• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

California Lawyer's Perspective on Iraq War-Raymond S. Kraft

Soapweed

Well-known member
Sixty-three years ago, Nazi Germany had overrun almost all of Europe and hammered England to the verge of bankruptcy and defeat, and had sunk more than four hundred British ships in their convoys between England and America for food and war materials

Bushido Japan had overrun most of Asia, beginning in 1928, killing millions of civilians throughout China, and impressing millions more as slave labor.

The US was in an isolationist, pacifist, mood, and most Americans and Congress wanted nothing to do with the European war, or the Asian war.

Then along came Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and in outrage Congress unanimously declared war on Japan, and the following day on Germany, which had not attacked us. It was a dicey thing. We had few allies.

France was not an ally, the Vichy government of France aligned with its German occupiers. Germany was not an ally, it was an enemy, and Hitler intended to set up a Thousand Year Reich in Europe. Japan was not an ally, it was intent on owning and controlling all of Asia. Japan and Germany had long-term ideas of invading Canada and Mexico, and then the United States over the north and south borders, after they had settled control of Asia and Europe.

America's allies then were England, Ireland, Scotland, Canada, Australia, and Russia, and that was about it. There were no other countries of any size or military significance with the will and ability to contribute much or anything to the effort to defeat Hitler's Germany and Japan, and prevent the global dominance of Nazism. And we had to send millions of tons of arms, munitions, and war supplies to Russia, England, and the Canadians, Aussies, Irish, and Scots, because none of them could produce all they needed for themselves.

All of Europe, from Norway to Italy, except Russia in the east, was already under the Nazi heel.

America was not prepared for war. America had stood down most of its military after WWI and throughout the depression, at the outbreak of WWII there were army units training with broomsticks over their shoulders because they didn't have guns, and cars with "tank" painted on the doors because they didn't have tanks. And a big chunk of our navy had just been sunk and damaged at Pearl Harbor.

Britain had already gone bankrupt, saved only by the donation of $600 million in gold bullion in the Bank of England that was the property of Belgium and was given by Belgium to England to carry on the war when Belgium was overrun by Hitler - actually, Belgium surrendered one day, because it was unable to oppose the German invasion, and the Germans bombed Brussels into rubble the next day anyway just to prove they could. Britain had been holding out for two years already in the face of staggering shipping loses and the near-decimation of its air force in the Battle of Britain, and was saved from being overrun by Germany only because Hitler made the mistake of thinking the Brits were a relatively minor threat that could be dealt with later and turning his attention to Russia, at a time when England was on the verge of collapse in the late summer of 1940.

Russia saved America's butt by putting up a desperate fight for two years until the US got geared up to begin hammering away at Germany.

Russia lost something like 24 million people in the sieges of Stalingrad and Moscow, 90% of them from cold and starvation, mostly civilians, but also more than a million soldiers. More than a million.

Had Russia surrendered, then, Hitler would have been able to focus his entire campaign against the Brits, then America, and the Nazis would have won that war.

Had Hitler not made that mistake and invaded England in 1940 or 1941, instead, there would have been no England for the US and the Brits to use as a staging ground to prepare an assault on Nazi Europe, England would not have been able to run its North African campaign to help take a little pressure off Russia while America geared up for battle, and today Europe would very probably be run by the Nazis, the Third Reich, and, isolated and without any allies (not even the Brits), the US would very probably have had to cede Asia to the Japanese, who were basically Nazis by another name then, and the world we live in today would be very different and much worse. I say this to illustrate that turning points in history are often dicey things. And we are at another one.

There is a very dangerous minority in Islam that either has, or wants and may soon have, the ability to deliver small nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons, almost anywhere in the world, unless they are prevented from doing so.

France, Germany, and Russia, have been selling them weapons technology at least as recently as 2002, as have North Korea, Syria, and Pakistan, paid for with billions of dollars Saddam Hussein skimmed from the "Oil For Food" program administered by the UN with the complicity of Kofi Annan and his son.

The Jihadis, the militant Muslims, are basically Nazis in Kaffiyahs - they believe that Islam, a radically conservative (definitely not liberal!) form of Wahhabi Islam, should own and control the Middle East first, then Europe, then the world, and that all who do not bow to Allah should be killed, enslaved, or subjugated. They want to finish the Holocaust, destroy Israel, purge the world of Jews. This is what they say.

There is also a civil war raging in the Middle East - for the most part not a hot war, but a war of ideas. Islam is having its Inquisition and its Reformation today, but it is not yet known which will win - the Inquisition, or the Reformation.

If the Inquisition wins, then the Wahhabis, the Jihadis, will control the Middle East, and the OPEC oil, and the US, European, and Asian economies, the techno-industrial economies, will be at the mercy of OPEC - not an OPEC dominated by the well-educated and rational Saudis of today, but an OPEC dominated by the Jihadis.

You want gas in your car? You want heating oil next winter? You want jobs? You want the dollar to be worth anything? You better hope the Jihad, the Muslim Inquisition, loses, and the Islamic Reformation wins.

If the Reformation movement wins, that is, the moderate Muslims who believe that Islam can respect and tolerate other religions, and live in peace with the rest of the world, and move out of the 10th century into the 21st, then the troubles in the Middle East will eventually fade away, and a moderate and prosperous Middle East will emerge.

We have to help the Reformation win, and to do that we have to fight the Inquisition, i.e., the Wahhabi movement, the Jihad, Al Qaeda, the Islamic terrorist movements. We have to do it somewhere. We cannot do it nowhere. And we cannot do it everywhere at once. We have created a focal point for the battle now at the time and place of our choosing, in Iraq.

Not in New York, not in London, or Paris, or Berlin, but in Iraq, where we did and are doing two very important things.

(1) We deposed Saddam Hussein. Whether Saddam Hussein was directly involved in 9/11 or not, it is undisputed that Saddam has been actively supporting the terrorist movement for decades. Saddam is a terrorist. Saddam is, or was, a weapon of mass destruction, who is responsible for the deaths of probably more than a million Iraqis and two million Iranians.

(2) We created a battle, a confrontation, a flash point, with Islamic terrorism in Iraq. We have focused the battle. We are killing bad guys there and the ones we get there we won't have to get here, or anywhere else. We also have a good shot at creating a democratic, peaceful Iraq, which will be a catalyst for democratic change in the rest of the Middle East, and an outpost for a stabilizing American military presence in the Middle East for as long as it is needed.

The Euros could have done this, but they didn't, and they won't. We now know that rather than opposing the rise of the Jihad, the French, Germans, and Russians were selling them arms - we have found more than a million tons of weapons and munitions in Iraq. If Iraq was not a threat to anyone, why did Saddam need a million tons of weapons?

And Iraq was paying for French, German, and Russian arms with money skimmed from the UN Oil For Food Program (supervised by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan and his son) that was supposed to pay for food, medicine, and education, for Iraqi children.

World War II, the war with the German and Japanese Nazis, really began with a "whimper" in 1928. It did not begin with Pearl Harbor. It began with the Japanese invasion of China. It was a war for fourteen years before America joined it. It officially ended in 1945 - a 17 year war - and was followed by another decade of US occupation in Germany and Japan to get those countries reconstructed and running on their own again a 27 year war.

World War II cost the United States an amount equal to approximately a full year's GDP - adjusted for inflation, equal to about $12 trillion dollars, WWII cost America more than 400,000 killed in action, and nearly 100,000 still missing in action.

[The Iraq war has, so far, cost the US about $160 billion, which is roughly what 9/11 cost New York. It has also cost about 1,800 American lives, which is roughly 1/2 of the 3,000 lives that the Jihad snuffed on 9/11.] But the cost of not fighting and winning WWII would have been unimaginably greater - a world now dominated by German and Japanese Nazism.

Americans have a short attention span, now, conditioned I suppose by 60 minute TV shows and 2-hour movies in which everything comes out okay.

The real world is not like that. It is messy, uncertain, and sometimes bloody and ugly. Always has been, and probably always will be.

If we do this thing in Iraq successfully, it is probable that the Reformation will ultimately prevail. Many Muslims in the Middle East hope it will. We will be there to support it. It has begun in some countries, Libya, for instance. And Dubai. And Saudi Arabia. If we fail, the Inquisition will probably prevail, and terrorism from Islam will be with us for all the foreseeable future, because the Inquisition, or Jihad, believes they are called by Allah to kill all the Infidels, and that death in Jihad is glorious.

The bottom line here is that we will have to deal with Islamic terrorism until we defeat it, whenever that is. It will not go away on its own. It will not go away if we ignore it.

If the US can create a reasonably democratic and stable Iraq, then we have an "England" in the Middle East, a platform, from which we can work to help modernize and moderate the Middle East. The history of the world is the clash between the forces of relative civility and civilization, and the barbarians clamoring at the gates. The Iraq war is merely another battle in this ancient and never-ending war. And now, for the first time ever, the barbarians are about to get nuclear weapons. Unless we prevent them. Or somebody does.

The Iraq war is expensive, and uncertain, yes. But the consequences of not fighting it and winning it will be horrifically greater. We have four options -

1. We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets nuclear weapons

2. We can fight the Jihad later, after it gets nuclear weapons (which may be as early as next year, if Iran's progress on nuclear weapons is what Iran claims it is).

3. We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the Middle East, now, in Europe in the next few years or decades, and ultimately in America.

4. Or we can stand down now, and pick up the fight later when the Jihad is more widespread and better armed, perhaps after the Jihad has dominated France and Germany and maybe most of the rest of Europe. It will be more dangerous, more expensive, and much bloodier then.

Yes, the Jihadis say that they look forward to an Islamic America If you oppose this war, I hope you like the idea that your children, or grandchildren, may live in an Islamic America under the Mullahs and the Sharia, an America that resembles Iran today.

We can be defeatist peace-activists as anti-war types seem to be, and concede, surrender, to the Jihad, or we can do whatever it takes to win this war against them.

The history of the world is the history of civilizational clashes, cultural clashes. All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like, and the most determined always win.

Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them.

In the 20th century, it was Western democracy vs communism, and before that Western democracy vs. Nazism, and before that Western democracy vs. German Imperialism. Western democracy won, three times, but it wasn't cheap, fun, nice, easy, or quick. Indeed, the wars against German Imperialism (WWI), Nazi Imperialism (WWII), and communist imperialism (the 40-year Cold War that included the Vietnam Battle, commonly called the Vietnam War, but itself a major battle in a larger war) covered almost the entire century.

The first major war of the 21st Century is the war between Western Judeo/Christian Civilization and Wahhabi Islam. It may last a few more years, or most of this century. It will last until the Wahhabi branch of Islam fades away, or gives up its ambitions for regional and global dominance and Jihad, or until Western Civilization gives in to the Jihad.

Senator John Kerry, in the debates and almost daily, makes 3 scary claims:

1. We went to Iraq without enough troops.

We went with the troops the US military wanted. We went with the troop levels General Tommy Franks asked for. We deposed Saddam in 30 days with light casualties, much lighter than we expected.

The real problem in Iraq is that we are trying to be nice - we are trying to fight minority of the population that is Jihadi, and trying to avoid killing the large majority that is not. We could flatten Fallujah in minutes with a flight of B52s, or seconds with one nuclear cruise missile - but we don't. We're trying to do brain surgery, not amputate the patient's head. The Jihadis amputate heads.

2. We went to Iraq with too little planning.

This is a specious argument. It supposes that if we had just had "the right plan" the war would have been easy, cheap, quick, and clean.

That is not an option. It is a guerrilla war against a determined enemy, and no such war ever has been or ever will be easy, cheap, quick, and clean. This is not TV.

3. We proved ourselves incapable of governing and providing security.

This too is a specious argument. It was never our intention to govern and provide security. It was our intention from the beginning to do just enough to enable the Iraqis to develop a representative government and their own military and police forces to provide their own security, and that is happening. The US and the Brits and other countries there have trained over 100,000 Iraqi police and military, now, and will have trained more than 200,000 by the end of next year. We are in the process of transitioning operational control for security back to Iraq.

It will take time. It will not go with no hitches. This is not TV.

Remember, perspective is everything, and America's schools teach too little history for perspective to be clear, especially in the young American mind.

The Cold war lasted from about 1947 at least until the Berlin Wall came down in 1989. Forty-two years. Europe spent the first half of the 19th century fighting Napoleon, and from 1870 to 1945 fighting Germany.

World War II began in 1928, lasted 17 years, plus a ten year occupation, and the US still has troops in Germany and Japan. World War II resulted in the death of more than 50 million people, maybe more than 100 million people, depending on which estimates you accept.

The US has taken a little more than 2,000 KIA in Iraq. The US took more than 4,000 Killed in action on the morning of June 6, 1944, the first day of the Normandy Invasion to rid Europe of Nazi Imperialism. In WWII the US averaged 2,000 KIA a week for four years. Most of the individual battles of WWII lost more Americans than the entire Iraq war has done so far.

But the stakes are at least as high . . . a world dominated by representative governments with civil rights, human rights, and personal freedoms or a world dominated by a radical Islamic Wahhabi movement, by the Jihad, under the Mullahs and the Sharia (Islamic law).

I do not understand why the American Left does not grasp this. They favor human rights, civil rights, liberty and freedom, but evidently not for Iraqis. In America, absolutely, but nowhere else.

300,000 Iraqi bodies in mass graves in Iraq are not our problem. The US population is about twelve times that of Iraq, so let's multiply 300,000 by twelve. What would you think if there were 3,600,000 American bodies in mass graves in America because of George Bush? Would you hope for another country to help liberate America?

"Peace Activists" always seem to demonstrate where it's safe, in America. Why don't we see Peace Activist demonstrating in Iran, Syria, Iraq, Sudan, North Korea, in the places in the world that really need peace activism the most?

The liberal mentality is supposed to favor human rights, civil rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc., but if the Jihad wins, wherever the Jihad wins, it is the end of civil rights, human rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc. Americans who oppose the liberation of Iraq are coming down on the side of their own worst enemy.

If the Jihad wins, it is the death of Liberalism. Everywhere the Jihad wins, it is the death of Liberalism. And American Liberals just don't get it.

Raymond S. Kraft is a writer and lawyer living in Northern California. Please consider passing along copies of this to students in high school, college and university as it contains information about the American past that is very meaningful TODAY - - history about America that very likely is completely unknown by them (and their instructors, too). By being denied the facts and truth of our history, they are at a decided disadvantage when it comes to reasoning and thinking through the issues of today. They are prime targets for misinformation campaigns beamed at enlisting them in causes and beliefs that are special interest agenda driven.


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

Faster horses

Well-known member
WHEW. If I never got anything else out of this site, that post alone more than made up for the time I have spent here.

Thanks so much, Soapweed, for posting it. What a summary of events written so one could understand how this war must be fought where it is and at this time. I feel so sad that President Bush is attacked daily for understanding what is necessary for our country and the world and having the strength to do it.

I will print this out along with sending it to all on my mailing list.

Sobering. Chilling. Necessary.
 

Red Barn Angus

Well-known member
Excellent history lesson, Soapweed. Thank you for posting. Even some of us "old" critters can learn a lot from an article such as that. I sent it to my grad student daughter who can be just a wee bit liberal at times !
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
This winter I got a chance to watch a show on the History Channel that dealt with the connection between the Nazis and the radical Muslims and the Arab world...It went into how the Nazi's (Hitler) set up the Baath party that Saddam belonged to as a way of taking over the Arab world and exterminate the Jews...How the Baath party was a facist regime and that the Nazis had printed millions of copies of Mein Kampf in Arabic as a guideline....I was surprised at all the ties between Hitler and these radical Muslims...

Also how the history of much of these Muslim problems tie back to the events of WWI and just after---and the British rule of these areas which caused the unrest that allowed Hitler to move in....

Two hours long, so you need a rainy day - but if it ever comes on it is enlightening......
 

Jinglebob

Well-known member
Great post! Probably the best written and stated thing I've ever seen as to why we should be over there.

OK Liberals, have at it!
 

MsSage

Well-known member
I agree worth the time it took to read....... dealing with daughter NOW about waiting. Too many people want it now and easy. Life is not like that.
I heard a long time ago Armys were made to kill and break things. The militant Muslims are worth breaking. Yes it will take a long time.

What is scary is the claim that Iran tested the worlds fastest underwater missle. The USA has a list of multiply site that are supposably Nuclear plants. We are closer than many want to see. I hope the silent majority will sound the alarm till they awake the rest of the country. We are at a turning point...I only hope it has not started turning the wrong way.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Thanks, Soapweed. That is an excellent read. Too bad I don't know any liberals to send it to. Not really. I mean....I really don't know any, but that's not bad. Swhat I meant. :lol:
 

T3023

Well-known member
2005 ADVANCES THE STRUCTURE AND POWER OF WORLD GOVERNMENT
Joan M. Veon
Last year was another instrumental year in the advance of world government. While most commentators will concentrate on popularized events, many will not discuss the latest steps taken to cement the final touches to a world governmental structure that has been in the making for the last 150 years or so. In order to understand the importance of 2005’s global achievements in the march towards global governance which is the integration of the world’s peoples, countries, and philosophies, we must briefly visit the past.

While we cannot recount all, the later half of the 19th century birthed Fabian socialism in 1883, the year that Karl Marx died. The small group which included Sidney and Beatrice Webb who decided to name their society after the Third Century Roman General Quintus Fabius Maximus who never confronted his enemy but used successful guerrilla tactics to wear them down. The aims of the Fabian socialists, according to the “Basis” which was adopted by them in 1919, are “the reorganization of society by the emancipation of land and industrial capital from individual ownership and vesting them in the community for the general benefit” (Edward Pease, History of the Fabian Socialists, 1916, p.296, Appendix II). Founder Sidney Webb described socialism as “The conscious and deliberate substitution, in industrial as well as political matters, of the collective self-government of the community as a whole, organized on a democratic basis for the individual control over other men’s lives, which unrestrained private ownership of land and industrial capital inevitable involves” (Anne Fremantle, This Little Band of Profits: The British Fabians, 1960).

It is the vision of the Webb’s and their disciples such as H.G. Wells and John Maynard Keynes, that we see in all that is happening around us today. It includes the graduated income tax, control of the banking system, free trade and a globalized level of government that shifts the power of national governments to the international level, transfer of wealth and a change in property rights.

Let us re-count the 1913 birth of the U.S. tax code. Over the past 92 years, the burden of taxation has been shifted from the highest income tax to the middle class as income tax rates under Ronald Reagan dropped from 60% to 35%. That same year, the Federal Reserve Act was passed. What this meant is that a private corporation, the Federal Reserve, now manages the monetary and financial system of the United States of America. As such, they have greater power than our president and Congress as they control the banking system and the country’s business cycle. You will remember that the purpose of the Federal Reserve was to eliminate the ups and downs of the business cycle. However, the country has not experienced that as it appears that the Fed has embraced Joseph Schumpeter’s theory of creative destruction which is based on the boom/bust business cycle (Joseph Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, 1942, p.83). Will the American people ever figure out that the reason why we cannot forgive ourselves the interest on the national debt is because we owe it to a private corporation and they want what the interest which Congress originally agreed to when they passed the Federal Reserve Act. If you want to know where they get their money to lend to our government-they print it!

Beginning in 1944, the walls between the nation-states began to fall as a new international infrastructure was set in place above the nation-states. One fine example of this was the United States signing in 1947 the General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs which became the World Trade Organization in 1994. With the birth of the International Monetary Fund/World Bank, the financial and economic barriers fell, with the birth of the United Nations, the political barriers fell, with the birth of the World Trade Organization, the trade barriers fell, with the birth of the International Criminal Court, the legal barriers fell, and as a result of 9/11, military and intelligence barriers fell between the nation-states. Thus today, we are in a borderless world.

In 1971, President Richard Nixon, issued Executive Order No. 11647 which divided the United States into ten regions, each with its own administrator who then reports directly to the president. Described as “metro government” or “regional government”, it decreases the lines of power and authority which centralizes all the decision-making in the White House. Today, Metro or Regional Government is alive and well as it is being given greater position not only in all of the new rebuilding of the new development plans being made public by Mississippi and New Orleans, but with many states trying to pass laws to consolidate the local, county, and village levels of government. Furthermore, our government has circumvented the power of the states by now taking the funds the states send them and re-distributing it to the metro or regional government instead! Many of the infrastructure needs such as transportation, waste, water, etc. are all on a “regional” basis.

In 1990, Prince Charles, Prince of Wales put together a new organization, the Prince of Wales International Business Leaders’ Forum, with the purpose of setting up public-private partnerships-PPP between governments, business, and non-governmental organizations. Basically, public-private partnerships provide a way for corporations to become “co-managers” with government regarding the governance of the country. The Prince admitted in a speech while he was in the United States that he met with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan to see if business and government could work together. What came out of their discussions was the U.N. Global Compact. Today, thousands of public-private partnerships are operating world-wide and are now commonplace. They include partnerships for schools, sewer systems, transportation, water, utilities, etc. In fact the proposed Trans Texas Corridor will be a PPP. At the 2002 World Summit for Sustainable Development, over 250 PPP’s were formed-that activity was unprecedented. One is the Congo Basin Forest Partnership which involves 14 governments, including the U.S. and 8 African countries, 8 environmental groups like the World Wildlife Fund along with the American Forest and Paper Association which represents 200 companies. This partnership includes 74 million acres of land in Africa. Furthermore, there are dozens of these types of complex partnerships that the U.S. has entered into that include countries around the world.

In 1992, the UN held the “Rio Earth Summit” in which those attending, which numbered less than 30,000, agreed to Agenda 21 which is a complete reordering of the planet. It basically elevates the earth above the value of man as man’s value is dependent on if he or she can produce. It basically says that the earth’s resources need to be counted, controlled, and monitored for “future generations.” Fifteen years later, every country in the world has changed how their government operates as sustainable development is carried out worldwide. One of the treaties encompassed in Agenda 21 is the UN Biological Diversity Treaty which says man has to be sequestered into “growth areas” so that the rest of the country can be put back for the purpose of re-wilding or allowing animals to roam freely.

In 2000, the United Nations was given an overhaul in which more power was given to the Secretary-General and the General Assembly. It was also given the ability to have its own rapid defense force. Furthermore, it was given the ability to raise its own finances through various schemes to be determined in the future. Lastly, the UN unveiled the Millennium Development Goals to reduce poverty, hunger, and disease worldwide which will demand new ways to find new sources of funds. With this background, we can now understand the events of 2005.

Since 9/11 which tore down the final barriers between the nation-states which were the intelligence and military barriers, the world has entered the “finishing stage.” By this we are talking about finding ways to integrate the people of the world so that they are one and feel they have common concerns-or catastrophic occurrences which blend the peoples together as one. The people now have to be brought together as one people. The South Seas Tsunami did just that. The outpouring of aid from around the world was unprecedented. Even Presidents Bush and Clinton teamed up to raise monies. Schools, churches, the Boy Scouts, department stores, football teams, singers, actors, and famous people from across the U.S. raised monies. The U.S. gave $1B in gifts and donations alone. At the 2005 World Economic Forum, Sharon Stone put up $10,000 and challenged attendees to give money for the tsunami. Within minutes, she raised $1M. Interestingly enough, a number of the corporations of the Global Compact were there, even before governments could get aid to the devastated area. This global outpouring of compassion helped to solidify the people of the world. Then Hurricanes Katrina and Rita continued the compassionate response that only comes from the most sacred place a person has, the heart. Now it was time for other countries to come to the aid of America.

Since there are no longer any barriers between the nation-states, that means the poor, starving, and diseased of the world are everyone’s responsibility, or so they would have us believe. The Fabian socialists would call this a transfer of wealth. At the 2004 Group of Eight meeting in Sea Island, Georgia and then at the 2005 World Economic Forum in January, French President Jacques Chirac called for a global tax for the poor. In Davos, he specified a tax on airline tickets. At the July, 2005 Group of Eight meeting in Scotland, it was high on the agenda for the heads of state with the French specifying the parameters. When I asked Chirac if there would be other kinds of global taxes if this was successful, he told me they had many other types planned. In fact, right before Christmas, the French Government passed a levy tax on airline tickets to generate $236M a year for health programs aimed at helping the world’s poorest countries. Of course this measure was applauded by the United Nations as a creative way of raising money. Perhaps I should mention that this is the first time since the Roman Empire in the time of the birth of Jesus, that a global tax has been passed.

With regard to regionalism, while the U.S. has been divided up nationally, we are also part of a hemispheric free trade bloc known as the Free Trade Areas of the Americas-FTAA. While the FTAA will involve all 34 countries in this hemisphere, it is being implemented gradually. The North American Free Trade Area-NAFTA was passed in 1994 and in 2005, the Central American Free Trade Agreement-CAFTA was passed. Because of the opposition to this bill, Bush made a special trip to Capital Hill where he twisted arms by granting over 6,000 pork barrel promises which were funded by the Transportation Bill pass before the summer recess.

It should be noted that any type of regional government-either within the U.S. or within the hemisphere is government by appointed officials and not ELECTED officials. Just as the UN system is based on appointed officials, so too is regional government which is the extension of the UN form of government. In other words, the ability of the people to have a say will not be through elected officials but by APPOINTED officials. In Our Global Neighborhood, The Commission on Global Governance in 1995 wrote, “The UN must prepare for a time when regionalism becomes more ascendant worldwide, and even help the process.” This brings us to the new actors that are now involved in governance.

The globalists do not like to refer to the new structure which is being birthed in the world as “world government.” Instead, they prefer to call it “global governance.” This term refers to all the new actors that are making their views known. In the past, at the United Nations General Assembly, only member-states made speeches during the General Assembly, but because of the rise of corporations through the Prince of Wales Business Leaders Forum, the International Chamber of Commerce and other international groups, business and non-governmental organizations now give presentations. Also, both of these groups freely lobby at the UN, at global conferences, and nationally.

Foundations have long been an actor on the international stage. Of the top 50 foundation in the United States in 2003, the Ford Foundation ranks No.2 in size at $10.6B, behind the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation at $26.8B. The total yearly giving of the top 50 foundations is well over $133.6B. Foundations play a very major role today in making and changing society and values. Rene Wormser wrote in 1958, “The influence of the foundation complex in internationalism has reach far into government, into the policymaking circles of Congress and into the State Department. This has been effected through the pressure of public opinion, mobilized by the instruments of the foundations” (Foundations-Their Power and Influence). The question asked by the Reece Committee which delved into the power of foundations was, “To what extent, if any, are the funds of the large foundations aiding and abetting Marxist tendencies in the United States and weakening the love which every American should have for his way of life?”

At the heart of Agenda 21 is sustainable development which supports “highest and best use” of the world’s resources which includes you and me. As a result of Agenda 21’s, Biological Diversity Treaty, man needs to be sequestered into growth areas. In 1997, the state of Maryland was the first to pass “Smart Growth” legislation which designates areas of growth that a state will allow in order to support those areas with infrastructure. Non-growth areas are those that will not be supported by the State with tax dollars for infrastructure. Maryland’s Smart Growth legislation was in effect the passage of the UN Biological Diversity Treaty.

In 2005, personal property rights, the cornerstone of American civilization, were dealt a severe blow with the Supreme Court Kelo vs. New London ruling which says that the city had the right to use eminent domain to force highest and best use of property that would create jobs and increase tax revenue for the public good. Around the U.S., the use of eminent domain is gaining popularity. Now everyone’s home and property is at risk.

In September, Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour brought together a team of 110 urban planners in architecture, regional and community planning, civil and transportation engineering, environmentalism, codes and laws, retail, economics, public process and communication who came together to envision and plan to rebuild 11 coastal cities and 120 miles of coastal region. Headed up by the Congress for New Urbanism, they are now in the process of obtaining community agreement for their plans. It should be noted that the “new urbanism” which the Congress uses is basically Smart Growth or the UN Biological Diversity Treaty. It encompasses a return to the town planning principles in practice before the automobile, recycling existing buildings and land where possible, promoting a sense of community, revitalizing historic downtowns and residential neighborhood, giving people the option of walking, bilking or taking public transportation, high density building, and sustainable transportation which is mass transit.

The New Urbanism encompasses the sustainable philosophy of highest and best use. Therefore, if there are key neighborhoods that can be rebuilt to attract businesses: hotels, office buildings, convention centers to bring in more tax revenues, those neighborhoods will be subject to eminent domain. The plans drawn up by the Congress for New Urbanism also use regional or metro government as well as public-private partnerships.

In summary, 2005 moved us closer to world government. There is a continuing revolution over rights, values, property, and form of government. The barriers between the nation-states are gone and in its place is regionalism, supported by public-private-partnership-both advocate a structure change in government and hence, governance. There are new and powerful players that have and are changing societies norms. Transfer of wealth is now under the guise of disaster relief and airline taxes. In addition, our government is working on an “open skies” agreements with all the countries of the world. Currently they are negotiating with the EU. This means that any airline that we sign the agreement with can fly into U.S. airports and it means that the U.S. would open up the ability of foreigners to purchase our airline companies. Furthermore, the rights of the individual are now filtered through the lenses of sustainable development’s “highest and best use.” Personal property rights are being diluted as a result of highest and best use. The bottom line is that a permanent revolution is taking place before our very eyes. Unless you connect the dots, you will not see it or understand it.
 

sw

Well-known member
Thanks Soapweed, that should be required reading and it should be front page of every newspaper.
 

Clarencen

Well-known member
Thanks for posting this again Soapweed. There is a lot of things there to think about. I suppose I read this back in 2006, but I have a somewhat different perception of it today. One small event in a remote part of the world can effect us all. Most of us have to limited of a vision to see what a few of our greatest leaders were able to see.

I suppose, I have watched world events since I was about 11 years old. I was not really aware of many of the happening and understood little of those I did know of. England would have went down like Belguim, France and Holland had it not been for the US aid. Germany waged a phycological war with their bombing and shelling. Our help boasted up the people's moral and their willingness to endure and fight back.

It is really quite easy to incite people and get them to follow a cause, or even become part of a riot, without clearly seeing the whole picture. I have seen this demonstrated a few times. Look at Germany, Germany had a dificult time recovering and re-building after World War II, Hitler didn't have much touble getting the people to follow, or to get people to hate the Jews, even after the Allies bombed and destroyed much of Berlin and other German cities the people still didn't waver much.
 
Top