The Manhattan Declaration: Read it, Sign it, and Share it!

The Manhattan Declaration

Thursday, October 29, 2009

The Goal For The Climate Deal in Denmark Made Clear

According to the BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8331125.stm the goals for the meeting in Denmark this December are in peril. But they have made those goals very clear; a new form of government, a legally binding form of government heretofore unknown in the annuls of men. The article reads in part:

EU leaders must also decide how to secure the Czech Republic's ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.

The treaty would create a full-time EU president, and leaders are expected to discuss who could fill the role.

December's eagerly anticipated United Nations' Copenhagen Climate Summit will attempt to hammer out a new global climate treaty to replace the UN Kyoto Protocol.

But Mr Rasmussen said he did not believe a final deal on reducing greenhouse emissions could be reached at the meeting.

"We do not think it will be possible to decide all the finer details for a legally binding regime," he said.

"The main story will revolve around what can be gleaned about Tony Blair's chances to become the first President of the European Council." Gavin Hewitt


Though Lord Monckton's prediction of the success of the Copenhagen meeting may have been a bit premature, his analysis of their desire and intent to create a new form of world government are spot on.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A definition from one of those pesky dictionary's again:

re·gime also ré·gime (r-zhm, r-) n.

1.
a. A form of government: a fascist regime.
b. A government in power; administration: suffered under the new regime.

2. A prevailing social system or pattern.

3. The period during which a particular administration or system prevails.

4. A regulated system, as of diet and exercise; a regimen.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

All Things Are Possible With God



There are things that happen in this world that make absolutely NO SENSE to the logical mind but are nevertheless true. The scene captured above bear witness to this reality. The event occurred in Ashburton, Melbourne, Australia, when a mother was waiting for a train and for a brief moment took her eye off her baby and the stroller started towards the tracks. By the time she realizes what is happening its too late!

A tragic end to a horrific story right? Wrong! Almost miraculously the 6 month old baby is spared ANY HARM whatsoever! A scenario that no Hollywood script writer could ever imagine transpires right before our eyes.

I see in this story a metaphor for the current onslaught of the globalist agenda:

1. An unstoppable force is bearing upon an unsuspecting victim powerless to change anything even their own course of action, momentum has over taken the course of events.

2. When viewed from the outside it appears as if all is lost. The situation is a hopeless cause, all that is left to do is to clean up the mess afterward.

3. But unseen forces are at work here. Somehow, beyond all reasonable explanation which seemed certain to the logical mind is NOT the reality at all. All is Not lost, rather 'something' has occurred to thwart complete annihilation.

4. The mother did everything she could but there reached a point where she simply had to get out of the way of the unstoppable force. Sacrificing herself in an attempt to save her precious baby would have solved nothing but to make her baby an orphan.

"When His disciples heard it, they were greatly astonished, saying, "Who then can be saved?" But Jesus looked at them and said to them, "With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible." Matt 19:25-26 (NKJV)

Think About It!

And Pray!

To Be A Pariah Like Jeremiah



Read the Treaty for yourself: http://www.globalclimatescam.com/documents/un-fccc-copenhagen-2009.pdf

Please let me make this perfectly clear, I am NOT claiming Divine inspiration in any way shape or form. With that said, I would like to draw an analogy between the prophet Jeremiah and those of us who are sounding the warning cry of the current move towards globalism by our own government.

The current administration (at this point I'm not sure it matters who sits in the White House) is currently attacking a major news organization (Fox News) simply because they "don't like" what they are saying! Does the First Amendment mean anything? (Well, with the current "Hate Crimes" legislation ready to be signed into law obviously not.) How can the rest of the media NOT be outraged at this? If this were Nixon and his cronies 'going after' a news organization the media would be in a feeding frenzy. No other administration, not even FDR's, could have ever been so bold and gotten away with it!

Here comes the analogy, when the prophet Jeremiah sounded the warning that Jerusalem was going to fall he was attacked by his own brothers, beaten and put into the stocks by a priest and false prophet, imprisoned by the king, threatened with death, and thrown into a cistern by Judah’s officials all for telling the truth that they didn't want to hear. The tactic continues today, when a messenger bears an unpleasant message silence the messenger, ridicule the messenger, if all else fails, murder the messenger. Make the messenger a pariah, but by any means necessary SILENCE the messenger!

The globalists have decided to silence Fox News (and no doubt will 'go after' those who are causing problems via the internet and blogs like this one). Therefore, just like Jeremiah had to make a decision, we have to make a decision. Will we meekly succumb to the pressure and tuck our tails between our legs like good little boys and girls, or will we stand for truth and freedom no matter where it leads.

If you doubt the hour is late, I BEG YOU to watch the video!

I have tried on several occasions to talk to others about the current situation, but most people find it so unpleasant that they simply don't want to talk about it. They act like that if they ignore it it will simply go away. I suppose there were those who thought the same thing about Hitler in 1932. Were there things that should have been done, could have been done to prevent the Nazis from taking the world into the abyss? Yes there were, but none of them were easy. None were pleasant. But they were NECESSARY for them and the sake of their children if they were to escape the coming abyss, but they chose the easy way (which always ends up being the hardest way).

I suppose it comes down to this, do you have the courage to be a pariah like Jeremiah, or are you a coward?

I have cast my lot, I have made my choice, I have drawn a line in the sand! This far and NO FARTHER!

To many I have become a pariah. That's OK, I feel that that puts Glenn Beck, et. al., and I in pretty good company.

Keeping Their Eyes On The Prize:http://www.crossroad.to/articles2/forcing-change/08/one-money.htm

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

The Council on Foreign Relations and The New World Order

I USED to laugh it off when people started to talk about "conspiracy theories" and the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, etc., etc. But when Barak Obama was elected I started to re-think everything when evidence began to accumulate that the destruction of the American economy was INTENTIONAL. That the Constitution and our national sovereignty are increasingly under pressure from those within our OWN GOVERNMENT.

Everything from the health of our own bodies, to the right to bear arms, to freedom of speech is in peril (Thursday the FFC will announce new plans for 'dealing with' the internet.) The fact that the US Supreme Court WILL NOT HEAR the case of Spc. 4 Micheal New and his refusal to wear the UN Blue uniform sends chills down my spine.

I am FORCED to ask the UNTHINKABLE!!!

Questions:


Could this be TRUE?

Is it POSSIBLE that the powers-that-be really want a One World Socialistic Government?

Are we witnessing their long held plans unfold right before our very eyes?

Is ObamaCare the first step toward their 'ultimate goal' of a New World Order?

“Medicine is the keystone of the arch of socialism.” Vladimir Lenin, 1917. First dictator of the USSR.


Read the following article and You decide:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Council on Foreign Relations and The New World Order
by William Blase of The Courier

For those who may be confused by the controversies surrounding the "New World Order", a One-World-Government, and American concern over giving the UN more power; those unaware of the issues involved; and those wishing more background, I offer the following.

Originally presented for an Honors Class, "Dilemmas of War and Peace," at New Mexico State University, the paper was ridiculed and characterized by Dr. Yosef Lapid, (an acknowledged and locally quoted "expert" on Terrorism and Middle Eastern affairs) as "paranoid... possibly a symptom of mental illness." You may judge for yourself.

Citing source data is the "scientific method," but does not seem to apply to "Conspiracy Theories." A thousand sources may be quoted, yet will not convince the "skeptics," the "realists." It seems to me the "symptoms of mental illness" are on their side, if they refuse to look at evidence ("There are none so blind as those who WILL not see"); or perhaps something more sinister is at work, such as a knowledge of the truth, that does not want YOU to know.

To be paranoid means to believe in delusions of danger and persecution. If the danger is real, and the evidence credible, then it cannot be delusional. To ignore the evidence, and hope that it CANNOT be true, is more an evidence of mental illness.

The issue involves much more than a difference of philosophy, or political viewpoint. Growing up in the midst of the "Cold War," our generation were taught that those who attempted to abolish our national sovereignty and overthrow our Constitutional government were committing acts of treason. Please judge for yourself if the group discussed is guilty of such.

If one group is effectively in control of national governments and multinational corporations; promotes world government through control of media, foundation grants, and education; and controls and guides the issues of the day; then they control most options available. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and the financial powers behind it, have done all these things, and promote the "New World Order", as they have for over seventy years.

The CFR is the promotional arm of the Ruling Elite in the United States of America. Most influential politicians, academics and media personalities are members, and it uses its influence to infiltrate the New World Order into American life. Its' "experts" write scholarly pieces to be used in decision making, the academics expound on the wisdom of a united world, and the media members disseminate the message.

To understand how the most influential people in America came to be members of an organization working purposefully for the overthrow of the Constitution and American sovereignty, we have to go back at least to the early 1900's, though the story begins much earlier (depending on your viewpoint and beliefs).

That a ruling power elite does indeed control the U.S. government behind the scenes has been attested to by many Americans in a position to know. Felix Frankfurter, Justice of the Supreme Court (1939-1962), said: "The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes." In a letter to an associate dated November 21, 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt wrote, "The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson." February 23, 1954, Senator William Jenner warned in a speech: "Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government, a bureaucratic elite which believes our Constitution is outmoded."

Baron M.A. Rothschild wrote, "Give me control over a nation's currency and I care not who makes its laws." All that is needed to effectively control a government is to have control over the nation's money: a central bank with a monopoly over the supply of money and credit. This had been done in Western Europe, with the creation of privately owned central banks such as the Bank of England. Georgetown professor Dr. Carroll Quigley (Bill Clinton's mentor while at Georgetown) wrote about the goals of the investment bankers who control central banks: "... nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole... controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences."

The Bank of the United States (1816-36), an early attempt at an American central bank, was abolished by President Andrew Jackson, who believed that it threatened the nation. He wrote: "The bold effort the present bank had made to control the government, the distress it had wantonly produced...are but premonitions of the fate that awaits the American people should they be deluded into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it."

Thomas Jefferson wrote: "The Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the principles and form of our Constitution...if the American people allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Does that not describe the situation in America today?

The U.S. managed to do without a central bank until early in this century, when, according to Congressman Charles Lindbergh, Sr., "The Money Trust caused the 1907 panic, and thereby forced Congress to create a National Monetary Commission." Headed by Senator Nelson Aldrich, father-in-law of John D. Rockefeller, Jr., the Commission recommended creation of a central bank.

Though unconstitutional, as only "The Congress shall have Power...To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof..." (Article I, Section 8, U.S. Constitution) the Federal Reserve Act was passed in December 1913; ostensibly to stabilize the economy and prevent further panics, but as Lindberg warned Congress: "This act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth...the invisible government by the money power, proven to exist by the Money Trust investigation, will be legalized." The Great Depression and numerous recessions later, it is obvious the Federal Reserve produces inflation and federal debt whenever it desires, but not stability.

Congressman Louis McFadden, House Committee on Banking and Currency Chairman (1920-31), stated: "When the Federal Reserve Act was passed, the people of these United States did not perceive that a world banking system was being set up here. A super-state controlled by international bankers and industrialists...acting together to enslave the world...Every effort has been made by the Fed to conceal its powers but the truth is--the Fed has usurped the government."

Although called "Federal," the Federal Reserve system is privately owned by member banks, makes its own policies, and is not subject to oversight by Congress or the President. As the overseer and supplier of reserves, the Fed gave banks access to public funds, which enhanced their lending capacity.

Peter Kershaw, in "Economic Solutions" lists the ten major shareholders of the Federal Reserve Bank System as: Rothschild: London and Berlin; Lazard Bros: Paris; Israel Seiff: Italy; Kuhn- Loeb Company: Germany; Warburg: Hamburg and Amsterdam; Lehman Bros: New York; Goldman and Sachs: New York; Rockefeller: New York. The balance of stock is owned by major commercial member banks.

According to Davvy Kidd, "Why A Bankrupt America?" The Federal Reserve pays the Bureau of Engraving & Printing approximately $23 for each 1,000 notes printed. 10,000 $100 notes (one million dollars) would thus cost the Federal Reserve $230. They then secure a pledge of collateral equal to the face value from the U.S government. The collateral is our land, labor, and assets... collected by their agents, the IRS.

By authorizing the Fed to regulate and create money (and thus inflation), Congress gave private banks power to create profits at will. As Lindberg put it: "The new law will create inflation whenever the trusts want inflation...they can unload the stocks on the people at high prices during the excitement and then bring on a panic and buy them back at low prices...the day of reckoning is only a few years removed." That day came in 1929, with the Stock Market crash and Great Depression.

One of the most important powers given to the Fed was the right to buy and sell government securities, and provide loans to member banks so they might also purchase them. This provided another built-in mechanism for profit to the banks, if government debt was increased. All that was needed was a method to pay off the debt. This was accomplished through the passage of the income tax in 1913.

A national income tax was declared unconstitutional in 1895 by the Supreme Court, so a constitutional amendment was proposed in Congress by none other than ...Senator Nelson Aldrich. As presented to the American people it seemed reasonable enough: income tax on only one percent of income under $20,000, with the assurance that it would never increase. Since it was graduated, the tax would "soak the rich", ...but the rich had other plans, already devising a method of protecting wealth.

As described by Gary Allen in his 1976 book "The Rockefeller File," "By the time the (16th) Amendment had been approved by the states, the Rockefeller Foundation was in full operation...about the same time that Judge Kenesaw Landis was ordering the breakup of the Standard Oil monopoly...John D...not only avoided taxes by creating four great tax-exempt foundations; he used them as repositories for his 'divested' interests...made his assets non-taxable so that they might be passed down through generations without...estate and gift taxes...Each year the Rockefellers can dump up to half their incomes into their pet foundations and deduct the "donations" from their income tax."

Exchanging ownership for control of wealth, foundations are also a handy means for promoting interests that benefit the wealthy. Millions of foundation dollars have been "donated" to causes such as promoting the use of drugs, while degrading preventive medicine. Since many drugs are made from coal tar derivatives, both oil companies and drug manufacturing concerns (many Rockefeller owned or controlled) are the main beneficiaries.

With the means to loan enormous sums to the government (the Federal Reserve), a method to repay the debt (income tax), and an escape from taxation for the wealthy, (foundations), all that remained was an excuse to borrow money. By some happy "coincidence," in 1914 World War I began, and after American participation national debt rose from $1 billion to $25 billion.

Woodrow Wilson was elected President in 1913, beating incumbent William Howard Taft, who had vowed to veto legislation establishing a central bank. To divide the Republican vote and elect the relatively unknown Wilson, J.P. Morgan and Co. poured money into the candidacy of Teddy Roosevelt and his Progressive Party.

According to an eyewitness, Wilson was brought to Democratic Party headquarters in 1912 by Bernard Baruch, a wealthy banker. He received an "indoctrination course" from those he met, and in return agreed, if elected: to support the projected Federal Reserve and the income tax, and "listen" to advice in case of war in Europe and on the composition of his cabinet.

Wilson's top advisor during his two terms was a man named Colonel Edward M. House. House's biographer, Charles Seymour, called him the "unseen guardian angel" of the Federal Reserve Act, helping to guide it through Congress. Another biographer wrote that House believed: "...the Constitution, product of eighteenth-century minds...was thoroughly outdated; that the country would be better off if the Constitution could be scrapped and rewritten..." House wrote a book entitled "Philip Dru: Administrator," published anonymously in 1912. The hero, Philip Dru, rules America and introduces radical changes, such as a graduated income tax, a central bank, and a "league of nations."

World War I produced both a large national debt, and huge profits for those who had backed Wilson. Baruch was appointed head of the War Industries Board, where he exercised dictatorial power over the national economy. He and the Rockefellers were reported to have earned over $200 million during the war. Wilson backer Cleveland Dodge sold munitions to the allies, while J.P. Morgan loaned them hundreds of millions, with the protection of U.S. entry into the war.

While profit was certainly a motive, the war was also useful to justify the notion of world government. William Hoar reveals in "Architechs of Conspiracy" that during the 1950s, government investigators examining the records of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a long- time promoter of globalism, found that several years before the outbreak of World War I, the Carnegie trustees were planning to involve the U.S. in a general war, to set the stage for world government.

The main obstacle was that Americans did not want any involvement in European wars. Some kind of incident, such as the explosion of the battleship Main, which provoked the Spanish - American war, would have to be provided as provocation. This occurred when the Lusitania, carrying 128 Americans on board, was sunk by a German submarine, and anti-German sentiment was aroused. When war was declared, U.S. propaganda portrayed all Germans as Huns and fanged serpents, and all Americans opposing the war as traitors.

What was not revealed at the time, however, was that the Lusitania was transporting war munitions to England, making it a legitimate target for the Germans. Even so, they had taken out large ads in the New York papers, asking that Americans not take passage on the ship.

The evidence seems to point to a deliberate plan to have the ship sunk by the Germans. Colin Simpson, author of "The Lusitania," wrote that Winston Churchill, head of the British Admiralty during the war, had ordered a report to predict the political impact if a passenger ship carrying Americans was sunk. German naval codes had been broken by the British, who knew approximately where all U-boats near the British Isles were located.

According to Simpson, Commander Joseph Kenworthy, of British Naval Intelligence, stated: "The Lusitania was deliberately sent at considerably reduced speed into an area where a U-boat was known to be waiting...escorts withdrawn." Thus, even though Wilson had been reelected in 1916 with the slogan "He kept us out of war," America soon found itself fighting a European war. Actually, Colonel House had already negotiated a secret agreement with England, committing the U.S. to the conflict. It seems the American public had little say in the matter.

With the end of the war and the Versailles Treaty, which required severe war reparations from Germany, the way was paved for a leader in Germany such as Hitler. Wilson brought to the Paris Peace Conference his famous "fourteen points," with point fourteen being a proposal for a "general association of nations," which was to be the first step towards the goal of One World Government-the League of Nations.

Wilson's official biographer, Ray Stannard Baker, revealed that the League was not Wilson's idea. "...not a single idea--in the Covenant of the League was original with the President." Colonel House was the author of the Covenant, and Wilson had merely rewritten it to conform to his own phraseology.

The League of Nations was established, but it, and the plan for world government eventually failed because the U.S. Senate would not ratify the Versailles Treaty.

Pat Robertson, in "The New World Order," states that Colonel House, along with other internationalists, realized that America would not join any scheme for world government without a change in public opinion. After a series of meetings, it was decided that an "Institute of International Affairs", with two branches, in the United States and England, would be formed.

The British branch became known as the Royal Institute of International Affairs, with leadership provided by members of the Round Table. Begun in the late 1800's by Cecil Rhodes, the Round Table aimed to federate the English speaking peoples of the world, and bring it under their rule.

The Council on Foreign Relations was incorporated as the American branch in New York on July 29, 1921. Founding members included Colonel House, and "...such potentates of international banking as J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Paul Warberg, Otto Kahn, and Jacob Schiff...the same clique which had engineered the establishment of the Federal Reserve System," according to Gary Allen in the October 1972 issue of "AMERICAN OPINION."

The founding president of the CFR was John W. Davis, J.P. Morgan's personal attorney, while the vice-president was Paul Cravath, also representing the Morgan interests. Professor Carroll Quigley characterized the CFR as "...a front group for J.P. Morgan and Company in association with the very small American Round Table Group." Over time Morgan influence was lost to the Rockefellers, who found that one world government fit their philosophy of business well. As John D. Rockefeller, Sr. had said: "Competition is a sin," and global monopoly fit their needs as they grew internationally.

Antony Sutton, a research fellow for the Hoover Institution for War, Revolution, and Peace at Stanford University, wrote of this philosophy: "While monopoly control of industries was once the objective of J.P. Morgan and J.D. Rockefeller, by the late nineteenth century the inner sanctums of Wall Street understood the most efficient way to gain an unchallenged monopoly was to 'go political' and make society go to work for the monopolists-- under the name of the public good and the public interest."

Frederick C. Howe revealed the strategy of using government in a 1906 book, "Confessions of a Monopolist": "These are the rules of big business...Get a monopoly; let society work for you; and remember that the best of all business is politics..."

As corporations went international, national monopolies could no longer protect their interests. What was needed was a one world system of government controlled from behind the scenes. This had been the plan since the time of Colonel House, and to implement it, it was necessary to weaken the U.S. politically and economically.

During the 1920's, America enjoyed a decade of prosperity, fueled by the easy availability of credit. Between 1923 and 1929 the Federal Reserve expanded the money supply by sixty-two percent. When the stock market crashed, many small investors were ruined, but not "insiders." In March of 1929 Paul Warburg issued a tip the Crash was coming, and the largest investors got out of the market, according to Allen and Abraham in "None Dare Call it Conspiracy."

With their fortunes intact, they were able to buy companies for a fraction of their worth. Shares that had sold for a dollar might now cost a nickel, and the buying power, and wealth, of the rich increased enormously.

Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking Committee declared: "It was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence...The international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might emerge as rulers of us all."

Curtis Dall, son-in-law of FDR and a syndicate manager for Lehman Brothers, an investment firm, was on the N.Y. Stock Exchange floor the day of the crash. In "FDR: My Exploited Father-In-Law," he states: "...it was the calculated 'shearing' of the public by the World-Money powers triggered by the planned sudden shortage of call money in the New York Market."

The Crash paved the way for the man Wall Street had groomed for the presidency, FDR. Portrayed as a "man of the little people", the reality was that Roosevelt's family had been involved in New York banking since the eighteenth century.

Frederic Delano, FDR's uncle, served on the original Federal Reserve Board. FDR attended Groton and Harvard, and in the 1920's worked on Wall Street, sitting on the board of directors of eleven different corporations.

Dall wrote of his father-in-law: "...Most of his thoughts, his political 'ammunition,'...were carefully manufactured for him in advance by the CFR-One World Money group. Brilliantly... he exploded that prepared 'ammunition' in the middle of an unsuspecting target, the American people--and thus paid off and retained his internationalist political support."

Taking America off the gold standard in 1934, FDR opened the way to unrestrained money supply expansion, decades of inflation--and credit revenues for banks. Raising gold prices from $20 an ounce to $35, FDR and Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau, Jr. (son of a founding CFR member), gave international bankers huge profits.

FDR's most remembered program, the New Deal, could only be financed through heavy borrowing. In effect, those who had caused the Depression loaned America the money to recover from it. Then, through the National Recovery Administration, proposed by Bernard Baruch in 1930, they were put in charge of regulating the economy. FDR appointed Baruch disciple Hugh Johnson to run the NRA, assisted by CFR member Gerard Swope. With broad powers to regulate wages, prices, and working conditions, it was, as Herbert Hoover wrote in his memoirs: "...pure fascism;...merely a remaking of Mussolini's 'corporate state'..." The Supreme Court eventually ruled the NRA unconstitutional.

During the FDR years, the Council on Foreign Relations captured the political life of the U.S. Besides Treasury Secretary Morgenthau, other CFR members included Secretary of State Edward Stettinus, War Secretary Henry Stimson, and Assistant Secretary of State Sumner Welles.

Since 1934 almost every United States Secretary of State has been a CFR member; and ALL Secretaries of War or Defense, from Henry L. Stimson through Richard Cheney.

The CIA has been under CFR control almost continuously since its creation, starting with Allen Dulles, founding member of the CFR and brother of Secretary of State under President Eisenhower, John Foster Dulles. Allen Dulles had been at the Paris Peace Conference, joined the CFR in 1926, and later became its president.

John Foster Dulles had been one of Woodrow Wilson's young proteges at the Paris Peace Conference. A founding member of the CFR...he was an in-law of the Rockefellers, Chairman of the Board of the Rockefeller Foundation, and Board Chairman of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

In 1940 FDR defeated internationalist Wendell Willkie, who wrote a book entitled "One World," and later became a CFR member. Congressman Usher Burdick protested at the time on the floor of the House that Willkie was being financed by J.P. Morgan and the New York utility bankers. Polls showed few Republicans favored him, yet the media portrayed him as THE Republican candidate.

Since that time nearly ALL presidential candidates have been CFR members. President Truman, who was not a member, was advised by a group of "wise men," all six of whom were CFR members, according to Gary Allen. In 1952 and 1956, CFR Adlai Stevenson challenged CFR Eisenhower. In 1960, CFR Kennedy (who was probably killed because he had the courage NOT to go along with all their plans) CFR Nixon. In 1964 the GOP stunned the Establishment by nominating its candidate over Nelson Rockefeller. Rockefeller and the CFR wing proceeded to picture Barry Goldwater as a dangerous radical. In 1968 CFR Nixon ran against CFR Humphrey. The 1972 "contest" featured CFR Nixon vs. CFR McGovern.

CFR candidates for president include George McGovern, Walter Mondale, Edmund Muskie, John Anderson, and Lloyd Bentsen. In 1976 we had Jimmy Carter, who is a member of the Trilateral Commission, created by David Rockefeller and CFR member Zbigniew Brezinski with the goal of economic linkage between Japan, Europe, and the United States, and: "...managing the world economy...a smooth and peaceful evolution of the global system." We have also had (though his name strangely disappears from the membership list in 1979) CFR director (1977-79) George Bush, and last but not least, CFR member Bill Clinton.

They have all promoted the "New World Order," controlled by the United Nations. The problem is that "...the present United Nations organization is actually the creation of the CFR and is housed on land in Manhattan donated to it by the family of current CFR chairman David Rockefeller," as Pat Robertson describes it.

The original concept for the UN was the outcome of the Informal Agenda Group, formed in 1943 by Secretary of State Cordell Hull. All except Hull were CFR members, and Isaiah Bowman, a founding member of the CFR, originated the idea.

The American delegation to the San Francisco meeting that drafted the charter of the United Nations in 1949 included CFR members Nelson Rockefeller, John Foster Dulles, John McCloy, and CFR members who were communist agents--Harry Dexter White, Owen Lattimore, and the Secretary-General of the conference, Alger Hiss. In all, the Council sent forty-seven of its members in the United States delegation, effectively controlling the outcome.

Since that time the CFR and its friends in the mass media (largely controlled by CFR members such as Katherine Graham of the "Washington Post" and Henry Luce of" Time, Life"), foundations, and political groups have lobbied consistently to grant the United Nations more authority and power. Bush and the Gulf War were but one of the latest calls for a "New World Order."

Admiral Chester Ward, a member of the CFR for over a decade, became one of its harshest critics, revealing its inner workings in a 1975 book, "Kissinger ON THE COUCH." In it he states "The most powerful cliques in these elitist groups have one objective in common: they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and national independence of the United States."

Most members are one-world-government ideologists whose long- term goals were officially summed up in September 1961 State Department Document 7277, adopted by the Nixon Administration: "...elimination of all armed forces and armaments except those needed to maintain internal order within states and to furnish the United Nations with peace forces...by the time it (UN global government) would be so strong no nation could challenge it."

Within the CFR there exists a "much smaller group but more powerful...made up of Wall Street international bankers and their key agents. Primarily, they want the world banking monopoly from whatever power ends up in control of the global government ...This CFR faction is headed by the Rockefeller brothers," according to Ward.

