From: [Sender’s name deleted]
Sent:
To: [Forwarded to Grotheer@adventistlaymen.com]
Subject: Fw: A scary man
This report was told to me a couple of weeks or so ago. Now it is circulating thru wider sources. If you know about some of the prominent neocons ( Ann Coulter, et al.), then you know the real agenda behind this movement disguised as 'political conservatism'. Conservatism, yes. RELIGIOUS conservatism within the most powerful religious power block. Some more of her ( Coulter's) spicy 'christian' remarks are included herein. This report confirms not a few statements made 100 years ago or more about where things were/are headed. Today it is here. Tomorrow,,,you ' 'who are in the light' know what the 'rest of the story' is that is to be played out.
I edited out some of the x-rated words. It certainly looks like history is out of the 'holding pattern' and committed to touchdown with the plethora of ''apocalyptica ' looming up.
This particular report is just 'unum' out of ' y pluribus' other 'timely' evidences of incipient
demise with pending convulsions. I personally feel sorry for the man. He doesn't see the bigger picture, only the opinions and 'values' of the privileged that he was raised with.
Being president is no longer the 'fun thing' it was 6 years ago. Scripture says 'pray' for your leaders- we do not stand in their shoes. And maybe read 1 Kings 12:. Any similarities here?
*************************************
Subject: A scary man
It’s
About A
Bush Remark Reiterates Arrogant Globalist/Neocon
"Crazies" Insane Lust For New World Order Prevalence And Power
Steve Watson | December 12 2005
“Last month, Republican Congressional leaders filed into the Oval Office to
meet with President George W. Bush and talk about renewing the controversial
USA Patriot Act,” writes Doug
Thompson for Capitol Hill Blue. “GOP leaders told Bush that his
hardcore push to renew the more onerous provisions of the act could further
alienate conservatives still mad at the President from his botched attempt to
nominate White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the
Supreme Court.” Thompson reports the following exchange:
“I don’t give a g..damn,” Bush retorted. “I’m the President and the Commander-in-Chief. Do it
my way.”
“Mr. President,” one aide in the meeting said. “There
is a valid case that the provisions in this law undermine the Constitution.”
“Stop throwing the Constitution in my face,”
Bush screamed back. “It’s just a g..damned piece of paper!”
“I’ve talked to three people present for the meeting
that day and they all confirm that the President of the United States called
the Constitution ‘a goddamned piece of paper.’” Thompson comments
This is just the latest remark in a long history of arrogant Neocon speak to highlight the fact that they have no
respect for
For the President of the United States to verbally wipe the floor with the Constitution and curse it in the way Bush has and it go virtually unreported serves as an indication of the threat America is facing today from an Elite power structure that cares nothing for the country it has usurped and is hell bent on centralizing power globally and undermining the principles America was founded on.
The
The framers of the U.S. Constitution were notably cognizant of what they perceived as a danger of majority rule in oppressing freedom of the individual or "Tyranny of the majority". For example, James Madison, in Federalist Paper No. 10 advocates a republic over a democracy precisely to protect the individual from the majority. However, at the same time, the framers carefully created democratic institutions and major open society reforms within the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. They kept what they believed were the best elements of democracy, but mitigated by a balance of power and a layered federal structure.
So the word "democracy" refers solely to direct democracy, whilst a representative democracy where representatives of the people govern in accordance with a constitution is a Republic.
The Neocons have adopted the word Democracy and
attached their world view to it. This as we have previously exposed is a Straussian world view - after Leo Strauss, who
arrived in the
Strauss was a German Jewish political philosopher whose views were elitist, amoral and hostile to representative democratic government. Strauss, as revealed in a major New Yorker article by legendary investigative reporter Seymour Hersh, believed the world to be a place where "isolated liberal democracies live in constant danger from hostile elements abroad", and where policy advisers may have to deceive their own publics and even their rulers in order to "protect" their countries.
Shadia Drury, author of 1999's Leo Strauss and the American Right, commented that Hersh was correct on the second point but wrong on the first, insisting that "Strauss was neither a liberal nor a democrat." She goes on to comment that "Perpetual deception of the citizens by those in power is critical because they need to be led, and they need strong rulers to tell them what's good for them."
Like Plato, Strauss taught that within societies, "some are fit to lead, and others to be led", according to Drury. But, unlike Plato, who believed that leaders had to be people with such high moral standards that they could resist the temptations of power, Strauss thought that "those who are fit to rule are those who realize there is no morality and that there is only one natural right, the right of the superior to rule over the inferior".
We have previously exposed how many major players in the Bush Administration and leading Neoconservative think tanks are followers of Strauss. Former Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Weekly Standard chief editor William Kristol, His father Irving, and Gary Schmitt, founder, chairman and director of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC). Also on the books of PNAC, prior to the 2000 election were Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush and Donald Rumsfeld as well as former defense Policy Board chairman Richard Perle. Other luminaries included Jon Bolton, now Ambassador to the UN and Scooter Libby, soon to be in Prison.
Also present was the darling of many Western academic institutions Francis
Fukuyama who's "End
of History" antics had gained him loving praise from the Straussian Neocons and got him
into the State Department.
The PNAC way of thinking has been implemented almost to the book since 9/11.
Their flagship document, Rebuilding America's Defenses noted that in order to
go ahead with their strategy their would have to be
some kind of pivotal event that would unite the American people behind the
Government. This was referred to as "a new
Leo Strauss was also a strong believer in the "Realism" form of International Relations made prominent by Thomas Hobbes. Like Hobbes, he thought that human nature was intrinsically aggressive and could be restrained only through a State formed via a powerful military industrial complex . "Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed," he once wrote. "Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united - and they can only be united against other people."
"Strauss thinks that a political order can be stable only if it is united by an external threat," Drury wrote in her book. "Following Machiavelli, he maintains that if no external threat exists, then one has to be manufactured. This is what Henry Kissinger was referring to in that often quoted statement he made about creating external future threats in order to guard the world order he wishes to see become more prevalent and powerful, the system we often refer to as the "New World Order". Thus for the Neocons, when the Soviet Empire weakened and a Unipolar world order was emerging, a new threat had to be there lurking to allow them to further their Straussian vision.
"In Strauss' view, you have to fight all the time [to survive]," said Drury. "In that respect, it's very Spartan. Peace leads to decadence. Perpetual war, not perpetual peace, is what Straussians believe in." Such views naturally lead to an "aggressive, belligerent foreign policy", she added.
The
This is how "crazy" the Neoconservative view is. It is a deeply pessimistic world view and they are constantly trying to make it a reality. They actually really believe that life on this planet is simply about death, destruction and gaining total Global Power over any other way of existence. In the early years of the Reagan Administration, before the term Neocon was even coined these people were emerging. Witness Reagan Pentagon adviser and former State Department and National Security Council man Michael Ledeen, who is quoted as saying : "Americans believe that peace is normal, but that's not true. Life isn't like that. Peace is abnormal."
In an influential essay in the National Review Online he asserts, "Creative destruction is our middle name. We do it automatically ... it is time once again to export the democratic revolution."
All you have to do to predict where things are headed next is read the
documents and policy reports that they put out. You don't even have to read
into them if you don't want to. For example Michael Ledeen's
last book was entitled Time to Focus on
These people are indeed "** crazy". They can see no other future for this planet than continual total complete and unequivocal war and destruction in the name of "security" for their own twisted beliefs and way of existence. The remarkable thing is that they think they are the good guys and everyone else is evil.
"We're going to get criticized for being an imperial power anyway, so you might as well make sure that the good guys win." - Bill Kristol.
Now whether there are two warring factions of the New World Order in the 21st Century is something to be considered. Many believe that the Anglo-American Neocon Globalist vision differs from the older European vision for a new world order which is one of more incremental steps and an evolving globe of Nations under the control of a world government. This is sometimes referred to rather loosely in many cases as Neo-Liberalism.
In any case both visions are thinking beyond
This becomes even more evident when you research deeper into the roots of Neoconservatives like Irving Kristol and James Burnham who were both strong admirers of Leon Trotsky. The Internationalist movement under Trotsky is often thought to be at the opposite end of the political scale to Neoconservativism, but when you expose the left/right political scale as a falsity, a cover for a higher elite level of globalism, the walls come crumbling down.
The Trotsky / Neocon links are further exposed in a 2003 National Post article entitled Trotsky's ghost wandering the White House. There is no doubt that the links exist, and furthermore they highlight the false left right paradigm by showing that so called Trotskyites can just as easily switch to Neoconservativism should the moment in world politics be right. They will use whichever end of the scale they believe is more likely to help them advance their quest for power.
As quoted in the afore mentioned article, Researcher Christopher Phelps rightly points out, that the circuitous route from Trotsky to Bush is "more a matter of rupture and abandonment of the left than continuity."
Of course, the rise of the Neocon cabal and the trashing of the constitution has not come without overarching help along the way from a gigantic propaganda machine. There has arisen a faction of media Neocons who are now also knowingly or unknowingly following the Straussian philosophical vision.
The Murdoch empire is a nice little Goebbels factory that attempts to churn out the same rhetoric as the Neocons until the general public actually believe it to be reality. Fox "News" is not actually news, it is Opinion on the world. This New York Times Article hits the nail on the head when writer Ron Suskind relates an encounter he had with a senior Bush aide in 2004:
The aide said that guys like me were "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality - judiciously, as you will - we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."
Creating false realities that fit the power structure's preconceived agenda is completely Straussian. The bad news for us is it's also completely Orwellian. In Nineteen Eighty Four George Orwell warned us of where this would lead if we allowed it to happen - and we know it's not pretty.
As Bush has been told (and has repeated) "You Have To Keep Repeating Things To Catapult The Propaganda" In other words, if you throw enough BS, some of it is going to stick, and that's what Mr Murdooch's job is.
Of course there are also the Murdoch underlings and wannabe's who are the useful Neocon mouthpieces.
Limbaugh, Hannity and O'reilly
like to tell people to shut up and accept that torture is no big deal and war
based on lies is acceptable if it is for the good of
Bill Kristol gets to go on Fox and tell us what's really going on everyday, whilst Ann Coulter likes to call For North Korea To Be "Nuked For Fun,".
And then you have Clear Channel who own the voting machines and put up giant Billboards telling us that George W Bush is "OUR LEADER".
But after all, what's the big deal about Bush trashing the Constitution? Fox News didn't report it, that means it didn't happen, doesn't it?
Besides, I thought that if you defend the Constitution, you were now considered a terrorist? That's what this FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force brochure says anyway. Defenders of the US Constitution and the common law from which it grew are being classified on the same level as Nazis and the KKK.
Therefore George Bush was right to say “It’s just a goddamned piece of paper!”, otherwise he's a terrorist.
INFOWARS: BECAUSE THERE'S A WAR ON FOR YOUR