Obama to Inherit "New Global Order" from Bush

The Journal of History Spring 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS

The Future

Obama to Inherit "New Global Order" from Bush

By Cliff Kincaid
Right Side News
November 12, 2008
http://www.infowars.com/?p=5937

The bankruptcy of Iceland, now receiving a $2.1 billion two-year loan from
the International Monetary Fund (IMF) "to support an economic recovery program," has been depicted as something that could never happen to America. Is the U.S. too big to fail? Or is the U.S. going through the same process, albeit on a slower basis?

Will we wake up to discover that America is now a bit player in a "New World Order" dominated by China, rich Arab nations, and international institutions?

The politicians from both major U.S. political parties are attempting, with the help of the media, to mask what is happening by passing what they call a financial "rescue" and economic "stimulus" packages. The word "stimulus"is sort of like "rescue." This is actually a process of piling up more debt and spending on top of more debt and spending. This puts us more at the mercy of those who decide to lend us money.

On November 15, the crisis goes global, as the Bush White House hosts an "international summit" designed, in the words of some of those participating, to create new "international financial architecture." This means increasing the power and financial resources of international agencies like the IMF, possibly by implementing global taxes on the U.S. and other nations.

Anticipating the event, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown says the current turmoil in the world economy offers a chance to build a "new global order" based on cooperation and opportunity.

Brown summarized his approach as "internationalist, interventionist, and progressive," says a release from his office.

And all of this is happening under a "conservative" U.S. President by the name of George W. Bush.

Editor's note: Bush is not a conservative. If he were a conservative, he would not have done what he did. Conservatives despise Bush. They uphold the Constitution. Bush committed treason. That is not upholding the U.S. Constitution.

Many of those attending the Washington, D.C. event will be associated with the Socialist International which issued a statement calling for the new international financial architecture to include a World Financial Organization. A World Tax Organization can be expected to follow. It has been on the U.N. drawing board for years.

The first meeting of the Socialist International Commission on Global Financial was held in Vienna, Austria, on November 3, and suggested "tackling the issue of insufficient financial resources in multilateral institutions and regional development banks by seeking new sources of funding and lending facilities, as well as more fundamental reforms in the global economic governance." This is bureaucratic doublespeak for finding new foreign aid money, possibly through a global tax, and cutting the U.S. down to size economically.

One of the key members of this Socialist International commission is Columbia University Professor Joseph Stiglitz, a "revolutionary" economist who was named by Miguel D'scoto, the new Marxist President of the U.N. General Assembly, to run a U.N. task force on international financial matters. Stiglitz, a key player in the emerging "New Global Order," wrote a Sunday Washington Post article urging more foreign aid spending, a new global warming treaty reducing U.S. use of energy,
and an expensive carbon tax on Americans.

On October 13, Stiglitz was among a group of economists meeting with Democratic politicians on Capitol Hill to devise their new economic "stimulus" plan. Obama says he wants this "stimulus" as soon as possible.

In a release from the World Economic Forum, Suzanne Nora Johnson, Senior Director of Goldman Sachs, USA, and a Trustee of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, declared that the Washington summit "gives us great opportunities to find solutions and new ways of looking at the world." Johnson says that, while there has been protectionist reaction" in the U.S. to sovereign wealth fund investments, as a result of the liquidity crisis there would now be greater openness to such deals.

Sovereign Wealth Funds are government financial entities based in China and several Arab/Muslim states.

In this context, the Center for Security Policy and other groups recently held a news conference to draw attention to how the Treasury Department is planning to implement aspects of Islamic banking in the U.S. In a release, the Coalition Against Shariah declared that, "It is especially alarming that the Treasury Department is now in a position to impose its submission to Shariah on the various financial institutions which it has bought in recent weeks or otherwise controls. With the nationalization of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, its purchase of-at last count-17 banks and the enormous leverage associated with its $700 billion slush-fund, Treasury can be an irresistible force should it actively promote Shariah-Compliant Finance."

The release notes with alarm that Assistant Treasury Secretary Neel Kashkari, the official charged with administering the bailout "slush fund," delivered the welcoming remarks at a November 6 Treasury event titled "Islamic Finance 101." It seemed designed to attract more Arab/Muslim dollars into the U.S. financial system.

It is apparently the Treasury's view that America's only hope in this financial crisis is to print more money through the Federal Reserve and attract more foreign money, especially from China and the Arab states. Perhaps the U.S. will even have to go to the IMF for financial help. Nothing can be ruled out at this point because no one seems to know how bad it will get.

But none of this will come without a steep cost. And we can see already that the cost will include not only our wealth, savings and retirement accounts, but the sovereignty of the United States.

Editor's note: Printing more money is the action that will destroy the U.S., because it places more debt on the people. History records that they did the same thing to Britain after WW II ended. That caused the British pound to decrease in value.