Project Camelot (update)

A friend pointed this out to me recently.
Here is an interesting video about Project Camelot.
It's really long but the interesting part in reference to government is at 24:15 but you can start around 23:00 to understand the topic:

">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ic70cVN5IdQ//>

Ultimately, it's liberalism morphing into libertarianism. it boils down to people deciding that central planning and organizing aka huge federal or central government will claim to "help" people but will ultimately do more harm than good which is why our founders made our federal government weak, and gave state governments far more latitude. Even my great grandmother who was the first woman Sheriff in tenessee considered herself a tennesseean American. State used to come first to people. elections were the same way, where local and state elections were much more important to people than national.and presidential elections. corporations are no different. multinational corporations have no love for the tea party or as I call it "the pro-liberty" movement. "too big to fail" means too big to this movement.
It's those corporations in conjunction with governing bodies like the UN, NATO ,EU, that are supporting obamacare. why, because they want the small businesses which still have the biggest piece of the overall pie out of the way. our big corpoations aren't capitalist, they are in the business of "manipulative consumerism." then the government call capitalists-small business owners...the boogeyman. Why is obama going after people making $250K a year? because that is the mean income for someone to have or begin their own business. What segment of our economy has the most small businesses? Doctors offices. There is no "walmart" of the medical care industry. Each doctor works for his/her self or with small group of other doctors. in the tea party movement, people ask, what can you do, what are you good at, now do that within the movement. If you can write, start a blog, if you are a good organizer, start a group, etc. every person do a little, donate what you can.
When Christianity was in it's infancy, there were no clergy in charge of regions, no pope, just small individual groups if people gathering, giving what they could to contribute, and each group picked a group of leaders from within to be organizers of that group. They engaging in willful socialsm on the local level. Peter was never a "pope" despite what you were taught in Catholic theology. Groups of Christans met, and dealt with their problems and needs on their own. The first record of a "church" picking a single leader begins at 120 a.d. and that was "Clement" who is often called the second Pope. The original idea was individualism not clergy issuing all powerful decrees. The reasoning for that, the pro-liberty movement all the way to our founding fathers separating the powers of the Federal Government was prevention of a few making decisions for everyone. That discussion about "project Camelot" is the simple notion that we don't need ever growing government bodies or multinational corporations telling us how to do things.
We can, at the local level, take care of ourselves. The closer we get to a "nanny
state," the more self serving that state will be. This is happening all world at the same time. Now violence is starting to uptick, not from the "pro-liberty" movement but from statists. That teacher who shot up that college, and the pentagon shooting yesterday were statists, as are the recent rash of Muslim terrorists such as the pantie-bomber and the Ft Hood. These people who are behind what we are ideologically opposed to have no problem with resorting to and have ties to, on many levels, to terrorism and gang violence, and if push comes to shove will not hesitate to use such means.

Earlier, I stated that the Ft Hood Bomber died the other day. I am positive I heard it on Fox news the other day but i can find no evidence to confirm this, so I am retracting the statement with an apology to those who read this. I made a mistake here and I am now correcting it. Big thanks to JDS for letting me know I missed that one as I am not out to mislead people here, and I am honestly spread so thin working on multiple state and national midterm election campaigns that I am having a hard time doing all the checking and rechecking that I prefer, but the workload will lighten up fairly soon as there is one special election in a month and I will be able to get back to a more normal posting schedule.
Sent from my Iphone

Project Camelot (update)

A friend pointed this out to me recently.
Here is an interesting video about Project Camelot.
It's really long but the interesting part in reference to government is at 24:15 but you can start around 23:00 to understand the topic:

">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ic70cVN5IdQ//>

Ultimately, it's liberalism morphing into libertarianism. it boils down to people deciding that central planning and organizing aka huge federal or central government will claim to "help" people but will ultimately do more harm than good which is why our founders made our federal government weak, and gave state governments far more latitude. Even my great grandmother who was the first woman Sheriff in tenessee considered herself a tennesseean American. State used to come first to people. elections were the same way, where local and state elections were much more important to people than national.and presidential elections. corporations are no different. multinational corporations have no love for the tea party or as I call it "the pro-liberty" movement. "too big to fail" means too big to this movement.
It's those corporations in conjunction with governing bodies like the UN, NATO ,EU, that are supporting obamacare. why, because they want the small businesses which still have the biggest piece of the overall pie out of the way. our big corpoations aren't capitalist, they are in the business of "manipulative consumerism." then the government call capitalists-small business owners...the boogeyman. Why is obama going after people making $250K a year? because that is the mean income for someone to have or begin their own business. What segment of our economy has the most small businesses? Doctors offices. There is no "walmart" of the medical care industry. Each doctor works for his/her self or with small group of other doctors. in the tea party movement, people ask, what can you do, what are you good at, now do that within the movement. If you can write, start a blog, if you are a good organizer, start a group, etc. every person do a little, donate what you can.
When Christianity was in it's infancy, there were no clergy in charge of regions, no pope, just small individual groups if people gathering, giving what they could to contribute, and each group picked a group of leaders from within to be organizers of that group. They engaging in willful socialsm on the local level. Peter was never a "pope" despite what you were taught in Catholic theology. Groups of Christans met, and dealt with their problems and needs on their own. The first record of a "church" picking a single leader begins at 120 a.d. and that was "Clement" who is often called the second Pope. The original idea was individualism not clergy issuing all powerful decrees. The reasoning for that, the pro-liberty movement all the way to our founding fathers separating the powers of the Federal Government was prevention of a few making decisions for everyone. That discussion about "project Camelot" is the simple notion that we don't need ever growing government bodies or multinational corporations telling us how to do things.
We can, at the local level, take care of ourselves. The closer we get to a "nanny
state," the more self serving that state will be. This is happening all world at the same time. Now violence is starting to uptick, not from the "pro-liberty" movement but from statists. That teacher who shot up that college, and the pentagon shooting yesterday were statists, as are the recent rash of Muslim terrorists such as the pantie-bomber and the Ft Hood. These people who are behind what we are ideologically opposed to have no problem with resorting to and have ties to, on many levels, to terrorism and gang violence, and if push comes to shove will not hesitate to use such means.

Earlier, I stated that the Ft Hood Bomber died the other day. I am positive I heard it on Fox news the other day but i can find no evidence to confirm this, so I am retracting the statement with an apology to those who read this. I made a mistake here and I am now correcting it. Big thanks to JDS for letting me know I missed that one as I am not out to mislead people here, and I am honestly spread so thin working on multiple state and national midterm election campaigns that I am having a hard time doing all the checking and rechecking that I prefer, but the workload will lighten up fairly soon as there is one special election in a month and I will be able to get back to a more normal posting schedule.
Sent from my Iphone

"Fundamental Transformation of America pt. 3 (the real threat))

How bad did the UN get and what is the greatest threat of our time?

Up until now we have watched the UN devolve from a quasi-decent organization to a statist supporting, anti freedom agency but that is only part of the story. The UN has become the most corrupt, genocidal, terrorism supporting organization.

1950 was a major turning point in the U.N and it's future. The Korean war broke out with little if any attempts from the UN to stop it. The U.S.S.R. withdrew as they were using their own pilots in the air war over Korea.

Under the UN Charter, Hungary was in independent nation free of Soviet control thanks to a revolution. The UN agreed to support Hungarian independence. However, when the Soviets surrounded Budapest and began systematically killing it's residents, the UN did nothing.

While the Hungary incident was happening the US, Britain. France, and Israel took action to retake the Suez Canal which belonged to those nations by treaty, (those were the nations, excluding Israel, who paid for the land and paid to build the canal. In the melee after WW2, Egypt took the canal by force. The U.N strongly condemned actions by the US, Britain and France while ignoring the U.S.S.R. which was openly engaging in genocide in Hungary.

