Failure to plan

Tools for survival in this insane world as an individual, a family, or a community. Ideas to share that work. Products to buy that empower us.
Site Admin
Posts: 7781

Failure to plan

Post#1 » Wed Oct 05, 2005 9:20 am ... &topic=309

Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D. is America's preeminent scholar on the New World Order and the coming world government. In his latest article, "FAILURE TO PLAN?", Cuddy writes about "How to Run the World", a 6th, 7th and 8th grade assignment plan in a Dallas, Texas, suburb that states: "You are the governing council of a new world order..." Remember, Texas and California are bewether states in education. What is tried first in Texas and California will eventually come to YOUR state.

Says Cuddy,"One problem for the global planners was how to get Americans to be willing to live under a world government. Americans believe they live in the mightiest nation on earth with the highest living standards. Therefore, the global planners had to devise a "leveling" process, which included shipping American jobs overseas and making us more vulnerable. Americans' willingness to purchase cheap goods from China despite the resulting job losses by their fellow Americans was critically important to this plan. The resulting trade imbalance with China has allowed that nation to build its military and financial reserves, which have been used to purchase American debt. As THE NEW YORK TIMES columnist Thomas Friedman said on NBC's "Meet the Press" (September 25, 2005), we ought to call the $200 billion price tag for hurricane Katrina what it really is, and that's "How much is China willing to lend us?" Friedman correctly noted that this daily borrowing from China will give that nation tremendous leverage over us in the future. One might also note here that the Saudis' leverage over us is that they have about $1 trillion invested in our stock market and another $1 trillion in U.S. bonds, corporations and banks.

"This is all part of the globalists' leveling process so that there is no longer one dominant nation, thereby making the plan for a world government more likely to succeed, unlike the "failures to plan" mentioned in Part 1 of this article. There are even public school classes that will result in the plan's acceptance. For example, a "How to Run the World" 6th, 7th and 8th grade assignment plan in a Dallas, Texas, suburb states: 'You are the governing council of a new world order. No longer are there separate countries. The entire globe is under your guidance and leadership. There is chaos everywhere, because it as (sic) been a long and arduous process to organize the earth and it's (sic) people into a workable situation. You currently have pockets of wealth, but most of your people are extremely poor and hungry. There is in-fighting among people of different religions and various races. The new world economy is at an all time low, because there hasn't been any leadership in this area in a very long time. What will you do to organize your world into a productive, economically feasible world where everyone gets to eat healthy food and drink clean water and earn livings to support their families?'

"Also necessary for the plan's acceptance is a willingness on the part of the public to accept military action in civilian life, thus eliminating the protection of Posse Comitatus. In this regard, not only have there been exercises where the military takes over towns looking for terrorists, but after the devastation of hurricane Katrina, there is a growing desire to have the military active in any large-scale civil emergency. Gun confiscation is usually part of this, which makes a population easier forcibly to relocate because, if unarmed, they will be at the mercy of looters and other criminals.

"Authoritarian power at the national level probably will precede a world government, which will have absolute power. And as Lord Acton warned: 'Absolute power corrupts absolutely.'"

Richard Gardner, CFR member and President Carter's ambassador to Italy wrote an infamous article entitled, "The Hard Road to World Order," printed in the CFR's Foreign Affairs (April 1974), where he said, "The 'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down..., but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault."

Walter Cronkite from his book "A Reporter's Life", wrote "If we are to avoid that catastrophe (nuclear devastation), a system of world order - preferably a system of world government - is mandatory. The proud nations someday will see the light and, for the common good and their own survival, yield up their precious sovereignty, just as America's thirteen colonies did two centuries ago.

"When we finally come to our senses and establish a world executive and parliament of nations, thanks to the Nuremberg precedent we will already have in place the fundamentals for the third branch of government, the judiciary."

"It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegiance." --
President George Bush addressing the General Assembly of the U.N., February 1,1992.

According to Henry Lamb of EcoLogic, "the foundation of global governance is a set of core values, a belief system, which contains ideas that are foreign to the American experience and ignores other values and ideas that are precious to the American experience. The values and ideas articulated in the Commission's report are not new. They have been tried, under different names, in other societies. Often, the consequences have been devastating."

These values, which we would label socialist at best and Marxist at worst, have consistently appeared in U.N. documents since the late 1980s. Appearing with repackaged names, they have dominated all international conferences, agreements, and treaties. Marxist transfer-of-wealth schemes, the demonization of capitalism, enforced equity among peoples, etc. are all part and parcel of the new globalist rhetoric.

As global government is locked into place, people should understand that the legal safeguards against government abuse do not exist at the international level nor are there plans to create them. The political bent of the U.N. has always been toward socialist ideology and the concept that government is all good, all knowing. The rights enshrined in the U.S. Bill of Rights - property and financial rights, freedom of speech and religion, the right to bear arms against invaders and abusive government, protection against double jeopardy, trial by a jury of one's peers, right to petition for redress of grievances, et al. - do not exist in the same form at the U.N. level.

Where the U.N. appears to guarantee rights, there are often "weasel words," which allow the so-called rights to be set aside at the will of government. As always, the devil is in the details - literally.

Article 19, Paragraph 1 and 2 of the U.N.'s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states:

1. Everyone shall have the right to hold opinions without interference.

2. Everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right shall include freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art, or through any other media of his choice."10

So far, everything sounds good. But read Paragraph 3:

3. The exercise of the rights provided for in Paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary (a) For respect of the rights or reputations of others; (b) For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals."

So the right to freedom of speech can be limited any time a state believes it to be in its own best interests or to protect its own corrupt politicians. The "weasel words" of Paragraph 3 destroy the guarantees of Paragraphs 1 and 2.

Another example: The U.N.'s Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) lays out what seems to be a wonderful series of rights, similar to the U.S. Bill of Rights. Article 18 of the UDHR upholds "the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion...." Article 19 affirms "the right to freedom of opinion and expression...and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers."

Sounds great! But then Article 29 states that "these rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations." In other words, these "rights" or "freedoms" don't apply to politically incorrect people who refuse to conform to U.N. policies. What is the purpose of freedom of speech if not to openly discuss and critique government? According to U.N. ideology, that won't be tolerated. The U.N. has a track record of showing zero tolerance toward those who oppose its goals.

By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
October 3, 2005

You will notice that the title of this article contains a question mark. That's because while there has been a great lack of planning concerning issues such as those covered in Part 1 of this series, the power elite's plan for a new world order is being fulfilled. The perception of national leaders as bumbling incompetents incapable of planning is useful to the power elite, because it creates the impression on the part of most people that there can't be a power elite manipulating global events if national leaders are incapable of managing events on their own level.

Part of the power elite's plan includes the dispersal of nations' military forces around the world. In that regard, American forces, including the National Guard, increasingly have been deployed overseas, while Germany now has a permanent military base in New Mexico. Various NATO nations (e.g., Denmark, Norway and the Czech Republic) have sent a mission to help victims of hurricane Katrina, while Mexico and Holland have sent troops to help in the clean-up effort. Concerning Mexico, many wonder why our southern border with that country is still so unprotected when the federal government keeps telling us it's a matter of "when," not "if," there will be another terrorist attack (perhaps nuclear) here. It's because, according to a Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) report, the borders between the U.S., Canada and Mexico are largely to disappear, resulting in freer movement of people and goods along with a common security arrangement.

The CFR is an outgrowth of Cecil Rhodes' secret Society of the Elect's plan "to take the government of the whole world," a fulfillment of what was called the "Grand Design" of centuries past. It would be a synthesis of Western Capitalism and Eastern Communism brought about by saying this would be the only way to manage globally linked regional economic arrangements (e.g., NAFTA linked with the European Union, etc.). The plan was described by Rhodes' Association of Helpers member P. E. Corbett in POST-WAR WORLDS (1942).

By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
March 16, 2004

There is… little doubt that the American power elite has… planned and plotted….. The power elite is not altogether 'surfaced.' …With the wide secrecy covering their operations and decisions, the power elite can mark their intentions, operations and further consolidation…. New men come into it [the power elite] and assume its existence without question.
--from The Power Elite (1956) by Columbia University sociologist C. Wright Mills

The nation's immediate problem is that while the common man fights America's wars, the intellectual elite sets its agenda. Today, whether the West lives or dies is in the hands of its new power elite: those who set the terms of public debate, who manipulate the symbols, who decide whether nations or leaders will be depicted on 100 million television sets as 'good' or 'bad.' This power elite sets the limits of the possible for Presidents and Congress. It molds the impressions that move the nation, or that mire it.
--from The Real War (1980) by President Richard Nixon

At the national level, this conditioning of the public might be brought about via certain crises, such as a terrorist attack…. For the sake of peace and security, people may be willing to give up certain of their freedoms to some extent.
--from The Globalists: The Power Elite Exposed (published July 2001, two months before the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001) by Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
by D.L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
Arranged and Edited by John Loeffler
by Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
FOREWARD: This article is a very valuable document showing the goals of the NEA nearly 70 years ago in 1932. This is about the time that William Z. Foster wrote Toward Soviet America and the Humanists wrote their First Manifesto. It should be read and kept as a clear understanding of the subversive plans the NEA had for using America's schools. Many people think of these goals as recent. This article should serve to set them straight.

By Dennis L. Cuddy Ph. D. -

Please visit Henrietta Bowman's WebStore for great bargains!

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest