It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

One World Government? Globe may not be big enough

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 06:29 AM
link   

One World Government? Globe may not be big enough


www.washingtonpost.com

The New World Order came into being at 4:25 Tuesday afternoon.

It arrived at the Capitol, until that moment the seat of American government, in the form of the stooped and bespectacled figure of Ban Ki-moon, who as U.N. secretary general is the de facto leader of what conspiracy theorists call the One World Government. One floor beneath the Senate chamber, Ban, a South Korean national, took his place behind a lectern bearing the Senate seal and spelled out his demands.

"I would certainly expect the Senate to take the necessary action; that's what I have encouraged the senators," he to
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 06:29 AM
link   

The New World Order came into being at 4:25 Tuesday afternoon.


Not really sure exactly what to make of this but it upsets me, this article is a good read and I wanted to pass it along here, I'm no expert so maybe some opinions would help me to better understand this. I searched but came up with no articles like it.

www.washingtonpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 12-11-2009 by alyosha1981]



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 06:59 AM
link   
I believe the problem here is sovereignty. When we agree to these treatises we lose this right to govern ourselves. The author is taking exception at the way the secretary general addressed our congress, which is made up of people voted in by us united states citizens to represent us. When the policies reflect the overall world and it's inhabitants it will not always coincide with our local issues.

Politicians should reflect the view of the populace directly under it's authority. This has been circumvented and threatens the concept of representative rule.

This problem concerns many of the treatises you see unfolding on the global scale today.

I hope that helps explain it in some way.



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 07:21 AM
link   
Ban Ki-moon is not talking to us like a NWO leader -- he is talking before the U.S. congress as a man that realizes he is speaking to a weakened, feeble U.S. body of politics.

What did everyone expect? That we would lose face with the world, become financially destitute, have a society that is increasingly showing their discontent with our government, and yet still be spoken to as if we are kings of the world?

Take this for what it is: confirmation that the rest of the world is aware that the United States is falling as well.

Get use to it -- this is only the start. Didn't everyone realize that those that have been kept "under our thumb" would revel in the fact that they now have unprecented power over us?

Coupled with the current U.S. administration's policy to apologize to, and negotiate with, terrorists and human rights' violators -- this is all par for the course. A bully can not suddenly decide to make friends with all of those he wronged and not expect a few beatings along the way.

Now it's time for us to take ours. Line up and bend over folks....this is just the start.



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Seiko
 





I believe the problem here is sovereignty. When we agree to these treatises we lose this right to govern ourselves.


That is the lie TPTB has worked hard to make real by hiding the truth.



The following qualifies as one of the greatest lies the globalists continue to push upon the American people.

That lie is: "Treaties supersede the U.S. Constitution".

The Second follow-up lie is this one: "A treaty, once passed, cannot be set aside".

HERE ARE THE CLEAR IRREFUTABLE FACTS:

The U.S. Supreme Court has made it very clear that
1) Treaties do not override the U.S. Constitution.
2) Treaties cannot amend the Constitution. And last,
3) A treaty can be nullified by a statute passed by the U.S. Congress (or by a sovereign State or States if Congress refuses to do so), when the State deems a treaty the performance of a treaty is self-destructive. The law of self-preservation overrules the law of obligation in others. When you've read this thoroughly, hopefully, you will never again sit quietly by when someone -- anyone -- claims that treaties supercede the Constitution. Help to dispell this myth.

"This [Supreme] Court has regularly and uniformly recognized the supremacy of the Constitution over a treaty." - Reid v. Covert, October 1956, 354 U.S. 1, at pg 17.

and it continues at Sweet Liberty



We just have to have the b@!!$ to throw the traitors out of Congress.




posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by crimvelvet
 


I can only agree, the op was asking for help understanding the language of the linked column. His column was making the statement that they can.

The other issue is economic sanctions if we "don't play ball".



posted on Nov, 12 2009 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by crimvelvet
 


Bravo!
Bravo!

I like the don't believe the hype stance because its 99% right HA ha



posted on Nov, 13 2009 @ 06:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Seiko
 





The other issue is economic sanctions if we "don't play ball".


That is very true, although I sometimes think we would be better off if we closed the borders and stayed home. We have the resources to be self sufficient. Unfortunately we have already been sold out by the wealthy and powerful.

Industries with over 50% foreign ownership, according to Source Watch


* Sound recording industries - 97%
* Commodity contracts dealing and brokerage - 79%
* Motion picture and sound recording industries - 75%
* Metal ore mining - 65%
* Wineries and distilleries - 64%
* Database, directory, Book and other publishers - 63%
* Cement, concrete, lime, and gypsum product - 62%
* Engine, turbine and power transmission equipment - 57%
* Rubber product - 53%
* Nonmetallic mineral product manufacturing - 53%
* Plastics and rubber products manufacturing - 52%
* Other insurance related activities - 51%
* Boiler, tank, and shipping container - 50%
* Glass and glass product - 48%
* Coal mining – 48%


A real eye opener isn't it. But it gets worse. The Department of Homeland Security says 80% of our ports are operated by Foreigners and they are buying and running US bridges and toll roads. www.alabamaeagle.org...

Statistics (courtesy of Bridgewater) showed in 1990,before WTO was ratified, Foreign ownership of U.S. assets amounted to 33% of U.S. GDP. By 2002 this had increased to over 70% of U.S. GDP. www.fame.org...

An analysis of the 2007 financial markets of 48 countries shows the world's finances are in the hands of a few mutual funds, banks, and corporations. This is the first report of global concentration of financial power ..www.insidescience.org...

Thanks to the mortgage fiasco, our homes are being sold to the chinese. A growing number of Chinese are joining tours organized especially for investors who want to take advantage of slumping US real estate

The next sellout is our Farmland thanks to Waxman and his Food Safety Con Job The bill contains crazy regulations such as HR 2749: Food Safety's Scorched Earth Policy and Strange Martial Law Provisions via Food Control: that effect everyone not just farmers. The bill containing warrantless search, large fines and jail sentences has already passed the house. No one in his right mind is going to want to farm under these regulations and red tape except the large Multinational Corporations. The World Trade Organization and its controlling Ag Cartel actually wrote the bill.

See: The WTO and the Politics of GMO

And the origin of the food safety bills, there have been several tries starting with 2005 Bill: Safe and Secure Food Act , just after WTO/UN published in January of 2005 The Guide to good farming practices




While we were not watch Congress sold the US of A out from under our feet.



posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 07:52 AM
link   
I came across this article only today on the Washington Post and came here to see if it had been posted as I've been away from ATS for a few days... it had been in this thread.

I am severely disappointed at the lack of attention this thread has gotten with the ATS community as well as other conspiracy related website... I would have expected it to be on the front page for days... 6 replies (other than the OP). This is important and yet nobody seems to care.


BTW, S&F OP.



posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 07:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Iamonlyhuman
 


I do care, but I'm not rich or powerful enough to stop this singlehandedly. I try to do what little bit I can voting for better people, and screaming at everyone that walks by but I am met with blank stares.

In a cynical way the person who quoted the supreme court may have the right idea. The u.s. can actually back out of this treaty if we're forced with a strong heavy hand. Playing politics for the world stage is a complicated gesture.



posted on Nov, 14 2009 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Seiko
 


Oh, I know... I wasn't talking about you. I was just saying that this is a topic which, normally here at ATS, would have garnered a lot of discussion. I guess times have changed, even here. Had this article been published a year ago, everyone would have been yelling and screaming but I guess everyone has been desensitized to it now... kinda the "plan", huh?




top topics



 
3

log in

join