On 10/16/62, a U2 spy plane flying over Cuba (probably not spying though) discovered Soviet made SS4 mid-range (1200 mile) nuclear warhead capable missiles. This put Miami, New Orleans, Dallas and even DC could be wiped off the map at the press of a button. Kennedy, who openly mistrusted the UN, told the American people about the Cuban Missile Crisis on 10/22, and unveiled spy photos to the UN on 10/26, (again taken by a U2 that was NOT spying) The UN did nothing while the world sat on the brink of a Nuclear apocalypse.

After the Cuban Missile crisis, where the US took the high road, the UN called America a "colonialist power".

Israel: The UN, through rewritten history claims to have created Israel but it did nothing to stop Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt from an attempted in invasion in 1948-49. Then in the 1967 war, the Egyptian army massed on Israel's border, started shelling it's cities, at the same time Syria did the same. As if that wasn't enough, Syria accused Israel of invading, and the UN condemned Israel for the non invasion and shooting down 6 syrian Mig 21s over Israeli airspace. Then the UN withdrew it's "UNICEF" peacekeepers and open war broke out.

After ignoring, and then triggering the 6 day war, where they expected Israel to lose, shock set in when the Israelis opened a can of whupass on all of it's neighbors all the way to Yemen. Then the UN decided to play an active role in deciding post war diplomacy (who got what land that Isreal had taken.) The poor decision making in this area led to the "Yom Kippur War." For 20 years, the UN tried to get Israel to withdraw to pre-1967 borders with no success.

The UN moral court.

Fast forward to 1998...The UN while allowing genocide in Rwanda, Bosnia, etc. the UN put forward the "Rome Statute." This statute set up a court system that could reach into any member state and remove their citizens based on a claim lodged by any other member nation. this was the first UN body that could supersede US sovereignty. This was the first time since 1776 that US citizens would have to answer to a power that did not answer to them in any way. This actually defied the original UN Charter from 1946. The wording in the Rome Statute was not done as well as needed, so it was toothless to stop actual genocide but U.S. troops and politicians are easily prosecuted for "war crimes". So Milosevic was able to execute untold thousands of Bosnians, at the same time Saddam Hussein was gassing the Kurds, and the UN did nothing. It took years to prosecute Milosevic but would take days if it were a US General. In his final act as President, Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute. The first thing Bush (43) as President did was notified the UN that our signing of the Rome Statute was null and void.

Now the UN has adopted the most dangerous and evil concept of all: "Moral Equivalence". this concept blurs the line between aggressors and victims even farther. Victims of terrorism or genocide can actually be held equally responsible for actions of aggressors. This adopts the lowest common denominator to to get the biggest consensus possible on whatever issue they take up.

Why is this a threat?

Now we have Barack Hussein Obama as President. What is the president? The President is the commander in chief of the military. He can do as he chooses regarding military assets. He can invade a country without any agreement from Congress for 6 weeks. So how does this affect the "fundamental transformation of America?" While we are busy watching the House and Senate, posting on our blogs about Obama's failures, he could be quietly transferring military assets (planes tanks etc.) to UN control and nobody would know but Obama's inner circle. Imagine the horror that would be brought on the world if this was his real transformation. Our Nuclear Arsenal could wind up in the hands of genocidal maniacs at the UN and we would not even realize it until one day we wake up and the UN is running the show. We know Obama is trying to destroy our monetary system at the same time the E.U. is facing financial collapse. So, if I can recognize this, do you think the folks pulling Obama's strings can't? Also, think about this, Obama is reshuffling troops and gear between Iraq and Afganistan. Given how well this administration blurs the numbers regarding finances, would it be that hard to lose some military hardware out in the desert where there is nothing but dirt such as Afganistan and Iraq?

If this is happening, the last thing you may see is an M1A1 Abrams tank that you helped pay for with UN logos on it crushing you inside your car. Think about this the next time you vote for a "commander in chief" of our military.

Info for this 3 part post came from various internet sources along with the book "Tower of Babble: How the UN has fueled global chaos" (2004) by Dore Gold (UN ambassador to Israel from 1997 to 1999).

"Fundamental Transformation of America pt. 3 (the real threat))

How bad did the UN get and what is the greatest threat of our time?

Up until now we have watched the UN devolve from a quasi-decent organization to a statist supporting, anti freedom agency but that is only part of the story. The UN has become the most corrupt, genocidal, terrorism supporting organization.

1950 was a major turning point in the U.N and it's future. The Korean war broke out with little if any attempts from the UN to stop it. The U.S.S.R. withdrew as they were using their own pilots in the air war over Korea.

Under the UN Charter, Hungary was in independent nation free of Soviet control thanks to a revolution. The UN agreed to support Hungarian independence. However, when the Soviets surrounded Budapest and began systematically killing it's residents, the UN did nothing.

While the Hungary incident was happening the US, Britain. France, and Israel took action to retake the Suez Canal which belonged to those nations by treaty, (those were the nations, excluding Israel, who paid for the land and paid to build the canal. In the melee after WW2, Egypt took the canal by force. The U.N strongly condemned actions by the US, Britain and France while ignoring the U.S.S.R. which was openly engaging in genocide in Hungary.

On 10/16/62, a U2 spy plane flying over Cuba (probably not spying though) discovered Soviet made SS4 mid-range (1200 mile) nuclear warhead capable missiles. This put Miami, New Orleans, Dallas and even DC could be wiped off the map at the press of a button. Kennedy, who openly mistrusted the UN, told the American people about the Cuban Missile Crisis on 10/22, and unveiled spy photos to the UN on 10/26, (again taken by a U2 that was NOT spying) The UN did nothing while the world sat on the brink of a Nuclear apocalypse.

After the Cuban Missile crisis, where the US took the high road, the UN called America a "colonialist power".

Israel: The UN, through rewritten history claims to have created Israel but it did nothing to stop Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt from an attempted in invasion in 1948-49. Then in the 1967 war, the Egyptian army massed on Israel's border, started shelling it's cities, at the same time Syria did the same. As if that wasn't enough, Syria accused Israel of invading, and the UN condemned Israel for the non invasion and shooting down 6 syrian Mig 21s over Israeli airspace. Then the UN withdrew it's "UNICEF" peacekeepers and open war broke out.

After ignoring, and then triggering the 6 day war, where they expected Israel to lose, shock set in when the Israelis opened a can of whupass on all of it's neighbors all the way to Yemen. Then the UN decided to play an active role in deciding post war diplomacy (who got what land that Isreal had taken.) The poor decision making in this area led to the "Yom Kippur War." For 20 years, the UN tried to get Israel to withdraw to pre-1967 borders with no success.

The UN moral court.

Fast forward to 1998...The UN while allowing genocide in Rwanda, Bosnia, etc. the UN put forward the "Rome Statute." This statute set up a court system that could reach into any member state and remove their citizens based on a claim lodged by any other member nation. this was the first UN body that could supersede US sovereignty. This was the first time since 1776 that US citizens would have to answer to a power that did not answer to them in any way. This actually defied the original UN Charter from 1946. The wording in the Rome Statute was not done as well as needed, so it was toothless to stop actual genocide but U.S. troops and politicians are easily prosecuted for "war crimes". So Milosevic was able to execute untold thousands of Bosnians, at the same time Saddam Hussein was gassing the Kurds, and the UN did nothing. It took years to prosecute Milosevic but would take days if it were a US General. In his final act as President, Bill Clinton signed the Rome Statute. The first thing Bush (43) as President did was notified the UN that our signing of the Rome Statute was null and void.

Now the UN has adopted the most dangerous and evil concept of all: "Moral Equivalence". this concept blurs the line between aggressors and victims even farther. Victims of terrorism or genocide can actually be held equally responsible for actions of aggressors. This adopts the lowest common denominator to to get the biggest consensus possible on whatever issue they take up.

Why is this a threat?

Now we have Barack Hussein Obama as President. What is the president? The President is the commander in chief of the military. He can do as he chooses regarding military assets. He can invade a country without any agreement from Congress for 6 weeks. So how does this affect the "fundamental transformation of America?" While we are busy watching the House and Senate, posting on our blogs about Obama's failures, he could be quietly transferring military assets (planes tanks etc.) to UN control and nobody would know but Obama's inner circle. Imagine the horror that would be brought on the world if this was his real transformation. Our Nuclear Arsenal could wind up in the hands of genocidal maniacs at the UN and we would not even realize it until one day we wake up and the UN is running the show. We know Obama is trying to destroy our monetary system at the same time the E.U. is facing financial collapse. So, if I can recognize this, do you think the folks pulling Obama's strings can't? Also, think about this, Obama is reshuffling troops and gear between Iraq and Afganistan. Given how well this administration blurs the numbers regarding finances, would it be that hard to lose some military hardware out in the desert where there is nothing but dirt such as Afganistan and Iraq?

If this is happening, the last thing you may see is an M1A1 Abrams tank that you helped pay for with UN logos on it crushing you inside your car. Think about this the next time you vote for a "commander in chief" of our military.

Info for this 3 part post came from various internet sources along with the book "Tower of Babble: How the UN has fueled global chaos" (2004) by Dore Gold (UN ambassador to Israel from 1997 to 1999).

Transformation of America pt2 (Decay)

Decay:

Among first acts of UN was a "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" act.

Russia and eastern bloc nations abstained

Critics complained that the UN had a "completely western" clarity of purpose despite having members such as India, Ethiopia Egypt and Turkey. (Christians, Muslims Hindus and Jews.

UN went from 51 member states in '48, to 83 in'59 to 132 in '72 to 184 by 1993. One of the before mentioned to loopholes allowed for the addition of authoritarian children of the USSR and China and Fundamentalist Islamist regimes. By the time the this had happened only 75 out of 184 were free democracies, the rest being dictatorships. They were able to vote in rules using the loopholes set by Russia during the founding of the U.N. Charter.

Now we had a U.N where 2/3rds of the member states (now known as the nonaligned union) that were dictatorial in nature that represented less than half the worlds population.

Support for the U.S. eroded from 50.1% that voted with the US in 1995 but by 1999 only 41.8% voted wit the US. The stated reason for this was that U.S interests were divergent with the interests of dictatorial interests of such members.

Early in the lifespan of the UN, authoritarian regimes did not have much power or say so in U.N affairs but by the 90s, the U.N had gerrymandered itself to the point where statists ran the show and the nations not involved in genocide or nuclear proliferation were outvoted.

By 1950, Dean Achenson (Secretary of State under Truman) said the UN charter was a huge mistake, and even President Truman who was among the biggest advocates for the UN had decided it was a big mistake. One big reason for this as the Veto power of the USSR which had become a cold war adversary. The U.N. Security Council was effectively neutralized because any proposal by the USA was vetoed by the USSR and Vice-Versa. It was believed that with the fall of the USSR, that the deadlock in the Security Council would change but that was not the case. (Could it be because all the European Nations on the security council are now socialists?)

Among the first US Presidents to become an open critic of the UN was JFK. This happened over the "Goa incident." In the "Goa Incident", India attacked a small enclave left over form the colonial era that was under the control of Portugal. No attempt was ever made to negotiate i.e. ask Portugal to leave. Instead Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru resorted to armed force. To justify the use of force, India claimed that Goa was Indian land by law. The said law was UN resolution 1514 which advocated decolonization of African and Asian states. The original draft resolution called for the establishment of representative governments in their places but this was blocked by the Statist regimes, so the actual law allowed for the establishment of dictatorial regimes in the place of withdrawing colonies.

Think of all the parts of the world impacted by this resolution from Iraq to N.Korea to Somalia, etc. Exempt from this resolution were the Eastern Bloc soviet satellite states as they were declared sovreign states despite the fact that Moscow had full control of all aspects of the lives of those populations. Had America had leaders with any sort of spine when the U.N. was created, our States would each have a vote just as the Soviet States do. So the "Goa incident" forced the U.N. to redefine the term "aggression" Bottom line: the U.N. basically ignored the whole incident because it was "too involved" in the Nuremburg and Tokyo military trials.

Following the "Goa incident" the Soviets began working on more restrictive definitions of "aggression designed to prevent any western response to the spread of Communism. Meanwhile, third world countries insisted that "aggression" must not be interpreted as "limiting the scope of the right of a people's self determination." By 1974 this rule was expanded to property rights of corporations, meanwhile any country that wanted could initiate "aggression" against it's neighbors as a "right of

self determination"

Next we will discuss the UN support of the nations it created and terrorism the UN allowed and endorsed regarding those states. There is a major point to this regarding the current administration and the promised "fundamental change."

Transformation of America pt2 (Decay)

Decay:

Among first acts of UN was a "Universal Declaration of Human Rights" act.

Russia and eastern bloc nations abstained

Critics complained that the UN had a "completely western" clarity of purpose despite having members such as India, Ethiopia Egypt and Turkey. (Christians, Muslims Hindus and Jews.

UN went from 51 member states in '48, to 83 in'59 to 132 in '72 to 184 by 1993. One of the before mentioned to loopholes allowed for the addition of authoritarian children of the USSR and China and Fundamentalist Islamist regimes. By the time the this had happened only 75 out of 184 were free democracies, the rest being dictatorships. They were able to vote in rules using the loopholes set by Russia during the founding of the U.N. Charter.

Now we had a U.N where 2/3rds of the member states (now known as the nonaligned union) that were dictatorial in nature that represented less than half the worlds population.

Support for the U.S. eroded from 50.1% that voted with the US in 1995 but by 1999 only 41.8% voted wit the US. The stated reason for this was that U.S interests were divergent with the interests of dictatorial interests of such members.

Early in the lifespan of the UN, authoritarian regimes did not have much power or say so in U.N affairs but by the 90s, the U.N had gerrymandered itself to the point where statists ran the show and the nations not involved in genocide or nuclear proliferation were outvoted.

By 1950, Dean Achenson (Secretary of State under Truman) said the UN charter was a huge mistake, and even President Truman who was among the biggest advocates for the UN had decided it was a big mistake. One big reason for this as the Veto power of the USSR which had become a cold war adversary. The U.N. Security Council was effectively neutralized because any proposal by the USA was vetoed by the USSR and Vice-Versa. It was believed that with the fall of the USSR, that the deadlock in the Security Council would change but that was not the case. (Could it be because all the European Nations on the security council are now socialists?)

Among the first US Presidents to become an open critic of the UN was JFK. This happened over the "Goa incident." In the "Goa Incident", India attacked a small enclave left over form the colonial era that was under the control of Portugal. No attempt was ever made to negotiate i.e. ask Portugal to leave. Instead Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru resorted to armed force. To justify the use of force, India claimed that Goa was Indian land by law. The said law was UN resolution 1514 which advocated decolonization of African and Asian states. The original draft resolution called for the establishment of representative governments in their places but this was blocked by the Statist regimes, so the actual law allowed for the establishment of dictatorial regimes in the place of withdrawing colonies.

Think of all the parts of the world impacted by this resolution from Iraq to N.Korea to Somalia, etc. Exempt from this resolution were the Eastern Bloc soviet satellite states as they were declared sovreign states despite the fact that Moscow had full control of all aspects of the lives of those populations. Had America had leaders with any sort of spine when the U.N. was created, our States would each have a vote just as the Soviet States do. So the "Goa incident" forced the U.N. to redefine the term "aggression" Bottom line: the U.N. basically ignored the whole incident because it was "too involved" in the Nuremburg and Tokyo military trials.

Following the "Goa incident" the Soviets began working on more restrictive definitions of "aggression designed to prevent any western response to the spread of Communism. Meanwhile, third world countries insisted that "aggression" must not be interpreted as "limiting the scope of the right of a people's self determination." By 1974 this rule was expanded to property rights of corporations, meanwhile any country that wanted could initiate "aggression" against it's neighbors as a "right of

self determination"

Next we will discuss the UN support of the nations it created and terrorism the UN allowed and endorsed regarding those states. There is a major point to this regarding the current administration and the promised "fundamental change."

The Invisible Transformation of America Pt1.

In 1990, President GHW BUSH called for a new world order. See it

here:http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8259800846851144110#

The first piece of the puzzle was a plan known as NAFTA. But to explain this, I must start at the beginning, and by the end, I will tell you how Obama IS transforming America before our eyes without us seeing it.

Early History:

After the Napoleonic wars, the Europeans started an international coaliton known as the the "Concert of Europe" aka the society, the COE was planned to prevent war in Europe. It worked for a time allowing european nations to build up huge stashes of arms that got used (many for the fist time in warfare) during WW1.

The League of Nations:
The League of (european) Nations was planned to prevent another WW1. But the real problem was allowing countries like Germany, Japan, and Italy to arm themselves once again. This was allowed to happen while other nations let them often claiming that doing do would promote peace. This mistake led to so many more, from letting The USSR take over half of Europe, forcing billions if not more to live under the same tyranny that we were wasting our heroic solders lives fighting to end to rampant socialism in Europe and so much more. Oddly much of this happened this way because FDR believed that Stalin's rule would be more just than Churchill's. Man crush??? You tell me. An even bigger mistake was the formation of the UN. While it didn't start this way, it is now the source of anti-western values,that has spread global chaos faster

than any group in history. UN membership has quickly changed from all western democracies to dictatorships terror sponsors and sworn enemies of the nation that pays for it to exist, and gives it a place to gather.

Ever get the feeling that there is something sinister going on behind all the stupidity at the white house? I believe that we are being sold the notion that the U.N is a weak toothless organization while it is secretly setting itself up for a massive power grab. There have been snippets in the news about the UN wanting to control how we raise our children for example. Now I will lay down facts about the U.N. and let you decide what you think.

The U.N: Part 1 early mistakes (cracks in the U.N. charter foundation)

Those who crafted the UN draft began the process before war. Roosevelt was far closer to Stalin in the respect of ideology than Churchill who he considered an imperialist with an agenda of growing his empire. The first time the term "united nations" referring to the allies fighting Nazi Germany and Japan was used by FDR in 1941 or 1942. Churchill was very upset by this as he wanted the alliance against Germany and Japan to be called the "United Allies." Churchill wanted the U.N to be an alliance of Democratic nations. Unfortunately, Roosevelt picked those who drafted the charter before he died. Even FDR understood that the UN would never create a "world utopia". However, his plan was to have America, Britain, China, and Russia as the enforcers of peace around the world. (what we now call the security council) However, others wanted an organization that any country could join. An American commentator named Lippmann agreed with FDR that if the entire world ran the UN, who was to decide what is in the world's best interest? What common interest would such countries have and would the countries have world interest at heart. basically, Lippmann had foreseen everything wrong with the UN years early by warning that the victorious powers must not put world peace in the hands of a body of government that had just formed.

Stalins Impact:

The architects that Roosevelt had chosen shared FDR's almost naive view of Stalin. As the war against Nazi Germany came to an end, the U.S.S.R., still considered an ally, used it's alliance with the USA and Great Britain to sneak in legislation in the U.N. charter calling for "closer relations" with eastern Europe that it liberated from Hitler. Such closer relations were only the beginning. There were many tiny loopholes in that founding document allowing Members to commit genocide to any political opponents. Those little cracks in the foundation created what we called the "Iron Curtain. Those cracks also grew and spread as this is just the beginning of the story.

The Invisible Transformation of America Pt1.

In 1990, President GHW BUSH called for a new world order. See it

here:http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8259800846851144110#

The first piece of the puzzle was a plan known as NAFTA. But to explain this, I must start at the beginning, and by the end, I will tell you how Obama IS transforming America before our eyes without us seeing it.

Early History:

After the Napoleonic wars, the Europeans started an international coaliton known as the the "Concert of Europe" aka the society, the COE was planned to prevent war in Europe. It worked for a time allowing european nations to build up huge stashes of arms that got used (many for the fist time in warfare) during WW1.

The League of Nations:
The League of (european) Nations was planned to prevent another WW1. But the real problem was allowing countries like Germany, Japan, and Italy to arm themselves once again. This was allowed to happen while other nations let them often claiming that doing do would promote peace. This mistake led to so many more, from letting The USSR take over half of Europe, forcing billions if not more to live under the same tyranny that we were wasting our heroic solders lives fighting to end to rampant socialism in Europe and so much more. Oddly much of this happened this way because FDR believed that Stalin's rule would be more just than Churchill's. Man crush??? You tell me. An even bigger mistake was the formation of the UN. While it didn't start this way, it is now the source of anti-western values,that has spread global chaos faster

than any group in history. UN membership has quickly changed from all western democracies to dictatorships terror sponsors and sworn enemies of the nation that pays for it to exist, and gives it a place to gather.

Ever get the feeling that there is something sinister going on behind all the stupidity at the white house? I believe that we are being sold the notion that the U.N is a weak toothless organization while it is secretly setting itself up for a massive power grab. There have been snippets in the news about the UN wanting to control how we raise our children for example. Now I will lay down facts about the U.N. and let you decide what you think.

The U.N: Part 1 early mistakes (cracks in the U.N. charter foundation)

Those who crafted the UN draft began the process before war. Roosevelt was far closer to Stalin in the respect of ideology than Churchill who he considered an imperialist with an agenda of growing his empire. The first time the term "united nations" referring to the allies fighting Nazi Germany and Japan was used by FDR in 1941 or 1942. Churchill was very upset by this as he wanted the alliance against Germany and Japan to be called the "United Allies." Churchill wanted the U.N to be an alliance of Democratic nations. Unfortunately, Roosevelt picked those who drafted the charter before he died. Even FDR understood that the UN would never create a "world utopia". However, his plan was to have America, Britain, China, and Russia as the enforcers of peace around the world. (what we now call the security council) However, others wanted an organization that any country could join. An American commentator named Lippmann agreed with FDR that if the entire world ran the UN, who was to decide what is in the world's best interest? What common interest would such countries have and would the countries have world interest at heart. basically, Lippmann had foreseen everything wrong with the UN years early by warning that the victorious powers must not put world peace in the hands of a body of government that had just formed.

Stalins Impact:

The architects that Roosevelt had chosen shared FDR's almost naive view of Stalin. As the war against Nazi Germany came to an end, the U.S.S.R., still considered an ally, used it's alliance with the USA and Great Britain to sneak in legislation in the U.N. charter calling for "closer relations" with eastern Europe that it liberated from Hitler. Such closer relations were only the beginning. There were many tiny loopholes in that founding document allowing Members to commit genocide to any political opponents. Those little cracks in the foundation created what we called the "Iron Curtain. Those cracks also grew and spread as this is just the beginning of the story.