Financial Times Editorial Admits Agenda For Dictatorial World Government
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 16

Thread: Financial Times Editorial Admits Agenda For Dictatorial World Government

  1. #1

    Financial Times Editorial Admits Agenda For Dictatorial World Government

    There agenda just makes me feel warm and fuzzy all over.

    Alex Jones' Prison Planet: The truth will set you free!

    Financial Times Editorial Admits Agenda For Dictatorial World Government

    Jaw-dropping report concedes that “global governance” is a euphemism for anti-democratic global government



    Paul Joseph Watson
    Prison Planet.com
    Tuesday, December 9, 2008

    The Financial Times, one of the most respected and widely read newspapers on the planet, features an editorial today that openly admits the agenda to create a world government based on anti-democratic principles and concedes that the term “global governance” is merely a euphemism for the move towards a centralized global government.

    For years we were called paranoid nutcases for warning about the elite’s plans to centralize global power and destroy American sovereignty. Throughout the 1990’s people who talked about the alarming move towards global government were smeared as right-wing lunatics by popular culture and the media.

    Now the agenda is out in the open and in our faces, the debunkers have no more ammunition with which to deride us.

    A jaw-dropping editorial written by the Financial Times’ chief foreign affairs commentator Gideon Rachman entitled ‘And now for a world government’ lays out the plan for global government and how it is being pushed with deceptive language and euphemisms in order to prevent people from becoming alarmed.

    “For the first time in my life, I think the formation of some sort of world government is plausible,” writes Rachman, citing the financial crisis, “global warming” and the “global war on terror” as three major pretexts through which it is being introduced.

    Rachman writes that “global governance” could be introduced much sooner than many expect and that President elect Barack Obama has already expressed his desire to achieve that goal, making reference to Obama’s circle of advisors which includes Strobe Talbott, who in 1992 stated, “In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.”

    Rachman then concedes that the more abstract term “global governance,” which is often used by top globalists like David Rockefeller as a veil to offset accusations that a centralized global government is the real agenda, is merely a trick of “soothing language” that is used to prevent “people reaching for their rifles in America’s talk-radio heartland”.

    “But some European thinkers think that they recognise what is going on,” says Rachman. “Jacques Attali, an adviser to President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, argues that: “Global governance is just a euphemism for global government.” As far as he is concerned, some form of global government cannot come too soon. Mr Attali believes that the “core of the international financial crisis is that we have global financial markets and no global rule of law”.

    Rachman proceeds to outline what the first steps to an official world government would look like, including the creation of “A legally binding climate-change agreement negotiated under the auspices of the UN and the creation of a 50,000-strong UN peacekeeping force”.

    “A “world government” would involve much more than co-operation between nations,” writes Rachman. “It would be an entity with state-like characteristics, backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a large civil service and the ability to deploy military force.”

    “So, it seems, everything is in place. For the first time since **** sapiens began to doodle on cave walls, there is an argument, an opportunity and a means to make serious steps towards a world government,” concludes Rachman, before acknowledging that the path to global government will be “slow and painful”.

    Tellingly, Rachman concedes that “International governance tends to be effective, only when it is anti-democratic,” citing the continual rejection of EU expansion when the question is put to a vote. “In general, the Union has progressed fastest when far-reaching deals have been agreed by technocrats and politicians – and then pushed through without direct reference to the voters,” writes Rachman.

    So there you have it - one of the world’s top newspapers, editorially led by chief economics commentator Martin Wolf, a top Bilderberg luminary, openly proclaiming that not only is world government the agenda, but that world government will only be achieved through dictatorial measures because the majority of the people are dead against it.

    Will we still be called paranoid conspiracy theorists for warning that a system of dictatorial world government is being set up, even as one of the world’s most influential newspapers admits to the fact? Or will people finally wake up and accept that there is a globalist agenda to destroy sovereignty, any form of real democracy, and freedom itself in the pursuit of an all-powerful, self-interested, centralized, unrepresentative and dictatorial world government?
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  2.   
  3. #2
    gpbarth Guest
    No surprises here. The EU is a good indicator, and the liberal agenda is a mis-guided "peace, love and happiness" blueprint for the world. There is only one problem - it won't work. It is socialism, and has failed time and time again. Now, I'm not saying that it won't be attempted. But the result will be one or more revolutions, very possibly violent in nature, which will turn this world into one big battlefield.

    I personally know it's coming. It's been prophesied, and if you read those prophecies, you can apply them very easily to today's happenings. The question is, are you ready? I was kind of hoping that it wouldn't happen in my lifetime, but it looks like it very well could.

  4. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    4,650
    It'll never happen. The world is just too big and diverse for a hare-brained scheme like the one proposed to even have a chance to succeed.
    Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

    Benjamin Franklin

  5. #4
    You don't have to read a newspaper to find predictions of one world government. Look into the Bible and read Revelation.

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    The Heart of Dixie
    Posts
    1,225
    Quote Originally Posted by gpbarth View Post
    No surprises here. The EU is a good indicator, and the liberal agenda is a mis-guided "peace, love and happiness" blueprint for the world. There is only one problem - it won't work. It is socialism, and has failed time and time again. Now, I'm not saying that it won't be attempted. But the result will be one or more revolutions, very possibly violent in nature, which will turn this world into one big battlefield.

    I personally know it's coming. It's been prophesied, and if you read those prophecies, you can apply them very easily to today's happenings. The question is, are you ready? I was kind of hoping that it wouldn't happen in my lifetime, but it looks like it very well could.
    Quote Originally Posted by ronwill View Post
    You don't have to read a newspaper to find predictions of one world government. Look into the Bible and read Revelation.
    You guys know what time it is!! I too believe and I see the prophecies of the Bible unfolding at an alarming rate. You may very well be right about it happening in our lifetime gpbarth.

  7. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by tattedupboy View Post
    It'll never happen. The world is just too big and diverse for a hare-brained scheme like the one proposed to even have a chance to succeed.
    So you don't believe the Bible either?
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  8. #7
    wolfhunter Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by HK4U View Post
    So you don't believe the Bible either?
    At least he didn't say his "H" word yet.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    4,650
    Quote Originally Posted by HK4U View Post
    So you don't believe the Bible either?
    Quite the contrary. Obviously, I could possibly be wrong, but as I said in my previous post, it's highly unlikely that this world government that is spoken of will be coming to fruition any time soon, due to the sheer size and diversity of the world.
    Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

    Benjamin Franklin

  10. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by tattedupboy View Post
    Quite the contrary. Obviously, I could possibly be wrong, but as I said in my previous post, it's highly unlikely that this world government that is spoken of will be coming to fruition any time soon, due to the sheer size and diversity of the world.
    The thing is if and when it is God's timeing and events are set in motion a lot can and will happent very quickly.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  11. #10
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,437
    Europe was in dramatic decline all through the 20th century, and has long been trying the "one-world government" card in an attempt to hedge itself against loss of power and influence.

    Basically they beat everyone else up for a while and colonized freely - but when they got old and weak, suddenly they're interested in being the nice guys. Let's all sit around and have a cup of tea and think about how we can make the world a better and sunnier place. Sign some nonsense environmental treaties, embrace socialism, etc.

    Europe might go for this, and the US might, if we get worn out and pathetic. However, that sentiment doesn't seem to be universal right now. China, Russia and India, which are dramatically on the rise economically (even in the current downturn) have no incentive to join in on any kind of global government. David Rockefeller and the CFR/Builderberg/whatever can do they want, but at the end of the day, most nations in the world are each run by their own group of elected, un-elected and shadow people who need to be given a good reason to dilute their power in exchange for joining a giant quasi-state.

    Maybe that's a hump that the One-Worlders can overcome, but it does pose a real problem. The Chair of the Chinese Communist Party isn't just going to say, "Well guys, it's been fun, but I guess we need to call it a day, give up our positions and join a formalized global government that includes Japanese and Americans sharing our power. Oh and by the way, running a shoe factory is about to get way more expensive! Who's up for mahjong?"

    Africa is a different situation, though. A good number of nations there are deeply in debt or are otherwise in need of cash and resources. They could probably be easily bribed into forming a huge conglomerate or joining a one-world government. Of course, that might prove to be incredibly toxic to the whole model, as thousands of thuglords steal whatever is given to the continent as an incentive.
    Silent Running, by Mike and the Mechanics

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast