…Y ahora Por Un Banco y Una Moneda Global

Por Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
Mayo 18, 2010

Desde que era niño he oído sobre la posibilidad de una moneda mundial. En aquel entonces nadie a mi alrededor supo explicar cómo surgiría y quién la controlaría. La respuesta a estas preguntas ya están claras. Dominic Strauss-Kahn, respondió a mis preguntas de infancia. Una moneda mundial administrada por un banco central global. El jefe del FMI dijo que esto era necesario en Zürich, Suiza, durante una reunión en la que confirmó su opinión de que esta crisis “es una oportunidad”.

Según Kahn, el Fondo Monetario Internacional y el Banco Internacional de Divisas serían una cosa de último recurso, en los casos en que la economía mundial cayera en ruinas. Kahn dijo que la nueva moneda sería un “activo libre de riesgo para el sistema independiente de las monedas nacionales”, y que un “banco central mundial también podría servir como un prestamista de última instancia”. Qué inteligente del Sr. Kahn! El problema es que estas ideas no son nuevas y no son suyas. La creació de un organismo financiero mundial ha estado en formación durante décadas.

La idea de un organismo mundial que controle la emisión de moneda y de toda la política financiera se creó antes que las Naciones Unidas, la Liga de Naciones y la Unión Europea. Este principio de concentrar el poder y la política fue originalmente concebido para amasar control con la excusa de que evitaría la corrupción económica y el desastre. Sin embargo, no pasó mucho tiempo para descubrir que es exactamente lo contrario. Así como la creación de la Liga de Naciones, las Naciones Unidas y la Unión Europea no puso fin a las guerras, la inestabilidad económica tampoco acabará con la creación de una organización supranacional. De hecho, lo perpetuarán.

Echemos un vistazo a los acontecimientos pasados. Desde que las Naciones Unidas nació, hemos experimentado conflictos en todos los continentes. Esos conflictos no fueron las obras de países contra países, sino la desestabilización llevada a cabo con grupos de delincuentes patrocinados por gobiernos o por organismos de inteligencia. Mossad, el MI6, la CIA, los talibanes y el IRA son sólo algunos ejemplos. Guerras patrocinadas por países son cosa del pasado, y en sus cartas de intención, los países que impulsaron la creación de la Liga de Naciones y la ONU sabían que no serían necesarias como una herramienta, ya que ellos también controlan las organizaciones terroristas que harían el trabajo para ellos.

En el mundo de la economía y las finanzas, los imperios, o los países que aspiran a convertirse en imperios también tienen sus herramientas para llevar a cabo terrorismo económico y financiero. Las corporaciones que inicialmente operaban fuera del gobierno contrataron entidades financieras para llevar a cabo sus actividades fraudulentas. A continuación, las Corporaciones se convirtieron en el gobierno y entonces fue más fácil llevar a sus operaciones de terrorismo financiero. Las corporaciones multinacionales de Banca establecieron un nuevo orden controlado por ellos mismos, acabaron con la supervisión gubernamental y crearon las políticas que efectivamente los convirtieron en los amos de la economía mundial.

Así, los banqueros no necesitaban de Al-Qaeda, el MI6, el Mossad o la CIA para poner al mundo de rodillas. Ese objetivo se podría lograr a través de Wall Street, el FMI y el Banco Internacionales de Divisas. La creación de bloques regionales para promover el comercio y el intercambio fue una excusa para consolidar el poder y los recursos. Esta idea más tarde se probó a nivel mundial, promoviendo la creación de una entidad financiera global que controlará la emisión de dinero y las condiciones en que se prestáse ese dinero.

¿Cuáles fueron los resultados de la concentración de la política financiera y económica en Europa? Los estamos viendo ahora. Islandia, Grecia y ahora España, Portugal e Inglaterra están en ruinas. ¿Por qué? Debido a que la homogeneización financiera no está destinada a promover economías estables y políticas económicas saludables, sino para reforzar los controles y llevar a cabo políticas que permitan a los banqueros consolidar aún más. El objetivo de los banqueros nunca ha sido contar con una economía estable, con una política monetaria sólida, ya que en ese tipo de mundo ellos tienen menos control y la riqueza no se concentra en sus manos.

Echemos un vistazo a otro ejemplo nos ofrece la historia: La creación y adopción de políticas globalistas como los acuerdos de libre comercio. NAFTA, CAFTA, GATT por mencionar algunos, fueron las tropas sobre el terreno para los banqueros. El fin del mundo industrial, el fin del capitalismo -ya que trabajó con éxito durante algún tiempo-, dio paso a la apertura de las fronteras para el flujo de productos tóxicos baratos y de inmigrantes ilegales. Los acuerdos de libre comercio no sólo destruyeron la industria, sino también aniquilaron la red de seguridad social en las naciones del mundo occidental. Mientras que los dineros de las ciudades y pueblos fueron robados y usados para invertir en productos financieros imaginarios, los extranjeros ilegales exprimieron los servicios sociales básicos -ya debilitados- en todas las naciones de las Américas y Europa.

Hoy en día, los políticos más influyentes y las estrellas de la cultura pop  justifican la falta de respeto hacia las naciones, sus constituciones y leyes al permitir que no sólo los acuerdos de libre comercio, pero el continuo flujo de inmigrantes ilegales a través de todos los lugares posibles en las fronteras. Hacer cumplir leyes de inmigración y la constitución es visto como racista y los que proponen la inmigración legal son etiquetados como injustos, inhumanos y simplemente locos. Este es exactamente el resultado que los globalistas bancarios esperaban. Dividir y conquistar nunca ha tenido mejores resultados. Las políticas de inmigración, son definitivamente radicales en un mundo donde todos inconscientemente creen que las fronteras abiertas son lo normal y los artículos baratos hechos por esclavos en Asia y América Latina son lo mejor por su precio.

Ahora que hemos dado una mirada hacia atrás, vamos a echar una mirada hacia adelante.¿Cómo sería un mundo con más concentración de poder y el control en manos de los responsables de la actual crisis? Seamos optimistas y digamos que no podría ser peor; ciertamente no será mejor. La centralización del poder y del gobierno a nivel regional es lo que causó el lío en que estamos en este momento, la centralización en manos de los que financiaron a Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Noriega, Pinochet, Saddam Hussein y que ahora controlan las finanzas y los gobiernos de los Estados Unidos, Gran Bretaña, Asia y África, hará que el mundo gire aún más fuera de control. Para su beneficio, por supuesto. La historia no miente, ¿verdad?

Aquellos que prometieron el fin de las guerras, sólo trajeron más, y los que prometieron la estabilidad financiera sólo crearon más desigualdad, pobreza y miseria. ¿Confiaría las llaves de su casa al ladrón que está fuera de su propiedad para que cuide de ella? Usted no lo haría. Usted no debería. En las próximas elecciones, donde viva donde viva, vote por usted y vote a los ladrones fuera del gobierno. Esa es la única manera de derrotar su agenda de conquista y esclavitud. Muchas personas ya están trabajando activamente para poner fin a la tiranía mundial que crearon hace décadas, por lo que usted no está solo.

Ahora, basta de charla! Vamos a actuar! Abajo aparece una lista de algunas de las empresas que en forma fraudulenta están a cargo del mundo de hoy. Estoy esperando que usted les niegue el privilegio de dirigir su vida. Deje de usar, comprar o de cualquier manera consumir sus productos. Vamos a utilizar su globalismo en su contra. Un boicot global de sus productos baratos, tóxicos y fraudulentos será el primer paso.

Disney                              Adidas                         Time Warner                  IBM

Merck                              Napa                              Holiday Inn                    ACE

Old Navy                        Ford                              Seven Eleven                  USPS

Comcast                         Chevrolet                    Citgo                                  VISA

CNN                                 Dyncorp                       Pepsi                                  Chevron

Coca Cola                      True Value                   Kraft                                  Chrysler

Exxon Mobile             General Electric         Starbucks                        Westinghouse

Taco Bell                       Wells Fargo                  America Online             KFC

NBC Universal            American Airlines    Royal Dutch Shell         Bank of America

CBS                                  The Carlyle Group    GAP                                     Master Card

Master Card                Stop&Shop                   HBO                                     ABC

Nike                               Wal Mart                       Jiffy Lube                          JP Morgan

GM                                 Volkswagen                 Fox News Channel        Monsanto

Du Pont                        NASA                             Pizza Hut                           Syngenta

Microsoft                    Mc Donald’s                 Home Depot                    Safe Way

Burger King               Sony                                Dodge                                Intel

Staples                         Verizon                          Toro                                  John Deere

Firestone                    Bechtel                           MSNBC                             Goodyear

Amoco                        AT&T                               Mitsubishi                       Nestle

Sugiera el nombre de más corporaciones a través de la sección de comentarios.  También, responda a nuestra encuesta sobre las corporaciones y su control sobre los gobiernos.