What must be remembered is that this is not some lunatic- fringe group...these are members of one of the most powerful private organizations in the world: the people who determine and control American economic, social, political, and military policy. Members' influence and control extends to "leaders in academia, public service, business, and the media," according to the CFR 1993 "Annual Report."

Their founding they describe as: "American Participants in the Paris Peace Conference decided that it was time for more private Americans to become familiar with the increasing responsibilities and obligations of the United States...there was a need for an organization able to provide for the continuous study of U.S. foreign police for the BENEFIT OF ITS MEMBERS (emphasis mine) and a wider audience of interested Americans."

They sponsor hundreds of programs, where members "exchange views with American and foreign officials and policy experts... discuss foreign policy issues...consider international issues of concern to the business community" (Corporate business), and "...affiliated groups of community leaders throughout the United states...meet with decision makers."

The CFR states that it is "host to many views, advocate of none," and it "has no affiliation with the U.S. government." No, no affiliation at all, if you don't count: "A Council member was elected president of the United States...Dozens of other Council colleagues were called to serve in cabinet and sub-cabinet positions," as they describe it in "Foreign Afairs," along with many members of Congress, the Supreme Court, the Joint Chiefs, the Federal Reserve, and many other Federal bureaucrats. They are not AFFILIATED with government, they ARE the government, in effect.

One re-occurring view was stated in the 50th anniversary issue of "Foreign Affairs," the official publication of the CFR. In an article by Kingman Brewster, Jr. entitled "Reflections on Our National Purpose." Our purpose should be, according to him, to do away with our nationality, to "take some risks in order to invite others to pool their sovereignty with ours..."

These "risks" include disarming to the point where we would be helpless against the "peace-keeping" forces of a global UN government. We should happily surrender our sovereignty to the world government in the interests of the "world community."

Today we have the spectacle of Spc. 4 Michael New, a U.S. soldier in Germany who refuses to wear the uniform of the UN, facing an "administrative discharge." He states rightly that he swore an oath to defend the U.S. Constitution, not the United Nations. Many other Americans have taken that same oath, such as myself, and believe it is our sworn duty still to defend the Constitution, since an oath sworn before God must be fulfilled. (Why else do we swear to tell the truth in our courts, or when taking public office?) Is it a crime these days to actually BELIEVE in God and the oath that was taken?

Meanwhile, others who attempt to destroy the Constitution and our sovereignty are given honors and position...At least they are not hypocrites...only supremely arrogant.

"In short, the 'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down...An end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old fashioned assault..." in the opinion of Richard N. Gardner, former deputy assistant Secretary of State in "Foreign Affairs," April 1974.

James Warburg, son of CFR founder Paul Warburg, and a member of FDR's "brain trust," testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17, 1950, "We shall have world government whether or not you like it--by conquest or consent."

Is this an AMERICAN speaking, or a dangerous lunatic? Who is this "We" who threatens to CONQUER us?

They are a group that actually has the power to do it, and is doing it every day, bit by bit.

CFR Members in the mass media, education, and entertainment push their propaganda of "humanism" and world brotherhood. We should all live in peace under a world government, and forget about such selfish things as nationalities and patriotism. We can solve our own problems. We don't need God, or morals, or values: it's all relative, anyway, right?...Because if we actually had some moral character and values, we might be able to discern that these people are actually EVIL.

The Bible says that the LOVE of money is the root of all evil (1 Tim. 6:10). These people are evil because they love money and power, and greed drives them to do anything to achieve their goals. They have lost all morality and conscience, and believe such concepts, as well as our Constitution, "outdated".

THAT is insanity--to have more wealth than can be spent, and still it is never enough. They have to control governments, start wars, conspire to rule the world; least the "common people" wake up to how they have gained their wealth, take it away from them, and demand that they pay the price for their crimes.

That is why they constantly pit us one against the other, with "Diversity," Affirmative Action, and other programs,...black against white, men against women, rural against urban, ranchers against environmentalists, and on and on...least we look in their direction.

We The People are held to a much higher standard. If we threaten the President or a public official, we are charged with a crime...yet the One-World-Gang can threaten the Constitution and the liberties of We The People, the sovereign rulers of this nation, and nothing is said or done.

Perhaps they do not fear what Man can do to them... they believe they have arranged everything, and their power and wealth will prevail in this world. However, those among them who have sworn an oath before God to uphold and defend the Constitution: the President, members of Congress, and the military; may find one day that they do indeed have something to fear. Partial List of CFR members, from the 1993 "Annual Report." Approximately 3,000 total.

Elliott Abrams, ROGER ALTMAN, John Anderson, Roone Arledge, LES ASPIN, BRUCE BABBITT, Howard Baker, William Bennett, LLOYD BENTSEN, Shirley Black, Tom Bradley, TOM BROKAW, Harold Brown, RONALD BROWN, Z. Brezindski, WILLIAM BUCKLEY, Frank Carlucci, JIMMY CARTER, John Chancellor, Richard Cheney, Henry Cisneros, BILL CLINTON, William Colby, WARREN CHRISTOPHER, Mario Cuomo, James Dalton, Richard Darman, JOHN DEUTCH, Charles Dodd, Michael Dukakis, L. Eagleburger, Daniel Ellsberg, Geraldine Ferraro, Thomas Foley, GERALD FORD, Robert Gates, DAVID GERGEN, NEWT GINGRICH, RUTH GINSBERG, Katherine Graham, ALAN GREENSPAN, Alexander Haig, Richard Helms, Benjamin Hooks, C. Hunter-Gault, JESSE JACKSON, Bernard Kalb, N. Katzenbach, George Kennan, John Kerry, Jean Kirkpatrick, Henry Kissinger, ANTHONY LAKE, JIM LEHRER, I. R. Levine, John Lindsay, Richard McFarlane, George McGovern, Robert McNamera, Robert McNeill, George Mitchell, Walter Mondale, Daniel Moynihan, Edmund Muskie, Jack Nelson, Paul Nitze, SANDRA O'CONNOR, Claiborne Pell, Richard Perle, COLIN POWELL, DAN RATHER, ALIVE RIVLIN, Charles Robb, David Rockefeller, John Rockefeller, William Rogers, Walt Rostow, W. Ruckelshaus, Warren Rudman, Dean Rusk, Carl Sagan, Harrison Salisbury, Jonas Salk, DIANE SAWYER, John Scali, James Schlesinger, Daniel Schorr, PAT SCHROEDER, Brent Scowcroft, William Scranton, DONNA SHALALA, William Shirer, S. Shriver, George Shultz, Gary Sick, L. Silberman, William Simon, Steven Solarz, G. Stephanopoulas, David Stockman, Robert Strauss, Peter Tarnoff, D. THORNBURGH, Stansfield Turner
LAURA D'ANDREA TYSON, Cyrus Vance, John Vessey, Paul Volcker, BARBARA WALTERS, Paul Warnke, Ben Wattenberg, William Webster, Caspar Weinberger, Timothy Wirth, Frank Wisner, JAMES WOOSLEY, Elmo Zumwalt,

Past and present Directors of the CFR include George Bush, Thomas Foley, Averell Harriman, David Rockefeller, Donna Shalala, Zbigniew Brzezinski, John McCloy, Douglas Dillon, Adlai Stevenson, Bill Moyers, Cyrus Vance, Henry Kissinger, George Shultz, Alan Greenspan, William Rogers, Lane Kirkland, and many other well-known names.

Corporate Members include:

American Airlines, American Express, Archer Daniels Midland, ASARCO, AT&T International, Atlantic Richfield, Avon Products, BMW of North America, Bank of America Bankers, Trust Barclays Bank, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Capital Cities/ABC, Chase Manhattan Bank, Chevron Citibank/Ciiticorp, Coca-Cola, Deere & Company, Dow Chemical, Dow Jones & Company, Dun & Bradstreet, E. I. du Pont, Estee Lauder, Exxon, Forbes Magazine, Ford Motor Company, General Electric, General Motors, Georgia-Pacific, H. J. Heinz, Hilton Hotels, IBM Corporation, ITT Corporation, John Wiley & Sons, Johnson & Johnson, J. P. Morgan & Co., Peat Marwick, Merill Lynch, Mitsubishi, Mobil Corporation, New York Times, Nippon Steel, USA Occidental Petroleum, Olin Corportation, Paramount Publishing, PepsiCo, Pfizer, Phillips Petroleum, Price Waterhouse, Proctor & Gamble, Prudential Insurance, RJR Nabisco, Rockefeller Group, Schlumberger Limited, S. G. Warburg & Co., Siemens Corporation, Smith Barney Shearson, Sony Corporation, Texaco, Times Mirror, Toyota Motor Corp., TRW, Xerox Corporation

Colonel House, the fallen angel, still has relatives controlling the CFR. Karen Elliot House is Chairman of the Membership Committee, and a member of the Nominating Committee, along with Jeane Kirkpatrick. David Rockefeller is now "Honorary Chairman of the Board", after serving as Chairman 1970-1985; and "Director Emeritus," after serving as a Director 1949-1985. Peter G. Peterson is Chairman, Admiral B. R. Inman is Vice Chairman, while Thomas Foley and Jeane Kirkpatrick are Directors serving on the Executive Committee.

These "private citizens" have access to government officials and policy makers as often as they wish, yet the results of their meetings can only be given to other government officials, corporate officers, or law partners. Participants are forbidden to transmit an attributed statement to any public medium, such as newspapers or TV, where there is "risk that it will promptly be widely circulated or published," as the "Annual Report" puts it.

Should not OUR public officials be forbidden to meet in secret with private groups? Public officials should only be allowed to discuss public business and policy in a public forum. The Public...remember US?

There is much more to say about this group and their plans for America. Gary Allen, in "The Rockefeller File," states that they are behind the many regional government plans, which would abolish city, county, and state lines, leaving us at the mercy of federal bureaucrats; and behind the push for "land use" controls. They want "federal control of everything. Since they intend to control the federal government..."

There are also the many allegations of involvement in gun running, drug smuggling, prostitution and sex slaves; and the many mysterious assassinations and "suicides" of witnesses and others who get too close to the truth...but that is another story.

REFERENCES

Bo Adelmann, 1986. "The Federal Reserve System." The New American, October 17.

Gary Allen, 1976. "The Rockefeller File". Seal Beach, CA: '76 Press.

Gary Allen with Larry Abraham, 1972. "None Dare Call it Conspiracy." Rossmoor, CA: Concord Press.

"Congressional Record," December 22, 1913, Vol. 51.

Phoebe and Kent Courtney, 1962. "America's Unelected Rulers, The Council on Foreign Relations." New Orleans: Conservative Society of America.

Curtis B. Dall, 1970. "FDR My Exploited Father-In-Law." Washington D.C.: Action Associates.

A. Ralph Epperson, 1985. "The Unseen Hand." Tucson, AZ: Publius Press.

"F.D.R.: His Personal Letters," 1950. New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce.

William P. Hoar, 1984. "Architects of Conspiracy." Belmont MA: Western Islands.

Herbert Hoover, 1952. "The Memoirs of Herbert Hoover, The Great Depression 1929-1941." New York: Macmillan.

Frederick C. Howe, 1906. "Confessions of a Monopolist." Chicago: Public Publishing Co.

Robert C. Johansen, 1980. "Models of World Order," in "Dilemmas of War and Peace."

Peter Kershaw, 1994. "Economic Solutions."

Devvy Kidd, 1995. "Why A Bankrupt America?" Colorado: Project Liberty.

Ferdinand Lundberg, 1938. "America's 60 Families." New York: Vanguard.

Louis T. McFadden, 1934. "The Federal Reserve Corporation, remarks in Congress." Boston: Forum Publication Co.

James Perloff, 1988. "The Shadows of Power." Appleton, WI: Western Islands.

Carroll Quigley, 1966. "Tragedy and Hope." New York: Macmillan.

Pat Robertson, 1991. "The New World Order." Dallas: Word Publishing.

Charles Seymour, ed., 1926. "The Intimate Paper of Colonel House." Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Colin Simpson, 1972. "The Lusitania." Boston: Little, Brown.

Arthur D. Howde Smith, 1940. "Mr House ob5 Texas." New York: Funk and Wagnalls.

Antony C. Sutton, 1975. "Wall Street and FDR." New Rochelle, New York: Arlington House.

George Sylvester Viereck, 1932. "The Strangest Friendship in History." New York: Liveright.

This document may be freely distributed or quoted in any medium, provided credit is given to the author and The Courier.

Copyright 1995 by William Blase

e-mail: wblase@zianet.com

The Courier 115 W. Hall Hatch, New Mexico 87937 TEL 505 267 3546 FAX 505 267 3019

e-mail: courier@zianet.com

http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/council_on_foriegn_relations.htm

Monday, October 19, 2009

THE UNITED STATES PROGRAM FOR GENERAL AND COMPLETE DISARMAMENT IN A PEACEFUL WORLD

FREEDOM FROM WAR

THE UNITED STATES PROGRAM
FOR GENERAL AND COMPLETE
DISARMAMENT IN A PEACEFUL
WORLD


DEPARTMENT OF STATE


DEPARTMENT OF STATE PUBLICATION 7277
Disarmament Series 5
Released September 1961

Office of Public Services
BUREAU OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office Washington 25, D.C.
- Price 15 cents.


Introduction

The revolutionary development of modern weapons within a world divided by serious ideological differences has produced a crisis in human history. In order to overcome the danger of nuclear war now confronting mankind, the United States has introduced at the Sixteenth General Assembly of the United Nations a Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.
This new program provides for the progressive reduction of the war-making capabilities of nations and the simultaneous strengthening of international institutions to settle disputes and maintain the peace. It sets forth a series of comprehensive measures which can and should he taken in order to bring about a world in which there will be freedom from war and security for all states. It is based on three principles deemed essential to the achievement of practical progress in the disarmament field:

First, there must be immediate disarmament action:

A strenuous and uninterrupted effort must be made toward the goal of general and complete disarmament; at the same time, it is important that specific measures be put into effect as soon as possible.

1



Second, all disarmament obligations must be subject
to effective international controls:

The control organization must have the manpower, facilities, and effectiveness to assure that limitations or reductions take place as agreed. It must also be able to certify to all states that retained forces and armaments do not exceed those permitted at any stage of the disarmament process.

Third, adequate peace-keeping machinery must be established:

There is an inseparable relationship between the scaling down of national armaments on the one hand and the building up of international peace-keeping machinery and institutions on the other. Nations are unlikely to shed their means of self-protection in the absence of alternative ways to safeguard their legitimate interests. This can only be achieved through the progressive strengthening of international institutions under the United Nations and by creating a United Nations Peace Force to enforce the peace as the disarmament process proceeds.


There follows a summary of the principal provisions of the United States Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.The full text of the program is contained in an appendix to this pamphlet.

2



FREEDOM FROM WAR
THE UNITED STATES PROGRAM FOR
GENERAL AND COMPLETE DISARM-
AMENT IN A PEACEFUL WORLD

Summary

DISARMAMENT GOAL AND OBJECTIVES

The over-all goal of the United States is a free, secure, and peaceful world of independent states adhering to common standards of justice and international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of law; a world which has achieved general and complete disarmament under effective international control; and a world in which adjustment to change takes place in accordance with the principles of the United Nations.
In order to make possible the achievement of that goal, the program sets forth the following specific objectives toward which nations should direct their efforts:

* The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force;

* The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all weapons of mass destruction and

3


the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order;

* The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations;

* The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to insure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations.


TASK OF NEGOTIATING STATES

The negotiating states are called upon to develop the program into a detailed plan for general and complete disarmament and to continue their efforts without interruption until the whole program has been achieved. To this end, they are to seek the widest possible area of agreement at the earliest possible date. At the same time, and without prejudice to progress on the disarmament program, they are to seek agreement on those immediate measures that would contribute to the common security of nations and that could facilitate and form part of the total program.

GOVERNING PRINCIPLES

The program sets forth a series of general principles to guide the negotiating states in their work. These make clear that:

4


* As states relinquish their arms, the United Nations must be progressively strengthened in order to improve its capacity to assure international security and the peaceful settlement of disputes;

* Disarmament must proceed as rapidly as possible, until it is completed, in stages containing balanced, phased, and safeguarded measures;

* Each measure and stage should be carried out in an agreed period of time, with transition from one stage to the next to take place as soon as all measures in the preceding stage have been carried out and verified and as soon as necessary arrangements for verification of the next stage have been made;

* Inspection and verification must establish both that nations carry out scheduled limitations or reductions and that they do not retain armed forces and armaments in excess of those permitted at any stage of the disarmament process; and

* Disarmament must take place in a manner that will not affect adversely the security of any state.


DISARMAMENT STAGES

The program provides for progressive disarmament steps to take place in three stages and for the simultaneous strengthening of international institutions.

FIRST STAGE

The first stage contains measures which would significantly reduce the capabilities of nations to wage

5



aggressive war. Implementation of this stage would mean that:

* The nuclear threat would be reduced:

All states would have adhered to a treaty effectively prohibiting tile testing of nuclear weapons.
The production of fissionable materials for use in weapons would be stopped and quantities of such materials from past production would be converted to non-weapons uses.
States owning nuclear weapons would not relinquish control of such weapons to any nation not owning them and would not transmit to any such nation information or material necessary for their manufacture.
States not owning nuclear weapons would no~ manufacture them or attempt to obtain control of such weapons belonging to other states.
A Commission of Experts would be established to report on the feasibility and means for the verified reduction and eventual elimination of nuclear weapons stockpiles.

* Strategic delivery vehicles would he reduced:

Strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles of specified categories and weapons designed to counter such vehicles would be reduced to agreed levels by equitable and balanced steps; their production would be discontinued or limited; their testing would be limited or halted.


6


* Arms and armed forces would be reduced:

The armed forces of the United States and the Soviet Union would be limited to 2.1 million men each (with appropriate levels not exceeding that amount for other militarily significant states); levels of armaments would be correspondingly reduced and their production would be limited.
An Experts Commission would be established to examine and report on the feasibility and means of accomplishing verifiable reduction and eventual elimination of all chemical, biological and radiological weapons.


