Bankers Declare U.S. & Europe Conquered Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones Infowars.com Thursday, July 19, 2012 World government now an open secret A recent CNBC clip in which financial analysts admit to viewers that America is under the control of a group of central bankers who are building a world government is a damning insight into how the establishment has dispensed with any pretense of trying to hide their agenda as it is finalized. CNBC admits We're all SLAVES to CENTRAL BANKERS VIDEO BELOW http://www.youtube.com/watch? feature=player_embedded&v=efKchHKMb2k During the video, the host asks guests, “Do we all work for central bankers – is this global governance at last – is it one world – the central bankers in charge….aren’t we all just living and dying for what the central banks do?” “To answer your question, we are absolutely slaves to central banks,” responds the guest. “We beholden to what central bankers and policy makers do rather than the fundamentals in the economy,” adds another. This is just one of a deluge of examples where it is now being thrown in our faces that a banking elite is building a world government at the expense of the American people. From treating the issue as a “conspiracy theory” for decades, the establishment is now tearing away the veil in an effort to force Americans to blithely accept what has been planned all along. A global government is now being forcefully pushed as the “solution” to all manner of problems, but specifically in relation to financial crises. We are being brainwashed to accept the premise that centralized power in the hands of a tiny elite is the only recourse, and that a one world currency is inevitable. At the height of the last economic crisis, Bilderberg member and Financial Times columnist Gideon Rachman argued that “everything is in place” for a dictatorial world government to be imposed by a technocratic elite. Rachman’s 2008 call for authoritarian technocrats to be put in charge of the global economy in preparation for the official birth of global government is now well on its way to completion, with the economies of France, Ireland, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Greece, along with the IMF and the European Central Bank, all under Goldman Sachs banker occupation. These technocrats have not been bashful in openly announcing what they are doing.
Upon his selection to become EU President in 2009, Herman Van Rompuy announced that the financial crisis and efforts to combat global warming were designed to precede “the global management of our planet.” He also declared 2009 to be “the first year of global governance.” New EU president confirms New World Order desire (19Nov09) VIDEO BELOW http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hXWeOa-FuyM In the same year, Van Rompuy was joined by the Pope who also called for a “world political authority” to manage the global economy. World Bank President and Bilderberg elitist Robert Zoellick also openly admitted the plan to eliminate national sovereignty and impose a global government during a speech on the eve of the G20 summit. Calls for a one world currency to be a key component of global governance have been consistent. In 2000 speech, member of the executive board of the ECB, Sirkka Hämäläinen stated, “In conclusion, I should like to come back to Paul Volcker’s prophecy. He might be right, and we might one day have a single world currency. Maybe European integration, in the same way as any other regional integration, could be seen as a step towards the ideal situation of a fully integrated world.” In a 2010 speech to the CFR, former president of the ECB Jean-Claude Trichet made it clear that the Global Economy Meeting (GEM), which meets at the BI S (Bank of International Settlements) headquarters in Basel would “become the prime group for global governance among central banks.” Trichet added that the BIS meetings were ensuring that “the system is moving decisively towards genuine global governance.” Trichet went on to define how global governance would operate.
“There are numerous definitions of global governance. In the economic and financial sphere I will propose that global governance comprehends not only the constellation of supranational institutions – including the international financial institutions – but also the informal groupings that have progressively emerged at the global level. Those informal forums (G7, G10, G20, etc.) are key in improving global coordination in all the areas where decision making processes remain national – whether in helping to work out agreed prudential standards and codes or to facilitate where appropriate, the coordination of economic macropolicies.” Numerous other members of the political establishment have openly expressed the agenda to create global government. not only in response to the financial crisis but also as an answer to man-made climate change. In 2009, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon admitted that carbon taxes levied in the name of abating global warming would be collected by a world body. “We will establish a global governance structure to monitor and manage the implementation of this,” he stated. In a New York Times editorial entitled “We Can Do It,” Ki-moon also wrote that efforts to impose restrictions on CO2 emissions, “Must include an equitable global governance structure.” Fellow globalist and environmentalist David De Mayer Rothschild also disclosed the agenda for global governancein an interview with Bloomberg news. “It’s past the point of talking. We know historically that the global governance sort of agenda to these issues is very hard to… with all the best intentions it’s very hard to actually activate.” Rothschild noted. Similarly, Al Gore said in a 2009 speech that attempts to regulate CO2 emissions would be driven through “global governance and global agreements.” A 2010 UN blueprint for putting the organization back at the forefront of global governance alarmingly revealed the agenda to re-brand global warming as “overpopulation” as a means of dismantling the middle classes while using “global redistribution of wealth” and increased immigration to reinvigorate the pursuit of a one world government. Bureaucrats at the 2011 UN Climate Summit in Durban outlined plans for the most draconian, harebrained and madcap climate change treaty ever produced, under which the west would be mandated to respect “the rights of Mother Earth” by paying a “climate debt” which would act as a slush fund for bankrolling an all-powerful world government. Earlier this year a Scientific American article entitled Effective World Government Will Be Needed to Stave Off Climate Catastrophe argued that global management of the planet was the only means of
combating global warming. Although the agenda for global government is now bearing its teeth with little regard for subtleness or stealth, the following quotes stretching back over the last several decades prove that the plan has been long in the works. “Today America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government.” Henry Kissinger “We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and their great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.” David Rockefeller “In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single global authority and realize national sovereignty wasn’t such a great deal after all.” Strobe Talbot “We need a global New Deal — a grand bargain between the countries and continents of this world.” Gordon Brown “It seems to many of us that if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic world conflict we must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government patterned after our own government with a legislature, executive and judiciary, and police to enforce its international laws and keep the peace. To do that, of course, we Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty. That would be a bitter pill. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith in the new order. Pat Robertson has written in a book a few years ago that we should have a world government, but only when the Messiah arrives. He wrote, literally, any attempt to achieve world order before that time must be the work of the devil. Well, join me. I’m glad to sit here at the right hand of Satan.” Walter Cronkite “This is global governance in the making. But we must agree, and agree to a binding commitment.” George Papandreou, former Prime Minister of Greece “For the first time, humanity is instituting a genuine instrument of global governance. From the very earliest age, we should make environmental awareness a major theme of education and a major theme of political debate, until respect for the environment comes to be as fundamental as safeguarding our rights and freedoms. By acting together, by building this unprecedented instrument, the first component of an authentic global governance, we are working for dialogue and peace.” Jacques Chirac “For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” David Rockefeller, from his own book, Memoirs.
JFK Secret Society Speech This is a portion of the speech that President John F. Kennedy gave at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel on April 27, 1961. "The President and the Press" before the American Newspaper Publishers Association. "The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secre t oaths and secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know." In my efforts to provide you a transcript of the attached file, I have discovered that the above paragraph is word for word the first 1:26. The next 3 paragraphs and the first sentence of the next paragraph were omitted. I do not know why since I do not know what the editor of the original speech had in his or her mind. The file continues ..... "For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence--on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day. It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit, highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. Its mistakes are buried not headlined. Its dissenters
are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed." End at 2:28 - This is a solid piece in the transcript but ends mid paragraph. Several more paragraphs of the transcript are skipped and the file continues....... "No President should fear public scrutinity of his program. For from that scrutiny comes understanding; and from that understanding comes support or opposition. And both are necessary. I am not asking your newspapers to support the Administration, but I am asking your help in the tremendous task of informing and alerting the American people. For I have complete confidence in the response and dedication of our citizens whenever they are fully informed. I not only could not stifle controversy among your readers-- I welcome it. This Administration intends to be candid about its errors; for as a wise man once said: "An error does not become a mistake until you refuse to correct it." We intend to accept full responsibility for our errors; and we expect you to point them out when we miss them. Without debate, without criticism, no Administration and no country can succeed-- and no republic can survive. That is why the Athenian lawmaker Solon decreed it a crime for any citizen to shrink from controversy. And that is why our press was protected by the First (emphasized) Amendment-the only business in America specifically protected by the Constitution-- not primarily to amuse and entertain, not to emphasize the trivial and sentimental, not to simply "give the public what it wants"--but to inform, to arouse, to reflect, to state our dangers and our opportunities, to indicate our crises and our choices, to lead, mold educate and sometimes even anger public opinion. This means greater coverage and analysis of international news-- for it is no longer far away and foreign but close at hand and local. It means greater attention to improved understanding of the news as well as improved transmission. And it means, finally, that government at all levels, must meet its obligation to provide you with the fullest possible information outside the narrowest limits of national security... This part ends at 4:52. mid sentence. It left out "--and we intend to do it." It also skips a paragraph and then the file continues ... "And so it is to the printing press--to the recorder of mans deeds, the keeper of his conscience, the courier of his news-- that we look for strength and assistance, confident that with your help man will be what he was born to be: free and independent." JFK Secret Societies Speech (full version) WATCH IT BELOW http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdMbmdFOvTs
The Vatican Calls for World Government forbes.com 10/25/2011 That isn’t just the implication it’s the explicit call in the latest from the Vatican: that we need to move to a system of world government: If Vatican cardinals have yet to join the Occupy Wall Street protesters, a document released by the Holy See calling for a “world authority” to crack down on capitalism suggests some are considering it. Alphaville has a bit of fun quoting scripture back at them here. The full (although preliminary translation) statement is here. As someone educated and raised a Catholic I can tell you what the problem is here. It’s the otherworldly parts of the Vatican’s worldview. In an institution which is based upon preparing us for the life after this one that’s no bad thing of course, and continual reminder that we should raise our eyes from the mundane cares of this world and consider our place in the eternity to come. However, it does in fact lead to a certain naivety about what actually happens in this world. The idea is that we ought to move to something like a beefed up United Nations. A supra-national body capable of: These measures ought to be conceived of as some of the first steps in view of a public Authority with universal jurisdiction; as a first stage in a longer effort by the global community to steer its institutions towards achieving the common good. Other stages will have to follow in which the dynamics familiar to us may become more marked, but they may also be accompanied by changes which would be useless to try to predict today.In this process, the primacy of the spiritual and of ethics needs to be restored and, with them, the primacy of politics – which is responsible for the common good – over the economy and finance. These latter need to be brought back within the boundaries of their real vocation and function, including their social function, in consideration of their obvious responsibilities to society, in order to nourish markets and financial institutions which are really at the service of the person, which are capable of responding to the needs of the common good and universal brotherhood, and which transcend all forms of economist stagnation and performative mercantilism.
With one proviso I’ve no problem with the basic desire, that the world could indeed be made a better place if the rules by which the world were run were changed and then enforced. My problem comes from the idea that the United Nations, or indeed anything involving politicians, is going to achieve anything like that. The United Nations has, recently you understand, had the Sudan as a member of the Human Rights Committee, heck it’s even had Libya as the Chair of the Committee (yes, the Ghadaffi era Libya). And that’s what the problem is. Not the desire to make the world a better place, but the idea that politics is going to do so. It’s this phrase that so grates: the primacy of politics – which is responsible for the common good – over the economy and finance. Given the spendthrifts, ogres, ignorants, panderers and outright thieves that actually manage to get into the positions where they can run the political process (yes, both democratically elected and selfappointed) we really don’t want to be giving them any more power: actually, we’d rather like to reclaim much of the power they already have, most especially over the economy and finance. Which is where the Vatican has gone wrong. They’re just not noting how things actually turn out in this vale of tears. They actually think that politics is something done by people of good will and honesty. Something far more ludicrous than anything at all in the official theology SOURCE: http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2011/10/25/the-vatican-calls-for-worldgovernment/