The New Cold War: it's just not the usual suspects.

Found this rather interesting article.
I found it to be informative though it missed mentioning the Bilderbergers, the CFR or the Illumanati, and perhaps, a few others...

Article:
"The Bear's Lair: The new Cold War"
Link:
www.upi.com...

Excerpts:

" Free trade is not an NWO objective, although establishing an international bureaucracy to oversee trade may be a useful tool. Much better, instead, to have a system of massive subsidization of agriculture, quantitative control over textiles, and the ability to impose randomly high tariffs against "dumping" malefactors. All three increase bureaucrat control, the object of the exercise.

It is not enough, however, for government to be all-powerful, it must also be unaccountable. As the British Labor party found out in 1979, it is little joy to leftist Keynesian bureaucrats to establish a New Jerusalem where they control the economy, if the electorate can come along and throw them out, reducing their finely-crafted construct to rubble. Accordingly, some mechanism must be found whereby, even if personalities and governments change from decade to decade, central bureaucratic control remains in place."

"The other favorite mechanism for reducing accountability is the supranational body. This got its start after World War I, with Woodrow Wilson's League of Nations, and its United Nations successor, but its real progenitors in the economic sphere were Keynes and Soviet spy U.S. assistant treasury secretary Harry Dexter White, with their formation of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Both the World Bank and the IMF are classic New World Order entities, being exempt from control either by a democratic electorate or by the market, and enjoying special privileges in terms of access to capital and de facto right of first repayment of their loans. Subsequent NWO entities include the European Union, the International Court of Justice, endless United Nations bodies and the World Trade Organization (the latter not entirely an NWO creation, since it remains pretty ineffectual without the full agreement of its member governments.) All these bodies share the characteristics of permanence, lack of accountability, immunity from economic pressure and ability to overrule private or even in many cases national interests that are the NWO ideal."

"Non-governmental organizations are particular havens of NWO strength, since they combine assumed moral superiority with total lack of accountability.

The European Parliament is the ultimate NWO vehicle, being both supranational and elected by proportional representation; with 45 of the current 626 Euro-MPs, the British Conservatives are the second largest grouping in the chamber. Of course, all resolutions of this body are settled by insider bargaining, with the EU's electorate having neither input in nor indeed knowledge of what is being decided.

In terms of policies beyond their own control, NWO proponents' priorities are pretty clear, and more or less united. They are in favor of globalization when it involves new international institutions or treaties such as the Kyoto protocol removing power from national governments, but against it when it involves private sector free trade or the activities of multinational corporations. They favor free immigration, at least of those without special qualifications, since this produces a global underclass of needy deracinated people whose need for government and supranational intervention is especially great. They favor policies that cut back U.S. hegemony, since only if the U.S. is constrained by international agreements and international bodies can their political agenda be advanced. And they favor regional integration pacts, and the creation of new supranational bodies, since these can be used both as anti-American forums and as additional constraints on the freedom of individual countries to pursue non-NWO policies."

"Just as there was a 45 year political -- only occasionally military -- struggle against the Soviet Union, so too does the political -- but not yet military -- struggle continue against the proponents of the NWO. The last few weeks have seen a number of successes for both sides in this Cold War:

-- The collapse at Cancun of the Doha round of trade talks, which removed the necessity for the U.S. and Europe to reform their agricultural, textile and steel policies, thus ensuring that U.S. and European farmers will remain dependent on their governments, and that Third World producers will remain both poor and dependent on the international aid agencies for succor. Big NWO win.

-- The Kay report on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, which has successfully been spun outside the United States as "proof" that such weapons did not exist, and hence that U.S. intervention in Iraq was illegitimate. A successful rebuilding effort in Iraq would be a major setback to the NWO's agenda (but is probably unlikely, since even the U.S. aid agencies are staffed largely by NWO proponents.)

-- The decline in popularity of the generally anti-NWO Bush administration, and its increasing budgetary difficulties, are hopeful signs for the NWO since they strongly suggest the election of a less anti-NWO (or even actively pro-NWO if it's Howard Dean) President in 2004. U.S. trade, budgetary and economic difficulties are also hopeful signs for the NWO; they reduce Bush's popularity, they allow a pro-NWO president (if one is elected) to increase taxes, and, if they bring on a truly severe recession, they de-legitimize the private sector and allow all kinds of NWO-generated, big-government economic experiments, just as happened in the 1930s New Deal.

-- The Swedish referendum on the euro was a big setback for the NWO, because it demonstrated that Swedish objections to the euro and greater Brussels control, that it would endanger their luscious welfare provisions, were from the left not the right. To the extent that welfare payments are legally mandated, non-discretionary and transfer purchasing power directly from taxpayers to recipients, they do not increase government control, and hence are unattractive to the NWO nomenklatura.

-- Japan's apparent emergence from recession, and the political strengthening of prime minister Junichiro Koizumi, are both blows to the NWO, whose solution to Japan's problems was an increase in public spending and a huge bureaucrat-directed reorganization of the Japanese banking system.

-- The IMF's bailout of the Kirchner government in Argentina, without either significant reforms of the Argentine economy or significant efforts to bail out private sector lenders to Argentina, is an example of the NWO in action. The "Washington Consensus" economic reforms of the 1990s were a fa�ade; what really matters to the NWO aid providers are that a country support them in international forums and allow them to maintain a veneer of success over the policies they mandate, even when they produce economic catastrophe.

This week is a particularly important one. California since 1998 has been an excellent example of an NWO polity in action; as the 2002 election showed, it was impossible for the electorate to remove an NWO-backed governor, however poor his performance, or to make a significant dent in the one-party NWO-backing California legislature. The recall election is thus critical; if Gray Davis survives, or is replaced by lieutenant governor Cruz Bustamante, the recall process will be de-legitimized, and action by the legislature will quickly be taken to remove this last threat to NWO hegemony in the state. Just in case, legislation to allow illegal immigrants to claim drivers' licenses, and to compel companies to provide health insurance, will ensure a flow of new NWO voters and an almost impossible economic legacy for any non-NWO successor.

In Europe, the conference on the EU constitution is haggling over the details, while NWO proponents attempt to ensure the adherence of all major national governments. Since the constitution would be voted out in a referendum in most EU countries except the beneficiaries from bureaucrat presence (Belgium, Luxembourg) or huge EU subsidies (Greece, and possibly Portugal and Ireland) the current NWO objective is to avoid referenda on the constitution if at all possible.

For the NWO, Britain is a particularly tricky problem. However much publicity was poured into the "yes" side, however stacked was the deck, it is certain that in a British referendum, the EU constitution would lose. Hence a referendum must be avoided at all costs, a necessity which is clearly understood by prime minister Tony Blair. However, a huge problem arises if, by forcing the constitution into effect without a referendum (which must chronologically be done in 2004-5, before the next election is due) Blair delivers the next election to the opposition."


Very good read.
I'm wondering what many here think of this article? Was or is this something that is "obvious" to anyone and everyone.....?
Or is this something that is just coming to light for some?
I have always believed that there was an "agenda"....the NWO....but defining the "who" was involved was a matter of taking many upon many pieces of a puzzle and trying to fit them together to glean a final picture....

Comments or idea's, etc. are welcome.
Peace.

regards
seekerof

Seekerof,

Have you ever read any of Frank Herberts stuff, mainly, his last two Dune Books?

Its the same thing youre pointing out, and basically the same thing I have been pointing out, theres two flip sides of the NWO, two different possibilities.

Buericracy is the path to eltism. Buerocracy basically moves power away from the people and pushes into untouchable places, where no vote nor sanction can reach. Fpor insatnce, the DMV. You cannot vote the DMV officals out of thier jobs, yet they can raise car taxes, anact new policies, ect, without anyones consent.

Beuroicracy leads to autocracy and dictatorship. It is the enemy of freedom, because the very weight of it basically leaves acess to power by those in the various offices. Even politicans cannot touch or remove buerocrats. And they are totally unaccountable for anything. So, they wierld power, but really dont answer to anyone.

A great post tho. I would suggest reading Frank Herberts whole Dune series mif you havent. If you have, then you know what I mean.

Honored Matres.

Skadi...yes, maam, I have read them...and, I do understand what you mean.

Everytime I find something like this or related to it, it reminds me of an old saying I recently encountered again....
"the elitist few controlling the ignorant many...."


regards
seekerof

This guy is talkin' out of his butt!

he does not mention the OWO and he claims that the NWO is left wing?

then he goes on to say that communism wasn't so bad after all,

then he makes some confusing argument for some other system that I have no idea what he is talking about.

then most amazingly he calls himself a business commentator.

thus,

what he is is an agent for the OWO beginning the attack on the NWO which means he is a socialist (which he admits too in the article), but he has to pass off some new kind of socialism in order to hide behind.

Excellent article! Its always good to see somebody talking about the IMF and the World Bank. Structural Adjustment Loans..don't they just sound evil?

I did find this a little one-sided. There are some great NGOs doing some great work.

"Non-governmental organizations are particular havens of NWO strength, since they combine assumed moral superiority with total lack of accountability.

Also..

"They favor policies that cut back U.S. hegemony, since only if the U.S. is constrained by international agreements and international bodies can their political agenda be advanced."

I think that the author is dismissing Bush's ability to co-opt the NWO for their own agenda. Most of the "international bodies" have some form of U.S. funding.

after i read this article i am starting to think that the left are the NWO. thats good then that Davis got racelled today.

Originally posted by THENEO
This guy is talkin' out of his butt!

he does not mention the OWO and he claims that the NWO is left wing?

then he goes on to say that communism wasn't so bad after all,

then he makes some confusing argument for some other system that I have no idea what he is talking about.

then most amazingly he calls himself a business commentator.

thus,

what he is is an agent for the OWO beginning the attack on the NWO which means he is a socialist (which he admits too in the article), but he has to pass off some new kind of socialism in order to hide behind.

Neo...have you had the opportunity to read thiese particular articles? :

"Secret Societies/New World Order"
Link:
www.grailwerk.com...

"THE SECRET SHADOW GOVERNMENT: A STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS"
Link:
members.fortunecity.com...



regards
seekerof


[Edited on 8-10-2003 by Seekerof]

The left is the NWO. So is the right. The both have thier own "New World Orders that they wish to impose, to maTCH thier philosphies. So, the left has an NWO buerocratic agenda of thier own.

Good, Seeker, so you know what I mean. Buerocracy leads to Autocracy, power in untouchable places.

This is something Ive been trying to point out. Buwsh and PNAC arent the only NWO style world take over. Just look at his opponents. Look at the left and thier agendas.

And run for your life.