Council on Foreign Relations Propaganda

Infowars

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is an invitation only membershipgroup made up of about 4000 people that comprise what many observers consider to bethe shadow government of America. The CFR is more than a ‘think tank’, it is a network of elitists that control America by creating policies, laws, financial alliances and monopolies. This new video, starring such diverse personalities as Angelina Jolie and Zbigniew Brzezinski, promotes the CFR as a wonderful place where people meet to discuss policy, thus giving the impression that all points of view are represented and implemented with the public’s best interests at heart.

Some of its members include bankers (Timothy Geithner, Henry Paulson, Alan Greenspan, Paul Volcker, and World Bank President Robert Zoellick), Secretaries of State (Henry Kissinger, Condoleeza Rice, Hillary Clinton), Supreme Court Justices (Bader-Ginsberg and Stephen Breyer), corporate titans (George Soros, Michael Bloomberg, Dick Cheney), mainstream media (mainstream media is manipulated by the CFR- Katie Couric, Bill Moyers, Diane Sawyer, Tom Brokaw), foreign heads of state (Mikhail Gorbachev, Benyamin Netanyahu and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe), religious leader (the Dalai Lama)and entertainers (Shirley Temple, Angelina Jolie, Fred Thompson).

Some of the more notable corporations that enjoy CFR membership include AIG, BP, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Google, Merck, NASDAQ, Pfizer and VISA.

The truth about the CFR is that it is a global agenda organizationfilled with collectivists who advocatedepopulation and covert controlover America and the world. An example of this is the quote by Zbigniew Brzezinski (co-founder of the Trilateral Commission and former US National Security Advisor):

“I once put it rather pungently, and I was flattered that the British Foreign Secretary repeated this, as follows: … namely, in early times, it was easier to to control a million people, literally it was easier to control a million people than physically to kill a million people. Today, it is infinitely easier to to kill a million people than to control a million people. It is easier to kill than to control….”

Brzezinski’s statement does not advocate killing, but that he and his compatriots have given serious thought to both options. The average auto mechanic does not ponder these things. Who does? Only those who have a self image of being empowered to do either and, therefore, must make a choice.

David Rockefeller, honorary chairman of the CFR, he is also the founder of the Trilateral Commission (a secretive members-only group with designs to remove the borders between Canada, U.S. and Mexico in the pursuit of eventual world governance),his family founded the Population Council (with its roots in eugenics, which is the philosophy of improving the human gene pool through selective breeding, historically, it has sometimes been accomplished through brutal means such as forced sterilization and genocide)and he is a banker, famous for this quote:

“For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as “internationalists” and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

This video is pure propaganda; it would seem incredible that some CFR members do not understand its true nature, but may have been used for marketing and public relations purposes in this video.

G. Edward Griffin , who revealed the character of the CFR in “The Capitalist Conspiracy” in 1971, said that due to the growing awareness of the CFR’s role in leading America into global collectivist government, the CFR is attempting to brighten their tarnished image with this public relations video. And it uses the same production style seen on TV ads selling pharmaceutical drugs. The message is about learning, discussion and solutions, but omits commentary on their goals and methods.

North American Union 101

Call it What You Want. If Everything Goes Business as Usual, Mexico, Canada and the United States Will Become One

By Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
May 5, 2010

Rome was not built in one day. In order to become the Empire it was, Rome went through years and years of progress until it becamNAUe the structure we know today. Democracy did not appear one morning with the rise of the sun.  The United States was not founded over a summer to become what it is today; it took a civil war to produce independence from Britain, an anti-slavery movement, a period of reconstruction and industrialization and two world wars. Local, National and Global structures of power are created one block at the time. The latest example of a superstructure in its works is the North American Union.

Known also by its NAU abbreviation, this new power structure emulates in many regards the European Union, EU, which came about as an economical organization, which sought to facilitate the trade between countries in the old continent. One thing the two structures have in common is its supranational nature, that is, its authority goes beyond the power of any of its member-partner governments. Just as its European equal, the North American Union and its roots were planted by non-governmental institutions, mainly the Council in Foreign Relations or CFR a branch of a globalist movement that seeks to unify the world under a one-world government. In Europe, the main contributors to the creation of the EU were the European Commission, the Council of the European Union, the European Council, the European Central Bank, the European Court of Justice, and the European Parliament, all of which represented no government in particular, but which represented the interests of national and regional corporations.
The European Union is today one single market with a common trade and political policy. It introduced a single currency, the euro, adopted by 13 member states. The EU initiated a limited Common Foreign and Security Policy, and a limited Police and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters. Another feature the EU and the NAU have in common is that those who are put in power are not elected by the people in every nation member, precisely because when a country is admitted into the EU, that nation ceases to exist. Everything from the security to the economy, to the politics, to the management of welfare and the military is then directed by unelected persons who raise to power once a country’s president or prime minister signs what in North America is the Security and Prosperity Partnership, SPP. Once the SPP is signed, most laws that previously governed such a country go into retirement, and the newly unelected parliament begins their never-ending governance.

Another similarity between the EU and NAU, is the authorization to let in millions of foreigners who are free to move within the borders of the union to live and work with zero restrictions. The newest push by the United States president and most congressmen to allow between 12 and 30 million illegal immigrants to remain in the United States soil regardless of their violations of immigration laws, is a clear sign, critics say, that there is a path being paved to lure people into coming to North America. The newest bill, which apparently counts with the blessing of George W. Bush, includes a renewable Z VISA, which will permit illegals to remain in the country for 4 years in a row. During that period, illegals will pay around $5,000 in fees and penalties, which will enable them to apply for a Green Card. At some point in the process, the head of the household, the bill says, will have to leave the United States to his country of origin in order to obtain a legal admittance into the US. Although most parts of the bill are kept secret by its writers and most congressmen, it’s been reported that the bill will allow illegals to bring into the US up to eleven relatives after the former obtain their green cards. This will not only make the immigration problem more serious, but also will turn the immigration debate more sour, because the bill does not account for how the country or the work market will cope with the increase in the population this measure will spur.

“The ultimate goal of any White House policy ought to be a North American economic and political alliance similar in scope and ambitions to the European Union.” So, whom are the ones pushing for the North American Union in the United States? Well, for starters Mr. Robert Pastor, from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), who said in the journal of the CFR: “NAFTA was merely the first draft of an economic constitution for North America.” Then, there is Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor who in 1995 said, “We cannot leap into world government in one quick step…the precondition for eventual globalization is progressive regionalization.” Last but not least, Mr. David Rockefeller, who said in his memoirs, “…Some believe we are part of a global cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure- one world. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

In March, 2005, president Bush, Canadian Prime Minister Martin and former Mexican president Vicente Fox signed the SPP, which again was written by Robert Pastor and other members of the CFR, who met with its Mexican and Canadian colleagues before the trilateral meeting featuring the three heads of state. The goal in that meeting was to create and establish a North American Community by 2010. Although Robert Pastor maintains the intention of the CFR is not to create anything like to European Union, the truth is that in its early stages the SPP look just like the plan the EU had when it was in its beginnings. First, it was shown as an economical alliance, to facilitate the circulation of goods from country to country and to find common ground on economic and trade policies. But the EU soon turned into a continental body that evolved into political unions. In 2005, after Bush signed the SPP, a proto-parliament called the North American Competitiveness Council was created, a prototype for what in Europe is today the European Parliament. The highlight of this section is that in the event a severe state of emergency hits the region, the SPP has plans for a continuity of government, which many call a shadow government.

The NAFTA Highways
But in order for a North American block to prosper, there is more that needs to happen. In order to open the borders, immigration laws need to change. A new transportation system needs to be constructed. Once trade limits are set aside, the path seems to point to a free circulation of products from Mexico into the US and to Canada. The North American Free Trade Agreement signed by Bill Clinton in 1993, opened the door for massive exchange of goods across the borders of Mexico, the United States and Canada. In order to have that massive movement of people and products a new highway system which will connect the three countries. The NAFTA highways will begin down on the border between Mexico and the US and spread to Florida, New York, Toronto, Oklahoma, Calgary and Vancouver. All in all, there will be four sections: an Atlantic, Pacific, Central Eastern and Central Western corridors. All this is possible due to the massive sell of local and regional highway systems to international corporations such as Spain’s Cintra and Zachry Construction. The lobbying of banks like Goldman Sachs and other companies like Merryl Lynch in Washington and the poor management of resources at the state level have sparked the sell of Parkways, Turnpikes and other highway systems which were built with taxpayers’ money and that now, opposing groups say, it being handed to foreigners for periods as long as 99 years.

The Amero
So, once there is a common government, a common trade policy and a common transportation system, there are two more things needed to complete the picture, one is a common currency and another is a regional database. According to Professor and Journalist, Jerome Corsi, one of the key issues is the use of a regional currency. “Robert Pastor has also called for the creation of the “Amero” that would replace the US Dollar, the Canadian Dollar and the Mexican Peso”, says Corsi. “This follows in virtual lock step with what the European Union has accomplished for the once-totally independent nations across the Atlantic. Most of them have discarded their own currencies in favor of the Euro.” Either due to currency devaluation or the push of the CFR for the Amero, it is clear that the fact the United States is part of this regional body and that the government borrows 3 billion dollars a day to maintain its operations, will eventually erode the dollar as a currency. Another thing that would precipitate the fall of the dollar and the rise of the Amero is the fact that China holds most of the US debt, which puts in their hands the future of the dollar as a currency. If China decides to dump the dollar as their trade currency and go for the Euro or the Pound, the United States will suffer an economic catastrophe much worse than that suffered during the depression of 1929. A devalued currency and a week economy, says Corsi, would open the doors for a new currency, the Amero.

The RFID
So where does the Radio Frequency Identification system fall into place? Questioned by pro-privacy groups as the greatest violation yet to the citizens private lives, the RFID appears as the best instrument to control the influx of dangerous individuals and to know everything about who enters the country, their origin and destination. In a world tainted by terrorism, it seems like a good idea to know who is here and why, the problem is that it will not only affect immigrants or tourists who come to the US or the North American Union for that matter. Every American citizen will be mandated to carry one of these ID’s as well. Although it was first promoted as a way to prevent the spread of animal disease from getting into the food chain, it soon turned into a tool to control the free movement of individuals across the region. The National Security theme doesn’t seem to be flying well among the population. Several states around the country have formally filed requests to reject the National ID Act, while some states have already totally rejected it. According to critics, the National RFID is an ineffective solution to a problem that can be addressed in less intrusive ways. In practice, it has been demonstrated that hackers can drain information from an RFID card from 160 feet away. Because the information on the ID is biometric the information could be stolen or changed. The ID system would track the card, not the person. What the ID will do it seems, is to create barriers as to where people can go. Those who do not hold an RFID will not be permitted to board planes, enter public buildings or banks, or to collect social security benefits. Organizations like the Liberty Coalition make clear that the RFID is the precursor for what is to come; the implantation of a chip under people’s skins as a way to avoid and end the tampering the RFID will be subject to. The implanted chip says the Liberty Coalition in a recent newsletter is what they are really after. In fact, hospitals and clinics around the country already use chips to store medical information, which is then retrieved with a scanner. Institutions like the Hackensack University Medical Center in Hackensack New Jersey, already offers this possibility to its clients.

The United Nations
In its official charter, the United Nations makes it clear, that its main function is to initiate studies and make recommendations for the purpose of promoting international co-operation in the political field and encouraging the progressive development of international law and its codification. It also says in article 28 that the Security Council shall be so organized as to be able to function continuously. In article 29, itsays the Security Council may establish such subsidiary organs, as it deems necessary for the performance of its functions. In article 30, it says the Security Council shall adopt its own rules of procedure, including the method of selecting its President. Probably the most controversial of the articles is where it establishes that, permanent members form the Security Council with the right to vote and veto. The members of that Council are The Communist Republic of China, France, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America. The rest of the members are non-permanent and are elected to sit for periods of two years. Note that two of the permanent members are the USSR, which hasn’t been changed to Russia, and China, communism’s last standing. This fact is of great concern for those who see the United Nations as the precursor for a one-world government due what they call dictatorial rules and regulations. The link between the UN and the EU and the NAU is that these blocks are also previews of what will become a global regulator organ. It seems the North American Union is another step towards formalizing this initiative. In fact the very United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights in its article 28 says: “Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.” Do critics have a point? Later, on Article 29 section 3, it says: “These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.” Article 30 and last says: “Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein. So in other words, taking into consideration the last three articles of the Declaration of Human Rights, anyone has the right to a social and international order. No one can use the rights given in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights if they are considered to be exercised against the UN and no one can act in orderto overcome the UN as a governing body. Since this is a news piece, I let you draw your own conclusions.

Reference Material:

United Nations Reference Manuals.

United Nations Charter.

The New American Magazine.

United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights

www.JonesReport.com

Lou Dobbs Tonight Transcripts

www.spp.gov