A Time, Times, and a Half a Time

Fanning the Flames

2010-09-19T05:56:00.017-05:00

These past weeks have proven productive for those who seek gain from a good crisis. Seemingly unrelated events appear more interconnected as I trace their origins and those who will ultimately benefit from the crisis. Amidst the Cordoba Mosque controversy, a new crisis has added fuel to the fire. The accelerant: the global media attention which focused on a church in Gainesville Florida and its 30-50 member congregation who planned to burn Korans on the anniversary of the September 11 terrorist attacks.

While the press remains perplexed how it lost control of the Koran burning story, inquiry should guide them to the conclusion that they were manipulated. United Nations’ Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon blames Pastor Terry Jones as the one who “hijacked” the media. But it was not Jones who kept feeding the media frenzy; it was those sympathetic to the Alliance of Civilizations continually added fuel to the flames. How could an event having next to nothing for financial resources—one which promoted itself on YouTube—have gained worldwide attention? Hmm, “I wonder when there will be a Koran burning event” is hardly something I would ever have imagined people tying into their YouTube search engines. It is worth taking a closer look at those fanning the flames of this crisis.

None of us would have known anything about the Dove World Outreach Center’s plans until the September 6 online edition of the Wall Street Journal quoted General Petraeus as saying that the Koran burnings would endanger U.S. troops. Incidentally, Petraeus is now defending himself against Pentagon officials who charge he crossed the civilian-military line. The very next day following the Journal’s report, the International Crisis Group posted a media alert on the Alliance of Civilizations’ Global Expert Finder web site. The International Crisis Group functions as a crisis management tool within the AoC network. The purpose of the Global Expert Finder is to provide journalists with information on how to report on issues surrounding cross-cultural and inter-religious tensions.

Petraeus’ statements have consequently generated debate on whether free speech needs to be balanced against safety concerns for U.S. military personnel. I could not help but remember the Alliance of Civilizations’ High Representative’s speech that our rights need to be balanced to achieve global social cohesion.

"…to build inclusive and cohesive societies we need to find the right balance between the rights of cultural communities and the need to maintain social cohesion respecting the principles of human rights that bind together all countries worldwide.

And if Petraeus hadn’t already drawn international attention to Terry Jones, the attention directed towards them by Attorney General Eric Holder, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and President Obama was certain to destine this as an international crisis. Considering that the Obama Administration has incorporated the Alliance of Civilizations into the United States’ political landscape, the spontaneity of this controversy started to resemble the cartoon crisis. This prompted me to take a closer look at you know who and, not surprisingly, their signature is there.

Could it be merely a coincidence that Akbar Ahmed who serves as an advisor to Petraeus published a piece in CNN International which directed the world’s attention to “Burn Koran Day” or that Ahmed is active with the Dialogue Among Civilizations which is the framework the Alliance of Civilizations used for its launch? Akbar Ahmed and the Ground Zero Mosque Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf are both involved with the Daniel Pearl Foundation’s interfaith dialogue. Ahmed is also a Bookings Institute Senior Fellow for the global governance think tank.

I believe the Pearl family is sincere in their dialogue efforts to combat the extremist ideology which led to the murder of their son. And while I do not wish to cause the Pearl family any additional pain, I’ve noticed that they have become integrated with Alliance of Civilizations’ personalities. Whether they understand and share the Alliance’s ideology I cannot say for sure, but I strongly urge them to closely examine the interfaith objectives and how the Alliance’s definition of extremism slates countless innocent people as terrorists.

Imam Rauf claims himself as a moderate as he can profess to be Jewish, Christian, and Muslim. One of the best critical assessments I’ve read on this statement and interfaith dialogue is written by an atheist. Rauf is able to make this claim because his belief system teaches that Jews and Christians are, in fact, Muslims who have not yet realized who they are. But when these faiths reject this belief system, according to the Koran and the Alliance of Civilizations, they become “exclusivist” extremists against whom they intend to conduct a war.

The Alliance of Civilizations and the Organization for Islamic Conference are politically partnered organizations who jointly call for restrictions on free speech. This past April, the OIC-Alliance action plan for combating Islamophobia cited Terry Jones’ as an example of one whose speech incites violence and discrimination against Muslims. The OIC envisions legislation such to Ireland’s anti-defamation law as a model for combating Islamophobia. Per the report:

“On July 10, 2009, Ireland passed the Defamation Bill. One of the aspects of this bill would make it illegal to criticize religion, any religion under penalty of fines up to 25,000 Euros. It was a most important development in conformity with OIC’s call for effective normative and legal frameworks to deal with the grave threat posed by Islamophobia. The following are some excerpts from the Blasphemy Clause:

(1) A person who publishes or utters blasphemous matter shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction on indictment to a fine not exceeding €100,000[Amended to €25,000]

(2) For the purposes of this section, a person publishes or utters blasphemous matter if (a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.

The Doha International Center for Interfaith Dialogue issued a statement on Terry Jones which reiterates this position on free speech: “We believe that all laws protect freedom of expression unless it constitutes to an act of insult, and abuse of others.”

While I believe book burnings is disgusting, I do believe it to be consistent with the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling that flag burning is a constitutionally protected form of speech. If a burning were to take place outside a place of worship or its intent one of intimidation, I would view that differently. It is clear, though, that to make Islamic culture socially cohesive with the West, the Alliance seeks to adjust our freedoms to accommodate Sharia law. At this year’s Cordoba conference on religious freedom, the Alliance indicated it is watching to see which will win out: the Protestantisation of religion or Islamisation of Christianity? For they conclude that Protestantization of religion will let secularization prevail while Islamization of Christianity will create a totally new agenda.

As with the Ground Zero Mosque controversy, the Koran burning crisis is being used to instigate a “clash of civilizations” which ultimately serves the Alliance of Civilizations’ political agenda. And as a tool they are using the First Amendment as a double-edged sword.

Terry Jones, agent provocateur or unwitting dupe? I suspect the latter. Either way, Jones’ actions has served the interests of the Alliance of Civilizations in labeling Christians as extremists and emboldened others to identify Christianity with terrorism. Once again, as in the cartoon crisis, the benefactor of this controversy is the Alliance of Civilizations.

An Alliance Temple

2010-09-02T17:16:00.014-05:00

Recent mosque controversy polling data shows around 61% oppose while 27% favor the Cordoba Mosque construction. Media reaction has been mixed. The majority have portrayed Americans as intolerant despite polling data which shows the majority of mosque opponents say the Cordoba Initiative has the constitutional right to proceed with construction. I also agree with this position. And while I would not attempt to infringe upon the Cordoba Initiative’s First Amendment rights, I do believe the public is entitled to an unobstructed view of its political platform. The builders can construct the store [mosque] but we don’t have to shop there. So, caveat emptor.

I had my eye on the Cordoba Initiative for nearly as long as I’ve been observing the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations initiative. It was in 2006 that the Alliance appeared on the world stage to calm Mideast tensions which resulted from the Danish cartoon crisis. For one to understand the Cordoba Initiative one must gain insight into the Alliance of Civilizations. The two are mutually-reinforcing, partnered initiatives. Cordoba’s web site, which has changed extensively over the past few weeks, still displays the Alliance of Civilizations as a partner organization. Noticeable omissions include organizations such as the United Religions Initiative, Karen Armstrong’s Charter for Compassion, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), and others. I suspect Cordoba scoured affiliations from its web site not only to lessen the severity of its own scrutinization but also prevent shifting it to others. For scrutinization of CAIR would lead one to find the FBI severed ties with the organization due to its affiliations with terror group Hamas. Alliance of Civilizations’ High Level Group member Karen Armstrong no longer is listed as the Cordoba Board’s most significant contributor. She is now only a board member.

As a bridge builder having the mission to facilitate intercultural and interfaith dialogue, tolerance and understanding, the Cordoba Initiative surely must have known that placement of the mosque so close to the Ground Zero Twin Towers would be received as insensitive and as anything but understanding. Moderate Moslem critics say this defies logic and call the mosque confrontational and in bad faith. They are questioning what is going on here?

I have found Cordoba’s partner, the Alliance of Civilizations, to be confrontational from its very inception. While they use nice words such as social inclusion, social cohesion, human family, ad nauseum, they speak with forked tongues. For this initiative has mobilized to facilitate a cultural divide—to build a new civilization. This crisis reminds me of a passage from new age writer Peter Lemesurier’s Armageddon Script, Prophecy in Action where he describes a time when the old religions would be manipulated and set against one another: “the wisdoms of all ages and cultures will be called upon to surrender their most precious secrets…The masses of the Old Age, however, will be unable to check their headlong onrush. In large measure they will go on to destroy each other in a massive, mutual venting of long pent-up aggression”.

This Cordoba mosque crisis is somewhat reminiscent of the 2006 “spontaneous” Danish cartoon crisis which firmly rooted the newly formed Alliance in a global political role. The cartoon crisis was the result of a Danish newspaper’s publication of caricatures which depicted the prophet Mohammed as a terrorist. Violence erupted four months later when these images were published in newspapers throughout the Mideast. The three most inflammatory caricatures seen in the Mideast’s had never been part of the Danish newspaper’s collection. The Alliance was soon to become the United Nations’ response to Samuel Huntington’s “clash of civilizations” theory which subsequently accused the West of insensitivity and placed blame for the clash squarely upon the West. The High Level GroupFinal Report attributes no positive values to the West. So why would the Islamic world seek to join an Alliance with the West?

This Cordoba crisis further exhibits the Alliance’s anti-western bias. Rather than accepting responsibility for their own insensitivity, High Level Group (HLG) members are actively guiding Moslems to feel victimized by an intolerant, Islamophobic West. John Esposito is using this controversy to bolster the Alliance’s position that Christianity and the political right are anti-democratic. It is ironic the Alliance would even argue this with a straight face.

The Alliance’s response to the cartoon crisis was a collaborative effort with the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) which, at that time and ever since, called for the West to place restrictions on free speech. Defamation of Religions resolutions intended to restrict religious criticism and free speech were introduced to UN governing bodies. The resolutions are pillars of the Alliance’s framework. Hillary Clinton addressed this at the Roosevelt Institute last year stating that the United States would never agree to such resolutions. Within weeks President Obama and the OIC co-authored an anti-defamation resolution which contains the same language as what Clinton opposed. This proved a bit much for even the Huffington Post which cried foul.

The Alliance of Civilizations calls for the establishment of a review board and accreditation for journalists who wish to report on areas involving cross cultural and political-religious tensions.

High Level Group member Karen Armstrong has long portrayed Christianity and the political right as anti-democratic. As a “religious historian” she has no regard for historical accuracy and is known to fabricate quotes. As most significant contributor to the Cordoba Board, I suspect she was aware opportunity would be found in this emotionally-charged crisis they have created. While people are re-living the traumatizing events of the 9-11 attacks, the Cordoba controversy is being used to aggressively attack them as anti-democratic and opposed to religious freedom.

The Alliance says that global governance will require nations to accept a redefinition of national sovereignty. They define democracy as an evolutionary process where national parliaments no longer serve as the monopolist voice of the people. That voice is to be shifted to non-governmental organizations which are better positioned to represent the people. Terms often used to describe this new style are “safe”, “participatory”, and sometimes “anticipatory” democracy.

Religious freedom is also redefined. Both Cordoba and the Alliance interlock with Karen Armstrong’s Charter for Compassion. The Charter’s intent is to provide global “guidelines” for the interpretation of religious texts. An indication of where this is headed can be found in Armstrong’s thesis on Genesis where she argues that the serpent was more truthful than God in the garden. Armstrong is an apologist for Islam. According to Armstrong:

“Christianity, which has as its main image, in the west at least, a man dying in a devastating, disgraceful, helpless death…Mohammed was not an apparent failure. He was a dazzling success, politically as well as spiritually, and Islam went from strength to strength to strength. But against the West, it’s been able to make no headway...whatever they do, they cannot seem to get Muslim history back on track, and this has led some, and only a minority, it must be said, to desperate conclusions.”

The United Nations spiritual foundation’s writings indicate that their political-spiritual leader will lead all “true Moslems” to spiritual victory. Iran has significantly shaped Alliance of Civilizations initiative.

The Alliance of Civilizations uses Cordoba as a model for the global governance of the culture. It portrays Cordoba as a utopian society and ignores the suffering of non-Moslems under the system of dhimmitude. The Alliance of Civilizations supports integration of Sharia law into Western democracies.

There is no Christian or orthodox Jewish representation on the Alliance of Civilizations.

Outwardly the Alliance and Cordoba Initiatives argue they favor bridge building and religious pluralism through interfaith dialogue. In practice they advance Universalism. The two are distinctly different. While pluralism requires tolerance, the Alliance’s Universalist value system rejects belief systems which make exclusive truth claims and refuse to adopt the mindset that we all worship the same God but follow different paths to the Almighty. Christian adaptation of Universalism constitutes apostasy. John Esposito has said that if one believes their religion to be right and another to be wrong, that person has adopted the “theology of hate” which is a root cause of terrorism. The HLG refers to this as religious fundamentalism. Georgetown University, an Alliance think tank which houses Esposito’s Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, defines fundamentalism as “those with an absolute conviction in the fundamental principles of their faith to the exclusion of other beliefs.”

Combating religious fundamentalism is the basis of the Alliance of Civilizations’ framework. The Alliance is the United Nation’s “mother tongue” and the core component of the UN global counter-terrorism strategy.

NATO’s Grand Strategy for an Uncertain World includes combating of religious fundamentalism as well. The Alliance of Civilizations is now part of the NATO framework. Secretary General Rasmussen represented NATO at the AoC Istanbul Conference.

The Albright Group (as in Madeline, former Secretary of State) is a supporter of the Cordoba Initiative. Albright participates on NATO’s Group of Experts which is implementing a “New Strategic Concept”.

The White House announced United States’ partnership with the Alliance of Civilizations on May 20, 2010.

Carnegie Corporation President Vartan Gregorian serves on the President’s Commission on White House Fellowships. Vartan is active with the Alliance of Civilizations and a bridge between the White House and the Alliance.

During the initial planning process the Alliance of Civilizations envisioned placement of Alliance temples in every major city throughout the world. The Cordoba mosque may well be a starting point. This “clash of civilizations” appears deliberate having a political objective. Again, as Jean Monet chair for European Integration once said, the United Nations has proven itself to be actually dangerous. This time, it appears, they have provoked a national controversy within one of its member states.

Religious Freedom in Context of the Alliance of Civilizations

2010-06-13T15:30:00.015-05:00

It was clear to me back in 2008 that unless the people of the United States woke up to the Alliance of Civilizations’ agenda that this country would partner with this vile thing. And so it has. On May 13 the State Department announced U.S. membership in the UN Alliance of Civilizations Initiative.

Worse yet is that this partnership happened with the help of the National Prayer Breakfast sponsored by the Fellowship Foundation, a.k.a. “The Family”. The 2010 breakfast featured Spanish Prime Minister Zapatero as its keynote speaker who professed Spain’s commitment to religious tolerance and pluralism along with its rejection of "exclusive ideology" and uncompromising fundamentalism. Zapatero's speech was a sales pitch for the Alliance of Civilizations. He was given a forum to introduce the United States Congress to what has become our new new strategic direction. Spain's reaction is not surprising...

Zapatero was not the first keynote speaker to direct the U.S. Congress down the Alliance's path. In 2009, Alliance implementation partner Tony Blair advanced the ideology that anything other than Universalism amounts to extremism. For Blair western democracies' long standing principles of religious tolerance is not enough. For if one rejects "the Other's" faith as not equally valid, then one becomes "intolerant" and is identified with extremism. This intolerance will not be tolerated. The basis of interfaith dialogue—“all [religions] different, all [outcomes] equal”—is absurd. For this requires that faiths discard their core teachings and favor of a “common spiritual value” which, as a result, redefines them. I have noticed that both Tony Blair's and President Obama's speeches echo the words of AoC High Level Group member Karen Armstrong.

Now would be a good time to review the Fellowship Foundation which has shown itself to be bedfellows with the Alliance of Civilizations. And in light of Spain's recent conference on religious tolerance within the framework of the Alliance of Civilizations, a review of this framework would also be timely.

Constance Cumbey’s research provides invaluable insight into why a “Christian” foundation would support an initiative which seeks to destroy Christianity and religious orthodoxy. One of her most disturbing discoveries was that the Fellowship Foundation had received $1.777 million from Institute of Noetic Sciences’ co-founder Paul Temple.

The Institute of Noetic Sciences is a group of conscious evolutionists! They believe that they have evolved to a higher, super human species called homo noeticus. Barbara Marx Hubbard refers to this species as homo universalis. They call for the extinction of the lower--or "egocentric" species. Where in not-too-distant history have we heard this before?

I have provided the following links to Mrs. Cumbey’s work on the Fellowship Foundation.

And finally, it is important to show exactly what it is the Fellowship Foundation, a.k.a., “The Family” and the Alliance of Civilizations supports. Presenting Religious Freedom within the Context of the Alliance of Civilizations.

Biometrics - RFID Agenda

2010-02-21T21:42:00.006-06:00

Constance Cumbey has described New Age politics as a continuum. For those of us watching the New Age over the years, those words have proven to be so true. Even though political power changes, each party has demonstrated they have globalists ready to advance us ever closer towards an Orwellian 1984 vision of horror which depicts the state as “Big Brother” which has seized absolute control.

As I’ve watched this continuum, one objective appears remarkably like the “Big Brother” description as portrayed by Orwell and the warnings contained in the Book of Revelation. That objective is the use of RFID-biometric identification systems for use in the “global governance of the culture”. Many of us Wisconsin residents were embarrassed to have to admit Tommy Thompson was from this state. Recall that while Thompson served as U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services under the Bush Administration he called for the micro chipping of all Americans in the interest of implanting us with our medical records.

I became even more concerned when I read the Club of Madrid’s global counter-terrorism outcome documents which calls for the use of biometrics. In 2005, under the honorary presidency of Bill Clinton, the Club of Madrid charged Kofi Annan with turning its recommendations into a global counter-terrorism strategy, a.k.a. “The Strategy”. The Strategy’s central organization responsible for setting the “global conscience” in the war on terror is none other than the Alliance of Civilizations. I noticed early in the Alliance’s formation there were calls to create a database of families who were sympathetic to the initiative.

The announcement of the FBI’s Server in the Sky database further demonstrated how serious the globalists are about exercising total control. The FBI database interlocks with its European cousin known as the Schengen, a.k.a. “Big Brother” System.

Revelation 13 warns of a corrupt leader of a world governmental system who “causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

“And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name”.

New Age visionary Barbara Marx Hubbard envisions this mark as a positive--a “loving birth”. She writes in the Book of Co-Creation that “in the negative scenario, John foresaw the possibility of total domination of humanity by a dictator who wields the power of science and technology to control rather than to emancipate.” The emancipation she refers to is the new social body’s liberation from the “dark karmic forces” or, in other words, the monotheistic faiths.

The intent of this blog post is to draw attention to the biometrics aspect of the movement and to welcome much needed research in this area. The new blog is called The Devil is in the Details written by JD. JD and Suzanna have done some EXCELLENT research and have documented the agenda behind the proposed U.S. health care overhaul which may ultimately demand we all be micro chipped. I have added a link to JD’s blog on my links and his first post follows. I am having trouble copying over the hyperlinked material from his blog so I recommend reading this from his site and visiting the blog regularly. Welcome JD.

Traceability in a Sustainable World:

A look into the very real RFID agenda ensnaring the earth

Part 1: Introductions

Picture a future where your right to privacy is a thing of the past. Where your government, doctor, retail stores, your home, your neighbor, and you keep accurate details of every transaction you make, whom you associate with, the amount of every and any goods you use, where you worship, your impact on the planet, your impact on your community, and any other piece of data that can be recorded as it pertains to your life. Many of us have seen articles and books that advocate for just such a world. Many more of us have read opinion pieces, and heard rumors of plans for such societies. Most recently as the Healthcare debate was heating up here in the United States, a group promoting Congressman Ron Paul published an article on it's website claiming that such a system via microchipping had been written into the Healthcare Reform Bill. Is any of this true? If so, who's behind it? If so, how far has such an agenda spread? How close are we to implementation of such a systematic society? A short time ago, I asked Susanna, a research associate, to help me dig into these questions. What was found during our investigation will shock some, and will be hard to believe by others. In this article, and those that follow, I will attempt to answer all of these questions and many more. Our investigation will show that such an agenda not only exists, but is far more advanced than anyone had imagined. We will explore the history, funding, and implementation of the many arms of this agenda, as well as some that have taken hold under our noses while no one noticed. Over the course of this series of articles we will cover many subjects from U.S. Politics to Social Media, from international treaties to social services, from iPhones to Echelon. The full scope will take time to explore, and may take a few of these articles to become 100% clear to some. While others may begin to immediately see the bigger picture. As is suggested by the title of this part, this article is a introduction to the overall agenda. Here we will begin with the outline of the subject, which is global in nature. As I have found, one of the reasons this agenda went unnoticed is because many don't know what to look for and if they have seen it, it was not recognized for what it was. This is no fault of the average observer. There have been slick redefinitions of terms that have allowed this agenda to remain under the radar for as long as it has.

No place can this be better witnessed than within the constructs of a United Nations sanctioned not for profit organization called GS1. Before we get into the redefinitions we must first understand what GS1 says about itself, its duties, and who makes up the organization. According to GS1: "GS1 is a leading global organisation dedicated to the design and implementation of global standards and solutions to improve the efficiency and visibility of supply and demand chains globally and across sectors. The GS1 system of standards is the most widely used supply chain standards system in the world. " http://www.gs1.org/

So in a nut shell GS1 is a organization that sets standards for supply chains internationally. This doesn't sound too bad does it? What though are the standards that GS1 wishes to have set? One of these is the GS1 Global Traceability Standard which requires everything produced for any use be tagged and identifiable via varying means, from bar-coding to RFID chipping. Among the Traceability Standard we also find that any machine used in production of materials must be identifiable in the same way. The same can be said for trucks, planes, or boats shipping the goods, crates which goods are packaged in, stores where the merchandise is sold, as well as any other aspect which influenced the production or sale of the product. The products range from cell phones, to fresh produce, to automobiles, to clothing, as well as anything else that can be produced or sold. In a normal world this is where a supply chain ends. However, in the GS1 dictionary, supply chain means from start of production to the end of a products life. This means they want continual information on the product long after you have purchased it. Another aspect that must be taken into account is the traceability standard that states the system must incorporate real time identification of parties, items, and events that have had a relationship with the product within its life. Did you catch that? Parties!!! According again to GS1 and their standards, parties refers to any individual involved in production, shipping, sales, or purchasing of a product. How was it GS1 proposed to identify things within the supply chain? Does GS1 have different systems in place to identify these parties? No they do not. GS1 proposes to identify YOU the same way they want to identify every other object, through RFID.

Now that we have established a desire by a group to do such a thing, one is left wondering is this fanciful talk or a viable threat? To answer this, let's look at who is working to implement GS1 standards. Driving forces for GS1 include North Atlantic Treaty Organization, World Trade Organization, World Health Organization, and World Customs Organization. Partners of GS1 include corporations influencing all walks of life including, Microsoft, Baxter, GM, IBM, Pfizer, Walmart, Google, and many many more. So many more that the odds are much better of you guessing who is on the list than who isn't. GS1 has branches in many of the countries which have agreed to implement their standards, these include India, Japan, China, Russia, the EU, and the United States. In the United States, GS1 has partnered with the US Chamber of Commerce, FDA, Department of Veterans Affairs, Department of Defense and many others to see to the implementation within the US. In June 2009, the EU GS1 launched the Transatlantic Traceability Infrastructure (TTI) Project. This part of the project was designed to fast track RFID implementation across Europe. What has remained quiet is that TTIP is a collaborative agreement between the US and the EU to fast track implementation in both. The projects of GS1 take into account anyway someone may purchase a product. This includes a section on Ecommerce which by its own definitions would make the Internet of Things a reality. There are also provisions for ordering products over the phone, which we will explore in more depth in a upcoming article. Now that you have a basic understanding of GS1, you may ask how far out is full implementation? GS1 has available on its site implementation projections which are sobering. According to GS1, 2009 was to be the year of preparation. All products and pieces of infrastructure were to be developed and in place by the end of 2009. Again according to GS1, this goal was met ahead of schedule. GS1 also claims 2010 as the year full implementation and operation is to begin, and again GS1 is ahead of schedule. There are still a couple of sectors where work needs to be done for this to be achieved. One of these is the healthcare industry, is it a coincidence that the Healthcare Reform Bill would make the healthcare industry in compliance with GS1 standards? This subject we will be looking at in depth in a upcoming article. Now that you understand the part of this international organization in implementing a complete RFID infrastructure, we can now go forward in upcoming articles and look at pilot projects, funding, the politics behind the agenda, and much more.

This agenda is real, and its implementation will forever alter life as we know it. The provisions within GS1 cover all aspects of business. There are numerous connections to be made, which will take us from captains of industry, to US politicians, deep into the Green movement, to some of the richest men on the planet, to those that were bailed out due to their "bad practices". My upcoming articles will explore these connections and how we got here. While we slept, a trap has been set, one that will soon ensnare the earth. My goal with these articles is to educate those reading in such a way that you will recognize the agenda when you see it. Only then can you be able to educate others. I encourage questions and discussion and will do my best to answer any directed my way. Susanna is well educated on this subject as well, and I must convey a great deal of thankfulness for her help on this project. Without her this project would not be as full of information as it is. To all others who have sent me information or have expressed an interest in this agenda, I thank you as well and hope this first article has been educational. For the rest of you, stay tuned as we are just getting warmed up!

Maitreya's Star

2009-12-27T16:00:00.008-06:00

It has been awhile since I've posted and my intent was to post a new YouTube video of a powerpoint presentation. But YouTube has a new policy of only 10-minute uploads. I need to decide how I want to break down a one hour and 10 minute presentation and then I will post it. In the meantime, I am posting a response to a couple of editorials which ran in the Medford paper. I have posted sections of those in the blog comments.

Once again Linda Osolkowski is portraying her political opponents as religious and political extremists by attempting to associate their ideology to that of the Taliban, a regime which governed by blurring the line of church and state. She presents the Iraq war as an exhibit of such extremism. Osolkowski’s revisionism is remarkable. She omits that many democrats voted for the war. Of course their decisions were based upon faulty intelligence reports, the same reports republicans were asked to consider. The intelligence was provided by Britain’s Tony Blair, President Bush’s closest friend and ally. Tony Blair and George Bush are both globalists so it is important to examine their actions through the prism of the global lens, i.e., new age politics.

Once the United States was well into the Iraq war, Blair’s message shifted from regime change to advocacy for the Alliance of Civilizations initiative. Blair called for an alliance for global values to straighten out the “clash about civilizations”. His change of opinion was not sudden for he had long held new age views. Blair had undergone a rebirthing ceremony to become “One” with “Mother Earth”, a.k.a., the goddess Gaia. Both Bush and Blair are on record as Universalists, a doctrine, though hostile to Christianity, has been welcomed into many of the apostate churches. The Universalist value of “we all religions worship the same God but follow different paths” is part of the global value system. Today Blair’s faith foundation is housed at Yale University where he teaches Alliance of Civilizations doctrine. The Bush Administration was also a supporter of the Alliance.

As long as there is religious freedom homosexuality and abortion will be debated as moral issues. But for new age politics expression of those views are considered to be an assault against the new civilizations’ “common value system”. Opposition is portrayed as “hateful” ideologies which lead to violent radicalization. This strategy steps beyond the suppression of legitimate debate for UN counter-terrorism measures labeled dissenters as “strategic terrorists”. Everywhere within “the Strategy” one can find these well-defined goals: set aside the separation of church and state; and, through interfaith dialogue, “use religion to combat religion”. The Nazis are known for their attempts at eliminating confessional divides and converging religion.

While Osolkowski’s portrayal of Christians as extremists reflects the New Age political strategy, it might behoove her to examine her support of the goddess cosmology which openly calls for global genocide. A good starting point would be with the most influential organizations in shaping the global spiritual-political landscape. I refer to Lucis Trust, the United Nations’ spiritual foundation, which intricately ties liberation of the goddess to the “doctrine of the coming one”. The coming one—Maitreya—has a mission: unite humanity with the fallen goddess and in the process fulfill all religions’ messianic expectations. Universalism will have served its role as religions are required to converge into “One”. Maitreya’s opposition-- the resistant form—must be destroyed. As written in the Great Invocation “Let Light and Love and Power and Death fulfil the purpose of the Coming One”. The process of destruction is what the New Age visionaries say is an integral part of “conscious evolution”.

December was a good month for Lucis Trust initiates. They are proclaiming the star which heralds in Maitreya’s arrival appeared over the Norwegian skies. While the press reported this “star” spiral as a failed Russian missile, Theosophists and Gaia hopefuls insist it was one of several spaceships placed around the world. Perhaps immature Pleiadians (the goddess’ keepers) could not wait for their 2012 cosmic party to razzle and dazzle with their props. Some point out that the timing coincides with the mid-2009 World Invocation Day which called upon Maitreya’s arrival and the ushering in of his 1000 year Reich (oops, era of peace, light, and love).

Some world leaders point out that 2010 is the first full year of global governance (which Maitreya is supposed to lead). The country that architected of the Alliance of Civilizations is to preside over the European Union’s rotational presidency during the first semester. Spain has announced it intends to advance existing clearly-defined objectives: replacement of the world’s existing economic system; strengthen the United Nations; and solidify the Alliance of Civilizations’ power. The envisioned economic system is “earth-centric” and requires those participating to recognize “Mother Earth”—the goddess—as creator.

One might be inclined to dismiss this New Age politic because it is so bizarre. Doing so would be a mistake. The Alliance of Civilizations has been incorporated into NATO military doctrine and some of its aspects can be found in U.S. military doctrine. NATO is scheduled to announce a new strategic concept in 2010. I’ve seen an emblem incorporates the EU and NATO flags, a fragmented U.S. flag, and three sixes (the number of initiation which New Age visionaries have been teaching is a requirement for transcendence).

What the Alliance of Civilizations proposes is fascism in its ugliest form. Osolkowski’s ideology reflects much of the same. One could say she has more in common with Bush and Blair than she could have imagined. Then perhaps she may be what I refer to as one the nice New Agers—the uninitiated; the hypnotized—who is just coming to the realization of what is involved with conscious evolution.

2010: Year of Bridezilla?

2009-10-29T20:19:00.006-05:00

Barbara Marx Hubbard’s words that the resonating core groups are blending and merging to do the 'one work' have no better evidence than the upcoming 2010 International Year for the Rapprochement of Cultures. In 2010 we are to witness many of the interlocking initiatives we’ve discussed here converge and become the legal basis for global governance. Among these core initiatives include the

With names indicative of peace how could anyone oppose these initiatives?

When I was young I worked for a family who farmed—Harold and Elaine Wells. Harold was a World War II veteran. One year he decided to take Elaine to Europe and travel the places he had been during the War. This meant that the couple would spend some time in East Germany which, then, was part of the communist bloc and divided by the Berlin Wall.

When the couple returned Elaine described to me how she disliked East Germany. They were permitted to see only what their guide allowed. While in a downtown district their guide stopped the group in front of a shop where Elaine saw the most beautiful dress. She said she had to buy it and before the guide could stop her, she had opened the shop door. What she saw was not a store, but a room filled with machinery.

These initiatives are exactly what Elaine saw—nice window dressing and machinery. The machinery, of course, is designed to combat monotheistic religion. As these initiatives blend and converge, we are certain to find the Alliance of Civilizations to be the core resonating group. The Alliance’s initial planning documents say that UN reform IS the successful implementation of the AoC initiative. The timeframe is to move from preparatory phase into activation mode in September 2009. Speaking before the 64th UN General Assembly Spanish Prime Minister Zapatero said:

"Now we must move a step further. The Alliance of Civilisations, which structures and implements those principles and values in the United Nations, should form part, structurally, of its main organs and at all levels. The moment has come for this General Assembly to approve a Resolution to provide the Alliance of Civilisations with that structural dimension. Spain and Turkey and the Friends of the Alliance will work together so that this Resolution may be endorsed before the end of autumn this year. I am sure that it will contribute highly positively to the task that is being developed by organs such as the Human Rights Council, the Economic and Social Council and, even, the Security Council. The dialogue of civilizations must become the mother tongue of the United Nations."

Make no mistake: this is just a formalizing of what has already taken place. All relevant UN organizations have already made entry points into the Alliance of Civilizations.

This resolution will essentially crown the Alliance queen. I expect in 2010 we will see the gathering together the “collective whole”. This is what the Gnostics refer to as the “world soul” which will become “one” with the earth (the goddess, the divine Sophia) and take her seat as the true bride of Christ. I tend to see her more as Bridezilla, the bride of the antichrist.

“Through his policy also he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand; and he shall magnify himself in his heart, and by peace shall destroy many: he shall also stand up against the Prince of princes; but he shall be broken without hand.” – Daniel 8:25

Masters of Deception

2009-10-15T17:35:00.008-05:00

The Alliance of Civilizations has never received such high level support from the United States as it is presently enjoying from the Obama administration. Even though the Bush administration’s Secretary of State Condolezza Rice expressed enthusiasm for the Alliance, the level of support appeared somewhat measured.

It is not yet clear to me whether Rice recognized the many problem areas contained within the Alliance of Civilizations’ final report, but the Alliance had complained that it was difficult to advance with such low level representation from the U.S. government. Even so, I have archived materials showing the Bush administration privately endorsed the initiative. But the tide has turned. The Obama administration, being fully aware of the Alliance’s problematic areas such as freedom of speech and religion, welcomes the initiative.

While speaking at the Roosevelt Institute, Hillary Clinton delivered tough words to the Alliance regarding restrictions on free speech and religion. Clinton said:

“Now, some claim that the United Nations can best protect the freedom of religion by adopting what is called an “anti-defamation” policy that would restrict the freedom of expression and the freedom of religion. I, obviously, strongly disagree. An individual’s ability to practice their religion should have no bearing on others individuals’ freedom of speech. The protection of speech about religion is particularly important since persons of different faiths will inevitably hold divergent views on religious questions. And these differences should be met with tolerance, not suppression of discourse. And the United States will stand against the idea of defamation of religion in the United Nations General Assembly and the Human Rights Council.”

“President Obama and I are committed to defending the Freedom of Expression on the new terrain of the 21st century…Similarly, we wish to stand firmly on the side of the freedom of religion.”

Normally Clinton’s words are ones I would have applauded, but I cannot in light of President Obama’s subsequent co-authorship of a resolution before the Human Rights Council. This resolution contains similar language as that used in the anti-defamation resolutions which are intended to curtail free speech. The strategy all along has been to convince people that they are operating within the framework of Human Rights. As such, a person’s words that might offend or insult another might be construed as a violation of another’s Human Rights. The Responsibility to Protect initiative indicates clear guidelines are to be posed in public places so civil society understands the expectations placed upon them.

Clinton’s speech appears disingenuous. Being aware of the Alliance’s major problem areas, why welcome the initiative at all? It’s like inviting a group of thugs to a formal dinner and as they are being seated they are given one caveat: their salad forks have been removed. Even though they have one less instrument there is no complaint as they proceed and reach for their dinner fork.

Hillary Clinton surely must be aware that Britain is an Alliance of Civilizations implementation partner. In the interest of protecting free speech she has received a high profile appeal from radio talk show host Dr. Michael Savage who has requested her assistance to get his name removed from the “Banned from Britain” list for voicing dissenting, “extremist” political views. To my knowledge Clinton has done nothing to intercede on behalf of Michael Savage and, by extension, free speech.

When the Michael Savage story broke Constance Cumbey and I warned today Michael Savage—tomorrow any one of us. Tomorrow has arrived. Today we see that Christian televangelist Benny Hinn has been banned from Britain for having “extremist” views. Britain appears to be implementing the Alliance of Civilizations “shared security” doctrine and is starting by isolating foreign “extremists”. The next step is to look internally. Some British government officials are already calling for population reduction to one-half of its present level. The British people had to combat Nazi ideology during the second world war--today those adopting this same ideology are setting Britain’s policy.

The Alliance of Civilizations has been a master of double speech. They support national sovereignty—redefined; freedom of speech—with restrictions; freedom of religion—with guidelines. It appears that British and U.S. heads of state have mastered the same. Clinton’s tough words appear to be an attempt to publicly placate the Alliance’s critics.

Riders of the Pale Horse

2009-09-21T21:17:00.016-05:00

From time to time I encounter people who attempt to build the case that Nazi doctrine was rooted in Christianity. Even in the small community of Medford, I've publicly debated this with a new ager. I have never read anything in the Bible which would support the notion that a super human race is going to consciously evolve. I have read the new age literature which twists the Bible to make this case. Conscience evolution was a core belief of the Nazis. Robert Jay Lifton, author of The Nazi Doctors: Medical Killing and the Psychology of Genocide, writes:

“Part of the cure is the experience of transcendence: of a psychic state so intense that time and death disappear. The cure must maintain, or at least evoke periodically, that psychic experience. One’s own sense of transcendence merges with the image of the endless life of one’s people. In that experience—or promise—of ecstasy, one may be ready to kill, or at least to sanction killing.”

Transcendence--or conscious evolution--is also a new age doctrine. There are variations of how the "new species" is labeled, from homo noeticus to homo universalis, but this is the same coin, different sides.

The other day as I visited You Tube, a link on extremism caught my attention. The link disappeared as quickly as it had appeared but I fortunately had time to click on it. The link was from the Cedar Institute dedicated to the intolerance of intolerance. The site is typical new age. Same agenda, different address. I did notice a cartoon which made me decide to give this site additional attention. The cartoon perfectly illustrates the Lucis Trust teaching the Sealing of the Door Where Evil Dwells.

This organization is clearly attempting to incite hatred towards monotheistic religion and also place the blame of Nazism on Christianity. The site deserved additional attention. I was able to identify the site's registration through the internet tool WhoIs. It belongs to Lloyd Bokman.

It turns out that Lloyd Bokman is a higher education trainer for FEMA. Note the address on WhoIs and FEMA's site.

Also noteworthy is that FEMA, part of the Department of Homeland Security, has incorporated the Alliance of Civilizations into its higher education curriculum. I don't know about you, but I thought FEMA was already a disaster given its response to Hurricane Katrina and now the Alliance of Civilizations! If you haven't listened to After the Flood, I highly recommend that you listen to the testimony of these Katrina survivors who sought shelter fearing for their lives knowing they were under a shoot-to-kill curfew. Exactly what they needed during time of disaster, huh?

So I conclude and direct the Cedar Institute's attention to true extremism: those calling for the "activation" of conscious evolution. The World Commission on Global Consciousness and Spirituality is stacked with heavy-hitting commissioners who follow a blueprint for the future “activation” of the evolutionary process. The average reader will most likely find the blueprint bizarre and not understandable. I suspect it was purposely written that way to avoid public scrutiny. They have a stupid notion that we cannot understand what they are saying. The blueprint is classic Barbara Marx Hubbard style, so to help explain it I have put up excerpts from the Book of Co-Creation.

*** See use doctrine here

“Those who induced Germany to embrace the swastika are not dead. They are still among us, just as they have been in every era, and doubtless will continue to be until the Apocalypse. National Socialism was for them but a means, and Hitler was but an instrument. The undertaking failed. What they are now trying to do is to revive the myth using other means.” - The Occult and the Third Reich, Jean-Michel Angebert

Lifting the Burden off the Media: the Alliance of Civilizations' Global Expert Finder

2009-07-25T17:09:00.015-05:00

One goal of the Alliance of Civilizations is to create a journalist review board which requires reporters covering cross cultural issues be board accredited. Of course op-ed pieces will be distributed by the Alliance for reporters' consideration in covering a story. As I was looking at the Alliance of Civilizations' Global Expert Finder when I found this blog post from the Atlas Shrugs which is linked to my blog. I do have some differences of opinion with the author of this article. One difference is that I do not believe the Alliance of Civilizations is an arm of the Organization of the Islamic Conference. I believe the Alliance is an arm of the European Union--the globalization of the Barcelona Process--which has been lent to the Organization of the Islamic Conference until such a time that Western freedom has been subdued. It was the EU's High Representative Javier Solana who initially called for restrictions on free speech where religious criticism is concerned. Overall, the article is very good. I borrow from and once again give credit to the blog Atlas Shrugs.

Islam: The War of Propaganda Makes Huge Gains

Islam is unique in that it is the only religion with a propaganda arm. No other religion advocates for propaganda, deception and disinformation. It is a powerful weapon in their war on the enemy (non-Muslims).

The media is indispensable in this aspect of Islam's war on the West (education is too, of course). Sophisticated and well packaged, Islamic objectives are served well. The assault is global and national. And pretenses are being dropped. Al Jazeera (the English version) is now being live streamed to our intelligence and State departments. It is the worst kind of bias, but every employee can livestream it.

In the global landscape, the Alliance of Civilizations (arm of the OIC, the Organization of the Islamic Conference), is "connecting experts with journalists" through the UN. Get it?

UN-Sponsored Service Connects Journalists with Experts Around the World

The United Nations' Alliance of Civilizations recently revamped and relaunched the Global Expert Finder (GEF), a searchable database of commentators, analysts and academics who have expertise in many topics, including politics, law, education, women's rights, human rights, terrorism, globalization, religion, and art. IJNet recently interviewed the UN's Daanish Masood about GEF and how journalists can benefit from the service.

Daanish Masood is a "Muslim Leader of Tomorrow" (here): Here's his bio - all the buzzwords are there.

Daanish Masood is currently Executive Coordinator at ASMA Society, a non-profit religious and educational organization dedicated to building bridges between the American public and American Muslims through culture, arts, academia and current affairs. Previously, Daanish worked as Outreach Coordinator for the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee where he developed a program to increase civil rights awareness in New York's Arab and South Asian immigrant communities. Over the last few months, he has been dedicated to organizing and developing programmatic content for the Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow forum. Daanish's main interest is in the political economy and economic anthropology of the Middle East and South Asia, particularly the issues of foreign labor in the Gulf region. He wrote his undergraduate thesis on the Saudi government's Saudization program, and hopes to pursue a doctoral degree in this area in the near future. Daanish graduated New York University with honors in Analytic Philosophy and Middle Eastern Studies. His language skills include: Arabic, Farsi, Urdu, and Hebrew. Born and raised in Saudi Arabia to Lukhnavi parents, he has been living in New York for the past eight years.

Masood was the contact person at the Istanbul Forum for the Alliance of Civilizations (which Obama in his Muhammadan mode attended on his European apology tour). One of the initiatives of the conference was:

“Restore Trust, Rebuild Bridges”, a cluster of Euro-Mediterranean projects, led by the Alliance and the Anna Lindh Foundation, to be developed by a number of partners, aimed at restoring trust and rebuilding bridges in that region in the wake of the Gaza crisis.

Bat Ye'or said of Obama's speech in Cairo concerning the Alliance of Civilizations:

The president’s speech is similar to many such declarations by European leaders. The question it raises is how much the West is ready to forgo truth and its basic principles in its supplication for obtaining peace with Islam. Clearly, the full Islamization of the West is the quickest way to obtain it. Obama’s political program in connection with the Alliance of Civilizations conforms to an OIC strategy that has already been accepted by the EU. In history, this policy has a name: the dhimmitude syndrome.

And President Barack Hussein Obama is fully on board: UN High Representative for the Alliance of Civilizations Jorge Sampaio "welcomed the bold vision set forth by the American President to inaugurate a new era of peace and cooperation between the "Muslim world" and the West based on mutual respect, trust and partnership."

"From the Alliance of Civilizations' perspective, this approach provides a strong framework, not only for advancing Muslim-Western relations, but also for engagement between diverse communities and cultures around the world. It constitutes our best hope to turn tides of mistrust that have beset us in past decades and forge a new beginning.
"President Obama's speech provides a clear path for constructive engagement with the Muslim world, a path that doesn't attempt to paste over differences, but builds on common aspirations. Most importantly, he emphasizes the need to address the various sources of tensions - including violent extremism and the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians - and join forces to confront them.

Back to the propaganda article:

The database currently has 120 experts but expects to include around 300 in the next year. Most of the sources speak English, but many are bilingual and can speak with journalists in multiple languages.
In times of a crisis or important breaking global news, GEF also sends media alerts directly to a subscribed list of journalists, containing brief biographies and contact details for experts able to comment on the topic.

Propaganda is taqiya, lies to advance Islam. Like this from their June 29th meeting:

'U(nderstanding) + R(espect) = U(nited) S(takeholders) for Good Governance of Cultural Diversity, Education for Social Cohesion, Respect and Peace,'

Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Conservatism Radio Broadcast

2009-07-09T07:14:00.005-05:00

UPDATE: This archive of this broadcast is available by clicking here.

Be sure and catch Constance Cumbey's broadcast next Tuesday (7/14) where she will discuss with CLIFF KINCAID ON POPE BENEDICT XVI'S EVIDENT ENDOSEMENT OF NEW WORLD ORDER MACHINERY AND SYSTEM.

This evening I have been invited to be a guest on Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Conservatism to discuss the Alliance of Civilizations with hosts Babe Huggett and Warner Todd Huston. The program info is below. This broadcast starts an hour after Constance Cumbey's My Perspective broadcast. Hope you can join.

Bjorn's Other Blog

2009-07-08T00:07:00.001-05:00

I am writing this blog post to acknowledge several of the emails regarding Bjorn (Farmer) and present my position on the controversy surrounding his Blue God Star blog. Portions of this may be hard for some to read, but it has to be said so one can understand how I have arrived at my conclusions.

Late Friday evening as I checked my e-mail, I found a message waiting which contained a link to a blog called the Blue God Star. The email indicated that it was Farmer’s new blog. As I read, my initial thoughts were that this is not Farmer’s blog, but then the author identified himself as Farmer. I decided to look at the various posters and found one named Arrowsmith. Arrowsmith writes a blog called the Black Dog Star. There I became even more stunned to find not even subtle Satanism and supportive posts by Farmer under various screen names of Bjorn (farmer); Freiberg; and Far More.

After reading the Star of Shiva and Nature of the Beast as well as Farmer’s posts, I sat silently for awhile overwhelmed by a sense of sadness and disbelief. I honestly did not want to believe this of Bjorn, he knows better. The Star of Shiva is about earth’s purification, a doctrine Bjorn himself has written about.

Some have characterized Constance Cumbey’s latest post exposing Farmer’s writings as a witch hunt. I do not see it that way. Farmer’s post ended with the words “stay tuned for…far more”. He fully intended to continue writing.

I find it reasonable that Constance Cumbey, an accredited author who has dedicated 30 years of her career combating the new age, would react as she did. After all, a person whom she trusted and one whom she linked her web site to recently launched a blog which honored Shiva. Constance had more than adequate reason to act as she did. I would have done the same.

I said on Constance’s blog that if attention were brought to Bjorn which was different in nature, one related to sin other than following a different god, Bjorn’s integrity as a anti new-age researcher would not have been compromised. As of last Friday night, I honestly do not know for which side Bjorn is a watchman.

I have decided to read much of Bjorn’s academic material in hopes of ascertaining what he really believes. This is not a witch hunt. I will let the evidence guide my conclusions. We cannot be compromised in ways our readers don’t know what we believe.

Bjorn, I hope you understand why I have taken this position. I say these things not to embarrass you. This is a very hard truth to say to you as I don’t want you to run away from Jesus Christ our Lord and Savior. I still care about you very much and hope and pray that we will be able to forget this and celebrate together at the Lord’s table.

Rich

Time for Action

2009-06-17T20:39:00.009-05:00

"Their script is now written, subject only to last-minute editing and stage directions. The stage itself, albeit as yet in darkness, is almost ready. Down in the pit, the subterranean orchestra is already tuning up. The last-minute, walk-on parts are even now being filled. Most of the main actors, one suspects, have already taken up their roles. Soon it will be time for them to come on stage, ready for the curtain to rise. The time for action will have come." - Peter Lemesurier, The Armageddon Script

"No more delays. No more reports. No more meetings to agree on what has been agreed upon for years...It is time for action." - Federico Mayor Zaragoza, Alliance of Civilizations

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me." - Exodus 20:1-3

Michael Savage, An Alliance of Civilizations Trial Run?

2009-05-19T21:34:00.007-05:00

From its earliest stages, the Alliance of Civilizations initiative found itself an ally named Britain. Tony Blair, reportedly a new ager, gifted the Alliance with Britain’s approval before the initiative had even launched. The spontaneous cartoon crisis yielded further British endorsement when Charles, Prince of Wales, called for the “at-one-ment” of all the world’s faiths through adoption the Alliance of Civilizations and Interfaith Reconciliation. “At-one-ment” is a new age doctrine said to join together individuals attuned to a collective global consciousness whereby religious and political ideologies which cause separation are to be set aside in favor of a common value system. This common set of values is to become the foundation upon which the new civilization is built. The Alliance of Civilizations is one such interfaith initiative responsible for defining that common value system. The difference between the Alliance and other interfaith efforts is that the Alliance has been incorporated into military strategy thus giving it lion’s teeth. The Alliance has set forth to establish a global conscience which UN signatory nations are to adopt in implementation of the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy. The Alliance has focused a great deal of effort attempting to unifying Islam with the West by heaping heavy scorn upon the West while praising Muslim nations for their contributions to modern civilization.

UK Parliamentary records further exhibit Britain’s participation in the Alliance of Civilizations and calls for other nations to follow their example. British Minister for International Development Shahid Malikis is Britain’s representative for the Alliance of Civilizations. According to Malikis, the UK favors tackling radicalization and that “true Islam is a key part of the solution to extremism in the name of Islam”. Malikis statement reminds me of the Alice Bailey doctrine on the partial sealing of the door where evil dwells which says:

“…Palestine should no longer be called the Holy Land; its sacred places are only the passing relics of three dead and gone religions. The spirit has gone out of the old faiths and the true spiritual light is transferring itself into a new form which will manifest on earth eventually as the new world religion. To this form all that is true and right and good in the old forms will contribute, for the forces of right will withdraw that good, and incorporate it in the new form. Judaism is old, obsolete and separative and has no true message for the spiritually-minded which cannot be better given by the newer faiths; the Moslem faith has served its purpose and all true Moslems await the coming of the Imam Mahdi who will lead them to light and to spiritual victory; the Christian faith also has served its purpose; its Founder seeks to bring a new Gospel and a new message that will enlighten all men everywhere…”

Bailey’s “true Moslems”, I believe, are those practicing Islamic mysticism, the Sufis. Today, Sufism is being portrayed to the westerners as the peaceful moderates of Islam who are valuable allies in the war against extremism which dismisses the Al-Qaeda ties to Sufism. (Additional criticisms of Sufism may be found here, here, and here.)

This would leave one to wonder why some of the British leadership would turn to “the most ferocious soldiers of Islam” and embrace a set of “common values” which are being defined by individuals who are hostile towards the West. One British MP of specific interests is counter-terrorism Home Secretary Jacqui Smith who praised the Sufis for providing a template of values in which we can live.

Smith made recent headlines when she included U.S. talk radio host Michael Savage among terrorists who are not permitted to enter Britain. Here are links to the official exclusion list along with the Smith’s announcement to Parliament.

Michael Savage is known for his conservative views and his opposition to global governance, communist ideology, illegal immigration, homosexual behavior, etc. Savage is a defender of national sovereignty. Overall, Michael Savage does not appear to share the Alliance of Civilizations values system and world view. Savage’s ideology is one which the Alliance considers exclusionary; intolerant; and violently radicalizing.

As I read Smith’s statements why she banned Michael Savage from Britain, I couldn’t help but notice the identities in her language and the corresponding Alliance of Civilizations’ Terms of Reference. According to Alliance, “to guide this initiative, the Secretary-General, in consultation with the co-sponsors, has established a High-level Group of eminent persons with the following objectives:

To provide an assessment of new and emerging threats to international peace and security in particular the political, social and religious forces that foment extremism;
To identify collective actions, at both the institutional and civil society levels, to address these trends;
To recommend a practicable programme of action for States, international organizations and civil society aimed at promoting harmony among societies.”

“Toward this end, the High-level Group will consider practical strategies:
To strengthen mutual understanding, respect and shared values among different peoples, cultures and civilizations;
To counter the influence of groups fomenting extremism and the exclusion of others who do not share their worldviews;
To counter the threat to world peace and stability posed by extremism;
To foster awareness in all societies that security is indivisible and is a vital need for all, and that global cooperation is an indispensable prerequisite for security, stability and development.

As I read Smith’s rationale for naming Savage amongst terrorists, I began to suspect she had applied Alliance of Civilizations’ guidelines which guided her to the conclusion he is a terrorist. According to Smith:

"I think it's important that people understand the sorts of values and sorts of standards that we have here the fact that it's a privilege to come and the sort of things that mean you won't be welcome in this country,"
"Coming to this country is a privilege. If you can't live by the rules that we live by, the standards and values that we live by, we should exclude you from this country and, what's more, now we will make public those people that we have excluded.
"This is someone who has fallen into the category of fomenting hatred, of such extreme views and expressing them in such a way that it is actually likely to cause inter-community tension or even violence if that person were allowed into the country”
"If people have so clearly overstepped the mark in terms of the way not just that they are talking but the sort of attitudes that they are expressing to the extent that we think that this is likely to cause or have the potential to cause violence or inter-community tension in this country, then actually I think the right thing is not to let them into the country in the first place. Not to open the stable door then try to close it later," Ms Smith said.

What about individuals presently living in Britain who violate these shared values? It may be worth taking a second look at Gordon Brown’s advisor who recently called for the UK population be reduced by one half.

Noteworthy is that dissenting voice in Britain named Melanie Phillips has also noticed the Alliance of Civilizations influence over British politics. Phillips writes “much of the problem is that the government’s advisers and civil servants have had their heads filled with the revisionist and ahistorical rubbish about Islam produced by authors such as Karen Armstrong or John Esposito.” Incidentally, Malaysia banned Karen Armstrong and John Esposito’s books citing reasons that they disrupted peace and harmony.

Michael Savage has raised an excellent question: how did his name reach the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith’s desk? For now, I can only speculate. Yet as I look at people and organizations I believe may share an interest in seeing Michael Savage disappear from the air waves, one common connection keeps coming up. That is the Alliance of Civilizations.

United States Department of Homeland Security
Michael Savage has named Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano in a lawsuit charging her with violation of Americans’ civil rights by subjecting them to unfavorable treatment based upon their political ideologies. Under the Bush Administration the United States privately supported the Alliance of Civilizations yet sent no high-level representation to AoC forums. President Obama’s has changed the tone by personally attending a dinner where he was expected to speak at the Second Alliance of Civilizations Forum. The Alliance of Civilizations’ doctrines are already noticeable in U.S. counter-terrorism materials.

Council of American-Islamic Relations
The Council for American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is an organization which has pursued interfaith dialogue as a means to resolve the clash among civilizations. Some of CAIR’s speakers favor Sufism and present it as the more peaceful aspect of Islam. Citations from CAIR’s material can be found in Alliance of Civilizations’ reports. The CAIR-Alliance relationship is most noticeable in its associations with Shaykh Hamza Yusuf and Alliance High Level Group members Mohammad Khatami and John Esposito. CAIR is a signatory of a Common Word which interconnects with Religions for Peace and the Alliance of Civilizations initiatives.

CAIR is an organization having a contentious relationship with Michael Savage. Despite CAIR’s claims that it does not support Britain’s ban of Michael Savage, it is behind Hate Hurts America, an interfaith dialogue organization calling upon companies to withdraw advertisements from Savage broadcasts for his criticisms of Islam. The FBI has recently severed ties with CAIR for its involvement with a Hamas a terrorist organization.

Bill Moyers
Michael Savage posted on his web site an article by the American Thinker which questions whether Bill Moyers “helped to set the stage for the latest UK-based demonization of Savage” by portraying him an extremist who promotes violent radicalization. Bill Moyers is an advocate of interfaith dialogue. Among his advisors is Karen Armstrong, High Level Group member of the Alliance of Civilizations.

In the upcoming days, we will hopefully learn of Jacqui Smith’s decision-making process to include Savage on Britain’s terrorist list. Regardless of how it happened, we are witnessing a fore shadow of what we might expect from the Alliance of Civilizations’ global conscience, global counter-terrorism efforts. Michael Savage is among the first to find himself within the Alliance of Civilizations’ domain which it has claimed for itself. Savage is a major media personality standing at the intersection of politics and religion.

May the Lord help Michael Savage. May the Lord help us all.

Free Speech in Fetters

2009-05-03T16:46:00.005-05:00

The Second Forum of Alliance of Civilizations has passed and the American media coverage has amounted to little more than did or did not Obama attend the Forum? One might have expected better media coverage with questions ranging from what is the Alliance of Civilizations to what is United States’ interest in this initiative. Instead, the media expressed confusion despite Turkey’s Foreign Ministry had published President Obama’s itinerary on its web site. The itinerary shows President Obama was expected to give a speech at the forum.

Heritage Foundation writer Brett Schaefer contacted both the White House and the Alliance of Civilizations seeking confirmation that the President would indeed address the conference. The White House said it simply did not know. The Alliance responded it would neither confirm nor deny the President’s attendance. If what the Alliance has planned for us is such a good thing, why not be more forthcoming? Why does the media neglect to give this coverage? In Hitler’s Germany, a resistance group known as the White Rose wrote in their first pamphlet:

"Nothing is so unworthy of a civilized nation as allowing itself to be governed without opposition by an irresponsible clique that has yielded to base instinct. It is certain that today every honest German is ashamed of his government…by means of gradual, treacherous, systematic abuse, the system has put every man into a spiritual prison. Only now, finding himself lying in fetters, has he become aware of his fate."

This eerily describes present day governments whose politicians have eroded them giving favor to global governance, doesn’t it? These days, I believe the media is contributing to similar treacherous, systematic abuse. Yet, along with the rest of us, the media, too, shall soon learn of its fate. What a shock it should be as they learn they assisted in sealing it.

This September the UN General Assembly will vote whether the Alliance of Civilizations initiative moves from that of preparatory to activation stage. The Alliance openly calls for tight controls on free speech. A Media Rapid Response force has been established to provide newspapers and television stations reporting “guidelines” during times of crisis, particularly in the area of where politics and religion intersect. Given the system of global governance intends to unify religion and the state rather than maintain separation, everything now falls within this intersection. To ensure that media coverage adheres to a code of conduct, the Alliance of Civilizations has called for journalistic accreditation as well as a review board which will monitor news coverage. The Alliance, to show it upholds the principles of a free press, says that the he media will be “self-regulating” although it acknowledges that “regulation is not possible without pressure to bear”.

There are two individuals whom I would like to credit for recently drawing attention to the Alliance’s global gag on free speech. These articles are by Claudia Rosett writing for Forbes and Brett Schaefer writing for Heritage Foundation. These journalists get it. Claudia Rosett has clearly spent time reading the Alliance of Civilizations materials. Quoting from Rosett:

“…the Alliance in 2005 set up a secretariat in New York, and enlisted a founding panel of 20 "eminent persons" to further shape its agenda. This group, heavy on eminences from Islamic states, included Iran's Khatami--proposer of the original Dialogue. ..And in the four years since it morphed into existence as the latest phase of the Iranian-sponsored Dialogue, the Alliance has become another megaphone for some of the U.N.'s most troubling campaigns. In deference to Islamic anti-blasphemy laws, the Alliance favors a global gag on free speech. ....”

Among the latest attacks on free speech include the resolution to combat defamation of religion which was voted on by Human Rights Council last March (analysis here). This defamation of religions framework has its way of appearing throughout the interlocking UN initiatives. The Alliance of Civilizations is committed to making it a high priority.

Incompetence with Confidence

2009-04-15T22:21:00.008-05:00

The cat was let out of the bag this week as Americans received a dose of reality from United States Department of Homeland Security Report on Rightwing Extremism. I found no surprises in the report. This is what I have been writing of for quite some time. For those new to this blog, the DHS strategy is consistent with the Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy in which you will find the Alliance of Civilizations as the centerpiece. Below are links to the counter-terrorism pieces I published earlier:

Who are the targets of the Department of Homeland Security? It is none other than individuals who politically dissent and/or who believe in an “end of days” theology. Imagine that. I find it incredible that the people in these counter-terrorism positions are shocked that one might believe in an “end of days” scenario. Karen Armstrong, for example, bitter over her life in a convent seeks to incite hatred against Christians by leveling false charges of anti-Semitism and accusations that Christians oppose democracy. It’s quite an absurd notion that Christians would oppose a form of government that permits religious freedom. It’s the Alliance’s form of democracy—a safe democracy—which Christians oppose as its intent is to unify the state and religion into one cohesive unit. No more separation of church and state there. One might look at Barbara Marx Hubbard who presented her Citizens Solutions Councils to be incorporated into the Office of the Presidency. Hubbard’s writings are terroristic in nature as they intend to incite violence against the “egocentric” one half of the world’s population and advocates destruction of this “defective seed” from the social body. But let’s not go overboard here, that couldn’t possibly be reason for concern.

Janet Napolitano stands behind the content of the Department’s report. Let’s look a bit further at who is on the list of political enemies or those prone to violent radicalization:

Individuals concerned with Second Amendment rights (right to bear arms);
Veterans;
Individuals critical of the first black president’s policies;
Individuals concerned with single issues such as abortion, gay marriage, etc.
Individuals who believe the old conspiracy theories of the ‘90s—that a “New World Order” would emerge following an economic crisis; etc. etc.

Wait! I fit several of those categories. But I’m starting to feel a little more at ease that I may be able to remove myself from the conspiracy theory category. It looks like I might be able to banish it back into the ‘90s and start to relax in the peace and security of these present moments. But first I need to verify, one can’t be too careful. So I decided to search various web sites for “global governance”. The world body of the United Nations might be a good starting point in seeking that comfort. Hmm, no comfort there: 1,710 documents found containing the words global governance and 410 containing new world order.

Disappointed, I decided to travel down the electronic boulevard to the Brookings Institute because I know they are in “the know”. No comfort there either—2,140 documents related to global governance. And they’re more concerned about securing the world than the Department of Homeland Security. Don't you just really feel secure knowing these people are securing the world?

By now I’m feeling let down. Perhaps Janet Napolitano is plain incompetent. Well, at least she’s confidently incompetent. But heck, maybe the United Nations and the Brookings Institute are conspiracy theorists too, so she deserves maybe one final chance. I decided to head over to the electronic Main Street of Amazon dot com. There I found 6,561 publications on global governance. Sorry Janet, you don't know what you're talking about on this one.

Responding to heavy criticism, the Department of Homeland Security's response somewhat resembles this...

Obama to Attend Istanbul Alliance of Civilizations Forum

2009-04-03T01:08:00.005-05:00

Newspapers throughout the Middle East are excitedly proclaiming that a new era of relations have begun as President Obama is to take part in the Istanbul Alliance of Civilizations forum.

Read the articles here, here, here, here, and here.

Yet the major news media in the United States reports the visit to be a roundtable discussion with students. See Fox, NBC, and ABC news coverage. Forbes Online is the only U.S. media giving the Istanbul Conference the accurate coverage it deserves--good work Forbes! It looks as though the big three are merely reporting what the White House has provided.

It appears as though the White House wants to keep a low profile within the United States where the Alliance of Civilizations is concerned. President Obama may be having a roundtable with students, but I expect his audience will look more like this.

EU-US Integration and the More Equal Citizen

2009-03-29T14:25:00.015-05:00

A recent European Union Parliamentary press release called for President Obama to politically and economically integrate the United States with the European Union. The measures would create two councils: the Political Council, charged with setting a common foreign security policy; and the Economic Council overseeing unification of the markets. I expect integration would also include changes in citizenship based upon the EU Citizens Programme guidelines. The programme creates a global citizen, or an EU citizenship which is “open to the world”.

Expected to preside over the Political Council would be EU High Representative for Common Foreign Security Policy, a position presently held by Javier Solana. The role of the U.S. Congress would be that of “making proposals” rendering it as powerless as the European Parliament. Should this integration take place, global governance stakeholders will have achieved what Alliance of Civilizations’ Giandomenico Picco called for at the 2005 Madrid Counter-Terrorism Conference—a “Safe Democracy”—one in which national parliaments no longer are the “monopolist voice of the people”. Bear in mind that the UN Alliance of Civilizations initiative is the globalization of Solana’s social cohesion policies.

The press release also called upon the U.S. to ratify and accede to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Ratification would subject American citizens to prosecution by the world court for human rights violations. Stakeholders in the global governance apparatus openly tell us what they consider to be human rights violations: political dissent; monotheistic religious belief or belief systems not condusive to sustainable development; separatist or divisive thought; etc. Anything identified as interfering with the “common humanity’s” joining into a “collective whole” has been declared to be an “enemy of the civilization”. For example:

“UNESCO promotes respect for all dimensions of cultural diversity since it is the very fabric of humankind and the “common heritage of humanity”, as stipulated in the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity…the Declaration is dedicated to preventing segregation and fundamentalism which, in the name of cultural differences, could sanctify those differences and in doing so, counter the message of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. As we can read…No one may invoke cultural diversity to infringe upon human rights guaranteed by international law, nor to limit their scope.” – Rosa Guerreiro, UNESCO Why terrorism? Strasbourg April 25-27, 2007

“Religion as a social force can be harnessed to build bridges or manipulate to erect walls. How religion functions in society depends upon a number of factors, among them, the political, economic, and cultural environment in which the particular religion operates. Justice, love and compassion – values that are highly cherished in any religion…Since these values are universal, religion, which serves as a conduit for them, should also be preached and practised in a genuinely universal manner. This is what one expects the practitioners of religions to do in the coming century to counter the challenge of globalization. They should discard the narrow, exclusive concept of religion, which often confines virtue and goodness to one’s own kind. Justice and compassion in this exclusive approach seldom transcend one’s own religious boundaries. We should eliminate forever such religious exclusivists.” – Dr. Abduljalil Sajid, The Role of Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue in Fighting Terrorism, Extremism, and Intolerance and Resolving Conflicts; Organization for Security and Cooperation of Europe.

The New Order has been guaranteed Rome Statute governance powers even in nations that do not ratify the statute. The UN initiative called Responsibility to Protect , or R2P, redefines nations’ sovereignties as shifting “from sovereignty as control to sovereignty as responsibility”. A nation, under the R2P framework, is subject to military intervention should it be unwilling or unable to prosecute individuals who violate international human rights laws. The rationale is that R2P’s function is to protect the human rights of the global citizen (“we the peoples of the United Nations”) which gives it the right to suspend an uncooperative nation’s sovereignty. The UN has gained support for R2P by presenting the case that it needs a mechanism to stop and prevent crimes such as genocide, an objective which is difficult to argue. It is the underlying pieces that pose the problem. The United Nations has built a case in which it has declared half of the world’s population to be terrorists. What is it that they intend to do with this population? In the interest of counter-terrorism measures, could the crime of genocide committed by the UN's hand be considered just? Former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has said the intent is to redesign the internet and use it as a weapon against "terrorists". He also said measures would be taken to remove "terrorists" from the world’s financial system.

EU-US integration is not new. Military integration already has taken place and is recognizable in the form of the 2003 Berlin-Plus Agreement. This agreement ensures the transfer of American assets to the EU’s Political Security Committee—a committee presided over by Solana—should it be needed for crisis management. Solana interprets this to include American service personnel.

I suspect, based upon the past and present behavior of the United States, that our leadership plans to pursue integration to avoid becoming a failed state. R2P characterizes an economically collapsed nation as a sem-failed state. A failed state is where degredation occurs to the point a government is no longer able to control the population within its borders. Last year while the banks were announcing failure, Bush Administration Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced integration of 20,000 Rapid Reaction Forces into every major U.S. city would be forthcoming. Gates’ has continued his role as Defense Secretary under the Obama Administration. These Rapid Reaction Forces appear very similar to Solana’s Headline Goal Battlegroups. Already, within the United States, there are signs that UN’s Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy language is now being incorporated in counter-terrorism training materials. Missouri law enforcement counter-terrorism training materials have emerged indicating that the police should look for signs such as third-party political bumper stickers, political dissent, etc. in identification of terrorist suspects.

I can think of many reasons why we should not integrate, but those who have already experienced intregration pains best tell the story. Consider EU rotational President Vaclav Klaus' warnings that the European Union’s governance structures resemble that of former Soviet-era dictatorships. Or from the South American-EU integration process we have Rita Giacalone’s warnings. Dr. Giacalone, Professor of Economic History and Coordinator of the Group of Regional Integration, tells us that South American countries have entered into association agreements with with the EU out of necessity and not conviction. She conveys that integrating countries have drawn that “the EU, under the name of democracy and good governance, is imposing “a complex system of domination and management of the non Western world” and that the European project is inherently antidemocratic.

Fuhrer Rising

2008-12-23T10:44:00.015-06:00

In May 1982 a man named Benjamin Crème published full page ads in newspapers throughout the world proclaiming “the Christ is Now Here”. That ad campaign was intended to prepare the population to accept the Theosophical teaching that Maitreya (a messiah rooted in occultism) and his entourage (the masters of wisdom) were about to step forward and govern the earth. According to the ads, Maitreya was to make his appearance within two months. That never happened. Maitreya’s delayed career caused embarrassment for many Theosophical circles. Crème subsequently changed the name of his organization to Share International.

Crème later explained that Maitreya’s delay was because humanity had not been adequately conditioned to accept his teachings. Hence Maitreya would occupy himself working to lessen the severity of natural disasters until conditions are right for his emergence. We learned the masters of wisdom would further condition humanity and emit stronger “initiatory rays of enlightenment” upon the earth. Those attuned to those impulses would receive them and be prepared for transcendence. Perhaps this conditioning is best portrayed in a prayer called the Great Invocation—when recited aloud is believed to quicken Maitreya’s arrival: “let purpose guide the little wills of men, the purpose which the masters know and serve”.

And shortly thereafter more aggressive conditioning did take place. A key Theosophical doctrine that all religions worship the same god but follow different paths to the Almighty was being projected everywhere: books, talk shows, entertainment, and even church pulpits. We were flattered with how wise we are because our souls were old and had passed through many life cycles. This “wisdom” had prepared us for the coming earth changes, or conscious evolution. Corporations everywhere required employees to attend “diversity training” where we were introduced to meditation. According to Theosophy, meditation, along with initiation, is the glue that binds together the new civilization. While many people consider meditation to be contemplation, the new age forms desire an outcome which leads to altered states of consciousness or a self-induced hypnotic state. Once one becomes accustomed to entering in and out of hypnotic states, I cannot help but believe that person has become vulnerable and easily manipulated by another trained hypnotist. Benjamin Crème has said that when Maitreya emerges he will appear on television and telepathically communicate to each of his followers in their own language. This claim brings to memory old film footage I've watched of Hitler's Germany where people appear to be locked in a trance.

Should we dismiss Crème’s writings because he erred in 1982? I believe doing so would be a mistake. Crème, once again, is publishing press releases with a renewed vigor. His latest, which may be read on the online edition of the Wall Street Journal, indicates that Maitreya is ready to start his career and build upon the earth a “brilliant new civilization”.

This press release concerns me because over the past year I’ve noticed a significant level of cooperation between Crème’s Share International, the United Nations’ Alliance of Civilizations, and the Aquarian Age Community. The Aquarian Age Community—the spiritual foundation of the United Nations—also recognizes Maitreya as the coming world spiritual and political leader. Both Crème and the Aquarian Community have expressed the opinion that the Alliance of Civilizations is the vehicle which will be used to materialize the new civilization.

According to the press releases, Maitreya is to be the Christ to Christians, the Imam Mahdi to Muslims, Krishna to Hindus, the Messiah to Jews, and Maitreya Buddha to Buddhists. Many people who subscribe to this universalist doctrine may find themselves in a bit of a dilemma. Does Maitreya fulfill your prophetic expectations or do your religious texts portray something altogether different? Is your Christ really Maitraya? If you reject the universalist doctrine, according to the Alliance of Civilizations you have an “exclusionary” ideology and are prone to violent radicalization and have terrorist leanings.

In the Armageddon Script, Theosophist Peter Lemesurier wrote that they have studied all the world religions and intend to fulfill all religions’ prophetic expectations so they can get on with the business of creating a new heaven and earth of their own devising. Share International has consistently said that Maitreya would not appear until the United States has economically collapsed and the world feels the pain of a global economic meltdown. I cannot help but believe the economic collapse was assisted with a push. The Alliance of Civilizations has said it could not implement its agenda until the United States’ sovereignty was redefined and subject to global governance.

Throughout 2008 Alliance of Civilizations’ Co-chair Federico Mayor’s message has been “no more delays. No more reports. No more meetings to agree on what has been agreed upon for years. It is time for action”. It is time for action; these words sound familiar to those of us who have read Peter Lemesurier’s Armageddon Script: “Their script is now written, subject only to last-minute editing and stage-directions. The stage itself, albeit as yet in darkness, is almost ready. Down in the pit, the subterranean orchestra is already tuning up. The last-minute, walk-on parts are even now being filled. Most of the main actors, one suspects, have already taken up their roles. Soon it will be time for them to come on stage, ready for the curtain to rise. The time for action will have come.”

Let us remember the history of what happens when man attempts to become God.

Obama's Socialist Vision?

2008-10-26T11:09:00.013-05:00

In 2007 European Union High Representative Javier Solana launched an initiative called Managing Global Insecurity saying “the aim of this project is ambitious and urgent: to launch a new reform effort for the global security system in 2009”. At that time, Solana told the United States that we will enter into the system of global governance by year end 2008. This initiative is ambitious. It bridges multiple interlocking security initiatives for use in the administration of global governance. Most notable is the Shared Security doctrine which aims to incorporate civil society and the military into one security apparatus. The idea is that in a world without borders traditional threats to nations no longer are other states; rather they come from radicalized individuals who reside within the nation. This is the core of the United Nations global counter-terrorism strategy. Nations therefore need to practice “responsible democracy” to ensure protection of the global citizenry— “we the people of the United Nations”—and root out terrorists from within. Solana refers to this as ‘war amongst the people”. The result is to be a global human security zone.

Spearheading the implementation of Shared Security is an organization which I have monitored from its beginnings—the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations. The Alliance of Civilizations professes its mission to be “the global governance of the culture”. Its foundation is traceable to the European Union’s social cohesion policy—the social dimension of the Barcelona Process—as architected by former Marxist and present socialist Javier Solana. Solana’s social cohesion strategy was formed to “straighten out the clash of civilizations” by creating a new common civilization based upon a system of “shared values”. The new civilization will be realized once it has successfully combated religious fundamentalism worldwide. In 2006 Solana’s vision moved a step closer to reality when Kofi Annan made the Alliance of Civilizations the central organ of the United Nations global counter-terrorism strategy. The work of the Alliance includes the establishment of a global ethic and identification of those radical ideologies which lead to terrorism.

Despite Alliance of Civilizations’ claims that they seek religious tolerance, the opposite is true. As one takes the time to read what the Alliance is saying, it becomes glaringly clear that the initiative is openly hostile towards religion, in particular the three monotheistic faiths. Angelo Santagostino Chair of European Economic Integration describes the initiative as “offensive and unjustifiably hostile” towards religion. The Alliance’s governing body, the High Level Group, attributes religious fundamentalism and extremism to those who refuse to agree with a Universalist world view that we all worship the same God but follow different paths. Those individuals, they say, have adopted ‘exclusivist” ideologies which are violently radicalizing. Political dissenters who oppose globalization also fall into this category. Organizations such as Hezbollah are now considered reasonable because they practice “tactical terrorism” meaning that they have a political wing with which negotiations are possible. Karen Armstrong, apostate nun, “religious historian” and Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group member earlier this year announced that she is writing guidelines for the interpretation of religious texts. The High Level Group has said that they have conducted a pedagogical exercise in truth which they will provide the civilization in mid 2010 and it is only extremists who will reject it. One might expect Armstrong’s guidelines to reflect her personal theological arguments such as Christians have perverted religious texts by adopting a belief in Christ’s divinity; the serpent was more truthful than God in the garden; that God has an evil impulse and that, being a good thing, is something we need to embrace; Mary, upon learning of her pregnancy, broke into song of the coming new world order, ad nauseum.

The Alliance of Civilizations and Shared Security have been given teeth. Solana envisions his global model of Civilian Military Co-operation (CIMIC) which subjects civil society to military rule to be implemented in the event of a crisis. Solana, being a former Secretary-General of NATO, has incorporated the Alliance of Civilizations and the Barcelona Process into the NATO framework through the Riga and Prague Summit Declarations. Solana has repeatedly said the goal is to utilize American assets. The Berlin-Plus Agreement signed by President Bush gives Solana control of American assets in the event of a crisis situation. Solana’s Headline Goals which highly militarizes the European Union is scheduled to be fully functioning in 2010. Solana speaks the language of peace while preparing for war.

I write this because America is about to step deeper into this mess. I, as do other Americans, desire change but not at the cost of implementing a version of European socialism which has wreck havoc on world before. We are already witnessing the nationalization of the banking system and not only within the United States, but at a global level. This may be the global crisis the Solana seeks to turn into opportunity.

In the upcoming elections, what I am finding troubling is that on Barack Obama’s blog one may find his support for the Alliance of Civilizations initiative. He has said that in the interests of the common humanity, he will spend $5 billion annually during the first three years of his presidency implementing a Shared Security doctrine. I would ask of Barack Obama to carefully re-examine his affiliations and in particular the Alliance of Civilizations initiative. It is worth heeding Angelo Santagostino’s warning that “the UN has been often under attack as a useless institution. This time it has shown itself to be not so much useless but actually dangerous.”

Here is the slightly different version of the above article published by the Central Wisconsin Star News.

An Open Letter to Politicians Regarding the Alliance of Civilizations Initiative

2008-08-06T22:55:00.012-05:00

Early in my research I couldn’t help but notice New Zealand’s heavy participation in the Alliance of Civilizations initiative. New Zealand is strategically important to the Alliance of Civilizations in that it is considered to be the bridge between Asia and the West. New Zealand planned the advancement of the Alliance of Civilizations throughout the Asia-Pacific during its 2007 Auckland Symposium. What a thrill it must have been for Javier Solana as he witnessed first hand the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (AESAN) officially incorporate his Alliance of Civilizations social cohesion policy into its framework during the 40th ASEAN Ministerial Meeting.

One morning early this year as I started my routine of coffee and checking e-mail, I noticed a letter from one of my New Zealand readers. This gentleman asked for my opinion on a letter he had received from his country’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Winston Peters. Mr. Peters’ letter addressed an inquiry questioning why New Zealand had financially supported an initiative such as the Alliance of Civilizations which sought to syncretize religion. As I read Mr. Peters’ letter I was troubled by his assurances that Christians need not worry as we have representation by respected “Christian” theologians and historians on the High Level Group. I thought to myself you are going to have to do better than that. Giving Mr. Peters the benefit of the doubt, I proceeded to provide my reader with educational materials he might pass along to Mr. Peters if he were so inclined. To date, Mr. Peters has not responded. I’ve been told not to expect a response from Mr. Peters anytime soon as he is preoccupied with a financial scandal for failure to disclose a $100,000 gift.

What follows is Winston Peters’ letter regarding the Alliance of Civilizations. Click on the files to expand them. Following that is the letter that was sent to Mr. Peters. This letter is not only for Mr. Peters, but to all politicians who may be mislead and involved with the Alliance of Civilizations initiative. To those, I urge you to examine the evidence and reconsider your positions.

Follow up letter to Mr. Peters or whomever this may apply:

Dear Rt Hon Winston Peters:

Thank you for your response to my inquiry regarding the Alliance of Civilisations (AoC) initiative. I believe you have correctly stated that New Zealanders are concerned with countering violence and terrorism as well as avoiding Samuel Huntington’s theorised “clash of civilisations”. However, I believe that once New Zealanders become aware of some of the underlying aspects of the AoC initiative that they will call for a different solution to the problem. The purpose of this letter is to alert you to some of those aspects which you may not be aware.

A paper prepared for the August 2007 Clash or Cooperation of Civilizations Workshop questioned why Spain choose to introduce the Alliance of Civilisations initiative to the United Nations rather than the European Union?1 It concluded that the European Union already has an alliance of civilisations in the form of the Barcelona Process and that implementation of the initiative at the international level would globalise Spain’s social cohesion policies. The social cohesion dimension of the Barcelona Process was first developed and introduced by Javier Solana in 1995 while he served as Spain’s rotational president on the European Council. The social dimension has the objective to create a common civilisation through cultural integration and the combating of religious fundamentalism worldwide2. Approaching its10-year anniversary in November 2005, the Barcelona Process appeared to be a European embarrassment and destined for failure.3 Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan had warned a month earlier that the EU could not become a global power without the Alliance of Civilisations.4 During the Barcelona +10 Conference, Javier Solana took measures to strengthen the Process by partnering the Anna Lindh Foundation with the AoC5. The Process of social cohesion was solidified as a result of the cartoon crisis in which Javier Solana, Zapatero, Erdogan, and the AoC High Level Group (HLG) were able to act quickly and turn crisis into opportunity.6

Solana’s social cohesion policy objective to combat religious fundamentalism is one that deserves scrutinisation and definition. A thorough examination of AoC’s writings begins to show we are presently at a dangerous intersection of state regulation vs. religious freedom. The AoC has said that rather than ban religion, it should bring it under the control of a centralised governing authority.7 The Final Report of the High Level Group calls for registration of all religious schools8 as well as a requirement that they teach “sound” interpretation of their texts9. The Alliance of Civilisations has said that it has conducted an exercise in truth and intends to provide that truth to all individuals. Spanish Prime Minister Zapatero has said that religion is the “tobacco of the people”.10 His government’s contribution to the initiative directs the Alliance to counter “those who feed on exclusion and claim sole ownership of the truth”.11 This direction ought to make one pause especially since the HLG has been placed in the position of formulating the global conscience for the United Nations’ Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy12. HLG member John Esposito has said that any person who believes their religion to be true and another’s to be false has adopted the “theology of hate” which Esposito continues on and associates them with terrorism.13 It escapes Esposito’s attention that every religion makes an “exclusive” truth claim, including the theology currently being advanced by High Level Group.

I would like to briefly discuss Karen Armstrong as you indicated she provides Christian representation on the HLG. Karen Armstrong, a former Catholic nun, after leaving the church identified herself as an atheist. Following a television career in which she says she attempted to destroy religion, she had what she describes as a mystical experience. This is reflected in her approach to religion. Armstrong is openly sympathetic to and espouses Share International’s14 “Maitreya the Christ is now here” doctrines15 which are anti-Semitic, anti-fundamentalist, and anti-Catholic. In a recent Share International interview, Armstrong launches various attacks against Christianity and, in particular, the core theological foundation of Christian belief, i.e., Christ’s divinity.16 Having been a former nun, surely she must realise this would be considered heresy by Vatican’s standards.”17 It is these types of inflammatory remarks that the AoC claims to avoid. It appears this may be a doctrine derived from the AoC’s exercise in truth and may foreshadow what we might expect of “sound religious interpretation” to be provided to Christians. Armstrong further accuses Christians of anti-Semitism for opposing mandatory “baptism” which Share International refers to as mandatory “initiation.”18 She also incorrectly accuses Christians of opposing democracy. Perhaps she has confused Christians’ opposition to democracy with that of Giandomenico Picco’s AoC-advanced “safe democracy” which calls for the exclusion of the people and national parliaments from the political process.19

Archbishop Desmond Tutu’s has advanced the same theological arguments. Along with his attacks on Christian and Muslim theology, he has aligned himself with extremist organizations. An example may be found in Desmond Tutu’s service on the World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality20 which seats individuals such as Barbara Marx Hubbard who openly calls for planetary genocide to be conducted through what she identifies as a “selection process”.21 By Hubbard’s account, one is given the opportunity to undergo planetary “initiation” or face personal extinction. Hubbard says that ‘we come to bring death…we do this for the sake of the planet…the riders of the pale horse are about to pass among you…they will separate the wheat from the chaff…this is the most painful hour in earth’s history.”22 Clearly Hubbard’s writings epitomise extremism and violent radicalisation. Should not Archbishop Tutu denounce such extremist theology rather than align himself with it?

Finally, the AoC, the Helsinki Process and Religions for Peace have jointly introduced the doctrine of “Shared Security”23 which incorporates the doctrines of Canadian-architected Responsibility to Protect and the European Union’s Human Security. On the surface these doctrines appear benign, but an in-depth examination shows a security model in which the military polices the civilian population. A summary of this model may be found in Javier Solana’s Human Security Doctrine for Europe where he calls for “the human security response force should be multinational with national military building blocks not below battalion level.” 24

In conclusion, the AoC’s formation to counter “cross-cultural polarisation” involves a militarised interlocking network comprising mainly of NATO, the EU, and UN “peacekeeping” forces. As Australian Dr. Mike Ellis has correctly observed regarding the AoC’s mission to address cross-cultural polarisation, “Is this not indeed, a euphemism, for the involvement of the military using "dual-use" technology in law enforcement affairs in secular society?” 25 These are but a few criticisms of the Alliance of Civilisations initiative. As Jean Monnet Chair of European Integration Angelo Santagostino has concluded “the UN has been often under attack as a useless institution. This time it has shown itself to be not so much useless but actually dangerous.”26

1. Koussay Boulaich, “The Alliance of Civilisations: a global project or a key aspect for the European Foreign Policy?”, College of Europe, http://www.ccis.aau.dk/GetAsset.action?contentId=2158460&assetId=2361376

2. Magda El-Ghitany, “Partnership in Question”, Yale Global Online, http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/display.article?id=6589

3. Álvaro de Vasconcelos, Director IEEI Lisbon, “Summit Drama – and Beyond”, EuroMeSCo e.NEWS, http://www.euromesco.net/images/enews_2_en.pdf, December 2005

4. “Turkey Rejects Latest EU Proposals”, China Radio International, http://english.cri.cn/2239/2005-10-3/51@275026.htm

5. “The Euro-Mediterranean Summit in Barcelona and the Anna Lindh Foundation”, EuroMed, http://www.assemblee-nat.com/europe/euromed/anglais/doc1.pdf

6. Bertrand De Crombrugghe, “The cartoon issue: Turning crisis into opportunity”, OSCE Magazine, April 2006 http://www.osce.org/publications/sg/2006/03/18565_569_en.pdf

7. Gaspar Martinez, “Report of the Hearings with the International Community & Civil Society regarding the United Nations High Level Group for the Alliance of Civilisations”, United Nations Alliance of Civilisations, http://www.unaoc.org/repository/hearings_report.pdf, 17 July 2006, pg. 29

8. “Report of the High Level Group, VII. Recommendations, Section 3”, United Nations Alliance of Civilisations, http://www.unaoc.org/repository/HLG_Report.pdf, 13 November 2006, pg. 34

9. “Report of the High Level Group, Section 4.15”, United Nations Alliance of Civilisations, http://www.unaoc.org/repository/HLG_Report.pdf, 13 November 2006, pg. 14

10. Angelo Santagostino, “Alliance of Civilisations and Solidarity Between Civilisations: A Lost Occasion for Europe”, Global Jean Monnet Conference ECSA-World Conference, http://ec.europa.eu/education/programmes/llp/jm/more/confglobal06/contribution_santagostino.pdf, 23/24 November 2006, pgs 4-5

11. MINISTERIO DE ASUNTOS EXTERIORES Y DE COOPERACIÓN, “Alliance of Civilizations”, United Nations Alliance of Civilisations, http://www.unaoc.org/repository/statement_foreign_ministry_english.pdf, November 2005, pg. 10

12. Eric Rosand, “Symposium on ‘Advancing the Implementation of the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy’”, Center on Global Counter-Terrorism Cooperation, http://www.globalct.org/images/content/pdf/Remarks/er_vienna_symposium.pdf, pg. 2

13. “The Doha Debates Special: Extremism”, “The Doha Debates”, http://www.thedohadebates.com/output/Page59.asp, 18/19 March 2006

14. http://www.share-international.org/

15. Constance E. Cumbey, “Karen Armstrong and the Alliance of Civilizations”, News With Views, http://www.newswithviews.com/Cumbey/constance15.htm, 12 October 2007

16. Andrea Bistrich, “Discovering the common ground of world religions”, Share International, http://www.unaoc.org/repository/armstrong_interview.pdf, Vol. 6, No. 7 September 2007

17. Catechism of the Catholic Church, Chapter Two, I Believe In Jesus Christ, The Only Son of God, Vatican, http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG0015/__P1D.HTM

18. Constance E. Cumbey, “Karen Armstrong and the Alliance of Civilizations”, News With Views, http://www.newswithviews.com/Cumbey/constance15.htm, 12 October 2007

19. Giandomenico Picco, “Who is Knocking at the Door of Democracy”, Club of Madrid, http://pineline.blogspot.com/2007/12/dictator-at-door.html, March 2005

20. http://globalspirit.org/pages/wc_members.php

21. Barbara Marx Hubbard, “Chapter 3, The Selection Process”, Happy Birth Day Planet Earth – The Instant of Co-Operation, 1986 Ocean Tree Books, pg. 22-29

22. Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Book of Co-Creation: An Evolutionary Interpretation of the New Testament: Part III, The Revelation: Alternative To Armageddon, a three part self-published manuscript, 1980, Distributed/sold by Barbara Marx Hubbard

23.

http://wcrp.org/news/sg-update/april07

24. Presentation to Javier Solana, “A Human Security Doctrine for Europe – The Barcelona Report of the Study Group on Europe’s Security Capabilities”, http://www.centrodirittiumani.unipd.it/a_laurea/esami/ppsuenu/HSDoctrineEurope.pdf, 15 September 2004, pg. 23

25. Dr. Mike Ellis, “Commentary - Time To Act”, New Paradigm Journal Vol. 2, Issue 2,

http://www.newparadigmjournal.com/Oct2007/timetoact.htm, October 2007

26. Angelo Santagostino, “Alliance of Civilisations and Solidarity Between Civilisations: A Lost Occasion for Europe”, Global Jean Monnet Conference ECSA-World Conference, http://ec.europa.eu/education/programmes/llp/jm/more/confglobal06/contribution_santagostino.pdf, 23/24 November 2006, pg. 13

Pillars of the "Alliance of Civilization" The Earth Charter

2008-07-24T21:04:00.006-05:00

I had intended to copy into my blogspot for some time now an excellent piece from Constance Cumbey's pen. Pillars of the "Alliance of Civilization" The Earth Charter is one of the best articles I've read on the topic and one I find useful as a reference. I post it here for those researching the Alliance of Civilizations.

By: Constance Cumbey
January 10, 2007
NewsWithViews.com

A primary source for what was to become known as the Alliance of Civilizations, was the “Earth Charter Initiative.” Some chroniclers trace it back only as far as the 1987 Brundtland Commission. The Earth Charter Declaration contains language startlingly reminiscent of its salvation-based religion baiting precedents, Humanist Manifesto and the Humanist Manifesto II. One prominent Earth Charter proponent, Maurice Strong, was quoted saying that the Earth Charter would become as important as the Ten Commandments. Conflicting histories have been given and it appears that it was in progress, per Maurice Strong, much earlier than the 1987 Brundtland Commission.

"The whole question of an Earth Charter was in fact on the UN Agenda at Rio. We didn't quite make it. We did make some progress. At the Stockholm Conference, which was the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm in 1972, governments agreed to a historic declaration, which moved the world community towards what we now call an Earth Charter. Then, at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, as the Secretary General of that conference, I challenged governments to produce an Earth Charter.[1]

This obvious phase of implementation of what former UN Assistant Secretary General Robert Muller and Maurice Strong alike would acknowledge was “The Plan” was being developed on Muller’s Costa Rican turf in 1995.[2] For me 1995 was an interesting year. It was then I discovered the existence of another interesting “eminent personality,” in the form of one Dr. Javier Solana. He also has had enormous input in the “Alliance of Civilizations.”

If the declared agenda of the Alliance of Civilizations of regulating religious schools and their curriculums seem potentially draconian, its incorporated “Earth Charter” is even stranger. It had a Vermont eerie coming out party, complete with drums and masks, preceding on September 9, 2001. This happened at Shelburne Farms, Vermont. “Eminent personalities” who were part of that party included Dr. Steven Rockefeller, Jane Goodall. New Age musician Paul Winter and “peace walker” Satish Kumar.

Clearly, their Moloch was not appeased. Only two tragic days later the Eastern USA skies were aflame. The Twin Towers burned, the Pentagon burned, and an assaulted plane crashed and burned over Pennsylvania. The ritual masks and pagan drumbeat to usher their version of a 21st Century “Ark of the Covenant” clearly had not inoculated the world against war.

Another source of both Alliance of Civilizations and The Earth Charter inputs include Mikhail Gorbachev’s Green Cross. Author Wayne Peterson, a former United States State Department official and Fulbright Scholar executive wittingly or unwittingly reveals much of the possible agenda. He claims to personally knows Mikhail Gorbachev to be open devotee of “Maitreya, the Christ.”

This may be entirely possible. The Earth Charter website says it was “restarted” by Strong and Gorbachev “with the assistance of the government of the Netherlands.” Many New Age guides to Europe in my personal library say Holland is the New Age capital of Europe. Apart from the obvious Findhorn Community (Scotland) claims, this may well be true. As early as 1903 a major Theosophical world congress was held in Amsterdam. During the 1920’s Theosophists were vigorously working to smooth the way for world acceptance of a “Day of Declaration.” Jiddhu Krishnamurti was anointed by Annie Besant, then Theosophical Society leader to be the “new Christ” and lead the world into a “New Order.” Dutch Queen Wilhelmina was an open devotee of Krishnamurti and eagerly awaited that “Day of Declaration,” offering Dutch national radio to broadcast the awaited Maitreyan acceptance speech. World theosophists flocked to the Theosophists Holland Camp Ommen. There they camped and shared vegetarian picnics out while taking part in convocations with “sacred fires.”

At Eerde, Holland, Krishnamurti had a lavish castle formerly belonging to a member of Dutch nobility. There he spent pre-Day of Declaration days with his Annie Besant and other followers. Several years later, in World War II, the Nazi warriors used Camp Ommen as a concentration camp. After Krishnamurti failed to deliver the acceptance speech, or so the official version goes, Annie Besant supposedly dissolved the “Order of the Star” connected with the “Christ’s reappearance.” Reportedly, she returned moneys to donors. I say supposedly, because despite these historical representations, I have amassed a collection of Order of the Star publications going through the mid 1930s and it appears that meetings were going on in Holland as well. Perhaps it was God who was not ready rather than Krishnamurti who expressed regrets from time to time in later life that he had not fully fulfilled his role as “the vehicle for the Christ.”

This is the Earth Charter Initiative’s own version of the time and events:

The World Commission on Environment and Development (aka "the Brundtland Commission") called for “a universal declaration” and “new charter” to set “new norms” to guide the transition to sustainable development. (Our Common Future, 1987)
A draft UN Earth Charter was developed for the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992, but the time for such a declaration was not right. The Rio Declaration became the statement of the achievable consensus at that time.
In 1994, Maurice Strong (Chairman of the Rio Summit) and Mikhail Gorbachev, working through organizations they each founded (Earth Council and Green Cross International respectively), restarted the Earth Charter as a civil society initiative, with the help of the Government of the Netherlands. The initial drafting and consultation process drew on hundreds of international documents.
Messrs. Strong and Gorbachev convened an independent Earth Charter Commission in 1997 to oversee the final development of the text and to come to agreement on a global consensus document.[3]

Bottom line: As one primary pillar of the now shaping Alliance of Civilizations, we have an Soviet atheist turned New Ager combining with an equally fervent Canadian billionaire devotee, both true believers in an alleged “Maitreya the Christ,” the latter particularly working openly with Lucis Trust, the offspring of Alice and Foster Bailey’s original “Lucifer Publishing Company.”

That such is taken seriously in more than esoteric circles is easily proved. One illustration is an article in the Vermont Journal of Environmental Law on December 2, 2001. Had a Christian or Jew dare suggest that this was God’s judgment on an idolatrous world, the outcry would still be heard. However, this suggestion that we all join in common earth worship passed at least the scrutiny of editors of what was supposed to be a respected legal journal:

World tragedies necessitate the reaction of a united global society dedicated to responsible action and committed to peace. Identifying a common motivation and mode of communication to which all individuals can relate is a prerequisite component to avoiding destruction and moving towards progress. Humanity's dependence upon the planet earth serves as the natural primary connection between all people. By joining this undeniable truth with the notions underpinning the Earth Charter,[1] a blue print for building a new foundation to address our current reality can be identified.

Where this is heading and where environmentalists and New Agers alike are harmonically converging is clearly in the direction of earth worship and beyond to universe/cosmos adoration. Bundled in with the concept is one of gratitude to [gasp!] Lucifer himself, whom Benjamin Crème proudly proclaimed on one unwilling radio debate he did with me in the early 1980s, “made a tremendous sacrifice for our planet.” Evidently Lucifer, per Crème, ran a Garden of Eden intervention challenging God to see that we properly “evolved” rather than vegetate in a tropical garden. As a result, per Crème, Lucifer is the “prodigal son.” It is startling in personal conversations I have had with some in those circles that God is expected to welcome Lucifer back with open arms. A related belief is that those forever barred from the new Utopian Eden are those who stood in Lucifer’s way. This is a strange perversion of Judeo/Christian theology, widely published from sources such as Futurist Barbara Marx Hubbard and David Spangler. Lucis Trust has offered to cap it all off by allowing the world to use their “Great Invocation,” presumably a forced replacement to “The Lord’s Prayer” and “23rd Psalm.”

Such idolatry is condemned across the board by traditional monotheistic theology. Catholics as part of their baptismal rites say, “Do you reject Satan? The congregation is expected to answer, “I do.” “And all of his works? I do”

The biblical Book of Revelation contains a stern warning in chapter 14 that all should “fear God and give glory to Him for the hour of his judgment is come. Worship God who created the heaven, the earth, the seas, and the fountains of waters.” The Earth Covenant and its new bible called “the Book of Temenos” frighteningly reverse that command to one that inverts it to the very worship condemned: “If any man worships the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation.” Those worshiping the “beast and his image” and receiving the mark of his name were to “have no rest day nor night.”[4]

An even earlier proponent, working even closer to the time of the Krishnamurti era envisioned a scenario startlingly close to what now appears to be full process. H. G. Wells wrote in his 1928 book, THE OPEN CONSPIRACY; BLUEPRINTS FOR A WORLD REVOLUTION:

"Whenever possible, the Open Conspiracy will advance by illumination and persuasion. But it has to advance and even from the outset where it is not allowed to illuminate and persuade it must fight . . .in the face of unscrupulous opposition creative ideas must become aggressive, must define their enemies, and attack them. . . . The Open Conspiracy rests upon a disrespect for "nationality . . ."

Again, I say, "fasten your seatbelts, friends. We are in for a bumpy ride. Keep the faith!"
Footnotes:

1, See "Earth Council: Papers" and here.

2, In his UN retirement, Robert Muller moved to Costa Rica to chair the UN University there.

3, Origin and history of the Earth Charter

4, See Revelation (Apocalypse) Chapter 14, verses 6 through 12).

The Devil in Drag

2008-07-13T15:35:00.021-05:00

In the small town where I live attacks against Christians regularly appear in our local newspaper. The new agers love to use the term crisis = opportunity. As I read these attacks I think of them as hostility = opportunity. One writer in particular despises Christians and places all of the world's ills at our feet. That being said, it is her latest opinion piece which leads me to this next blog post which will be published in this Thursday's newspaper.

It looks as though Linda Osolkowski wants to talk about religious extremism and silly beliefs. In her latest vox pops she ridiculed Dr. Uhri for having what she considers a ridiculous belief system. She goes as far as to sarcastically suggest Dr. Uhri believes gravity to be only a theory. It is not uncommon for Osolkowski to publicly mock Christians as in past posts she has ridiculed doctrines such as the rapture while touting her “goddess” worship as being firmly based in reason. So it is time to further examine her new age mindset and the theology which surrounds the goddess.

The goddess identifiable by many names was known to the Egyptians as Isis, the Greeks as Demeter-Persephone, to the Romans Diana and, at present, is commonly known as Sophia-Gaia. Gaia is most recognizable to people as “Mother Earth”. Although the goddess’ theology varies amongst Sophiologists the core belief system remains common. Hence I will present the goddess from the perspectives of her story tellers, those credited with heralding in the new age and popularizing her in the west, namely H.P. Blavatsky and Rudolph Steiner.

In the beginning God existed as one in the form of a polarity: the divine masculine and the divine feminine (Sophia). Together they co-created the universe. Each entity was a conjoined triune deity, the male being the Father, Logos and Holy Spirit and the female being the Mother, Daughter and World Soul. In the goddess’ zeal to create, she formed the cosmos independently of her male counterpart resulting in a mistake which caused the divine feminine to separate from the divine masculine. Upon her descent Ialdabaoth, the God of Israel, taunted her so she gave her light to the sun and became the earth where she remains in the depths of the under world longing to reunite to the divine masculine. The universal prayer to the goddess opens as “our Mother, who art in the depths of the under world”. Her only hope to reconnect to the divine masculine has been to facilitate humanity’s evolution to its final stage by emitting evolutionary impulse streams through her spiral vortexes. It is only when humanity becomes attuned to her impulses and by adopting a global consciousness—the World Soul—that the goddess will become redeemed and able to reunite to the divine masculine. The final earthly stage of human development is considered to be the most painful period in earth’s evolutionary process because not everyone is attuned to the goddess’ impulse streams. Those individuals, primarily monotheists and political dissenters, are considered to be the World Soul’s karmic opposites which inhibit the goddess’ redemption. Shirley McClain, among many, explains that their karmic opposites soon await their fate in “karmageddon”. Once the “World Soul” eliminates its karmic opposites, it will have become divine and transcend thereby bringing an end to time and death. This transcended humanity will move forward to become co-creators with the rejoined godhead culminating its journey partaking in the Vulcan stage of cosmic evolution wherein they will realign the cosmos by transforming the earth into a new sun.

It would be remiss of me not to mention Mother Earth’s (Gaia’s) keeper—the Pleiadians—as they too emit impulses through her vortexes. The Pleiadians, from the planetary star Alcyone, are hosting in honor of Gaia’s redemption a cosmic party to commence on December 21, 2012. They have chosen to communicate their agenda by channeling their writings through Barbara Hand Clow’s Pleiadian Agenda. They do so as they recognize some goddess worshippers have been lazy and not adequately expanded their levels of consciousnesses by focusing their meditative energies into the reptilian forces. According to the Pleiadians, not everyone has an invitation to the cosmic party—only those who recognize that Lucifer lives within them and are willing to undergo a Luciferic initiation. This is a common theme in new age literature and one which is problematic for the world’s monotheists as they recognize Lucifer to be none other than Satan. As clearly presented throughout their writings, Blavatsky and Steiner agree that Satan and Lucifer at the same. They however exhibit great admiration for him. Per Blavatsky’s Secret Doctrine, “In this case it is but natural…to view Satan, the Serpent of Genesis, as the real creator and benefactor, the Father of Spiritual mankind…” Blavatsky also identifies the goddess Sophia and Lucifer to be one and the same—Lucifer’s female persona. Maybe the devil really does wear Prada. The Pleiadians tell us how to recognize the start of the cosmic party—it will commence when their mother ship enters earth’s atmosphere. As one can see, “goddess” theology is based upon "solid scientific inquiry".

Although I disagree with theologies such as the goddess, I would defend anyone’s right to believe it. It is when governments—such as the new global order and its governmental structures—demand that individuals shift their religious beliefs to one centered around earth-worship and the acceptance of their political-spiritual cosmic Christ that they have crossed the line into dictatorship and have themselves adopted an ideology of religious extremism. Global governmental organizations such as the Alliance of Civilizations, Gorbachev’s Earth Charter, the World Commission on Global Consciousness and Spirituality, etc., etc. openly portray such a system. They have formulated a strategy to rid themselves of dissenters by identifying those individuals as religious extremists who are prone to violent radicalization. Osolkowski attempted to do the same in her latest vox pops. The Alliance of Civilizations has said that it is a sovereign United States which presently stands in its way of globally deploying its new spirituality. It has further called for the abolition of national parliaments worldwide. At least in the United States, despite our flaws, we can voice our opinions without the threat of death. There are visible signs that this too is shifting as leadership in both the Republican and Democratic parties rush towards handing over our national sovereignty in the interest of global governance. So if Linda wishes to further discuss religious extremism and silly religious beliefs we too are willing to participate in that discussion.

The Xtian Theology of Desmond Tutu

2008-05-31T16:58:00.007-05:00

Each year during the Christmas season I see advertisements for Xmas gifts, Xmas trees, etc. I tend to offer those stores year round consistency and X them off as places I will ever shop. As I see it, how is it they show contempt yet expect us to support them? I use this analogy to illustrate a point. Earlier this year a reader forwarded me a letter he received from his country’s minister of foreign affairs regarding the Alliance of Civilizations. This minister, addressing issues raised about the AoC, assured the individual that there was no cause for concern because there is Christian representation on the High Level Group. The names provided were Desmond Tutu and Karen Armstrong. I nearly laughed when I read this section of the letter and said aloud “who do you think you’re fooling”. Thus, I decided to devote blog topics to these High Level Group members and provide readers with a glimpse of their theologies. Let us begin with Archbishop Desmond Tutu.

Before I read Desmond Tutu’s book God Has A Dream: A Vision of Hope for Our Time, I was puzzled by his participation as a High Level Group member of the Alliance of Civilizations. After all, my impressions of the man were initially favorable. In his book Forgiveness he described some of the most awful of atrocities carried out by South Africa’s apartheid regime. He appeared to be a man who condemned violence, government oppression, genocide, and human rights violations. So how is it this man became a participant in the system of world government—a system which he ought to recognize and heed the scriptural warnings? Could it be he isn’t aware of the global government’s population reduction agenda or its required “initiation” of the masses? After reading the blueprint of the World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality—a commission on which Desmond Tutu serves—I removed any doubts that Desmond Tutu knows exactly what he is supporting.

As one reads the Commission’s blueprint, it is clear that they intend to “activate” an “evolutionary” process in which they will reckon with “pathologies” (individuals) whom they consider to be of a lower species (egocentric mind) and unite and transcend their more highly-evolved (universal mind) civilization. As found in history’s not-too-distant past, the portrayal is of an advancement of a superhuman race. Although the blueprint’s views are not isolated to any one individual commissioner, this identical theme may be found in Commissioner Barbara Marx Hubbard’s writings. Hubbard’s book Happy Birthday Planet Earth which is quite small yet filled with threats, provides an overview of the impending “selection process”.

We are instructed that everyone on the planet is to be given a choice—either transcend with the collective or face personal extinction. This is a theology which Desmond Tutu ought, and still has the opportunity, to denounce.

I would encourage Desmond Tutu to look at Commissioner Hubbard’s materials and in particular those related to the “activation” of the selection process. The Book of Co-Creation: An Evolutionary Interpretation of the New Testament Part III, provides insight. Here Hubbard’s explanation of Revelation 13: 16-17, I suspect, would make Karen Armstrong proud as Hubbard leaves this piece of scripture giving it a “charitable interpretation”. Revelation 13:16-17 reads:

“And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark on their right hand, or in their foreheads: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.”

Throughout Hubbard’s writings, the interpretation applied to this scripture is one of liberation—that of a loving birth:

“In the negative scenario, John foresaw the possibility of total domination of humanity by a dictator who wields the power of science and technology to control rather than to emancipate…for the science and technology has only now emerged, to be used or misused according to which scenario your generation chooses—Armageddon or loving birth.” Book of Co-Creation Part III - Pg. 127

This alone ought to make Archbishop Tutu pause and recognize the system in which he has become entangled. I’m not holding my breath on that one though as the archbishop tends to have contempt for literalists and those who do good and seek their rewards in heaven.

“Often we focus too much on concrete images of God and on overly literal readings of the Bible…The Bible is not something that came dropping from heaven, written by the hand of God. It was written by human beings, so it uses human idiom and is influenced by the context in which whatever story was written. People need to be very careful. Many tend to be literalists, people who believe in the verbal inerrancy of the bible, who speak as if God dictated the Bible, when in fact God used human beings as they were, and they spoke only as they could speak at that time. There are parts of the Bible that have no permanent worth—that is nothing to be sorry about, it is just to say that it is the Word of God in the words of men and women.” God Has A Dream – Pg. 105-106
“A church that tries to pacify us, telling us not to concentrate on the things of this world but of the other, the next world, needs to be treated with withering scorn and contempt as being not only wholly irrelevant but actually blasphemous.” God Has A Dream - Pg. 65

The entire foundation of Christianity is based upon Christ’s bodily resurrection. It is noteworthy to recognize Archbishop Tutu’s position here:

“But when we say Jesus Christ ascended into heaven, you don’t believe that he got into a kind of ecclesiastical lift that took him into the stratosphere. This is language that is being used figuratively because the realities that are being described are not human realities, they are supranatural realities. When we speak even about the resurrection of Jesus Christ, it is not the revivification of a corpse.” God Has A Dream – Pg. 107

Desmond Tutu has clearly made his choice—a new spirituality for a new age.

“I knew it was important to cultivate an authentic spirituality of transformation in that transition period of flux, bewilderment, violence, and turbulence. This authentic spirituality of transformation is the basis for any true and lasting transfiguration in our world…we are all meant to answer God’s call to be His partners in transfiguring the world.” God Has A Dream – Pg 108-109

But whose world is Desmond Tutu working towards? For its conclusion is:

“Even if God’s dream were to come true, there would still be pain in childbirth, torment in illness, and anguish in death. Sadness, longing, and heartache would not disappear.” God Has A Dream – Pg 72

which is significantly different than that promised by the Most High:

“And there shall no longer be any curse; and the throne of God and the Lamb shall be in it, and His bond-servants shall serve Him;” Revelation 22:3

Response to Desmond Tutu’s theology:
As an additional note, I cannot exit this post without providing a scriptural response to Archbishop Tutu’s “Christian” theology. Regarding statements on:

The value of scripture:

"All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness” 2 Timothy 3:16

The next world:

“By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance…for he was looking for the city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God…But as it is, they desire a better country, that is a heavenly one. Therefore God is not ashamed to be called their God; for He has prepared a city for them.” Hebrews 11:8-15

Christ’s bodily resurrection:

“Then He said to Thomas, “Reach here your finger, and see My hands; and reach here your hand, and put it into My side; and be not unbelieving, but believing.” Thomas answered and said to Him, Lord and my God!” John 20:27-28

"Minding" Our Youth through a Children's State

2008-04-28T21:02:00.014-05:00

This article is the last of three in a series which compares the legal and cultural changes being made by today’s global government to those made by Hitler’s Third Reich. Part I, Ghost of Nazi Past, Ghost of Nazi Present focused on cultural, media, parliamentary, and judicial manipulations. Part II, Mobilising People and Actions for War focused on science, religion, religious education and spiritual mobilization. This last section is about the shaping (or reshaping) of young minds or, as the World Commission on Global Consciousness and Spirituality refers to it, activating the “science of minding”. Again I draw comparisons to the Third Reich from Richard Evans’ book The Third Reich in Power with my citations indicated by bold type.

During the second world war the Nazis had successfully undermined the role of family through an organization called the Hitler Youth. “These days parents have nothing more than the duty to feed and clothe their children; educating them is in the first place the task of the Hitler Youth’” complained one parent. And another, “‘the worst is…that you’ve got to watch yourself in front of your own children.’” (Pg. 279) These words ought to serve as a warning against any cultural move in which the state or otherwise attempts to gain control over the lives of young people. I wrote of such conditioning in an earlier post called the Formation of an Alliance Youth. As presented by the OSCE Contribution to the Alliance of Civilizations, the objective is “sustaining youth as a fundamental element in promoting comprehensive security…[through] greater activation and engagement through advocacy and exercise of political rights and the creation of youth councils.” This reinforces the Alliance of Civilizations’ Final Report that, “it is extremely important to recognize youth not only as a source of mobilization, but as autonomous actors and partners.” There is no doubt that the intent is to connect children into an ideology sympathetic to the building of their new civilization, a civilization which has already identified religious freedom and political dissent as the “enemies of the civilization”.

One possible model which may be used to advance these objectives is Children’s State and Children’s United Parliament of the World (CUPW). Children’s State is a global internet state having a parliamentary assembly which convenes annually. According to the organization’s Strong Announcement, it “gives a new identity, dual nationality and international identity number for the children and young people of the world…[and] has a central role taking the lead of mankind in the new generation.” Among the supporters of Children’s State are organizations such as UNICEF, Save the Children, SOS Children's Village, Plan International and, of particular interest, the European Union:

Most interesting is Javier Solana’s support of the Children’s United Parliament of the World and the CUPW’s demands that nations demilitarize and allocate those resources to civilian-crisis management programs—a militarized security model formulated by Solana. These two initiatives appear to be mutually reinforcing. As I look at the above picture the thing that most saddens me is the young girl. She is obvously a young lady who makes her parents proud. I believe that she is participating in what her convictions tell her is a good cause. My hope for her is that one day she is able to objectively evaluate the entire underlying political agenda behind Children’s State. As one reads through the Children’s State web site, a picture emerges that portrays a cross between Jonestown and the Hitler Youth.

Overall Vision
According to the Children’s State vision statement, “The Children's United Parliament of the World is an international umbrella organisation for local and national children's parliaments…Organisation has been established to promote children's active citizenship, and their social and international partnership. In 2001 the General Assembly of the children’s parliament established an internet state, the Universal Childrensstate, that has today its own constitution, hymn and flag.”

“We educate children to become globally and locally responsible active citizens who wish for world peace. At the moment adults and decision-makers do not listen to children’s wishes enough, and thus children’s parliament provides a legal ground for children to act in their own societies as well as internationally….“Children do not need to be taught what to think, but rather how to think and act both critically and constructively.”

If only promotion of world peace and responsible citizenship were the actual goals rather than euphemisms for ideological instruction! Already we see groundwork which will require parents to relinquish control in educating their children. Interesting to note is that the Hitler Youth also had their own hymns.

Principles & Declaration of Independence
Children’s State has a Declaration of Independence which says that “Citizens of CHILDRENSSTATE are all the children of the earth under the age 18.” Children’s State’s principles require that:

The Children shall have the right to free decision making and opinion.
The Children shall be equal to adults.
The Children shall have the right to vote.
The Children shall have their own ID code.
The interests of Children shall be equally considered.
The Children shall have the right to their own values.
The Children shall have the opportunity to free communication.
The Children shall have the right to grow completely as per their own personality.

There ideology is a totalitarian regime’s dream come true. Clearly this is intended to undermine the family structure. One begins to get a sense that if parents were to resist co-operating with Children’s State, penalties similar to those carried out by the Nazis might be reintroduced:

“After 25 March 1939, membership was legally binding from the age of ten, and parents could be fined if they failed to enroll their children, or even imprisoned if they actively tried to stop them joining.” Pg 272

“Idealism undoubtedly played a role in committing many young people to the cause in defiance of their parents’ wishes.” Pg 274

“One Hitler Youth leader himself admitted, ‘the leadership encourages amongst many boys a kind of megalomania that refuses to recognize any other authority.’” Pg 281

Power Structure
Although children are told that they execute the highest authority of the Children’s United Parliament of the World, this is questionable. Similar to the European Union’s governance structure where the Council presents the parliament with legislation for its rubber stamp, it is the Council of the Future and Secretary General who submit legislation to the CUPW assembly. One astute 16 year old correspondent who attended a Children’s State function reported:

“Whilst the adults were not emitted inside the room, their thoughts and opinions were heard from the teenagers’ comments. It was easy to notice that the groups had practised their speeches quite well in advance. So it is questionable, how much of what was spoken really came from the children.”

Schirach proclaimed that ‘the principle of self-leadership’ would apply as it had in the old youth movement, but in practice the organization was effectively run by grown-ups.” Pg. 276

“…it was emphatically a top-down organization, run not by young people themselves, as the old youth movement had been, but according to the leadership principle, by the Reich Youth Leadership under Schirach…All those who joined had to swear a personal oath of allegiance to Hitler. Their training was compulsory and legally binding.” Pgs. 273-274

Parental Rights
Apparent in Article 8 of the Children’s State Constitution, the primary role of parents is to supply their children with basic human development needs. The state will be in the position to determine whether the parent is suitable to meet the educational and emotional needs of the child.

“The child shall enjoy the benefits of social security. He shall be entitled to grow and develop in health; to this end, special care and protection shall be provided both to him and to his mother, including adequate pre-natal and post-natal care. The child shall have the right to adequate nutrition, housing, recreation and medical services… The child shall, wherever possible, grow up in the care and under the responsibility of his parents…”

“Nowadays, childless couples are often congratulated by parents on their childlessness. These days parents have nothing more than the duty to feed and clothe their children; educating them is in the first place the task of the Hitler Youth.” Pg. 279

Currency
Children’s state has its own bank, the State Bank for the Universal Childrensstate, and currency, the Kyper, which is valued at a ratio of 1:1 Euro.

Children’s State Capital
Children’s State is to have KyperLedCity, Tunisia as its capital. Plans for construction of the capital city have been submitted to the government of Tunisia.

According to Children’s State Strong Announcement “After filling out the application of citizenship, under 18-year old person gets immediately dual citizenship, international ID number and a right to process the passport for one self. The passport is valid until the age of 26-years, and it entitles the person to act in CHILDRENSSTATE.”

If a parent wishes to visit their child in Children’s State they must get approval as such: “Adults need to apply for the visa from CHILDRENSSTATE's commission, to be able even to visit at children and young people of the world state.”

“The Order Castles (Ordensburgen) were the next stage in the system of Party-based education dreamed up by Schirach and Ley. They were intended exclusively to teach graduates of the Adolf Hitler Schools…the Order Castles in turn functioned as training centres for numerous Nazi Party officials on short courses.” Pg. 286

Disciplinary Action
Children’s State has developed measures known as the Internet Prison and Black List intended for discipline whenever necessary.

“Children's United Parliament of the World and the Commission have authority, in the name of the children of the world, to punish the people who destroy the future of the children of the world by putting them to the Universal Childrensstate prison.”

Children are prohibited from interfering in any areas where disciplinary action is being taken by the Children’s State.

Article II, paragraph 7 of the Charter: “All Members shall give the every assistance to the Children’s United Parliament of the World in any action it takes in accordance with the present Charter, and shall refrain from giving assistance to any instance against which the CUPW is taking preventive or enforcement action.”

Article 25 of the CUPW Charter: “The Children’s United Parliament of the World may also recognise those individuals, institutions and companies that operate against to the moral principles of the Charter, and place them on a Black List. The CUPW recommends children not associate themselves with those on the Black List.”

Children’s State is only one of many initiatives aimed at conditioning youth to adopt a global governance mindset. I have critiqued Children’s State because of its apparent relationship with the European Union. I would further like to add that I believe there are individuals involved with Children’s State who have not fully examined its underlying politics. I would encourage those people to honestly examine the evidence and determine whether the entire global governance agenda—along its various components designed to control society at every level—is something worthy of your participation and support.

Did Hitler Act Upon Catholic Convictions?

2008-04-19T10:50:00.004-05:00

Each week Medford’s local newspaper publishes letters in which people voice their opinions. Over the past few years I have watched carefully as there are those who frequently launch attacks against Christians making assertions that are not true. One writer has published multiple opinions in which she attempts to equate Hitler’s actions with Christianity and, in particular, place blame on the Catholics. Clearly Hitler was not acting upon Catholic doctrine. For this I found it necessary to respond. Again, the critic launched another attack maintaining that Hitler belongs to the Christian world. Since this subject matter is so closely related to my previous blog post, I have decided to republish it here. First, I will publish an excerpt of the critic’s letter and follow with my response which address these allegations.

Writer responds to writer’s Vox Pop challenge
“…Oh, and to set the record straight: “I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so.” (Hitler to General Gerhard Engel in 1941)

Hitler was a baptized Roman Catholic who was never excommunicated by the church.“I am convinced that I am acting as the agent of our Creator by fighting the Jews, I am doing the Lord’s work.” (Mein Kampf)

And he hated the Atheists: “We were convinced that the people need and require faith, We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations We have stamped it out.” (Hitler, 1933)

If I have to get my facts right then so do you…”
Linda O_________

Nazism was viewed as heretical by the Catholic church
Last week Linda O________ continued her argument that Adolf Hitler was a Christian and that he acted upon his Catholic convictions. Any serious researcher of the Third Reich would dismiss this as irrational so let’s relegate him back to where he belongs. First, an elementary review of the Nazi belief system: Nazi’s believed themselves to be an advanced race—the Aryans; Nazis believed the Aryans originated from the lost continent of Atlantis; the Nazis looked upon Hitler as their messiah; the Nazis promised a vision of transcendence where the collective would become divine and usher in a 1000 year Reich. One need not be Catholic to comprehend the church considers this heretical. Pope Pius X confronted these very doctrines in his September 8, 1907 Pascendi Domminci Gregis, Encyclical on the Doctrines of the Modernists.

Pope Pius XI’s encyclical Mit Brennender Sorge, is a strong denunciation of the Nazi regime and doctrine. The encyclical was read to every Catholic congregation in 1937 during a period of intense persecution. Reinhard Heydrih had already classified the Jews and the Catholic Church as the two principal enemies of Nazism. Pope Pius XI writes “at a time when your faith, like gold, is being tested in the fire of tribulation and persecution, when your religious freedom is beset on all sides.” Preceding the encyclical in 1933 the Nazis seized the property of the Catholic lay organizations banning their activities and forcing their closure. In 1935 Hermann Goring declared Catholicism incompatible with the spirit of the age. In 1937 crucifixes were ordered removed from state AND parish buildings. Afterward in 1939 all religious instruction was replaced with Nazi ideological instruction.

The encyclical did not go unnoticed by the regime as it directly attacked the Nazi belief system: “None but superficial minds could stumble into concepts of a national God, of a national religion; or attempt to lock within the frontiers of a single people, within the narrow limits of a single race…” The contention that the Church had never excommunicated Hitler is irrelevant because he had already been done under Catholic canon law latae sententiae. The German bishops had also excommunicated all Nazi party officials which would have included Hitler.

The doctrine that the Nazis attempted to implement will be found in the writings of Helena Blavatsky, founder of the Theosophical Society. Former Theosophical president Annie Besant summarizes the root race doctrine in The Coming Race which is available online at www.theosophical.ca/ComingRaceAB.html. New Age Almanac presents Blavatsky’s and Alice Bailey’s doctrine as foundational of the modern New Age Movement. The doctrine may be found among the World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality and Alliance of Civilizations personalities. They openly believe they are doing the Lord’s or Christ’s work. Their definition of the Lord is Sanat Kamura, Lord of the World and head of a spiritual hierarchy, and Christ as a spiritual consciousness that overshadows an “enlightened” individual.

Per Theosophist Foster Bailey in Running God’s Plan (1972), they had attempted to usher in a new age before but failed. Accordingly: “One attempt was to begin by uniting the peoples living in the Rhine river valley using that river as a binding factor. It was an attempt by a disciple but did not work. Now another attempt is in full swing...” With the Alliance of Civilizations now responsible for implementing a global consciousness and presiding over the UN-led global counter-terrorism strategy and compounded with its introduction of the new global Shared Security model, it appears they are once again ready “activate” the evolutionary process of the Aryan race. (Rich Peterson, Medford)

Mobilising People and Actions for War

2008-04-13T00:41:00.008-05:00

This article is the second of a three part series which compares the legal and cultural changes being made by today’s global government to those made by the Nazis. Part I, Ghost of Nazi Past, Ghost of Nazi Present focused on cultural, media, parliamentary, and judicial manipulations while this part focuses on science, religion, religious education, and spiritual mobilization. The format of this post is as follows: texts in bold font are citations from Richard Evans’ book The Third Reich in Power. Italicized texts that follow Evens’ citations are quotations from global governance actors along with some of my commentary.

Writing of the hostilities between the Nazis and the Catholic Church, Evans explains “…the German government repeatedly told the Vatican that its fight against Marxism and Communism demanded the unity of the German people through the ending of confessional divisions.” (pg. 241) Today, we see the identical argument being advanced by the Alliance of Civilizations, the World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality, et al. In the interest of combating extremism and terrorism we are told a global code of conduct which embraces only common spiritual and political ideologies must be adopted. Contributors to this code of conduct are groups such as the World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality which will “activate” the evolutionary process of global consciousness; the Alliance of Civilizations which is currently developing guidelines for how religions must interpret scripture; Religions for Peace which is advancing A Common Word, an initiative designed to undermine religious doctrines and hijack religion; etc. Orchestrated efforts to incite violence against those who refuse to set aside their doctrines—particularly against the monotheistic faiths – have intensified on multiple fronts. Evans writes “Nazism imbued the German language with the metaphors of battle: the battle for jobs, the struggle for existence, the fight for culture…The language itself began to be mobilized for war.” (pg. 214) We are in this same place today. Christians who dare voice an unpopular opinion are accused of having a violent ethos. The existence of the new civilization is threatened if the egocentric are permitted to continue with their “defective disconnection”. It is, as they say, a fight for civilization. Setting the stage for the new religious ethos is Karen Armstrong, Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group member.

See use doctrine. The full version of the Karen Armstrong presentation can be found here.

Science
One criticism consistently launched against the adherents of the Abrahamic faiths’ is that the doctrines cannot be scientifically proven and the faithful have abandoned rational scientific inquiry. Yet many of the same critics who claim superiority have no problem advancing unproven occult doctrines such as notions of a “planetary spiritual hierarchy”; the existence of the Aryans and Atlantis; evolutionary advancement through Luciferic initiations; etc., etc.

“The real core of Nazi beliefs lay in the faith Hitler proclaimed in his speech of September 1938 in science – a Nazi view of science – as the basis for action.” Pg 259

“But humanity has hitherto lacked an adequate global grammar and a global lens to fully activate this integral/holistic/dialogic technology of mind; and since our living realities are co-created by out patterns of minding, the supreme technological advance in the human condition is this advance to the integral technology of minding.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

Religion
Here the comparisons I draw are between the Third Reich’s attempts to control Christianity and the global government’s plans to control the three monotheistic faiths. The below World Commission citations that refer to the egocentric mind refer to individuals who believe their religious texts to be true and are not prepared to abandon their convictions for a new revelation. The egocentric mind also pertains to political dissenters of the globalization process.

“National Socialism is not only a political doctrine, it is a total and all-encompassing general perspective on all public matters. So our entire life has to be based on it as a matter of natural assumption. We hope that the day will come when nobody needs to talk about National Socialism any more…One day, the spiritual awakening of our time will emerge from this will to culture.” - Joseph Goebbels Pg 211

“Our great spiritual traditions and teachers were all in diverse ways fostering and opening the way to the awakening of global consciousness.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“One striking result of the general global law – we are as we mind…But humanity has hitherto lacked an adequate global grammar and a global lens to fully activate this integral/holistic/ dialogic technology of mind; and since our living realities are co-created by our patterns of minding,, the supreme technological advance in the human condition is this advance to the integral technology of minding.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“As an SS plan put it in 1937: ‘We live in the age of the final confrontation with Christianity. It is part of the mission of the SS to give to the German people over the next fifty years the non-Christian ideological foundations for a way of life appropriate to their own character.’…Christianity, Himmler was to declare on 9 June 1942, was ‘the greatest of plagues’; true morality consisted not in exalting the spirit of the individual but in abnegating oneself in the service of the race. Moral values could be derived only from consciousness of one’s place in, and duty to, the chain of ‘valuable’ heredity.” Pg 252

“Perhaps the single most powerful event facing humanity today is a great awakening on a planetary scale that has been millennia in the making. We humans are in the midst of a profound advance as a species to a higher form of global consciousness that has been emerging across cultures, religions and worldviews through the centuries. This awakening…is nothing less than a shift…from more egocentric patterns of life to a higher form of integral and dialogic patterns of life.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“…it should now be apparent that global spirituality is precisely this crossing from egocentric life into the deep–dialogic life of global consciousness: this is the highest telos and consensus of our great planetary spiritual endowment…True Spirituality is the highest expression of our rational essence and is not to be confused with egocentric religious life. Spirituality is the awakening of our highest being, bringing us into direct relation with Reality as the Logosphere; it is the process of self–transformation from ego life to the awakened life of mature Integral Natural Reason and flowing in harmony with the Lawlike Moral Energy of the Logosphere. And Global Spirituality is this awakening of the Global Mind, the highest mature form of spirituality in its global power. Global Spirituality then is Awakened Critical Reason and is thus free of all ego ideology and ego dogma. Now, hopefully, the direct link between global consciousness and global spirituality should be more manifest.” – World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“By 1937 the Protestant Church was either deeply divided between the German Christians and the Confession Church…biblical fundamentalism and Nazified Christianity were equally repellent.” Pg 228

“The egocentric… mind is a stage in our human development (evolution) which tends to separate and objectify the thinking subject from the objects of though, and to remain centered in and privileging its particular worldview (religion, ideology, cultural lens) as the exclusive measure of reality (meaning, truth, fact, value, experience, existence). The egocentric mind is broken off from the Integral Field of Reality and packages, constructs, separates, divides, polarizes, fragments all its touches….ego minding is the primary cause of the spectrum of human pathologies. And the consensus prescription is that to change this mentality is the single most important factor in transforming the human condition.” - World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“Anti-Christian writings of the Nazi ideologue Alfred Rosenberg, who publicly rejected such central doctrines as the immortality of the soul and Christ’s redemption of humankind from original sin. In his book The Myth of the Twentieth Century, Rosenberg excoriated Catholicism as the creation of the Jewish clericalism” pg 238

“Robert Ley, leader of the Labour Front, went even further than Rosenberg in his disdain for Christianity and his rejection of the Divinity of Christ…” pg 251

“Jesus, whom the Muslims regard as a prophet, as in fact do many of the New Testament writers. Luke’s gospel calls Jesus a prophet from start to finish; the idea that Jesus was divine was a later development, often misunderstood by Christians.” Karen Armstrong, Alliance of Civilizations

Karen Armstrong, a apostate and former Catholic nun, is certainly aware that this is considered heresy by the Catholic church and that her words were intended to attack an entire religion. At least the Alliance of Civilizations is no longer attempting to pretend to be something they are not.

Religious Education
“Remoulding the educational system would create a new generation of young Germans who had known no alternative source of values to Nazism. Yet there was of course one area in which such values did persist…That was religion. For reasons of political expediency and caution, the Third Reich had stopped short in 1933 of attacking the Churches and their dependent secular institutions. As it became more self-confident, however, it began to turn its attention to Christianity too, and to seek a means of either converting it to a form more suitable to the new Germany, or, if that did not work, of doing away with it altogether.” Pg 218

“Nazis now launched a sustained campaign to close denominational schools and replace them with non-religious ‘community schools’…Parents were forced to sign prepared statements declaring that they ‘did not want the education of my child at school to be misused by stirring up religious unrest’ Pg 246

“By the summer of 1939, all denominational schools in Germany had been turned into community schools, and all private schools run by the Churches had been closed down or nationalized…By 1939 religious instruction in vocational schools had been reduced to half an hour a week, and in many areas it had to follow guidelines…Parents who objected to these moves…were obliged by the local authorities to withdraw their objection, summoned to special meetings at the school to pressure them to sign their children up for ideological instruction instead of religious education…” pgs 246-247

“The German Christian’s attempt to create a synthesis between German Protestantism and Nazi racism had effectively collapsed…Hitler reluctantly abandoned his ambition of convereting it into the official state Church of the Third Reich. Instead, he ordered the creation of a new Ministry for Church Affairs, established in July 1935 under the 48-year-old Hanns Kerrl…The new Ministry was given wide-ranging powers, which Kerrl did not hesitate to deploy in order to bring refractory pastors to heel…Pastors were banned from preaching, or had their pay stopped. They were forbidden to teach in schools. All theological students were ordered to join Nazi organizations.” Pg 230

Such measures are most likely to succeed if supported by religious education that is based upon a sound interpretation of religious teachings. – Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group

“Education as we understand it here makes it possible to view with equanimity the completion of the process of secularisation, first of structures, then of society itself, as just one of several possible reflections of a modern way of life. School should give children a clearer understanding of the psychosocial, cultural and sometimes political functions of religion. This sort of approach would undoubtedly help to sharpen and challenge their critical faculties and combat the wilder excesses of particularism. This has fundamental consequences for the educational system, particularly as regards the teaching of religious education. Who should teach religion? Who can make a valid comparison between the different doctrinal elements of religions? We must beware of confusion here. A clear distinction needs to be drawn between religious education in the sense understood by adherents of a faith, which consists of transmitting the values, teachings and liturgy of their religion with a view to the proper practice of that religion (e.g. the Catholic catechism), and the teaching of comparative religion which aims only to instil knowledge about religion and the history of religion. Only the latter forms one of the bases of learning for the intercultural dialogue through education. Religious education of the first kind is perfectly legitimate, but is not relevant to the objective under discussion. Comparative religion should therefore be taught by professional teachers capable of providing a comparative analysis of religions, regardless of their own religious choice, with the objectivity of an expert, not the passion of a devotee. This is an essential choice that will determine the success of the dialogue through education. The difficulty of the exercise lies in integrating religion, which is such a sensitive issue in the Euro-Mediterranean area, into the field of education, taking into account its irreducibility and its mission to provide absolute truth, but without altering the educational philosophy of mutual knowledge based on curiosity, self-respect and openness to the Other.” - Dialogue Between Peoples and Cultures in the Euro-Mediterranean Area

Propaganda & Spiritual Mobilization
“Hitler had created a new Ministry of Popular enlightenment and Propoganda on 13 March 1933 and put Goebbels himself into the Ministry…the Ministry’s task as the ‘spiritual mobilization’ of the German people in a permanent re-creation of the spirit of popular enthusiasm…” pg. 121

“In other words, religions and the institutions that represent them cannot be banned from the public sphere but must be brought in under the leadership of the international civil bodies when it comes to questions concerning mutual recognition, universal justice, and lasting peace.” – Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group

“The revolution we have made’, declared Joseph Goebbels, on 15 November 1933, ‘is a total one. It has encompassed every area of public life and fundamentally restructured them all. It has completely changed and reshaped people’s relationship to each other, to the state, and questions of existence.’ Page 120

“One striking pattern and disclosure that is of the utmost importance for seeing that entering the global perspective is a dimensional shift....This dimensional shift to the global lens is well beyond a mere "paradigm shift"…It actually taps a deeper ground of Reality – it is an existential shift.” - World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“To what extent is the current state of "American civic discourse" dominated by egocentric politics and ego democracy= egocracy? Have we truly matured into a secular civic space? A truly secular civic democracy can only arise through spiritual citizenship. That would be the true American revolution. - World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality

“That is the secret to propaganda: to permeate the person it aims to grasp, without his even noticing that he is being permeated. Of course propaganda has a purpose, but the purpose must be concealed with such cleverness and virtuosity that the person on whom this purpose is to be carried out doesn’t notice at all.” – Joseph Goebbels Pg 127

“What the Nazis wanted from books was demonstrated in propaganda events such as the German Book Week, held annually from 1934 onwards. ‘Sixty million people will be roused at the end of October by the drumbeat of book promotion,’ declared one of the leading organizers of the 1935 event. These ‘days of mobilization’ would ‘implement inner military preparedness from the spiritual angle in the cause of building up our people.’ Pg 162

Last November I posted an article, Aligning the Masses, regarding the 2008 Euro-Mediterranean Year of Intercultural Dialogue. The campaign, “Mobilising People and Actions for Dialogue”, intends to mobilize civil society and “raise awareness” of 500 million European citizens and develop an active European citizenship which is “open to the world, respectful of cultural diversity and based upon common values”. I had intended to write in-depth analysis on this mobilization project but while looking for a reference document found a blog space called Euro-Med which had already written everything I had intended to cover. I have not read this entire blog, but the previous link contains good information.

“Advertising and design began to incorporate Nazi symbols and to adopt approved Nazi style.” Pg 211

“Symbols can be very effective tools in advancing a cause. The creation of a house or temple of religions or civilizations in as many cities as possible will be a tangibleand important step in this direction.” - Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group

On a personal note, my apologies for the delay in updating the blog. Life has been quite busy lately plus I've found it necessary to write at a local level as well as other other locations. Once I complete the next post in this series, I will share some of the issues I've needed to address and post my local writings here, thus making them "glocal".

Rich

Ghost of Nazi Past, Ghost of Nazi Present

2008-03-16T20:21:00.009-05:00

Part I – Cultural, Parliamentary, Media, and Judicial Manipulations

Quite often as I’ve spent time preparing material for this blog space, I’ve thought to myself, “this is a resurgence of Nazism”. I had been raised in a household by a father who purchased every book he could find related to the first and second world wars. I knew that it was important to direct attention to this area and parallel the changes the Nazi’s made to law with those being prepared by the global government. I understood this would be an extremely time consuming task and one which I was not too excited to start. Fortunately for me, around Christmas time, as I passed through the history section in Barnes & Noble, a book title caught my eye. The book The Third Reich In Power by Richard J. Evans had done exactly what I was preparing to do. It seemed as though it was God’s Christmas present to me for which I am thankful. Richard Evans has provided an excellent high level overview of Nazi changes to law and culture—a book which I highly recommend.

I will be quoting from Evans’ work extensively in this and the next blog post. The format will be that I present a passage from The Third Reich In Power followed by citations of global governance proposals. I have already dedicated ink to much of the material I’m about to cover, but it is worth re-reading as one considers we have seen this before in various dictatorships, and in particular, the Nazi regime.

Throughout my lifetime, I’ve heard people argue that what happened in Nazi Germany could never happen again. My father advised me that when people truly start to believe that, that’s when it will happen. Perhaps Richard Evans best explains this mindset as “the further in time we get from Nazi Germany, the more difficult it becomes for historians living in democratic political systems and in cultures which respect the rights of the individual to make the leap of imagination necessary to understand people’s behaviour in a state such as Nazi Germany, where imprisonment, torture or even death might await anyone who dared to voice the slightest criticism of the regime and its leaders.” Pg 116

Indeed, and today the masses may be prepared to accept the doctrines like those of the Nazis-- the newly-proposed model of Shared Security, a.k.a, “Civilian-Military Cooperation (CIMIC), “Responsibility to Protect”, “Human Security”—because their architects present the doctrines as belonging to the human rights framework. Nonetheless, the definition of human rights has become a slippery slope. For example, any religious or political viewpoint that does not fall within “common shared value” guidelines is considered extremist and said to be a gross violation of another’s human rights. Therein the hostilities begin.

Following, I have divided sections into topic. The lead section which is bolded has been quoted from The Third Reich in Power. The italicized sections following it are citations which demonstrate there are calls to implement similar legislation.

Cultural/Social
“…he [Justice Minister Gurtner] quickly appointed a committee to revise the Reich Criminal Code of 1871 in accordance with the new ethos of the Third Reich. As one committee member, the criminologist, Edmund Mezger, put it, the aim was to create a new synthesis of ‘the principle of the individual’s responsibility to his people, and the principle of the racial improvement of the people as a whole.” Pg 72

“Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.” – Article 29, Universal Declaration on Human Rights

“UNESCO promotes respect for all dimensions of cultural diversity since it is the very fabric of humankind and the “common heritage of humanity”, as stipulated in the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity…The Declaration furthermore aims at preserving cultural diversity as a living, and thus renewable treasure that must not be perceived as static but rather as a process guaranteeing the survival of humanity…the Declaration is dedicated to preventing segregation and fundamentalism which, in the name of cultural differences, could sanctify those differences and in doing so, counter the message of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.” Rosa Guerreiro

“…its rhetoric [Nazi regime] announced from the start that it intended to represent the people as a whole, mobilizing them in support of a new kind of state that would overcome internal divisions and create a new national community for the whole German race.” pg. 58

“We may well need a ‘global coalition of the sane’… A coalition of the sane would have to be pursued across divides of all kinds and under a flag that would be recognized by all peoples to be their own…These advocates of a coalition of the sane would need to raise their voice in support of the large majority of the world who does not have the arrogance to believe they own the truth alone, but instead has the wisdom to know we are profoundly interconnected and interrelated…” Prince Hassan

“The only way for everyone to creatively construct a common future is to…seek in the dialogue with the Other new reference points for oneself and, second, general agreement on the aim of constructing a ‘common civilisation’…” - Dialogue Between Peoples and Cultures in the Euro-Mediterranean Area

“The purpose of the law, in the eyes of the Nazis, was not to apply long-held principles of fairness and justice, but to root out the enemies of the state and to express the true racial feeling of the people.” Pg 73

“…men like the criminologist professor Edmund Mezger, a member of the committee charged with preparing a new Criminal Code, who declared in a textbook published in 1933 that the aim of penal policy was ‘the elimination from the racial community of elements which damage the people and the race…the problem, as they put it, of ‘community aliens’…people who for whatever reason were not ‘racial comrades’…and therefore one way or another had to be removed from society by force…anyone who was just merely ‘indifferent’ towards it was acting ‘from a criminal or asocial mentality’ and was thus a ‘criminal enemy of the state.’ Pg 80

“Out of the full spectrum of human personality, one-fourth is electing to transcend…One-fourth is ready to so choose, given the example of one other…One-fourth is resistant to election…They are unattracted by life ever-evolving…they go about their business, eating, sleeping, reproducing and dying…One-fourth is destructive…They are defective seeds…In the past they were permitted to die a “natural death””

“...we approach the quantum shift from creature-human to co-creative human—the human who is an inheritor of god-like powers…Before this stage of power can be inherited by the God-centered members of the social body, the self-centered members must be destroyed…We come to bring death to those who are unable to know God. We do this for the sake of the world…The riders of the pale horse about to pass among you…This is the most painful period in the history of humanity.” - “The Book of Co-Creation: An Evolutionary Interpretation of the New Testament Part III, The Revelation: Alternative to Armageddon”, 1980 self published manuscript – Barbara Marx Hubbard, pg 59-61

Parliamentary/Electorate
“…Papen had by no means abandoned his dream, articulated openly during his period of office as Chancellor in 1932…His speechwriter Edgar Jung continued to argue in the summer of 1933 for a vision of the ‘German revolution’ that would involve ‘the depoliticization of the masses, their exclusion from the running of the state’. Pg. 28

“Another step was taken on 30 January 1934 when, under pressure from the Reich Interior Ministry under the Nazi Wilhelm Frick, a new law abolished all the federated states, from Prussia downwards, along with their governments and parliaments, and merged their Ministries into the corresponding Reich Ministries…Reich Local Government Law of 1935, in abolishing local elections, placed the appointment of mayors largely within competence of the Interior Ministry in Berlin.” Pg. 47-49

“Now the challenge which faces most of our institutions, which are part and parcels of the system of indirect democracy, is whether they can evolve to meet a world where there are many ways to express the voice of the people besides elections and where knowledge is so wide spread that a group of few cannot claim monopoly on the truth. The participation of the peoples in elections is diminishing in many societies…I would venture to say that of the democratic institutions the first to evolve would be the Parliament: no longer the monopolist of the voice of the people, nor of knowledge for the people, they may have to reinvent themselves…” Giandomenico Picco

“…traditional actors, such as states, need to re-adapt themselves in order to deliver and meet their obligations with their citizens. They should do so through a redefinition of their national interest, the recognition of the intersection between domestic and international politics (redefining thus, the concept of sovereignty) …” Alliance of Civilizations

Press/Media
“Dietrich secured the promulgation responsible for the content of their papers, removed the proprietors’ powers of dismissal and laid down rules governing the content of news-the strength of the German Reich abroad or at home, the community will of the German people, German defence, culture or the economy, or to injure the religious sensibilities of others’. Membership in the Reich Association of the German Press was now compulsory by law and subject to revocation if a journalist contravened a code of conduct enforced by professional courts.” Pg 144

"I share the distress of the Muslim friends who feel that the cartoon offends their religion. I also respect the right of freedom of speech. But of course freedom of speech is never absolute. - Kofi Annan

“Free speech is nowhere absolute. Notwithstanding legitimate concerns among media professionals that government bodies not restrict their range of action for political purposes, any diverse society must regularly revisit the lines it draws in its legislation and within its editorial decision-making processes, over where to draw the line between free speech and that speech which foments hatred…” – Alliance of Civilizations Analysis on Media

“Calling for the establishment of a Code of Conduct for journalists risks arbitrary interpretation by licensing authorities within individual states for partisan purposes, and conflicts with the concept of free expression underlying media rights in many countries. However, standards have been developed which cover many of the concerns related to the state of cross-cultural media coverage, including the International Federation of Journalists’ code, and are voluntarily pursued in many countries today.” – Alliance of Civilizations Analysis on Media

“Goebbels was clear that control over the press should mean that all newspapers and magazines should follow the same line. To help steer their content from the centre, the Propaganda Ministry took over the two main press agencies…and merged them into the German News office. This supplied not only much of the national and international news content for all papers but also commentaries and instructions as to how the news was to be interpreted. Pg. 146

“The AoC will seek to establish a rapid response media-based mechanism to be mobilized during times of increased global tensions around cross-cultural issues.”
“This mechanism will be developed in three stages: 1. an international network of prominent personalities who are strongly involved in cross-cultural issues and are in a position to provide insights into potentially divisive intercultural debates will be created. 2. When an event that threatens to polarize communities along religious or cultural lines occurs, this network will be rapidly mobilized. Op-ed pieces (including some that may be co-authored across relevant cultural, national, and/or religious lines) signed by members of this network will be produced in a short space of time and translated in major languages. 3. This media content will then be distributed to major print media editors for their consideration as they try to cover and explain divisive cross-cultural issues to their readers, and disseminated through other mechanisms. – Alliance of Civilizations Implementation Plan

Judicial
“…it would be a mistake to imagine that the regular courts continued more or less unaltered by the advent of the Nazi dictatorship. They did not.” Pg. 70

“The central goal of a human security strategy has to be the establishment of legitimate political authority capable of upholding human security…At an operational level, the primary task of any deployment is to assist law enforcement. This means that a much larger investment will have to be made in civilian capabilities for law-enforcement, i.e. police, court officials, prosecutors and judges… Military troops will be an important component of these operational capacities, but they will have to restructure and reequip along new lines and they will need to be integrated with civilian capabilities, such as police, tax and customs officers, judges, administrators, providers of aid and human rights specialists. The ultimate aim is to be able to deploy different packages of military-civilian capabilities according to the situation.” - A Human Security Doctrine for Europe

“A new law, passed on 10 February, took the Gestapo out of the jurisdiction of the courts, so that there could henceforth be no appeal to any outside body against its actions.” Pg. 55

“Perhaps the most important challenge is the considerable cultural shift both for the military and civilians. The new type of human security office…will have to develop a common ethos, which will require…putting individual human beings, whoever they might be, above nation or homeland…the legal framework could build on the domestic law of the host state, the domestic law of the member states and the rules of engagement, international criminal law, human rights law, and international humanitarian law…a human rights oriented, bottom-up approach would require that the rules of engagement are public, and are translated into local languages, so that the local population is aware of them.” - A Human Security Doctrine for Europe

Next blog post I will devote commentary to the Nazi's control of religion and youth--areas which deserve added attention. As Evans wrote

“Goebbel’s propaganda machine could not persuade people that all their most dearly held values and beliefs had to be abandoned in the brave new world of Hitler’s Third Reich” pg 214

But they tried and failed and they will fail once more.

America's Future Engagement with the Alliance of Civilizations

2008-03-02T18:52:00.006-06:00

A participant of the Alliance of Civilizations Madrid Conference described the lack of engagement of U.S. policy makers as a gaping hole. What kind of response can the AoC expect from a future president?

Generally, one hopes, that along with power change comes necessary political corrections. The United States has had 20 years of the same two families setting policy and Hillary Clinton hopes to add another four to the tally. Early in Hillary’s campaign she unsuccessfully attempted to entice Americans with the "get two for the price of one” slogan. She has said that when she becomes president that Bill will have a prominent position within the United Nations. Having already served as President of the United States, it appears Bill has his eye on the position of “president of the world”. I wonder what Javier Solana thinks of that as it would put the Clintons in a competing rather than co-operative role. One thing is for certain, the Clintons share the goal of creating a common civilization.

In a 2002 speech delivered to Compuware, Bill Clinton said that we must move from a world of interdependence to integration, one in which the common civilization will combat the enemies from “within”.

“On the other hand, the greatest threat to our security comes out of our interdependence, our vulnerability everywhere to enemies from within. To people who use sophisticated weapons in an open society to advance exclusive claims rooted in ancient hatreds, the most ancient difficulties of people based on our racial, ethnic, tribal and religious differences…in addition to a security strategy, a more partners and fewer terrorist strategy, we need to overtly support the idea that there can and must be a global community…our differences are important and they make life more interesting, but our common humanity matters more…All these things that you may think are bad actually reflect how people have behaved for most of human history. There’s our crowd and their crowd. We have the truth and they don’t…But we live in an interdependent world and we literally cannot make of it what it ought to be unless we make it a home for all the children of the world. Nobody has to give up anything except the claim to exclusive truth...We really like our differences and they’re really important, but our common humanity matters more.”

This sounds exactly like the Club of Madrid’s global counter-terrorism strategy—one which calls for the establishment of a police state. I'm not surprised as Bill Clinton was the Club of Madrid’s Honorary Co-Chairman at the time the strategy was formed.

Rivaling the Clintons is Barack Obama. One might suspect that Solana would prefer to see Obama become president as he intends to work within the already existing Alliance of Civilizations framework. Obama’s blog site recently featured a post entitled Friends Waiting to Be Made in an Alliance of Civilizations in which Obama is called upon to support the initiative. Yet more troublesome is Obama’s plans to implement Shared Security, a Solana-architected doctrine which places the military in the position of policing civilians. Additional details of Shared Security can be found in blog post Enemy of the Civilization. According to Obama, in the interest of the common civilization:

“As president, Barack Obama will create a Shared Security Partnership Program to forge an international intelligence and law enforcement infrastructure to take down terrorist networks from the remote islands of Indonesia to the sprawling cities of Africa. This program will provide $5 billion over three years for counter-terrorism cooperation with countries around the world, including information sharing, funding for training, operations, border security, anticorruption programs, technology, and targeting terrorist financing.”

As we have learned from the Alliance of Civilizations materials, terrorists have been identified as the religious faithful who derive “exclusivist” interpretations from their religious texts. In other words, if you believe your religious texts to be true and reject another’s as being equally valid, consider yourself a terrorist.

Over the years I have been disillusioned with John McCain. I have yet to learn of how he views the creation of a common civilization. One positive for him is that he recognized Solana as a Marxist and opposed his appointment as NATO’s secretary-general. How does McCain view Solana now? I will be watching very closely.

Enemy of the Civilization

2008-02-12T23:55:00.004-06:00

Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy Part V

(Previous: Part I Killing with a Clear Conscience
Part II Dictator at the Door
Part III Big Brother on Stage: What Kind of Actor is the EU
Part IV The Purposes and Principles of the Shadow Government)

Shared Security is the doctrine that a person living in one part of the world has responsibility for the security and well being of a person living in other parts of the world. For example, a person living in Mexico shares responsibility for the well being of a person living in Pakistan and so forth. Shared Security incorporates the doctrines of EU and UN-architected human security and Canadian-architected Responsibility to Protect. These doctrines are designed to eradicate and prevent extreme poverty, hunger, abuses against women and children, genocide, terrorism, insecurities caused by economic collapse and/or state failure, etc. The Shared Security doctrine is the security model for the new global government. In a globalized world where national borders shall become obsolete, nations are expected to fundamentally shift their security strategies. Strategies which once were concerned primarily with forces of external aggression are now being called upon to focus on threats from within.

The issues Shared Security addresses are legitimate and should concern all of us—so why should we oppose it? As one becomes familiar with the global governance leadership one learns to read further to, as Paul Harvey says, “get the rest of the story”. Having read calls for sustainable development following drastic population reduction has left me skeptical that good will is the guiding principle. Underlying Shared Security is a fully-developed interlocking security model called CIMIC, i.e., Civilian-Military Cooperation. To understand CIMIC, let’s further examine the components which make up Shared Security.

Starting with the Canadian-architected “Responsibility to Protect”, this doctrine has become the cornerstone of the United Nations’ reform and security architecture. The Report of the International Conference "The EU, the US and the Reform of the United Nations: Challenges and Perspectives reveals that “the most significant conceptual shift occurred through the linking of the notions of sovereignty with that of responsibility. Responsibility is not only a virtue to be promoted to achieve international security; it is also a condition necessary to exercise full sovereignty. For the High Level Panel States are means, not ends per se. The “responsibility to protect” populations from atrocities and gross human rights violations shared between states and international institutions, becomes the new organizing concept for the new international security system. A number of participants shared the view that when states are unable or unwilling to perform these functions, the international community must intervene, even with the use of force when necessary.”

Responsibility to Protect is understandable where nations are called upon to respond to state aggression and genocide, but language exists which is vulnerable to broad interpretation and abuse. In my previous blog post I presented some of the global governance documents which target political dissent and monotheistic religious doctrines as “extremist” ideologies which lend themselves to violent radicalization. Interpretations of religious texts which do not conform to the Alliance of Civilizations’ guidelines are said to cause social exclusion and violate others’ human rights. (It escapes their attention that syncretism of the world’s faiths and the requirement that everyone discard their religion for a new revelation—one which their messianic figure Maitreya is expected to introduce—is itself exclusivist and violently radicalizing.)

While the Responisibilty to Protect establishes the framework for vacating a nation’s sovereignty, it is the Human Security doctrine that, in the interest of human rights, implements the global interlocking civilian-military cooperation (CIMIC) model. The idea behind CIMIC is that it places the civilian population under military policing authority. Canada’s experience with CIMIC provides some insight to what we might expect.

The picture on the left is scanned from the Canadian military journal Dispatches, Vol. 5, No. 3, Lessons Learned in Civilian-Military Cooperation. Here, the peace keeper is shown empathizing with a civilian woman. In the soldier’s right hand he holds a bayonet to the civilian’s head. His right foot is raised to a kicking position. In his left hand he smokes a cigarette. My many thanks go to Constance Cumbey for providing me with the pages of this journal.

The Human Security doctrine, originated by European Union High Representative Javier Solana, is the “preventive engagement” framework which is to be implemented globally. The 10-nation military wing of the European Union—the Western European Union—provides Solana with emergency powers to convene the European Council and preside over the military and civilian crisis management (CIMIC) machinery. Solana’s Human Security doctrine outlines the makings of a police state. Some of its characteristics are:

“The European Union pioneered the technique of integration at the level of society, based on the interdependence and adherence to common standards, as a way of promoting peace. The same approach should be adopted in external relations…And if necessary, it must be guaranteed by the use of military capabilities.”
“The debate about sovereignty and the conditions under which human rights concerns should take precedence over sovereignty has been a central preoccupation…The primacy of human rights also implies that those who violate human rights are treated as individual criminals rather than collective enemies…assigning individual criminal responsibility might be more effective. In the case of terrorism it is equally important to realise that the perpetrators are individuals and the means of curbing terrorism should be tailored to that insight.”
“An integrated civil-military force is most suitable for carrying out human missions. Military troops will be an important component of these operational capacities, but they will have to restructure and reequip along new lines and they will need to be integrated with civilian capabilities, such as police, tax and customs officers, judges, administrators, providers of aid and human rights specialists.”
“Effective civil-military integration is only possible in situations where the military act in a law-enforcement role and the civil agencies are part of a combined politically led operation.”
“The central goal of a human security strategy has to be the establishment of legitimate political authority capable of upholding human security.”
“The human security response force should be multinational with national military building blocks not below battalion level.”

Notice that Solana understands that CIMIC must be legitimized throughout the populations if he is to be successful. As I read through the global counter-terrorism materials I noticed that religion is being used as the legitimizing vehicle. This reminds me of the Peter Lemesurier’s blueprint for bringing forth Maitreya. In the Armageddon Script one of Lemesurier’s themes is the use of religion against itself:

"Rather than attempt to create a new vision, therefore, the task which presses most urgently upon us at the present time would seem to be to investigate those ancient prophecies which seem to swamp our world of modern vision, to research their origins and implications, to observe their extraordinary effects throughout history and above all to watch the successive efforts of those concerned to control and cope with the forces thus unleashed...we may finally find ourselves in a position not merely to anticipate the likely flow of future events …but actually to exercise a conscious control over those events by co-operating with, rather than opposing, the prophecies...Only then, perhaps, having, as it were, exorcised the former visions, shall we be in a position to create new visions of our own, and thus go on to create a 'new heaven and a new earth' of our own devising." p. 30

"For the wisdoms of all ages and cultures will be called upon to surrender their most precious secrets...The massed forces of the Old Age, however, will be unable to check their headlong onrush. In large measure they will go on to destroy each other in a massive, mutual venting of long pent-up aggression…" p. 237

It is not surprising to see that two United Nation’s organizations—the Alliance of Civilizations and Religions for Peace—have combined efforts to promote the concept of Shared Security.

At its 8th World Assembly, Religions for Peace adopted the Kyoto Declaration on Confronting Violence and Advancing Shared Security. Instrumental in carrying forward this security doctrine is Alliance of Civilizations’ High Level Group member and Honorary President of Religions for Peace Ismail Serageldin. Serageldin further advanced the doctrine by facilitating the Helsinki Process Round Table Meeting on “Multi-stakeholder Approach to Shared Security: the Role of Religions”. Since we’ve been directed to look at the Helsinki Process, let’s further examine the Organization for Security and Co-operation of Europe’ conference on The Role of Religion and Belief in the Fight Against Terrorism.

As it has been so frequently pointed out, those of us who believe our religion to be true stand accused of adopting terroristic ideologies and of hijacking religion. The OSCE’s counter-terrorism report becomes even more interesting as one considers the doctrine of Shared Security. First, notice the syncretization of religion along with traces of the “we are all one” transcendent and divine human family doctrine.

“It is as if social reality itself is forcing us to get rid of our exclusive attitudes and develop a universal orientation to our religion, which will be more accommodating of “others”. Indeed, one gets the feeling that each and every society is slowly, often painfully, beginning to realize what “humanity as a single family” means. Perhaps this is the path that nations must take for a universal community founded upon our common humanity to emerge…When such a universal community of different religions and peoples bound by their common humanity becomes a reality, we will understand what the illustrious mystic, Jallaluddin Rumi, meant when he wrote, “The lamps are different but the light is the same.”

Next we see that those who believe an exclusive truth claim are considered narrow and should be eliminated forever:

“Religion as a social force can be harnessed to build bridges or manipulated to erect walls. How religion functions in society depends upon a number of factors, among them, the political, economic, and cultural environment in which the particular religion operates. Justice, love, and compassion – values that are highly cherished in any religion – Since these values are universal, religion, which serves as a conduit for them, should also be preached and practised in a genuinely universal manner. This is what one expects the practitioners of religions to do in the coming century to counter the challenge of globalization. They should discard the narrow, exclusive concept of religion, which often confines virtue and goodness to one’s own kind. Justice and compassion in this exclusive approach seldom transcend one’s own religious boundaries. We should eliminate forever such religious exclusivists.”

Next, “exclusivists” are targeted for re-education. This reminds me of the Orwellian horrors of the Ministry of Love.

“As far as I am concerned, one of the fundamental aspects of the fight against religious extremism and terrorism on religious grounds is the development of proper religious education.”

“If we are talking about beliefs, then we should be interested in whether those beliefs are healthy or unhealthy, helpful for society for harmful. If a harmful belief takes the form of a religion, then it should meet serious opposition from society, and the state should further this. We shouldn’t assess the fight with unhealthy forms of belief that are propagated under the guise of religion as an infringement on freedom of religion.”

To assist in the control of religious thought, religion itself is calling for integration and strengthened state control. The Alliance of Civilizations has written that rather than ban religion, religion will become accountable to a central governing authority.

“I am sure that, in the fight with terrorism, the front shouldn’t be lined with tanks, guns, and fighter planes but with true religious figures and authoritative religious leaders who should declare a “holy jihad” in the name of preserving the integrity of the democratic society of which they are citizens. In this battle, the concept of “religion separated from the state” should be set aside; society should make a common, concerted effort to defeat the horrible disease of terrorism. The parameters of this joint activity should be extremely clear and comprehensible. Religions, religious leaders, and religious organizations need to assist the strengthening of state power at the expense of their activities in the sphere of spirituality, insofar as strong authorities have wide-ranging possibilities to provide for freedom of belief and freedom of religion.”

Finally, those who refuse to comply are declared an “enemy of the civilization”.

“Enemies of the civilization are misusing the name of "religion"”

The Purposes and Principles of the Shadow Government

2008-01-20T21:12:00.001-06:00

Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy Part IV

(Previous: Part I Killing with a Clear Conscience
Part II Dictator at the Door
Part III Big Brother on Stage: What Kind of Actor is the EU)

In April 2007, the Council of Europe Counter-Terrorism Task Force conducted a comprehensive conference aimed at addressing the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism. The Why Terrorism conference reinforced the efforts of the Council of Europe’s convention on the Prevention of Terrorism, the UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, the initiative of the Alliance of Civilizations, and the Club of Madrid’s counter-terrorism agenda. The outcome document called for the international community to:

rapidly conclude the Comprehensive Convention on International Terrorism;
strengthen regional organizations to combat terrorism; and
conduct the global war on terror within the framework of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights (otherwise known as “shared universal values”).

As I’ve covered in previous blog posts, the EU presents itself as the gravitational point in the system of world government. By enshrining human rights into the framework of its foreign policy, the Union believes it can export its interpretation of human rights values without legal constraint. This far-reaching policy compounded with a unique interpretation of human rights has most dangerous consequences--for we have seen that the Alliance of Civilizations’ initiative is the global implementation of the EU’s social cohesion policy. The EU’s rotational president Danilo Türk addressed this at the recent Alliance of Civilizations Madrid Forum.

Alliance of Civilizations High Representative Jorge Sampaio describes this policy as the global governance of culture

As we have seen, the Alliance of Civilizations social cohesion policy is the core component of the United Nations’ global counter-terrorism strategy. The strategy places a great deal of emphasis on regional organizations for they are key in the implementation of AoC objectives. An example of AoC-regional organization cooperation is the Tripartite-Plus agreement in which the United Nations, the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), and the Council of Europe have united to combat “extremist” ideology. States that have bound themselves by treaty to these regional organizations are politically bound to abide by the organization’s decisions. For example, the United States as an OSCE signatory state is expected to implement OSCE decisions bypassing the approval of our national legislature. In its document The Role of Religion and Belief in the Fight Against Terrorism, pertaining to restrictions on religion or belief, the OSCE tells us:

"Let us restrain to affirm that: ‘The legal binding force of these documents is not seriously doubted…A commitment does not have to be legally binding in order to have binding force; the distinction between legal and non-legal binding force resides in the legal consequences attached to the binding force, not in the binding force as such.’"

Similarly, Russia and its former satellite (eastern block) countries are bound to Council of Europe decisions. Stanford University’s Europeanisation as a Gravity Model of Democratisation notes that:

“For democracy and human rights the Council of Europe is important as a norm setting organization and codifier of law, Membership of the Council of Europe requires adherence to the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms…”

Stanford University later explained that it is probable that these countries did not realize what they were getting themselves into when they bound themselves to the Council of Europe. Note the significance of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR). The ECHR is modeled after the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights which is said to be the cornerstone of every counter-terrorism strategy we have examined thus far. Article 29 states:

(1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
(2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
(3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.

The limitations as determined by international law and the purposes and principles of the United Nations are of particular interest to me for they are companions to the social cohesion policy. In this context, human rights are based upon the adherence to a set of common beliefs and values having the intent to ensure social inclusion. This theory is seriously flawed for it introduces governance in which thought and belief become strictly controlled thereby negating the very diversity they claim to protect. The quest to build a new common civilization further contradicts the notion of diversity and a free society. Take, for example, the inter-religious dialogue aspect of the social cohesion policy which recognizes that all religions’ gods are equal. If an individual’s belief system requires they reject this premise, their belief system then becomes a violation of another person’s human rights where they further stand accused of exhibiting an ideology of hate or one that contributes to social exclusion. Worse yet, that individual’s belief system categorically becomes one associated with violent radicalization and terrorism. Article 5 of the Council of Europe’s Convention on Terrorism addresses the public provocation to commit a terrorist offence as such:

“For the purposes of this Convention, "public provocation to commit a terrorist offence” means the distribution, or otherwise making available, of a message to the public, with the intent to incite the commission of a terrorist offence, where such conduct, whether or not directly advocating terrorist offences, causes a danger that one or more such offences may be committed.”

The Council of Europe has provided legal analysis for article 5:

“The Committee therefore focused on the recruitment of terrorists and the creation of new terrorist groups; the instigation of ethnic and religious tensions which can provide a basis for terrorism; the dissemination of "hate speech" and the promotion of ideologies favourable to terrorism, while paying particular attention to the case-law of the European Court of Human Rights concerning the application of Article 10, paragraph 2 of the ECHR, and to the experience of States in the implementation of their national provisions on "apologie du terrorisme" and/or "incitement to terrorism" in order to carefully analyse the potential risk of a restriction of fundamental freedoms.”

There are many documents within the European Union that identify religious ideologies considered to be hate speech and conducive to the spread of terrorism. Among them are the ideological foundations of Europe: unity in diversity which warns us that we must embrace redefined humanistic versions of our faiths:

“…The fundamentalist, let him be Christian, Israelite, Muslim is the follower of his own truth, regards those belonging to his group as good and everybody else as bad or evil. He is not willing to learn and not able to conduct a dialogue. Fanatic violence is born from fundamentalism, which wants to force his own “truth” upon others. The shallow nihilism feeds the spread of such fundamentalism very effectively. Hence the danger that it would proliferate, entailing the rejection of the essential elements of the European heritage. Thus, we have to look for another solution. The Christian humanism and Christly humanity, which basically reformulate the Christian and Greek elements of the European intellectual heritage.”

Not only is religious belief attributed to violent radicalization but also political dissent. How could one possibly oppose globalization without adoption of an “extremist” ideology? In communication from the European Commission to the Parliament and the Council, the final paragraph of Terrorist recruitment: addressing the factors contributing to violent radicalization states:

“…Individuals, particularly young people from poorer, or excluded backgrounds, may feel a strong attraction for the “certainties” of extreme (or antiglobalisation) ideologies, although of course it is not only individuals in these categories who are found to have turned to violent radicalisation.”

The European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), article 10, paragraph 2, modeled after the United Nations’ human rights declaration, establishes a framework which would place restrictions on individuals accused of advocating “extremist” ideologies:

“The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.”

Now let’s back up to article 9 of the ECHR which pertains to religious freedom. Here we read similar language where restrictions may be imposed on religious freedom:

“Freedom to manifest one’s religion or beliefs shall be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society in the interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.”

In its conference The Role of Religion and Belief in the Fight Against Terrorism, the Organization for Security and Co-Operation of Europe provides interpretation of plausible restrictions.

"…it recognizes that in democratic societies, in which several religions coexist within one and the same population, it may be necessary to place restrictions on this freedom in order to reconcile the interest of various groups and ensure that everyone's beliefs are respected. Indeed, the fact that the freedom of religion is an element of a democratic and pluralistic society entails the placing of limitations thereupon in order to protect everyone's rights. Nevertheless, unlike Article 18 of the ICCPR, Article 9 is not included among the rights that cannot be derogated from in times of war or public emergency that threatens the life of the nation, arroding to Article 15 of the ECHR. But this may be done only to "the extent strictly required by the exigencies of the situation."

Note that the commentary indicates that if the state believes that others’ religious beliefs are not respected, restrictions on religion are permissible. Recall that religious fundamentalists have been described as those who reject another’s belief system as being equally valid. By definition, this constitutes disrespect. Additional clarification may be found in the Council of Europe’s counterterrorism document written by UNESCO’s Rosa Guerreiro, program specialist for Intercultural and Interreligious Dialogue. Guerreiro warns that religious fundamentalism constitutes disrespect and violates article 4 of the Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity thereby violating the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

“UNESCO promotes respect for all dimensions of cultural diversity since it is the very fabric of humankind and the “common heritage of humanity”, as stipulated in the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity, unanimously adopted in 2001. The Declaration furthermore aims at preserving cultural diversity as a living, and thus renewable treasure that must not be perceived as static but rather as a process guaranteeing the survival of humanity. At the same time, the Declaration is dedicated to preventing segregation and fundamentalism which, in the name of cultural differences, could sanctify those differences and in doing so, counter the message of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is extremely important to stimulate the respect of all cultures including religions. As we can read in the article 4 of UNESCO’s Declaration on Cultural Diversity: “the defence of cultural diversity is an ethical imperative, inseparable for human dignity. It implies a commitment to human rights and fundamental freedoms…..No one may invoke cultural diversity to infringe upon human rights guaranteed by international law, nor to limit their scope.””

To further combat religious fundamentalism is the United Nations’ Declaration on the Elimination of All Forms of Intolerance and of Discrimination Based on Religion or Belief. The declaration provides for restrictions on proselytization as well as introduces constraints on what a child may be taught in their religious education as we see in article 5, paragraph 5:

“Practices of a religion or beliefs in which a child is brought up must not be injurious to his physical or mental health or to his full development, taking into account article 1, paragraph 3, of the present Declaration.”

Article 1, paragraph 3:

“Freedom to manifest one's religion or beliefs may be subject only to such limitations as are prescribed by law and are necessary to protect public safety, order, health or morals or the fundamental rights and freedoms of others.”

In addressing what contributes to violations of the fundamental rights of others, the United Nations’ definition is consistent with that of the European Union’s. The special rappateur on the implementation of the Declaration tells us that religious man and women who reject another’s religion as being equal have an extremist belief system:

“It is a fact that freedom of religion does not seem to have won over the minds of all men and women. Each religion tends to believe that it is sole guardian of the truth and that it has a duty to make everyone bear witness to that truth. That does not always contribute to tolerance among religions. Moreover, each religion may be tempted to fight what it may consider to be deviance within its own ranks or around it. That does not always contribute to tolerance within religions, especially tolerance of religious minorities…”
“Moreover, the fact is that religious extremism is not yet in retreat and seems set to continue to pose a threat, sometimes to entire regions. The major religions are no strangers to extremism and are sometimes exposed to these terrorist manifestations, which spare neither Governments nor the governed. It is vital to combat this religious extremism by taking action against both its causes and its effects and by getting States to define a minimum set of common rules of conduct and behaviour with regard to it.”

Even the OSCE’s counter-terrorism report recognizes problems with the Declaration, problems I’m sure will be ironed out.

"Restrictions upon proselytizing, which would be permissible under the Declaration to protect the rights of those targeted by the proselytizing activities, may conflict with the freedom of expression guaranteed in Article 19 of the ICCPR.

Closer to home, we are now witnessing similar legislation within the United States. Legislation intended to combat violent radicalization has passed the House of Representatives. H.R. 1955: Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 has disturbing similarities to the European anti-radicalization legislation as such:

“(2) VIOLENT RADICALIZATION – The term ‘violent radicalization’ means the process of adopting or promoting an extremist belief system for the purpose of facilitating ideologically based violence to advance political, religious, or social change.”

This legislation creates a commission which will report on the root causes of violent radicalization. I rather suspect we will see definitions consistent with those provided by the United Nations and European Union. Our military counter-terrorism experts already echo what I’ve written here. James Forest, Director of Terrorism Studies at West Point Academy perhaps provides us with a hint of what we may expect. In The Final Act: Ideologies of Catastrophic Terror Forest reports that religious adherents who believe in an apocalypse are prone to violent radicalization. Additionally, pertaining to religious beliefs, Forest writes:

“As British terror expert JP Larsson has observed, religious ideologies are often theologically supremacist—meaning that all believers assume superiority over non-believers, who are not privy to the truth of the religion.3 Second, most are exclusivist—believers are a chosen people, or their territory is a holy land. Third, many are absolutist; in other words, it is not possible to be half-hearted believer, and you are either totally within the system, or totally without it. Further only the true believers are guaranteed salvation and victory, whereas the enemies and the unbelievers—as well as those who have taken no stance whatsoever—are condemned to some sort of eternal punishment or damnation, as well as death. Overall, religious ideologies can foster polarizing values in terms of right and wrong, good and evil, light and dark—values which can be co-opted by terrorist organizations to convert a “seeker” into a lethal killer. “
“Regardless of the underlying monotheistic faith, groups that adhere to an apocalyptic ideology see their mission in two general ways: they either want to accelerate the end of time (e.g., Aum Shinrikyo) or take action to ensure that they survive the millennium (e.g., the Branch Davidians). Overall, groups which embrace this unique “end of times” form of catastrophic ideology represent a worst-case scenario type of terrorist threat, although to date there have been relatively few groups at this end of the spectrum (and apocalyptic groups have historically had very limited appeal to a broader population).”

James Forest correctly recognizes that the Nazis had terrorist ideologies. I would encourage him to conduct an in-depth analysis of the new age writings and earnestly question what could cause a Christian to believe the foretold apocalypse is nearing. He may start by considering the following writings:

New Age Almanac credits the foundational writings of the modern new age movement to Helena Blavatsky and Alice Bailey. Hitler, an occult initiate, followed Blavatsky’s writings.
The writings of Alice Bailey which contains threats to bomb the Vatican and elimination of the monotheistic faiths.
Threats from New Age visionary Barbara Marx Hubbard telling us that the new system of global governance expects to kill half of the population who refuses to receive a mark of liberation, i.e., 666.
The threatening writings of Barbara Hand Clow that instructs us we must accept that Lucifer lives within us. If we do not accept this belief we will not make it to the New Age cosmic party.
The writings of New Age visionary David Spangler telling us we have the choice of receiving a Luciferic initiation or death.

Clearly, these writings are intended to terrorize and would naturally lead one to believe in an approaching apocalypse. Even so, speaking on behalf of Christians to reject Mr. Forest’s conclusions that we desire to accelerate the apocalypse, Revelation 12:11 tells us:

"And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death"

As for the Alliance of Civilizations, when one looks at a web site such as the World Commission on Global Consciousness & Spirituality and notes Desmond Tutu along side Barbara Marx Hubbard it becomes more clear that the intent is not to counter extremist, rather religious beliefs that do not adhere to the new civilization. It is the Alliance of Civilizations itself that is institutionalized extremism.

Part V

Big Brother on Stage: What Kind of Actor is the EU?

2007-12-25T21:58:00.000-06:00

Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy Part III

(Previous: Part I Killing with a Clear Conscience
Part II Dictator at the Door )

Rafael Dochao Moreno, principal administrator of the Euro-Med Partnership, when asked the question why Spain chose to launch the Alliance of Civilizations initiative at the United Nations rather than the European Union responded that the “Barcelona process is already an AoC…why do we need an AoC?” Moreno’s response reminded those of us who have been following the Barcelona Process what we’ve already known--that the Alliance of Civilizations is a key aspect for the European foreign policy. The Barcelona Process, introduced in 1995 by Spain’s Javier Solana, contained a social cohesion strategy which had a goal to combat religious fundamentalism worldwide. The Alliance of Civilizations is merely a vehicle for such activity. Right from the start, the AoC was intended to form the core of the global counter-terrorism strategy. Before the cartoon crisis (in which Spain’s Zapatero, Moratinos, Federico Mayor, and Solana so authoritatively rose to the occasion to turn crisis into opportunity), Spain’s foreign minister had introduced the idea of the AoC as a tool to combat terrorism. Incidentally, although no group has ever stepped forward to claim responsibility or offer rationale for inciting the cartoon crisis, blame was assigned to “religious extremists” along with the claim that they seek to provoke a clash of civilizations. There is only one group that has reaped tremendous political benefit from the cartoon crisis--it almost reminds me of the Reichstag fire.

In a previous blog post we examined the Club of Madrid’s 2005 counter-terrorism strategy. As I reviewed the conference pictures and list of participants, I noticed linkages to those who put forth the EU Social Cohesion Policy and the Alliance of Civilisations initiative. (Click on image to enlarge.)

It is not surprising then that the Madrid Agenda contains identical objectives to those of the European Union’s Counter-Terrorism Strategy. Europe’s counter-terrorism strategy was presented to the June 2003 Thessalonika European Council by Javier Solana. Solana’s counter-terrorism strategy, which was incorporated into the security strategy A Secure Europe for a Better World, addresses combating strategic terrorism as its primary objective. Recall in Part I of my counter-terrorism article that strategic terrorism has been attributed to religious beliefs in which one accepts an “exclusivist” truth claim. An examination of the EU counter-terrorism documents yields the same definition. But here we see the lion’s teeth of militarization. There is an interesting paragraph in the Thessalonika document which reads:

“…the Danish Presidency decided to commission a group of Ministers' personal representatives to submit an analysis of the phenomenon of extreme fundamentalism and terrorism…The final report has been submitted and will be further discussed within the Council with a view to taking forward its recommendations.”

I of course was curious to read this report but have been unable to do so because a Decision of the European Ombudsman ruled that there were politically sensitive evaluations concerning a large number of foreign states. During my search, I was able to locate a research report published by the Danish Ministry of Foreign Affairs which frequently quotes from the Extreme Fundamentalism and Terrorism Group (EFTG). It may give us a glimpse of some of the sensitive issues contained within this report. For example, I suspect we may find that the EFTG considers Israel an authoritarian regime:

“In most fundamentalist transnational terrorist violence, the perpetrators tend to view the front line to be between Israel and the United States, on the one hand, and the Islamic world on the other. It involves the dispute about the US occupation of holy areas either itself or through proxies such as the authoritarian regimes of Saudi Arabia and Persia, or Israel. According to the report of the Extreme Fundamentalism and Terrorism Group (EFTG) the settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would have a very important positive impact on the struggle against extreme fundamentalism and terrorism.”

This is consistent with the Alliance of Civilizations’ statements as during the Doha debates Israel’s government was named an extremist regime. Regarding fundamentalism, the EFTG says:

"Fundamentalism has been defined as an attitude where non-negotiable principles are introduced to politics from a transcendental source, holy texts or a divine discourse. “From the point of view of fundamentalism, religion expresses a divine order, which ideally embraces all life spheres. Although this may simply lead fundamentalists to encapsulate their own existence around their religious beliefs (“Quietism”), they will most often actively pursue the goal of seeking other life spheres, including political one, dominated by religious rather than secular principles.” Often fundamentalism has also meant a tendency to impose these principles indiscriminately on believers and non-believers alike.”

The European Commission’s social cohesion research report further demonstrates that religious fundamentalism will not be tolerated within the European neighborhood.

"This third school of thought is referred to as 'civil society as the public sphere'. "Theories of the public sphere demand a return to the practice of politics. Not as an elite occupation in which the public takes part once every four or five years through elections, but as an ongoing process through which 'active citizens' can help to shape both the ends and means of the good society…Essential to the functioning of democracy, according to the line of thinking of this school, is that all sets of voices are heard. Inequality and discrimination are therefore seen as the enemies of the public sphere. Fundamentalism is seen as its most dangerous enemy, since fundamentalism does not acknowledge the existence of different truths nor does it respect other values, which makes it impossible to reach a consensus with other groups... The only similarity between European policy and this third school of thought is its aversion to fundamentalism."

As part of the 2007-2013 Cohesion Policy, member states are bound by agreement to implement European Security and Defense Policy (ESDP) guidelines. As mentioned earlier, the European Defense Strategy’s focus is primarily on combating strategic terrorism. To do so, Solana has created a military-industrial complex having the following characteristics (to name only a few):

The theatre of operations is global.
Military assets that operate far beyond European borders.
Capacity to conduct offensive in addition to defensive war.
In the event not all member states are in agreement, draw upon a nucleus of states comprising a permanent structured cooperation.
Strategic missions will be organized through coalitions of the “willing and able.”
A civilian-military crisis management approach (CIMIC). CIMIC is a plan which places the civilian population subject to military authority.
Crisis management through EU Battle Groups
Overcome the divide between military and criminal intelligence.
Involve gendarmerie forces in all types of police missions: crowd control, maintaining public order, conducting intelligence work, criminal investigations, counter-terrorism, etc.
Establishment a citizens’ biometrics database (Schengen Information System, aka SIS II and Visa Information System). These systems were developed in secrecy without consultation of the European Parliament.
Gather intelligence through satellite capabilities and the Torrejon Satellite Centre.
The Galileo Navigational System provides the ability to conduct precision urban warfare (see An Evaluation of the Military Benefits of the Galileo System).
New EU-NATO framework - Ensure escalation dominance in the essence of Berlin-Plus.
Ability to conduct network-enabled warfare: co-operability with US armed forces having ability to “plug into” US networks.
Use of NATO Response Forces in crisis management.
Provide military capabilities to the UN. Would include a reserve or an “extraction force” provided to support a UN operation.
Activate Western European Union Recommendation 666 which places above assets into control of the High Representative (Solana) in the event of a crisis.

The new EU-NATO relationship has tripled European capacity for power-projection. The Prague Summit Declaration , a blueprint for EU-NATO co-operation, reinforces Solana’s social cohesion platform:

We reaffirm that security in Europe is closely linked to security and stability in the Mediterranean. We therefore decide to upgrade substantially the political and practical dimensions of our Mediterranean Dialogue as an integral part of the Alliance’s cooperative approach to security. In this respect, we encourage intensified practical cooperation and effective interaction on security matters of common concern, including terrorism-related issues, as appropriate, where NATO can provide added value. We reiterate that the Mediterranean Dialogue and other international efforts, including the EU Barcelona process, are complementary and mutually reinforcing.
Endorse the agreed military concept for defence against terrorism. The concept is part of a package of measures to strengthen NATO’s capabilities in this area, which also includes improved intelligence sharing and crisis response arrangements.

NATO’s military concept for defence against terrorism coincides with Solana’s civilian-military approach as NATO’s framework directs:

“Act…in support of the international community’s efforts against terrorism.” [Recalling that the Alliance of Civilizations social cohesion program is the core of the counter-terrorism strategy.]
“Developing an overreaching international strategy for defence against terrorism.”
“religious extremism is likely to be the source of the most immediate terrorist threats to the Alliance…”
“Counter Terrorism, primarily offensive measures.”
“…winning the trust of the local population through Psychological Operations and Information Operations is vital.”
“Within most NATO nations, civil authorities, such as the police, customs and immigration authorities, finance ministries, interior ministries, intelligence and security services, are the primary agencies involved in dealing with terrorism and military forces will need to operate in support of, and in close coordination with all of these agencies. The Concept therefore states that NATO must harmonise its procedures and efforts with civil authorities within nations in order to maximize its effectiveness against terrorism.

This is a tremendous amount of power to be placed in the hands of one individual. Many of us have often heard that a picture is worth 1000 words. For a visual representation of the EU Security and Defense Policy and to grasp Javier Solana’s power, watch this Center for International Peace Operations presentation. (I would recommend you download it as it is likely to soon disappear.) So what kind of actor is the EU? Again, this picture speaks volumes.

One living in other parts of the world may read this and mistakenly believe that this is only a European problem. This cohesion strategy is global and is intended to be realized through the United Nations’ Alliance of Civilizations initiative. For those of us living in the United States, this past week we were made aware of the FBI’s formation of a vast biometrics database as well as the Dept. of Homeland Security’s domestic satellite-surveillance program. I am certain that these systems will “plug into” the Schengen biometrics system which is referred to as Big Brother. What many have long feared, I’m saddened to say, has arrived. Indeed, Big Brother is now here.

Part IV

Dictator at the Door

2007-12-08T22:20:00.000-06:00

Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy Part II
(Previous: Part I)

*** See use doctrine here

During Kofi Annan's presentation to the General Assembly of the United Nation's Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, he applauded the Club of Madrid for its related efforts in countering terrorism. In 2005, the Club of Madrid conducted a democracy, terrorism and security conference which is said to have been the largest gathering of security and terrorism experts that has ever taken place. Annan delivered the keynote address to the closing plenary where he conveyed that he would form an implementation task force dedicated to fighting terrorism and that all the UN system would play a role. We know that the role of setting the "global conscience" is being fulfilled by the Alliance of Civilizations High Level Group. One need not look too far on the list of conference participants to find individuals connected to the Alliance of Civilizations. Noteworthy participants include John Esposito, Giandomenico Picco, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Javier Solana, etc. Here, I provide a summation of the conference outcome documents.

In Addressing the Causes of Terrorism, identification of the problematic individuals are found on pages 27-33. The core of the experts’ argument is that religion can contribute to a ‘culture of violence’, a condition which must be addressed to stop the spread of terrorism.

“…religion is often ‘centered around themes that can be inherently polarizing—concepts of truth, notions of good, of absolutes and ultimate realities’. For this reason, religion can contribute to a culture of violence where violence becomes ‘a defining issue’ in the identity of activist groups.”

In Part I of this series, we see that Alliance of Civilisation’s High Level Group member John Esposito equates monotheistic religions’ exclusive truth claims with terrorism. In light of Esposito’s contribution to this counter-terrorism strategy, it’s no surprise that the question “Is violence more frequently linked with monotheistic traditions?” resulted in the following answer:

“Samuel Peleg pointed out that the monotheistic religions (Christianity, Judaism and Islam) have a tendency to authoritarianism and intolerance due to ‘their centrist emphasis on a single deity’. Esposito said that the ‘three Abrahamic traditions’ have been ‘more prone to exclusivist theologies/worldviews which can be used by political and religious leaders to legitimate imperialist expansion, violence, and terror’. Elorza gave explanations of why – in his view – Islam and Judaism had a propensity towards violence and Buddhism did not. Other members of the group stressed that some strands of Hinduism, Sikhism and Buddhism have also been capable of hideous acts of terror, and that these acts have been justified by violent images and themes within these Eastern traditions. Moreover, the distinction between ‘monotheism’ and ‘polytheism’ is much debated by scholars of comparative religion who point out that a supposedly polytheistic religion such as Hinduism has a strong sense of unity behind its diversity, and that notions such as the Christian Trinity and concepts of sainthood introduce a complexity into the idea of God in the supposed monotheisms of Western religions.”

Maybe the monotheistic faiths are too complex for these individuals. So they concluded: therefore, responding to terrorism:

“Multi-track approaches (involving political, social and economic in parallel with security and military measures) should be employed.”

The Confronting Terrorism working papers lay out these multi track approaches. I subtitled my copy “Directives for a Police State”. There is a common thread running through the three main counter-terrorism strategies which I focus on —one which migrates the military from battlefield situations and embeds it into the populations. This is referred to as peace-keeping. (I will address this further in my next blog article.) This approach is intended for global implementation. Among the Club of Madrid's plans of action are:

“Legal standards need to be improved by harmonising penal and police laws, as well as by ratifying and implementing the relevant United Nations Conventions and Protocols and similar regional agreements.”
“Creation of a global citizens’ network.”
“Transformation of the armed forces - We do not see a need for dedicated counter-terrorist forces as special branches of the military establishment. Rather we would see this role, as well as the anti-terrorist and consequence management roles, as fitting in with what might be considered to be the emerging model for Western armed forces…models geared to peace-keeping (with only a limited capacity for self defense and dependent upon local consent).”
“The experiences of the humanitarian interventions as well as the counter-terrorist operations of recent years point to a need for lighter, more agile forces, drawing on modern technologies (for example in combining the ability to track targets and attack them with precision) while understanding the difficulties when it becomes necessary to mingle with civil society and the overall political context within which operations are conducted.”
“Biometrical identification systems will increasingly be used in travel documents as well as in other transactions.”

Travel documents for a world without borders? Hmmm. But, of course, all of this is intended to be conducted within the framework of and with sensitivity to democracy—that is “safe democracy”. The Alliance of Civilizations Giandomenico Picco has provided us with direction on what form of democracy we may expect under this weltanschauung. I noticed after I published my first article in this series that the Club of Madrid had removed Picco’s article from their website. I have attached it to the top of this piece for educational purposes. It can also be found on safe democracy foundation’s website. Simply click on each document to expand it so it becomes readable. According to Picco:

“Now the challenge which faces most of our institutions, which are part and parcels of the system of indirect democracy, is whether they can evolve to meet a world where there are many ways to express the voice of the people besides elections and where knowledge is so wide spread that a group of few cannot claim monopoly on the truth. The participation of the peoples in elections is diminishing in many societies.”
“I would venture to say that of the democratic institutions the first to evolve would be the Parliament: no longer the monopolist of the voice of the people, nor of knowledge for the people, they may have to reinvent themselves…”
“Our societies are likely unprepared for that kind of democracy as we have never experienced it. But for how long can we keep the door closed?”

Well this is one weltanschauung that amounts to nothing more than old fashioned fascism--a relic of extremist ideology has been tested before. Ultimately, it will become known as the most terroristic regime the world has ever known.

Part III

Killing with a Clear Conscience

2007-12-02T13:44:00.000-06:00

.

Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy Part I

In my early writings on this blog space, I warned of the Militarization of the Alliance of Civilizations. A militarized Alliance of Civilisations is necessary for the High Level Group (HLG) to successfully conduct a war on extremism and terrorism. Most people consider those objectives to be positive. I may have too had I not read the AoC’s definitions of terrorism.

When Kofi Annan first introduced the AoC, he said that the problem (civilizational tensions) is not with the faiths, but with the faithful. The AoC has since expanded on this statement. Accordingly, if you read a religious text and apply an interpretation that becomes an “exclusive” truth claim, you have thereby entered a theology of hatred and have terrorist leanings. That, they say, is a root cause of terrorism. During the Doha Debates HLG member John Esposito said:

“I think the danger of religious extremism can be, even though it's not necessarily violent, when it becomes exclusivist in which is basically says, 'Not only is my faith right, but your faith is absolutely wrong, and not only is my faith right, but my faith position within my faith is right, and so another Muslim who disagrees with me is wrong,' then you're moving into a very dangerous position here because you're bordering on what I would call theology of hate. That kind of mentality can easily be used by some, and it has been used by people like Osama Bin Laden, to legitimate military action at a certain point. You can easily slip over the line once you're into that realm of what I would call theology of hate, and we see that with elements of the Christian right, the Jewish right, and with elements of the Muslim right. I'm avoiding the word fundamentalism here, but you know what I mean.”

This poses a significant problem for most monotheists as our religious texts make exclusive truth claims. What escapes Esposito’s attention is that most of us enjoy freedom—we can choose our faiths and worship as we please. We respect and defend others’ rights to do likewise. This is called respect, not hatred. Perhaps Esposito’s vision of democracy is entirely different than mine.

As I took an in-depth look at the United Nations Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy, it was not surprising to find the Alliance of Civilizations and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) at its core. This “comprehensive” strategy contains “measures to address the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism”. The strategy and its related documents can be found at the UN’s Uniting Against Terrorism website. While reading through the many documents, an item of interest in the recommendations document caught my attention which reads:

“I also urge the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, in collaboration with the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute, to continue its work…”

Nearly a year ago I had archived a counter-terrorism piece from the Office on Drugs and Crime’s website which says:

“Religious groups often claim to be in possession of absolute truth, and some terrorist groups do the same. Religion also appears to offer the terrorist a seemingly ‘moral’ justification for immoral deeds. Human rights violations are ‘justified’ in the name of an invoked ‘divine law’”

(This link is no longer on the website, but the same material can be found here.)

This prompted me to check and see if the Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute shared the same wisdom. Sure enough, I found counter-terrorism material by Giandomenico Picco. Picco was Kofi Annan’s personal representative who worked on the Dialogue Among Civilizations project and later was instrumental in the startup of the Alliance of Civilizations initiative. Picco’s contribution to the AoC is certain to have a significant impact world’s religious populations as he has most disturbingly defined terrorism which can be found in UN publication International Terrorism and Governmental Structures. Here Picco explains that there are two types of terrorism, those being tactical and strategic. Tactical terrorist are associated with groups such as Hezbollah. Hezbollah, Picco explains, has a both a political and military branch whereby negotiations are possible. Strategic terrorism is based on religious belief. It is altogether different--more radical—of which there can be no negotiation. According to Picco:

“Different is the new kind of terrorism we witnessed in the last ten years or so by the Al Qaeda type of organizations. The Al Qaeda virtual groups have provided an almost opposite image from the tactical terrorists. The weltanschauung they offer is one of deep and profound exclusion and one of “us and them” which is rooted in an ideology of religious overtones and the arrogance of being alone in the possession of the truth on every single issue. The takfiri imprint is at the core of that vision. Thus negotiations have no place in the vision of the new terrorists.”

“I call them the strategic terrorists for their objective goes much beyond the readdress of what they perceive are injustices. They are moved by a global strategy. The ideology with heavy religious overtones behind it is that of the monopoly of truth. The mentality of the monopoly of truth is at the very origin of extremism and indeed of all kinds of exclusionism. Clearly any ideology based on dogmas has the potential of generating more and more confrontation.”
"As for the first challenge it has to be repeated that any weltanschauung that is based on the belief of having a monopoly of truth is exclusive, divisive and I would dare say a bit out of sink with reality: a reality that is of increasing interdependence of all with all. The monopoly of truth concept which is rooted on the ‘holier than thou’ concept and the concept of superior or holier group, would fit better a world where autocracy was still a possibility; but autocracy is a long-gone concept in an intertwined and interdependent world. To instigate exclusiveness is in fact to march against time and most importantly against the facts of life, as they exist today and not 1000 years ago.”
“We may well need a “global coalition of the sane”; as Prince Hassan used to call it before he was told that it was not politically correct. A coalition of the sane would have to be pursued across divides of all kinds and under a flag that would be recognized by all peoples to be their own…”
“These advocates of a coalition of the sane would need to raise their voice in support of the large majority of the world who does not have the arrogance to believe they own the truth alone, but instead has the wisdom to know we are profoundly interconnected and interrelated. A strategy of a global coalition needs a coalition of peoples. That may be a task for “leaders who can lead without enemy.””

Here we have the United Nations Crime and Justice department likening a large part of the world’s population to Al Qaeda terrorists and at the same time advancing the new age dogma of interconnection. The doctrine of interconnection is itself exclusivist and separatist. New age authoritative writings point to a process of separation—an evolutionary transformation—in which those not in touch with the new age will be sent to another dimension.

The Alliance of Civilizations’ HLG member John Esposito has drawn a division line of acceptable beliefs. In an upcoming post I will show how this line has become even more dangerous. HLG personality Karen Armstrong ridicules us for having the belief that they seek to “wipe us out”. Of course, as the AoC implements its guidelines of acceptable interpretations of the faith, the faithful who do not conform will be redefined as terrorists. By doing this, they can now kill having a clear conscience.

(Related Posts: Part II)

Aligning the Masses

2007-11-10T14:30:00.001-06:00

From Mobilising people and Actions for Dialogue Web Site:

On January 1, Javier Solana advanced the political and economic dimensions of his Barcelona Process by strengthening the Association Agreements with the Mediterranean Partners for a period of seven years. It looks as though 2008 is the social dimension’s year to prosper. The social dimension, tasked with combating religious fundamentalism worldwide as well as creating a common civilization, is where the Alliance of Civilizations (Dialogue Between Peoples and Cultures) was inspired. This coming year has been declared the EU Year of Intercultural Dialogue and facilitating it is the EU’s Alliance of Civilizations.

This month, the Anna Lindh Foundation is launching the 1001 Actions for Dialogue campaign to unite together their common culture. This campaign reminds me of the 1987 Harmonic Convergence but on a much more grandiose scale. The Anna Lindh Foundation’s plans are to “work for the promotion of dialogue and the aim of knowing the ‘other’”. But if you are one of the “others” who “merciless claims possession of absolute truth”, joining the common civilization is going to be a problem. Well c'est la vie, we’re in good company as I have no intention of joining them in their destiny.

Formation of an Alliance Youth

2007-10-29T22:32:00.000-05:00

.
I must admit that I enjoy interacting with our youth. In the university system, I am known as a non-traditional student. In case you’re wondering, at age 40 I decided to return to college as a part time student. I have found the experience of being amongst young people very pleasant and enjoyable. The campus has a bulletin board where students post news items they find of interest. I read this board often as I like to know of their concerns. I’ve noticed two issues stand out most: 1) world peace; and 2) freedom. Frequently posts are related to RFID technology and the implantation of both animals and humans. They clearly do not like it.

Nearly every Alliance of Civilizations’ report has stated that its primary target audience is our youth. I refer to it as the recruitment of an Alliance Youth. It appears that young people are being indoctrinated as they participate in problem solving exercises (through conferences, seminars, etc.) and guided to arrive at predetermined outcomes—outcomes consistent with the “global conscience” of the United Nations.

One example can be found in Model United Nations (MUN). MUN Headquarters reports that more than 200,000 high school and college students participate in UN simulation conferences each year. In a 2003 interview with SHARE International, former UN Assistant Secretary-General Robert Mueller said that the United Nations was finally being taught globally through the Model United Nations program. Mueller, who shares SHARE International’s vision of world governance by “Maitreya the Christ”, has done his part to introduce youth into this occult-based system by forming the Global Elementary Model United Nations (GEMUN) program which is offered through the Robert Mueller Schools. The Robert Mueller Schools associate themselves with the School of Ageless Wisdom which has as a basis of study the writings of Alice Bailey and Helena Blavatskky.

Mueller has connected with other Maitreya proponents and has incorporated into GEMUN's theme the Earth Charter which represents itself as being “a unique framework for developing educational programs and curricula aimed at transformative learning” (see Earth Charter & Education). It appears that Benjamin Crème has jumped onto the MUN bandwagon as I have discovered a discussion board link that shows he has been distributing “the Christ is now here" literature at those events.

Some of the more troubling materials coming out of the Model United Nations simulations are those pertaining to the Alliance of Civilizations initiative. In C’MUN’s concluding document, the final paragraph identifies that “extremism and terrorism are motivated solely by exclusivist interpretations of religion”. This is consistent with the AoC's theme that exclusivist interpretations equals terrorism. I've listed a few documents targeted to youth that carry this theme:

“Based on the value of tolerance stems the notion that perfection is solely reserved for God and that only He knows Absolute Truth whereas human beings can merely make individual efforts and judgments.” (Chicago Model United Nations blogspace)
“There should be no monopoly of the truth, and there should be a clear understanding that the traditional Christian Churches and Muslim centrism have to speak the language of the age.” (Amman Model United Nations)
Objective of the Euro-Mediterranean partnership and the young alliance of civilizations: “to counter the influence of those who want to have the monopoly of the truth.”
“A major issue that the world community faces is to accept that no group, religious or otherwise, has a monopoly on enlightenment or truth.” (New Zealand Diversity Forum working to implement an Alliance of Civilizations)

These documents also coincide with the Alliance of Civilizations’ grades 6-12 Daily Lesson Plan where Christianity is portrayed as exclusivist and as a religion that foments hatred. For example, this theme is found scattered throughout the materials on Christianity: “Exclusivism, the belief that my religion is true and that all others are false, can develop into hatred of other faith groups and their members. Religious exclusivism is often a major cause of much of the world's civil unrest, civil wars, mass crimes against humanity and genocide.”

The lesson plan also explains that the Revelation prophecy pertaining to the mark of the beast, number 666, was fulfilled by Roman Emperor Nero. Read here and here.

Universities are also cooperating with the AoC as we see in the Higher Education’s contribution to building the Alliance of Civilizations workshop. The Council of Europe recently sponsored the seminar Global Education and Youth which focuses on the implementation of the Alliance of Civilizations. The seminar’s purpose is to “develop, enhance and sustain strategies and capacity-building for global education, targeting institutions and practitioners in the field of global education in the formal and non-formal sectors.”

Palgrave Macmillan, a publisher of educational text books, shares the AoC’s vision. Notice the section in the above image which states “The aim of the initiative [Alliance of Civilizations] is for all the citizens of the world to unite in placing their universal citizenship before their condition as citizens of a country, religion or civilization.

As I was preparing this article, the History Channel broadcasted an interesting commercial produced by Youth for Human Rights International (YHRI) . YHRI is the collaborative efforts of the Church of Scientology and Scientologist Mary Shuttleworth. YHRI seeks to combat intolerance through the advancement of human rights within the framework of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The Alliance of Civilizations has said that intends to establish a “global conscience”. Article 29 of the Declaration accommodates just that:

Article 29: 1) Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible. 2) In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations are determined by law solely for the purposes of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society. 3) These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purpose and principles of the United Nations.

The Alliance of Civilizations et al are actively recruiting well intentioned youth. I share the young peoples' concerns that we live in peaceful world as free peoples. But there is much underlying garbage that is being subtly--and sometimes not so subtly--introduced to serve the AoC’s broader objectives. I fear for young people. How many have been conditioned to accept Maitreya? How many of the youth in the opening picture will find themselves transformed to accept a doctrine of “no fear, no mercy”?

Propaganda Precedes War: the AoC's Media Rapid Response Force

2007-10-14T14:28:00.001-05:00

Propaganda precedes war. It is war that the Alliance of Civilisations’ High Level Group intends to conduct on those who practice “religious fundamentalism” or “religious exclusivism.” The Alliance is finding it increasingly difficult to strike a balance tolerating religious diversity and secularization. As written in the Cultural Exchange Report:

“Religious fundamentalism is on the rise globally, and intolerance of secular humanism and modern science is its dangerous companion. It is largely a Christian phenomenon in the U.S., but a Muslim one in Europe and elsewhere…Many countries in secular Europe are struggling to find a balance between tolerating diversity and assuring that their basic humanistic beliefs and values are sustained.”

The opening of the AoC’s Analysis on Media report quotes Benjamin Barber saying “it is time to recognize that the true tutors of our children are no longer the school teachers and university professors, but the filmmakers, advertising executives and pop culture purveyors.” This being the case, securing access to media resources has ranked high on the Alliances’ Implementation Plan. To achieve its goals, the establishment of a media rapid response force is essential. The rapid response force will have the following characteristics:

“The AoC will seek to establish a rapid response media-based mechanism to be mobilized during times of increased global tensions around cross-cultural issues.”
“This mechanism will be developed in three stages: 1. an international network of prominent personalities who are strongly involved in cross-cultural issues and are in a position to provide insights into potentially divisive intercultural debates will be created. 2. When an event that threatens to polarize communities along religious or cultural lines occurs, this network will be rapidly mobilized. Op-ed pieces (including some that may be co-authored across relevant cultural, national, and/or religious lines) signed by members of this network will be produced in a short space of time and translated in major languages. 3. This media content will then be distributed to major print media editors for their consideration as they try to cover and explain divisive cross-cultural issues to their readers, and disseminated through other mechanisms.
“At the political level, mainly through the High Representative’s role, the AoC aims to facilitate the establishment of contacts and dialogues with political, religious, media and civil society personalities who would be prepared to exert their influence in advancing the Alliance of Civilizations’ objectives.”

I believe we have witnessed personalities sympathetic to the Alliance’s objectives already exert their influence through CNN’s broadcast of God’s Warriors.

(Left to right: Karen Armstrong, Genevieve Abdo, Jimmy Carter, Christiane Amanpour, Richard Cizik) In an interview with the San Jose Mercury News, Christiane Amanpour said that the two big issues that our planet faces are the environment and the clash of civilizations. It came as no surprise that the program paralleled the writings of the Alliance of Civilizations’ as it identified the Israeli-Palestinian problem as being kept alive by the adherents of the three monotheistic faiths. It pointed to these adherents as extremists who, by applying a literal interpretation of religious texts, are susceptible to adoption of a terrorist mindset.

Amanpour then periodically interjected analysis from “moderates” who were clearly aligned with her presentation of the problem. Among them include “religious historian” and AoC High Level Group member Karen Armstrong, AoC Liaison Officer Genevieve Abdo, Lucis Trust World Server Jimmy Carter, and National Association of Evangelicals Richard Cizik.

The CNN-Alliance of Civilizations partnership links are clear where Karen Armstrong and Genevieve Abdo are concerned. Armstrong is perhaps the most vocal critic of monotheists and Christianity in particular. The preceding blog article provides an in-depth into her mindset.

Jimmy Carter was given a great deal of time to “re-claim” Christianity from the fundamentalists. Carter points to his christ as being quite different to that of, let’s say, John Hagee. No doubt. Jimmy Carter is one of Lucis (formerly Lucifer) Trust’s World Servers. Lucis Trust’s spiritual community gives us insight into the purpose of the Group of World Servers:

“…this group is today preparing the way for the Christ, the coming World Teacher, as they labor to bring the "Kingdom of God"-the kingdom of Souls-into physical manifestation.”
“The restoration of the mysteries can only take place when members of the Hierarchy of Love-Wisdom are again openly active on the physical plane, as they were in the days of Atlantis, many millions of years ago. At the core of the mysteries is the recognition of humanity's own divine nature. Humanity, the great world disciple, stands at the door of initiation. It is the great opportunity and responsibility of the NGWS to prepare the way for the reappearance of the Christ-the Hierophant of the first and second initiations and the One who will lead in the restoration of the mysteries and the consequent "full flowering" of humanity”

Perhaps one of the most troubling participants I see is Richard Cizik. It appears as though he has climbed into bed with the new agers. I recently read where he partakes in mocking Christians for having an unfounded fear of the United Nations. According to the Christian Post, Cizik participated in the development of the World Council of Churches’ Code of Conduct for Religious Conversion. The World Council of Churches, speaking of the Code of Conduct, tells us that “religious preachers need to be told that no religion has a monopoly on the truth, that there are many ways to find salvation.” Cizik is well aware that the claims of the Gospels are exlusive. Perhaps he’s not so convinced of John 14:6 himself as he tells us that all truth is God’s truth wherever we find it.

I would urge Richad Cizik to carefully re-examine his political partnerships as the United Nations has openly said that the partnership of civilizations is to represent a “powerful response to those who feed on exclusion and arrogantly claim sole ownership of the truth.”

Also within the Analysis of Media report, we learn that “free speech is nowhere absolute…

"any diverse society must regularly revisit the lines it draws in its legislation and within its editorial decision-making processes, over where to draw the line between free speech and that speech which foments hatred.”

This is very troubling as one begins to question what does the AoC consider speech which foments hatred? Proselytization with an “exclusive” truth claim? Religious criticism? Let’s look at some not-to-distant past examples.

"I share the distress of the Muslim friends who feel that the cartoon offends their religion. I also respect the right of freedom of speech. But of course freedom of speech is never absolute. (Spoken by Kofi Annan)
"No one should be 'free' to attack Muhammad. You must have a clear stance on the attacks on Muhammad. If you do not have a clear stance, this would hurt the alliance of civilizations” (Spoken by Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan)
When the Pope associated Islam to violence, the United Nations Human Rights Council discussed whether to cite the Pope for religious intolerance.
Publication of some Biblical passages in some countries has been declared hate speech and a punishable offense.

Apart from the news media, the AoC places much emphasis on reaching youth through popular culture. As they’ve said

“Western popular culture, developed and distributed by powerful multi-national corporations, is seen by many as a hegemonic, and negative force…At the same time, popular culture is perhaps one of the greatest opportunities for combating fundamentalism and bridging the cultural divide between Muslim and Western cultures. …common musical language results in voracious consumption of hip-hop by youth across the world regardless of where it originates.”

The AoC intends to introduce its messages through rap music as well as television entertainment medium such as sit coms. Little Mosque on the Prairie, which broadcasts in Canada, is one such example. Interestingly, the AoC, claiming to be so sensitive over religious symbols, shows little regard for the symbol of the cross as one can see in this Little Mosque youtube introduction.

As Amanpour has said, the biggest problem facing the world today is the “clash of civilizations”. I concur. But it is not a clash amongst the three monotheistic faiths that worries me. It is the clash that the Alliance of Civilizations intends to facilitate and manage—a clash to bring about the restoration of the mysteries—that all others will appear pale in comparison.

Karen Armstrong and the Alliance of Civilizations

2007-10-12T19:01:00.000-05:00

Here is an article written by Constance Cumbey. It provides valuable insight into the direction of the Alliance of Civilizations' High Level Group.
===============================================
KAREN ARMSTRONG AND THE ALLIANCE OF CIVILIZATIONS

I decided it was time that I look in on the Alliance of Civilizations. Internet searching, I found a page on its UNAOC (United Nations Alliance of Civilizations) website. It was labeled “HLG Analysis.” I went there. The first thing I noticed was a fairly new article by Karen Armstrong. Karen Armstrong is a former nun who considers herself a first rate theologian as well as an analytical scholar of world religions. Many others have given her credit for this as well, including but not limited to Kofi Annan, the former Secretary General of the United Nations who appointed her as one of the High Level Group of Personalities to oversee and make recommendations for governments to regulate religious school curriculums globally. Since Karen Armstrong spent years, per her account, in a convent, “under a veil,” I expected her to have some basic grasp of at least Christianity. She is perhaps the most prominent face and voice of the HLG (High Level Group).Karen Armstrong writes lots of articles and gives lots of interviews. What initially distinguished this one for me was to whom she gave it: SHARE INTERNATIONAL! Share International is the official publication of the “Christ is now here” crowd, specifically Benjamin Crème and his “Maitreya the Christ” company. Sometimes they, with permission, reprint articles from other sources. I looked carefully to see if this was perhaps the case here. It was not. The article was an interview specifically for SHARE INTERNATIONAL by Andrea Bistrich. I am now wondering out loud if Karen Armstrong knew that SHARE INTERNATIONAL was (1) about a new ‘Christ’ who was decidedly not Jesus (and probably not Jewish either) and (2) was the official organ for a group officially seeking a “New World Religion.”Since Karen Armstrong holds herself out as an expert in comparative religion, I assumed that if she knew even 1/100th of what she is reported to know, that she should have had knowledge of what Share International is about. I decided to “google” for myself. I assume Karen Armstrong is also as Javier Solana accused fundamentalists of doing, “taking full advantage of the global village” and doing her own due diligence google/yahoo searches before lending her name and prestige to one cause or another. Doing my own google search on “Share International” I didn't have to look far. The top ten hits were all about “Maitreya the World Teacher.” You may read the top hit by clicking here.Well, certainly no ambiguity there! Well let’s go to the interview article itself and judge her theological and scriptural expertise by its content. A few quotes from her SHARE INTERNATIONAL interview will do:“American Christian fundamentalists are not in favour of democracy; and it is true that many of the Neo-cons many of whom incline towards this fundamentalism, have very hard line, limited views.”“The Arab-Israeli conflict has also become pivotal to Christian fundamentalists in the United States. The Christian Right believes that unless the Jews are in their land, fulfilling the ancient prophecies, Christ cannot return in glory in the Second Coming. So they are passionate Zionists, but this ideology is also anti-Semitic, because in the Last Days they believe that the Antichrist will massacre the Jews in the Holy Land if they do not accept baptism.”Baptism? I’m sure she meant to say, “initiation.” The New Agers of whom she has said nothing in expressing her alleged worries over various “fundamentalisms” have clearly written in so many of their books by so many of their prominent writers (Alice Bailey, Gina Cerminara, Benjamin Crème, Barbara Marx Hubbard, and David Spangler to name but a few) that there will be violence against, “the sword of cleavage” and death to those who fail to accept their New Age “Christ.” A relatively less publicized version of the Great Invocation that Lucis Trust promotes as the new world prayer for the New Age contains a stanza, “let light and love and power and death fulfill the purpose of the coming one.”Well, maybe their New Age Christ repented and decided everybody should be baptized to protect them from his god Lucifer! Fat chance!Well, now about her theology. Again, I found she was a much better and closer reader than me. Maybe her contemplative time in the monastery showed her hidden texts or was it her post-nunnery Akashic record meditations? Her Christology is certainly most unique for a former religious:“Luke’s gospel calls Jesus a prophet from start to finish; the idea that Jesus was divine was a later development, often misunderstood by Christians.”Well, now I know for certain that Karen Armstrong is certainly both a superior reader and theologian to Yours Truly. I have read the Gospel of Luke many times and certainly missed the points that Karen Armstrong raised to Share International the purveyors of a very foreign gospel proclaiming that Jesus is not the Christ, but this “Maitreya”/Betraya or whatever his/its name is supposed to be is divine.I decided to again read the Gospel of Luke for myself. Far from finding what Karen Armstrong claimed it said, here’s what it said about Jesus’ divinity:“Fear not Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. (Luke 1:31-33)“Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.” (Luke 1:34-35)“And it came to pass, that when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, Blessed art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit of thy womb. And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord should come to me? (Luke 1:42-43)“And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people. For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord.” (Luke 2:11-12)“And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him. And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost that he should not see death, before he had seen the Lord’s Christ. . . . Then took he him [Baby Jesus] up in his arms, and blessed God, and said, “Lord now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, according to thy word: For mine eyes have seen thy salvation, Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people; A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the glory of thy people Israel.” . . . And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against(Luke 2:26-31)May I disrespectfully guess that Karen Armstrong in her own inimical way is striving to fulfill the prophetic musings of Simeon? And then, also in the Gospel of Luke was the prophetess Anna, also finding the Baby Jesus in the temple.“And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.” (Luke 2:17)Well, Karen Armstrong is a busy person. Maybe she has no time, given her busy media and Alliance of Civilizations schedule to read the Book of Luke for herself. If she had, she might have noticed this statement from Jesus as recorded in the Book of Luke:The law and the prophets lasted up until John. From that time the kingdom of God is proclaimed and every man presses into it.Well you get the point. The Book of Luke from start to finish clearly proclaims the Divinity of Jesus. Perhaps Karen Armstrong confused the statements about Jesus with the statements about John!Well, I’ve got to put a charitable interpretation on all of this. My most unkind observation is to say that since she left the convent, she has obviously made her divorce from Jesus very final. My charitable interpretation is maybe she, an ex-nun, just got out of the habit!Finally, maybe her knowledge is so specialized, she just plain doesn’t know. If Karen Armstrong needs a reading list of the Hidden Dangers of the folks she gave that Share International interview to, I could help!