U.S. Integration with the EU, Russia and China

Before there can be a New World Order (NWO) or a global government, all nations have to agree to abide by a global system of justice. The NWO is being introduced as Free Trade agreements between the nations. Regional governance and regulatory bodies like the WTO (World Trade Organization) has been slowly implemented in Fabian fashion throughout the Western world.

In the U.S. we adhere to the emerging integration requirements via trade agreements like CAFTA and NAFTA and the WTO. Regional contracts may in fact negate our status (and I am studying this concept right now, thanks to Todd from WA). At the bottom community level (with the global community existing at the very top) regional communitarian integration is accomplished via subserviant local community and economic development regulations.

The "former" Communist Russia must also adapt to international communitarian law before they can be fully admitted into the global free trade community, while openly communist China already participates (very successfully) in the global free trade community. Apparently the very concept of putting one's nation and home businesses first, or protecting local markets from cheap imports, died with the end of the U.S. Republic. (Shhh... Friedrich List never existed.)

As the following report explains, the transition is painful for local manufacturers and agriculture, even in the Re-Sovietized Union, but it's the "long-term" socio-economic gains that justify the complete and utter destruction of local economies. (And lest we forget, Amitai Etzioni and Mikhail Gorbachev coined the term "socio-economics," together.) Across America small and locally owned businesses and industries have been closed because they cannot "compete" on the emerging "free" global to local market. Overwhelming American support for Wal Mart's Chinese goods have been a big boost to global free trade. While many Americans do seem to notice how quickly locally owned businesses close their doors forever after the "new" corporate stores open, that deosn't stop them from shopping at the new corporate/government stores.

We're paying for the total destruction of our national standard of law. Our taxes already paid for a good portion of the integration, and now we're trading the last of our liberty for cheap toasters.

This just came in from Pete. I haven't read through it all (it's a 26 page pdf file). Notice how important the year 2020 is to the entire "concept." "Russia's 2020 Strategic Goals and the Role of International Integration" http://etresoi.ch/Denis/russia2020strat.pdf

Our little biographical textbook, "2020: Our Common Destiny," explains our biased American view (and Paul Barnes' Canadian Perspective) of the outcome of Free Trade International Integration. We include a brief introduction to the EU and the applicable standards for adapting national systems. To be in full compliance with international communitarian law (supreme) requires a complete "overhaul" of national and state legal standards. http://nord.twu.net/acl/2020.html

Bobby Garner recently joined a law forum and tried to start a discussion on Communitarian Law. Here's what happened:

My first post on the Team Law forum (posted here on congregator.net) which I posted on September 3rd was immediately quarantined by the forum administration. On Thursday September 4th, 2008, in a private message they wrote:

Though we appreciate your participation in our Open Forum, we temporarily moved your recent post to the Secured Admin access only forum. This action was taken due to the length of the post and the fact that Admin will not have a chance to review the document until next week. It also took place because the content might not comply with our Forum Rules or the purpose of our Open Forum, which is: to eliminate e-mail to and from Team Law.

That "next week" and following weeks, nothing happened, but then on the 18th I received the following:

Though we appreciate your participation in our Open Forum, we deleted content form one of your posts. The deletion occurred because the post did not comply with the purpose of our Open Forum,...
Regarding the subject matter of your post:
We addressed it accordingly on our Open Forum system in the post where the content was removed.

The post was moved to the 'Elections' forum. You will notice that the first paragraph and a portion of the first sentence of the second paragraph survived, as did some of the last paragraph. Everything between was deleted, and replaced with their own connective wording. As they explain in the reply:

Your original post was significantly longer and it delved into an interesting point of view regarding Freemasonry, its intentions and the outcomes proposed from their continuing efforts along with those that have molded that path for our country from the beginning.

This reads like an acknowledgment to the truth of my argument, but to steer me away from that conclusion, they continue:

Regardless of our opinion regarding such matters, they remain hypothetical offerings we have heard before that have nothing to do with our work.

My comments about the reality of Communitarian Law are nothing more than a "hypothetical offering" which they have already heard before. If in fact they ever did actually hear of it, the audience was carefully protected from the actual word, since it never before existed on the whole website. I checked. They wrote:

The reason such ideologies exist is people are ignorant of the law... If we had not edited a single word of your post, this would not change. We can do absolutely nothing about such conspiracy theories; even if they were true.

While it may be true that we can do nothing about it, and that is an argument I myself have made, the implication clearly is that this is only a conspiracy theory, which is probably not true. The difference is that I recognize that Communitarianism is already the reality, and not a theory at all. Nevertheless, they "addressed it [the issue] accordingly on our Open Forum system".

Here some more of my "hypothetical offering" posted today:

The Governor's Corner page lists 12 original jurisdiction states which are electing governors. All of these governors are members of the National Governors Association. As such they are part of a network of organizations known as the National Associations of Development Organizations. All 12 original jurisdiction state governors actively participate in the National Governors Association programs.

Other NADO member organizations include:
National Conference of State Legislatures
National League of Cities
U.S. Conference of Mayors
National Association of Local Government
National Association of Counties
National Association of Towns and Townships
National Association of State Budget Officers
National Association of Regional Councils

Who coordinates and directs the activities of the National Association of Development Organizations?

What kinds of development? sustainable, regional, economic,community, urban..., "National Association of Development Organizations provides training, information and representation for regional development organizations in small metropolitan and rural America"

Each of these areas of development comes under the purview of Sustainable Development, which is the UN Agenda 21 program. The various associations of local, regional and national government, write, adopt, promote and enforce the body of Communitarian Law.

How can the mayor of my town make decisions in the interest of my town when he is building consensus with neighboring towns throughout a region, which by design promote the greater good of the region regardless of its effect on my town.

Seeing that the Original Jurisdiction state governors are complicit in this unconstitutional regional governance, how do they distinguish themselves from the corporate governors?

You can read it on the forum if you get there before they delete it, or the can read the entire thread HERE...

Bobby Garner
http://www.congregator.net/
http://apps.congregator.net/Blog/
Free to forward or post.

In America, Communitarian Legal Integration is still a conspiracy theory. How is that possible? Oh that's right, it's illegal here. It can never be openly discussed in front of a nation of individuals whose national and state law forbids globalists plotting to destroy the constitutional basis for ALL American law on U.S. soil.

Thanks to Bobby, Pete and Brian and Trudy for keeping me informed. For all the new people writing me lately asking what they should do now that they know, we just made another new friend who may have some ideas we can ponder. Lainie is a staunch McCain/Palin Republican who can recognise the communitarian vision in Obama. It's a start in the right direction. Welcome to the ACL quest Rev. Lainie!

Rev. L. Dowell, Five-Fold Minister
revldowell-clergywomen@erols.com
http://www.voiceink.blogspot.com

And now for economic and Wall Street news from Peter Myer's elist:

From: IHR News Date: 20.09.2008 04:01 AM

Worst Crisis Since '30s, With No End Yet in Sight
by Jon Hilsenrath, Serena Ng and Damian Paletta
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
The Wall Street Journal

http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/105785/Worst-Crisis-Since-1930s-With-No-End-Yet-in-Sight

And in keeping with the topic of this post:

From: Sino Economics Date: 18.09.2008 07:48 AM

China paper urges new currency order after "financial tsunami"
Wed Sep 17, 2008 1:45am EDT http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSPEK4365020080917?sp=true

BEIJING (Reuters) - Threatened by a "financial tsunami," the world must consider building a financial order no longer dependent on the United States, a leading Chinese state newspaper said on Wednesday.

The commentary in the overseas edition of the People's Daily said the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc (LEH.P: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) "may augur an even larger impending global 'financial tsunami'."

The People's Daily is the official newspaper of China's ruling Communist Party, and the overseas edition is a smaller circulation offshoot of the main paper.

Its pronouncements do not necessarily directly reflect leadership views, but this commentary by a professor at Shanghai's Tongji University suggested considerable official alarm at the strains buckling world financial markets.

China's central bank earlier this week cut its lending rate for the first time in six years, a move analysts said was aimed at bolstering the economy and the battered stock market.

"The eruption of the U.S. sub-prime crisis has exposed massive loopholes in the United States' financial oversight and supervision," writes the commentator, Shi Jianxun.

"The world urgently needs to create a diversified currency and financial system and fair and just financial order that is not dependent on the United States."

But Vice Premier Wang Qishan, on a visit to the United States, told U.S. trade officials in a meeting on Tuesday that China and the United States needed to maintain close economic ties with global markets going through such turbulence.

"The Chinese government is well aware of the fact that the United States, which is the world's largest developed country, and China, which is the world's largest developing country, should have constructive and cooperative economic and trade relations," he said.

China is a major buyer of U.S. Treasury bonds, and through its sovereign wealth fund it has taken stakes in two large U.S. financial institutions.

In July 2005, China revalued the yuan and freed it from a dollar peg to float within managed bands. But the yuan and China's trade remains tightly linked to the fortunes of the dollar.

The commentary suggested China must brace for grave economic fallout and look to alternatives, saying the crisis brings to mind the Great Depression of the 1930s.

"Lehman Brothers announced bankruptcy will not only have a domino effect on the global financial world, it will bring a shock to the world economy," the front-page comment stated.

(Reporting by Chris Buckley; Editing by Ken Wills)

Just think how much easier it will be to sell the Third Way synthesis during a global depression. The global planners know that desperate people make stupid choices. Will Americans fall for another New Deal? Maybe it's best to write it in Chinese and Russian so most Americans will accept a dumbed down translation of their new contract. Maybe too many of my generation can recognise the communist language in a globalist planning, so that's why they made such an effort to take over U.S. education, right Gislea?