* Peaceful use of outer space would be promoted:

The placing in orbit or stationing in outer space of weapons capable of producing mass destruction would be prohibited.
States would give advance notification of space vehicle and missile launchings.


* U.N. peace-keeping powers would be strengthened:

Measures would be taken to develop and strengthen United Nations arrangements for arbitration, for the development of international law, and for the establishment in Stage II of a permanent U.N. Peace Force.



* An International Disarmament Organization would be established for
effective verification of the disarmament program:

Its functions would be expanded progressively as disarmament proceeds.

7



It would certify to all states that agreed reductions have taken place and that retained forces and armaments do not exceed permitted levels.
It would determine the transition from one stage to the next.


* States would he committed to other measures to reduce international tension and to protect against the chance of war by accident, miscalculation, or surprise attack:

States would be committed to refrain from the threat or use of any type of armed force contrary to the principles of the U.N. Charter and to refrain from indirect aggression and subversion against any country.
A U.N. peace observation group would be available to investigate any situation which might constitute a threat to or breach of the peace.
States would be committed to give advance notice of major military movements which might cause alarm; observation posts would be established to report on concentrations and movements of military forces.


SECOND STAGE

The second stage contains a series of measures which would bring within sight a world in which there would be freedom from war. Implementation of all measures in the second stage would mean:

* Further substantial reductions in the armed forces, armaments, and military establishments of states, including strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles and countering weapons;

8


* Further development of methods for the peaceful settlement of disputes under the United Nations;

* Establishment of a permanent international peace force within the United Nations;
* Depending on the findings of an Experts Commission, a halt in the production of chemical, bacteriological, and radiological weapons and a reduction of existing stocks or their conversion to peaceful uses;

* On the basis of the findings of an Experts Commission, a reduction of stocks of nuclear weapons;

* The dismantling or the conversion to peaceful uses of certain military bases and facilities wherever located; and

* The strengthening and enlargement of the International Disarmament Organization to enable it to verify the steps taken in Stage II and to determine the transition to Stage III.


THIRD STAGE

During the third stage of the program, the states of the world, building on the experience and confidence gained in successfully implementing the measures of the first two stages, would take final steps toward the goal of a world in which:

* States would retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order; they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a U.N. Peace Force.

9


* The U.N. Peace Force, equipped with agreed types and quantities of armaments, would be fully functioning.

* The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful purposes.

* The peace-keeping capabilities of the United Nations would be sufficiently strong and the obligations of all states under such arrangements sufficiently far reaching as to assure peace and tile just settlement of differences in a disarmed world.



10




Appendix

DECLARATION ON DISARMAMENT

THE UNITED STATES PROGRAM FOR
GENERAL AND COMPLETE DISARMA-
MENT IN A PEACEFUL WORLD


The Nations of the world,
Conscious of the crisis in human history produced by the revolutionary development of modern weapons within a world divided by serious ideological differences;
Determined to save present and succeeding generations from the scourge of war and the dangers and burdens of the arms race and to create conditions in which all peoples can strive freely and peacefully to fulfill their basic aspirations;
Declare their goal to be: A free, secure, and peaceful world of independent states adhering to common standards of justice and international conduct and subjecting the use of force to the rule of law; a world where adjustment to change takes place in accordance with the principles of the United Nations; a world where there shall be a permanent state of general and complete disarmament under effective international control and where the resources of nations shall be devoted to man's material, cultural, and spiritual advance;
Set forth as the objectives of a program of general and complete disarmament in a peaceful world:
(a) The disbanding of all national armed forces and the prohibition of their reestablishment in any form whatsoever other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to a United Nations Peace Force;

11


(b) The elimination from national arsenals of all armaments, including all weapons of mass destruction and the means for their delivery, other than those required for a United Nations Peace Force and for maintaining internal order;
(c) The establishment and effective operation of an International Disarmament Organization within the framework of the United Nations to ensure compliance at all times with all disarmament obligations;
(d) The institution of effective means for the enforcement of international agreements, for the settlement of disputes, and for the maintenance of peace in accordance with the principles of the United Nations.
Call on the negotiating states:
(a) To develop the outline program set forth below into an agreed plan for general and complete disarmament and to continue their efforts without interruption until the whole program has been achieved;
(b) To this end to seek to attain the widest possible area of agreement at the earliest possible date;
(c) Also to seek -- without prejudice to progress on the disarmament program -- agreement on those immediate measures that would contribute to the common security of nations and that could facilitate and form a part of that program.
Affirm that disarmament negotiations should be guided by the following principles:
(a) Disarmament shall take place as rapidly as possible until it is completed in stages containing balanced, phased and safeguarded measures, with each measure and stage to be carried out in an agreed period of time.
(b) Compliance with all disarmament obligations shall be effectively verified from their entry into force. Verification arrangements shall be instituted progressively and in such a manner as to verify not only that agreed limitations or reductions take place but also that retained armed forces and armaments do not exceed agreed levels at any stage.
(c) Disarmament shall take place in a manner that will not

12


affect adversely the security of any state, whether or not a party to an international agreement or treaty.
(d) As states relinquish their arms, the United Nations shall he progressively strengthened in order to improve its capacity to assure international security and the peaceful settlement of differences as well as to facilitate the development of international cooperation in common tasks for the benefit of mankind.
(e) Transition from one stage of disarmament to the next shall take place as soon as all the measures in the preceding stage have been carried out and effective verification is continuing and as soon as the arrangements that have been agreed to be necessary for the next stage have been instituted.
Agree upon the following outline program for achieving general and complete disarmament:


STAGE I

A. To Establish an International Disarmament Organization:
(a) An International Disarmament Organization (IDO) shall he established within the framework of the United Nations upon entry into force of the agreement. Its functions shall be expanded progressively as required for the effective verification of the disarmament program.
(b) The IDO shall have: (1) a General Conference of all the parties; (2) a Commission consisting of representatives of all the major powers as permanent members and certain other states on a rotating basis; and (3) an Administrator who will administer the Organization subject to the direction of the Commission and who will have the authority, staff, and finances adequate to assure effective impartial implementation of the functions of the Organization.
(c) The IDO shall: (1) ensure compliance with the obligations undertaken by verifying the execution of measures agreed upon; (2) assist the states in developing the details of agreed further verification and disarmament measures; (3) provide for the estab-

13


lishment of such bodies as may be necessary for working out the details of further measures provided for in the program and for such other expert study groups as may be required to give continuous study to the problems of disarmament; (4) receive reports on the progress of disarmament and verification arrangements and determine the transition from one stage to the next.

B. To Reduce Armed Forces and Armaments:
(a) Force levels shall be limited to 2.1 million each for the U.S. and U.S.S.R. and to appropriate levels not exceeding 2.1 million each for all other militarily significant states. Reductions to the agreed levels will proceed by equitable, proportionate, and verified steps.
(b) Levels of armaments of prescribed types shall be reduced by equitable and balanced steps. The reductions shall be accomplished by transfers of armaments to depots supervised by the IDO. When, at specified periods during the Stage I reduction process, the states party to the agreement have agreed that the armaments and armed forces are at prescribed levels, the armaments in depots shall be destroyed or converted to peaceful uses.
(c) The production of agreed types of armaments shall be limited.
(d) a Chemical, Biological, Radiological (CBR) Experts Commission shall be established within the IDO for the purpose of examining and reporting on the feasibility and means for accomplishing the verifiable reduction and eventual elimination of CBR weapons stockpiles and the halting of their production.

C. To Contain and Reduce the Nuclear Threat:
(a) States that have not acceded to a treaty effectively prohibiting the testing of nuclear weapons shall do so.
(b) The production of fissionable materials for use in weapons shall be stopped.
(c) Upon the cessation of production of fissionable materials for use in weapons, agreed initial quantities of fissionable materials from past production shall be transferred to non-weapons purposes.

14


(d) Any fissionable materials transferred between countries for peaceful uses of nuclear energy shall be subject to appropriate safeguards to be developed in agreement with the IAEA.
(e) States owning nuclear weapons shall not relinquish control of such weapons to any nation not owning them and shall not transmit to any such nation information or material necessary for their manufacture. States not owning nuclear weapons shall not manufacture such weapons, attempt to obtain control of such weapons belonging to other states, or seek or receive information or materials necessary for their manufacture.
(f) A Nuclear Experts Commission consisting of representatives of the nuclear states shall be established within the IDO for the purpose of examining and reporting on the feasibility and means for accomplishing the verified reduction and eventual elimination of nuclear weapons stockpiles.

D.To Reduce Strategic Nuclear Weapons Delivery Vehicles:
(a) Strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles in specified categories and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such vehicles shall be reduced to agreed levels by equitable and balanced steps. The reduction shall be accomplished in each step by transfers to depots supervised by the IDO of vehicles that are in excess of levels agreed upon for each step. At specified periods during the Stage I reduction process, the vehicles that have been placed under supervision of the IDO shall be destroyed or converted to peaceful uses.
(b) Production of agreed categories of strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such vehicles shall be discontinued or limited.
(c) Testing of agreed categories of strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such vehicles shall be limited or halted.

E. To Promote the Peaceful Use Of Outer Space:
(a) The placing into orbit or stationing in outer space of weapons capable of producing mass destruction shall be prohibited.

15


(b) States shall give advance notification to participating states and to the IDO of launchings of space vehicles and missiles, together with the track of the vehicle.

F. To Reduce the Risks of War by Accident, Miscalculation, and Surprise Attack:
(a) States shall give advance notification to the participating states and to the IDO of major military movements and maneuvers, on a scale as may be agreed, which might give rise to misinterpretation or cause alarm and induce countermeasures. The notification shall include the geographic areas to be used and the nature, scale and time span of the event.
(b) There shall be established observation posts at such locations as major ports, railway centers, motor highways, and air bases to report on concentrations and movements of military forces.
(c) There shall also be established such additional inspection arrangements to reduce the danger of surprise attack as may be agreed.
(d) An international commission shall be established immediately within the IDO to examine and make recommendations on the possibility of further measures to reduce the risks of nuclear war by accident, miscalculation, or failure of communication.

G. To Keep the Peace:
(a)States shall reaffirm their obligations under the U.N. Charter to refrain from the threat or use of any type of armed force-including nuclear, conventional, or CBR--contrary to the principles of the U.N. Charter.
(b) States shall agree to refrain from indirect aggression and subversion against any country.
(c) States shall use all appropriate processes for the peaceful settlement of disputes and shall seek within the United Nations further arrangements for the peaceful settlement of international disputes and for the codification and progressive development of international law.

16


(d) States shall develop arrangements in Stage I for the establishment in Stage II of a U.N. Peace Force.
(e) A U.N. peace observation group shall be staffed with a standing cadre of observers who could be dispatched to investigate any situation which might constitute a threat to or breach of the peace.


STAGE II

A. International Disarmament Organization:
The powers and responsibilities of the IDO shall be progressively enlarged in order to give it the capabilities to verify the measures undertaken in Stage II.

B. To Further Reduce Armed Forces and Armaments:
(a) Levels of forces for the U.S., U.S.S.R., and other militarily significant states shall be further reduced by substantial amounts to agreed levels in equitable and balanced steps.
(b) Levels of armaments of prescribed types shall be further reduced by equitable and balanced steps. The reduction shall be accomplished by transfers of armaments to depots supervised by the IDO. When, at specified periods during the Stage II reduction process, the parties have agreed that the armaments and armed forces are at prescribed levels, the armaments in depots shall be destroyed or converted to peaceful uses.
(c) There shall he further agreed restrictions on the production of armaments.
(d) Agreed military bases and facilities wherever they are located shall he dismantled or converted to peaceful uses.
(e) Depending upon the findings of the Experts Commission on CBR weapons, the production of CBR weapons shall be halted, existing stocks progressively reduced, and the resulting excess quantities destroyed or converted to peaceful uses.

C. To Further Reduce the Nuclear Threat:
Stocks of nuclear weapons shall be progressively reduced to the minimum levels which can be agreed upon as a result of the find-

17


ings of the Nuclear Experts Commission; the resulting excess of fissionable material shall be transferred to peaceful purposes.

D. To Further Reduce Strategic Nuclear Weapons Delivery Vehicles:
Further reductions in the stocks of strategic nuclear weapons delivery vehicles and agreed types of weapons designed to counter such vehicles shall be carried out in accordance with the procedure outlined in Stage I.

E. To Keep the Peace:
During Stage II, states shall develop further the peace-keeping processes of the United Nations1 to the end that the United Nations can effectively in Stage III deter or suppress any threat or use of force in violation of the purposes and principles of the United Nations:

(a) States shall agree upon strengthening the structure, authority, and operation of the United Nations so as to assure that the United Nations will be able effectively to protect states against threats to or breaches of the peace.
(b) The U.N. Peace Force shall be established and progressively strengthened.
(c) States shall also agree upon further improvements and developments in rules of international conduct and in processes for peaceful settlement of disputes and differences.


STAGE III


By the time Stage II has been completed, the confidence produced through a verified disarmament program, the acceptance of rules of peaceful international behavior, and the development of strengthened international peace-keeping processes within the framework of the U.N. should have reached a point where the states of the world can move forward to Stage III. In Stage III progressive controlled disarmament and continuously developing principles and procedures of international law would proceed to

18


a point where no state would have the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N. Peace Force and all international disputes would be settled according to the agreed principles of international conduct.
The progressive steps to be taken during the final phase of the disarmament program would be directed toward the attainment of a world in which:
(a) States would retain only those forces, non-nuclear armaments, and establishments required for the purpose of maintaining internal order; they would also support and provide agreed manpower for a U.N Peace Force.
(b) The U.N. Peace Force, equipped with agreed types and quantities of armaments, would be fully functioning.
(c) The manufacture of armaments would be prohibited except for those of agreed types and quantities to be used by the U.N. Peace Force and those required to maintain internal order. All other armaments would be destroyed or converted to peaceful
purposes.
(d) The peace-keeping capabilities of the United Nations would be sufficiently strong and the obligations of all states under such arrangements sufficiently far-reaching as to assure peace and the just settlement of differences in a disarmed world.




19
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1961 O---609147

http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu/ERC/arms/freedom_war.html

Medicine: The "Keystone in the Arch of Socialism" Lenin

Physician Jane Orient wrote:

Besides being a scam as far as health is concerned, universal health care is a great way of implementing one of socialism’s main objectives through the back door: equalization of incomes through redistribution of wealth. Let us not forget that Lenin called medicine the “keystone in the arch of socialism.” In Canada, for example, socialized medicine is a reality of everyday life. Everybody has to have insurance. It is universal, it is mandatory, and it is affordable. People with low incomes may pay as little as $300 a year through their taxes whether they like it or not.

Those in the upper-income category may pay as much as $22,000 for the same low-quality insurance policy. Canada’s upside-down-and-backward universal health care makes sure that anybody can go to the doctor because of a sniffle without paying the bill. On the other hand those who are really sick are “guaranteed” to be circling around the emergency room or piled up on gurneys in the corridor, and they are forced to pay for such care on the basis of income. It is the ultimate sliding scale.

Can you think of any other product that you have to pay for according to your income? When you buy a car, does the dealer look at your tax return and say, “Well, this car is going to be ten times as much for you as it is for me”? It’s a great way to redistribute the wealth.


http://www.fff.org/freedom/fd0807e.asp

Physician Richard B. Swint wrote:

A history lesson: Perhaps these events listed below are expected social regression. Aside from the unbearable tax for socialized medicine, there is something basically evil in this much government control over people and doctors.

1801 President Thomas Jefferson: “If the people let government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as sorry a state as are the souls of those who live under tyranny.”

1883 Germany introduced Social Security and compulsory medical insurance.

1917 Lenin, first dictator of the USSR: “Medicine is the keystone of the arch of socialism.”

1933 Hitler, January 30, became chancellor of Germany (50 years after socialism enacted) and 45% of doctors and most university professors joined the Nazi party. Hitler carried out extermination and sterilization of large numbers of “non-productive” Germans with the assistance of German physicians before starting the extermination of the Jews.

1935 U.S. enacted Social Security.

1967 U.S. enacts Medicare; (32 years after Social Security).

1990 September 1, Social Security Act (Section 1848) requiring providers (doctors) to submit claims to the government. The penalty for not submitting claims to Medicare is $10,000 for each claim, with triple damages (i.e., $30,000) for each repeated offense. Now, probably more than 95% of U.S. doctors participate in Medicare. (Is that adequate coercion to join?)

1991 June 5, Special Medicare Newsletter. No. 99 from Blue Cross of Texas: “Inquiries Regarding Dissociation from Medicare: ”…only way a physician can dissociate: Discontinue Medicare services; or surrender his/her license.” (Does that sound like a threat?)

1996 The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act. “The Privacy Rule…permits disclosure of personal health information for … and other important purposes.” The privacy section of this act is a farce. When you sign the papers in the doctor’s offices you authorize dissemination of your medical records for “other important purposes”. (You may end up on the ‘termination’ list.)

1964 Ronald Reagan: “Plutarch, Roman historian 86 AD, warned, The real destroyer of the liberties of the people is he who spreads among them bounties, donations and benefits.”
“. . . the doctors fight against socialized medicine is your fight . . . We can’t socialize the doctors without socializing the patients … government invasion of public power is eventually an assault upon your own business.”
“We will preserve for our children . . . or we will sentence them to take the first step into a thousand years of darkness.”

1864 Abraham Lincoln: “The people of the United States are the rightful masters of both Congress and the Courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.”

Don’t forget the mandatory new tax. On the face, socialized medical care looks charitable, with only good intentions, but once power over your health care is given to a government bureaucracy, it may take you places you do not want to go, a little at a time.

Follow the trail of the best and worse outcomes of socialism: read about Germany’s plan during the era from 1883 to 1945 at these links: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazi_eugenics and/or http://highschoolbioethics.georgetown.edu/units/cases/unit4_5.html).

Now, do you want to go along with nationalized (socialized) health care?


Sincerely,

Richard B. Swint, M.D.

2510 Stillhouse Road

Paris, TX 75462

903-784-5727

903-784-5814

903-782-8140

The Future of American Health Care

Saturday, October 17, 2009

The VERY High Price of ObamaCare

If you would like to know the future of the Health care bill and the the future of health care in America watch this interview with Newt Gingrich then read the article by Dick Morris.



HIGH PRICE OF OBAMACARE
By Dick Morris 10.14.2009

Published on TheHill.com on October 13, 2009

Will a young, healthy, childless individual or couple buy health insurance costing 7.5 percent of their income, as required by Obama’s health legislation? Not until they get sick. Then they can always buy the insurance, and the Obama bill requires the insurance companies to give it to them. And if the premiums come to more than 7.5 percent of their income because they are now sick, no problem. Obama will subsidize it.


Instead, young, healthy, childless people will likely opt to pay the $1,000 fine (aka slap on the wrist) mandated in the bill. After all, even if they make as little as $50,000 a year, the fine is a lot cheaper than 7.5 percent of their income (or $3,500 a year)!

So…these young households will not contribute to the coffers of any health insurance company until they are sick and need the coverage. By then, their costs will come to vastly more than their premiums.

Who will subsidize the difference? We will.

The insurance industry estimates that the bill will drive up premiums for the average family by $1,700 a year. By the time the bill takes effect in 2013, it estimates that the average annual family health insurance premiums (now $12,300) will rise to $17,200 if the Obama bill is passed, but only to $15,500 if it is defeated.

And who do you think the voters will blame for the hike in their premiums? The Democrats who passed the bill.

Supporters of the bill are quick to counter that greater efficiency, etc., will hold down premiums. But they have little to answer the argument that, without higher fines, the young and healthy will not consent to pay an arm and a leg for insurance they don’t need.

Any lingering motivation to pay the premiums will disappear once the Obama bill requires insurance companies to cover them when they do, finally, limp in the door, desperately in need of insurance. Why pay now when you can always pay later? And, with a government subsidy, you gain nothing by paying for all those years when you don’t need insurance.

So Obama’s program turns out not to be one to spread insurance and thus spread the risk of costly illness, but one to make people pay 7.5 percent of their incomes once they get sick, with the government picking up their remaining premium and the health insurance customers paying for the medical expenses. Some deal!

So tote up the cost of this bill on the middle class:

• $1,700 more in insurance premiums for the average family

• Medical devices like wheelchairs and hearing aids get taxed

• Those who are sick must pay an average of about $600 more a year in income taxes because the bill raises the threshold for deducting medical expenses from 7.5 percent of income to 10 percent

• A $404 billion cut in Medicare

• Ending the subsidized Medicare Advantage insurance for costs over and above Medicare. Without Medicare Advantage, the elderly can only augment Medicare by buying Medigap coverage, for which no subsidy is available and whose premiums are higher (offered, conveniently enough, by Obama’s buddies at the AARP)

• No importation of Canadian medicines and no competitive bidding to hold down prescription drug costs (Obama’s deal to get Pharma’s support and advertising dollars)

• A shortage of medical personnel and equipment as 30 million new patients are added without any expansion of the population of doctors and nurses. This shortage will make rationing inevitable, even if it shortens life expectancies among the elderly.

And all of this assumes that the House bill, which imposes a 4.5 percent payroll tax (which will discourage new employment), does not pass.

…And that the cost estimates of this program prove realistic. Despite the Congressional Budget Office’s concurrence, one can’t help noticing that Massachusetts’s program was estimated to cost $200 million in 2005 and now costs $700 million!

This healthcare bill is, indeed, Obama’s first tax on the middle class.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

A Not So Covert Assult on the 2nd Amendement

Most People are UNAWARE of the fact that any treaty ratified by the US government SUPERSEDES US law and the Constitution of the United States of America!

Watch this report broadcast by CNN's Lou Dobbs.

Wednesday, October 7, 2009

They're Baack: With A Vengence

Most of us have been lulled into believing that the war of ideologies has been fought, won and decided. That the ideologies of Marxism, Communism, Fascism and any other 'ism', i.e. Islamo-fascism, etc. have already been relegated to the ash heap of history. We have fought those wars. We have won those battles. Humanity has already declared the verdict, these forms of government are not viable alternatives. Democracy must prevail!

Not so fast there cowboy. We have the "NEW PROGRESSIVES" in this country who are now in power and are emboldened enough to reveal their true thoughts and intent for anyone willing to listen to what it is that they have to say (and yes, they are good at bloviating and using their special 'code' language to bore a man to tears but we MUST listen for the POTUS is their man and he listens to them).

The "NEW PROGRESSIVES" (Neo-Progressives, or neo-progs)are a rueful lot. They seem to be able to ignore the facts that stare them in the face and and carry on as though nothing has ever happened to contradict their Pollyannic view of the world. They TRULY BELIEVE in Big Government as the cure for the ailments of the world. They TRULY BELIEVE that if only government were IN CHARGE OF EVERYTHING that there would be a Utopian Society where everyone would do his share and everyone would be a happy and productive member of society. If they were in charge we could stop building prisons (eventually, because we are going to NEED them in the near future for those who are causing 'problems') and wastefully spending our resources on wars and keeping a standing military. If we would only listen to them and let them have their way everyone would be happy and young forever. Oh, what a wonderful world it would be, if only....

I suppose one could call them idealists, or unrealistic, or egg-headed intellectuals, Marxists, Communists or whatever. I call them what they are: DANGEROUS~

These "NEW PROGRESSIVES" ignore men like Madison, Jefferson, Franklin and one of the most remarkable men in history; George Washington (when he voluntarily relinquished the reigns of power he set a new standard in the annals of human governance). These men understood the human condition. They knew what unrestrained government was capable of and they knew that government BY ITS VERY NATURE is coercive. Government exists for one reason and one reason alone: Do what we say or else! Or else pay the fine, or else we will put you in prison, or else we will take your very life! Listen to the words of George Washington,
"Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."

Yet these "NEW PROGRESSIVES" think that they are different. They think that they are smarter than everyone else, including the founding fathers. That they will FINALLY get big government right THIS TIME. Yes, the Soviet Union failed, but that was because they weren't in charge. Yes, the Post Office is a national embarrassment of governmental bureaucratic inefficiency, and the Social Security Administration is a bureaucratic nightmare, and the Internal Revenue Service is so complicated and convoluted that if you call and speak to one official and ask a question and then call back five minutes later and ask the same question to a different official you are likely to get two completely different answers to a question for which YOU will be criminally liable. But the Veteran's Administration is supposed to be a model for nationalized health care due to the "care" that our veterans receive (never mind the fact that there is NO ACCOUNTABILITY in the VA system, that veterans were infected with the AIDS VIRUS when given routine colostomies in Nashville, or that our veterans were counseled on when life was not worth living anymore, or that...).

But that's just.... (well I don't know what they would say to that argument, but I do know that they ignore the evidence and would somehow try to explain it away). "BUT BIG GOVERNMENT IS THE ANSWER!" Just trust us and give us complete control over everything and we will show you what REALLY Big Government can do!

The following are video excerpts from the "Thinking Big, Thinking Forward Conference" held February 11th, 2009



http://www.findinternettv.com/Videos/3244564388.aspx (A 1 hour and 28 minute long drivel of frightening nonsense)

The Bottom Line "NEO-PROGRESSIVE" Philosophy:

1) Control the Masses


a) What they think
b) What they buy
c) What they eat
d) Who lives and who dies (medical care given or denied SEE: Complete Lives System Philosophy)
e) How long they live so as not to be an undue burden on society and resources

Think the movie "Logan's Run"

2) Redistribute Wealth

a) Take from the rich and give to the poor until they are rich no more
b) Take from the rich nations and give to the poor nations until they are rich no more


Questions:


What are the implications of Deepak's statement of the change from personal freedom to the new paradigm?
What are the consequences for all of us? Intended and unintended?
Who comes to bail out the poorer nations in crisis if America isn't there to do it anymore?

Final Thoughts:

Time is short! The coming financial economic earthquake is being brought upon us INTENTIONALLY for the purposes of creating a new form of REALLY BIG GOVERNMENT!

A Plausible Scenario:

A crisis occurs, man-made or natural, let's say a massive earthquake in the region of San Francisco. Given the increasingly fragile state of our economy, the intentional devaluing of the dollar and the rapidly increasing global loss of confidence in American financial systems we enter into an economic free fall from which EVERYONE is powerless to stop.

We go over the cliff!

Untold pain, misery, suffering and death.

The Obama administration scrambles to restore order out of chaos reveling in "how bad and how long the crisis is" then Rahm Emmanuel and company pounce on the opportunity to recreate America in their idea of a Utopian Oligarchy.

The Constitution ~ Relegated to the ash heap of history!
The Bill of Rights ~ See Above
Our Beloved Republic, "of the People, by the People and for the People" ~ See Above

Result ~ A Brave New World!

May God Have Mercy on His People!