Written by  Alex Newman

As awareness grows of the international establishment’s globalist plotting against liberty and national sovereignty, problems on the road toward a “New World Order” are becoming increasingly obvious, and opposition is surging in tandem. It seems that insider bigwigs are getting nervous. Changes in strategy may be forthcoming as a result. Still, as a recent “analysis” by establishment spokesman Henry Kissinger (shown) makes clear, the powerful forces of globalism and totalitarianism have no intention of backing down from their plot to impose their “New World Order” on humanity.   

Former Secretary of State and national security adviser Kissinger — a key front man for a powerful movement aiming to impose what he and other globalists refer to as a “New World Order” — recently outlined some of the establishment’s concerns. In a piece published on August 29 in the Wall Street Journal, headlined “Henry Kissinger on the Assembly of a New World Order,” the prominent foreign policy Machiavellian also proposed the acceleration of efforts to impose global governance on humanity.  

Adapted from a soon-to-be-released book on the subject of “World Order,” Kissinger’s analysis purports to identify various speed bumps on the road toward the globalist vision of planetary government. It then offers some policy prescriptions to overcome them, buried between the lines of unexciting and opaque writing. And it warns about what may befall the world if humanity refuses to submit to the global order pushed by Kissinger and company.

“The concept of order that has underpinned the modern era is in crisis,” argued the globalist apparatchik. As evidence, he cited the planned collapse of Libya after being “liberated” by the United Nat...; the Islamic State’s efforts to impose a “caliphate” in the Middle East (without mentioning the crucial role played by the U.S. government and its allies in creati...); and alleged tensions between Russia and the West. Again without mentioning the U.S. government or his own role in the trends, Kissinger also points to “a relationship with China divided between pledges of cooperation an...”

One of the key problems, Kissinger’s analysis falsely suggests, is that many of the world’s ruling governments and dictatorships never fully embraced the globalist “New World Order” scheming pushed by the Western establishment. “Vast regions of the world have never shared and only acquiesced in the Western concept of order,” he wrote. In reality, as The New American and countless scholars have documented, even the regimes he implies are hostile to the Western establishment’s vision of “world order” are largely the product of that same establishment — including the brutal regime ruling mainland China.

They all seem to be largely on the same page, too. Just this summer, for example, the Communist Chinese dictatorship and more than 130 Third World regimes in the G77 signed a declaration calling for what they termed a “New World Order to Live... While taking shots at Western governments for not re-distributing enough taxpayer wealth to their regimes, the massive screed outlines essentially the same vision of a “New World Order” pushed openly by Western globalists such as Kissinger. Even UN boss Ban Ki-moon joined the festivities in Bolivia and celebrated the declaration and the renewed Third World push for the world order, complete with global governance and regional regimes under the UN itself.      

“The order established and proclaimed by the West stands at a turning point,” Kissinger continued, citing, firstly, challenges to the “nature of the state.” His first example is the globalist-orchestrated attack on national sovereignty that has esse.... Kissinger, though, frames the top-down attack in a different light. “Europe has set out to transcend the state and craft a foreign policy based primarily on the principles of soft power,” he claims, giving the false impression that “Europe,” rather than the establishment ruling over it, was behind the radical scheme.

Now, however, Kissinger implies without saying it directly, that the controversial European Union must usurp even more power, wealth, and liberty from the peoples and formerly sovereign nations its unelected bureaucrats rule from Brussels. “It is doubtful that claims to legitimacy separated from a concept of strategy can sustain a world order,” the establishment operative declared. “And Europe has not yet given itself attributes of statehood, tempting a vacuum of authority internally and an imbalance of power along its borders.” In other words, turn the EU into a true “state” — despite the fact that Europeans have repeatedly rejected such machinations — or face various crises and horrors.

“The economic system has become global, while the political structure of the world remains based on the nation-state,” Kissinger complained. “The international order thus faces a paradox: Its prosperity is dependent on the success of globalization, but the process produces a political reaction that often works counter to its aspirations.” In other words, globalists are worried that the public backlash — or “political reaction,” as Kissinger put it — to the “international order” created partly by Kissinger and his radical comrades is growing and must be dealt with.

Kissinger acknowledges the almost absurd amount of “multilateral forums” proliferating all over the world today, many of which have been explored in depth in these pages and almost all of which depend on the continued usurpation of national sovereignty and wealth for their existence. However, in his analysis, the former secretary of state argues that the time has come to take the emerging world order to the next level. “A contemporary structure of international rules and norms, if it is to prove relevant, cannot merely be affirmed by joint declarations; it must be fostered as a matter of common conviction,” he wrote.

Then, Kissinger hints at what may be in store for humanity if it continues to resist the imposition of a “structure of international rules and norms” — a phrase that sounds suspiciously like world government. “The penalty for failing will be not so much a major war between states (though in some regions this remains possible) as an evolution into spheres of influence identified with particular domestic structures and forms of governance,” he said. “At its edges, each sphere would be tempted to test its strength against other entities deemed illegitimate. A struggle between regions could be even more debilitating than the struggle between nations has been.”

Using opaque language, Kissinger also essentially spelled out the globalist road map going forward: Rather than creating a global government all at once, dividing up the world’s peoples and nations into various “regions” ruled by regional regimes must come first. “The contemporary quest for world order will require a coherent strategy to establish a concept of order within the various regions and to relate these regional orders to one another,” he explains.

As readers of this magazine know well, the trends are already obvious. In Europe, the EU now totally dominates policymaking. In North America, globalists are openly boasting that, using NAFTA as the foundation,.... In Latin America, the Middle East, Asia, Africa, and worldwide, the sa.... Consider the African Union and the Union of South American States, for example. Only the end-game remains concealed from full public view — and just barely.

MORE HERE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/item/19030-globalist-henry...

Did the New World Order just Blink?

Jim’s Rant For The Day, Blink, Blink.

I still can’t get over yesterday’s Op-Ed article by Henry Kissinger in the Wall Street Jou... Here are some more thoughts on that possible world changing article.

First of all, why didn’t he publish in the New York Times or the Washington Post? Because he wanted to communicate directly with the decision makers for our government – the money junkies. Cold and simple.

Secondly, Just who is Henry Kissinger? He is a German born adviser to all presidents after WWII, primarily in the area of world control, in one way or the other. To go deeper into that, he is one of the co-creators of the 30 year One World Order plan.

Thirdly, exactly what did he signal to the Money Junkies? Let’s divide his article into two parts; Narrative and Pleading. The narrative was a statement of the intent of the NWO, a recognition of its impending utter failure, and possibly a cover of the good intents of those that would play God with the masses so that they might expect to be forgiven for their noble but wrong gesture to be World king. In my opinion he is playing his cards in all three ways so that the elite cannot get mad at him.

Lastly, he is pleading with the elite and money junkies to consider long and hard if they are willing to push the planet into near extinction just to be able to say that they succeeded in their take-over. He is suggesting that at this point it is possible suicide for the planet in general and definite suicide for the elite to continue to go against the entire world.

The timing could not be any more appropriate. There is no doubt in my mind that the U.S. is preparing for it’s ultimate false flag event to occur in the next few weeks to try to grab what jacks are left for them.

The planet is now at a jumping off point, no doubt about it. The elite and the masses of the globe have been locked in a staring contest the past few years in the elite’s takeover tactics. Their architect just blinked and said that his plan is utter madness. Let’s hope he is a good communicator.

MORE HERE: http://beforeitsnews.com/politics/2014/08/did-the-new-world-order-j...