Tuesday, June 25, 2019
12:51 PM (GMT +5)

Go Back   CSS Forums > CSS Optional subjects > Group I > International Relations

International Relations Notes on IR

Reply Share Thread: Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook     Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter     Submit Thread to Google+ Google+    
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #1  
Old Friday, January 05, 2007
MUKHTIAR ALI's Avatar
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: LARKANA
Posts: 123
Thanks: 5
Thanked 51 Times in 31 Posts
MUKHTIAR ALI is on a distinguished road
Question What Is The New World Order??

What is new WORLD ORDER??????????


Since the 1991 Persian Gulf War, the term "New World Order" has become well-known. There has been, however, no explanation as to what the term really means except that it implied a new spirit of cooperation among the nations of the world in order to further the cause of peace. Peace is essentially and undoubtedly good; therefore the New World Order is good and should be accepted categorically by all the nations of the world.
First of all the term "New World Order" was used about seventy years ago by Adolph Hitler. He exclaimed: "National Socialism will use its own revolution for the establishing of 'a new world order'." Edward VIII became King of England on January 20, 1936, but after eleven months he was bound to abdicate the throne for he married a common though an extremely beautiful woman. He became the Duke of Windsor, and afterwards, the governor of the Bahamas in July 1940. He is on record as saying: "Whatever happens, whatever the outcome, a New Order is going to come into the world...It will be buttressed with police power...When peace comes this time there is going to be a New Order of social justice.” Then it was New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller who declared about the then U.S. President in a speech as reported by Associated Press on July 26, 1968 "he would work toward international creation of a New World Order."
During the 1976 Presidential campaign, Jimmy Carter said: "We must replace balance of power politics with world order politics." On February 14, 1977 Carter said in a speech: "I want to assure you that the relations of the United States with the other countries and peoples of the world will be guided during my own Administration by our desire to shape a World Order that is more responsive to human aspirations. The United States will meet its obligation to help create a stable, just, and peaceful World Order."
But the man who put the New World Order in the limelight, and did more than anyone to bring about its acceptance, was President George Bush. In a February, 1990 fundraiser in San Francisco, Bush said: "Time and again in this century, the political map of the world was transformed. And in each instance, a New World Order came about through the advent of a new tyrant or the outbreak of a bloody global war, or its end." Later on in an interview, he said: "When we are successful, and we will be, we have a real chance at this New World Order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the United Nations' founders." The September 17, 1990 issue of Time magazine said that "the Bush administration would like to make the United Nations a cornerstone of its plans to construct a New World Order." Jeanne Kirkpatrick, former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, said that one of the purposes for the Desert Storm operation, was to show to the world how a "reinvigorated United Nations could serve as a global policeman in the New World Order." Prior to the Gulf War, on January 29, 1991, Bush told the nation in his State of the Union address: "What is at stake is more than one small country, it is a big idea - a New World Order, where diverse nations are drawn together in a common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind; peace and security, freedom, and the rule of law. Such is a world worthy of our struggle, and worthy of our children's future."
Hence we can see a new world coming into view and prevailing according to the U.S. plans. Winston Churchill had also promised a "world order" entailing "the principles of justice and fair play” for protecting the weak against the strong. “A world where the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic vision of its founders, a world in which freedom and respect for human rights find a home among all nations.” A world in which there is the very real prospect of a new world order.
But all the promises made so far are yet to be fulfilled and all the definitions of the New World Order look absolutely superficial and cursory as we proceed to go into the minute details. Like the old saying, you can't tell a book by its cover, there is more here than meets the eye. Though one could visit 20 websites and read 30 books, still the entire picture would remain beyond grasp. This is because the concept is ancient and there is a philosophy rooted in the New World Order. If one fails to take into account the occult nature of the New World Order, one would be remiss.
The founders of New World Order are assumed to be the guardians of the occult mysteries which resemble the ancient mysteries of Egypt. They are to re-instate their mystery plan in the same fashion as the magical mystery religion of Ancient Egypt exercised a great fascination over Renaissance man when symbols and gestures had become a means of conveying “secrets” and "truths". The cosmos was seen as an organic unity. It was peopled by a 'hierarchy of spirits' which exercised all kinds of influences and sympathies. The practice of magic became a holy quest. Back in 1927, Freemason W.L. Wilmhurst saw the dawning of the Aquarian Age as the fulfillment of the "Plan". In The Meaning of Masonry, p.4, he writes:
In this new Aquarian age, when many individuals and groups are working in various ways for the eventual restoration of the mysteries, an increasing number of aspirants are beginning to recognize that Freemasonry may well be the vehicle for this achievement.
Another passage from the same book, on page 46-47, proves that the teaching of Freemasonry is the same as New Age beliefs:
"He begins his Masonic career as the natural man; he ends it by becoming through its discipline, a regenerated man... This is the evolution of man into superman." This superman could be like Nietzsche’s.
In the 'Spirit of Masonry' Foster Bailey states that Masonry "is the descendant of, or is founded upon, a divinely imparted religion..." This religion he explains "was the first United World Religion. Then came the era of separation of many religions and sectarianism. Today we are working again towards a World Universal Religion."
*Virtually all Masons are unaware of whatever they do and do not even understand or care about the real meanings of many of their traditions & rituals. Anyhow, the purpose of the ancient Mysteries and the real purpose of modern Masonry are the same. They highlight the social, cultural, educational and charitable objectives but their main target is to expedite the perfection of their own standing or status, and transform it into a sublime and god-like elevation.
European mysticism was not dormant at the time the United States of America was founded. The hand of the mysteries controlled in the establishment of the new government; the signature of the mysteries may still be seen on the Great Seal of the United States of America. Careful analysis of the seal discloses a mass of occult and Masonic symbols, chiefly among them, the so-called American eagle. The American eagle upon the Great Seal is but a conventionalized phoenix..." Once the U.S. Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter said: "The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes."
The New World Order cannot happen over night, just as Rome wasn't built in a day. This has been a plan in motion for centuries. To accomplish this goal, the globalists must remove the guns from the hands of private owners, remove the present currency and replace it with credit, and coordinate their intelligence databases throughout the world. And most important of all, they must get us to fall for it. If it is imposed on us too fast or too harshly and vigorously, the people will be obliged to stop financing it and wake up to the tyranny. The year 2000 was at one time their goal year for accomplishment, however, too many people are becoming aware that something serious is secretly going on in this world. At the same time, there is a struggle going on as to HOW to unite the global currencies, trade boundaries, and Nation States. The New World Order is made up of many NEW players who weren't raised the same as the older generations of Rockefellers, Harrimans, Vanderbuilts, or Pierponts. The Bill Gates, Ted Turners and Michael Eisners of the world are a whole new breed of scum.
It is interesting to note that the ancient plan of secret societies was also supposed to dub "The Global Regime of Economic Interdependence". Those who follow the line today are called Globalists. There exists in the world today, a secret power behind the scenes to control almost all the governments of the world. The New World Order is made up of many elements of control. Mind control, NAFTA, gun control, The United Nations, FEMA, IMF, The World Bank, The Pentagon, concentration camps, underground bases and tunnels, secret societies, weather control and so on and on and on. The New World Order is nothing but complete and absolute control over everything; trade, banking, stock markets, oil, energy, technology, cyber world, nuclear capability, etc., etc.
There is Hegelian Philosophy at the core. First, they create a problem, then they come forward to provide stability, order and peace First they have their thesis, then they have their anti-thesis. The U.N. solution is provided, first, in the form of peacekeeping operations but when U.N. troops are found committing rape, torture and crimes of a similar nature, then this force is gradually turned into a Global Police Force. There is a "hidden variable" in "Order". That is the beginning of "dis-Order". They want the general public to overlook "dis-Order" just because it leads to eventual unraveling of the truth. The "Hidden Variable" can be sought by looking at an "agenda", and then examining the results. Conspiracy and threatening will also follow the most horrible events and disasters like exploding buildings, killing people. The Masonic Motto used to describe it as "Ordo Ab Chao", i.e., order out of chaos.
The idea started as a plan to unite the different sectors of society, secretly, behind the scenes. This was done first through Nation States, then through Corporations and Trusts, and through Intelligence Agencies, but all the while it was being orchestrated from within the Masonic Lodges, and through Great Britain. Great Britain is the junior partner of the United States. It may also be called in our slang as "bacha jamoora". The assumption about England was once expressed by a high advisor to the Kennedy Administration secretly in the words: "England is our 'lieutenant.' The fashionable word is 'partner'. The British only hear the fashionable word. They persist with various illusions of partnership, but their role is to be our lieutenant in this." By the way let us be familiar with the term "The United Kingdom". The "United King-Dom" - First is "United" meaning "All One", then "King" meaning "crown" or "head" and "Dome", which is a term that expresses "Covering". So, broken down, we have a word which means the ONE, at the TOP, and ALL COVERING. This is a very simple illustration that expresses the "idea" under discussion. The term "United States" is also meaningful. It implies a similar connotation: "ONE STATE". If we go a little further, we have the "United Nations" what simply implies "ONE NATION". Similarly we may look for the word "Global" or "International". They both mean the same thing. There are a lot of new businesses and enterprises popping up having the common word "Global" in them, and for a long time, there have been companies using the term "International". All the companies with the label “International", placed together mean they are real ‘internationalists’.
So essentially the basic idea is to conserve and consolidate power as efficiently as possible. If there is a "plan", like the masons want to put in one of "their men", a candidate for office can easily mobilize against the whole opposition through control over media, intelligence agencies, and local and state authorities. If they want to get rid of any persona non grata, or to get any piece of their "agenda" passed, they’ll have members at the top level in the military or civilian circles also considered as patriots, and help them to carry out a plan like blowing up a building, crashing a plane. At the same time, they would be able to coordinate all local and state agencies to "varying degrees" and have them respond accordingly, in order to keep everything "covered-up". In the same manner, they could use another Military connection to stage a shootout at a High School, and carry it out professionally, so as to leave little trace of doubt as to any conspiracy. Though even common people knew who was behind the most shocking air crash of C-130 killing of President of Pakistan, General Zia-ul-Haq and other top generals on August 17, 1988, it was astonishing for them that nothing came out of various enquiries and investigation reports. Bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in the Sudan sounds unbelievable like something out of a James Bond movie. Yet there is no denying the fact.
Seen in this perspective, the "New World Order" is actually a worldwide conspiracy of the highest echelons which include many of the world's wealthiest people, top political leaders, and corporate elite, as well as members of the so-called Black Nobility of Europe (dominated by the British Crown) whose goal is to create a One World (fascist) Government, stripped of nationalistic and regional boundaries, that is totally obedient to their agenda. Their intention is to affect complete and total control over every human being on the planet and to dramatically reduce the world's population by less than five billion people. While the name New World Order is the term most frequently used today when referring to this group, it's more useful and significant to identify the principal organizations, institutions, and individuals who make up this vast interlocking spider web of elite conspirators. The New World Order is a powerful & secret movement aiming to place the world under a global totalitarian dictatorship called ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT. This may sound like utopia but it is barely concealed imperialism & dictatorship.
Speaking of the networks and webs of influence, Ferguson proclaimed: "There are legions of conspirators or say the torchbearers of the New World Order in corporations, universities, hospitals, on the faculties of public schools, in factories, in doctors' offices, in state and federal agencies, on city councils and the White House staff, in state organizations, in virtually all arenas of policy making in the country (U.S.) [including] at the cabinet level of the United States Government."
Among many critics of American foreign policy and New World Order, Noam Chomsky is one of America's most prominent political dissidents. A renowned professor of linguistics at MIT, he has authored over 30 political books dissecting such issues as U.S. interventionism in the developing world, international terrorism, the political economy of human rights, the propaganda role of corporate media and New World Order. The main reason for his concern with U.S. foreign policy is that he finds it horrifying and aspires to mitigate some of its most dangerous and destructive aspects by means of speaking, writing, demonstrating, resisting, etc. He puts a simple question: "Whose World Order?" for he finds basic conflicts which persist about fundamental values. They are about freedom, justice, human dignity and human rights in a world of great inequality and great concentration of power. He finds in the doctrines of neo-liberalism or economic rationalism or free market doctrine a good deal of deceit, hypocrisy and possibly outright fraud. He thinks that “These days it's international terrorism, or the clash of civilization; tomorrow it will be something new, but it's basically the same ones all the time.”
Commenting on the first President Bush, A Vatican journal, Il Sabato, writes that "George Bush is the surly master of the world. He had a very concrete possibility of a just peace and he chose war. Bush doesn't give a damn about the numerous peace deals issued by Pope John the Second, the proposal of Gorbachev, others. He repeatedly re-imposed new conditions on Iraq to justify the war and the humiliation which were always his unchanging objectives." The fact that George Bush is the surly master of the world and that what lies ahead of us is the rule of force, not peace and justice can be elucidated by the following account of Noam Chomsky:
"When a President comes into office he asks right away from the CIA and the Pentagon for a review of world affairs and a National Security Review and we usually don't learn about it for thirty years or so unless someone like Daniel Ellsberg comes around and expedites the process and this time apparently the Administration is proud of one section of it and they leaked it. This section has to do with what are called "Third World Threats to the United States." And here's what it says; it says in the case of conflicts with much weaker enemies it is not enough merely to defeat them, we must defeat them rapidly and decisively. Anything else will be too embarrassing to us and will undercut political support. Now those are the words of the surly master of the world, and they're interesting words."
The United States repeatedly defeats Security Council resolutions calling for diplomatic settlement. It has voted along with Israel in the General Assembly to block the settlement virtually supported by the entire world. The U.S. position has always opposed any form of political settlement that accepts the human rights and self-determination of the Palestinians, and that in any way interferes with Israel's right to maintain military advantages in the Occupied Territories. United States who has no sympathy, no concern at all for the Palestinians damns care for being alone in that position. The poor Palestinians are human dust, nothing to offer the United States as they have no military force and no wealth, they have no position in U.S. strategic planning.
For United States, even a much weaker enemy doesn't deserve negotiations but is to be forthwith pulverized. The purpose of this aggressive attitude is to teach some lessons and there are three targets of peculiar lessons.
First of all, "the lesson to the Third World is", in the words of Noam Chomsky: “don't raise your heads. We are the masters. You are the slaves. If you get out of line, you don't get just defeated, but you get totally destroyed.” Second message is to the rich countries of the world, and they are supposed to learn the lesson that the world is to be ruled by force. We'll do it for you, but you better pay us for it. And the third lesson is directed to the domestic population (which is invariably intimidated) and that is: (though) “Malnutrition has increased. Federal money for education has declined. The Federal debt has zoomed skyward. Real wages are continuing to decline and are now back to the level of about the late 1950s. The infrastructure is collapsing. But you have to beware of huge monsters, Grenada, Libya, international terrorism, Panama, now Iraq." In short, they are trained to respect the martial values.” At home the population has to be constantly in fear, has to be cowering in terror, in fear of terrible enemies. “The world has to be put on notice that the surly master will do what it wants. The intellectuals have the responsibility to conceal all of this in beguiling rhetoric.”
It was so funny, so ludicrous when Grenada was presented before the American public as a monstrous and literally portrayed as a threat to their existence. "The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General More, intoning away in somber sounds on the radio about how, in the event of a Russian attack on Western Europe, Grenada would interdict the supply lines between the Caribbean and Western Europe and without oil from the region our leaders would be lost. And it was reinforced and magnified. Sober scholars were called upon by the media, to explain 'great stores of weapons found on Grenada' afterwards showing that we got there in time before they were about to do something really serious." The fact is that their propaganda machinery is so powerful and an edifice of lies is constructed so extensively that the domestic people are almost dumbfounded. The Cuban paramilitary forces were attacked by 6000 elite U.S. troops who incidentally got 8000 medals for their fighting the Cubans so bravely.
Iraq was smashed with continuous carpet bombing by to make sure there was nothing to be left except broken bones. There was a huge disinformation effort. It was later on practically conceded that all those fanciful tales about tremendous fortifications, hundreds of thousands of troops dug in a half a mile underground, artillery that can shoot all the way to who knows where, chemical weapons, were all a farce. Now his son, the President Bush is dealing with international relations similarly in the style of his father, who rallied a broad coalition to fight the Gulf War. Observers say the task facing the son is a similar one: working from an initial base of close allies to construct an "inclusive" coalition that will not end up in a ‘clash of civilizations’ but would only make things worse. Again when the world is overwhelmingly opposed to the U.S./British insistence on going to war against Iraq, the United States has been intent to make lame excuses like a wolf and teach Iraq a final lesson and remind the entire world once again that they are the real guardians of the New World Order. So they wish to make it sure that the world is united against Saddam Hussain, and that "Saddam Hussain is the most hated man in the world." Where cruelty and malice are in combination with villainous power, nothing is so easy as for a superpower to find pretence to tyrannies, and exercise all manners of misdemeanor and injustice.
This is one brief aspect of the story. There is a very long tale, to be told, of social, cultural and economic exploitations and persecutions which are liberally exerted to promote ‘New World Order’. Let us pray for peace, justice, fraternity and proprieties to prevail in the world.


