I was in college when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. Previous to that, I had never heard of Saddam Hussein, Iraq and Kuwait. Soon, President Bush was on the news saying Saddam Hussein was a Hitler-like tyrant bent on taking over the world. I had faith in our Republican President. I was proud that my country was going to use its military might to stop a power-hungry madman. It seemed like Americans in general wanted to get Iraq out of Kuwait.
My faith in President Bush wavered when he began using “New World Order” in his speeches. I knew those words had meaning, and I couldn’t understand why he was using them. Did he not know what he was doing? Why he was giving credibility and deference to the United Nations?
“We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a new world order, a world where the rule of law, not the rule of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations. 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 U.N.’s founders.” (George H. W. Bush, January 16, 1991.)
I didn’t think better of Saddam Hussein, but I did lose my confidence in President Bush’s motives. If I had known Bush’s history as U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. I wouldn’t have been so surprised when he said this:
“It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegiance.” (George H. W. Bush, addressing the General Assembly of the U.N. February 1, 1992.)
It was shocking to hear it on television–a U.S. president saying the American people are going to pledge our allegiance to the U.N. charter rather than to our Constitution or to our flag. I don’t remember any of my friends or family reacting to it. To me it was a shock. It was a confirmation of something I had read before but not fully believed.
Sometime before the conflict in Kuwait, I had read Gary Allen’s book, “None Dare Call It Conspiracy”. In the book he tells about the New World Order and explains that the goal of the United Nations is to bring about world government. When I read the book his warnings about the New World Order had been provocative theories. I had no evidence of my own to confirm that the New World Order was a real thing.
President Bush took the theory from fiction to fact when he spoke boldly of the New World Order on national television. I’m surprised his speech writers allowed him to say the words. Sometime later I would learn that Bush had been CIA director and U.S. ambassador to the U.N. He had been a director in the Council on Foreign Relations. He couldn’t have been using the words by accident. The New World Order was real and the President wanted to promote it. I wasn’t interested in pledging any allegiance to the U.N. charter.
I don’t remember Republicans making any fuss about his speeches. My friends and family weren’t talking about it. I don’t remember hearing anything about it on the news. I felt like I was the only one hearing what he said. I didn’t make any loud declarations, but I stopped calling myself a Republican after that.
It wasn’t that I rejected all Republicans. At the grassroots level I have much in common with them. Most of my friends and family are Republicans, and we share very similar beliefs. But, I knew I couldn’t count on Republicans to be the “good guys” in Washington. If George Bush, a Republican President, could say such things without any rebuff from the Republican leadership in Washington, I certainly couldn’t count on them to alert me to other threats to U.S. sovereignty. Republicans and the Republican Party weren’t going to tell me about the dangers of a New World Order. I knew not to trust George Bush. I also knew not to trust his son. I did not vote for him.
With the passage of years it is clear to me that the Establishment owns men like George Bush, John McCain, Mitch McConnell, Paul Ryan, and many others in Washington. When they are campaigning, Establishment men make beautiful speeches about the Constitution and the country’s Founders. They temporarily become patriotic superheros. Their tune changes when they secure the office. Then they can be counted on for abundant excuses rather than action. They can be counted on to criticize those in the Party who want to take real action. For example, they claimed to oppose Obamacare, until they were given an opportunity to really oppose it. It became obvious then that they were more interested in pleasing the Establishment than keeping promises to the American people. In predictable fashion, Washington Republicans leveled their harshest criticisms at the “obstructionists” who actually wanted a full repeal of Obamacare.
I don’t expect Republican leadership in Washington to do anything other than play party politics. They always have an excuse. My belief keeps me from being surprised when their actions don’t match their words. I was not surprised when Republicans did not repeal Obamacare. Several year before, I predicted they wouldn’t do it. I said if they were to take control of the House, the Senate, and the presidency, and they still wouldn’t repeal it. They didn’t repeal it. If they had been valiant in their opposition I would have at least had some respect for them. It was obvious they had no intention of repealing it. And why would they? The agenda of the Establishment is to move slowly toward socialism and world government, not away from it.
I have made another interesting observation over the decades. Republicans will never say anything about the power and influence of the Council on Foreign Relations. I have asked my own family members what they know about the Council on Foreign Relations. They know nothing about it. And yet the majority of key government positions are filled by CFR members. How is this possible? The media, with very few exceptions, is silent about the CFR. The Democrats are predictably silent. The Republicans, who should be most opposed to its agenda, are silent. And the world moves ever closer to socialism and world government under their leadership.
