What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Windmills & Conspiracies


Sep 23, 2010
Reaction score
Over the years, liberals attacked me for repeatedly writing messages in defense of America’s sovereignty; i.e., the very real danger of losing sovereignty to global government. I posted, and commented on, every article, every quotation, every detail I could find in order to show that powerful forces were at work trying to abolish America’s independence. I don’t know how many times I pointed out that sovereignty did not belong to the New World Order crowd; hence, it is not their’s to give away. How much of a dent I made is impossible to know. I tell myself I alerted a few who were previously unaware of the insidious goal the most treacherous group of people in the world are driving towards. My efforts were rewarded in one sense.

Liberal opponents on previous message boards never defended a one government world with any substantiative arguments if at all; they simply accused me of tilting at windmills. More recently, conspiracy theories replaced windmills.

Agenda 21's environmental claptrap is neither windmill nor conspiracy theory. Agenda 21 is a relatively new prong in the attack on independent nations. Agenda 21 first saw the light of day in 1992. There have been additions and modifications since 1992.

Note that Agenda 21 was born when all of those displaced Communists flocked to environmental movement after the Soviet Union imploded.

A number of conservatives have published articles chronicling the inherent dangers in Agenda 21. For those who are not familiar with Agenda 21, three pieces by Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh make a good start in learning just how destructive it is:

Happily, the Republican party’s platform includes this:

We strongly reject the U.N. Agenda 21 as erosive of American sovereignty.

More good news : Alabama became the first state to prohibit government participation in Agenda 21. One would think that every state would follow Alabama. No such luck. Arizona’s legislature would not pass a similar bill.

In any event, Agenda 21 is but one phase of the incremental attack on America’s sovereignty:

“The New World Order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down…but in the end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault.” CFR member Richard Gardner, writing in the April l974 issue of the CFR’s journal, Foreign Affairs.

Incremental betrayal was never a secret. Fortunately, eroding America’s independence piece by piece was never separated from this essential requirement: Keep the number of average Americans aware of the threat to an absolute minimum. I said fortunately because the Internet changed everything.

Limiting the number of informed Americans opposing global government to a small handful was not a problem when the ruling class’ media monopoly and the Fairness Doctrine controlled the dissemination of information.

Today, opposition to a one government world is becoming a problem for the New World Order crowd as more and more Americans see and understand what quislings are up to. I believe the tipping point is close at hand. Once enough well-informed Americans become engaged the chance of establishing a global government by incremental bites decreases dramatically.

Organizations and individuals cited in the linked article are not blind. They know they are losing ground because of the Internet. That is why they must throw caution to the wind and go all-out in their efforts to abolish national sovereignty before the aforementioned tipping point is reached. Implementing Agenda 21 is an important part of the push for global government.

I want to remind everyone there are two forces driving towards a one government world. Socialists/Communists and wealthy ruling classes in every country. In every instance their ultimate goal is the same —— totalitarian government. Whenever the forces for totalitarian government confront each other they form an alliance. That makes stopping them doubly difficult.

Experience taught me that when I concentrated on exposing wealthy traitors for what they are I was painted a Socialist/Communist. Attacking Socialists exclusively immediately labeled me an uncaring stooge for the rich. Whenever I advocated defending individual liberties and the Constitution I found myself accused of being a pseudo-patriot and warmonger.


This quote from Henry Kissinger is a philosophical roadmap to global government:

Because very powerful people are members of this organization, they wield significant influence on American government policies. Henry Kissinger, a member of the CFR, said this: “Today Americans 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 there was 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 with world leaders 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 their world government.”

Everything I know about Kissinger was gathered from his public persona, things he said, his television appearances that I saw, things said about him. Based on those shadows he is ambiguous at best. His Harvard education and his long association with that institution coupled with his Nobel Peace Prize makes everything he says suspect. I’m sure intellectuals love him. My average-joe opinion is that he is a one world government stooge who dearly wants to be one of the people he serves.

Long before Agenda 21

Prior to WWI, ruling classes never hesitated when it came to sending others out to die in foreign wars. Until the invention of flying machines and poison gas being dropped from those planes ruling classes had little fear of being killed by mistake in a war they started even if their country lost the war. Then, as now, ruling classes protect their own kind.

Being killed by mistake, especially after the invention of the atomic bomb, suddenly convinced totalitarians of every stripe that war might blow them to a nuclear hell along with everyone else. If nuclear war scared the hell out of them, just imagine what chemical and biological WMD is doing to them? My point: Kissinger has it backwards:

“. . . individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well being granted to them by their world government.”

It is so-called world leaders who are pleading with free people to abandon their freedoms in order to protect ruling classes.

In short: Liberty is worth dying for, but apparently Kissinger and his pals are not willing to die for a one government world; hence, the necessary con job. The folks who populate every powerful global government organization know that when the rubber meets the road most individuals will fight and die for their own liberties, while not too many will risk their lives for the likes of Kissinger & Friends.

Kissinger is also wrong about this:

“The one thing every man fears is the unknown.”

Which unknown is Kissinger talking about in the context of global government? Death? Everybody knows they are going to die.

The method of dying?—— possibly —— fear of nuclear war has certainly been an effective scare tactic. The question should be: Which one is worse, being beheaded by a crazed Muslim fanatic, or dying instantly in a nuclear holocaust? Dead is dead no matter how you get there.

Fear of the next life? That fear only affects guilt-laden sinners and religious true believers regardless of Hamlet’s generalization:

But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered country from whose bourn
No traveler returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?

Suffering before dying? There is something to that fear when it is applied to the tender mercies the New World Order crowd has planned for everyone else. The fear of being enslaved by a global ruling class amounts to long-term suffering for the slaves, and is a greater fear for most people than is fear of Hamlet’s undiscovered country.
One does not have to be a political genius to know that there is not a bit of difference between being enslaved by a global government and being enslaved by a national government.

I can only hope that those who read this message also read the linked article. I’ll close with this excerpt:

If Americans don’t wake up pretty damn soon, the merging of our unique water droplet with the ocean of planet-wide evil will have taken place and the final corruption of the 234-year experiment with human good, freedom, creativity and generosity will have been absorbed into the mediocrity and mindlessness of the collective, a collective for the masses created and manipulated by men of power, money and industry that inhabit the halls of centralized government. The 5,000-year dream of world domination will have become a reality and American freedom, liberty and sovereignty will be redacted from the history books so that no other human will be tempted to challenge ..... the One World Order.

The Council on Foreign Relations
Will American Sovereignty Withstand the Onslaught of Global Government Forces?
By Ron Ewart Monday, December 6, 2010

Will American Sovereignty Withstand the Onslaught of Global Government Forces?


Gold Member
Jul 5, 2011
Reaction score
I guarantee no one has attacked you for defending America’s sovereignty.


Sep 23, 2010
Reaction score
I guarantee no one has attacked you for defending America’s sovereignty.

To Politico: You’d be surprised at how many touchy-feely fools would abandon America’s sovereignty. I cannot count how many of those fools attacked me personally in the 12 years I’ve been posting messages.

Well-known Americans along with members of America’s governing class come right out and say sovereignty should be replaced with a global government. The late Walter Cronkite said this at the United Nations:

. . . 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.

A speech by Walter Cronkite -
United Nations, national sovereignty and the future of the world

United Nations, national sovereingty and the future of the world - Walter Cronkite - a speech on UN

The old Socialist never said exactly how much sovereignty Americans had to yield up. I always thought Cronkite believed that women would still be virgins if they only did it once. Unfortunately, sovereignty is like virginity; once it’s lost, it’s gone forever.

Nor did Cronkite ask my permission to give my piece of sovereignty to the United Nations. And isn’t it funny that Socialists love collectivism except when it is collective ownership of national sovereignty.

Cronkite’s pal, Hillary Clinton, praised Uncle Walter for telling it “The way it could be.”

Those people don’t read message boards, but do you actually believe they are alone in their views? Fame alone guarantees a following.

My biggest frustration has been talking to halfwits who defend environmental crapola without realizing they are being suckered into handing their independence to a global government. Worse still are the idiots who believe famous creatures like the Clintons because they talk about human Rights at the same time they’re stealing the God-given Rights Americans always enjoyed. Not once did I ever hear a one of them say they wanted to increase Rights for ALL Americans. Everything they do say is a variation of the crap Cronkite spouted for decades.
Last edited:


Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Jun 9, 2011
Reaction score
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
The UN couldn't organize a frog jumping contest. They've literally had attendees PILLAGE the cafeteria.

The "Oil for Food" fiasco was a death-blow for their aspirations of being "better" than your average govt.

I'll admit there's a danger here. That most of the world would agree to create a "gun free" planet. Or having the rich give up their excess income. But the idea that we're BOUND by anything created by these clowns is not in evidence.

Seems to me you'll have a choice. Elect representatives that would RESCIND onerous "global" treaties, or elect representatives that LOVE to continue to usurp national sovereignty..

No one officially signed the comical "UN Bill of Human Rights" declaration.. It's just a toothless tiger. Ummm. More like a toothless mole..

USMB Server Goals

Total amount

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List