Recommendation 666

Global Governance 2025′ by US & EU Intelligence Agencies

September 23, 2010, 2:20 pm By Arlen Williams 16 Comments

Yes, it is true.

You may read this September 2010 report, courtesy of our Freedom of Information Act, at cia.gov.

Since the bulk of what this report discusses apparentlyhas to do with international cooperation, why then, did they not choose that apparently appropriate phrase, instead of “Global Governance?”

“Global Governance” – in case you need to recheck your eyes and mind.

Here is an interesting and self-conflicted disclaimer, from its “Introduction,” page 1:

The term “global governance” as used in this paper includes all the institutions, regimes, processes, partnerships, and networks that contribute to collective action and problem solving at the international level. This definition subsumes formal and informal arrangements as well as the role of nonstate actors in transnational settings. Regional cooperation may also be regarded as an element of global governance insofar as it contributes to broader efforts. Governance differs from government, which implies sovereign prerogatives and hierarchical authority. Global governance does not equate to world government, which would be virtually impossible for the foreseeable future, if ever.

Are you saying, under your breath, “‘Governance differs from government….  Global governance does not equate to world government….’  Who are they trying to kid?”

How can any set of people practice governance when there is no effort of government in effect? Clearly, they wish to establish dependable and enforceable arrangements, coordinated and administered between nations, hence their admission to the word “governance,” even though they create the distinction without a difference, between that word and “government.”

It is a natural and logical fact that if “global governance” is coordinated effectively, it must be done through an coordinating entity of some kind.  But, we must not call that body any kind of “government” — is what they are saying.

And what is any difference between the nouns-turned-adjectives, used in these terms?  How exactly does “globe” differ from “world,” o United States’ National Intelligence Council (NIC) and European Union’s Institute for Security Studies (EUISS)?  What color is the sky in your world, er, globe?

So, reader, is there a beacon flashing in your mind, “Orwellian. Orwellian. Orwellian…?” The term “global governance” may also be though of as an Hegelian (and Marxist) compromise, between thesis: international cooperation and antithesis: world government. For those that would like a summary of  Hegelian philosophy and it’s implications for Karl Marx, it is a way of establishing revolution, plus a way of observing reality,  then arguing impossibility, and then influencing people to believe they can “progress,” step by step, toward the unreal and impossible.

A bias for “world government” is apparent in this conflicted pseudodisclaimer, or they would not have admitted (as if forlornly kicking the dust with one shoe, hands in pockets) that “world government… would be virtually impossible for the foreseeable future, if ever.”

Your Sovereign expenditure of tax dollars at work, Sovereign Americans.

Exactly what entities orchestrated this?  Only the present US administration and that of the EU (which, by the way, are called “governments”)?  The major CFR, Bilder, Trilateralist, mega-financier, Marxist, fascist, and globalist movers and shakers down?  All, likely, of the above?  (Much of that list is redundant.)  Any others?

And, if this is what is published, what associated intentions, plans, and implications are they holding back, as objectives for their (our) 2025 benchmark/deadline?

More to be published about this, after further research.

---

by Arlen Williams & Tallulah Starr

Recommendation 666 is a reply from the WEU (Western European Union) to the Council of the European Union. The WEU told the EU, via. Reccomendation 666, that they would be the military muscle for the EU, and in the event of an emergency, the power of the 10 nation WEU would be directed by the Secretary General of the European Union, also known as the High Representative for the Common and Foreign Security Policy. The office of High Representative was created by a seperate EU legal document #666 in 1998.
The Western European Union members are All of them were members of both NATO and the European Union. These are the only nations that had full voting rights.

Belgium
France
Germany
Greece (1995)
Italy
Luxembourg
Netherlands
Portugal (1990)
Spain (1990)
United Kingdom
Ten Nations! These will replace NATO which will diminish U.S. involvement jeopardizing our interests, ie Israel and other free democracies.

Europe after NATO

It is inaccurate to suggest, as NATO partisans often do, that the only alternative to Atlanticism is a return to the dark ages of the interwar era: nationalized European defenses, American isolationism, xenophobia, demagoguery, and the other evils associated with the rise of Hitler and World War II. Former U.S. senator Malcolm Wallop (R-Wyo.) warns that weakening NATO will have dire consequences. "As we have thrice before in this dreadful century, [we will] set in motion an instability that can only lead to war, shed blood, and lost treasure. Pray that we are wiser."(4) Lawrence di Rita of the Heritage Foundation similarly defends NATO as an "insurance policy" against a future world war. "If keeping 65,000 young Americans in Europe will prevent 10 times that many new headstones in Arlington cemetery once the Europeans turn on themselves again--as they have twice this century--then it's a small price to pay."(5)

So once again when we see American power in Europe wane, her enemies will rise;and most people reporting and reading the news sense that the world is becoming an increasingly dangerous place. Neither the United Nations, nor American projection of power, have prevented strife or resolved major problems facing mankind. Few today realize that momentous and totally unexpected events lurk just over the horizon. Even foreign policy experts who see potential danger ahead admit they have no clear idea what the future holds. However, Bible prophecies reveal, in striking detail, sobering events that are about to unfold on the world scene.
Earth-shaking changes are going to catapult Europe—and Germany—back to the center of the world stage. These sudden and surprising developments will have grave implications for America, Britain and peoples of northwest European descent. These events are developing according to a plan, and for reasons, that God outlined long ago in the Bible. This dramatic turn in world events is prophesied to precede Jesus Christ’s return to Earth. You need to understand not only what is going to happen, but why. You cannot afford to ignore the direction in which world events are moving.

Jesus said, “Everyone who comes to me and hears my words and does them, I will show you what he is like: he is like a man building a house, who dug deep and laid the foundation on the rock. And when a flood arose, the stream broke against that house and could not shake it, because it had been well built. But the one who hears and does not do them is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. When the stream broke against it, immediately it fell, and the ruin of that house was great.” Luke 6: 47-49.

Luke 21: 34And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares.