Global Governance: The Quiet War Against American Independence

Unknown year Conspiracy 1.73K Views 10 Comments
In 1966, a Georgetown University professor published a big book about the elite Network which he said controls America. His book approved of their plan for global, or world, control to supersede our self-government by "We the people." The professor had a profound effect on one of his students.

In 1992, that student became President of the United States and Bill Clinton credited Professor Carroll Quigley with forming his vision for the future. In the next several years, he pushed for several United Nations treaties (including some rejected by Presidents Reagan and Bush) which are designed to control human behavior, energy consumption, private property, and natural resources. The President issued a secret order (PDD 25) to place American armed forces under foreign command and in foreign uniform, and he began using U.S. troops as global cops and social workers. His Administration is steadily putting American trade and property under the control of international organizations.

"Global Governance: The Quiet War Against American Independence" contains exclusive interviews with national news makers on the front lines of the quiet war. This compelling program documents the treaties and UN conferences that are undermining American independence and paving the way for global control.

10 Comments

To post a comment please sign up or login.
  • TheDocumentarian 5 years ago

    Yeah, well you are equivalent to an ignorant baffoon, if you happen to be lucky enough to be born in America and just plainly ignorant to our ways, if not. You sir are one of those few who could care less about the documents that gave you what you have, if you truly understood what you were given, it wasn't from unelectable, globalist rulers. It came from my and your ancestors, otherwise you are nothing more than used controlled opposition and a shill.

    I understand that you might disagree, everyone can, but to deny our way of life and the facts that are right in your face, for just another right wing theory or ideology is nonsensical. Perhaps you should school yourself a little before berating those who are in the know and not for those who live in extremely miniscule bubbles, with narrow points of thought.

    There is a right way to produce global governance and there is a wrong way and this is 199% wrong, corrupt, immoral, unethical, take your pick at words to describe your enslavement, I dare you.

    1
  • WIDE AWAKE 6 years ago

    OH AND BTW THE CONSTITUTION OF WHICH YOU SPEAK AS BEING THE HIGHEST LAW...IS G O N E !!

    1
  • WIDE AWAKE 6 years ago

    TRM..IF YOU CANT SEE IT YOU NEVER WILL..ANYONE WHO WOULD GO TO SUCH GREAT LENGTHS TO ARGUE THAT THEY ARE RIGHT IS TOTALLY BLIND AND NEEDS TO BE PUT DOWN...LOL YA BETTER GET A THICK PAIR OF KNEE PADS ...BUT THEN AGAIN IT SOUNDS LIKE YOUR KNEES ARE PROBABLY ALREADY CALLOUSED.. LEFT AND RIGHT ARE DIFFERENT SIDES OF THE SAME STINKING COIN!!
    BEST OF LUCK WITH YOUR NWO

    1
  • TheRagingModerate 6 years ago

    Todd... anything?

    Anyone else -- any other FoxNews automatons -- want to take a shot at defending this typically dishonest rightwing crap?

    1
  • TheRagingModerate 6 years ago

    Todd, please enlighten me -- with FACTS -- as to how I'm "wrong on so many levels." Just some specifics and a few FACT-based examples, if you don't mind?

    You'll notice I was pretty specific with my critique. That's because my faith in my views is based on FACTS, not on my gut or what Rush Limbaugh or my reverend told me. Can you honestly say the same? Prove it. Explain to me WHY you believe I'm wrong on any of my points. Who knows, maybe you're right; I promise to give you a fair chance to convince me, so long as you can do it with something other than just your personal opinions and heated rhetoric. Go ahead, lay some FACTS on me...

    1
  • Ragingmoderate You are just wrong on so many levels.
    The constitution has been shredded as our rights.You have debunked nothing but your ignorance.This film is old,the same shit is happening now by the ruling elite.the grid has been set.those of us people who can "see" are preparing from what is coming.I hope you took a flu shot,your problems are forthcoming.

    1
  • TheRagingModerate 7 years ago

    You should not believe a single word in this propoganda film unless you've first verified it using credible sources. And by "credible," I just mean any source that isn't provably false, like this typical piece of dishonest and manipulative brainwashing - another fine product from the folks on the hysterical right. Don't believe ME? Here are a few examples...

    Exactly one minute into the film, Phyllis Schlafly says, "When Bill Clinton gave his acceptance speech at the 1992 DNC, the only person he mentioned, other than his mother and grandfather, was his history professor at Georgetown University Foreign Service School..."

    Next (only 14 seconds later), cut to video of Clinton's actual 1992 DNC speech: "As a teenager, I heard John Kennedy's summons to citizenship..." So there you have it -- Within the first eighty seconds, the film has already demonstrated that its factual reporting is, at best, completely unreliable (assuming Schlafly's misstatement was unintentional, it was still careless and incorrect, though not as careless as the editors were when they missed this obvious contradiction. Assuming there were any editors.) At worst, it shows a deliberate disregard for the truth. Either way, it's obvious before you get a minute and a half into the film that facts and accuracy weren't even a serious consideration in the maing of this film.

    By 3 minutes in, more verifiable deception. The description of Strobe Talbott is full of easily disprovable lies -- first asserting that Talbot's writings for Time "revealed his eagerness to get rid of patriotism, American sovereignty, and independence." Wow. Where I'm from, those are fighting words. You better be able to back up such accusations with facts. Instead, they just cite a 7/20/92 article in Time and then proceed to misrepresent it and take phrases completely out of context. Here, read the article for yourself and compare to the treatment in the film at 2:50-3:05: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,976015-2,00.html .

    Next, listen to the discussion of the UN Treaty on the Rights of Children, beginning at 4:40. In particular, consider the wild predictions made by the film's legal expert about how this treaty would affect parents' rights if the treaty were to pass (5:10-5:50). Well, the UK ratified the treaty in 1991, and yet, as the film points out, in 1995 when the UK allowed parents to spank their children and dictate their exposire to sex ed (in violation of the treaty, I guess), all the UN could do about it was....nothing -- just "chastise the British government." Whoa! Yeah, that really changed child-rearing in Great Britain, I'm sure! So clearly the rightwing legal expert's dire predictions didnt come true for the UK, even when their national law and mores clashed with the treaty. (And for the record, I completely agree with the UK there -- of course parents should be allowed to spank their own children and have a say on sex ed). So here we are, still not ratifying a treaty that can prevent (does prevent, I would imagine) a lot of evil and true abuse of children in hellhole countries around the world, but the US won't sign on because we don't want to be chastised over minor disagreements? Brilliant. Way to be a leader, US. And yet GWB wanted to go to war with as many nations as necessary in order to spread freedom all around the world! You conservatives are so freaking irrational.

    I love the next part -- the purported legal expert says, "We have to understand: a treaty in the U.S. is the highest law of the land, co-equal with the Constitution, co-equal with federal laws passed in accordance with the Constitution..." Nonsense. The Constitution has no co-equal. It alone is THE "highest law of the land," and any other legal authority (whether federal statute or treaty) is VOID to the that it is inconsistent with the Consititution. Period. But I guess these kinds of inconvenient details don't help buttress the film's fear-mongering, so they're conveniently misstated or ignored.

    Ok, I;ve wasted enough of my life easily debunking virtually everything the film has communicated through the first 7 minutes, You get the picture. It's a bunch of shameless, partisan lies. Same ol' same ol'. If you still don't see that this is crap, then you're already OD'ing on the KoolAid and are a lost cause. Wish I could be there to see your face in the afterlife when it's made clear to you that, in a political system frought with corruption, you threw your lot in with the worst offenders.

    1
  • Charlie D. 7 years ago

    One side has become as bad as the other. Right. Left.
    The dogma differs, yet each has an agenda that erodes our rights and diminishes the sovereignty of our nation. It is no wonder we are so hated around the world.

    1
  • will hale 7 years ago

    ben get your head around the right left illusion
    its created to keep us fighting while they quietly push ahead with its agenda

    1
  • This is right wing crap. World Government sucks, but the people interviewed in this are some of the most nazi fucks ever in government. As long as it fits in with their right wing agenda it's OK.

    1