“Chuffed” To Be Invited

If you were a professional of one sort or another, and you were invited to join a very exclusive club, you would almost certainly be flattered. The probability, if you regarded yourself as important enough, and there were no obvious detriments, is that you would accept the invitation.

At that point, you have diminished yourself. You have become a junior member. It does not matter what High Office you have held. You have become a Junior. Your superiors are the existing members of the club and its hierarchy. They will, of course, flatter you further by appearing to value your opinion, but that is a sham. Your opinion does not matter one jot. The Agenda has already been set. You have simply been ‘brought on board’.

If the UN was really serious about One World Gov, it would not have started with Europe. It is a bit like TC starting to protect children and teenagers with a ban on smoking in adult places. It makes no sense and never did.

Where should the UN have started its drive for One World Gov? Africa, South America, Asia? But OWG could not have been achieved without conquest in those places. The easy way was to cajole and invite VIPs in Europe to accept a vision.

There is much detail about the vision of ‘One Europe’ here:

http://www.4liberty.org.uk/2017/09/11/social-re-engineering-by-swamping-populations/

You can disregard ideas about swamping Europe with Middle East Muslims. The intention was to mix up the population of Europe: to do away with National Identities. All would be ‘Europeans’. Individual Countries, such as England and Germany and France would be simply ‘Regions’. Sure, they would have their football teams and ‘go to war’ on the football pitch. They might also ‘go to war’ on singing contests, and in the Olympics, but they would not have the power to actually fight against oppression.

The world-wide smoking hysteria has shown just what I mean.

The plan also intended to create ‘super regions’ in the One World Gov. Thus, there would be an African Super Region, with its EU-like Administration, and a South American Super Region, and an …. etc.

The USA was initially in favour of that idea, but I think that it is beginning to have doubts.

What is the ideal? I do not know, and I doubt that anyone knows. Some things are obvious – the idea of a European Army, under the control of Junker et al is a joke.

I do not know, but there is at least a reasonable idea that belligerents should be allowed to fight it out. It is their problem. At least, having fought it out, they would have responsibility for what follows.

The reasons for the dissolution of the USSR have not been properly investigated as yet. I do not know why. The USSR was a perfect example of ‘integration’. It failed miserably and was abandoned. Why did it fail? Why did Maoism in China fail?

All these things are very important, and yet no one is talking about them. Can world trade prosper without political costs and interference? Note the words “Political Costs’.

Advertisements

4 Responses to ““Chuffed” To Be Invited”

  1. Smoking Lamp Says:

    I think you are right; there is a movement toward a single global government. Smoking bans and antismoking in general are part of the process of breaking down identity so they can forge new identities.. So far they have has success but as you note the opposition is beginning to rise.

    Orwell anticipated this shift. After all he saw the world divided into Oceania, Eurasia, and Eastasia with a disputed region in most of Africa, the Middle east, India, and Indonesia/The Philippines. Maybe that’s why the uproar over Brexit as Britain moves back to Oceania (The Atlantic Alliance) rather than into the Euro-Russian orbit?

    • junican Says:

      I honestly have no idea what is actually being, or has been, planned. That is part of the problem. Only a small group of people are at the top. We do not know who they are. It is a ‘secret society’. The weird thing is that no ex-members of ‘The Society’ blow the whistle. Perhaps the reason for that is that there are no minutes of meetings.In other words, meetings would be about ‘attitudes’ and ‘what needs to be done to change attitudes’.

  2. Samuel Says:

    Back in the eighties the “news” promulgated in the US and the lessons taught in the schools made it clear that President Reagan was a “strong leader” who would “get tough” on “America’s enemies” (unlike those weak and vacillating losers, Carter and Ford). We were told that the US would reinvest in weapons of war, including a space based weapons platform (the Strategic Defense Initiative, SDI, or “Star Wars”) that would negate the ability of the USSR to successfully strike anyone with its missiles.
    This, we were told, this massive increase in “defensive” weapons, is what caused the Soviet Union to fall apart because their backward and primitive industries couldn’t compete with “capitalism”.
    This was, of course, a lie (notice there is no (admitted to or known) space based defense platform)
    It wasn’t until the early years of this century that the real cause began to leak ou – mostly from the Russians.
    The US government had established a special relationship with the Saudi monarchy all the way back to WWII.
    We help them to develop their oil extraction industry, they use the money to buy off their people and they agree to only sell oil for US dollars. This deal about only selling in exchange for US money forced other countries to sell their products to the US in exchange for dollars thus linking all countries to whatever the US government wanted and it kept the value of US dollars high despite the most extreme over printing and borrowing the world has ever known. Even OPEC, which was tarted up as a “threat” to the US, was just a means to deal with other countries trying to make an end run around this special relationship.
    Behind the scenes, while the “news” corporations were blathering about strong leadership and Reagan’s “Star Wars” (which was all nonsense), the US was setting up its strategy to have OPEC, led by the Saudis, begin pumping massive amounts of oil to flood the world market with cheap fuel.
    The USSR’s chief export and source of real money was oil but its equipment was old and inefficient because the government hadn’t invested in necessary improvements choosing, instead, to purchase “loyalty” from the people it had captured after the war. Most of the oil it exported went to Western Europe but with the Middle East selling oil for less than half the price of Russian oil the USSR ran out of customers and cash.
    That was the real cause of the fall of the USSR. An economic war it simply couldn’t win and an increasingly fed up civilian population that could only have been held if the government was willing to wage all out war on its own people.

    • junican Says:

      I think that you are right about the economic war between the USA and Russia. A totalitarian ‘one size fits all’ regime could not hope to compete with a capitalist ‘free for all’ system. As the citizens of Russia watched the West becoming wealthier and wealthier, something had to give.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: