B.Huldah & Company

B.Huldah & Company, research and developement. Passionate about preserving historical and religious truths.

   The New World Order and the Federal Reserve




                                 Jesus cast out the money changers


                                      ORDER OUT OF CHAOS


The Latin phrase "Ordo Ab Chao" is the motto of the 33rd degree Scottish Rite Freemasonry. It means, "Order out of Chaos". Intention for establishing New World Order.

 Is the U.S. about to lose its status as the dominant global superpower? Will the dollar collapse? If so, what would become the new global reserve currency and what would replace U.S. hegemony in a new world order?

So how would a new world order emerge? It seems that the global population would only be willing to accept the implementation of a new world order, in either form, in the event of a major global crisis, such as the complete economic collapse of the United States of America.

Looking at history, there is only one circumstance under which a very large and diverse population would be willing to accept such a massive override and restructuring of the global order. That circumstance is chaos.

The collapse of the United States of America would certainly create the chaos necessary to justify the formation of a new global reserve currency and ultimately a new world order currency.

                 Jesus was betrayed with 30 pieces of silver


This is not a coin issued by the U.S. Government, U.S. Mint, Federal Reserve Bank or U.S. Treasury. This is not a North American Union Amero coin. This is intended to be used as currency in the New World Order. 

Side 1 (Obverse): image: Pyramid text along top: "NEW WORLD ORDER" text along bottom: "HONEST WEIGHTS FOR HONEST MEN" text inset left: "The 7th Silver Standard" text inset right: "ONE TROY OUNCE 99.9% FINE SILVER" text inset bottom: "2009"

Side 2 (Reverse): mage: World Map with Clouds and Fire text along top: "TEN WORLD REGIONS" text along bottom: "POST-CHANGE 8TH IS 666" text inset center: numbers 1 through 10


 Gordon Brown announced the creation of a "new world order" after the conclusion of the G20 summit of world leaders in London.

    International Institutions and Global Governance Program

International Institutions and Global Governance Program
World Order in the 21st Century
A New Initiative of the Council on Foreign Relations
May 1, 2008

2009 G20 Summit, Obama's World Tour


The finance ministers of the G20 met in Horsham, England on Mar.13-14 to prepare for a G20 London Summit on the global financial crisis on Apr. 

The G20 is made up of the finance ministers and central bank governors of 19 countries: Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and the European Union, which is represented by the rotating Council presidency and the European Central Bank.



The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) has launched a comprehensive five-year program on international institutions and global governance. The purpose of this cross-cutting initiative is to explore the institutional requirements for world order in the twenty-first century. The undertaking recognizes that the architecture of global governance—largely reflecting the world as it existed in 1945—has not kept pace with fundamental changes in the international system, including but not limited to globalization.
Existing multilateral arrangements thus provide an inadequate foundation for addressing today’s most pressing threats and opportunities and for advancing U.S. national and broader global interests. The program seeks to identify critical weaknesses in current frameworks for multilateral cooperation; propose specific reforms tailored to new global circumstances; and promote constructive U.S. leadership in building the capacities of existing organizations and in sponsoring new, more effective regional and global institutions and partnerships. This program is made possible by a generous grant from the Robina Foundation.

The program draws on the resources of CFR’s David Rockefeller Studies Program to assess existing regional and global governance mechanisms and offer concrete recommendations for U.S. policymakers on specific reforms needed to improve their performance, both to advance U.S. national interests and to ensure the provision of critical global public goods. The program will take an issue area approach, focusing on arrangements governing state conduct and international cooperation in meeting four broad sets of challenges:

(1) Countering Transnational Threats, including terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and infectious disease;
(2) Protecting the Environment and Promoting Energy Security;

(3) Managing the Global Economy; and
(4) Preventing and Responding to Violent Conflict. In each of these spheres, the program will consider whether the most promising framework for governance is a formal organization with universal membership (e.g., the United Nations); a regional or sub-regional organization; a narrower, informal coalition of like-minded countries; or some combination of all three. Building on these issue-area investigations, the program will also consider the potential to adapt major bedrock institutions (e.g., the UN, G8, NATO, IMF) to meet today’s challenges, as well as the feasibility of creating new frameworks. It will also address the participation of non-state actors.


The program falls squarely within CFR’s historic mission as an independent, nonpartisan membership organization, think tank, and publisher dedicated to being a resource for its members, government officials, business executives, journalists, educators and students, civic and religious leaders, and other interested citizens in order to help them better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries. In fulfilling its mandate, the program draws on the CFR’s unique attributes as a premier think tank on matters of foreign policy; as a prominent forum for convening American and international statesmen and opinion leaders; and as a platform for forging bipartisan consensus on the priorities, terms, and conditions of the nation’s global engagement.

Throughout its activities, CFR will engage stakeholders and constituencies in the United States and abroad, including governments, non-governmental organizations (NGOs), civil society representatives, and the private sector, whose input and endorsement are critical to ensure the appropriateness and feasibility of any institutional reforms. The program is led by Senior Fellow Stewart Patrick. This concept note summarizes the rationale for the program, describes potential areas of research and policy engagement, and outlines the envisioned products and activities. We believe that the research and policy agenda outlined here constitutes a potentially significant contribution to U.S. and international deliberations on the requirements for world order in the twenty-first century.

RATIONALE AND CONTEXT - The Significance of the Issue

The creation of new frameworks for global governance will be a defining challenge for the twenty-first century world, and the attitude of the United States will be among the most important factors in determining the shape and stability of the world order that results from these efforts. The need for a reformed, robust system of multilateral cooperation has never been more obvious. Today’s global agenda is dominated by a host of issues—from terrorism to climate change to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction—that no single country, no matter how powerful, can address on its own. Tomorrow’s challenges and policy agendas will only be more transnational in scope. At the same time, existing multilateral institutions are increasingly divorced from global realities, hindering their capacity to deliver global public goods and mitigate global “bads.” Since the end of the Cold War, world politics have been transformed in fundamental ways. As outlined in the accompanying box, these changes include an ongoing shift in global power to non-Western countries; the rise of transnational threats to the top of the global security and development agendas; a growing concern with state weakness, as opposed to state strength; the emergence of agile and increasingly powerful non-state actors (both malignant and benign); the evolution of new norms of state sovereignty and new criteria for armed intervention; the proliferation of regional and sub-regional organizations; the increasing importance of cross-border networks; and a growing reliance on ad hoc “coalitions of the willing” as an adjunct to—and sometimes a replacement for—more formal, standing international bodies.

A New World
The point of departure for the program is a recognition that the world of 1945 has evolved dramatically, fundamentally, and irrevocably. New rules and institutions of global governance will need to take into account several fundamental changes in world politics. These include: − A shift in power to the global “South.” While the United States remains at the apex of the international system, the global distribution of power—political, economic, demographic, technological, and to some degree military— is shifting toward the developing world, driven by the rise of China, India, Brazil, and other nations (and the relative decline of Europe). Core international institutions, from the UN Security Council to the Group of Eight industrialized nations (G-8), have not yet adapted to accommodate these seismic shifts, reducing both their perceived legitimacy and their practical effectiveness. − The rise of transnational threats. While great power war will always be possible in a system of sovereign states, the principal foreign policy challenges of the twenty-first century are likely to be transnational threats—from terrorism to pandemics to climate change. Such challenges will necessitate new forms of institutionalized cooperation and pose particular challenges to the United States, historically ambivalent toward multilateral institutions.

The specter of weak and failing states. For the first time in modern history, the main threats to world security emanate less from states with too much power (e.g., Nazi Germany) than from states with too little (e.g., Afghanistan). The goal of collective security has thus shifted from counter-balancing aggressive powers to assisting fragile and post-conflict countries in achieving effective sovereign statehood, including control over “ungoverned spaces.” 

The mounting influence of non-state actors.

 A corollary to state weakness is the rise of non-state groups and individuals that are capable of operating across multiple sovereign jurisdictions. These include illicit organizations motivated by political grievance (e.g., al-Qaeda) or simple greed (e.g., Russian crime syndicates). But non-state actors also include more benign forces, such as humanitarian NGOs and civil society actors, philanthropic institutions like the Gates Foundation, and “super-empowered” individuals like Bono, all clamoring for entrée into decision-making forums that have traditionally been the purview of states alone. How to integrate these new stakeholders into multilateral deliberations remains a major challenge for global governance. 

Evolving norms of sovereignty and intervention.

 There is growing recognition that each state owes certain fundamental obligations to its own citizens and to wider international society. These responsibilities include an obligation not to commit atrocities against one’s own population; a prohibition against sponsoring or providing a safe haven to transnational terrorist groups; and a duty to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Yet the effort to make these new norms operational and enforceable remains a Herculean challenge.

The spread of regional and sub-regional organizations. Although the UN Charter of 1945 explicitly endorsed regional organizations, such bodies truly began to flower only with the end of the Cold War, both as complements to universal-membership organizations and as substitutes for them. The task for U.S. policymakers is to assess the comparative advantages of different institutions and encourage a judicious division of labor (between, say, the UN and the African Union) that ensures effective burden sharing, rather than unwarranted “burden shifting.”

The increasing prominence of transnational government networks. In past decades, the process of multilateral cooperation and rule-making tended to be hierarchical and centralized, reflecting formal negotiations among high-level national delegations. In the twenty-first century, multilateral cooperation frequently unfolds in a distributed and networked manner, through the collaboration of transnational networks of government officials from regulatory agencies, executives, legislatures, and courts. − A growing reliance on coalitions of the willing. A recent trend in global governance has been to rely less on large, formal organizations (like the UN), which are vulnerable to paralysis and inaction, than on narrower collective action among like-minded countries, as in the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI). An ongoing dilemma for U.S. policymakers will be to exploit the flexibility of such coalitions without undercutting formal, large-membership organizations whose technical expertise, legitimacy, and resources the United States will need over the long haul.

Despite these tremendous changes in the context, content, and conduct of international relations, there has been no “act of creation” analogous to the flurry of institution building that occurred in the 1940s and early 1950s. Indeed, many of the central institutions of global governance, such as the UN, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), remain substantially unchanged since the days of Roosevelt, Truman, Churchill, and Stalin. Recent efforts to reform the architecture of global governance, including at the UN High Level Summit of September 2005, have produced at best incremental change, as states disagree over how to reallocate power and authority in existing organizations and bring old rules in line with new realities.

The world community thus makes do with creaky institutional machinery that is increasingly obsolete, ineffective, and unrepresentative, and which makes few allowances for the potential role of the private sector and global civil society in shaping and addressing the global agenda. As hard as it is to create rules of global governance, it is even harder to re-write them when institutions already exist. The United States and its partners have a critical window of opportunity to update the architecture of international cooperation to reflect today’s turbulent world. The creation of a more effective framework for global governance will depend on a clear and common understanding among the world’s major nations of the new dynamics and forces at play in world politics, and their recognition that there can be no one-size-fits-all solution to the management of transnational problems. It will also depend on the willingness of the United States to exercise the same creative, enlightened leadership that it exercised in the mid-twentieth century, when it chose to champion and defend new forms of international cooperation.

A New Era of American Leadership?
Among the most important factors determining the future of global governance will be the attitude of the United States, likely to remain the world’s most prominent actor at least until 2050. Historically, Americans have adopted an ambivalent and selective posture toward multilateral cooperation. On the one hand, no country has done as much to create the institutional infrastructure of world order, including the bedrock institutions dating from the 1940s, such as the United Nations, the Bretton Woods Institutions, and NATO. Over the past six decades, the United States has benefited tremendously from this architecture, which has helped to legitimate U.S. global leadership, improve predictability in world affairs, and permit the joint pursuit of shared objectives across a wide range of countries. On the other hand, few countries have been as sensitive as the United States to restrictions on their freedom of action or as jealous in guarding their sovereign prerogatives. This ambivalent orientation can be attributed to at least three factors: America’s overwhelming power, its unique political culture, and its constitutional traditions.

First, given its massive weight, the United States enjoys unparalleled unilateral and bilateral options, as well as a plausible claim to special exemption from some rules binding on others, since it serves as the ultimate custodian and guarantor of world order. Second, the country’s longstanding tradition of liberal “exceptionalism” inspires U.S. vigilance in protecting the domestic sovereignty and institutions from the perceived incursions of international bodies.
Finally, the separation of powers enshrined in the U.S. Constitution, which gives Congress a critical voice in the ratification of treaties and endorsement of global institutions, complicates U.S. assumptions of new international obligations. This instinctual skepticism toward multilateral cooperation, which was particularly pronounced in the first term of the administration of George W. Bush, is unlikely to disappear. Nevertheless, the first years of the new millennium have also demonstrated limits to unilateral U.S. action, military or otherwise, in mitigating the threats and taking advantage of the opportunities posed by globalization. Regardless of whether the administration that takes office in January 2009 is Democratic or Republican, the thrust of U.S. foreign policy is likely to be multilateral to a significant degree.

Multilateralism can come in many forms, however. From a U.S. perspective, the ideal vehicle for international cooperation in a given instance will depend on a number of factors, including whether other countries share a common conception of the nature of the policy challenge (to say nothing of its appropriate remedy). Although the United Nations has distinct advantages, given its perceived international legitimacy and universal membership, it will not always be the instrument of choice; regional organizations or narrower affinity groups sharing common purposes may have a comparative advantage. The United States and other countries are likely to require a diverse array of frameworks—formal and informal, universal and regional, and functional—to address particular tasks. In some cases, effective governance may require public-private partnerships involving a range of stakeholders, including private corporations and non-governmental organizations. Accordingly, global governance in the twenty-first century may well come to resemble what Francis Fukuyama terms “multi-multilateralism.”

New Thinking for a New Era
The program on international institutions and global governance aims to assist the architects of U.S. foreign policy and their counterparts in other countries and in regional and global organizations in drafting the blueprints for new structures of international cooperation that are more closely tailored to global realities, consistent with long-term U.S. national interests, and sensitive to historic U.S. concerns about domestic sovereignty and international freedom of action. The program’s approach to global governance will remain a pragmatic and flexible one, emphasizing customized solutions rather than “one-size-fits-all” responses. The process of formulating policy recommendations will be an open and consultative one. CFR research staff will meet with and solicit input from the main constituencies—American and foreign, public and private – with a stake in the relevant deliberations.
For example, discussions on strengthening the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) would necessarily involve both arms control advocacy organizations and major chemical firms, among others. In a similar manner, deliberations on a post-Kyoto framework to respond to climate change would solicit views from environmental groups, industry representatives, developing country officials and civil society, and U.S. officials at the federal, state, county, and municipal levels. Such consultations are imperative to ensure a comprehensive understanding of the stumbling blocks to change, the trade-offs of alternative institutional options, and the feasibility of new arrangements. CFR recognizes that identifying where current international institutions
deficient and where new ones are appropriate is but one dimension of reforming global governance. The harder chore is to persuade the relevant parties to adopt a new way of doing business, including (in some cases) the loss of current privileges.
For this reason, CFR will include in any proposed recommendations a practical strategy to win multilateral support for needed changes, as well as forging domestic consensus among the major U.S. stakeholders.


The agenda of the program on international institutions and global governance is potentially vast. To make it more tractable, we have adopted a sector-based approach, in which we will assess the institutional arrangements governing specific global challenges. In each case selected, the program will work with CFR fellows to examine (a) how the nature of this particular challenge has changed in recent decades;
(b) what international regimes and frameworks—informal and formal, permanent and temporary, global and regional—exist to regulate behavior or advance cooperation in this issue area; (c) whether these mechanisms are adequate to the task at hand or must be modified; and (d) what institutional reforms and new divisions of labor would be appropriate, consistent with long-term U.S. national interests, and sustainable within the U.S. domestic context. In conducting this analysis, the program will draw on expertise of many of the fifty-five full- and part-time fellows in the CFR’s Studies Program. CFR would also seek out expertise in those areas where it does not currently exist in-house. The program will employ several standards to judge the adequacy and appropriateness of existing regimes, organizations, and other arrangements of global governance. These criteria will include: − Effectiveness, in terms of actual performance in accomplishing the stated objective(s), ideally measured through independent monitoring and evaluation. − Legitimacy, assessed in terms of whether existing arrangements accurately reflect the current distribution of global political power and interest, are consistent with international legal regimes, and reflect broadly accepted procedures for multilateral decision-making. − Accountability, evaluated according to whether the
institutional agents can be held to account for their performance and whether the institution provides opportunities for expressions of democratic will both in the United States and abroad.

Consistency with U.S. interests and values, including whether the proposed framework promises to advance U.S. national security and welfare, legitimate U.S. purposes abroad, and resonate with the democratically-expressed will of the American people. Building on this sector-based audit and analysis, the program will likely recommend reforms to a number of “bedrock” institutions of world order including the UN (particularly the composition of the Security Council), the G-8, NATO, and the Bretton Woods institutions—as well as major regional organizations, such as the European Union (EU), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the African Union (AU), and the Organization of American States (OAS). Where appropriate, the Council will also explore the potential for global governance arrangements that are less state-centric. Recommendations for major institutional reform will proceed from (rather than precede) this issue area analysis. Moreover, wherever such reforms are recommended, the Council will include a plausible strategy for winning international backing for this new governance framework. Issues and Sectors for Analysis The program has identified four critical areas of global governance where current frameworks for multilateral cooperation are increasingly outdated.

These include (1) Countering Transnational Threats; (2) Protecting the Environment and Promoting Energy Security; (3) Managing the Global Economy; and (4) Preventing and Responding to Violent Conflict. In this section, we highlight what we consider to be the most compelling issues within these four broad clusters, and where the program might add value through policy research and engagement over its five year time frame. These clusters include: (I) Countering Transnational Threats Terrorism. The struggle against Salafist-inspired Islamist terrorism is likely to be a generational one for the United States and the world community, and an effective response will require a variety of international partnerships. To date, however, the “Global War on Terrorism” has often borne a “made in the USA” stamp, rather than representing a genuinely multilateral undertaking. The United Nations has made some progress in enlisting member states in the struggle against al-Qaeda and affiliated organizations, including through UN Security Council Resolution 1373, which established the UN Counter-Terrorism Committee, as well as multilateral efforts to combat terrorist financing. The United States has also expanded its intelligence cooperation on counterterrorism matters with scores of states. Nevertheless, the global anti-terror campaign has been less multilateral than it might be, both in terms of consolidating new norms (e.g., a common definition of terrorism) and ensuring robust operational responses to the threat (including building the counterterrorism capacity of weak but willing states). The program will work with Council Fellows to review promising multilateral initiatives and needed reforms within both UN and regional organizations that are essential if the struggle against terrorism is to become a more effective effort. − Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction. The spread of catastrophic technologies has placed the ability to kill vast numbers of people in the hands of a growing number of governments and non-state actors.
At the same time, the international regimes and institutions charged with controlling the spread of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons—from the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to the Biological and Toxic Weapons Convention—are under increasing strain. Despite high hopes, the Outcome Document of the UN High-Level Summit of September 2005 failed to include a single significant reform to global non-proliferation regimes. Frustrated by the shortcomings of established frameworks to halt proliferation, the United States in recent years has experimented with a number of ad hoc, flexible groupings, such as the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI). It has also adopted a differentiated response to proliferators – most notable in the case of India’s nuclear program – that grants special treatment to regimes that Washington believes can be trusted. The program will work with CFR’s experts in arms control and international security to assess needed reforms to existing nonproliferation regimes, including the potential creation of an international facility to provide nuclear fuel to participants in the NPT regime. The program will also evaluate the appropriate balance between such formal organizations and treaties like the IAEA and NPT and narrower, informal arrangements of like-minded parties, such as PSI, the Nuclear Suppliers Group, and the Missile Technology Control Regime. − Homeland Security. The rise of transnational terrorist networks and the spread of catastrophic technologies have made homeland security a priority for all nations, particularly Western democracies.
The United States and other countries face a number of common challenges, including policing maritime and land frontiers and national airspace; protecting civil aviation; improving border control; regulating immigration; hardening critical infrastructure; inspecting cargo; and tagging and tracking suspicious individuals and shipments. Effective homeland security increasingly relies on creative multilateral partnerships, such as the Container Security Initiative, which among other things implies the placement of U.S. customs officials in foreign ports (and vice-versa). It also requires deeper intelligence- and information-sharing and more intensive law enforcement cooperation. These innovative partnerships have forced the United States and its allies to tolerate some sacrifice of national sovereignty, reconcile distinct constitutional and legal traditions, and (at times) overcome divergent threat perceptions.

The program will work with CFR scholars to assess promising areas for expanding and formalizing multilateral cooperation in this arena. − Infectious Disease, Biosecurity, and Global Public Health. Among the most sobering concerns on the global security agenda is the specter of massive death at the hands of naturally occurring or man-made pathogens. Over the past three decades, the world has experienced the emergence of more than thirty previously unknown disease agents, including HIV/AIDS, Ebola, SARS, and avian influenza, for which no cures are yet available, as well as the reemergence and spread of more than twenty well-known diseases, including TB, malaria, and cholera, often in more virulent and drug-resistant forms. At the same time, the U.S. and other governments are increasingly fearful of the purposeful design and release of biological toxins by international terrorists. Unfortunately, as the belated response to SARS revealed, serious shortcomings exist in national and global systems for epidemiological surveillance, preparedness, and response. The program will work with CFR fellows to identify what reforms to current frameworks of global health governance, including the World Health Organization, are required to meet this burgeoning threat.

(2) Protecting the Environment and Ensuring Energy Security
− Global Climate Change. New international institutions to mitigate the degradation of the global commons will likely be a defining feature of global governance in the twenty-first century. The global environmental agenda includes a broad array of oceanic, terrestrial, and atmospheric challenges, from the exhaustion of marine resources like fish
stocks and coral reefs to deforestation and desertification, the loss of biodiversity and endangered species, air pollution, and the depletion of the ozone layer. Nowhere is the need for a new global compact more imperative, however, than in the case of climate change, which unless corrected will irrevocably alter the biosphere on which all humanity depends. Moreover, the effects of global warming are predicted to affect most dramatically some of the most fragile, poor and unstable developing countries that are least equipped to adapt. The program will work with CFR fellows in examining the institutional preconditions for a post-Kyoto framework agreement to which the United States and the major developing countries, including China, India, and Brazil, can agree, as well as a potential expansion of the Global Environmental Facility to create incentives for carbon-neutral development.

 Energy Insecurity.

The recent dramatic rise in global petroleum prices—combined with the exhaustion of many proven oil reserves, the insatiable Chinese appetite for fossil fuels, political instability in oil-producing regions from Nigeria to Iraq, and the rise of “petro-autocracies” from Russia to Venezuela—has focused the attention of U.S. policymakers on the security of world energy supplies. The United States and its international partners need new frameworks to ensure adequate global production, refining and transportation capacity, and new strategies to prevent potential interruption of supplies. There is also growing awareness that shifting the U.S. economy away from its current heavy reliance on fossil fuels—particularly from the Middle East—makes good strategic sense. New frameworks of multilateral cooperation will be essential components of any U.S. strategy to improve global energy security and create the incentives for international movement toward cleaner and more reliable forms of energy. The program will work with CFR fellows to examine promising steps, including through the International Energy Agency, to improve long-term global and U.S. energy security. (3) Managing the Global Economy − The International Financial System.
The program will support the work of the Center for Geoeconomic Studies (CGS) in casting a sober eye on the current framework of global financial and monetary relations, including rules governing exchange rates, proposals to create regional currency unions, and initiatives by individual countries to dollarize or euro-ize. It will promote work by CFR fellows to evaluate current trends in the global financial system—including strains caused by the twin U.S. deficits, the emerging role of China in the global monetary system, and the rise of alternative reserve currencies (including the euro)—and explore promising means to improve coordination among the world’s major governments and central banks in dealing with structural weaknesses. The program will also support CFR’s work in reevaluating the mandate of the IMF, which has lost much of its relevance with the growth of private capital markets. 

 International Trade:

The stagnation of the current Doha Round of World Trade Organization (WTO) negotiations and the ongoing expansion of bilateral and regional trade arrangements have called into question the commitment of the United States and other major countries to the vision of an open, reciprocal, and non-discriminatory system of international trade and payments. Stumbling blocks in the current WTO round include the resistance of wealthy countries in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) to liberalize trade in protected agricultural commodities and the unwillingness of developing countries to quicken their own embrace of Western standards on foreign investment, intellectual property, and trade in manufactures. In the absence of sustained forward movement on global trade liberalization, we are likely to see an increased fragmentation of world trade into regional—and potentially discriminatory and protectionist—blocs. The program will support the ongoing work of the CGS in examining the preconditions for a North-South compromise, and in assessing the trade-offs for the United States of bilateral, regional, and global approaches to trade liberalization. The program will also seek to advance CFR’s work on new regional and international frameworks to regulate global labor mobility.

International Investment.

The economic gains from cross-border investment are as great as those from cross-border trade, and corporate investment in multi-country supply chains is a large driver of growing trade flows. Moreover, the rapidly growing sovereign wealth funds of several East Asian countries and energy-exporting states are complicating the picture. The huge capital surpluses now in the hands of foreign governments may trigger a political backlash in the countries where these funds are invested). Yet international investment is not subject to any multilateral regime comparable to the World Trade Organization. Instead, a crazy-quilt of bilateral investment treaties, together with an OECD-effort led by the OECD, attempt to set global norms for investment rules. In the 1990s an effort to upgrade this framework with a Multilateral Agreement on Investment was defeated by civil society critics. The program will support work by CFR fellows to consider the case for a global investment agreement, as well as to examine the need for rules to govern sovereign wealth funds and the recipients of their capital. 

Global Development Policy.

Contemporary policy discourse concerning global development has been dominated by two extreme camps: advocates of enormous expenditures of foreign aid to achieve the Millennium Development Goals, on the one hand, and skeptics of development assistance, on the other, who contend that it is wasteful, redundant (given private sources of investment) and often counterproductive (since it breeds dependency). Often missing from this dialogue of the deaf is a careful appraisal of what targeted foreign aid can (and cannot) accomplish, as well as a recognition that aid is but one component—and rarely the most important—in development outcomes. The program will support efforts by CFR fellows to evaluate the continued relevance and appropriate mission of the World Bank, the regional multilateral development banks, the UN Development Program, and other UN development agencies, with an eye to assessing how their aid windows and technical expertise complement one another and the capacities of donor governments. The analysis will also consider arguments for institutional reforms, such as transforming the governing structure of the World Bank and correcting the UN’s fragmented approach to global development. It will consider ways to harness the growing interest of the private sector in corporate social responsibility programs in developing countries: While spending by multinational corporations on development is growing, the sophistication with which these funds are disbursed is perhaps two decades behind that of the public sector. This work will be undertaken in collaboration with the CGS.

(4) Preventing and Responding to Violent Conflict − Preventing State Failure and Internal Conflict.

In an age of transnational threats, states that cannot control their borders and territory and that collapse into violence pose a danger not simply to their own populations but indeed to the entire world. Unfortunately, the international community continues to struggle in its efforts to prevent states from sliding into failure and internal violence. To date, no major international actor—whether the United States, other major governments, or international institutions like the United Nations, World Bank, and African Union—has made prevention a strategic priority. Notwithstanding the UN’s rhetorical commitment to conflict prevention, its actual policy remains modest, ad hoc and reactive, limited in most cases to occasional “good offices” efforts by the Secretary-General. The G8, likewise, has devoted little attention to reducing critical sources of insecurity and instability in the developing world, including cutting the illicit revenue streams that fuel corruption and violence in weak states and conflict zones, curbing illegal trade in weapons, shutting down offshore financial havens for the ill-gotten gains, and insisting on transparent management of natural resource revenues. The program will collaborate with CFR’s Center for Preventive Action (CPA) to assess what institutional reforms can be made to improve the capacity of the UN, G8, World Bank, AU and other international frameworks and partnerships to address the underlying sources of instability and mitigate and manage conflict in the world’s most vulnerable states through a mixture of diplomatic, economic, political, and military means. It will also address private sector and public-private initiatives to reduce conflict, such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and the Kimberley Process for conflict diamonds.

The Use of Force.

Today more than at any other time in the past sixty years, the rules governing the use of armed force are up for grabs. The diplomatic deadlock over Iraq during 2002-2003—like the preceding Kosovo crisis of 1999—raised fundamental questions about the recourse available to the United States when disagreement among the Permanent Five blocks Security Council action. In the aftermath of both episodes, some observers have suggested the need for alternative (or surrogate) sources of legitimacy for armed force, whereas others have cautioned against setting a dangerous precedent. At the same time, there has been growing international support—particularly among Western governments—for a doctrine of contingent sovereignty, whereby countries guilty of genocide, terrorism, and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction would forfeit their presumption against external intervention. Despite these normative shifts, however, the United States and its international partners have made little headway in determining the circumstances in which the Security Council might be legitimately bypassed or the evidentiary criteria required to justify armed intervention into a sovereign state. The program will work with CPA and CFR fellows to clarify these criteria, building on the CFR’s previous work on such questions, including on the “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine.

Peace Operations and Post-Conflict Peace-Building.

 Notwithstanding setbacks and shortcomings in UN peace operations since the end of the Cold War, the United Nations is being called upon as never before to keep – and in some cases enforce – peace between warring parties, as well as to pick up the pieces when the shooting stops. Today, more than 100,000 blue helmets are deployed in a score of operations around the globe – more than at any time in the UN’s history. Yet the complexity and pace of such multidimensional efforts have strained the modest capacities of the UN Department of Peacekeeping Operations, which struggles on its modest budget and capabilities to develop a robust doctrine; to procure logistical support from member states; to ensure the quality and discipline of contributed troops; to negotiate an effective division of labor with regional organizations (such as the AU); and to realize the vision of “integrated missions” that unite the humanitarian, reconstruction, governance, and security components of international interventions.
Meanwhile, the UN Peacebuilding Commission—one of the few significant results of the 2005 UN High Level Summit—has thus far failed to live up to its potential in ensuring effective state-building and sustainable recovery in war-torn societies. The program will collaborate with the Center for Preventive Action and CFR fellows on proposals to deepen recent UN reforms, as well as explore potential partnerships between the UN and the AU as well as other regional and sub-regional bodies. In advancing this ambitious agenda, the program will draw on both core program staff and also the fifty-five other permanent and adjunct members of CFR’s Studies Program. This will permit the program to generate a steady stream of research, publication, and policy engagement in all four clusters over the five-year span of the program. Reforming the Bedrock Institutions of World Order Building on these issue-area investigations and the identified shortcomings of existing organizations and frameworks, the program will, over five years, seek to propose reforms to some of the bedrock institutions of world order, including the United Nations, regional organizations, and major ad hoc groupings. − The United Nations Security Council. Among the biggest disappointments of the UN High-Level Summit of September 2005 was the failure of UN member states to cut the Gordian knot with respect to UN Security Council Membership, particularly the extension of permanent (or semi-permanent) membership to accommodate the shifting balance of world power since 1945. Although the UN Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel outlined two realistic and balanced alternatives for enlargement, forward progress was blocked by a combination of regional rivalries, intra-European differences, and U.S. disengagement. The program will examine prospects and preconditions for a renewed reform effort that would satisfy the aspirations of critical players (including Japan, India, Germany, and Brazil) while extending Security Council representation to Africa and the Middle East.

The Group of Eight. G8

The obsolescence of current mechanisms of global governance is increasingly apparent in the management of the world economy, not least during the annual summits of the G-8. It simply makes no sense to exclude from this ostensible global directorate the world’s largest emerging economies, including China, India, and Brazil, as well as multiple other middle powers. The program will examine the merits of recent proposals to expand the membership of the G-8 (such as the “L-20” proposal championed by former Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin); as well as to create unique groupings tailored to discrete political, economic, or functional issues (e.g., energy or migration). 

Regional and Sub-Regional Organizations.

 One of the hallmarks of the past two decades has been the formation, deepening, and enlargement of formal regional organizations in many corners of the globe. The mandates, competencies, capacities, and effectiveness of these heterogeneous bodies vary enormously. The United States has a critical interest—and a central role to play—in ensuring that these bodies play their full and appropriate role in managing global insecurity and in providing public goods for their respective regions. The program intends to examine the current status and potential role of multilateral bodies in at least some of the following regions, drawing on relevant CFR scholars: 

Europe, including the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the European Union, and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE). − Asia-Pacific, including the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the ASEAN Regional Forum, and potential sub-regional security architecture for Northeast Asia.

Africa, notably the African Union (including its new Peace and Security Council), the New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD), the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS), the Southern African Development Community (SADC), and other relevant organs. − South and Central Asia, including the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and other potential multilateral arrangements for these two sub-regions.

 Latin America, including the Organization of American States, the Summit of the Americas, sub-regional trade groupings (e.g., NAFTA, CAFTA, Mercosur), and potential groupings of like-minded countries to manage transnational challenges like energy security, migration and narcotics.

The Middle East, including the G-8 sponsored Forum for the Future, the Arab League, and the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC). Big Picture Issues As we explore the most appropriate international frameworks to address today’s global agenda, the program will seek to break new ground on three big picture issues: the changing nature of sovereignty in an age of globalization; the challenges of accommodating non-state actors in global decision-making; and the preconditions for democratic accountability in multilateral institutions.

Re-conceptualizing “sovereignty” in an age of globalization.

The post-Cold War era has posed challenges to traditional concepts of state sovereignty, in at least four respects. First, some failing and post-conflict states have become wards of the international community, submitting to a form of UN “neo-trusteeship.” Second, some countries by their conduct have lost their immunity from intervention, as part of an emerging doctrine of “contingent sovereignty.” Third, nearly all states – including the United States – have voluntarily forfeited some historic freedom of action to manage transnational threats and exploit international opportunities. Finally, some countries, particularly in the EU, have chosen to “pool” their sovereignty in return for economic, social, and political benefits. The program could provide a valuable intellectual contribution by tracing the scope and implications of these transformations. − Accommodating non-state actors in global governance. Although states remain the foundation of international order, they face growing competition as wielders of influence and (often) legitimacy from non-state actors. In designing new frameworks of global governance, the United States and other governments must provide opportunities for partnership with and input from interested stakeholders, including civil society actors, advocacy groups, and corporations—without allowing the global agenda to be hijacked by unrepresentative interests.
The program can identify lessons from recent experience about how to strike this delicate balance. − Overcoming the “democratic deficit” in global governance arrangements. Efforts at international cooperation, particularly of a supranational character (as in the European Union), often become divorced from the democratic will of the national publics of member states. By examining multilateral institutions across a variety of sectors, the program may generate useful insights about how to improve the democratic accountability of multilateral bodies. It might also evaluate the frequent contention that an Alliance of Democracies represents a plausible framework for global order and a realistic alternative to the UN (which obviously includes authoritarian as well as democratic regimes).

THE PROGRAM’S VALUE ADDED CFR’s program on international institutions and global governance seeks to make a significant contribution to U.S. and international understanding of the institutional infrastructure required for effective multilateral cooperation in the twenty-first century. The program is envisioned as a multi-year effort, rather than a one to two-year project geared toward a specific event or electoral cycle. This relative permanence will hopefully permit CFR to become a center of excellence in thinking about global governance, and a repository of useful knowledge and lessons learned available to other scholars and institutions. It will also facilitate the difficult process of building domestic political consensus—within the executive and legislative branches, the policy community, and the informed public—about the appropriate parameters of U.S. engagement in multilateral cooperation. The program’s location within the Council on Foreign Relations will prove invaluable in furthering its ambitious aims. The program will exploit the CFR’s convening power, offering forums in New York, Washington, and around the country where domestic and international opinion leaders can debate proposed institutional reforms with the Council’s membership. Through co-hosting events with partner institutions in the United State and abroad, the program will solicit input and buy-in from foreign governments and publics, as well as representatives from civil society and the private sector, for proposed recommendations on global governance.

Finally, the program will serve a broader role in bipartisan consensus-building and public education by engaging administration officials and members of Congress on new directions in global governance, and by making its products widely available through a variety of media.






                                     Shadow Banking / Shadow Goverment

 Alan Greenspan:
"In the absence of the gold standard, there is no way to protect savings from confiscation through inflation. ... This is the shabby secret of the welfare statists' tirades against gold. Deficit spending is simply a scheme for the confiscation of wealth. Gold stands in the way of this insidious process. It stands as a protector of property rights. If one grasps this, one has no difficulty in understanding the statists' antagonism toward the gold standard."

James Madison:
"History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling the money and its issuance."

Abraham Lincoln:
"I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country; corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in High Places will follow, and the Money Power of the Country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the prejudices of the People, until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands, and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war"

James Paul Warburg:
"We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent."

Barry Goldwater:
"Most Americans have no real understanding of the operation of the international money lenders. The accounts of the Federal Reserve System have never been audited. It operates outside of the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States."

G. D. McDaniel:
"If, as it appears, the experiment that was called 'America' is at an end ... then perhaps a fitting epitaph would be ... 'here lies America the greatest nation that might have been had it not been for the Edomite bankers who first stole their money, used their stolen money to buy their politicians and press and lastly deprived them of their constitutional freedom by the most evil device yet created --- The Federal Reserve Banking System."

Louis McFadden:
"The Federal Reserve Bank of New York is eager to enter into close relationship with the Bank for International Settlements.... The conclusion is impossible to escape that the State and Treasury Departments are willing to pool the banking system of Europe and America, setting up a world financial power independent of and above the Government of the United States.... The United States under present conditions will be transformed from the most active of manufacturing nations into a consuming and importing nation with a balance of trade against it."                                         


Thomas Jefferson said " The Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the form and Principles of our Constitution. If the American People allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the Banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the People of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.

One of the most ungodly and fraudulent institutions ever perpetrated on the American people and the world, is the Federal Reserve System which through deceit became the central bank of the United States in 1913. The idea came about on a meeting in Jekyll Island off the coast of Georgia in 1910. The bankers in this country, especially J.P. Morgan, created a currency panic in 1907 in order to get the American people to accept the idea of a central bank.

Enter 1913
In November of 1910, some of these vultures came together at the Jekyl Island Hunt Club on Jekyl Island, Georgia. What were they hunting? The biggest prize of all, the absolute and complete control of all the money in America which means control of all America and with it the power to make slaves of all the people.

Those who attended were: Senator Nelson Aldrich (Nelson Rockefeller's maternal grandfather); A. Piatt Andrew, Economist and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury; Frank Vanderlip, President of the National City Bank of New York; Henry P. Norton, President of Morgan's First National Bank of New York; Paul Moritz Warburg, a German who was partner in the New York banking house of Kuhn, Loeb Co.; Benjamin Strong, an aid to J. P. Morgan.

Paul Warburg was credited as the architect of the bill which was passed by Congress and signed by traitorous Woodrow Wilson. It was entitled the Federal Reserve Act of 1913. America once again had a central bank but this time they had placed America under an absolute dictatorship.


A central bank already existed in England from as far back as 1694. The Rothschilds completely dominate the banking system. It is estimated their wealth goes into the trillions.

Baron Nathan Mayer Rothschild boasted:

• "I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man that controls Britain's money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply."

"Give me the power of the money and it will not matter any more who is commanding" Mayer Amschel Rothschild - (Illuminati)

The idea of a central bank is to so enslave the people of the country to a debt money system that you continue to collect taxes continuously which just covers the interest. The duped people of the United States are paying about $400 billion dollars per year to the IRS which is the collection agency for the Federal Reserve. By the way, the Federal Reserve is a privately owned bank with 10 private members. The Chase Manhattan Bank is a member which is owned by the Rockefellers who are Rothschild Agents. 

See:link  →   Federal Reserve!!!! Important link, a must see

Also see: The Israeli NWO          

The Israel Supreme Court sits on a plot of land opposite the Knesset and next to the Rothschilds’ Central Bank of Israel. It sits in accordance with Ley-Lines connecting the building to the center of Jerusalem and to the Rockefeller State Museum. The Rockefellers were among the first financial supporters of the Zionist State of Israel owing to their oil and financial alliances with the Rothshilds and their mutual political goals.

In the entrance of the Israel Supreme Court building is a large picture of the “founding fathers” of the court. The picture includes 4th Baron Jacob Rothschild who at the time was Chairman of his parents’Yad Hanadiv.

Outside the President’s Chamber is displayed the letter Mrs Dorothy de Rothschild wrote to Prime Minister Shimon Peres expressing her intention to donate a new building for the Supreme Court. In accordance with her husband’s Illuminati orientation, the designers of the building were instructed to incorporate various Illuminati symbols:

The All Seeing Eye: This occult symbol is on the outside left hand of the building. Its symbolism is taken from the book of Genesis wherein the serpent promised Adam and Eve that their ‘eyes would be opened’ if they ate of the tree of ‘knowledge’ of good and evil. The Hebrew word for ‘eyes’ in this passage is in the singular. The pyramid upon which the eye is inserted represents the Rothschilds’ hierarchical command of world-wide rule.

The Trampled-On Christian Cross: At the front left-hand side of the building are steps leading down to an adapted figure of the Christian Cross designed to be trampled on under foot.

The Egyptian Obelisk: Part of the outside architecture includes a garden with an Egyptian occult Obelisk. This symbolizes in Illuminati culture the Egypto-Israeli origins of the Jews coupled with the Rothschild vision to tie the obelisks of New York and London in a world-rule union.

Masonic Compass & Square With “G” In The Middle: Across from the main Courtroom are stairs leading down to the Masonic occult symbol of Compass and Square with the “G” in the middle. The “G” taken from the Greek word “gnosis” represents “knowledge” which is the key focus of Illuminati culture.

The Rothschilds have been the main financial sponsors of archaeological digs in Israel. The Masada Dig was first known to the Israelis as the “Edmond de Rothschild Masada Dig” under the auspices of the Rothschilds’ Palestine Exploration Fund. The PEF established the Biblical Archaeology Society which publishes the Biblical Archaeology Review touting it as the authority on Solomon’s Temple.

In December of 1995, a month after Rabin was assassinated, the Jerusalem Masonic Lodge was established adjacent to the Temple Mount in the underground Grotto of King Solomon. The lodge was founded by the Grand Master of the Italian illuminati Giuliano Di Bernardo who at the opening ceremony declared, “The rebuilding of the Temple is at the center of our studies.”

* 1791-1811: Rothschilds’ First Bank of the United States
1816-1836: Rothschilds’ Second Bank of the United States
1837-1862: Free Banking Era -no formal Central Bank through the efforts of President Andrew Jackson
1862-1913: System of National Banks through the efforts of President Andrew Jackson
* 1914-Current: Federal Reserve Act effects a consortium of 7 privately held Jewish banks called the Federal Reserve Bank. The largest share holders of the bank are the Rothschild’s of London holding 57% of the stock which is not available for public trading. A MUST SEE: Link  The History of the house of Rothschild

Also see: The Secret Government

Rockefeller speaks out!

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto determination practiced in past centuries."
David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991.

The Illuminati has planned first for a financial collapse that will make the great depression look like a picnic. This will occur through the maneuvering of the great banks and financial institutions of the world, through stock manipulation, and interest rate changes. Most people will be indebted to the federal government through bank and credit card debt, etc. The governments will recall all debts immediately, but most people will be unable to pay and will be bankrupted. This will cause generalized financial panic, which will occur simultaneously worldwide, as the Illuminists firmly believe in controlling people through finances.

 The good news is that if a person is debt-free, owes nothing to the government or credit debt, and can live self sufficiently, they may do better than others. I would invest in gold, not stocks, if I had the income. Gold will once again be the world standard, and dollars will be pretty useless (remember after the Civil War? Our money will be worth about what confederate money was after the collapse).

                               Where does Rothchild get his power from?


It was African gold and diamonds that built international finance, trade and

banking that the Jews (Rothschild, Warbug, Rockefeller and others) dominate.

It was African gold and diamond that built Jewish banks and wealth worldwide.

This strategy negates their numerical numbers as a minority population but increases their ability to advocate the Jewish Agenda and most of all ensure that the State of Israel is top priority for both the Republican and Democratic candidates. The Congressional Black Caucus yet lager in numbers are no political match, as far as the Israeli Lobby when it comes to leveraging economic and political influence. Power concedes nothing without a demand. So Obama is more interested in courting the Jewish vote than the African/American vote because he is fully aware of their financial and political influence.

             Who will have the answer to peace and security and prosperity ?


                         Who is this man and where does he come from?

Psalms 87:4,5,6 - I will make mention of Rahab and Babylon to them that know me: behold Philistia, and Tyre, with Ethiopia; this man was born there.  The word mention in this verse  the Hebrew ZAKAR, means --- TO MARK AS TO RECONIZE...                                      

 According to scripture, the man of sin (SON OF PERDITION) will come in at a time of trouble...He will come in peaceably, but they will not want to give him the honor of the Kingdom. This man will have solutions and basically wipe the debt by spreading the spoils and riches, he will look like a saviour. He will do that which his father's have not done...see Daniel 11:21-24. He will forecast his devices against the strong holds, even for a time...but in the latter half of his rule he will implicate that no man might buy or sell save he have his mark, number, or name of the beast......

                         OBAMAH meaning: the eye of Baal



Remember the name Obamah/Obama is on our Money and is known as the great seal of the united states.....See link:  → Obama name and it's meaning

The insigna of the Order of the Illuminati first appeared on the reverse side of U.S. one-dollar bills in 1933. One can read, at the base of the 13-story pyramid, the year 1776 (MDCCLXVI in Roman numerals). The eye radiating in all directions is the “all-spying eye” that symbolizes the terroristic, power agency set up by Weishaupt. The Latin words “ANNUIT COEPTIS” mean “our enterprise (conspiracy) has been crowned with success.” Below, “NOVUS ORDO SECLORUM” explains the nature of the enterprise: a “New Social Order” or a “New World Order”.                                 





Construction on the President's House began in 1792 in Washington. The D.C. commissioners, charged by Congress started building the new city under the direction of the president.  It was planned to import workers from Europe to meet their labor needs. The response to recruitment was dismal so they turned to African Americans - slave and free - to provide the bulk of labor to build the White House, the United States Capitol, and other government buildings.

Two executive orders were issued by President Abraham Lincoln during the American Civil War. The first one, issued September 22, 1862, declared the freedom of all slaves in any state of the Confederate States of America that did not return to Union control by January 1, 1863, thus The Emancipation Proclamation. 

President John Kennedy's desire to maintain the image of activist president gave legitimacy to Civil Rights cause, made him responsive to Civil Rights pressures and encouraged youth activism on Civil Rights issues.

November 4, 2008 Senator Barack Obama is elected the first African/White President of the United States.

                                           What is in a name? 




See: The original Greek & Hebrew page

Isaiah 14:26 - This is the purpose that is purposed upon the whole earth: and this is the hand that is stretched out upon all nations.    

         Mystery Babylon the Mother of harlots sits atop the Beast with a golden cup in her Hand

                   Who is she? All the rebellious Jews that sit upon every shore

The Whore sits upon a scarlet coloured beast that has seven heads and ten horn having a golden cup in her hand.

This golden cup means in the Greek (chrusion) meaning a golden article or ornament or coin. Through the idea of UTILITY of the metal. The meaning means to furnish what is needed (GIVE AN ORCLE), it comes from the word charo meaning to loan or lend......to handle by hand through power, a storm, a rainy season, a winter temptest. the cup is filled  with the content there of.  It is the drinking vessel that seals her fate....The wine she has fermented for her fornications which intoxicates all Nations.

                                Revelation Chapter 17                 

1. And there came one of the seven angels which had the seven vials, and talked with me, saying unto me, Come hither; I will show unto thee the judgment of the great whore that sitteth upon many waters; The word great means of age, eldest. The word whore here in the Hebrew is Porne. or pornos, a strumpet, an idolater, to sell meaning to traverse; to traffic by travelling to dispose of as a merchant of slavery. A debauchee (LIBERTINE) - fornicator and whoremonger.   The word sitteth (KATHEMAI) means where she resides, meaning to sit sedentary, immoveable. the many water she sitteth upon means the major portion (PEION) very great exceeds more execellent. meaning more in quanity, number, or quality.


Rothschild speaks of the New Global governance........

“We provide advice on both sides of the balance sheet, and we do it globally. There is no debate that Rothschild is a Jewish family, but we are proud to be in this region. However, it takes time to develop a global footprint.“

Banks will deleverage and there will be a new form of global governance.

Rockefeller is reported to have said: "Competition is a  sin". "Own nothing.
Control everything".  

"Money is power or shall we say, the monopoly to create credit money and
charge interest is absolute power" : Alex James

"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who makes its
laws":  Amschel Bauer Mayer Rothschild, 1838  

Letter written from London by the Rothschilds to their New  York agents
introducing their banking method into America:  "The few who can understand
the system will be either so  interested in its profits, or so dependent on
its favours,  that there will be no opposition from that class, while, on
the other hand, that great body of people, mentally  incapable of
comprehending the tremendous advantage that  Capital derives from the
system, will bear its burden  without complaint and, perhaps, without even
suspecting  that the system is inimical to their interests."  

Nathan Rothschild said to the Commons Secret Committee on  the question
early in 1819: "In what line of business are  you? - Mostly in the foreign
banking line. "Have the  goodness to state to the Committee in detail, what
you  conceive would be the consequence of an obligation imposed  upon the
Bank [of England, which he owned] to resume cash  payments at the expiration
of a year from the present time?  - I do not think it can be done without
very great distress  to this country; it would do a great deal of mischief;
we may not actually know ourselves what mischief it might  cause. "Have the
goodness to explain the nature of the  mischief, and in what way it would be
produced? - Money  will be so very scarce, every article in this country
will  fall to such an enormous extent, that many persons will  be ruined."  

The director of the Prussian Treasury wrote on a visit to  London that
Nathan Rothschild had as early as 1817: "..,  incredible influence upon all
financial affairs here in  London. It is widely stated.., that he entirely
regulates  the rate of exchange in the City. His power as a banker is

Austrian Prince Mettemich's secretary wrote of the  Rothschilds, as early as
1818, that: "... they are the  richest people in Europe."  

Referring to James Rothschild, the poet Heinrich Heine  said: "Money is the
god of our times, and Rothschild is his  prophet."  

James Rothschild built his fabulous mansion, called  Ferrilres, 19 miles
north-east of Paris. Wilhelm I, on  first seeing it, exclaimed: "Kings
couldn't afford this. It  could only belong to a Rothschild!"  

Author Frederic Morton wrote that the Rothschilds had:  "conquered the World
more thoroughly, more cunningly, and  much more lastingly than all the
Caesars before..."  

As Napoleon pointed out: "Terrorism, War & Bankruptcy are  caused by the
privatization of money, issued as a debt and  compounded by interest "- he
cancelled debt and interest in  France - hence the Battle of Waterloo.  

Some writers have claimed that Nathan Rothschild "warned  that the United
States would find itself involved in a most  disastrous war if the bank's
charter were not renewed."  (do you see the similarities here? If you don't
play the  game an economic disaster will fall on you and you will be

Lord Rothschild (Rockefellers and Rothschilds' relatives)  in his book The
Shadow of a Great Man quotes a letter sent  from Davidson on June 24, 1814
to Nathan Rothschild, "As  long as a house is like yours, and as long as you
work  together with your brothers, not a house in the world will  be able to
compete with you, to cause you harm or to take  advantage of you, for
together you can undertake and  perform more than any house in the world."
The closeness of  the Rothschild brothers is seen in a letter from Soloman
(Salmon) Rothschild to his brother Nathan on Feb. 28, 1815,  "We are like
the mechanism of a watch: each part is  essential." (2) This closeness is
further seen in that of  the 18 marriages made by Mayer Amschel Rothschild's
grandchildren - 16 were contracted between first cousins.  

"Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by  means of a national
bank with state capital and an  exclusive monopoly." The Communist
Manifesto. In the case  of the Bolshevik revolution, Rothschilds/
Rockefellers'  Chase Bank owned the state. In the US, the FED owners  "own"
the state.  

Rothschilds' favorite saying who along with the  Rockefellers are the major
Illuminati Banking Dynasties:  "Who controls the issuance of money controls
the  government!"  

Nathan Rothschild said (1777-1836): "I care not what puppet  is placed on
the throne of England to rule the Empire. The  man who controls Britain's
money supply controls the  British Empire and I control the British money

The Rothschild were behind the colonization and occupations  of India and
the Rothschild owned British Petroleum was  granted unlimited rights to all
offshore Indian oil, which  is still valid till this day.  

"Give me the control of the credit of a nation, and I care  not who makes
the laws." The famous boastful statement of  Nathaniel Meyer Rothschild,
speaking to a group of  international bankers, 1912: "The few who could
understand  the system (cheque, money, credits) will either be so
interested in its profits, or so dependent on its favours,  that there will
be no opposition from that class, while on  the other hand, the great body
of people, mentally  incapable of comprehending the tremendous advantage
that  capital derives from the system, will bear its burdens  without
complaint, and perhaps without even suspecting that  the system is inimical
to their interests." The boastful  statement by Rothschild Bros. of London.

These people are the top masterminds and conspired for the  creation of
illegal FEDERAL RESERVE BANK in 1913: Theodore  Roosevelt, Paul Warburg -
Representative Of Rothschild,  Woodrow Wilson - U.S. President Signed FED
Into Act, Nelson  W. Aldrich - Representative Of Rockefeller, Benjamin
Strong  - Representative Of Rockefeller, Frank A. Vanderlip -
Representative Of Rockefeller, John D. Rockefeller -  Rockefeller Himself,
Henry Davison - Representative Of J.  P. Morgan, Charles Norton -
Representative Of J. P. Morgan.  

In the last century, members of the British Fabian Society  dynastic banking
families in the City of London financed  the Communist takeover of Russia.
Trotsky in his biography  refers to some of the loans from these British
financiers  going back as far as 1907. By 1917 the major subsidies and
funding for the Bolshevik Revolution were co-ordinated and  arranged by Sir
George Buchanan and Lord Alfred Milner. [no  doubt using money from Cecil
Rhodes' South African gold and  diamond legacy - Ed] The Communist system in
Russia was a  "British experiment" designed ultimately to become the  Fabian
Socialist model for the British takeover of the  World through the UN and
EU. The British plan to takeover  the World and bring in a "New World Order"
began with the  teachings of John Ruskin and Cecil Rhodes at Oxford
University. Rhodes in one of his wills in 1877 left his  vast fortune to
Lord Nathan Rothschild as trustee to set up  the Rhodes Scholarship Program
at Oxford to indoctrinate  promising young graduates for the purpose, and
also  establish a secret society [Royal Institute of  International Affairs
RIIA, which branched into the Round  Table, the Bilderbergers, the CFR, the
Trilateral, etc --  Ed] for leading business and banking leaders around the
World who would work for the City to bring in their  Socialist World

Rothschild appointed Lord Alfred Milner to implement the  plan.  

Benjamin Freedman (Friedman) said this in 1961, Washington  (he was a
millionaire insider in international Zionist  organizations, friend to 4 US
presidents, and was also part  of the 117-man strong Zionist delegation at
the signing of  the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 where Germany was forced
into bankruptcy to the Zionist BankLords and social chaos):  "Two years into
WW1, Germany, which was then winning the  war, offered Britain and France a
negotiated peace deal,  but German Zionist groups seeing the opportunity
made a  deal with Britain to get the United States into the war  if Britain
promised to give the Zionists Palestine."     

In other words, they made this deal: "We will get the  United States into
this war as your ally. The price you  must pay us is Palestine after you
have won the war and  defeated Germany, Austria-Hungary, and Turkey." They
made  that promise, in October of 1916. And shortly after that --  I don't
know how many here remember it -- the United  States, which was almost
totally pro-German because the  newspapers and mass communications media
here were  controlled by the Zionist bankers who owned the major  commercial
banks and the 12 Federal Reserve Banks (the  original Stockholders of the
Federal Reserve Banks in 1913 were the Rockefeller' s, JP  Morgan,
Rothschild's, Lazard Freres, Schoellkopf,  Kuhn-Loeb, Warburgs, Lehman
Brothers and Goldman Sachs, all  with roots in Germany's Zionists like the
British Royal  family, J.P. Morgan, Carnegie, Bush, Rumsfeld, Clintons,  the
Nazis that were brought into the CIA, etc  and they were
pro-German because they wanted to use Germany  to destroy the Czar of Russia
and let the Communists  whom they funded take over. The German Zionist
bankers --  Rothschilds, Rockefeller, Kuhn Loeb and the other big  banking
firms in the United States refused to finance  France or England to the
extent of one dollar. They stood  aside and they said: "As long as France
and England are  tied up with Russia, not one cent!" They poured money into
Germany, fighting with Germany against Russia, to lick the  Czarist regime.
The newspapers had been all pro-German,  where they'd been telling the
people of the difficulties  that Germany was having fighting Great Britain
commercially  and in other respects, then after making the deal with the
British for Palestine, all of a sudden the Germans were no  good. They were
villains. They were Huns. They were  shooting Red Cross nurses. They were
cutting off babies'  hands. And they were no good. The Zionists in London
sent  cables to the US, to Justice Brandeis: "Go to work on  President
Wilson. We're getting from England what we want.  Now you go to work, and
you go to work on President Wilson  and get the US into the war." And that
did happen. Shortly  after President Woodrow Wilson declared war on Germany.

The power of the Rothschild family was evidenced on 24  Sept 2002 when a
helicopter touched down on the lawn of  Waddedson Manor, their ancestral
home in Buckinghamshire,  England. Out of the helicopter strode Warren
Buffet, -  touted as the second richest man in the World but really  a lower
ranking player- and Arnold Schwarzenegger (the  gropinator), at that time a
candidate for the Governorship  of California. Also in attendance at this
two day meeting  of the World's most powerful businessmen and financiers
hosted by Jacob Rothschild were James Wolfensohn, president  of the World
Bank and Nicky Oppenheimer, chairman of De  Beers. Arnold went on to secure
the governorship of one of  the biggest economies on the planet a year
later. That he  was initiated into the ruling class in the Rothschilds'
English country manor suggests that the centre of  gravity of the three
hundred trillion dollar cartel  is in the U.K. and Europe not the U.S.  

A recent article in the London Financial Times indicates  why it is
impossible to gain an accurate estimate of the  wealth of the trillionaire
bankers. Discussing the sale  of Evelyn Rothschild's stake in Rothschild
Continuation  Holdings, it states: ...[this] requires agreement on the
valuation of privately held assets whose value has never  been tested in a
public market. Most of these assets are  held in a complex network of
tax-efficient structures  around the World.  

Queen Elizabeth II's shareholdings remain hidden behind  Bank of England
Nominee accounts. The Guardian newspaper  reported in May 2002 ... "the
reason for the wild  variations in valuations of her private wealth can be
pinned on the secrecy over her portfolio of share  investments. This is
because her subjects have no way of  knowing through a public register of
interests where she,  as their head of state, chooses to invest her money.
Unlike  the members of the Commons and now the Lords, the Queen  does not
have to annually declare her interests and as a  result her subjects cannot
question her or know about  potential conflicts of interests..." In fact,
the Queen  even has an extra mechanism to ensure that her investments
remain secret - a nominee company called the Bank of  England Nominees. It
has been available for decades to the  entire World's current heads of state
to allow them  anonymity when buying shares. Therefore, when a company
publishes a share register and the Bank of England Nominees  is listed, it
is not possible to gauge whether the Queen,  President Bush or even Saddam
Hussein is the true  shareholder.  

By this method, the trillionaire masters of the universe  remain hidden
whilst Forbes magazine poses lower ranking  billionaires like Bill Gates and
Warren Buffett as the  richest men in the World. Retired management
consultant  Gaylon Ross Sr, author of Who's Who of the Global Elite,  has
been tipped from a private source that the combined  wealth of the
Rockefeller family in 1998 was approx (US)  $11 trillion and the Rothschilds
(U.S.) $100 trillion.  However something of an insider's knowledge of the
hidden  wealth of the elite is contained in the article, "Will the  Dollar
and America Fall Down on August 19?.." on page 1 of  the 12th July 2001
issue of Russian newspaper Pravda. The  newspaper interviewed Tatyana
Koryagina, a senior research  fellow in the Institute of Macroeconomic
Researches  subordinated to the Russian Ministry of Economic  Development
(Minekonom) on the subject of a recent  conference concerning the fate of
the U.S. economy:  

Koryagina: The known history of civilization is merely the  visible part of
the iceberg. There is a shadow economy,  shadow politics and also a shadow
history, known to  conspirologists. There are [unseen] forces acting in the
World, unstoppable for [most powerful] countries and even  continents.  

Ashley Mote (EU): "Mr President, I wish to draw your  attention to the
Global Security Fund, set up in the early  1990s under the auspices of Jacob
Rothschild. This is a  Brussels-based fund and it is no ordinary fund: it
does not  trade, it is not listed and it has a totally different  purpose.
It is being used for geopolitical engineering  purposes, apparently under
the guidance of the intelligence  services." "I have previously asked about
the alleged  involvement of the European Union's own intelligence  resources
in the management of slush funds in offshore  accounts, and I still await a
reply. To that question I now  add another: what are the European Union's
connections to  the Global Security Fund and what relationship does it have
with European Union institutions? "Recently, Ashley Mote of  the European
Union (EU) asked this volatile question in a  public EU meeting, a question
never answered, as Mr. Mote,  merely by asking this question, was
immediately scratched  from the White House Christmas card list and placed
on its  top ten hit list. The Illuminati's cash cow, grazing freely  on the
World wide pasture of greenbacks, isn't called  "Elsie" but instead is
called the Global Security Fund, a  name actually meaning in the secret
cult's language Global  Terrorist Fund. In simple terms, it's a gigantic
illegal  trust fund, estimated by undercover overseas financial
investigators at 65 trillion dollars, set-up for  "Illuminati rainy days"
and established when it is  desperately needed in a pinch for bribery,
assassinations  and sponsoring World wide terrorist activities to divert
attention from their banking mafia. Although the fund is  cloaked in secrecy
and made possible by the Western  civilization' s Federal Reserve banking
system,  investigators trying to pry into the Illuminati's secret  treasure
trove have uncovered some interesting facts. 


"There is but one power in Europe and that is Rothschild."  19th century
French commentator.  

"... In politics nothing is accidental. If something happens, be assured it was
planned this way"
- Franklin D. Roosevelt - (32 Degree Freemason)

"It's not the votes that count,
it's who counts the votes."
-- Josef Stalin --

"We are not going to achieve a new world order without paying for it in blood as well as in words and money."
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., in Foreign Affairs (July/August 1995)

"The world is governed by personalities very different to what people
that cannot see further than their eyes, believe"
- Benjamin Disraeli - (Statesman)

"Behind the October Revolution there are more influential personalities
than the thinkers and executors of Marxism"
- Lenin - (Illuminati)

"It doesn't matter who the people voted for; they always vote for us".
- Joseph Stalin, Illuminati - Freemason  

"Today, I say that no nation in the world need be left out of the global system we are constructing."
- Madeleine Albright - Jew

The following is from the magazine Progress for all January 1991, an interview
regarding the clarification of the Pyramid and the shining eye on the back of the US One Dollar Bill

"The seal of the pyramid was created by the Rothschild family and brought
to North America by Benjamin Franklin and Alexander Hamilton before 1776.
The Rothschild family is the head of the organization in which I entered in
Colorado. All the Occult Brotherhoods are part of it. It is a
Lucifer Organization to install his reign in the whole world. The eye on the
pyramid is the eye of Lucifer. Supposedly the Rothschild's have personal dealings
with the Devil. I have personally been in his villa and have experienced it. And I know it is true",
- John Todd - ("Masonic Council of Thirteen")

Directed to the 23 Supreme Councils of the Illuminati 4 June 1889:

"To you, Sovereign Instructors of Grade 33, we tell you: you have to repeat
to the brothers of inferior grades that we worship only one God to whom we
pray without superstition. It is we, Initiated in the Supreme Grade, that are to keep the real Masonic religion preserving pure the Lucifer doctrine"
- Albert Pike - (Illuminati, founder of the Ku Klux Klan)

We shall unleash the Nihilists and Atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effects of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will be from that moment without compass, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view, a manifestation which will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time.
Illustrious Albert Pike 33°
Letter 15 August 1871
Addressed to Grand Master Guiseppie Mazzini 33°
Archives British Museum
London, England

As owner-publisher of the Memphis, Tennessee, Daily Appeal, Albert Pike wrote in an editorial on April 16, 1868: "With negroes for witnesses and jurors, the administration of justice becomes a blasphemous mockery. A Loyal League of negroes can cause any white man to be arrested, and can prove any charges it chooses to have made against him. ...The disenfranchised people of the South ... can find no protection for property, liberty or life, except in secret association.... We would unite every white man in the South, who is opposed to negro suffrage, into one great Order of Southern Brotherhood, with an organization complete, active, vigorous, in which a few should execute the concentrated will of all, and whose very existence should be concealed from all but its members."
- Albert Pike on KKK -

Fictions are necessary to the people, and the Truth becomes deadly to those who are not strong enough to contemplate it in all its brilliance. In fact, what can there be in common between the vile multitude and sublime wisdom? The truth must be kept secret, and the masses need a teaching proportioned to their imperfect reason.
- Illustrious Albert Pike 33°
Sovereign Grand Commander
Mother Supreme Council of the World
THE SUPREME COUNCIL of the ThirtyThird and Last Degree
Ancient and Accepted Scottish Rite of Freemasonry Morals and Dogma, page 103 -
You must conceal all crimes of your brother Masons...and should you be summoned as a witness against a brother Mason be always sure to shield him...It may be perjury to do this, it is true, but you're keeping your obligations.
Handbook of Masonry, page 183

It was during that period that I became interested in freemasonry. ... In the eighteenth century freemasonry became expressive of a militant policy of enlightenment, as in the case of the Illuminati, who were the forerunners of the revolution; on its left it culminated in the Carbonari. Freemasons counted among their members both Louis XVI and the Dr. Guillotin who invented the guillotine. In southern Germany freemasonry assumed an openly revolutionary character, whereas at the court of Catherine the Great it was a masquerade reflecting the aristocratic and bureaucratic hierarchy. A freemason Novikov was exiled to Siberia by a freemason Empress.

I discontinued my work on freemasonry to take up the study of Marxian economics. ... The work on freemasonry acted as a sort of test for these hypotheses. ... I think this influenced the whole course of my intellectual development.
Leon Trotsky
My Life: The Rise and Fall of a Dictator
pages 124-127

"When nations get disappointed on their governments, the population will start
to clamor for a singular Government that can bring peace and harmony. This will be the moment to enthrone our sovereign"
- Member of the Illuminati -

"After the monarchies have lost their prestige, we will elect Presidents among persons that can be obedient servants. The elected ones must have some black spot in their
past in order to be able to keep them silenced because of fear of being discovered by us. At the same time tied by the acquired position of power, enjoying the honors and privileges of a President, make them feel anxious to co-operate, not to loose it".
- Protocols of the Wise Men of Zion [1776] - (Illuminati doctrines)

"If we like it or not, we will have a One World Government. The question is if it will beachieved through consent or through conquest"
- J. Warburg - (Illuminati and Rothschild banker)

"The Technocratic Age is slowly designing an every day more controlled society. The society will be dominated by an elite of persons free from traditional values (!) who will have no doubt in fulfilling their objectives by means of purged techniques with which they will influence the behavior of people and will control and watch the society in all details". "... it will become possible to exert a practically permanent watch on each citizen of the world". - Zbigniew Brzezinski - (Illuminati and co-founder of Trilateral Commission)

To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family tradition, national patriotism and religious dogmas ...
We have swallowed all manner of poisonous certainties fed us by our parents, our Sunday and day school teachers, our politicians, our priests, our newspapers and others with vested interests in controlling us.

The reinterpretation and eventual eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of child training, the substitution of intelligent and rational thinking for faith in the certainties of the old people, these are the belated objectives ... for charting the changes of human behavior.

"Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order [referring to the 1991 LA Riot]. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond [i.e., an "extraterrestrial" invasion], whether real or promulgated [emphasis mine], that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government."
Dr. Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991

"The idea was that those who direct the overall conspiracy could use the differences in those two so-called ideologies [marxism/fascism, socialism, capitalism, etc.] to enable them [the Illuminati] to divide larger and larger portions of the human race into opposing camps so that they could be armed and then brainwashed into fighting and destroying each other."
Myron Fagan

"No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation."
David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations.

"In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder interest, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press....They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers.

"An agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers."
U.S. Congressman Oscar Callaway, 1917

"The world can therefore seize the opportunity (Persian Gulf crisis) to fulfill the long-held promise of a New World Order where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind."
George Herbert Walker Bush

"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."

Strobe Talbot, Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.


"We shall have world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent."

Statement by Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member James Warburg to The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17th, l950


"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."

Benjamin Disraeli, first Prime Minister of England, in a novel he published in 1844 called Coningsby, the New Generation


"The governments of the present day have to deal not merely with other governments, with emperors, kings and ministers, but also with the secret societies which have everywhere their unscrupulous agents, and can at the last moment upset all the governments' plans. "

British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli, 1876


"Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the Field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it."

Woodrow Wilson,The New Freedom (1913)


"What is important is to dwell upon the increasing evidence of the existence of a secret conspiracy, throughout the world, for the destruction of organized government and the letting loose of evil."

Christian Science Monitor editorial, June 19th, l920


"The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen....At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties."

New York City Mayor John F. Hylan, 1922


"From the days of Sparticus, Wieskhopf, Karl Marx, Trotsky, Rosa Luxemberg, and Emma Goldman, this world conspiracy has been steadily growing. This conspiracy played a definite recognizable role in the tragedy of the French revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the 19th century. And now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their head and have become the undisputed masters of that enormous empire."

Winston Churchill, stated to the London Press, in l922.


"We are at present working discreetly with all our might to wrest this mysterious force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local nation states of the world."

Professor Arnold Toynbee, in a June l931 speech before the Institute for the Study of International Affairs in Copenhagen.


"The government of the Western nations, whether monarchical or republican, had passed into the invisible hands of a plutocracy, international in power and grasp. It was, I venture to suggest, this semioccult power which....pushed the mass of the American people into the cauldron of World War I."

British military historian MajorGeneral J.F.C. Fuller, l941


"For a long time I felt that FDR had developed many thoughts and ideas that were his own to benefit this country, the United States. But, he didn't. Most of his thoughts, his political ammunition, as it were, were carefully manufactured for him in advanced by the Council on Foreign Relations-One World Money group. Brilliantly, with great gusto, like a fine piece of artillery, he exploded that prepared "ammunition" in the middle of an unsuspecting target, the American people, and thus paid off and returned his internationalist political support.

"The UN is but a long-range, international banking apparatus clearly set up for financial and economic profit by a small group of powerful One-World revolutionaries, hungry for profit and power.

"The depression was the calculated 'shearing' of the public by the World Money powers, triggered by the planned sudden shortage of supply of call money in the New York money market....The One World Government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S. via the creation of the privately owned Federal Reserve Bank."

Curtis Dall, FDR's son-in-law as quoted in his book, "My Exploited Father-in-Law"


"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the larger centers has owned the Government ever since the days of Andrew Jackson."

A letter written by FDR to Colonel House, November 21st, l933


"The real rulers in Washington are invisible, and exercise power from behind the scenes."

Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, 1952


"Fifty men have run America, and that's a high figure."

Joseph Kennedy, father of JFK, in the July 26th, l936 issue of The New York Times.


"Today the path of total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people. Outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government - a bureaucratic elite.

Senator William Jenner, 1954


"The case for government by elites is irrefutable"

Senator William Fulbright, Former chairman of the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, stated at a 1963 symposium entitled: The Elite and the Electorate - Is Government by the People Possible?

"The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States. The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power political, monetary, intellectual and ecclesiastical. What the Trilateral Commission intends is to create a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nationstates involved. As managers and creators of the system ,they will rule the future."

U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater in his l964 book: "With No Apologies".


"The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the worlds' central banks which were themselves private corporations. The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect injury of all other economic groups."

Tragedy and Hope: A History of The World in Our Time (Macmillan Company, 1966,) Professor Carroll Quigley of Georgetown University, highly esteemed by his former student, William Jefferson Blythe Clinton.


"The Council on Foreign Relations is "the establishment." Not only does it have influence and power in key decision-making positions at the highest levels of government to apply pressure from above, but it also announces and uses individuals and groups to bring pressure from below, to justify the high level decisions for converting the U.S. from a sovereign Constitutional Republic into a servile member state of a one-world dictatorship."

Former Congressman John Rarick 1971


"The directors of the CFR (Council on Foreign Relations) make up a sort of Presidium for that part of the Establishment that guides our destiny as a nation."

The Christian Science Monitor, September 1, l961


"The New World Order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down...but in the end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault."

CFR member Richard Gardner, writing in the April l974 issue of the CFR's journal, Foreign Affairs.


"The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining supercapitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control.... Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in planning, and incredibly evil in intent."

Congressman Larry P. McDonald, 1976, killed in the Korean Airlines 747 that was shot down by the Soviets


"The planning of UN can be traced to the 'secret steering committee' established by Secretary [of State Cordell] Hull in January 1943. All of the members of this secret committee, with the exception of Hull, a Tennessee politician, were members of the Council on Foreign Relations. They saw Hull regularly to plan, select, and guide the labors of the [State] Department's Advisory Committee. It was, in effect, the coordinating agency for all the State Department's postwar planning."

Professors Laurence H. Shoup and William Minter, writing in their study of the CFR, "Imperial Brain Trust: The CFR and United States Foreign Policy." (Monthly Review Press, 1977).


"The most powerful clique in these (CFR) groups have one objective in common: they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the national independence of the U.S. They want to end national boundaries and racial and ethnic loyalties supposedly to increase business and ensure world peace. What they strive for would inevitably lead to dictatorship and loss of freedoms by the people. The CFR was founded for "the purpose of promoting disarmament and submergence of U.S. sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful one-world government."

Harpers, July l958


"The old world order changed when this war-storm broke. The old international order passed away as suddenly, as unexpectedly, and as completely as if it had been wiped out by a gigantic flood, by a great tempest, or by a volcanic eruption. The old world order died with the setting of that day's sun and a new world order is being born while I speak, with birth-pangs so terrible that it seems almost incredible that life could come out of such fearful suffering and such overwhelming sorrow."

Nicholas Murray Butler, in an address delivered before the Union League of Philadelphia, Nov. 27, 1915


"The peace conference has assembled. It will make the most momentous decisions in history, and upon these decisions will rest the stability of the new world order and the future peace of the world."

M. C. Alexander, Executive Secretary of the American Association for International Conciliation, in a subscription letter for the periodical International Conciliation (1919)


"If there are those who think we are to jump immediately into a new world order, actuated by complete understanding and brotherly love, they are doomed to disappointment. If we are ever to approach that time, it will be after patient and persistent effort of long duration. The present international situation of mistrust and fear can only be corrected by a formula of equal status, continuously applied, to every phase of international contacts, until the cobwebs of the old order are brushed out of the minds of the people of all lands."

Dr. Augustus O. Thomas, president of the World Federation of Education Associations (August 1927), quoted in the book International Understanding: Agencies Educating for a New World (1931)


"... when the struggle seems to be drifting definitely towards a world social democracy, there may still be very great delays and disappointments before it becomes an efficient and beneficent world system. Countless people ... will hate the new world order ... and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to evaluate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people."

H. G. Wells, in his book entitled The New World Order (1939)


"The term Internationalism has been popularized in recent years to cover an interlocking financial, political, and economic world force for the purpose of establishing a World Government. Today Internationalism is heralded from pulpit and platform as a 'League of Nations' or a 'Federated Union' to which the United States must surrender a definite part of its National Sovereignty. The World Government plan is being advocated under such alluring names as the 'New International Order,' 'The New World Order,' 'World Union Now,' 'World Commonwealth of Nations,' 'World Community,' etc. All the terms have the same objective; however, the line of approach may be religious or political according to the taste or training of the individual."

Excerpt from A Memorial to be Addressed to the House of Bishops and the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in General Convention (October 1940)


"In the first public declaration on the Jewish question since the outbreak of the war, Arthur Greenwood, member without portfolio in the British War Cabinet, assured the Jews of the United States that when victory was achieved an effort would be made to found a new world order based on the ideals of 'justice and peace.'"

Excerpt from article entitled "New World Order Pledged to Jews," in The New York Times (October 1940)


"If totalitarianism wins this conflict, the world will be ruled by tyrants, and individuals will be slaves. If democracy wins, the nations of the earth will be united in a commonwealth of free peoples, and individuals, wherever found, will be the sovereign units of the new world order."

The Declaration of the Federation of the World, produced by the Congress on World Federation, adopted by the Legislatures of North Carolina (1941), New Jersey (1942), Pennsylvania (1943), and possibly other states.


"New World Order Needed for Peace: State Sovereignty Must Go, Declares Notre Dame Professor"

Title of article in The Tablet (Brooklyn) (March 1942)


"Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles tonight called for the early creation of an international organization of anti-Axis nations to control the world during the period between the armistice at the end of the present war and the setting up of a new world order on a permanent basis."

Text of article in The Philadelphia Inquirer (June 1942)


"The statement went on to say that the spiritual teachings of religion must become the foundation for the new world order and that national sovereignty must be subordinate to the higher moral law of God."

American Institute of Judaism, excerpt from article in The New York Times (December 1942)


"There are some plain common-sense considerations applicable to all these attempts at world planning. They can be briefly stated: 1. To talk of blueprints for the future or building a world order is, if properly understood, suggestive, but it is also dangerous. Societies grow far more truly than they are built. A constitution for a new world order is never like a blueprint for a skyscraper."

Norman Thomas, in his book What Is Our Destiny? (1944)


"He [John Foster Dulles] stated directly to me that he had every reason to believe that the Governor [Thomas E. Dewey of New York] accepts his point of view and that he is personally convinced that this is the policy that he would promote with great vigor if elected. So it is fair to say that on the first round the Sphinx of Albany has established himself as a prima facie champion of a strong and definite new world order."

Excerpt from article by Ralph W. Page in The Philadelphia Bulletin (May 1944)


"The United Nations, he told an audience at Harvard University, 'has not been able--nor can it be able--to shape a new world order which events so compellingly demand.' ... The new world order that will answer economic, military, and political problems, he said, 'urgently requires, I believe, that the United States take the leadership among all free peoples to make the underlying concepts and aspirations of national sovereignty truly meaningful through the federal approach.'"

Gov. Nelson Rockefeller of New York, in an article entitled "Rockefeller Bids Free Lands Unite: Calls at Harvard for Drive to Build New World Order" -- The New York Times (February 1962)


"The developing coherence of Asian regional thinking is reflected in a disposition to consider problems and loyalties in regional terms, and to evolve regional approaches to development needs and to the evolution of a new world order."

Richard Nixon, in Foreign Affairs (October 1967)


"He [President Nixon] spoke of the talks as a beginning, saying nothing more about the prospects for future contacts and merely reiterating the belief he brought to China that both nations share an interest in peace and building 'a new world order.'"

Excerpt from an article in The New York Times (February 1972)


"If instant world government, Charter review, and a greatly strengthened International Court do not provide the answers, what hope for progress is there? The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple solutions to complex problems, but it comes down essentially to this: The hope for the foreseeable lies, not in building up a few ambitious central institutions of universal membership and general jurisdiction as was envisaged at the end of the last war, but rather in the much more decentralized, disorderly and pragmatic process of inventing or adapting institutions of limited jurisdiction and selected membership to deal with specific problems on a case-by-case basis ... In short, the 'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing confusion,' to use William James' famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault."

Richard N. Gardner, in Foreign Affairs (April 1974)


"The existing order is breaking down at a very rapid rate, and the main uncertainty is whether mankind can exert a positive role in shaping a new world order or is doomed to await collapse in a passive posture. We believe a new order will be born no later than early in the next century and that the death throes of the old and the birth pangs of the new will be a testing time for the human species."

Richard A. Falk, in an article entitled "Toward a New World Order: Modest Methods and Drastic Visions," in the book On the Creation of a Just World Order (1975)


"My country's history, Mr. President, tells us that it is possible to fashion unity while cherishing diversity, that common action is possible despite the variety of races, interests, and beliefs we see here in this chamber. Progress and peace and justice are attainable. So we say to all peoples and governments: Let us fashion together a new world order."

Henry Kissinger, in address before the General Assembly of the United Nations, October 1975)


"At the old Inter-American Office in the Commerce Building here in Roosevelt's time, as Assistant Secretary of State for Latin American Affairs under President Truman, as chief whip with Adlai Stevenson and Tom Finletter at the founding of the United Nations in San Francisco, Nelson Rockefeller was in the forefront of the struggle to establish not only an American system of political and economic security but a new world order."

Part of article in The New York Times (November 1975)


"A New World Order" -- Title of article on commencement address at the University of Pennsylvania by Hubert H. Humphrey, printed in the Pennsylvania Gazette (June 1977)

"Further global progress is now possible only through a quest for universal consensus in the movement towards a new world order."

Mikhail Gorbachev, in an address at the United Nations (December 1988)


"We believe we are creating the beginning of a new world order coming out of the collapse of the U.S.-Soviet antagonisms."

Brent Scowcroft (August 1990), quoted in The Washington Post (May 1991)


"We can see beyond the present shadows of war in the Middle East to a new world order where the strong work together to deter and stop aggression. This was precisely Franklin Roosevelt's and Winston Churchill's vision for peace for the post-war period."

Richard Gephardt, in The Wall Street Journal (September 1990)


"If we do not follow the dictates of our inner moral compass and stand up for human life, then his lawlessness will threaten the peace and democracy of the emerging new world order we now see, this long dreamed-of vision we've all worked toward for so long."

President George Bush (January 1991)


"But it became clear as time went on that in Mr. Bush's mind the New World Order was founded on a convergence of goals and interests between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, so strong and permanent that they would work as a team through the U.N. Security Council."

Excerpt from A. M. Rosenthal, in The New York Times (January 1991)


"I would support a Presidential candidate who pledged to take the following steps: ... At the end of the war in the Persian Gulf, press for a comprehensive Middle East settlement and for a 'new world order' based not on Pax Americana but on peace through law with a stronger U.N. and World Court."

George McGovern, in The New York Times (February 1991)


"... it's Bush's baby, even if he shares its popularization with Gorbachev. Forget the Hitler 'new order' root; F.D.R. used the phrase earlier."

William Safire, in The New York Times (February 1991)


"How I Learned to Love the New World Order" -- Article by Sen. Joseph R. Biden, Jr. in Tthe Wall Street Journal (April 1992)


How to Achieve The New World Order -- Title of book excerpt by Henry Kissinger, in Time magazine (March 1994)


"The Final Act of the Uruguay Round, marking the conclusion of the most ambitious trade negotiation of our century, will give birth - in Morocco - to the World Trade Organization, the third pillar of the New World Order, along with the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund."

Part of full-page advertisement by the government of Morocco in The New York Times (April 1994)


"New World Order: The Rise of the Region-State" -- Title of article by Kenichi Ohmae, political reform leader in Japan, in The Wall Street Journal (August 1994)


The "new world order that is in the making must focus on the creation of a world of democracy, peace and prosperity for all."

Nelson Mandela, in The Philadelphia Inquirer (October 1994)


The renewal of the nonproliferation treaty was described as important "for the welfare of the whole world and the new world order."

President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, in The New York Times (April 1995)


"Alchemy for a New World Order" -- article by Stephen John Stedman in Foreign Affairs (May/June 1995)


"Today, America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead with world leaders to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government."
- Henry Kissinger, Bilderberg meeting, Evian-les-Bains, France, 1992-


"There will be in the next generation or so a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude and producing dictatorship without tears so to speak. Producing a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies so that people will in fact have their liberties taken away from them, but will rather enjoy it, because they will be distracted from any desire to rebel by propaganda, or brainwashing, or brainwashing enhanced by pharmacological methods. And this seems to be the final revolution."
- Aldous Huxley, Tavistock Group, California Medical School, 1961 -  

War Mongering Central Bankers Own "The State" i.e. the Component
 Parts that Comprise "World"


"Bankers Make Wars to Create Debt"