The Sinister Plan or Evil Agenda


I have often alluded to the idea, and I am sure you have probably picked up on the idea that perhaps the government and the parties involved have some kind of sinister plan in motion. Not one party or the other, but both. Perhaps they are attempting to control the masses for some bigger agenda, be it for their own power, wealth, etc. Again, you will probably not like what you read in this article, but it is essential for you to at least have a vague understanding of what you are up against.

Ultimately, our objective is to welcome the Soviet Union back into the world order. Perhaps the world order of the future will truly be a family of nations.

President George Bush Texas A&M University 1989

It is not a stretch to say that power is crucial if you want to control. That seems to be a rather basic concept. However, YOU need to understand that for your power to be seized, you have to first be willing to give it up. Sure, power can sometimes be beaten out of you, but it can also be starved out of you, guilted out of you, or just stolen because you simply did not know what you had in the first place.

The depression was the calculated ‘shearing’ of the public by the World Money powers, triggered by the planned sudden shortage of supply of call money in the New York money market . . . . The One World Government leaders and their ever close bankers have now acquired full control of the money and credit machinery of the US via the creation of the privately-owned Federal Reserve Bank.

Curtis Dall, FDR’s son-in-law as quoted in his book, My Exploited Father-in-Law

Some probably believe that a global government or a global currency is a great idea and that perhaps FINALLY, the statist wars could stop, and we could finally get along and be happy as a species. The view of such a world indeed seems appealing. On the other hand, I see no such evidence in the entirety of the planet or the natural world that suggests that such a world could ever exist.

Dogs fight. Kids fight. Plants fight. Bacteria fights. There appears to be this continual battle in every living aspect of life. Perhaps it is for balance. In the case of viruses, we know it is for dominance. We see numerous religions and political philosophies in our own country that always fight.

Can someone explain how a global government would solve this? Perhaps it is because the work would be forced. Perhaps the belief systems would be forced. Perhaps those who go against the grain would be put down.

The biggest problem with a global anything would be that someone or some group would control it, which would leave the people of such a world subservient to their demands. The power would be consolidated, and it would not include even a hint of a democratic model, let alone the desired republican model. Once again, I am not speaking of the party system; I am referring to the government model.

You would be amazed at how many people have been working towards this global government, though. Our own elected representatives, our education systems, and even the mainstream media have been indoctrinating the masses for some time.

Take Walter Cronkite, for example. He was an American broadcast journalist, best known as an anchorman for the CBS Evening News for 19 years. His reign on television was when there was no such thing as the internet or alternate media sources. Essentially, he was the information. The scary part for me is when considering his politics and his drive. Consider the ramifications of the following:

In 1999, he appeared at the United Nations to accept the Norman Cousins Global Governance Award from the World Federalists Association. He told those assembled, “It seems to many of us that if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic world conflict we must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government patterned after our own government with a legislature, executive and judiciary, and police to enforce its international laws and keep the peace. To do that, of course, we Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty. That would be a bitter pill. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith in the new order.

Cronkite went on to say that “Pat Robertson has written in a book a few years ago that we should have a world government, but only when the Messiah arrives. He wrote, literally, any attempt to achieve world order before that time must be the work of the devil. Well, join me. I’m glad to sit here at the right hand of Satan.

His rhetoric just got worse. In an interview with the BBC, Cronkite described how this New World Order would take place. “I wouldn’t give up on the U.N. yet, I think we are realizing that we are going to have to have an international rule of law. We need not only an executive to make international law, but we need the military forces to enforce that law and the judicial system to bring the criminals to justice before they have the opportunity to build military forces that use these horrid weapons that rogue nations and movements can get hold of—germs and atomic weapons.

It gets even worse, though. “American people are going to begin to realize they are going to have to yield some sovereignty to an international body to enforce world law, and I think that’s going to come to other people as well,” he said. “It’s a fair distance to get there, but we are not ever going to get there unless we keep trying to push ourselves onto the road.

This is a man that the people were forced to trust for their news and information, a man who appears to champion a military dictatorship where people are forced to give up their supreme power and authority. What ideas slipped through during his broadcasts?

Unfortunately, it is not just Cronkite who feels this way. Before the World Federalist Association, then First Lady Hillary Clinton said the following:

Good Evening and Congratulations  Walter, on receiving the World Federalists Associations Global Governance Award, for more than a generation in America, it wasn’t the news until Walter Cronkite told us it was the news. Every night at six o’clock, we welcomed you into our living rooms and listened as you explained the complex events of the day, whether it was the space race or the Vietnam  War,  Presidential Elections or Peace  Treaties, you were there . . . telling us in simple, yet riveting pros . . . what was happening. You became a trusted member of my family and the families across America. For decades you told us, the way it is . . . but tonight we honor you for fighting for the way it could be. We honor you for lending your voice to the cause of human rights around the world and for your lifelong commitment to international human rights law. From your reporting on the Nuremberg Trials to your work with WFA Campaign to end genocide, you have stirred our conscious, and challenged all of us, to live closer to the words of the universal declaration of human rights. All humans beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. So thank you, Walter.

Hillary Clinton

Aside from the fact that this is entirely creepy and that most Americans simply have no clue that people from media and government continue to talk about global government, global currencies, etc., it becomes unbelievably scary when we consider that it is not merely coming from the left and state ran media. Still, it also comes from the party that sells itself as the champion of Constitutional liberties.

The world can, therefore, seize the opportunity to fulfill the long-held promise of a New World Order where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind.” George Herbert Walker Bush

Friends, I could dedicate an entire book to the quotes surrounding the desire and plans to establish a global government and global currency. However, even in the brief sampling that I have provided, you can clearly see that these plans are put in place and desired by both the Republicans and the Democrats. Remember the five constants.

This is why there is a difference between a conservative and a Republican or a Democrat vs. Liberal. For clarity, you can, in fact, be conservative without being a Republican. You can be a liberal without being a Democrat. And you can love your Constitution being either conservative or liberal. That being said, I am not entirely sure you can truly love your Constitution being Democrat or Republican, considering the false choice paradigm that comes with either. Progressives . . . I am pretty sure they are the devil.

Let me make clear the premise of this article. Power is crucial to those who want to control. Your power is inherent, but it can be taken away if you do not realize you have it or if you decide to trade it. The ultimate goal of those seeking the power you hold, have an absolutely moronic plan that will utterly fail because it goes against the laws of what nature intended. We know that Socialism and Communism will fail because they, too, go against what nature intended.

Today, America would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing every man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government.

Henry Kissinger, Bilderberger Conference, Evians, France, 1991 (Tyson, 2011).

Remember, regardless of whether or not you want to see the truth about the world around you is quite irrelevant. Reality is still reality, and the result is still the same. However, considering the overt push for something we know is both corrupt and doomed to fail, I cannot help but believe that a sinister plan or agenda is in play.

Sovereignty is a good thing. Free Market Capitalism is a good thing. It is not the principles that are flawed; it is the unchecked corruption that is bad. Corruption gets bad when those in power allow such events to occur. Those in power are allowed these slides when the people have no recourse for their leaders’ actions.

Mancur Olson, Professor of Economics at the University of Maryland, College Park, wrote a book called Power and Prosperity. In this book, he demonstrated that communist countries are at a much greater risk for corruption than are democratic societies with a free market (Olson, 2002). It then comes as no surprise that Xi Jinping, the current paramount leader of China, pointed out that corruption is one of the main concerns surrounding his party’s success.

As stated earlier in previous articles, this may be why even Putin has warned against such systems of government. Do we not heed the warnings from those who have been there when the evidence we collect and observe provides us with the same conclusions?

In my humble opinion, it is not a new system that is needed. Instead, the answer lies in providing a level of fear for those in power who continue to allow corruption and manipulations to occur in the first place.

Ironically enough, and still very much on the topic, perhaps we should reflect on some of the most profound words ever used to debate socialism. Published in 1914, John Basil Barnhill said, “Where the people fear the government you have tyranny. Where the government fears the people you have liberty” (Barnhill- Tichenor Debate on Socialism, 1914).

Those are some profound words. Words so profound and so true that today these words are often attributed to Thomas Jefferson, Samuel Adams, or even Thomas Paine. There you have it yet again, another example of how the simplest answer is probably the right one.

But everything is not so simple. I still have questions. For example, who is on what side, and what side is the right one? It seems our choices are either big government or big government. Neither of those seems appealing. Perhaps it’s time to make the Constitution an option (and priority) again.