CoreIssue
Well-Known Member
The UN is joke. We should get out.
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
That website is not credible.
No information on who owns. No information on who runs it. No information on their material sources.
It's one of hundreds of conspiracy websites that do not agree with each other.
EVERY nation has blood on its hands--some more than others. The U.S. has less than nearly all. Look at all the tens of millions who were killed by their own Marxist governments. Mao--70,000,000; Stalin---20,000,000 (the majority of whom were Christians); Pol Pot of Cambodia, N. Korea; Cuba and now Venezuela under Maduro.
Not to forget the genocides in Africa and the Balkans, which could have easily been stopped, but no one in the so-called United Nations had any will to do so. To some degree, the Native populations of America were also subjected to genocide. And now we have Radical Islamists all over the world ready, willing, and able to kill innocents throughout the Western world, while the stupid politicians can't seem to see this as a serious issue.
It's more of a rude awakening to me because I was brainwashed to believe that we were the good guys. Pledge Allegiance to the flag and all that. Then when I really began to look at the truth, I saw that we're not the good guys. I recall reading about all the Vietnamese women who were raped by American soldiers. I read of one particularly heinous thing American soldiers did to the women. The blinders came off - bit by bit. I read what America did to Guatemala - a big-wig in the Bush administration wanted to make $$$ and bought land in Guatemala and put all the local Guatemalan farmers out of business. That's why many there are moving to America. It's terrible what has been done. I don't know how those people live with themselves. Correction; I do know: the have a 'seared' conscience.
We used to be a nation more-or-less dominated by Christians--or at least, the Christian ethos. The unbelieving super-wealthy (remember, Jesus said that it was very difficult for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God) have always tried to control the nation, to their benefit. Through intermediaries, they employed bribery, blackmail, economic manipulation, lies, smears, canny persuasion and thuggery of one sort or another, to attempt and finally succeed in putting a bit in the mouth of the powerful economic horse that, by the early part of the 20th century, the U.S. had become. Here is an article which discusses the workings of those who would control government officials--often to the detriment of their citizens: PRESIDENT WILSON BLACKMAILED - Historicist.com The Protestant Interpretation of Biblical Prophecy. The Historical Alternative
The Manipulations of 1913
In 1913, through the adoption of the private Federal Reserve System that year handed over the control of the nation's money supply to private interests--which was against the U.S. Constitution. The European and American bankers achieved it through chicanery (read The Creature From Jekyll Island by G. Edward Griffin). Jekyll Island was where they met secretly, under pseudonyms, in order to hatch their plot. President Woodrow Wilson, who signed the Federal Reserve Act into law, said later, "I fear I have ruined my country." Thomas Jefferson, among many, had warned about exactly that.
Franklin, Adams and Jefferson vs. The Bankers
The brilliant patriot, Benjamin Franklin, influenced his good friends, John Adams and Thomas Jefferson to adamantly oppose the idea of private central banking in the U.S. Franklin had, on his trips to Europe, seen the economic ravages wrought on the middle and lower classes of Europe, caused by the extreme economic stratification of private central banking. The bankers were a new kind of nobility--building or buying enormous estates, while the middle and lower classes struggled, often in misery, to put food on the table--virtual slaves to the European system.
Franklin, a Pennsylvanian, favored a monetary system after the style of the earlier Pennsylvania colony. The U.S. Constitution gives the control of the money supply to the government. Franklin understood that the control of the issuance of the currency was a critical measure for governments to have, if they were not to be ruled by moneyed interests. Prior to the American Revolution, the colonial government of Pennsylvania had issued currency based on the estimated value of all land and industry in the colony--rather than the debt-based system of the central bankers. This currency, widely used throughout the American colonies, was known as "colonial scrip" and the average Pennsylvanian colonist prospered greatly under the system which was inflation/deflation-free. But, the greedy elitist/royalist bankers at the private Bank of England, saw the growing prosperity of the largely middle-class colonies and pushed the British Parliament to outlaw colonial scrip in favor of the British pound (which they controlled through increasing or decreasing the interest rates, causing deflation or inflation at will). The Pennsylvania colony was plunged nearly overnight into unemployment and poverty. To his dying day, Franklin maintained that the real reason for the American Revolutionary War was that rule by Parliament. He insisted that the colonists would have grudgingly put up with an increase in the tax on tea, but taking their system of money away was just too much for the colonists to bear.
Andrew Jackson and the Bankers
But, even after Americans had gained their independence, the European central bankers were not about to give up their plans. Alexander Hamilton, Secretary of the Treasury under President Washington, an agent of European central bankers, urged the establishment of a private central bank of the U.S. He might have succeeded, had he not been killed in a duel with Thomas Jefferson's vice president, Aaron Burr, over a smear campaign Hamilton had initiated against Burr. However, even then, the struggle against the bankers continued. A little more than three decades later, the dying words of the very popular President, Andrew Jackson were: "I fought the banks." A number of historians believe that an earlier assassination attempt on Jackson's life was put in place by the European central bankers.
Lincoln, Czar Alexander II and the Bankers
Another three decades later, during the U.S. Civil War, (probably instigated by the influence of international bankers) Lincoln resisted them in their usurious demands for 24% to 34% interest on the money he needed to borrow to finance the war. Lincoln instead floated the "greenback dollar" to finance the war, at no interest to the Union government. The powerful, private Bank of England placed editorials in The Times of London, ranting about Lincoln (you can read them online). Here is one of their more outrageous statements: "If that mischievous financial policy, which has its origins in the North American Republic, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off debts and will be without a debt. It will have all the money necessary to carry on its commerce. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of civilized governments of the world. The brains and the wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."
The British Parliament, under unremitting pressure from European central bankers, agreed to send a British naval expeditionary force (along with the same from France) to interrupt the Union trade blockade of the Confederacy. Lincoln heard about their plans and appealed to his friend, Czar Alexander II of Russia (who was also struggling against the bankers' plans to put in place a private central bank in Russia). The Czar was fascinated by the "American experiment" and had urged Lincoln to free the slaves, as he intended to free the serfs in Russia from the land. Czar Alexander agreed to send a force from the mighty Imperial Navy of Russia to prevent the British and French from disrupting the Union blockade of the Confederacy. When the British and French understood (through their spies in the Union government) that the Russian navy was on the way, they scooted back to Europe. The blockade was thus successful, and the Union was saved. Lincoln well understood that, if the Union had failed, the British and French would be only too ready to take back former colonies and the "American experiment" of "government of the people, by the people and for the people" would have failed. He said as much at the end of his Gettysburg Address. Had Lincoln caved to the interest demands of the European bankers, the U.S. would likely still be making payments on the Civil War debt. We have had measures put in place since 1913 to reduce the amount of interest money handed over to the bankers but they remain in control of the money supply to this day. In the words of a famous central banker, "Give me control of a nation's money supply and I care not who makes its laws." Lincoln was assassinated by John Wilkes Booth who was, according to some historians, almost certainly an agent of the Bank of England--they know he had several close associates there. Czar Alexander II was also assassinated. In addition, it is known that the European central bankers financed the Bolshevik Revolution that put an end to Romanov rule in Russia. The grandson of Czar Alexander II--Nicholas II--was slaughtered, along with his entire family, by the Bolsheviks. (continued on next post)
Trump allocating $100 million for daughter Ivanka's global project: Trump budget to include $100M for daughter Ivanka's project
$100 million is an extremely tiny portion of the U.S. budget--especially when you consider that the budget for the war machine is something in the neighborhood of $900 Billion. Americans are a generous people--why wouldn't they want to help those around the world who are less fortunate? That doesn't mean that Americans want to give up the sovereignty of their nation in favor of a world government.
Islam is allegedly a creation of the Catholic church...Why the Catholic church would create Islam is beyond what I've looked into yet, but everything is all coming together.
That article was just a small, single example of how the Trump admin is not "nationalist", as Trump said he was - this is just another global project of his administration. Nothing more than that really; nothing whatsoever pertaining to the American people giving up their sovereignty in favor of a world government.
He is surrounded by neocon RINO globalists (Trump can't administer the government all by himself). He seems to have rooted out most of the neoliberal globalists from powerful positions in the administration. There's only so much a President can do, when he has even members of his party against him. A number of the neocons have left office--neocon, RINO Paul Ryan was one of the more powerful globalists in the GOP. Mitch McConnell is another. I think that McConnell personally likes Trump but he thinks it is much too late for second thoughts about globalism.
I'm not sure how genuine listening to those who rep the Central Bank talking about any "new world order" is tbh? Iow inferring a coming "world order" is possibly a great way to hide the world order that we already have maybeI like people questioning this because it causes me to research into it. I read this:
It has been several years since the term “New World Order was widely used. It almost seems as if it faded from the world scene after George Bush (father) popularized the term in the 1990’s. His use of the term didn’t set too well with conservative voters. After a glorious victory over Iraq, he became a one-term president. Politicians learned not to use the cliché around voters. But across the pond, in stodgy old Europe, the New World Order is as popular as ever.
Just six weeks after 9/11, Belgium’s Prime Minister, Guy Verhofstadt, while serving as President-in-Office of the European Council, gave a speech in Warsaw, Poland, at the opening ceremony of the College of Europe, on the very subject of the emerging New World Order. He spoke to students at the beginning of their academic year. He noted the need for Europe to become a model for an emerging New World Order. He mentioned that the United Nations was organized to establish the “New World Order” and that the United States, under former president, George Bush, had tried and failed.
George Bush senior who, in 1991, two years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and shortly after the victory against Saddam Hussein, issued a call the a New World Order…A New World Order built or protected by the United States alone turned out to be an illusion. Verhofstadt went on to say, “And yet, we now need a New World Order more than ever before. A world order in which American leadership will of course remain a key element, if only because it will remain the only country with a global military force until such time as Europe develops a defense capability of its own. But the other continents, and especially Europe, must make a major contribution to building this New World Order. How can we find a stronger and more effective alternative to a system based on the United Nations with its 189 formally sovereign states? We need to find a new path, a middle way. We could order the world on the basis of existing regional cooperation organizations: The European Union, ASEAN, Mercosur, NAFTA, the African Union, the Arab League and SAARC in southern Asia. In this context, we should also include countries like China, Russia, and Japan, and the whole of Oceania. We need to take a first step down the path towards a global form of federalism, a structure where the reality of an increasingly interactive world is finally made a political reality too. In fact, a structure of this kind was already planned when the United Nations was created in 1945, but was never implemented after the Cold War.
“We need a global political vision, a political counterweight capable of reining in uncontrolled forces, be they market forces or ideological forces. The European Union is the model, which shows this is possible. The European Union has become a model for regional cooperation agreements worldwide; a source of inspiration for the structures of a new world yet to be created. What I have tried to do today is to prove that the European Union is the most generous political project on our continent, a project that can be held up as an example for a New World Order that will truly begin to close the gap between rich and poor.. Now, as we stand on the threshold of the 21st century, I find it hard to imagine a greater political ambition.”
IT’S JUST A MATTER OF TIME!
A “coming one-world political, economic and religious system” has been predicted by most Bible prophecy teachers for as long as anyone can remember. Old Testament prophets referred to the condition of the world at the time of the end. Jesus had more to say about the status of the world at the time of His return than any of the writers of the New Testament. He talked about the signs of His coming in Matthew 24, Mark 13, Luke 17 and 21.
The Apostle Paul spoke about the last days, Peter, Jude and John, climaxing about the coming New World Order.
Past president George Bush, along with Mikhail Gorbachev, popularized the terms, “New World Order,” “New International Order,” and “new partnership of nations.” In George Bush’s address to a joint session of Congress of September 11, 1990, his entire theme and focus was “The New World Order.” In speaking of the Persian Gulf crisis, Bush warned, “This is the first assault on the new world we seek, the first test of our mettle.” He then summed up: “a new world order” may emerge from the crisis in which the world is “freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice and more secure in the quest for peace.”
Trump is initiating and executing policies that are global efforts, in contrast to policies one would expect from a person that stated over and over, and proudly, that he is a nationalist.
We're not talking about administration RINO globalists here, because they haven't stated they are nationalists proudly and arrogantly then put forth globalist policies. Trump is deceptive in his words and actions.
I'm not sure how genuine listening to those who rep the Central Bank talking about any "new world order" is tbh? Iow inferring a coming "world order" is possibly a great way to hide the world order that we already have maybe
U.S. government leaders (including Trump family) history with the Jesuits: Ann Coulter’s Jesuit Problem – Johnny Cirucci