Rand Paul Fears One-World Government, Just Like Dad

The Daily Beast:

The diehard supporters of GOP maverick Ron Paul are back in campaign mode. But they're not backing another presidential run by America's favorite libertarian. Paul's son, Dr. Rand Paul, is running for a 2010 U.S. Senate seat in Kentucky. To hear the other Dr. Paul's take on one-world government and abolishing the Federal Reserve, you'd swear you were listening to his dad.

I called Rand Paul at his medical office in Bowling Green, Kentucky. In a drawling voice, Paul echoed his father's strong isolationist streak. He brought up fears of a united North American government, including Mexico and Canada, that would replace American currency, an idea he said was being actively promoted by David Rockefeller.

Read the whole story: The Daily Beast

Comments

[gbrooks]

Hey, if you guys want to toss Ron Paul supporters to the wolves, have at it. But just know that you're tossing people who are fully committed to equal rights for homosexuals, believe in the Constitution and are entirely anti-war.

We might not like big government like you do, but we have a hell of a lot more in common than we do differences.

[Rog49Thomas]

An interesting post.

Here's what I intend as a thoughtful reply. Part 1

(1) Tossing Supporters to the Wolves

Most of the comments here including mine take issue with specific points advocated by Drs. Paul. The OWG/NWO conspiracy theory. The Fed Reserve Bank is a conspiracy.

What is being tossed to the wolves are not people but ideas.

Personally, I find these views little different from the birthers' conspiracy, the death panel conspiracy, fluoride in the water, black helicopters, etc.

Political dialogue should be reasoned not hysterical.

As an aside given the presumed reach and power of the conspirators, I've always wondered why they just didn't sit back and control things through existing institutions. Seems like it would be a lot easier.

Now, does that mean that there are no valid criticisms of the conduct of monetary policy? Or that one might reasonably debate the benefits of alternative methods of anchoring the money supply? Or advocate different approaches to solving social problems?

No.

Could there be reasoned discussions on the extent of the influence of the rich and powerful
on our government?

Yep.

[Rog49Thomas]

Part 2

(2) Constitutional Government

The Constitution is a fine document. And provides an anchor to our system of government.

It, however, was written by humans in a particular context. It is therefore not infallible.

The Founding Fathers were not the equivalent of secular prophets Divinely inspired. Or if religion is not your cup of tea, with a direct link to ontological truth. Or the secret of historical processes.

They were as flawed as we are today. Their self interest is a matter of historical record.

We have amended that document and the practice of that time to abolish slavery, extend the franchise (at least in theory) to all adult citizens, provide for the direction election of senators, etc. To adapt the document to changing times and changing perceptions.

[Rog49Thomas]

Part 3

(3) A "United Front"

It is a good idea to unite where there is a commonality of interest to achieve something.

But, one needs to be as selective in choosing one's allies as one does one's life partner or one's investments.

Many moderate Republicans (yes, indeed they did exist at one time and may still today in the dense woods) saw no harm in welcoming so-called Christian evangelicals into the party. They were after all believers in country, God, hard work, the Constitution, freedom, etc.

Problem was they were also by and large "crazies".

And that sort of takes us back full circle to my first point in my first post above.

[gbrooks]

Your post was polite, I'll give you that much.

1. I'm not much of an NWO-believing person myself, but if you understand where that comes from, then you might understand why people who value American sovereignty are upset. Obama just "loaned" the IMF a trillion dollars, and that is likely part of a bigger financial conspiracy that exists between global bankers and our very own FED. If you want to delve further into that, you're asking the wrong person. That part interests me less than it probably should.

2. The Constitution as a fallible, living document. Fallible? Obviously, it was written by man. Living document? Only so far as SCOTUS interprets it and Constitutional Amendments are made. I have no idea where I ever made any mention of the founding fathers as prophets.

3. Comparing us to the religious right of the GOP is ridiculous, about 50% of us are non-religious/agnostics/atheists.

Obama is expanding the wars, supports indefinite detention and has no interest in prosecuting those who tortured in your name and mine. Democrats have the house, the senate and the presidency and they are too weak to do anything but take a teensy baby step every now and then. These wars are looking more and more indefinite, the alleged "peace" candidate was voted in, now the anti-war movement is neutered with Obamalove and we're making excursions into Pakistan--like Bush, without a declaration of war from Congress.

Good luck, you'll need it.

[CulpeperMin]

It's fascinating that even as the Global Corporate & Banking Occupation rubs their aims & intents in the people's collective face, the defense mechanism of many remains "Conspiracy" or "Tin Foil Hat".

"And now for world government" - Financial Times of London, 12/8/2008.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7a03e5b6-c541-11dd-b516-000077b07658.html?nclick_check=1

Medvedev sees single currency dream in G8 coin gift
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.4eb2c06b46ea42dece225df0a3ec3799.641&show_article=1

To those that would lump the notion of global currency into the realm of Tin Foil Hats;

What exactly is the Bank Of International Settlements? Never heard of it, not surprising.

Why has the Bilderberg Group enjoyed a total mass media blackout for its entire 60 year history? What exactly do world leaders and billionaire elites talk about when they meet in secret each year?

Why exactly are these questions cooky/illegitimate? If the MSM didn't tell you that questions like the above are "conspiracy theories", would you believe otherwise?

[Rog49Thomas]

Part 1

(1) The FT article is a musing by a columnist that a world govt or a partial world govt might be a good idea. This does not prove there is a one world conspiracy any more than some guy advocating a national health care system in the USA proves the existence of a conspiracy. Nor do these musings have any more real import than some Congressman from Tejas opining that Social Security is bad.

(2) Medvedev has a coin and a dream. I have a US$, a dream and a lottery ticket.

What I focused on in the article were two comments..
"Russia, along with China, has been a vocal proponent of diversifying the global currency system away from the dollar, which has dominated global finance and commerce since the end of World War II.

French President Nicolas Sarkozy at the summit joined the band in favour of dumping the dollar as the international currency of reference, insisting that "we cannot stick with just one single currency."

Sounds less like a desire for a "Worldo" than a desire to eliminate the US$ as the world reserve currency.

[Rog49Thomas]

Part 2

The BIS was founded in 1930 to settle the thorny issue of WW 1 German reparations. It also functioned as a clearing house for gold transactions among various national central banks. And does today. A clearing house makes a lot of sense for transactions in a difficult to transport commodity like gold. Today the BIS is involved in other financial transactions among central banks

Then as institutions do (to extend their lives) it found a role for itself in economic research and advocating common policies. One example of the latter: bank capital adequacy.

Prior to the BIS setting standards for capital adequacy, there were wide divergences between capital requirements set by national authorities. Several major bank failures in the 1990's led central bankers to conclude that banks were not holding enough capital. Each central bank was worried if it increased capital unilaterally, others wouldn't follow.

So central banks formed a committee under the BIS umbrella and hammered out a compromise. The resulting guidelines were established not by faceless OWG bureaucrats in Bern, but by the OECD central banks themselves. The BIS had and has no authority to impose its guidelines on countries. Adherence is voluntary. In the past few years, the capital adequacy framework was revised again by a committee of central bankers from various countries. Several countries (including the USA) have adopted the revised guidelines but with major changes.

[nooel]

"It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning." — Henry Ford

Directly from Wikipedia's Jekyll Island Entry:

Planning of the Federal Reserve System

At the end of November 1910, Senator Nelson W. Aldrich and Assistant Secretary of the Treasury Department A.P. Andrews, along with many of the country's leading financiers, who together represented about one-fourth of the world's wealth[citation needed], arrived at the Jekyll Island Club to discuss monetary policy and the banking system, an event which some say was the impetus for the creation of the Federal Reserve.

[nooel]

"Some people think the Federal Reserve Banks are the United States government's institutions.
They are not government institutions. They are private credit monopolies which prey upon the people of the United States for the benefit of themselves and their foreign swindlers" — Congressional Record 12595-12603 — Louis T. McFadden, Chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency (12 years) June 10, 1932

"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 the control of Congress and manipulates the credit of the United States" — Sen. Barry Goldwater (Rep. AR)

Andrew Jackson
"If Congress has the right [it doesn't] to issue paper money [currency], it was given to them to be used by...[the government] and not to be delegated to individuals or corporations" — President Andrew Jackson, Vetoed Bank Bill of 1836

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 money and it's issuance." — James Madison

[blueskybigstar]

Send these to every person in congress and the president. There have to be some good people who get that we have been scammed.

[Rog49Thomas]

Hmm

What a shocking conspiracy! Even the auditors are now in on it! (LOL)

(1) Audited Financials of the NY Fed (2009 Deloitte and Touche)
http://www.newyorkfed.org/publications/frame2.cfm?url=%2Faboutthefed%2Fannualreports.html

(2) Audited Financials of Other Fed Banks and the Federal Reserve System
http://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/bst_fedfinancials.htm

[nooel]

Quote from Woodrow Wilson, before his death, after signing the Federal Reserve into law:

"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated governments in the civilized world. No longer a government by free opinion, no longer a government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."
~ Woodrow Wilson

[blueskybigstar]

Where do you get your quotes?

[Rog49Thomas]

John Cooper PhD Professor of History at University of Wisconsin debunked this quote in 2007.

http://webskeptic.wikidot.com/woodrow-wilson

Of course maybe John is in on the secret OWG/NWO conspiracy.

I'll write an ask for his birth certificate just to be sure.

[nooel]

Hey SharpDressedMan:

Thomas Jefferson said, "If the America people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currencies, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their prosperity until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered."

Lets see you argue Jefferson.

[blueskybigstar]

Fanned.

[nooel]

Thanks dude. Just google "federal reserve quotes"

also swing by freedocumentaries.org

check out the banking videos. watched one on the whole history of central banking, and its been going on forever. its funny its even mentioned in the story of jesus (because im on the huff post i need to add the disclaimer that im an athiest, who regards biblical truth more or less like the truth you find in a bob dylan song), the only time he gets pissed. remember that one story where jesus goes to the temple and throws tables and such? because there were money-changers in the temple!

[Rog49Thomas]

No private bank is issuing US currency so what's your point?
The Fed was created in the form it has because of the history of the USA - where there was a profound fear of a central bank. The first two "Banks of the USA" were central banks in the mold of those in Europe.

The Fed Reserve Board and the various regional Fed banks are firmly under the thumb of the US Govt.

[Rog49Thomas]

Who controls the Fed? Part 1

The 7 member Board of Governors (BOG) of the Federal Reserve System is appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate for 14 year terms. Terms are staggered so that a single president cannot appoint the entire board.

The presidents of the 12 regional banks in the system serve for five year terms after being elected by their directors. However, the BOG must confirm an individual before he can serve as President of a Federal Reserve Bank.

The Fed Open Market Committee which decides USA monetary policy consists of 12 members - 7 of whom are the BOG and the other 5 presidents of the various 12 member banks. Note the Govt has control of the FOMC through Presidential appointed BOG.

The President of the Fed NYC is a permanent member of the FOMC and serves as its Vice Chair. The Chairman of the BOG is the Chair of the FOMC. The remaining 4 seats on the FOMC are allocated to the remaining 11 FRBs and chosen from groupings of banks designed to ensure each region is represented. Terms for these 4 are one year with rotation. That is, after one year, another FRB president from the regional grouping goes onto to the FOMC.

When the Fed wants to take actions in the FX markets, it co-ordinates with the US Treasury.

The above should pretty conclusively show that the Govt controls the Fed.

[Rog49Thomas]

Who controls the Fed? Part 2 - The 12 Individual FR Banks

Each individual Federal Reserve Bank has 9 directors.

The BOG appoints three directors (Class C Directors) who are the Chairman, Deputy Chairman and one other director. Note the first two positions are lead positions on boards. By statute Class C Directors may not be shareholders in banks.

FRB member bank elect the remaining six directors.:
(a) 3 Class A who represent the member banks.
(b) 3 Class B who represent other local interests - business, labor, etc.
Note that by the FR Statute: Class B Directors may not be directors, officers or employees of banks.

Each member bank has two votes regardless of the amount of stock it holds: one for a Class A Director and one for a Class B Director.

Thus, at the NY FRB, JPMorgan has the same vote as the Bank of Podunk despite having a lot more shares.

The three Class A directors are allocated as follows: one for small, medium, and large banks. Therefore, Citibank and JPMorgan, cannot be Class A Directors at the same time.

[Rog49Thomas]

Who controls the Fed? Part 3 How does it work in practice?

Here's some data as of 29 March 2008 when I last posted on this topic.

District 2, the NY Fed. The governors. Class A: Jamie Dimon JPMorgan, Charles Wait Adirondack Trust ($717mm in assets, $77mm in equity) and Richard Carrion, Banco Popular ($36bn in assets, $3 billion in equity)

Class B: Jeff Immelt, GE: Indra Nooyi Pepsi: Richard Fuld, Lehman Brothers.

Class C: Steve Friedman Stone Point Capital (Chairman), Dennis Hughes NY State AFL-CIO (Vice Chairman) and Lee Bollinger, President Columbia University.

District 7, Chicago Fed: Class A: Dennis J. Kuester (Marshal and Ilsley), Michael L. Kubacki (Lakeland Financial, Warsaw Indiana Financial $2 billion assets $147mm equity), Mark C. Hewitt (Clear Lake Bank and Trust, Clear Lake Iowa, $210mm in total assets, equity not disclosed (owned by Hewitt family)).

Class B: Anthony K. Anderson (Partner Ernst and Young), Mark T. Gaffney (Michigan AFL-CIO), Ann D. Murtlow (Indianapolis Power and Light).

Class C: John A. Canning, Jr. (Madison Dearborn – a private equity firm) (Chairman), William C. Foote (USG Corp) (Vice Chairman) and Thomas J. Wilson (Allstate Insurance). The Deputy Chairman of the Philly Fed is Charles Pizzi CEO of The Tasty Baking Company.

If you're interested, the names and affiliations of all Board members are at www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/listdirectors/

[Rog49Thomas]

Who controls the Fed? Part 4 - What does private ownership mean?

First, national banks are compelled to join the FRB. Each FRB member must maintain shareholding equal to 6% of its capital and reserves. As a bank grows, it must buy more shares. Normally, in a free market economy, the decision to purchase shares is voluntary. One is never forced forced to buy more.

Second, voting rights usually are in proportion to the number of shares one owns. That's not the case with FRB shares as outlined above..

Second, member banks may not sell, transfer or pledge their FRB shares as collateral.

What does this mean? The bank's shareholding in the Fed is locked in. As long as it is a national bank or member of the FRB, it can’t dispose of its property..

Third, the dividend rate is fixed by statute. Congress has to amend the FRA to change the dividend rate. This is currently 3%. Would you buy an illiquid potentially ever growing investment that you can't sell or pledge as collateral? One with limited voting rights? For a 3% dividend?

One would have hoped that the conspiratorial banks would have cut themselves a better deal.

[blueskybigstar]

In response to Knowitalls response to the link below which I thought yesterday was the most important video that is on youtube and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nD7dbkkBIA&feature=relatedrelated

Watch it again. He was friends with Nick Rockefeller; that was who he was talking about and it was mentioned. He was a successful producer. He started a foundation for truth before he passed away. The fact that he brought up the chips does not mean that it was not said. Rich people are pretty stoop id when it comes to how things work, but I don't remember him saying that the chips would control people, but you would need one to get anything done, that they would keep tabs on you with it, how much you owe, indentured servitude. The stoop id mind of some rich guy is not the point of this video. The point is that the elite knew and they do not care about the public. They just want more power to themselves and are willing to do anything for it.

[SharpDressedMan]

I hate to alarm the Libertarians but apparently they forgot about Hasbro and it's unsupervised capacity to print Monopoly money. In fact, this unsecure currency is easily counterfeited by anyone with colored paper, a computer and printer.

Libertarians must tend to this matter immediately in case Hasbro enlists to the New World Order and takes over the toy world. The last thing we need is Monopoly money printed overseas and circulated here.

[CulpeperMin]

Hasbro of course does not enjoy the Monopoly on coercive force that the government brings to bare. What if Hasbro were able to protect its own counterfeiting operation from Mattell's counterfeiting option by deploying a private mercenary army to arrest (and kill if necessary) Matell's executives who are accused or printing another game's money in competition with Monopoly.

[nooel]

LOL, would be ridiculous if it wasn't true regarding the Fed. Its amazing to me how this guy is arguing for the theft of his own money by bankers. You always see the publies arguing against their own interest, but to make fun of people's concern over the actions going on at the Fed is just amazing.

Forget the NWO, this guy doesn't understand the Fed, as most people don't, and having a bit of argument in his bones (and a good deal of insult to make up for the lack of facts in his brain) this is what we get.

[nooel]

also, should point out to you sharpdressedman, of the irony of libertarian concepts found in our very news story here...

rand paul set KY records for fund-raising in the senate race. why? because there is rare amount of libertarians, and a large demand for it, so the all that money gets funneled into a handful of politicians. thats how the paul's and schiff and etc can even compete against the corporate funded GOP contenders....

[Andrea Soule]

The fact that a physician (which this Paul is) to assert that 100% of Americans are receiving adequate health care because they can't be denied an emergency room visit, just astounds me.

[SharpDressedMan]

Ron Paul's irrational disdain for the federal government goes beyond health care. He wants to abolish the federal government. That includes the CDC. Go figure.

[CulpeperMin]

Total BS.

In short Ron Paul would like to hit the reset button on the Federal Government, preferring something remotely constitutional to the illegitimate behemoth that we see today.

I personally would like to legislative reset the Federal Government to the Constitution, BoR & Amendments 11-14.

Hardly "nuts" given the fiscal & currency collapse that awaits us.

[nooel]

His dad practiced before Medicare and said that relative costs were extremely cheaper.

"relative costs": the same procedures have risen faster than inflation

The reason for this is because the government pays for Medicare, which inflates the whole market. If someone (in this case the Gov't) is willing to pay more for services than other folks, it will raise prices, again simple economics which most liberals don't understand.

[KidMohair]

So THIS is the reichving soulution for 2010?

Even CRAZIER crazies.

[JohnPaulJones]

oh wow, a Nazi reference. How clever of you.

[SharpDressedMan]

For Libertarians unaffected by a good dose of common sense, history, geography, economics and civics, I recommend the following.

- Wear the best crash helmet in case the sky falls.

- Cover the helmet with a thick layer of foil or tin to repel electromagnetic signals used to assimilate people into the New World Order.

- Install surveillance cameras to scan all quarters of the home. Apartment dwellers are less secure.

- Place garlic around doorways to the outside world. Replenish the garlic by making lots of pasta sauce.

- Build a bomb shelter. You just never know.

- If a helicopter flies above, run to the bomb shelter. But don't panic, usually it's a traffic report helicopter.

- Have night time goggles ready just in case.

- Always blog from the safe room. Make sure the room is vapor tight but don't forget to provide oxygen for the occupants. Don't take chances.

If all else fails, move to the Arctic and attain independence by claiming your own chunk of ice. The Feds won't find you. But be careful, you might occupy ice previously claimed by a polar bear. Bears don't negotiate.

:-)

[DannyGee]

Typical of the mainstream left or right mindset with no cranial capacity to understand the concept of liberty.

[SharpDressedMan]

It's like this. My concept of liberty is humanitarian, people living with choices, participating in all levels of government including federal, people helping each other when the need arises, an educated population in tune with worldly matters. Believe it or not, people can and do have choices in a tax paying society.

Having more guns and bullets doesn't equate to more liberty.

[BlackJAC]

Typical of the Ron Paul groupie mindset with no cranial capacity to understand the concept of Being Sold A Bill Of Goods.

[BlackJAC]

Why do the wingnuts think that aluminum foil will keep EMF out when aluminum is a conductor?

[SharpDressedMan]

One reason why they are called "nuts".

[kilgore trout]

If they remembered to ground their foil hats, they might actually reduce the EMF a little...

[SharpDressedMan]

In all seriousness despite the farcical nature of a tin hat, the foil absorbs electromagnetic signals that induce electricity and conduct it elsewhere, like ground if connected to a ground.

The shielding in co-axial cables such as those running from the wall connector to the cable box and tv works like that. Shielding diverts stray signals to avoid interference.

[Policon]

Sounds like you've had some practice.

[SharpDressedMan]

I had a slurry of discussions and debates last year with a number of Libertarian supporters and proponents. Too few were able to argue rationally.

[nooel]

Wow, just incredibly un-informed.

Libertarians make up such a small group, and its because we've streamlined ourselves against idiocy. If you talk to a Libertarian, they will know what they're talking about.

Liberals like this guy up here can't count yet, but I'd imagine if he's got the intellect, he eventually will.

As you can tell, he has yet to debate any of us on facts. Check the earlier posts, we tried debating things but every thread eventually ended in an insult. Now its just insults as he knows he has no idea what he's debating about.

[DannyGee]

Sharp dressed man is a poser. He responded to my post about defining liberty and he said "people participating in government at all levels". Huh? Not a clue.

[Bjarni]

Interesting to see Liberals attack Libertarians, when we agree on alot of issues that have to do with Personal Choice.

Now regarding these Conspiracy Theories the Nafta Superhighway is not controversial. It's for the most part privately funded.
It's being lobbied by the NASCO, their website here.
http://www.nascocorridor.com/corridormaps.asp
The first part is the Texas portion of the superhighway.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trans-Texas_Corridor
From the Texas Department of Transportation
http://www.keeptexasmoving.com/index.php/texas_corridors
What's most controversial about the TTC is: "The planned system would require about 584,000 acres (2,360 km2) of land to be purchased or acquired through the state's assertion of eminent domain" which violates the owners property rights.

Then the Amero/NAU thing:
We currently have http://www.spp.gov/ in addition to NAFTA
The EU started as the "European Economic Community"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Economic_Community
So it's not really far fetched to think that leaders of the countries want the merger. Vincente Fox (Former Mexican President talks about it as a long term vision although not important)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnSMxKVk0V4 (Question comes at 5:00)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYGrn0hZlCQ

And the FED was made to preserve the value of the dollar, and it's value has fallen 95% since the FED was created, so it's safe to say they've failed at their own goals.

[SharpDressedMan]

"And the FED was made to preserve the value of the dollar, and it's value has fallen 95% since the FED was created, so it's safe to say they've failed at their own goals."

Please provide a credible link that proves the dollar lost 95% of its value since the Federal Reserve was created.

This should be good.

[knosiswar]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seignorage

In fact, "hard money" advocates argue that central banks have utterly failed to obtain the objective of a stable currency. Under the gold standard, for example, the price level in both England and the US remained relatively stable over literally hundreds of years, though with some protracted periods of deflation. Since the US Federal Reserve was formed in 1913, however, the US dollar has fallen to barely a twentieth of its former value through the consistently inflationary policies of the bank. Economists counter that deflation is hard to control once it sets in and its effects are much more damaging than modest, consistent inflation.

[knosiswar]

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

Here, you can figure it out for your self then.

[knosiswar]

A dollar from 1913 could by 21.75 worth of today's groceries.

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

Does it hurt when you see the sun light?

[knosiswar]

A dollar from 1913 could buy 21.75 worth of today's groceries.

http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm

Does it hurt when you see the sun light?

[CulpeperMin]

http://goldprice.org/bob/uploaded_images/dollar_USD_Purchasing_Power-753629.gif

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics - Wholesale Price Index as a proxy.

[knosiswar]

It's no longer theory, a theory is something you cannot prove. The results prove the assertion. We are going Bankrupt, the Dollar will be set aside as a Reserve Currency, The US will default on it's debt repayment, we will go up for sale.

The Treaty of Lisbon will be ratified by Ireland this October as Ireland succembs to the pressure of the Global Depression, engineered by the BIS. The Treaty of Lisbon will in an instant re-establish the Roman Empire to the Byzantine Royalty, the Hapsburgs. The Hapsburgs, the Spanish and Hungarian Royalty, have the central role and complete loyalty from leadership to once again place them at the top of an Empire.

The Spaniard Javier Solana will be elected the President of the European Union after negotiating a seven year peace between Israel, the Palestinians, Iran, and the Arabs. As a bankrupt country, we will be forced into a North American Union subject to the admission requirements of the EU, superceeding any civil liberties once promised in the Constitution.

[Eoin45]

"...a theory is something you cannot prove." You are, quite simply wrong and do not understand what a theory is.

[knosiswar]

I use it in the form of a Scientific Theory, it is the best answer for the problem, but cannot be tested for it's validity. Is that incorrect?

[knosiswar]

"...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 to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations."

Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time (1966)

Carroll Quigley was a noted historian, polymath, and theorist of the evolution of civilizations.

Bill Clinton named Quigley as an important influence on his aspirations and political philosophy in 1991, when launching his presidential campaign in a speech at Georgetown. He also mentioned Quigley again during his acceptance speech to the 1992 Democratic National Convention,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carroll_Quigley
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_for_International_Settlements

[knosiswar]

Quigley was born in Boston, and attended Harvard University, where he studied history and earned B.A, M.A., and Ph.D. degrees. He taught at Princeton University, and then at Harvard, and then at the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University from 1941 to 1976.

From 1941 until 1969, he taught a two-semester course at Georgetown on the development of civilizations. According to the obituary in the Washington Star, many alumni of Georgetown's School of Foreign Service asserted that this was "the most influential course in their undergraduate careers".

In addition to his academic work, Quigley served as a consultant to the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Navy, the Smithsonian Institution, and the House Select Committee on Astronautics and Space Exploration in the 1950s. Quigley served as a book reviewer for the Washington Star and was a contributor and editorial board member of Current History. His work emphasized "inclusive diversity" as a value of Western Civilization long before diversity became commonplace, and he denounced Platonic doctrines as an especially pernicious deviation from this ideal, preferring the pluralism of Thomas Aquinas. Quigley said of himself that he was a conservative defending the liberal tradition of the West. He was an early and fierce critic of the Vietnam War, and he was against the activities of the military-industrial complex which he saw as the future downfall of the country.