous defense capabilities."
Mr. Kissinger has noted that America has suffered on the economic front," "The days of America as the principal source of world-wide investment capital are OVER."
Like Bush, who offered proposals which would further erode national sovereignty at the United Nations in September, Kissinger suggested a new international order based on a national security policy that is "defined by distinctions between the essential and the desirable... more discriminating in its strategy and, above all, more regional in its design."
NOW GET THIS: Kissinger, despite the discussion of limits to American power, in the end, advocates relinquishing sovereignty in favor of internationalism. His arguments reflect, point by point, the long-term goals of the Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg organization, the branches of the Committee of 300 seeking to establish this New World Order. Remember, Kissinger is the power behind the Bush throne.
Kissinger noted the world's six-fold population increase in the past 150 years, from a billion in 1850 to an estimated 6 billion-plus in the next century. Kissinger asked how problems of the environment, nuclear proliferation, and the agenda for the new population could be solved on a purely national level.
I warn you, beloved ones, that the 'one worlders' vision ignores boundaries, cultures, and democratic rights, in favor of what they say is in the best interest of mankind (which of course, is that which is in the best interest of themselves). The Internationalists--the Elite few, the wealthy and influential controllers--will function in this scheme as the sole arbiters of what is good for mankind and will maximize their profits in the bargain, at the expense of entire populations.
So, you might suggest--don't ratify the Order. Ah, but who will notice a bill coming up at midnight on Dec. 24th, before a handful of Zionists still available to Congress, called No. 12770, dealing with some sort of "old counting system"? Would you take note? I thought not!
Source: THE PHOENIX LIBERATOR, Dec. 30, 1991, Volume 17, Number 11, Pages 14-15.
http://phoenixarchives.com/liberator/1991/1291/123091.pdf
Transcribed into HTML format by R. Montana.