MUKHTIAR ALI SHAR

Last edited by Shooting Star; Tuesday, March 27, 2012 at 11:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to MUKHTIAR ALI For This Useful Post:
aariz (Tuesday, October 13, 2009), Jahanzebmemon (Monday, October 19, 2009), pisceankhan (Wednesday, August 13, 2014)
  #2  
Old Monday, January 08, 2007
M.A.N's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Lahore
Posts: 67
Thanks: 38
Thanked 125 Times in 37 Posts
M.A.N will become famous soon enough
Default

President George Walker Bush's NEW WORLD ORDER

President Bush's broad characterizations of the terrorist threat led him to expand the focus of his foreign policy from al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations to other regimes hostile to the United States, regardless of their connection to the Sept. 11 attacks. Following the war in Afghanistan, Bush designated Iraq as the primary new threat to American security. He famously labeled Iraq, along with North Korea and Iran, as part of an “axis of evil.” Over the course of 2002, President Bush announced that the U.S. foreign strategy of containment and deterrence was an outdated cold war policy, and introduced the Bush doctrine, which asserted that in an age of terrorism, the U.S. could no longer wait by defensively until a potential threat to its security grew into an actual one—a preemptive strike was called for. In Sept. 2002, Bush addressed the UN, challenging the organization to swiftly enforce its own resolutions against Iraq, or else the U.S. would have no choice but to act on its own. Many world leaders expressed alarm at this shift in U.S. policy, which stressed unilateralism rather than international consensus. The alleged existence of weapons of mass destruction, Iraq's links to terrorism, and Saddam Hussein's despotism and human rights abuses were cited as the casus belli for “regime change.” The UN Security Council unanimously approved a resolution imposing tough new arms inspections on Iraq, but after three months of inspections that resulted in only modest Iraqi cooperation, U.S. patience ran out: on March 19, President Bush declared war on Iraq and U.S. troops, along with their British allies, began bombing Baghdad. By April 9, Baghdad had fallen, and by May 1, combat was officially declared over.
The official phase of the war was swift, but the post-war reconstruction period proved far more difficult. The country was enveloped in violence and chaos and its infrastructure was in ruins. While the Bush administration successfully turned over sovereignty to an interim Iraqi government in June 2004, within months pockets of Iraq were essentially under the control of insurgents. President Bush assured the country that despite these difficulties, the United States would stay the course until Iraq emerged as a free and democratic country. More than a year-and-a-half of searching for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction—one of the prime reasons Bush cited for launching the war—yielded no hard evidence, and the administration and its intelligence agencies came under fire. There were also mounting allegations that the existence of these weapons and their imminent threat to American security was exaggerated or distorted as a pretext to justify the war. The Senate Intelligence Committee's unanimous, bipartisan “Report on Pre-War Intelligence on Iraq,” harshly criticized the CIA: “most of the major key judgments” on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were “either overstated, or were not supported by, the underlying intelligence report.” The report disputed the CIA's assertions that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program and that it had chemical and biological weapons, and also concluded that there was no relationship between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. With the justifications for the war evaporating, the Bush administration began emphasizing that the removal of dictator Saddam Hussein had been grounds enough for waging war, and that the United States was more secure as a result of it.
Critics of the administration's policy in Iraq described it as a distraction from the war on terror, preventing the United States from effectively battling the war on its genuine fronts. Since the start of the U.S. war in Iraq, the two remaining countries in the “axis of evil,” North Korea and Iran, had grown into alarming nuclear threats. The Bush administration's diplomatic efforts made little headway against Iran and North Korea's defiance and evasion.
II)
Iraq's continued insurgency, lack of political stability, and the acknowledgment that only a small number of Iraqi forces were capable of replacing American troops stationed in the country led to increased domestic discontent. In the face of growing American casualties and the absence of a clear strategy for winning the protracted war beyond “staying the course,” the president's approval ratings plummeted in 2005

III)
As security in Iraq deteriorated in 2006 and reconstruction efforts foundered, the increasingly unpopular war became the president's greatest liability. November 2006 mid-term elections led to a seismic shift in the political landscape, with Democrats gaining control over the House of Representatives and the Senate for the first time in twelve years. A day after the election, President Bush, acknowledging that his party had taken a “thumping,” announced the resignation of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, whose intransigent Iraq policies had made him the bete noir of Democrats and many Republicans. In December, the bipartisan report by the Iraq Study Group, led by former secretary of state James Baker and former Democratic congressman Lee Hamilton, concluded that “the situation in Iraq is grave and deteriorating” and “U.S. forces seem to be caught in a mission that has no foreseeable end.” The report's 79 recommendations included reaching out diplomatically to Iran and Syria and having the U.S. military intensify its efforts to train Iraqi troops. The report heightened the debate over the U.S. role in Iraq, but President Bush kept his distance from it, indicating that he would wait until Jan. 2007 before announcing a new Iraq strategy.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to M.A.N For This Useful Post:
aariz (Tuesday, October 13, 2009), Jahanzebmemon (Monday, October 19, 2009), pisceankhan (Wednesday, August 13, 2014), shozab.hussaini (Tuesday, December 08, 2009)
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pakistan's History From 1947-till present Sumairs Pakistan Affairs 13 Wednesday, January 02, 2019 08:18 AM
Islamic Information safdarmehmood Islamiat 4 Thursday, June 28, 2018 08:09 AM
The Religion Of Islam MUKHTIAR ALI Islamiat 1 Thursday, June 28, 2018 08:08 AM
development of pakistan press since 1947 Janeeta Journalism & Mass Communication 14 Wednesday, November 11, 2015 11:03 AM
The Globalization of World Politics: Revision guide 3eBaylis & Smith: hellowahab International Relations 0 Wednesday, October 17, 2007 03:13 PM


CSS Forum on Facebook Follow CSS Forum on Twitter

Disclaimer: All messages made available as part of this discussion group (including any bulletin boards and chat rooms) and any opinions, advice, statements or other information contained in any messages posted or transmitted by any third party are the responsibility of the author of that message and not of CSSForum.com.pk (unless CSSForum.com.pk is specifically identified as the author of the message). The fact that a particular message is posted on or transmitted using this web site does not mean that CSSForum has endorsed that message in any way or verified the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message. We encourage visitors to the forum to report any objectionable message in site feedback. This forum is not monitored 24/7.

Sponsors: ArgusVision   vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.