Americans Committing National Suicide
April 4, 2002
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive
treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known
and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the
gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls
of government itself.
"For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims,
and he wears their face and their garments, he appeals to the baseness that lies
deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and
unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic
so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear.
-- Marcus Tullius Cicero 42 BC
Americans have been warned for almost 100 years about the evil creeping into our Republic. The vast majority have ignored the warnings for a variety of reasons with the list growing over time: apathy, blind loyalty to their political party, self-absorption, addiction to drugs, sports, pornography, sexual perversions being sold as "alternative lifestyles," a good economy, offerings from "Pretendland" (Hollywood), "free" prescription pills and remaining in their false "comfort zones."
Since 9-11, Mr. Bush and his mouthpieces have told the American people to get busy with shopping and go do the things you normally do. Sure, that way the people won't catch on to the chicanery underway. Since Mr. Bush was selected for the White House, the Unseen Hand has gone into hyper- drive to cement it's one world government.
Perhaps a few words from the past will shake some of the dust out of people's brain cavities long enough to think about the words below. And for those who think communism and fascism are dead, I'm sorry to inform you that they are alive and well, they're just being sold under a different name with "new and improved" packaging.
NONE IS SO BLIND AS HE WHO WILL NOT SEE
Congressional Record. House of Representatives January 15, 1962 Page 215
Mr. Utt: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks.
Mr. Speaker: Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from California?
There was no objection.
Mr. Utt: Mr. Speaker, on the opening day of the 2nd session of the 87th Congress, I introduced H.R. 9567, a bill to rescind and revoke membership of the United States in the United Nations and the specialized agencies thereof and to repeal the Immunities Act relative thereto.
I introduced this resolution because it is my firm conviction that this Nation cannot survive as a Republic as long as we are shackled to an international organization by a treaty which supersedes our Constitution. As stated in the Declaration of Independence:
When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bonds which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the law of nature and nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
So in this resolution that same decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that I state the causes which impel me to seek this separation. To prove my point, I submit the following facts for a candid review. Our Constitution provides:
This Constitution and the laws of the United States, which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land.
Hence, any law enacted by Congress pursuant to a treaty becomes the supreme law of the land even though it would otherwise be unconstitutional. The supremacy of laws under a treaty was clearly set forth in the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in 1920 in the Missouri v. Holland case wherein a federal law, otherwise unconstitutional, was held valid because of a treaty between Canada and the United States. This decision clearly held that where there was a conflict between the provisions of our Constitution and the provisions of a treaty, this conflict must be resolved in favor of the treaty.
This same doctrine has been extended to include executive agreements. The result of this situation has been to destroy our limited form of republican government and has denied to each State a form of republican government as guaranteed by the Constitution and has supplanted it with a government of unlimited powers which destroys the historical separation of executive, judicial and legislative branches of our government. This was certainly never envisioned by the framers of the Constitution.
When the United Nations Charter was submitted to the Senate for ratification, great stress was laid upon Art. 2, subparagraph 7, which states:
Nothing contained in the present charter shall authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state or shall require the members to submit such matters to settlement under the present charter.
I do not believe that the U.S. Senate would have ratified this treaty without relying on the above quoted paragraph. However, this paragraph has been complete and constantly ignored over the past 16 years and every organization, commission, and covenant flowing out of the United Nations Charter has been for the sole purpose of intervening in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the member nations as well as the several States of our own Union, completely destroying the sovereignty of each State to legislate in contravention of the treaty provisions. Mr. Moses Moskoqitz, a noted internationalist, made the following statement in the American Bar Association Journal of April 1949 (35 A.B.A.J. 283, 285):
Once a matter has become, in one way or another, the subject of regulation by the United Nations, be it by resolution of the General Assembly or by convention between members states at the instance of the United Nations, that subject ceases to be a matter of being 'essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the member states.' As a matter of fact, such a position represents the official view of the united Nations, as well as of the member states that have voted in favor of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Hence, neither the declaration nor the projected covenant, nor any agreement that may be reached in the future on the machinery of implementation of human rights, can in any way be considered as violative of the letter or spirit of Art. 2 of the Charter.
Following this, the Acheson State Department made this official declaration:
"There is now no longer any real difference between domestic and foreign affairs."
These statements plainly render Art. 2, subparagraph 7, of the Charter meaningless. John Foster Dulles, a former Secretary of State, in a speech before the American Bar Association in Louiseville, KY, April 12, 1952, said:
"Treaty law can override the Constitution. They (treaties) can cut across the rights given the people by the constitutional Bill of Rights."
This conversion of our limited republic to an unlimited democracy is a death blow to this nation.
The realization of this tragedy was the reason for the proposal of the Bricker Amendment nearly a decade ago. The Bricker Amendment simply provided that when there was a conflict between the Constitution of the United States and a treaty, that conflict must be resolved in favor of the Constitution, and yet the Bricker Amendment was defeated by a narrow margin under strong propaganda pressure from the Council on Foreign Relations and politicians who glories in the unlimited power conveyed upon them by the United Nations Charter. There were just too many politicians and too few statesmen.
Now let us look at the record. According to Trygve Lie, longtime Secretary General of the United Nations, he stated flatly that there was a secret agreement between Alger Hiss [Hiss was a Communist who was convicted of spying against the United States.] and Molotov to the effect that the head of the UN military staff should always be a Communist. That agreement has never been broken, and we have had a succession of Communists filling that post, the present one being Mr. Arkadov. As a first consequence of this treasonous agreement, this country lost its first military engagement in Korea at a cost to this country of more than $20 billion and 145,.000 American casualties, to say nothing of the honor and prestige of this nation.
This was the first war in which we engaged, not as the United States military force, but as a UN force, although we contributed 90 percent of the men and the money. How convenient this was to the Communists to have one of their own men as head of the UN military staff, who reviewed all orders going from the Pentagon to General MacArthur and gave them to our enemy before General MacArthur Received them. The enemy, which consisted of the Red Communist army and Russian equipment an fliers was driven back to the Yalu River and given sanctuary on the other side. General MacArthur could have destroyed the enemy in short order had he been permitted to pursue them across the river from whence they came. Because General MacArthur could not in good conscience follow these orders, he was recalled and the Korean War ended in dismal defeat.
We were sold the U.N. on a promise of peace, but we failed to realize that this peace was to be on Communist terms; in fact, it was to be a total victory for the international Communist conspiracy. Our faith in this hope was so firm that we were lulled into a state of false security while the Communist world gobbled up 13 or 14 countries, bringing 800 million people under their domination. Russia has used the veto power nearly a hundred times. The United Nations has been completely unable to bring any degree of peace, and Russia itself has created 13 or 14 military conflicts between the East and the West.
The United Nations has not as yet passed a resolution of censorship against Russia for its Hungarian bloodbath but rather stood idly by and helped to betray the Hungarian freedom fighters into the hands of Russia. It could not even get a censorship resolution against India for its military invasion of Portuguese enclaves.
Further, Mr. Speaker, what may I ask is the United Nations doing to prevent President Sukarno of Indonesia from carrying out his military attack against the island possession of Holland which lies more than a thousand miles away from Indonesia? Is colonialism under Holland a bad thing but colonialism under pro-Communist Indonesia a good thing? I have been unable to get any rationale on this question. In fact, it has passed no resolutions of condemnation against Russia or any of its satellites or against the so-called neutral countries but busies itself with resolutions of condemnation against our allies, such as Portugal, Holland and France.
The power, the honor, and the prestige of America have fallen from their high point in 1945 to an absolute zero today.
The action in Katanga is nothing short of lunacy. Not a voice was raised in the United Nations when Syria withdrew from the United Arab Republic, but that same organization sent troops into the Congo to prevent self-determination of a civilized and Christian province which did not want to be part of a Communist-controlled Congo.
Our defeat in the abortive Cuban invasion can be laid on the doorstep of the United Nations, as the United Nations treaty prohibits us from engaging in any military operations without the consent of the United National Security Council in which Russia holds the veto power. At this point, Mr. Speaker, may I remind the members of the House and the people of America that the Cuban situation was not even mentioned in the President's state of the Union message on January 11, although the so-called white paper issued by the Department of State declares that Cuba constitutes a Sino-Soviet bridgehead in the Western Hemisphere and that the military power of Cuba is second only to that of the United States in the Western Hemisphere due, of course, to the millions of dollars of armaments, equipment, and technicians and money furnished by the Communist countries to Fidel Castro. Why, I ask, as not this clear and present danger to the security of our country discussed in the state of the Union message together with a proposal to dispel this danger?
Let me put this in very simple and understandable terms so that no one can misunderstand it. This situation is analogous to having a rattlesnake in the bedroom, and father ignores this danger to his family and starts blithely off on a big game hunt in Africa leaving mama and the children to cope with the rattlesnake in the bedroom.
Mr. Speaker, how silly can we get to relinquish the right to protect our nation against Communist invasion in the Western Hemisphere? If we continue our membership in this organization, you can look to see this Nation condemned for having our naval base at Quantanamo Bay, Cuba. You can also look to see us condemned for owning the Panama Canal, and the same 66 votes which threw France out of its legal position in Bizerte, can vote us out of Guantanamo and out of Panama.
You can see, and with reason, Mexico demanding through the United Nations that all that territory taken from them under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo following the Mexican War in 1848. You can see Russia demanding the return of Alaska because we only paid them $17 million when it is really worth billions and certainly the American Indians, if they have representation in the United Nations, could demand the return of Manhattan Island together with the rest of the land that was legally theirs. You say this is fantastic? You would have said that the present situation in Cuba was a fantastic idea 10 years ago.
You can expect to see a one world government, Communist controlled, under the United Nations. You will see the United Nations run up astronomical debts which we, under the terms of the treaty, are bound to pay.
In a book by William Z. Foster, former head of the Communist Party, U.S.A., entitled "Toward Soviet America," he gives a complete blueprint of the conquest of America by the international Communist conspiracy. It is as clear a blueprint as given by Adolph Hitler in "Mein Kampf." Following are some of the things you may look for under the controlled Communist America as stated by William Z. Foster:
"The final aim of the Communist international is to overthrow world capitalism and replace it by world Communism. The Communist Party of the United States is the American section of the Communist International. The Communist International carries out a united revolutionary program on a world scale. The American Soviet government will be organized along the broad lines of the Russian Soviets.
"Under the dictatorship, all the capitalist parties - Republican, Democrat, Progressive, Socialist, etc., will be liquidated. Likewise, will be dissolved all other organizations - including chambers of commerce, employer's associations, Rotary Clubs, American Legion, YMCA, and such fraternal orders as the Masons, Odd Fellows, Elks, Knights of Columbus, etc., lawyers will be abolished.
"The press, the motion pictures, the radio, the theater, will be taken over by the Government. Studies will be revolutionized, being cleansed of religious, patriotic and other features of the bourgeois idealogy. The decisions of the Soviets are enforced by the armed red guard. Citizenship is restricted to those who do useful work, capitalist, landlords, clericals and other nonproducers being disfranchised.
"In the so-called black belt of the South where the Negroes are in the majority, they will have the fullest right to govern themselves and also such white minorities as may live in this section. Where the party elects it's candidates to legislative bodies they make use of these public forums to bring forth the Communist program.** End of quote.
The trade unions are the great schools for Communism. Religion has sanctified every war and every tyrant no matter how murderous and reactionary. The free American woman, like her Russian sister, will scorn the whole of bourgeois sex hypocrisy and prudery."
Our Declaration of Independence concludes with these words:
"...and for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine providence, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, fortunes, and our sacred honor."
This is a full and complete acknowledgment of divine guidance. Nowhere in the United Nations Charter or any of its subsidiaries do you find any reference to a Supreme Being The Bible says: Unless the Lord build an house, they labor in vain who build it." End of Congressman Utt's statement on the House floor.
Today the United States "owes" the United Nothing billions of dollars. For the past 50 years we have been sending our freedom fighters (active and reserve), to die in foreign lands, to fight tribal wars for other countries who destroy their own, because one group doesn't like the other's religion - all orchestrated by the international bankers running the show. No?
Do your homework and then try to say, no. Today we are headed towards a new world order of Communism and America snoozes on, their loyalty placed blindly in the hands of the Republicans and democrats who are allowing this to happen because so many of them want it to happen.
Congressman Utt was a statesman of the finest caliber and he has been right on point. Allow me to quote another great American, George Washington, during his farewell address, September 17, 1796 [Executive Papers, pg 38, published 1832, Denver Public Library]:
"The great rule of conduct for us, in regard to foreign nations, is, in extending our commercial relations, to have with them as little political connection as possible. So far as we have already formed engagements, let them be fulfilled with good faith. Here let us stop.
"Europe has a set of primary interests, which to us have none, or a very remote relation. Hence she must be engaged in frequent controversies, the causes of which are essentially foreign to our concerns. Hence, therefore, it must be unwise in us to implicate ourselves, by artificial ties, in the ordinary vicissitudes of her politics, or the ordinary combinations and collisions of her friendships or enmities.
"Our detached and distant situation invites, and enables us to pursue a different course. If we remain one people, under an efficient government, the period is not far off when we may defy material injury from external annoyance; when we may take such an attitude as will cause the neutrality we may at any time resolve upon, to be scrupulously rejected; when belligerent nations, under the impossibility of making acquisitions upon use, will not lightly hazard the giving us provocation; when we may choose peace or war, as our interest, guided by justice, shall counsel.
"Why forgo the advantages of so peculiar a situation? Why quit our own, to stand upon foreign ground? Why, by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humor, or caprice?"
* * *
And words from an equally wise man, now deceased, former Secretary of Ag, Ezra Taft Benson, from his book, An Enemy Hath Done This, pg 155:
"Already, I can hear the chorus chanting "isolationism, isolationism, he's turning back the clock to isolationism." How many use that word without having the slightest idea of what it really means! The so-called isolationism of the United States in past decades is pure myth. What isolationism? Long before the current trend of revoking our Declaration of Independence under the guise of international cooperation, American influence and trade was felt in every region of the globe. Individuals and private groups spread knowledge, business, prosperity, religion, good will and, above all, respect throughout every foreign continent.
"It was not necessary then for America to give up her independence to have contact and influence with other countries. It is not necessary now. Yet, many Americans have been led to believe that our country is so strong that will can defend, feed and subsidize half the world, while at the same time believing that we are so weak and "inter-dependent" that we cannot survive without pooling our resources and sovereignty with those we subsidize. If wanting no part of this kind of "logic" is isolationism, then it is time we brought it back into vogue."
* * *
** Kevin Kornbuckle is Oregon's only duly elected Communist; he ran as a Democrat and "came out" after he was elected. In March, 1996, this Communist, after coming under attack by other city council members stated: "I'd simply point out that Communists in the U.S. are fighting for health care, housing and jobs as a human right. I'm proud to be a Communist." Mail Tribune, Medford, Oregon, March 4, 1996.
How many other Communists have been elected as Democrats or Republicans who haven't come out of the closet yet, but vote for all new world order programs? The answer is simple" Read the Communist Manifesto and then look at how your state or federal politician has been voting.
JFK was President when this speech was made by Congressman Utt from California. Now California is represented by bottom feeders like Maxine Waters, Henry Waxman, Bob Matsui, Wally Herger, Doug Ose - just to name a few.
By the way, in case you aren't aware of the number of members of the U.S. Congress who belong to the Progressive Caucus and other commie fronts, i.e., Americans for Democratic Action (ADA), you will get a good education by reading the article below -especially if you're union:
Of course most people won't. They don't want the documented truth to interfere with their preconceived notions of what they want to believe. Or, some stupid TV program is more important than their children's freedom.
The next time you go to buy a workout video by Jane Fonda, you might remember her words of lunacy:
"I would think that if you understood what Communism was, you would hope, you would pray on your knees, that we would someday become Communists." Quoted from the outstanding book, You Don't Say by Fred Gielow.
Who can we thank for the destruction of America's sovereignty? The Republican and Democrat parties. The so-called "mainstream media," both electronic and print. Past White Houses and the America people themselves for turning a blind eye to important things like our freedom vs how much food they can plow down in a day or how many sitcoms they can watch in one night on the boob tube.
Remember this: The United Nothing (Nations) is not a government. It is an organization funded by countries of the globe to make sure the one world order comes together through brute force. Our participation in the UN is unconstitutional and we are under no obligation to this gang of private war mongers.
Related Pieces that are very important:
Deadly Failures in Intelligence Analysis and Defense Unpreparedness
by Benton K. Partin
Brig/Gen U.S.A.F. (Ret)
Think the term 'American Soviet government' is far-fetched? Better read these words:
The following excerpt is from the 700 pages of transcripts re: In 1978 the legislature of Illinois created a committee to study regional governance - one of the key mechanisms to erasing our sovereignty and bringing America into a Communist "New World Order." There were three hearings, April 11, 1978, July 10, 1978 and September 26, 1978; the following statement is from the September 26, 1978 hearing.
This is the testimony of Norman Dodd, chief investigator in 1953 for U.S. Congressman B. Carroll Reece, whose committee investigated tax-exempt foundations run by the biggest traitors in this nation. This investigation eventually narrowed down to about 10 foundations, those chief among them for Un-American activities were Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie and the Rhodes Scholarship Fund. No?
I invite you to do your homework. Did you know that Cecil Rhodes was one of the original white supremacists? Oh yes he was. In his will he spoke of eliminating all but the superior white race and working towards eliminating all minorities. If I were Bill Clinton, Robert Reich, George Stephannoplous, just to name a few, I would be ashamed to be a "Rhodes Scholar."
Transcript of Public Hearing, Joint Committee on Regional Government, September 26, 1978, Edwardsville, Illinois, Norman Dodd, page 51,
"Mr. Chairman. After listening to the very able descriptions of how complex the question that is before the Committee is, I have been thinking in terms of drawing on my own experiences that relate to the development of the proposal called 'regional government'...As a result of that investigation [into tax exempt foundations], experiences began to accrue and one of them stemmed from the entity - or the head of the entity - responsible for the proposition which you all now face called regional government. This individual was the head of the Ford Foundation, and this experience took place back in 1953. It took the form of an invitation from the President of the Ford Foundation to me to visit the Foundation's offices, all of which I did and on arrival, was greeted by the President of the Ford Foundation with this statement:
"Mr. Dodd, we have invited you to come to NY and stop in and see us in the hope that, off the record, you would tell us why the Congress of the U.S. should be interested in an operation such as ours." Before I could think of just exactly how I would reply, Mr. Gaither volunteered the following information, and these are practically in his exact words: "Mr. Dodd, we operate here under directives which emanate from the White House. Would you like to know what the substance of these directives is?" I said, "Indeed, I would, Mr. Gaither."
"Whereupon he then said the following: "We here, operate and control our grant making policies in harmony with the directives, the substance of which is as follows: We shall use our grant making power so to alter life in the U.S. that it can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union."
"Now, the second experience that I would like to share with you, oh, and incidentally, it is the Ford Foundation's grants which are responsible for the formulation of this idea of regional government, and also the idea that given regional government, we must, in turn, develop and accept and agree to a totally New Constitution which has already been drawn up, as was mentioned just a few minutes ago."
[Editorial note: Let me leave Mr. Dodd's testimony for a moment. I have a copy of the New States Constitution, developed many, many years ago and refined in 1978 by the Center for Democratic Studies, a Rockefeller funded operation. This New States Constitution is to replace ours. Ask former Senatorette Nancy Kassenbaum, now married to Howard Baker - she helped draft this document. However, first a Constitutional Convention must be called and the globalists are desperate to pull a con-con.
They tried and failed in 1994, they will try again. Did you notice during the 105th Congress, each session these people continued to call for a Constitutional Amendment for virtually every major piece of legislation, i.e. a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, a balanced budget amendment [another meaningless, phony ploy], an amendment to the Constitution for school prayer, for victim's rights, to fix the IRS? This is unprecedented in this century.
The last Constitutional Convention was in 1787. We've passed 16 Amendments to the Constitution without a con-con, so why all of a sudden do we need one for all the legislation listed above? We don't, but it's the only way they can throw out our Constitution and replace it with this Communist doctrine called a New States Constitution.]
Back to Mr. Dodd's testimony beginning on pg. 53, Mr. Dodd is speaking about looking at the minutes and records of the Carnegie Endowment:
"Mr. Dodd, we have received your letter. We can answer all the questions, but it will be a great deal of trouble. The reason it will be a great deal of trouble is because, with the ratification by the Senate of the U.S. of the United Nations Treaty, our job was finished, we bundled up our records, spanning, roughly speaking, fifty years and put them in the warehouse."
"I did send a member of my staff to NY to read the minute books of this organization since it's inception in 1908. Now, we are back in the period of 1908, ad these minutes reported the following: The Trustees of the Carnegie Endowment bring up a single question, namely, if it is desirable to alter the life of an entire people, is there any means more efficient than war to gain that end? And they discuss this very question at a very high academic and scholarly level for a year, and they come up with an answer - there are no known means more efficient than war, assuming the objective is altering the life of an entire people."
[Editorial note: Remember, Mr. Dodd is now quoting from the Carnegie Foundation's own meeting minutes]
"....oh, before that, the Trustees then answered the question of how to involve us in a war by saying, "We must control the diplomatic machinery of the U.S."; and then that brings up the question of how to secure that control, and the answer is we must control the State Department. Now, at that point, research discloses a relationship between the effort to control the State Dept. and an entity which the Carnegie Endowment set up, namely the Council of Learned Societies.
[Editorial note: Later followed by the Council on Foreign Relations [CFR]. And through that entity, are cleared all of the appointments - high appointments in the State Department and they have continued to be cleared that way since then.]
"Now, finally, we are in a war. Eventually the war is over, and the Trustees turn their attention, then, to seeing to it that life does not revert in this country to what it was prior to 1914; and they hit upon the idea that in order to prevent that reversion, they must control education in this country. They realized that this is a perfectly tremendous, really stupendous and complex task - much too great for them alone. So, they approached the Rockefeller Foundation, with the suggestion that the task be divided between the two of them.
"The Carnegie Endowment takes on that aspect of education which is a domestic in its relationship. These two run along in tandem that way, disciplined by a decision - namely, that the answer lies entirely in the changing of the teaching of the history of the U.S. They then approached five of the most prominent historians in this country with the proposition that they alter the manner of the teaching of the subject, and they get turned down flatly; so they realized then they must build their own stable of historians, so to speak.
"They approach the Guggenheim Foundation, which specializes in Fellowships, and suggests to them that when they locate a relatively young potential historian, will the Guggenheim Foundation give that person a Fellowship, merely on their say-so and the answer is, yes they will.....And that becomes the policy which if finally picked up and manifests itself in the expression of collectivism all along the line, of which the dividing of this country into regions, using all of the logic which supports the ultimate idea that in order that regional government, in turn, be effective, there must be a new Constitution of the United States." End of quote.
Entire article is at: https://devvy.com/dodd_20001221.html
Remember this America: War is business and business is booming.
One final ting. In 1958, a really great American by the name of Cleon Skoussen, former FBI agent, revealed in his book, The Naked Communist, which every American should read, but unfortunately most only read the TV guide or Hustler, the long-term goals of the communist agenda.
This information is contained not only in the Congressional Record (August 1963), but also in the Communist Manifesto itself. For the sake of brevity, only a few of those goals are listed here, but it should give you a real wake-up call as to how far the goals of our enemies have succeeded:
U.S. acceptance of coexistence as the only alternative to atomic war.
Develop the illusion that total disarmament by the U.S. would be demonstration of
Permit free trade between all nations regardless of Communist affiliation and regardless of whether or not items could be used for war.
[Today NAFTA & GATT and all the other "free trade" agreements so loved by Congressman Ron Paul and others, is destroying this nation.]
Provide American aid to all nations regardless of communist domination.
Set up East an West Germany as separate states in spit of Khrushchev's promise in 1955 to settle the German questions by free elections under the supervision of the United Nations.
Allow all Soviet satellites individual representation in the United Nations.
Promote the United Nations as the only hope for mankind. If its charter is rewritten, demand that it be set as a one-world government with its own independent armed forces.
Resist any attempt to outlaw the Communist Party.
Do away with all loyalty oaths.
Capture one or both of the political parties of the U.S.
Use technical decisions of the courts to weaken basic American institutions by claiming their activities violate civil rights.
Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Get control of the teachers associations.
Gain control of all student newspapers.
Infiltrate the press. Get control of book review assignments, editorial writing, policy making positions.
Gain control of key positions in radio, TV and motion pictures.
Eliminate all laws governing obscenity by calling them censorship and a violation of free speech and free press.
Break down cultural standards of morality by promoting pornography and obscenity in books, magazines, motion pictures and TV.
Present homosexuality, degeneracy and promiscuity as normal, natural and healthy.
Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with social religion. Discredit the Bible and emphasize the need for intellectual maturity which does not need a religious crutch.
Eliminate prayer or any phase of religious expression in the schools on the ground that it violates the principles of separation of church and state.
Discredit the American Constitution by calling it inadequate, old-fashioned, out of step with modern needs, a hindrance to cooperation between nations on a worldwide basis.
Belittle all forms of American culture and discourage the teaching of American history on the ground that it was only a minor part in the big picture.
Eliminate all laws or procedures which interfere with the operation of the communist apparatus.
Eliminate the House Committee on Un-American Activities.
Discredit the family as an institution. Encourage promiscuity and easy divorce.
Emphasize the need to raise children away from the negative influence of parents.
Create the impression that violence and insurrection are legitimate aspects of the American tradition; that students and special-interest groups should rise up and use united force to solve economic, political and social problems.
How does treason taste, America?
Take a look at that list of goals and see how many have been accomplished. No more SAC (Strategic air Command) to keep America from harm. Loyalty oaths, out the window. We all remember Mr. Reagan asking the Ruskies to "tear down that wall." Quite a well orchestrated photo op, but it was all settled behind the scenes long ago.
The Communist Party is flourishing in America. Here in California, Angela Davis teaches at a state college, paid for by my tax dollars. She's also head of the Commie party in this state. Nice, huh?
Present sodomy as normal? We can all see the big push to normalize perversion so these non- reproducing men and women can continue to brainwash your children in grade school so they can recruit them later when they're teens. Only a fool can't see how the American people have been manipulated on that issue.
Prayer in school? Cleon revealed this information in 1958. What year was prayer outlawed in school? I believe it was 1962.
Discredit the Constitution? How many times do we hear "liberals" spew nonsense about how the U.S. Constitution isn't keeping up with today and is "elastic"? Anyone who has taken a hard look at education today sees that even saying the Pledge of Allegiance is banned or has been dropped all together so it doesn't offend foreigners who have come to America to destroy our culture and demand we adopt their religions.
Disparage American history? What history? When I went to school, the day was reading, writing, arithmetic, home ec, phys ed and electives like drama or public speaking. Today's school child gets 1st period diversity training and multiculturalism indoctrination. 2nd period how to have a queer experience and put a condom on a cucumber. 3rd period is about how to become a model citizen under the UN.
Then lunch. 4th period is how to get an abortion without your parents finding out or training on your "reproductive rights." 5th period is porn movies disguised as sex ed training. Think I'm kidding? Wake up.
Get the kids of America away from their parents and under the influence of the state and schools, discredit the Bible. Out of their own mouths:
"Every child who believes in God is mentally ill."
--Dr. Paul Brandwein, leading U.S. child psychologist.
If you really want to know what these people who would destroy our beloved Republic are saying, go to:
You can see how badly the American people have been duped into buying this bunk and assisting in the goals of setting up a Communist America by evil doers. Of course, none of this would be happening if we had real Americans serving in Congress, the 50 state legislatures and 50 governors mansions. We don't. Not anymore.
America is committing national suicide, but it can be stopped if every single American who really cares about this country gets off their collective backsides, puts entertainment and fun times aside and help us get the truth to as many people as possible. Please send any of the pieces off my web site to everyone you know. Knowledge is power, but only if it's shared.
FOX News now enjoys a ratings elevation higher than CNN. During the day, like CNN, they have a lot of filler junk when there's nothing "hot" going on. Instead of all that useless gas being broadcast, why don't they have people on their programs who discuss what you've read above? They refuse and the term 'fair and balanced' as it refers to FOX is just more BS.
For a legal analysis on getting out of the insidious, Communist controlled UN, go to: