New World Order Series - 21st Century

for Fortune, like a madman in her moods, springs towards this man, then towards that; and no one ever experiences the same unchanging luck." [1]

In the first paper of The New World Order - Age of Discontent, it was stated that the purpose of World War I was to be the war to end all wars, which unfortunately never came to be. What World War I did accomplish with surgical precision, however, was the end of the Old World Order, and the preparation of a fertile crucible: the human race – to accept the New World Order.

The Old World Order was based on the rule of absolutism that had governed most nation states. Now the time had come to throw off the shackles of nationalism and to embrace internationalism – the New World Order. In the next article in the series The New World Order - The Players, in was shown that one of the main purposes of the Paris Peace Talks was to set up the League of Nations – the first true international governmental organization.

The third paper in the Series: The New World Order - Secrets, discussed the many elite groups and organizations that were attempting to establish the New World Order. Some of those mentioned were:

The New World Order - Incognito, carried on with an expose of the various elite and secret societies involved with the New World Order. Emphasis was placed on the Council of Foreign Affairs and the Fabian Society.

The sixth article in the series, The New World Order - Club, was about the Club of Rome. The Club did not attempt to remain secrete, in fact they were very public with their opinions for solving the world’s problems via their New World Order.

The most recent paper in the series was The New World Order - Illuminati, which was solely about the order of the Illuminati, specifically the Bavarian Illuminati. Most of the various groups, organizations, and societies discussed in the previous papers were offshoots or roots if you will – from this same seed.

However, the Illuminati was born of a seed as well – a most ancient seed that goes back to when time began – it is in essence why time appears, as that which Is, is yet to come; and has gone before.

This paper continues the exegesis of the elite collectivists who desire to rule the world. Many of their stated policies have of themselves noble sounding qualities, but noble qualities when used for sinister goals, are tainted as water is by blood.

The end does not justify the means – as the means and the end are one and the same – both are here but yet to come. Justice is just. Righteousness is right. Not is not.

During the early 1980’s the Independent Commission on International Development Issues did a study on several of the global problems facing modern civilization. West German Chancellor Willy Brandt oversaw the project. A group of former world leaders and other noted specialists were brought together to determine just what the problems were, and to suggest a proper course of action.

The panel’s general finding was that developing nations were economically dependent upon already developed nations. Once again it was a meeting of the elite minority to solve the world’s problems.

Although the 1980’s and 90’s witnessed unprecedented economic growth and world trade, financed by direct foreign investment and huge flows of international capital, most of this expansion was concentrated in the already developed nations. The developing nations saw minimal progress against even the basic needs of survival: ample food and water. Poverty actually increased in many developing nations.

In 1980 the North-South: A Program for Survival report was released. This was followed in 1983 by Common Crisis: North-South Cooperation for World Recovery. The reports advised a dual approach: an emergency relief program to address the most pressing conditions of starvation and poverty, and a second plan for restructuring the global economy.

The Commission came up with twelve categories of the most pressing worldwide problems:

Needless to say – in today’s modern world no one should have to go without food and water. Yet there are hundreds of millions of people literally starving to death across the world. Many do not have access to clean drinking water, let alone water for farming, crop irrigation, and the raising of livestock.

The Brandt Report called for a two pronged effort to tackle the problem. First and foremost is an emergency assistance plan to provide immediate relief to the most destitute areas on earth. Once emergency assistance has been provided, the focus can then turn to developing farming, crop and livestock production, all headed towards the goal of self-sufficiency in food-stuff. The means for obtaining clean water for drinking and irrigation is imperative.

The underlying cause of hunger is poverty. In the last two decades, despite the so-called progress the world has made poverty has more than doubled. Two billion people now live in absolute poverty – according to the UN Development Program's standard of minimum human requirements. There is no need or reason for this to be the case.

The estimated cost for the relief of world poverty is less than most people would assume. The World Bank has estimated that a comprehensive international poverty relief program would cost about $80-$100 billion a year. This is less than 10% of the world's annual military budget. Once again – what are our priorities: to kill one another – or to live?

The rapidly expanding world population was considered to be an issue of huge importance regarding the future living standards of the world. The North/South Commission stated that rising population levels:

"Compounds the task of providing food, jobs, shelter, education and health services, of mitigating absolute poverty, and of meeting the colossal financial and administrative needs of rapid urbanization" [2]

Of crucial importance to the Committee is whether the earth has the capacity to support human consumption at the present rate of population growth. I say yes, and that there is more to this issue then meets the eye. The thoughts of the Club of Rome come to mind. To read further details click on the following link: The New World Order - Club.

"Any definition of development is incomplete if it fails to comprehend the contribution of women to development and the consequences of development for the lives of women. Every development policy, plan or project has an impact on women and cannot succeed without the work of women. And development with justice calls urgently for measures that will give women access to better jobs; that will diminish the arduous tasks that hundreds of millions of women face in their domestic and agricultural occupations; and that will distribute more fairly between the sexes opportunities for creative work and economic advancement" [3]

In 1951, developed nations were lending nearly 1% of GNP in aid. In 1980, it stood at 0.35%, and by the Millennium contributions from developed to developing nations had dropped to less than 0.21% of GNP. As the worlds rich became richer – the poor not alone became poorer, but the rich drastically cut back on any subsistence charity.

The Reports stated that development assistance remains uncoordinated at the global level. The Commission recommended an international organization – perhaps a restructured World Bank – to provide a centralized location for the distribution of foreign aid.

"We believe that the richer nations must continue to give special attention to the poorest countries to help them to help themselves. They should step up their aid, directing it with effective planning into the critical areas of the ecology. They should provide emergency assistance as an addition to the longer-term programs, not (as at present) as a large share of their total regular aid" [4]

"Almost all advanced technology originates in industrial countries and most of it continues to be developed by them. The North accounts for about 96 percent of the world's spending on research and development. The scientists and engineers, the advanced institutions of education and research, the modern plants, the consumer demand and the finance are all found mainly in the richest countries" [5]

The Brandt Equation: 21st Century Blueprint for the New Global Economy reported:

“International corporations continue to locate in nations where wages, taxes, and trade, financial and environmental restrictions are the lowest. There is virtually no regulation of corporate practices, which are often at odds with the developmental objectives and national interests of poor countries. In addition, there is no international agreement on foreign direct investment which could allow developing nations to participate in decisions on:

• Corporate disclosure of information
• Ethical behavior
• Restrictive business practices
• Labor standards
• Tax policies
• Fiscal incentives
• Repatriation of profits, royalties and dividends” [6]

The two decades from 1980-2000 saw strong economic growth in the developed countries and limited expansion in the developing nations. International and transnational corporations continued to set up shop in undeveloped nations where wages were cheap, environmental restrictions almost non-existent, and taxes low. This allowed the corporations to exploit both the indigenous people and the land, basically accountable to no one but their own share-holders.

Since the late 1980s, many scientists have argued that greenhouse gases are trapping heat in the atmosphere, raising the temperature on earth. The elite have grabbed hold of this issue and have milked it for all its worth, when in fact the scientific community is very divided on this issue.

The Commission called for a reduced dependence on non-renewable fuels, and the development of clean energy sources, along with a transnational energy strategy.

"Important harm to the environment and depletion of scarce natural resources is occurring in every region of the world, damaging soil, sea, and air. The biosphere is our common heritage and must be preserved by cooperation – otherwise life itself could be threatened" [7]

Lastly, the committee called for an internationally authorized agency, such as the United Nations, to protect and manage the ecosystems and biodiversity of the world. Once again, control of the world by the self-elected elite. This will be discussed in more detail later on.

All people desire security: the need to feel secure and to be safe, in their own homes within the borders of their homeland. One of the most basic functions of government is to provide self-defense of the homeland from external attacks.

Note the words self-defense and external, as they sum up the extent and parameters of necessary military force. They do not speak of imperial conquest that seeks to force its rule of law upon the rest of the world. This is nothing more then war-mongering by the merchants of death and their dogs of war – the elite who wish to rule.

Self-defense has often been used as the excuse of governments that go way beyond their constitutional granted authority and seek to attack other nations in pre-emptive strikes, or to suppress the freedoms and liberty of their own citizens.

The Brandt Reports recognized most of these issues, however, they also stated that ultimately the international community must have a say in the trade of armaments used for security, and they noted especially in regions of conflict and tension. The latter alludes to what sounds like a bit more then the self-defense of the homeland. The issue of “the international community” having oversight powers of a sovereign nation’s self-defense will be discussed in future papers.

The Brandt reported stated that the trade deficits of the richer developed nations were keeping the global system running. However, this was causing the developed countries to be racking up unprecedented debt levels. Trade was steadily increasing, but disproportionably so. The undeveloped nations were not experiencing the rising tide of the developed countries economies.

“are seen therefore as measures both to support growth in developing countries directly, and to permit a significant expansion of world trade. It is in this sense that we view them as contributing to growth and employment creation in the North as well as the South” [8]

Trade agreements were suggested as means to raise the global level for wages. This would supposedly increase income, purchasing power, and consumption. We will comment on this later.

“Perhaps a Global Securities and Exchange Commission, a new multilateral agency independent of the WTO, could be created to oversee international mergers and guard against international capital flight, money laundering, fraud, and insider trading. Likewise, an independent Global Foreign Exchange Ministry could be created to regulate international investment, and a new Global Food and Drug Agency could be setting safety standards for trade in international health care, food, and drugs.” [9]

Debt forgiveness to the developing countries was recommended on either a partial or perhaps even a total level, however, it was also to be predicated on domestic policy reform.

Recommendations on restructuring the global economy by setting the guidelines and format for such changes were to be formulated over time and passed on to the UN General Assembly.

“as a means of modern impunity, debt makes legitimate our inequitable system of exchange. It allows one person to control another, though the mechanism of that control may be indirect or concealed.” [10]

The North-South directive called for a summit of international leaders to discuss the multi-dimensional collective of issues, both developmentally and structurally. It was noted that any worthwhile global negotiations for the formation of a new international economic system would require a greater commitment from all governments and international organizations involved in the process.

“The achievement of economic growth in one country depends increasingly on the performance of others. The South cannot grow adequately without the North. The North cannot prosper or improve its situation unless there is greater progress in the South” [11]

A major flaw the Committee reported was that there was no central international body

Which brings us to the topic of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund that warrant a section of discussion all their own.

Both the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund have acted as the two pillars of the international banking and financial system. They were created after the war in 1944, at the Bretton Woods Conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, U.S.A.

International currencies were maintained at fixed rates relative to the US dollar, and the dollar was more or less backed by gold. Most refer to this as the gold standard – the gold standard under which the nation is said to have thrived.

This is partially true. Nonetheless, the gold standard prior to the Bretton Woods Conference was different from the latter, and even more importantly, the original hard currency system of gold and silver coin as mandated in the Constitution was a far cry from the gold standard whereby paper money was backed by gold.

These are three different systems with only the first – the hard currency system of gold and silver coinage of the Constitution being Honest Money; and the standard is silver not gold, which because a constitutional amendment has never been passed to change it – still stands as the Supreme Law of the Land. The rest are mere shadows – waifs in the night. We do not have the time to go into this in detail here; however, we have done so many times in other papers. To access further details click on the following link: The Constitution of the United States & Honest Money Summary & Conclusions.

The World Bank finances large industrial projects in developing countries: public infrastructure works such as roads, dams, and power plants. The International Monetary Fund provides temporary loans to countries that face shortages in foreign exchange or with pre-existing loans.

Voting rights in both institutions are based on the size of a country’s financial contributions to the organization. Since the most developed nations contribute the most money they dominate the initiatives and plans at both the Bank and the Fund, which end up reflecting their individual foreign policy objectives – especially those of the

United States

Whatever the original goals of the IMF and the WB may have been said to be, what they have been used for is a tool of the elite moneychangers for the privatization of public assets – in other words another wealth transference mechanism for the elite collectivists. See: Honest Money: What It Is and What It Isn't - Part 4 Store of Wealth.

World Bank programs have been said to often have the direct opposite affect upon the host country then was supposedly intended. Accusations alleging the subsidization of corrupt governments, thereby contributing to increased levels of poverty, and the destruction to the environment due to inadequate or non-existent environmental policies, are just some of the charges. Why – because profits are thereby maximized.

IMF loans are famous for the imposition of draconian measures that require a nation to divert its monies out of public employment, welfare, pension systems, education and healthcare, and into debt repayment.

The Commission recognized these unfair dealings yet they also suggested that the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund be restructured; and that they both play a central part in the management of the global economy – elitism plan and simple.

The Brandt Reports stated that the floating exchange rate system that began in 1971 caused more problems then it solved, favoring developed countries over the rest of the world. In 1971, Nixon closed the gold window – refusing to honor

U.S.

contractual obligations to settle foreign trade accounts in gold. This was the severing of the last tie between gold and our monetary system. Some call such repudiation the same as a declaration of bankruptcy. We would agree.

This was the final act that placed the

U.S.

currency on the road to perdition. Floating exchange rates are changing exchange rates; stability is thrown out the window. Currency had been redeemable at a fixed rate of gold. Now the supply of paper money was flexible and unrestrained. It began to expand and with it came inflation. Oil prices reacted upwards and unemployment soon followed.

The first major coup had already occurred in 1932, under Roosevelt’s socialist regime. He confiscated all private gold holdings, which at the time was the actual currency in circulation: the gold and silver coins mandated by the Constitution. History will recognize this as one of the greatest swindles of all time.

As we will see, it is this purposeful destruction of our constitutional hard money system of silver and gold coin, which allows paper fiat debt-money to take its place that is the true culprit of all our economic and monetary problems. The quote above stated that debt is a terrible thing; but when debt is allowed to circulate as the currency – it becomes a sinful abomination – a wealth transference mechanism that sucks the life from those who use it and fall under its mesmerizing sway. See: Gold's Hidden Secret: The Moral Hazard of Fiat Money.

The Brandt Commission believed that gold and paper money should be gradually phased out of use in their vision of the New World Order. The Committee called for a new world reserve monetary system, based on the Special Drawing Right the International Money Fund created, in 1969. The report stated that

“It is a contradiction in terms to have a global market without a standard unit of account, an orderly system of exchange rates, or a universal regulatory body.” [13]

According to the Committee, the Special Drawing Right is a line of permanent credit through which national central banks, treasuries, and the Bank for International Settlements obtain foreign currencies to clear and settle outstanding balances.

Furthermore, it states that since the SDR is the world’s only means of meeting international payments that has been authorized through international contract,

“The SDR therefore represents a clear first step towards a stable and permanent international currency” [14]

The following is from the International Monetary Fund’s website under monetary and financial definitions.

The bottom line is that the SDR’s currency “value” is determined daily by the IMF by summing the values in U.S. dollars, based on market exchange rates, of a basket of four major currencies: the euro, the yen, the pound sterling, and the U.S. dollar. Once again, from the IMF’s website we find:

It thus appears that the SDR is a mere piece of paper that represents the “value” of a basket of four other pieces of paper, i.e. the above listed currencies, and the various exchange rates of said currencies.

If nothing else, the SDR is the epitome of paper fiat debt-money: the King of Paper Fiat if you will. It is nothing more and perhaps a whole lot less – than an obligation of a basket of obligations: promises of other promises, as in wishful fantasies that never come to be.

We find the statement that the SDR is the world’s only means of meeting international payments that has been authorized through international contract, to be most telling. This gets to the heart of one of the central issues that this expose on the New World Order is trying to reveal: Qui Warranto – by what authority? In simpler terms: who died and left them King?

Yet for all the sound and fury of the Commission on this subject, nothing of substance came forth. Nothing was offered that would make any changes to the existing monetary system that would make it more sound; on the contrary, it could be argued that the proposal for the SDR would make the international monetary more unstable.

Debt is debt any way you look at it and by whatever name you choose to call it. Money and debt in an honest monetary system are two entirely different things. Any monetary system that does not recognize and pay homage to this fact is doomed to fail, be it intended or not.

The Commission proposed that an international advisory board be formed to inform the governments, as well as the UN General Assembly, on the progress of the international bodies working on the various problems.

“We must not surrender to the idea that the whole world should copy the models of highly industrialized countries. One must avoid the persistent confusion of growth with development, and we strongly emphasize that the prime objective of development is to lead to self-fulfillment and creative partnership in the use of a nation’s productive forces and its full human potential” [17]

If the whole world should not copy the models of the highly industrialized countries, then why recommend that the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the United Nations all be the center hub from which the New World Order is to emanate? Why continue to recommend more centralized global governance and one world rule by the select elite minority?

Lastly, on this subject, the Report stressed the need for global financial sustainability.

"Our proposals in the monetary field keep in mind the necessity of a more orderly monetary system for the world economy as a whole, as well as for meeting the needs of the developing countries. Greater stability in the exchange rate system encourages both trade and investment" [18]

While it is true that greater stability and soundness of the money used in the monetary systems (in contradistinction to the proposed existing exchange rate system, which the report has already criticized and now seems to be contradictorily embracing), no where has a viable plan been offered to affect the soundness of the monetary system. The only change placed on the table is to use the SDR as the new one world currency of the New World Order.

The only form of Honest Money is money that is not debt – money that is no one’s obligation – the hard currency system of the United States Constitution: gold and silver coin. All else are fakes – false prophets – wolves dressed as lambs.

Be not deceived by the deceivers – by the priests of the temple – by the descendents of the Babylonian Brotherhood, as they still walk among us, still trying to satiate the insatiable.

[1] [Hecabe 1. Euripides, Daughters of Troy 1204]

[2] (N–S, 106)

[3] (N-S, 59)

[4] (N-S, 88)

[5] (N-S, 194)

[6] The Brandt Equation: 21st Century Blueprint for the New Global Economy

[7] (N-S, 72-73)

[8] (N-S, 68)

[9] The Brandt Equation: 21st Century Blueprint for the New Global Economy

[10] same

[11] (N-S, 33)

[12] The Brandt Equation: 21st Century Blueprint for the New Global Economy

[13] same

[14] (N-S, 209)

[15] IMF

[16] IMF

[17] (N-S, 23)

[18] (N-S, 74)

[19] 2 Pet 2:1

Douglas V. Gnazzo is the retired CEO of New England Renovation LLC, a historical restoration contractor that specialized in the restoration of older buildings and vintage historic landmarks. Mr. Gnazzo writes for numerous websites, and his work appears both here and abroad. Just recently, he was honored by being chosen as a Foundation Scholar for the Foundation of Monetary Education (FAME).

Disclaimer: The contents of this article represent the opinions of Douglas V. Gnazzo. Nothing contained herein is intended as investment advice or recommendations for specific investment decisions, and you should not rely on it as such. Douglas V. Gnazzo is not a registered investment advisor. Information and analysis above are derived from sources and using methods believed to be reliable, but Douglas. V. Gnazzo cannot accept responsibility for any trading losses you may incur as a result of your reliance on this analysis and will not be held liable for the consequence of reliance upon any opinion or statement contained herein or any omission. Individuals should consult with their broker and personal financial advisors before engaging in any trading activities. Do your own due diligence regarding personal investment decisions. This article may contain information that is confidential and/or protected by law. The purpose of this article is intended to be used as an educational discussion of the issues involved. Douglas V. Gnazzo is not a lawyer or a legal scholar. Information and analysis derived from the quoted sources are believed to be reliable and are offered in good faith. Only a highly trained and certified and registered legal professional should be regarded as an authority on the issues involved; and all those seeking such an authoritative opinion should do their own due diligence and seek out the advice of a legal professional. Lastly, Douglas V. Gnazzo believes that The United States of America is the greatest country on Earth, but that it can yet become greater. This article is written to help facilitate that greater becoming. God Bless America.


	LIVE Gold Prices $ \| E-Mail Subscriptions \| Update GoldSeek \| GoldSeek Radio