Zahir Ebrahim | Project Humanbeingsfirst.org
August 29, 2010
It was refreshing to read the entirely innocent of knowledge composition of August 24, 2010 on Forbes blog by Andy Greenberg, titled ‘Full-Body Scan Technology Deployed In Street-Roving Vans’. Most honest people would take sides – but not Mr. Andy Greenberg who refreshingly played dumb and dumber by staying neutral. He framed his conclusion thusly on a profoundly self-evident moral truth that is brazenly being subverted to achieve a “1984” like engineered police-state using the pretext of security: ‘What do you think? Do AS&E’s vans threaten your privacy? Do airport full-body scans? Or are either one–or both–a fair price for the security they could provide?’
Why is Mr. Greenberg so innocent of knowledge of the underlying raison d’être behind it which was even expertly presaged by Bertrand Russell over 60 years ago in these words: “World government could only be kept in being by force”? (see Impact of Science on Society, 1952, pg 37). Even Mr. Gideon Rachman at the Financial Times, Forbes’ competitive twin, glibly admitted to the impetus toward one-world government in his editorial almost two years ago (see Gideon Rachman, And now for a world government, Financial Times, December 8 2008 ). As did the new EU Council President, Herman Van Rompuy, in his 2009 speech in Brussels concluding the same thing as Gideon Rachman, that “We are living through exceptionally difficult times. Financial crisis and its dramatic impact on employment and budgets, the climate crisis which threatens our very survival, a period of anxiety, uncertainty, and lack of confidence. Yet these problems can be overcome by a joint effort between our countries. 2009 is also the First Year of Global Governance,”. Of course, the Council on Foreign Relations leads that effort with a Global Governance Monitor which tracks how much of the global management of the planet by its elite have been achieved.
Can Mr. Andy Greenberg not identify the role these multitudinous catastrophic threats have played in structurally ushering in all this Global Governance as the prelude to one-world government – which can only be kept in being by force, i.e., under police-state control? Perhaps he might recall the words of Richard N. Gardner of the Council on Foreign Relations who outlined the subversion processes for ending national sovereignty, in CFR’s Foreign Affairs in April 1974 in his article “The Hard Road To World Order”: “In short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up, rather than from the top down. It will look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault. Of course, for political as well as administrative reasons, some of these specialized arrangements should be brought into an appropriate relationship with the central institutions of the U.N. system, but the main thing is that the essential functions be performed. The question is whether this more modest approach can do the job. Can it really bring mankind into the twenty-first century with reasonable prospects for peace, welfare and human dignity? The argument thus far suggests it better had, for there seems to be no alternative. But the evidence also suggests some grounds for cautious optimism.” (pages 558-559)
When the profoundly innocent of knowledge are given soap-boxes as journalists and opinion makers, when stupidity is considered patriotic journalism by the establishment’s paymasters, it is surely unsafe to be intelligent. But equally, Mr. Andy Greenberg might further recall what George Orwell had noted, and had Winston Smith in the conclusion of “1984” speak to it even in his tortured state by correctly adding two plus two equal four and not five, that “in a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”
California, United States of America