Posted on 08/17/2006 10:21:22 AM PDT by Bokababe
Last in a three-part series. Addressing a joint session of Congress on Sept. 1, 1990, President George H.W. Bush proclaimed the advent of the New World Order. A new era of peace, prosperity, transnationalism and integration was ahead for long-suffering humankind. The new system was based on the notion that nation-states are destructive to the progress of humankind because nationalism, like cancer, spreads and causes conflicts. Therefore, dominant and enduring international institutions should be empowered to coordinate worldwide efforts in the political, social and economic realms. The collapse of communism presented the world with unforeseen problems. As the Cold War ended, many countries and people began to reclaim their individual national identity, traditions and self-interest. Future historians may well conclude that the Yugoslav civil-religious war (1991-1998) tested the viability of this new order. "Yugoslav carnage poses painful questions for the Western Alliance and the United Nations," possibly "foretelling a failure of the New World Order," said the May 15, 1992, New York Times. Overwhelmed with realities of history and tradition, of nationalism and religion, of their own convictions and biases, the architects of the new order failed to implement their vision and successfully deal with its very first challenge. Simply, America was not ready for the New World (dis)Order. .........
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
ping
Here's a post from a Belmont club commentator on terrorists and progressive transnationalists.
////////////////////
How does one define terrorism? When drafting my Goals on the Global War on Terror document, that definition needed to be done and to separate terrorism and give it a more coherent view as to what it is all about.
Well, looking at the major goals across terrorist organizations, as opposed to standard Nation based insurgencies, the broad swath of terrorist organizations have no standard set of goals, save that they are international in flavor. Islamofascist types seek to install a Caliphate, while the old fashioned Communist International version would prefer that sort of system and your plain old narcotics trafficker version is just looking to get some sort of dissolution of State to State police and military activities against it to help further its commerce. Not a perfect grouping, but its not a perfect world.
Their end state goals, however, have a common means: degrade the Nation State and the validity of the State to act in its own defense. Once that is achieved, domination through terror will get the end goals installed. This means, however, has another international version to it: Transnational Progressivism. The Transnational Progressivists also want to diminish the power of Nation States, degrade their ability to rule, remove their ability to fight and, generally, end them. In their place will be 'group rule' in which individuals only get cumulative rights from the groups that they are born into. Over all of those groups will be a ruling elite.
Terrorists picked up on this at some point and now use the same group-based identity concept and have added *that* to their weaponry. Their goal is now identical to Transnational Progressivists, save that they operate in the interstices of the Nation State system while the Progressivists work within the system. Once the Nation State is removed as an effective concept both internally and externally, group-based rule will happen and the differences are only on *which* group gets supremacy.
Thematically this is a return to Empire as the highest form of governance, and various arguments have been made on all sides of *that* question before. Very few of those arguments actually apply it to the modern era and formulate how it can be done. The Transnationalist conception is the leading way in this both in its internally corrosive concept of group/ethnic/ideology based ruling and refusal to support National identity and the externally terroristic side which aims to delegitimize the monopoly of States on military power. Gwynn Dyer noted in the 1970's that the US and USSR would finally need to come to some form of cooperation against terrorism because of this inherently delegitimization of State based military systems.
Transnational Terrorists of all stripes and kinds have recognized this commonality of method, although differing on end status, and have internetworked to form a system of sharing tactics, plans and actually cross-planning between groups. They are, of course, aided by various States that use terrorists to their own ends. Iran, by training Hezbollah better than their internal Revolutionary/Special Guards, Basij, Police and Military have effectively created a highly capable Foreign Legion which they support and direct, but do not directly control. The ruling regime in Tehran is using the Nation as a basis for supporting the removal of the Nation State concept via the fostering of a strong external terrorist presence and itself looks towards the Transnational dissolution of the Nation to work its goals.
It is a long road ahead of us if this is not stopped.
Brilliant!
The word "nationalist" has become a dirty word, reminiscent of goose-stepping Nazis, just like the term "New World Order" sounds Goebbelesque -- and yet the two ideas are in direct opposition to one another. So which one is bad and which is good?
One man's "nationalist" is another man's "patriot". The New World Order is a world government of which I want no part.
Outstanding!
Addressing a joint session of Congress on Sept. 1, 1990, President George H.W. Bush proclaimed the advent of the New World Order. A new era of peace, prosperity, transnationalism and integration was ahead for long-suffering humankind.
The new system was based on the notion that nation-states are destructive to the progress of humankind because nationalism, like cancer, spreads and causes conflicts. Therefore, dominant and enduring international institutions should be empowered to coordinate worldwide efforts in the political, social and economic realms.
The collapse of communism presented the world with unforeseen problems. As the Cold War ended, many countries and people began to reclaim their individual national identity, traditions and self-interest. Future historians may well conclude that the Yugoslav civil-religious war (1991-1998) tested the viability of this new order. "Yugoslav carnage poses painful questions for the Western Alliance and the United Nations," possibly "foretelling a failure of the New World Order," said the May 15, 1992, New York Times.
Overwhelmed with realities of history and tradition, of nationalism and religion, of their own convictions and biases, the architects of the new order failed to implement their vision and successfully deal with its very first challenge. Simply, America was not ready for the New World (dis)Order.
"The collapse of communism presented the world with unforeseen problems."
Is this an argument to KEEP communism? I'll accept the consequences that arise from having individual nations, inherent or not.
Thanks for the reprint with paragraphs.
. BB
No problem. All you have to do is put <P> after each paragraph for them to be formatted correctly.
"Is this an argument to KEEP communism?"
No, this is not what he is saying at all.
It is simply that the US & Western World had no experience in dealing with such a mass collapse of communism and we did not know what to expect from these countries when they emerged from their cultural and economic coma. So we were unprepared for how to react when many reverted to the nationalism of their previous existence.
the sad thing is that bush is as much of a bilderburger as any of the others.
the chaos at the US border is a matter of white house policy. I worked in the US customs & border patrol at their hq in downtown dc. It was common knowledge that the US could stop the flow of illegals in a heartbeat but that white house wouldn't allow it.
Its still not happening.
the point of the illegals is to force the USA into a north american union.
I've felt the same way for some time and that's why anyone that can't figure out Homeland Security is nothing more than a big joke is just clueless as we watch them refuse to seal off the so. border (especially after 9-11) but have no problem shaking down gray haired white folks in airports.
Illegal immigration is nothing more than the conditioning process used by Bank of Amer, Wells Fargo, Walmart, Home Depot and the other usual suspects along with their favorite whores/sellouts/traitors in DC to shove this American Union square up our collective arses no matter how much we protest.
Whenever I see talk about the collapse of communism I reflect back on a speech Gorbachev gave Politburo in 1987 when he talked about " do not be concerned about all you hear regarding glasnost, perestroika, and democracy in the coming years......these are for outward consumption....there will be no other significant change within the Soviet Union, other than for cosmetic purposes......our purpose is to disarm the Americans and let them fall asleep".
This was almost 20 years ago but whenever I see more bases being closed on a routine basis it does cause one to wonder at times what's really going on here.
Yes, american spirit, we've been had. And many of us knew it at the time...but "our" govt wouldn't listen.
The nationalistic spirit was just another reason the NWO targeted Serbia. There are many other reasons, but this one was sigificant early on. The question was asked, during the planning stages many decades ago, how to get Americans to accept Socialism. The quote stated, words to the effect, mask a Democracy, and call it Liberalism, to cover Socialism. American will become a socialist country and they won't realize it until it's too late. (Evol, remove the religion, pride in the flag, etc.....) it's working, but recently, we have regained our strength. The sale of the ports to Dubai. Long story short, to fight this, joining ABG....Americans for a Better Government.
The propoents of the NWO following the meeting of the Trilateral Commission (Bush was a member)...1972, soon afterwards, interviewed members admitted that one thing they failed to consider. This was that religion would be a factor. Thus, a "relationship" was formed with Muh in Afghanistan to fight the main target, Russia. The final stage would eventually be the dissoluion of Yugoslavia. We targeted the Balkans in 1948 when the CIA entered Albania. Tito and the communist influence was strong and presented a problem. Also, Korea was a better target and thus the Korean war....I have a lot of the details on this planned failure and I'm sure you're aware of the planned failure in Vietnam. This is actually true........Finally, in the 80's when the NWO (we shall say...) realized Religion was a factor, we armed Iraq with Chemical weapons to fight the Iranians....you know the story there i'm sure. Then, we switched sides again to go after Iraq....As he was an tyrant. At the same time frame we took the Muh from Afghanistan and placed them in Bosnia after Milosevic would not play with CIA in the late 80's. He came to America mid to late 80's to gain knowledge and experience in Banking and finance. He arrived in NY to learn. The CIA gained access to him and turned him to politics. When he returned to Serbia, the elite nationalist got to him, he became a nationalist and the CIA lost their boy. No problem, Clinton takes Muh, Bin ladens' and stirs up an insurgency in Bosnia, fakes some massacres, exaggerated others.....and now you have the strategy of taking one state after another ending with Kosovo Independence as a carrot. The Albanians love Americans, especially Billy Clinton. When I lived there, they couldn't understand why I disliked billy bob so much as he was an American president. Anyway, the Albanians tolerate for the time being, the other internationals as long as independence is on the Albanians side. However, they have targeted international Civ Police officers and murdered certain ones. I have a film from a outside camera showing a car bomb going off by remote or cell phone killing an international CivPol officer.....Even though they appear to be friendly to Internationals it can change literally in five minutes. Right now, they are friendly, with a hint of dislike......until the Independence issue is decided. Now, watch if we, US becomes friendly with Serbia now......the goal is to set a precedent to set free other Balkan states and finally states within Russia. on and on we go......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.