Infowars.com
Alex talks with the Health Ranger, Mike Adams, in-studio. Adams, a former high-powered software executive, began his mission as the Health Ranger in response to his own failing health. He is the founder of NaturalNews.com, an online news source covering all areas of personal and planetary wellness from nutrition to renewable energy. Mike has written thousands of articles and built a following of over 800,000 people across the globe. Adams also founded a non-profit organization, The Consumer Wellness Center, an online retail center, Better Life Goods, and the popular publishing company, Truth Publishing. Mike speaks frequently at national and local gatherings like the Amazon Herb Summit and the Raw Foods Challenge in Los Angeles.
Sunday, October 3, 2010
Feds Say Global Governance at 'Critical Juncture"
By Henry Lamb
Sovereignty International
Pundits and politicians who giggle and point fingers at people who dare refer to global governance display their ignorance, or their duplicity. The U.S. National Intelligence Council, and the European Union's Institute for Security Studies has just released a report called: Global Governance 2025: At a Critical Juncture.
This 82-page document discusses quite openly the current status of global governance and the likelihood of global governance maturing into full-fledged global government. Those who scoff at the reality of global governance are to be pitied for their ignorance or despised for their duplicity. As Gustave Speth , former director of the World Resources Institute and head of the U.N. Development Program, said in 1997:
"[G]lobal governance is here, here to stay, and driven by economic and environmental globalization, global governance will inevitably expand."
Speth's belief was confirmed in November 2009 by Herman Van Rompuy, president of the European Union Council, who said "Global governance is the global management of our planet."
The new U.S.-E.U. report defines global governance to be "the collective management of common problems at the international level" and says that global governance is at a critical juncture.
The United Nations Development Program, in its 1999 report, defines global governance to be "the framework of rules, institutions, and practices that set limits of the behavior of individuals, organizations and companies."
Both the U.N. and the new U.S.-E.U. report are quick to say that global governance in not global government. The new report describes global government as the exercise of sovereignty through a hierarchical system of authority, while global governance is a voluntary arrangement of shared sovereignty among nations.
If global governance has the power to "limit the behavior of individuals, organizations, and companies," then such actions are, indeed, the exercise of sovereignty, even if that sovereignty has been voluntarily surrendered to an international institution such as the World Trade Organization or to an international treaty.
Dancing around the semantics is simply a diversion in an attempt to appease, distract or discredit the opponents of global governance. The indisputable fact is that global governance has advanced dramatically in the last two decades and is moving forward even faster under the Obama administration.
The new report says:
"[The] EU has sought to export its model of regional integration and sovereignty-sharing and has devised a distinctive discourse on global governance and priorities."
The report also quotes a Chinese participant:
"Global governance requires giving over significant sovereignty to others – that is the view in China. …"
Any way you look at it, as global governance advances, national sovereignty evaporates. The report identifies three areas in which more effective global governance is badly needed and is likely to materialize: climate change and the environment, opening of the Arctic and the global economy.
Proponents of global governance expected the Kyoto Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change to provide the structure required to impose global governance over global energy use. Their plan has not yet materialized, even though the proponents continue to work toward a treaty and an international mechanism with the power to control energy use.
The Convention on the Law of the Sea, and its International Seabed Authority, was supposed to be the treaty and the mechanism to control the use of the sea and its resources. Recent discoveries of enormous petroleum reserves in the Arctic region are sure to prompt ownership battles between the United States and Russia, unless proponents in the Obama administration and the Senate can get the treaty ratified.
The global economic meltdown in the last few years has forced the U.N. and other global governance enthusiasts to shift into high gear their plans to take over the global economy. First proposed publicly by the U.N.-funded Commission on Global Governance in 1995, it is their ultimate goal to have all international trade, international transfer of currency and international money flows under the direct control of a U.N. agency. Inherent in this dream is the authority to rake-off a percentage of the money flow as a global tax that would provide independent funding for the United Nations operation.
Whether it is recognized or not, global governance is here, here to stay and it is expanding rapidly. At the very least, global governance is the transitional step to unabashed global government. One of the most important obstacles that have yet to be overcome is the creation of an independent revenue stream. So far, the Obama administration has been very supportive of the U.N.'s plans to create this global economic regulatory mechanism.
In fact, the Obama administration supports the creation of a global system to control energy through a climate-change treaty. The Obama administration supports the ratification of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, as well as the global economic regulator mechanism.
No wonder the new U.N.-E.U. report forecasts global governance. They claim the prospects for global governance are at a critical juncture because despite Obama's support, their agenda has met significant opposition within the U.S. and in other countries. It is clear that the governments of the U.S. and the European Union are eager to continue expanding global governance. No combination of nations can stop the U.S. and the E.U. in their quest.
The only power sufficient to stop this agenda is the power of American voters who care enough to turn out the current majority in Congress, in a dress rehearsal for turning out the current administration in 2012.
View Original Article HERE
Sovereignty International
Pundits and politicians who giggle and point fingers at people who dare refer to global governance display their ignorance, or their duplicity. The U.S. National Intelligence Council, and the European Union's Institute for Security Studies has just released a report called: Global Governance 2025: At a Critical Juncture.
This 82-page document discusses quite openly the current status of global governance and the likelihood of global governance maturing into full-fledged global government. Those who scoff at the reality of global governance are to be pitied for their ignorance or despised for their duplicity. As Gustave Speth , former director of the World Resources Institute and head of the U.N. Development Program, said in 1997:
"[G]lobal governance is here, here to stay, and driven by economic and environmental globalization, global governance will inevitably expand."
Speth's belief was confirmed in November 2009 by Herman Van Rompuy, president of the European Union Council, who said "Global governance is the global management of our planet."
The new U.S.-E.U. report defines global governance to be "the collective management of common problems at the international level" and says that global governance is at a critical juncture.
The United Nations Development Program, in its 1999 report, defines global governance to be "the framework of rules, institutions, and practices that set limits of the behavior of individuals, organizations and companies."
Both the U.N. and the new U.S.-E.U. report are quick to say that global governance in not global government. The new report describes global government as the exercise of sovereignty through a hierarchical system of authority, while global governance is a voluntary arrangement of shared sovereignty among nations.
If global governance has the power to "limit the behavior of individuals, organizations, and companies," then such actions are, indeed, the exercise of sovereignty, even if that sovereignty has been voluntarily surrendered to an international institution such as the World Trade Organization or to an international treaty.
Dancing around the semantics is simply a diversion in an attempt to appease, distract or discredit the opponents of global governance. The indisputable fact is that global governance has advanced dramatically in the last two decades and is moving forward even faster under the Obama administration.
The new report says:
"[The] EU has sought to export its model of regional integration and sovereignty-sharing and has devised a distinctive discourse on global governance and priorities."
The report also quotes a Chinese participant:
"Global governance requires giving over significant sovereignty to others – that is the view in China. …"
Any way you look at it, as global governance advances, national sovereignty evaporates. The report identifies three areas in which more effective global governance is badly needed and is likely to materialize: climate change and the environment, opening of the Arctic and the global economy.
Proponents of global governance expected the Kyoto Protocol to the Framework Convention on Climate Change to provide the structure required to impose global governance over global energy use. Their plan has not yet materialized, even though the proponents continue to work toward a treaty and an international mechanism with the power to control energy use.
The Convention on the Law of the Sea, and its International Seabed Authority, was supposed to be the treaty and the mechanism to control the use of the sea and its resources. Recent discoveries of enormous petroleum reserves in the Arctic region are sure to prompt ownership battles between the United States and Russia, unless proponents in the Obama administration and the Senate can get the treaty ratified.
The global economic meltdown in the last few years has forced the U.N. and other global governance enthusiasts to shift into high gear their plans to take over the global economy. First proposed publicly by the U.N.-funded Commission on Global Governance in 1995, it is their ultimate goal to have all international trade, international transfer of currency and international money flows under the direct control of a U.N. agency. Inherent in this dream is the authority to rake-off a percentage of the money flow as a global tax that would provide independent funding for the United Nations operation.
Whether it is recognized or not, global governance is here, here to stay and it is expanding rapidly. At the very least, global governance is the transitional step to unabashed global government. One of the most important obstacles that have yet to be overcome is the creation of an independent revenue stream. So far, the Obama administration has been very supportive of the U.N.'s plans to create this global economic regulatory mechanism.
In fact, the Obama administration supports the creation of a global system to control energy through a climate-change treaty. The Obama administration supports the ratification of the Convention on the Law of the Sea, as well as the global economic regulator mechanism.
No wonder the new U.N.-E.U. report forecasts global governance. They claim the prospects for global governance are at a critical juncture because despite Obama's support, their agenda has met significant opposition within the U.S. and in other countries. It is clear that the governments of the U.S. and the European Union are eager to continue expanding global governance. No combination of nations can stop the U.S. and the E.U. in their quest.
The only power sufficient to stop this agenda is the power of American voters who care enough to turn out the current majority in Congress, in a dress rehearsal for turning out the current administration in 2012.
View Original Article HERE
No Attempt to Fix US Economic Disaster
PressTV
The widening gap between the rich and poor seems to be swallowing the American Dream, with no sign of attempts to fix the problem, says a US expert.
“I haven't seen any signs of attempts to fix the problem -- and there are many,” Paul Sheldon Foote, professor of accounting at California State University, told Press TV on Tuesday.
The dispiriting remarks come in the wake of a new report released on Tuesday, stating that the income gap in the United States is on the rise.
The official census report shows that the Gini index was at its highest level since 1967 when the US Census Bureau began recording household incomes.
The report says that poor families have less income than last year, while the wealthiest five percent of Americans have added to their income.
“Corporations are out of control," Foote said. "In the good old days people would buy stocks for the long term, they would attend annual meetings; they would vote people in and out of management.”
He went on to observe that an entirely different trend is prevalent today. “In running corporations today, people are in and out of stocks within a day or within a few weeks."
"The problem is rooted in the fact that the few people running major corporations, build factories overseas rather than in America," Foote said.
“They make decisions about their personal expenditure desires that leaves out everyone else at the other end of the poll in the country's system,” he added.
“People who are at the top are going to be making decisions that benefit them and people at the bottom are too stupid and they continue voting for the democrats,” Foote explained, concluding that he therefore sees no end to the problem in the near future.
View Original Article HERE
The widening gap between the rich and poor seems to be swallowing the American Dream, with no sign of attempts to fix the problem, says a US expert.
“I haven't seen any signs of attempts to fix the problem -- and there are many,” Paul Sheldon Foote, professor of accounting at California State University, told Press TV on Tuesday.
The dispiriting remarks come in the wake of a new report released on Tuesday, stating that the income gap in the United States is on the rise.
The official census report shows that the Gini index was at its highest level since 1967 when the US Census Bureau began recording household incomes.
The report says that poor families have less income than last year, while the wealthiest five percent of Americans have added to their income.
“Corporations are out of control," Foote said. "In the good old days people would buy stocks for the long term, they would attend annual meetings; they would vote people in and out of management.”
He went on to observe that an entirely different trend is prevalent today. “In running corporations today, people are in and out of stocks within a day or within a few weeks."
"The problem is rooted in the fact that the few people running major corporations, build factories overseas rather than in America," Foote said.
“They make decisions about their personal expenditure desires that leaves out everyone else at the other end of the poll in the country's system,” he added.
“People who are at the top are going to be making decisions that benefit them and people at the bottom are too stupid and they continue voting for the democrats,” Foote explained, concluding that he therefore sees no end to the problem in the near future.
View Original Article HERE
Students Forced To Wear Radio Frequency IDs At Multiple Schools
The Intel Hub
Big brother has taken it to a new level, outfitting student Ids with tracking devices at Santa Fe Junior High and Santa Fe High School. Minus a few high profile shootings, schools are generally known as a safe environment for our children. Why then are these schools outfitted school ids with tracking devices that must be worn at all times?
Are our students going to school or prison? What is the threat that requires such drastic measures? How many more schools plan on implementing these Orwellian “security” measures?
Patrick Mann is a senior and said he feels like he’s in prison. “Normally, the one people you would track are say prisoners or somebody that’s done something very wrong,” Mann said. All students at Santa Fe Junior High and Santa Fe High School have to wear the radio frequency IDs. KHOU.com
This technology doesn’t stop when you leave campus. Students have reported being tracked by campus police when they LEAVE the school grounds. That’s right, multiple schools are tracking students through the use of RFID technology, on and off campus.
“At that Shell Station, they can see exactly where I am,” Mann said. “I know that because the school cops came up there and said, ‘Hey, you need to get back to school. We tracked you over here.’”
What is our country coming to when we have to outfit our school children with tracking devices? Staged terror attacks have been used throughout the world to create this false reality in which terrorists are around every corner.
Intel Hub Article HERE
View Original Article HERE
Big brother has taken it to a new level, outfitting student Ids with tracking devices at Santa Fe Junior High and Santa Fe High School. Minus a few high profile shootings, schools are generally known as a safe environment for our children. Why then are these schools outfitted school ids with tracking devices that must be worn at all times?
Are our students going to school or prison? What is the threat that requires such drastic measures? How many more schools plan on implementing these Orwellian “security” measures?
Patrick Mann is a senior and said he feels like he’s in prison. “Normally, the one people you would track are say prisoners or somebody that’s done something very wrong,” Mann said. All students at Santa Fe Junior High and Santa Fe High School have to wear the radio frequency IDs. KHOU.com
This technology doesn’t stop when you leave campus. Students have reported being tracked by campus police when they LEAVE the school grounds. That’s right, multiple schools are tracking students through the use of RFID technology, on and off campus.
“At that Shell Station, they can see exactly where I am,” Mann said. “I know that because the school cops came up there and said, ‘Hey, you need to get back to school. We tracked you over here.’”
What is our country coming to when we have to outfit our school children with tracking devices? Staged terror attacks have been used throughout the world to create this false reality in which terrorists are around every corner.
Intel Hub Article HERE
View Original Article HERE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)