Real World Government Forces on the March!
James Daugherty
>
> It's been awhile since this tripe was posted, but it still cries out for
> a response from a rational voice.
"Tripe"? Be sure to tell us how to interpret it, huh!
> On Sat, 11 Mar 1995, James Daugherty wrote:
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > From: James Fish <jf...@execpc.com>
> > Subject: [FWIW] UNworld Order..
> >
> > TACIT CLINTON SUPPORT?
> >
> > U.N. AGENCY PUSHES HARD FOR WORLD GOVERNMENT
> > ============================================
> > By Cliff Kincaid
> >
> > A United Nations agency financed by American taxpayers is openly advocating
> > "world government"
>
> How shocking that the fiends would "openly advocate" such a thing. What
> are they trying to do, ruin all the nifty theories of secret conspiracy?
No, one said the real efforts toward world government are secret! They
are just no headlined, because if they were, all politicians supporting
them would lose their jobs. They were not elected on a platform of world
government, but it is clear that that is their agenda.
> > The Clinton Administration is being represented by Vice President Al Gore,
> > who, as a senator, was a leading light at the U.N.'s anti-growth "Earth
> > Summit" in 1992. Hillary Clinton is also scheduled to attend the summit
> > for a few days.
>
> How fortunate for us that we have you to tell us how to interpret
> everything. Just tack on a little adjective like "anti-growth" and
> voila! we will all think the Earth Summit is part of the nasty plottings
> of the World Government Conspirators.
The environmentalists constantly tell us that environment does not end at
borders and therefore world government must be instituted to protect the
government. That was a constant theme at the Earth Summit and you know
it! The adjective "anti-growth" has nothing to do with it....
I read World Watch and many other environmentalist rags, all supported by
the Multi-National Corps. They are all anti-growth or pro extremely
limited grownth.
> Of course, there's just a teensy contradiction here. If the World
> Government Conspiracy is led by multinational corporate bankers and
> financiers, why are they sponsoring "anti-growth" conferences? I thought
> they were supposed to be plotting the corporate-industrial domination of
> the globe, not sponsoring small-scale environmentalist projects and
> working do establish economic self-sufficiency for local communities
> around the world.
The Multi-National Corp. support the anti-growth movement. Real, robust
economic growth tends to bring new competitors into the the market. By
limiting growth the Multi-Nationals protect their existing privileged
positions.
No, growth or controlled growth or limited growth is the archtypical
strategy of monopolists. Restrict supply and raise the price! That is
why the Super Rich founded the Club of Rome and got the whole
environmentalist non-sense going in the first place. Remember Walter
Cronkite in 1968 day after day starting his environmentalist series with
a picture of the earth in a trash can?!
It is interesting to recall that the anti-Vietnam War crowd's initial
reaction was that the Establishment had invented environmentalism to
distract attention from the war. Unfortunately, the real conspiracy of
the World Caesars and Alexanders was much worse!
Media Monopoly creation.....
> Oops. Better rework the ol' conspiracy theories...
Nope! Better understand what you try to criticize!
>
> > The key player in the summit is the UNDP, a special agency of the U.N. with
> > its own $1.4-billion annual budget, $125 million of which is supplied by
> > the U.S. government.
> >
> > As the name implies, its 7,000 staff members in 131 countries are supposed
> > to work on development projects around the world. Especially since the
> > "Earth Summit," however, it has focused on "sustainable development," a
> > euphemism for government-imposed limits on economic growth.
>
> I see. The Multinational World Government Corporate Illuminati Elite is
> busy sponsoring government-imposed limits on economic growth. If they're
> really that stupid, what are we worrying about?
How does that make them stupid...looks like it working to me.
> Perhaps "government-imposed limits on economic growth" is really a
> negative euphemism for policies aimed at making sure development benefits
> people, rather than maximizing corporate profits under the guise of
> economic aid. Does Nestle infant formula ring a bell with anyone?
> Seems doubtful to me that sustainable development is a brainchild of the
> "WOULD-BE CEASARS AND ALEXANDERS" who will supposedly twist any attempt
> at world self-government into a tool for their tyranny. The basic idea
> of sustainable development is letting people at the local level retain
> control over their own lives. Who's conspiring against whom here?
Check-out the funding of you naive environmentalists....all tools of the
super rich! You cannot retain control over your life when your each and
every action is going to be regulated by a central world authority in the
name of environmentalism! Try thinking!
> > The proclaimed goals of the Copenhagen summit include "attacking poverty,
> > building solidarity and creating jobs." But the real agenda was laid out
> > in last year's UNDP report, in which member U.N. states were urged to
> > "strengthen" the U.N. by establishing another level of international
> > bureaucracy, an "Economic Security Council" to manage a "global human
> > security fund."
>
> Um, help me out, here. Seems to me, a strengthened U.N. with an Economic
> Security Council and a global human security fund just might be able to
> use those resources for attacking poverty, building solidarity, and
> creating jobs. If you wish to imply that such goals will not be pursued,
> please find some kind of evidence to that effect. Thanks.
Simple! The pinnacles of power created by world government movement will
always be manipulated by the super rich! That's why the super rich want
such International Entities created and why everyone else should oppose them!
> > "Mankind's problems can no longer be solved by national governments,"
> > declares Nobel Prize-winning economist Jan Tinbergen in the document.
> > "What is needed is a World Government."
> >
> > "This can best be achieved by strengthening the United Nations system,"
> > he says.
> >
> > The UNDP document also urges establishment of a World Ministry of Agri-
> > culture, a World Minisrty of Industry, a World Ministry of Social Affairs,
> > and a World Police.
>
>
> This is another place where I'm having difficulty perceiving the evil
> schemes. Is the intended audience of this piece composed of people so
> steeped in World Government Conspiracy theories that simply noting that an
> agency's name includes the word "World" tags it as an instrument of
> dictatorial domination?
No, the article is aimed at people who can think and deduce the
consequences. Many of us are able to read World Ministry of Agriculture
in the UNDP literature and understand that means world control of
agriculture! Such bureaucracies are designed to over-rule local
decisions, ie. dictatorial domination! How dense are you?
> > In order to finance the "global human security fund," the UNDP report
> > urged the imposition of international taxes and cutbacks in military
> > spending that amount to "total revenues" of $1.5 trillion over five years,
> > 1995-2000.
>
> Okay, so the UNDP wants to spend $1.5 trillion on people instead of on
> weapons. I'm still not seeing the problem here.
>
> I'm also unimpressed by the fact, cited later in the same article, that
> feminists, abortion rights activists, and homosexuals are active in
> international and world-government politics. So what? The same groups
> are also involved in governments at national, state, and local levels,
> all of which does nothing to prove that national, state, and local
> governments are inherently evil and ought to be abolished or prevented
> whenever possible.
Not being a Christian Fundamentalist I am not anymore concerned about
feminists, gays, abortion rights activists being active at the world
government level than other. But the point is clear, world government
will mean the top down imposition of values and the stuggle is already in
motion for hegemony.
> To sum up, the whole article to which I am replying contained not one
> valid argument against the establishment of a world government, nor did
> it refute even one of the many valid arguments in favor of such a
> government. This is why some of us feel justified in calling such
> articles tripe. They avoid any real discussion by presenting slanted
> views on issues which have no direct bearing on the question of world
> government.
To the contrary, I would suggest that you are simply so thoroughly imbued
with your own environmentalist, world government tripe that you are
unable to read opposing ideas with a clear head.
> signed,
> Kevin Haines
>
>
\\\\\\<http://msen.com/~jhdaugh>\\\\*////////<in...@a-albionic.com>//////////
James Daugherty, volunteer Postmaster for A-albionic Research (POB 20273,
Ferndale, MI 48220), a ruling class/conspiracy research resource for the
entire political-ideological spectrum. Quarterly journal, book sales,
rare/out-of-print searches, New Paradigms Discussion List, Weekly Up-date
Lists & E-text Archive of research, intelligence, catalogs, & resources.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\*///////////////////////////////////////
**E-Mail Update/Discussion/Archive**|*******World Wide Web/Gopher/FTP*******
e-mail: majo...@mail.msen.com | <http://a-albionic.com/>
message: info prj | <gopher.a-albionic.com 9006>
get prj gopher/keytogopher | <ftp.a-albionic.com>
////////////////////////////////////*\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\