THE MILITARY AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER

By Michael LeMieux
May 1, 2010
NewsWithViews.com

Anyone who has been watching the news or paying attention to the world around them has heard of conspiracy theory of the “New World Order.” According to this theory, over the decades, a relatively small group of elite people have been manipulating events to create a global governance to usher in total control of the entire planet.

To some the evidence of this conspiracy is overwhelming and cannot be mere coincidence. Others cannot fathom that such a thing could actually happen without everyone knowing about it. I think it may be a little of both. If you Google “New World Order,” you will return a list of over 276 million hits. By anyone’s standard this is quite impressive. In contrast, if you do a similar search for “George Washington,” one of our nations most honored and renowned leaders, you would only come up with 74 million hits.

Obviously this is not definitive proof, but it shows that there has been a great deal of time and effort involved to both prove or disprove the theory. As with most conspiracy theories, behind each of them lay a grain of truth upon which the theory is based. The conclusion, however, may be something totally different or it could be spot on. This, however, is the nature of conspiracy theories. They are as hard to prove as they are to disprove.

Another aspect of a great conspiracy theory is the deniability factor. If the government denies it is happening, then the supporters of the theory say they are lying to cover up what they are doing. If the government is silent, then the theorists say they consent by their silence (because if they were innocent, they would attempt to clear their name.) Occasionally the target of the conspiracy theory may use the attention to their advantage, to deflect attention away from something they may not want others to know. So you see conspiracy theories can be used by both sides.

What happens when a theory gains more and more evidence of its existence and national leaders openly admit to the theory? For example:

President George W. Bush (March 6, 1991): “Until now, the world we’ve known has been a world divided – a world of barbed wire and concrete block, conflict and cold war. Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order. In the words of Winston Churchill, a "world order" in which "the principles of justice and fair play ... protect the weak against the strong ..." A world where the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders.”

Dr. Carroll Quigley, CFR member, college mentor of President Clinton, author of "Tragedy and Hope," stated: "The Council on Foreign Relations is the American branch of a society which originated in England ... [and] ... believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established."

Zbigniew Brzezinski was National Security Advisor to five presidents. What was not widely known is that he was also a CFR member and founding member of the Trilateral Commission. He stated: "In the economic-technological field, some international cooperation has already been achieved, but further progress will require greater American sacrifices. More intensive efforts to shape a new world monetary structure will have to be undertaken, with some consequent risk to the present relatively favorable American position." He also stated that: "The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities." (Emphasis added.)

Part of this plan to implement a New World Order has already been completed in Europe with the European Union. At first it was designed only as a “free trade” agreement to make Europe more competitive with the larger markets of the United States and China. Since its original formation they have grown to include a political system to govern monetary affairs. They adopted a new currency, a court system, imposed taxes, created a police force, and also a military. It seems like they have all the makings of a United European States government.

Transpose that scenario across the seas to the United States – for the past few decades the federal government has been pushing more and more free trade agreements around the world. Under President GHW Bush we implemented the Security and Prosperity Partnership with the United States, Canada, and Mexico as partners. Under this agreement many goals were established to build cooperation in key areas of security and business to include a single border that encompassed all three countries. Part of this shared border would include integration of police and military command and control, training, interoperability of equipment, and standards.

Another aspect of the SPP was to have more open borders where citizens of each of the member countries would more easily be able to travel and that the flow of goods and services would be expedited. Travel corridors would be created to ensure a smooth flow between the three countries.

The CFR produced a report entitled, “Building the North American Community” recommending the following:

1. That the three nations should cooperate and share responsibility in areas of law enforcement, energy security, regulatory policy, dispute resolution, and continental defense vice national defense.
2. That the countries should rely more on business and less on bureaucracy.
3. To build an area where there is free movement of trade, capital and people. (Apparently border security is out the window.)
4. Security boundaries should be around the continent not around individual nations.
5. They recommend creating a North America security pass. Not only will we have a national ID, we will have a continental ID, which has smart chip technology so we can be tracked wherever we go.
6. By 2010 they wanted to have established a free flow of people across the interior borders of all three countries.
7. They recommend development of a tri-national threat intelligence center and joint training for law enforcement officials.
8. They recommend the development of tri-national ballistics and explosives registration. (Second Amendment, we don’t need any Second Amendment.)
9. Military defense structures are to be comprised of all three countries’ militaries.
10. Combine the intelligence-sharing capabilities at both the military and law enforcement levels.
11. They also want to spread the benefits of economic development. (This sounds a little like socialism -- entitlement rights for the poor to narrow the income gap between the three countries. Why don’t they have to work for a living like everyone else?)
12. Pour more money, resources, businesses, infrastructure, judicial reform, and governmental oversight into Mexico to allow them to grow faster than the U.S. or Canada so they can catch up to us economically.
13. They want to create investment funds in Canada and the U.S. to funnel more capital into Mexico.
14. Combine national resources for all three countries to share.
15. They want to create common tariffs for all three nations and allow all ports to be used for all of the nations. (This will require modification of national tax structures, port authorities, Labor Union practices, and security.)
16. Establish a permanent tribunal for dispute resolution. (This is the first step in creating a judicial system. This tribunal will supersede national law and constitutions.)
17. Open skies and open roads. No more borders and check points, we should all trust each other. We’re a partnership now.
18. Increase labor mobility. (Sounds like open borders to me.)
19. They also want us to implement a Social Security Totalization Agreement between the U.S. and Mexico. (What? We can’t make SS work for our own citizens, and they want to add more? It keeps sounding more like socialism.)
20. Next, a full North American education system. (Maybe this will fix our broken education system, NOT.)
21. Create organizations and governmental departments to facilitate a vision-to-action framework. (This, my friends, has already started.)

I did not go into every detail of what the CFR wants in the way of creating this integration, community, union, or whatever you want to call it; but I think you get the picture. Now looking over the list and comparing it to the European structure and SPP goals laid out above, do you notice the striking similarities between the two?

President Obama stated his intent to move forward with advancing the SPP agenda under a less controversial title of “North America Leader Summit.” Navy Vice Admiral James Winnefeld Jr. stated, during his April confirmation hearings to a Senate committee, that if confirmed to head U.S. Northern Command and the North American Aerospace Defense Command, he will work to build and maintain the command’s relationships between the militaries of Canada and Mexico.

We have already integrated the Northern Command with the Canadian Command to aid in missions in support of the civil authorities. This means that the President could call upon foreign troops to operate within the borders of our own nation and for/or against the American people.

To further entrench the New World Order conspiracy – a February 2009 U.S. Army War College paper authored by Scott G. Wuestner, entitled “Building Partner Capacity/Security Force Assistance: A New Structural Paradigm,” stated:

“This paper analyzes this construct and provides a framework for identifying proponency, institutionalizing lessons learned from Operation IRAQI FREEDOM and Operation ENDURING FREEDOM, as well as providing military, police and governance structure as a tool for global engagement. This new structural paradigm will help the United States gain access, influence, and build capacity throughout this new world order.”

President Obama in his Berlin wall speech called for a World Order “where the burdens of global citizenship…” would be shared. Yet in this very same speech he condemns the workers of America for causing global warming, which we now know is based on lies and false data.

We have changed Presidents and political parties many times over the past forty plus years, but when you look at what they have said and what they are doing, you have to wonder if the conspiracy theorists are right. How could so many different leaders, with different backgrounds, different political platforms, different beliefs, all promote the same programs that are leading us toward a “New World Order?”

Do you really think this is all a coincidence?

© 2010 Michael LeMieux - All Rights Reserved