Soini 2012: Kaikki jotka haastavat nykyisen pankkijärjestelmän ovat vaarassa. Ketkä muut ovat [hengen] vaarassa?
Kun perehdyt Q-liikkeeseen, ymmärrät paremmin sitä kaaosta mitä maailmassa juuri nyt elämme
Tutkiva journalismi on kuollut.
Mukavaa joulukuuta! Mitä löytyi joulukalenterin ensimmäisen luukun takaa? Meillä tuli adventtikynttilä ja pipareita kantava tonttu.
Trump was never running against Biden. He was running against voter fraud.
Kuinka helppoa ihmisten manipulointi on? Amazing Polly: THIS IS TOO IMPORTANT "You [who just want to be a good guy] don't want a world without people fighting for your freedom"
Globalistit onnistuivat: Enemmistö briteistä uskoo BLM-liikkeen lisänneen rotuvihaa
Ruotsin taru on niin lopussa: Ruotsin voimisteluliitto otti edistysaskeleen, kuka tahansa voi urheilla missä tahansa joukkueessa
Newsmax: kuinka se tehtiin - Asiantuntijat kertovat kuinka helppoa vaalit on varastaa, kun laskentaan käytetään koneita.
Juuri YT-kanavansa menettänyt ent. CIA, Robert Steele: Robert David Steele & Michelle Holiday Discuss Sidney Powell, Patrick Byrne, Election Fraud, & More Videolla mm:
Julians Rum: The Biden boot is coming (Toim: China-Biden valokuvattiin juuri "nilkkalääkärillä", ortosaapas peittää kätevästi vangin seurantapannan)
CBS: Joe Biden's doctor says he suffered "hairline fractures" in foot after he slipped while playing with dog
Tarvitsemme koronarokotteen ja pian - Ihmisiä kuolee 0.00001:täin!
Ja näin meiltä viedään sananvapaus: HS: Lainmuutos velvoittaa operaattorit estämään pääsyn vaarallisiksi arvioiduille sivustoille, etujärjestö huolestui ”epäselvästä” blokkauspykälästä
Pojat koronan vuoksi etätöissä: Fakhrizadeh assassination details:
Fraud may not be proven in the courts in time. That's why Rudy and Jenna are holding hearings in swing states to provide evidence of fraud. State legislatures can act on that evidence. They don't need an opinion from the courts.
Easiest path: Trump needs 3 more states. PA, MI & AZ have GOP legislators that are assisting with pubic hearings to expose election fraud. Those 3 states choose Trump electors instead of Biden electors. Electoral college win for Trump on Dec 14.
Qantas-lentoyhtiön pomo Alan Joyce saa kakun naamaansa koska haluaa covidpassin matkustajille (latasin 7:40, näkyy pian, twiitti aiheesta tässä)
Twitteristä: If American military were killed seizing servers from the CIA in Frankfurt, Germany, and those servers show clear evidence of electronic voter fraud in the 2020 US Election...do you know what that means? (Kohdassa 43:00 kenraali McInerney sanoo että hänen ymmärtääkseen yhdysvaltalaisia sotilaita kuoli tuossa [CIA:n vastaisessa] operaatiossa!)
Taloustieteilijä Tuomas Malinen: #Democracy is dying in #Finland , and across #Europe , due to the dishonesty surrounding the #RecoveryFund . Suomalainen demokratia on kuolemassa. Meidän pitäisi olla äärimmäisen huolissamme.
BBC maaliskuussa: Venezuela fire: Thousands of voting machines burned
Total deaths in USA by year:
TW: Another thing to add to the list of reasons to be very thankful today: “...even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away.” -SCOTUS
Michigan Filing: Exhibit 105 Countries/Groups Involved in US Election 2020 Access/Manipulation:
Vuoden 2019 Uuden-Seelannin moskeija-FF:stä analyysi: FALSE FLAG EVENT - THE CHRISTCHURCH SHOOTING
Tynkkynen (Video 5:23): Tämän vuoksi eroaminen Euroopan unionista on Suomelle paras ratkaisu pitkällä aikavälillä
Ekman: LOPPUA KOHDEN VAUHTI KIIHTYY
Maaseudun tulevaisuus: Lammastilallinen Yläneeltä ihmettelee, miksi Helsingin joulutorit on suljettu mutta ostoskeskuksissa tungeksitaan Black Fridayn tunnelmissa – "Vaikuttaako taustalla amerikkalainen ajatusmalli, money talks?"
Perussuomalaiset ovat esittäneet, että kielteisen turvapaikkapäätöksen saaneet otettaisiin säilöön maasta poistamista odottamaan. Koska hallitus ei ole toiminut tämän esityksemme mukaisesti, tämäkin saattoi tapahtua. (Re: IS: tänään: Vantaan henkirikos: Mies kertoi aikovansa tappaa useita kielteisten turvapaikkapäätösten takia)
"Trumpin" (tai tarkemmin sanottuna "Me Kansan") asianajaja Sidney Powell antoi ihmiskunnalle kiitospäivänlahjan: "Kanteen diippareita vastaan"
Tuomas Malinen: My dear people. This is what we have arrived to. Citizens petition demanding a referendum on the #recoveryfund has disappeared from the schelude of the Parliament of #Finland ! This is an outrage! We are not a democracy anymore!
TM jatkaa: Just talked with an expert of our Constitutional Committee. No one seems to have any idea when the MPs get to discuss on the petition! Maybe next year!
Valtamedia hiljaa FIXIT[istä]. Twitter FIXIT/järjestäjien tilit väliaikaisesti suljettiin. Face varoituksia FIXIT mainostamisesta. Vieläkö vitsit Pohjois-Koreasta naurattaa? SITÄKIN SUUREMALLA SYYLLÄ & ÄÄNELLÄ NYT LA 28.11 FIXIT VOL2 MIELENILMAUKSEEN!
Satanistien "varasto" hupenee hupenemistaan: Medicaid can be cut from Planned Parenthood in Texas, Louisiana, 5th Circuit rules (PP:stä sivullani tässä)
The corruption is everywhere. Not only will corrupt politicians be exposed. Corrupt judges & media outlets & Big Tech executives... Google, for example, is in big trouble if it can be proved they tried to meddle with a U.S. election
ITALY: CONFIRMED BY ITALIAN HEALTH SERVICE: False positives to Covid19 test as diagnosis are 95%. Legal cases started against testing under charges of fraud to procure public funding, false alarm, ideological false, and manslaughter
Ja sitten Ylen valeuutisia: Joe Biden saattaa tuoda Yhdysvallat takaisin Iranin ydinaseohjelmaa hillitsevään sopimukseen ("Roskalinkki" jätetty tarkoituksella pois)
I guess we can finally stop with the "but there's no evidence" bullshit. "In all cases the chain of custody was broken. It was broken for mail in ballots, the drop box ballots, the election USB flash drives. In all cases they didn't follow any procedures"
Praying Medic: What is Sidney Powell's "Kraken?" (Toim: Sidney uudelleentwiittasi, eli vahvisti, edellisen)
Miksi WHO:n juoksutyttö, THL:n matkailulääkäri Nohynek on jatkuvasti äänessä: Avoin viesti ylilääkäri Hanna Nohynekille - Kannattaako ottaa K-rokote?
IL: Tieteellinen skandaali: WHO:n politiikkaa ohjanneet koronatutkimukset perustuvat epämääräisen pikkufirman kyseenalaiseen dataan Tutkimusyrityksen palveluksessa on tieteiskirjailija ja aikuisviihdetähti
Ehdoton redpillausvideo Sorosia koskien:
Oma sivuni Sorosista tässä
Asianajaja Lin Wood: "I guarantee you the real vote was an overwhelming landslide for Donald Trump. The servers that were seized in Frankfurt a few days ago, from a company called Scytl. Those servers show the real vote. Trump won this election with 410 Electoral votes"
IPOT: B&W [Twitterin profiilikuvat mustavalkoisia, satanisteja?]
22.11: Today: Shanghai International Airport- two airport cargo employees test positive for Covid 19. Entire airport shuts down- no one can leave- 100,000 travelers are isolated and quarantined, waiting to be tested. (video from a friend who is there)
Soros ja Smartmatic (2016):
Mukavaa sunnuntaita: Bill Gates Is A Wanker (Coronavirus Song)
Ehdoton luettava (toksikologilta): New Strain? Or Antibody Dependent Enhancement? "Scientists have been trying to make coronavirus vaccines for decades and have not been successful. Previous SARS-CoV vaccines that they initially thought were successful because of the robust antibody production, turned out to make the disease worse when subjects were challenged by infection. So let’s look at antibodies."
Tri. Mercola (jolla oli 3M kuukausittaista lukijaa ennen kuin lääkefirmoja omistava Google "tuhosi hänet"): First COVID-19 Vaccine 90% Effective?
Antti Heikkilä: Ralf Ludwig, juristi ja fiksu mies esitti, että pandemia on ohi
Argenta FB:ssä: Berlin [15/11?], thousands of German Patriots, without masks, attempt an assault on Parliament: they are protesting against the Covid restrictions. Clashes with the police.
Daily Mail: What they DON'T tell you about Covid: Fewer beds taken up than last year, deaths a fraction of the grim forecasts, 95% of fatalities had underlying causes... and how the facts can be twisted to strike fear in our hearts
Rokotevalmistajien vastuuvapaudesta (phe.gov)
Takaportti tietokoneeseesi: Intel Management Engine - Vorhies selittää seuraavassa:
Edellisen voit lukea myös tässä (Oma Word-dokumenttini)
CNN: President Trump hasn’t answered a question from reporters in 17 days!
Sidney Powell: He doesn't need to. He already decided to #ReleaseTheKraken He can sit back with popcorn and watch the show
Praying Medic Retweeted: Smoking Gun: Dominion Transferring Vote Ratios between Precincts in PA. - By: Edward Solomon
Georgia eilen: Georgia certifies Biden's win
Vaalikomission johtaja uskoo vilpin mahdollisuuteen: FEC Chairman: Trump campaign bringing 'legitimate accusations' of election fraud to court
Mitä jos Covidissa onkin kyse jostain rokotetta suuremmasta?
World Economic Forum twiittasi 3 päivää sitten:
Artikkeli aiheesta: Special Operations Leader to Report Directly to Acting Defense Secretary
Oikea media (artikkeli suomeksi): Keep calm - Trump will expose massive voter fraud
Sidney Powell: Maailma seuraa sitä mitä Yhdysvalloissa tapahtuu [vaalipetosten suhteen]
South Australia Police [vastaa kansalaisen kysymykseen]: Hi Andrea, You cannot leave the house to walk the dog or to exercise.
Ent. Pfizer pomo twiittasi: Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine deliveries could start 'before Christmas'
Trump twiittasi QAnon-Ronin haastattelun! (Ron oli vaaleihin asti 8kunin, QAnonin käyttämän alustan, webmasteri)
"CIA" Steele: "Dominion temppu" tehtiin myös "5 Eyesissä" ja Saksassa + NSA:n top hakkeri ja ent. tech-pomo Binney muutaman apurin kanssa löytää NSA:n tallenteista pahisten kaikki "pankkikuprut" 30 päivässä
Praying Medic: - Jos käyt lääkärissä sinut kirjataan Covidiksi : It's flu season. Most of us are carrying the virus. If we were tested, we would likely test positive, even if we had no symptoms. Hospitals now have mandatory testing. Come in with back pain and test positive for the flu, and you're now a covid admission.
1 esimerkki tuhannesta: A fourth county in Georgia finds counting error. “we forgot to upload one memory card from one precinct”
Yrittääkö satanisti-Macron pelastaa nahkansa: French President Emanuel Macron Slams U.S. Mainstream Media: ‘Legitimizing’ Violence
Report from @OANN : Raw data from a server seized by US Army forces appears to show Trump won by a landslide with as many as 410 electoral votes.
Tuoreen tanskalaisen tutkimuksen mukaan Covidmaski ei hyödytä käytännössä yhtään:
Edellisen lähde NYT
Twitteristä: South Australia will enter a six-day "circuit breaker" COVID-19 lockdown overnight that'll see schools, bars and restaurants close, only 1 person per household permitted to leave home each day and exercise outside [is] banned
IPOT: KRAKEN (Itse Krakenin selitys alkaa kohdassa 15:30)
Ben Swnn (Video 8:47): CEO's GRILLED over Whistleblower Evidence of De-platforming Collusion Between Big Tech
WEFfin tuore twiitti "The Great Reset" (salaliittoteoria!):
Tässä todellinen ilmiantaja joka kertoo Covidhuijauksesta: Pfizerin ent. varatoimitusjohtaja (Twittertili tässä):
Englannin terveysviranomaiset peräänkuuluttavat softaa, joka prosessoisi suuren määrän koronarokotteista aiheutuneita haittavaikutuksia:
Alkaako pato murtua? Del Bigtree: UK EXPECTS ‘HIGH VOLUME’ OF COVID VACCINE ADVERSE REACTIONS
Oma sivuni rokotteista: totuusrokotteista.fi
Yhdysvaltojen partiolaiset konkurssiin johdon pedofilian vuoksi: Nearly 90,000 sexual abuse claims against Boy Scouts filed in organization’s bankrupcy case
Twitteristä: Schumer saying Biden can cancel first $50,000 in student debt via executive order. And will do so in first 100 days. This will change so many lives.
Praying Medic vastasi: The Great Reset:
Trump twiittasi tyyliin pari vuotta sitten että ikuiset ovat nyt loppu: New Pentagon Top Adviser Wants US Troops Out Of Syria “Immediately”
On se Marinkin joskus saanut sanoa mitä ajattelee:
Twitteristä: Eikös Johnsonilla ollut jo se tauti [Covid]? Miten rokote voi antaa immuniteetin, jos taudin sairastaminen ei anna? IL: Boris Johnson altistui koronalle - joutui karanteeniin
Jussi Halla-aho: "Macronin mielestä median uutisointi siitä, että Ranskan ongelmien taustalla on maassa vallitseva rasismi ja islamofobia on tulkittavissa islamistisen väkivallan oikeutukseksi." Meillä samaa tekevät median lisäksi ministerit.
"Meidän mielipiteemme" saa kyytiä: Yle: Tuntuuko hankalalta, kun joku on eri mieltä? Yle ryhtyy parantamaan suomalaista keskustelukulttuuria
Suursiivous jatkuu (911-kuva):
Sota on vasta alkuvaiheessa, mutta:
If you feel hopeless, seriously, withdraw from the field. Spend the next month off of Twatter and read Revolutionary War literature.
Hernarit ja muutama hyvä kirja ostoslistalle: Biden task force member: 'We are entering this period that I call COVID hell'
Tässä pähkinänkuoressa CNN (shit): President Trump just arrived at his golf course.
Moni poliitikko suojelee pedofiileja: Mr. Wiener, your bill, SB145, protects child molesters from being forced to register as sex offenders. As a mother of three children, parents deserve to know who has abused children.
Tanskassa miekkaroidaan "yhdeksättä päivää" pähkähulluja pakkorokotuksia vastaan: Law that "would be able to define groups of people who must be vaccinated. People who refuse the above can be coerced through physical detainment, with police allowed to assist."
Aiheesta yksi versio: EXPLAINED: What is Denmark’s proposed 'epidemic law' and why is it being criticised?
Yhdysvalloissa Posti lakkaamassa jakamasta Trumpilta/republikaaneilta tullutta postia?: Orders To Stop Delivering @realDonaldTrump And Republican Mailings - "The only mail that will be delivered from now(Nov 9) on will be for that of the winner [Biden]"
Sidney Powell: The evidence will show that #Dominion and #Smartmatic were created for the precise evil purpose of rigging elections for corrupt rulers. And the companies are foreign owned, created with communist money.
NYTIMES (Oct 29, 2006): “The concerns about possible ties between the owners of Smartmatic and the Chávez government have been well known to United States foreign-policy officials since before the 2004 recall election...”
Q 2018: Net will be paused:
RAW AUDIO of USPS Investigators Interrogating USPS Whistleblower Richard Hopkins Released … Investigators Use Intimidation Tactics to Sway Hopkins Away From Original Version: ‘I Am Trying To Twist You’ … ‘I Am Scaring You Here’
Enoch: Where have I heard that military is the only way forward before? - Sidney Powell: This should be investigated by military intelligence for its national security implications
Julians Rum: If the local authorities won’t step up, I don’t see any other way than the Military.
Partiolupauksesta poistettiin sana "Jumala" (Toim: Kommunistit ovat ateisteja)
Christian streaming service Pure Flix being bought by Sony Pictures (Toim: So they can destroy it?)
Video (1:38): Narrative control. Mind manipulation.
28 STATES send election results to a remote server in Frankfurt, Germany, according to election security expert Russell Ramsland. The servers are based on SCYTL software, exposed by MIT Tech as having the ability to switch votes, "UNDETECTED."
Muistatko tämän (September 12, 2018): [Trump] Executive Order on Imposing Certain Sanctions in the Event of Foreign Interference in a United States Election
Kommunismi vs. Covidismi:
Mitä pohjoismaiden Wikipedian sivut sanovat tänään Trumpista 2020 presidentinvaaleihin liittyen: Suomi - Suht neutraali, Ruotsi - Ei mitään, Norja - Trump hävisi. Vertailun vuoksi englanninkielinen sivu:
Facebook poisti Trumpin tililtä presidentin tittelin:
More than one MILLION marchers for president @realDonaldTrump descend on the swamp in support.
JoeM: The Spanish election manipulation company behind #Dominion software was RAIDED by a large US ARMY force in Germany during which they SIEZED servers!
Sorosilla näppinsä taikinassa: Soros-connected Vote-counting Firm Expands in U.S.
Praying Medic selittää CISAa (USA:n "kyberturvallisuusvirastoa"):
Video (0:31): CNN compares Trump to Nazis purging Jews
”Perkele, sika, v***u” – Oulun kaupunginvaltuuston kokous lähti pahasti käsistä - IS:n artikkeli tässä
Remix-versio edellisestä tässä (Huippubiisi!)
Haaviston seikkailuja vai votosoppia?
Edellinen Bitchutella tässä
Miksi meille ei kerrota totuutta rokotteista - Jakso 1/7 - Osa 1/2 (Osa 2 puuttuu vielä)
Erikoislääkäri Mikko Paunio:
Dr. Mercola: Why COVID-19 Testing Is a Tragic Waste
5G:stä: Who is spreading misinformation?
Oma sivuni 5G:stä tässä
Twitteristä: Mamu hakkasi vihreiden ex-puoluesihteerin lähes hengiltä. Ilmankos valtamedia ei ole kertonut tätä:
Moni asioista perilläoleva on sitä mieltä, että netti mahdollisesti suljetaan (ainakin jossain päin maailmaa ja ainakin joksikin aikaa) hyvin pian, todennäköisesti juuri ennen kuin Trump julistetaan virallisesti vaalien voittajaksi. Netin tilan näet livenä tässä. ( Tuon sivuston mukaan "normikatkoksia" on maailmalla n. 11.000/tunti, Yhdysvalloissa n.6.500/tunti.)
WTF: The official Twitter account for ICE appears to have disappeared
Ben Swann (Video 7:58 ): 20,000 Pennsylvania Mail-In Ballots have "Impossible" Return Dates
Trump varoitti vuoden 2018 twiitissään vaalivilpin tekijöitä:
Praying Medic selittää eilisessä videossaan mm. äänten uudelleenlaskentaa
The absurd amount of "settings" on the Dominion Voting Software is off-the-charts. If I was a local IT guy, I could probably setup the voting machine to give myself an elected position without ever being on any ballot or running any campaign.
Näin diipparit kommunikoivat:
Praying Medic eilen: Regarding the election, the fake narrative has been defeated. Trump has hinted that evidence of fraud is coming. If social media platforms intend to hit the kill switch, that would be an opportune time. Only cable news left? Who controls? Emergency Broadcast System? Mayday
Internetin tilaa voit seurata tässä
Sikiöbisnes on valtava. Yhdestä sikiöstä voidaan maksaa kymmeniä tuhansia euroja. Kuka hyötyy aborteista?Massachusetts Dems Push Radical ROE Act: Abortions Until Birth, Care Denied to Baby Survivors
Lisää aiheesta sivustollani tässä (hakusana abort tai parenthood)
68% yhdysvaltalaisista oli vuonna 2014 sitä mieltä, että vaalit ovat vilpillisiä. Biden’s choice for chief of staff, Ron Klain, agreed that American “elections are rigged” in 2014 tweet:
10.11:2020: The [New York] Times Called Officials in Every State: No Evidence of Voter Fraud (Toim: The Ochs/Sulzberger Family wants you to relax & rest easy)
Praying Medic: Create accounts on other platforms. But POTUS needs Patriots on Twitter now, more than ever. Our assignment is to refute the false narratives of the mainstream media. Digital soldiers do not leave the field of battle.
Catholic Family News: Open Letter to President Donald Trump
Foxin Ingraham: From Trump's 'America first' to Biden's 'America last.
Englannissa: 40% want politicians to take coronavirus vaccine first [before citizens] to prove it's safe (Toim: Suomessa voitaisiin aloittaa pääministeristä ja poliitikoista ja rokotteet arpomalla kansalle suunnatuista eristä)
DailyMail kysely: Otatko rokotteen heti kun se on saatavilla? 52% ei ota:
Onko mielesi avoin? Vaikea aihe hyvästä lähteestä - Ent. CIA, Nobel ehdotettu, vuoden 2012 presidenttikandidaatti Robert David Steele haastattelee Kerry Cassidya (Video 31:05): Secret Space Force, Extraterrestials, Near Future
Tutkiva journalisti Ben Swann (Video 11:56): Election Fraud is NOT a Conspiracy, Credible Allegations of Fraud in Nevada
Janus Putkonen: Verkkostudio LIVE: "Kaikkien värivallankaappausten äiti"
Laillisten vaalien 33 periaatetta:
Hups! Bidenia ei olekaan vielä valittu presidentiksi: Video (3:26): BIDEN LOSES PRESIDENT-ELECT STATUS AFTER PENNSYLVANIA WIN RIPPED FROM HIS GRASP
Hesarin artikkeli tässä.
CNN tyypillisesti valehtelee:
Ekman: Värivallankumous USA:ssa (Tai Bitchutessa)
#maidengate is currently trending at #9 on Twitter in the United States
Ennen kuin otat koronarokotteen, suosittelen perehtymistä rokotteisiin. Oma sivustoni: totuusrokotteista.fi
Edellinen kuva: "70 prosentissa tutkimuksia emme pystyneet selvittämään eturistiriitoja puutteellisen yksityiskohtien raportoinnin vuoksi.
Noin 15% tutkimuksista oli hyvin suunniteltu ja toteutettu."
Todella arvostetun lääketieteellisiä julkaisuja julkaisevan Lancetin ent. päätoimittaja:
Jos haluat lisää esimerkkejä juuri tapahtuneesta vaalivilpistä USA:ssa, katso Dustin Nemosin uusin video (7min 2x nopeudella) BTW: Puolustusministeri Esper taitaa olla maanpetturi (kohdassa 13:00).
Juho Lyytikäinen: Onnittelut ilmiantajille
Election fraud punishment -haku Googlessa:
CNN:ällä menee pasmat sekaisin kun Biden saa yht'äkkiä 110.000 ääntä:
Trump & Co. (patriootit) virittivät taas kerran ansan demokraateille (globalisteille); vaalivilppiin varauduttiin ja se dokumentoitiin huolella. Korkein oikeus käsittelee vilpin ja pian vaalit ympäri maailman ovat pitkästä aikaa oikeasti demokraattiset.
MSM: There's no evidence to support claims that election observers were blocked from counting rooms.
TOP DOC CONFIRMS: COVID IS OVER Thousands of doctors around the world are saying: the pandemic is over. So, why is Europe headed for a second lockdown? Dr. Yeadon believes …
The Mueller investigation was a scam.
Impeachment was a hoax.
The plandemic was a psyop.
The election was rigged.
Biden was the phoniest presidential candidate in history.
Everything about the Democrat political machine is fake.
Twatterini pelittää taas:
More real vote map as of 8/11/2020:
Linkit edellisiin kuviin:
Twatter lukitsi tilini vuorokaudeksi 8/11 kello 21:47 (And I have no idea why):
Hyviä uutisia: Vähemmän valeuutisia? - CNN.com on pukannut minulle jo monta päivää ilmoitusta"sivustoon ei saada yhteyttä":
Trumpin twiitit sensuroidaan saman tien:
HS: "Trumpin puhe täynnä valheita":
Juho Lyytikäinen: Kaik männöö minne männöö mut kulje sie omii polkujas
8/2020: Ministeri Lintilä: Teollisuuden tilauskirjat tyhjentyneet ja konkurssiaalto uhkaa – ”Rahalla ei ole kysyntää” [Venäjän] kansantalous jatkaa dynaamista kehitystä ja kasvua ... Globalismille uskollinen Ministeri Lintilä katsoo vain länteen eikä tarjoa ratkaisua Suomen talouden imeytymiselle lännen ”mustaan aukkoon”.
Tässä postaus aiheesta:
Ekman: Vaaleja ja vilppiä
Ekmanin kanavat tässä
Ilmiantajia ei jätetä yksin (Yhdysvalloissa potkujen saannin myötä menee usein sekä jo tienattu eläke että sairausvakuutukset) - 90.000 dollaria jo lahjoitettu:
Muistutus siitä kuinka sairas tuo mies on: New Yorkin kuvernööri Cuomo televisiossa nännikorut näkyvissä:
SidneyPowell discusses that 3% of pre-election digital ballots may have been changed digitally. The Scorecard & Hammer software were likely accessed by dem operatives to change votes. She says it's part of a federal filing.
Tässä esimerkki siitä kuinka ylimielisiä mediajätit Yhdysvalloissa ovat - ME julistamme vaalivoittajan:
A #USPS employee was arrested and charged after being stopped at the US-#Canada border this week with undelivered mail, including #AbsenteeBallots. The charge carries a maximum penalty of 5 years in prison and a $250,000 fine.
Julians Rum just tweeted: I’m expecting the “my fellow Americans” tweet from POTUS sooner rather than later.
IPOT: GO TIME (min 25:30 - All ballots were watermarked with QFS-blockchain encryption code)
Highwire (video 6:33): IS A EUROPEAN LOCKDOWN COMING TO AMERICA?
Dailymail: There IS another way to beat coronavirus ... we need to find a way out of the mess that does no more damage than the virus itself ... Our strategy would be to tackle the four key failings. We must address the problems in the Government's mass testing programme; we must tackle the blight of confused and contradictory statistics; we must make real efforts to protect and isolate those who are vulnerable; and we must inform the public about the true and quantifiable costs of lockdown (as if they needed telling).
David Icke (video 26:38): PROOF THAT 'COVID LAWS' ARE THE SYSTEMATIC DEMOLITION OF THE HUMAN PSYCHE (PLEASE SHARE)
Juuri nyt: Ruotsalainen "terrorismitutkijatrutheri" Ole Dammegård varoittaa mahdollisesta (feikistä?) terrori-iskusta kello 16:32 (ruotsinaikaa) tänään: VIKTIGT! Varning för potentiell terrorattack idag. DELA VIDARE SNABBT.
DJT ja CB (ChinaBiden) pissing contest:
JoeM ennustaa tulevaa:
Hyve: Once again, James and his team do it again. Proving to the Dems and the world that #VoterFraud is real. I'm sure they have plenty more.
Yazka: 5.11.2020 Live
Vaalipetoksesta uutisia twittertililläni
Senaattori McCain teloitettiin maanpetoksesta - Kansanedustaja televisiossa:
Video myös tässä
Käsittämättömiä pellejä meillä ministeriöissä: "Sisäministeriö ilmeisesti tarkoituksella rapauttaa kansalaisten luottamusta" - Sisäministeriö veti hatusta ”EU:n vihapuheen vastaisen päivän"
Kaliforniassa ainakin käytettiin vesileimaa äänestyslipukkeissa:
Praying Medic News (The whole 21min video Is numbercrunching)
"Yhdysvaltalaismedia lähtikin kilpaa tukemaan Bidenia, kuten se teki viime vaaleissa Clintonille. Bidenin takana laskettiin olevan ainakin 119 tiedotusvälinettä, Trumpilla niitä oli kuusi." Otsikoita ja lainauksia suomalaisista lehdistä:
DJT twiittasi: Detroit Absentee Ballot Counting Chaos, Blocked Windows and Observers
Reuters: European police in coordinated raids against online hate speech
4.11.2020 "Ääntenlasku ja vaalivilpinpaljastuspäivä" - The Great Awakening continues:
Oma sivuni vuoden 2016 vaalivilpistä tässä. (Yksi vaalivilppikeinoista on painaa omia äänestyslipukkeita, ongelma niissä on se, että niitä tulee helposti lisättyä liikaa "oikeiden" joukkoon. Esimerkiksi siksi monissa äänestyspiireissä ääniä on joskus enemmän kuin äänestäjiä)
Biden sai KAIKKI "viimeiset" äänet! (Matemaattisesti kuinka mahdollista?) Nothing to see here:
Bidenin äänten hyppy, esimerkki 1:
Bidenin äänten hyppy, esimerkki 2:
Twitter poisti tämän Trumpin linkkaaman twiitin (mutta löytyy kuvakaappauksena kommenteista):
Yksi syy vaalivilppiin on se, että Trump taistelee lastemme turvallisuuden puolesta:
Ekman: Trump: "Me voitimme."
Toim: Katsottuani Foxin "tulospalvelua", totesin seuraavaa; Trump on todennäköisesti voittanut 18:ssa osavaltiossa ("ylivoimainen" johto), ja Biden yhdeksässä. Kuvakaappaukset: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9
Mellakoita odotettavissa - Antifan terroristit aikovat naamioitua patriooteiksi/poliiseiksi:
Kello 9:24 Äänistä on vielä "pieni" osa laskematta, mutta: Onnea Presidentti Trumpille toiselle kaudelle!
Praying Medic: Trump has an insurmountable lead in Georgia, North Carolina, Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. These states should be called. POTUS is closing the gap in Arizona. The only way Biden wins is by cheating.
Q: 4/11 saattaa olla kyberiskuja tulossa:
Praying Medic to China Joe: You're not going to win Michigan or Wisconsin. You have no path to 270.
POTUS Wins Kentucky (by praying medic)
Fox live here
Praying Medic retweettasi: ALERT: #Florida #Republicans have expanded their lead to 212,411 votes. This includes all votes cast. Data per FL GOP GOTV Tracker.
Joe Biden’s lead vanishes in four swing states, according to poll aggregator In Iowa, Georgia, North Carolina and Ohio Joe Biden’s lead may have disappeared
Missä Trump? :
Miksi Biden haluaa venyttää lockdownia:
CNN: Cov is BS(?):
Suosittelen (20.00-21.00 Jarmo Ekman 21.00-22.00 Blokkimedia):
Uutispäivitys kello 8:25:
Aika moni demokraatiksi rekisteröitynyt taitaa äänestää Trumpia:
Draft Kings Election Pool: Majority in 49 States Predict Trump Victory "Democrat panic appears to be the emerging theme"
PrayingMedic: Trump's rush to get a vaccine available is his way of providing a medically defensible reason not to lock us down again. Biden and the media's push to delay a vaccine will be used to justify more lockdowns and institute The Great Reset (= A plan to destroy private businesses through lockdowns, implement government healthcare, guaranteed minimum income, debt forgiveness, contact tracing, forced vaccinations, and a state of permanent lockdown.)
Infosodankäynnin keinot - Termit selitettyinä:
Robert David Steele postasi: Illuminati Control Pyramid:
2.11.2020 - 1 päivä historian tärkeimpiin vaaleihin "This is not about R vs. D. This is about preserving our way of life. If America falls, the World falls. Patriots on guard." Q
Ekman: Valon lasten voitto
Parents of Brain-Injured Child Sue Pesticide Maker for ‘Selfish, Greedy, Malicious’ Manipulation of Science Corteva (formerly Dow) hit with second lawsuit in less than 30 days over pesticide linked to brain damage in children.
YouTube peak concurrent viewers for the @realDonaldTrump rally in Rome:
AWK:n uusin: Victory is NEAR! God is in CONTROL!
1.11.2020 - 2 päivää historian tärkeimpiin vaaleihin "This is not about R vs. D. This is about preserving our way of life. If America falls, the World falls. Patriots on guard." Q
Put down the hopium pipe ja katso tämä tuore missdanaashlie.com:in video (Muistathan että on olemassa pieni mahdollisuus, "tämä kaikki" onkin osa suurta psy-oppia, ja että Q ja DJT ovatkin diippareiden "marionetteja")
Edellinen video myös tässä
Dailymail: National security nightmare of Hunter Biden's abandoned laptop containing phone numbers for the Clintons, Secret Service officers and most of the Obama cabinet plus his sex and drug addictions - all secured by the password Hunter02
Express: Poll: Donald Trump set to win US presidency by electoral college landslide - By voters 48 % vs. Joe Biden 47% - Electoral college by 326 to 212 - Would shock the world even more than his astonishing defeat of Hilary (sic) Clinton in 2016.
DJT vs. Biden rallies 31/10:
Hunter Biden's Laptop is on the Ballot . . including "Mobile numbers for former President Bill Clinton, his wife Hillary and almost every member of former President Barack Obama’s cabinet"; NEW: Hunter Biden's Laptop Is "National Security Nightmare"
Eiliseen postaukseeni liittyen - En olisi liian huolissaan Suuresta Resetistä, vaikka mahdollisesti pian tuleva koronarokote todennäköisesti tuleekin olemaan ihmisen terveydelle todella, todella haitallinen:
AWK:n tuore video selittää mm. sitä, miksi "vaalikyselyt" ovat harhaanjohtavia (mm: demokraatit pelkäävät Covidia ja äänestävät mielummin postitse): Americans LOVE FREEDOM! We will WIN BIG!
Aussi-Sky (video 2x n. 4min): US media beginning to notice a ‘clear path to victory’ for Trump
Iinteresting Tweeet froom Truump 30/10:
Me: iiindictments coming?
"Kaikki" Valkoisen talon ympäristön rakennukset on "levytetty" ("BLM:ien") mellakoiden varalta:
Leftist protest groups plot election day coup aided by the Democrat Party, Federal employees & Intelligence contractors. - They plan to shut down & take over Washington D.C. starting Nov. 4th until inauguration day to force Trump out of the White House (tai tässä)
Päivän nauru - CNN: Joko käytit "lemmikkimuurahaisesi" covid-testissä (Toim: DS:n täytyy saada Covidluvut ylös)
Mutta ehkä vielä parempi on tämä (Kun klikkaat linkkiä, tulee CNN.com "suljettu". Koitin usean minuutin ajan):
JUST IN: Burlington County pastor arrested&charged with “coaxing underage boys to send him nude photos&videos, then using that material to blackmail them into performing sexual acts on themselves for his enjoyment”
31.10.2020 - 3 päivää historian tärkeimpiin vaaleihin "This is not about R vs. D. This is about preserving our way of life. If America falls, the World falls. Patriots on guard." Q
Kenraali Flynn twiittasi eilen: Former Apostolic Nuncio to the US, Arch Bishop Vigano’s open letter to President Trump warns of a ‘Great Reset’ plot to destroy humanity. “It is not surprising that the enemy is angered at being discovered... undisturbed.” Read his letter here
Suomalaisia truthereita eliminoidaan eri alustoilta. Tässä back-upeja:
Jyrkiltä tärkeä viesti (video 9:25): Tärkeä viesti välitettäväksi
AWK:n tuore video: Flood of INFO exposes MSM! Lies are not working anymore!
Q postasi linkin tähän: Wtf?—@PolitiFact rates it “mostly true” that the pro-police thin blue line flag is actually an “anti-Black Lives Matter” flag:
Edellinen artikkeli tässä
Ja sitten tuli Espanjan vuoro herätä: Spain is Rising up - They have the police on the run & it’s time too
Mellakkasuunnitelma valmiita: Exclusive–Leaked Document: Leftists Fear Trump May Win Minnesota, Plot Post-Election ‘Mass Mobilization’
Antifa people can just say "I'm press!" and be let off the hook LAPD just sent out this memo detailing how interactions w/members of the media should be handled during protests/unrest. Media credentials will NOT be required, and “the inability to produce ID does not preclude an individual from acting as a member of the media.”
MSM paniikissa - Hunter-todisteet huijausta: MSNBC’s Ruhle: Hunter Biden Allegations Have Been ‘Debunked’
Bobulinskiä yritetään salata kuin Neuvostoliitossa ennen vanhaan: FNC’s Carlson: Media Handling of Bobulinski-Hunter Biden Saga ‘Soviet-Style Suppression of Information’
"Biblical": Gmail vaihtoi satanistien vapaamuurarilogonsa (satanistien alunperin käyttämään) "sateenkaarilogoon": Google is replacing its iconic Gmail envelope logo with a design that’s a lot more in keeping with other Google products.
AWK:n tuore video: Standby! MINNESOTA Red WAVE is HERE! Winning!
Nykin ent. kaup. joht. "anti-mafia" Rudy Giulianin tuore video: CENSORED: Here Are The Crimes They Are Hiding From You
30.10.2020 - 4 päivää historian tärkeimpiin vaaleihin:
Näin absurdilandiassa - Lukijan pitää selvittää ennen jakoa onko uutinen totta! : Jakoi FB:ssä uutislinkin käräjäoikeus tuomitsi - Tuomitun Mika Rannan kommentit (Toim: Uutisella oli 10.000 jakajaa x 500 Euroa = 5 miljoonaa afgaani "uhrille")
UMV:n artikkeli tässä
DOJ officials confirm Hunter Biden and his business associates are currently under ACTIVE criminal investigation by the FBI The investigation has been ongoing since 2019 and may include his father, Joe Biden. Where is the media?
There is a presidential election going on, and a (Biden) crime family with enough evidence to put them all away for life, but twitter wants you to know that Fear Porn and Hollywood are the topics of choice for you.
James Woods: The great thing about Democrat criminals is that they always manage to incriminate themselves on video or audio. Listen to this recording of bagman #HunterBiden discussing his woes. This is grand jury material here, folks
Avaa seuraavat kuvat hiiren oikealla näppäimellä:
Muistatko tämän: Oikeusministeriön (koordinoima?) videon alapeukkuhuijaus:
Wikileaks: CIA osti (lue:ostaa) toimittajia:
Mistä FB sai alkunsa:
EOW: Communism seeks to make one’s personal property the property of the state. Every communist regime has said the same thing—socialism’s goal is communism.
Kommunismista lisää sivullani tässä
Video Twitter-ketjusta tässä
29.10.2020 - 5 päivää historian tärkeimpiin vaaleihin:
Since Labor Day President Trump has entertained nearly 360,000 supporters at his rallies and speeches. During the same period former Obama Vice President Joe Biden has entertained around 637 supporters at his events.
Suomen Uutiset rikkoi HB mediahiljaisuuden Suomessa: Liikekumppani vahvistaa: Joe Biden oli mukana poikansa Kiina-diileissä
Ent. kansanedustaja, psykiatri Turpeinen-Saari:
OANN Chief White House Correspondent: I now have possession (sans photos), of the #Biden Hard Drive. It is the @fbi’s DUTY to directly address and inform the American people what it has known about the BidenCrimeFamily for years.
Look at all those people (Arizona 28/10):
Samuli Perälän tuore video: Aikamme suurin taistelu on käynnissä - Osa 1/3
Globalistikommunistit haluavat vetemme: Suursijoittaja Keva tähyää Suomen vesiverkkoja – Veden hinnassa on nousupaineita
Blokkimedia suomensi: Sensuuri on irti | Valkoisen talon lehdistötilaisuudet 15.-20.10.2020
C-span televisiokanava: Facebook, Google & Twitter Execs Testify on Social Media Regulations
PrayingMedic suosittelee että suojaat tiedostosi nyt (elämme jänniä aikoja): “Back up your data” — download everything you can from every service that matters to you, and keep an offline copy too. In a Faraday bag if you have a modest budget and want all plausible risks covered off.
Project Veritas: 1,200,000+ views in 3 hours and @Twitter is doing everything imaginable outside of literally shutting our account down to slow the spread of this video.
Jalkapallotähti - ja hänen miljoonat seuraajansa - tietävät että Covidtestit ovat hevonpa*kaa: Juventus vs Barcelona: Cristiano Ronaldo says ‘PCR IS BULL****’ after third positive coronavirus test
Vapaamuurareiden historiaa: FROM TEMPLARS TO FREEMASONRY
28.10.2020 - 6 päivää historian tärkeimpiin vaaleihin:
Trutherit keräsivät USD130K ja haastoivat YT:n oikeuteen: 15 QAnon influencers sue YouTube for removing their content from the platform
Trumpille naurettiin kun hän sanoi, että Kaliforniassa lämpötilat laskevat pian. Nyt: A RECORD LOW TEMPERATURE OF -26 DEGREES WAS SET AT LARAMIE TODAY. THIS BREAKS THE OLD DAILY RECORD OF -16 DEGREES SET IN 2011.
Jordan Sather: Q turns 3 tomorrow! They grow up so fast!
"Meidän perheessä" otamme 100 mikrogrammaa/päivä: Report: 80% of COVID patients in hospital had Vitamin D deficiency
Jr.:We went from 75,000 flu deaths last year in America to almost 0. Does anyone actually believe that? Or do you think there may be allocation games being played to manipulate the truth?
Trumpin rallissa Bidenin "kannattajia":
Hunter Biden and Devon Archer were planning to launder $500 MILLION from Kremlin asset. US Sanctions prevented the LEGAL transfer... so they worked a way around the sanctions. $35 mill. was “tester” amount. Biden partner: “There’s so much more.”
PrayingMedic ketju: 16-vuotinen suunnitelma Yhdysvaltojen tuhoamiseksi
Bidenin kampanja lässähtänyt – Tapasi muutamia kannattajiaan kotinsa lähellä [Video] - Fox: Biden melusi 30 minuuttia tyhjälle parkkipaikalle
Älä hulluja puhu! Kaupunkeja maan alla? Hoitoon! IS: Yhdysvaltain armeija kaivoi Grönlannin jäätikön alle kaupungin 1950-luvulla – jää sulaa saastuneen paikan yläpuolelta
Aftonbladet listaa lehdet jotka tukevat Trumpia 26/10:
EOW: 1/ Let no one forget that the current leaks of criminal & illicit activities of US polit. figures are those of a CCP operation. There is no scenario where they did this because anyone in that regime is a hero & wants to end the CCP. This is an op. Thread
Trump the Trolling King: The WiFi password the PRESS had to use at President Trump's rally last night in Wisconsin was "WhoBuiltTheCagesJoe?"
Biden campaign insider (?):
Onkohan Englannissa hulluja lääkäreitä: Oxford coronavirus vaccine is to get approval ahead of Christmas so it can be used for medics and the elderly BEFORE final trials are finished
Tässä oma listani: Yle, IL, IS, HS, AL, SK, TS,...
Trump: Joe Biden called me George yesterday. Couldn’t remember my name. Got some help from the anchor to get him through the interview. The Fake News Cartel is working overtime to cover it up! (Video tässä)
We were told initially that the premise for lockdown was to ‘flatten the curve’ and therefore protect the NHS from being overwhelmed.
It is clear that at no point was the National Health Service (NHS) in any danger of being overwhelmed, and since May 2020 covid wards have been largely empty; and crucially the death toll from covid has remained extremely low.
Their aim: To end all lockdowns ... and to re-establish universal health determinance of psychological and physical wellbeing for all humanity.
Mustat muuttaneet mieltään Trumpin suhteen - Rasmussen Reports: National Daily Black Likely Voter Job Approval For POTUS - October 19-26, 2020:
Uusi Nobelin rauhapalkinnon Trumpille antamisen syy: U.S.-Armenia-Azerbaijan Joint Statement
USA on ollut sotatilassa vuosikaudet. Loppuuko sota kohta?:
Miksi hesari ei uutisoi?:
Anti-Trump protesters rip flags off vehicles part of the #JewsForTrump vehicle convoy. Throw red paint on vehicles, punch Trump supporters.
Junes Lokka: Tästäkin Saska tai @mikahentunen voisi kertoa kuinka heidän toverinsa hyökkäävät juutalaisten kimppuun, repivät lippuja, sotkevat autot maalilla ja lyövät ihmisiä eli suvakit niitä aitoja antisemitistejä ja pitäisi muutenkin laittaa kaikki vankilaan
Bannon Twitterissä: Forget the Hunter Biden sex tapes. The real news is much bigger than that. The big news is that Communist China owns #JoeBiden; Joe Biden sold out CIA assets in #China who were then executed or imprisoned
Biden taas kellarissa? Uskomatonta, että hän kuulosti ajoittain jopa järkevältä VIIMEISESSÄ (!) vaaliväittelyssään (klooni?):
"Trumpin" Papadopoulos: Biden has no planned events for the next 9 days leading up to the election
Kauppalehden 180? : Pandemia on pian ohi – jos Joe Biden voittaa
EOW posted: Mr. Lude on Parler is releasing all of the Hunter Biden evidence. Warning: not for the faint of heart. Mr. Lude:
Biden on call with Poroshenko, threatens his “physical security” if he doesn’t push the privatbank (of whom had been used to transfer $3.5m to Hunter Biden) to closure as it could mean the president investigating details ‘tween Biden and Ukraine!:
Kansanedustaja kommentoi sitä, kuinka media kieltäytyy uutisoimasta Bideneiden rikoksista: The media went through Brett Kavanaugh’s yearbook and childhood calendars but won’t go through Hunter Biden’s laptop?
Pidetään Suomi Suomena: Joe Biden Promises A Pathway To Citizenship For 11 Million Illegal Immigrants
Ekman: Senaattoriehdokas Lauren Witzken mukaan Hunterin tietokoneella on kuvia senaattori Chris Coonin tyttärestä ja 7:stä muusta alaikäisestä. Coonin 13-vuotias tytär oli yksi lapsista, joita muistamme Joen lähennelleen v. 2015 senaatin virkaanastujaisissa.
Mistä ruotsalais-kiinalainen propagandamediamme uutisoi juuri nyt? (Spoiler: Ei mistään millä olisi jotain merkitystä)
Muistutus siitä mikä on oikeasti FB:n takana (klikkaa auki oikeanpuoleisella napilla):
JoeM ("kaikkien truthereiden" arvostama patriootti) tuuttasi: Joe Biden, head of an international money laundering crime family, most likely had his wife and child murdered. His two sons, Hunter and Beau were injured. This means he tried to kill Hunter also. No wonder the kid ratted out his dad
Kiinan tiedustelupalvelut (ja Kiinan kommunistipuolue) saavat "laillisen" pääsyn kaiikien meidän "salaisuuksiin" Kiinalaisen Huawein avulla. Moni maa on jo sanonut tuolle hulluudelle ei, viimeisimpänä Italia:
Edellisessä on yksinkertaistettuna kyse siitä, annetaanko Kiinalle kaikki, siis todella kaikki tieto meistä vai ei. 5G:n avulla Huawei saisi kerättyä tuota tietoa, ja Kiinan lain mukaan joutuisi luovuttamaan tuon tiedon valtiolle (Kiinan kommunistipuolueelle). Jos et ole perehtynyt siihen, mitä kaikkea tuolla tiedolla voidaan sinunkin manipuloimiseksi tehdä (eikä nyt ole kyse mainoksista ja ostamisesta) suosittelemme katsomaan seuraavan videon: Maailman synkimmät salaisuudet
Uutisiani Kiinaa koskien kymmenittäin tässä (hakusanat: kiina, china)
Tässä muutama linkki suosittujen sensuroitujen patrioottien tileille:
Twitteristä: There are only a few good ones left there [at Fox]: Hannity, Tucker, Ingraham, Gutfield, Dobbs, Watters, Pirro, Bartiromo, Hegseth
Vaalitentissä tänään Buy-den valehteli: "En ole koskaan sanonut että vastustan vesisärötystä", johon DJT vastasi sanomalla että postaa tuon valheen paljastavan videon aiheesta. Video tässä.
Dailymail: Hunter Biden was paid $3.5 million by Russian oligarch...
Fact Check: Millions of insurance plans were cancelled due to Obamacare, but Biden says nobody lost their plans
JoeM buustasi Gabillä:
A Chinese Whistleblower claimed on September 24th that three hard drives had been mailed to the DoJ.
These hard drives contained, essentially, all the blackmail the Chinese had on Hunter Biden, as well as blackmail about US Congressmen, Xi's financial assets, a pedophilic sex tape involving Hunter Biden, and the Chinese plan to take over the US and the UN.
This [tuutattu] video was recorded on Sept 24th and published on September 30th. (Video tässä)
Mukavaa perjantaita! Ohjelmassa "tänään":
Bidenien rikollinen kartelli selitettynä alle minuutissa tässä
PM: Senate Judiciary approves the SCOTUS nomination of Amy Coney Barrett. A full Senate vote is scheduled for Monday the 26th. Barrett was nominated by POTUS on September 26th. [Done in 30]
50 Cents will vote 4 DJT:
Muutaman tunnin sisään putoaa uutispommeja:
Q eilen: BOOMS EN_ROUTE TOMORROW.
This is not a drill.
PrayingMedic: What motive would the media have for gaslighting the public into thinking Biden has a massive lead when he does not? - Newsweek: Trump loses lead in Texas, where Democrats haven't won since 1976
Fox: Laptop connected to Hunter Biden linked to FBI money laundering probe FBI, DOJ agree Hunter Biden emails were not Russia disinformation
Twitteristä: Elämme parodiatodellisuudessa. Opettajalta on juuri irroitettu pää opetustyössä esitetyn kuvan takia, ja HS murehtii onko Ranskan presidentti puhunut rumia
Halla-Aho: Media on rummuttanut surutta - ja yleisen käytännön vastaisesti - rikoksesta epäillyn nimeä ja naamaa. Nyt olisi ehkä anteeksipyynnön paikka? - STT/IL: Tero Ala-Tuuhonen ei ole enää epäiltynä murhan yrityksestä
Fox's Ingraham on Twitter: Your Daily Reminder: Every reporter and talking head in DC knows that Biden is a puppet for rich people, that a lot have ties to the CCP, and that his family made a fortune as a result.
ensin viimeisiksi: ”Ilmiöpohjaista työskentelyä” – Sisäministeriö tekee parhaansa laittomien siirtolaisten aseman parantamiseksi
Bilderberg/EVA:n Matti Apunen YLE:n hallituksen puheenjohtajaksi Globalistit kiristävät otettaan Suomen valtamediasta
Supreme Court turns away PA GOP effort to block extended period for turning in ballots - Pennsylvania will be able to accept and count ballots up to three days after the Tuesday election
Kenelle maskinaamamarionetti oikein heiluttaa?
Twitteristä: Follow the money! In the next few weeks, the attacks on Republican Senators or candidates will increase. Heavily funded by George Soros.
Dutchsinseltä tuli todella hyvää materiaalia jo kymmenisen vuotta sitten. Nyt hän "erikoistuu" maanjäristyksiin. Tutustu ja vedä omat johtopäätöksesi: Very Large Earthquake M7.5 and Tsunami Warning in Alaska (Jos YT sulki: dutchsinse.com)
Seuraavilla videoilla nähtävien dokumenttien aitoutta ei ole tiettävästi pystytty vielä vahvistamaan, ja meitä varoitetaan feikeistä dokumenteista tämän tästä, mutta aihe, adrenokromin tuottaminen, on todellinen, ja hirvittävä ongelma:
Yazka Lovelta tuskallista aihetta käsittelevä video (ei heikkohermoisille): [Tuoreet] Adrenokromivuodot ja dokumentit
Oma sivuni adrenokromista (lapsista kerättävä eliitin huume) tässä
Edelliset dokumentit voit ladata tässä
Twitteristä: Ei sanaakaa islamista, terrorismista tai jihadista. Yle= taattua propagandaa. "Tuhannet kokoontuivat kunnioittamaan surmattua opettajaa Pariisissa – Ei ajattelun totalitarismille"
Giuliani Shows New Hunter Biden Evidence ON AIR! Ent. NY:n kaup. johtaja antoi Foxin pomon tutkia materiaalin aitouden - Huoltokuitissa Bidenin allekirjoitus
Nuhakuumeluvut tänä vuonna "nollissa":
Twitteristä: Kaikki yhä muistaa, kun Stubb servasi Trumpin:
Yle tänään: Rikollisjengi julisti tukholmalaislähiöön ulkonaliikkumiskiellon – tutkija: osoitus rikollisten suuresta vaikutusvallasta alueella
Suosittelen kaikille: Pedo-asiantuntija Shaun Attwoodin video (hänen oma kanavansa on blokattu) jossa käydään läpi ”nettipedofilian” eri muotoja, pedofilian normalisoinnin keinoja, jne. Tästä ”K-13” -videosta on poistettu "häiritsevä kuvamateriaali": THE DARKEST NET - Episode 1 With Shaun Attwood
Lisää pedofiliasta omalla sivustollani pedogate.fi (pizzagate.fi)
Redpill-materiaalia: CIA-Nobel-Robert EOW:n vieraana: Robert David Steele: NSA, CIA and FBI Illegal Domestic Operations
U.S. Attorney Huber: Federal charges filed in 3 recent Utah child pornography cases. “The Smith investigation is the third disturbing child pornography case that U.S. Attorney for Utah John Huber’s office has filed in recent weeks.”
James Woods: Americans lined up for hours to see President Trump. A Biden rally can’t fill a strip mall parking lot
Q postasi: Just saw for myself a behind the scenes look at the #HunterBiden hard drive: Drugs, underage obsessions, power deals…
Without you [isänmaalliset anonit], collectively, there would have been no way to bypass their control.
Toim: Liity meihin. Tutki ja jaa.
Voitto kulku jatkuu - Äänten oltava perillä marraskuun 3. päivä: A Michigan appeals court overturned an extension that allowed absentee ballots to be received two weeks after Election Day, ruling that the votes must instead be received by 8 p.m. on Nov. 3.
YOUTUBE PURGE - LATEST LIST:
Totuus Osama Bin Ladenista tuli esiin, Obama, Biden, Hillary ja kumppanit **sessa. Tässä pari tuoretta videota, joissa selitetään aihetta:
Näyttää siltä, että Bidenin presidenttihaaveet ovat historiaa. Kuka tilalle? Tuleeko vaaleja? Elämme mielenkiintoisia aikoja.
Presidentti Niinistön puhe Uutisia, tiedonvälitystä ja informaatiosotia -mediaseminaarissa 15.10.2020 on ylistyspuhe Britannian yleisradioyhtiö BBC:lle. Samaan aikaan brittipoliitikko Nigel Farage tuomitsee BBC:n yrityksestä pimittää Joe Biden -skandaali
Twitteistä: Quite extraordinary moment in France this morning... The homes and offices of France's health minister and director general of health have been searched by police as part of a judicial enquiry into the government's handling of the #coronavirus pandemic
Kyllä se postiäänestys hyvä on: Key battleground states don’t require signature-matching on mail-in ballots
Ja hyväähän postiäänestyksessä on myös se, että äänesi kulkee tavallisen postin joukossa todella pitkän matkan, jonka matkan aikana tuhansilla epärehellisillä (lue: lahjotuilla) postin työntekijöillä on mahdollisuus poimia ei-toivotut (merkatut) äänet pois ja heittää ne roskiin.
Oletko koskaan nähnyt DJT:n tanssivan? Tässä tuore taidonnäyte.
Agenttimme maailmalla: Britit rakentavat “kansalaismediaa” Syyriassa (osa 1) ENSIMMÄINEN OSA LÄNSIMAISTA INFORMAATIOSOTAA JA TERRORISTEILLE ANNETTUA TUKEA KÄSITTELEVÄSTÄ, BRITTIHALLITUKSEN ASIAKIRJOIHIN PERUSTUVASTA USEAN ARTIKKELIN SARJASTA.
Trump edellisellä videolla: "Uinuvalla Jounilla [Sleepy-Joe] oli vaalitilaisuus tänään eikä käytännössä kukaan ollut kuulemassa."
Biden Cincinnatissa 12.10.20: Speaking to 20 local DemoRats:
Todella hyvä paketti -Davidsson kertoo siitä, missä mennään: Globalistien tappio - Jukka Davidsson, Me Kansa
Todella huono paketti by Huhtasaari: Mamupaketti
Ekman 2018: Valheen tummat vedet
Ei ole mikään salaisuus, että "diipparit" haluavat meidät kaikki suurkaupunkeihin, joissa karjaa on helpompi manipuloida. Tässä aiheesta: Tynkkynen tylyttää keskustan täysin maaseudun alasajosta - keskustakansanedustajat hiiltyvät salissa
Kuinka ja miksi Yle meitä maalittaa (video 25:47): YLEISRADIO TROLLITEHTAANA
Crimes against Humanity "Viikossa miljoona katsonutta" (video 49:00) - Reiner Fuellmich, a German lawyer, is one of four members of the German Corona Investigative Committee ... international network of lawyers ... the Corona Fraud Scandal ... probably the greatest crime against humanity ever.
Blokkimedia (15:17): Älä pelkää koronaa | Valkoisen talon lehdistötilaisuudet 3. - 6.10.2020
Joko "live BB:t" Guantanamosta pian alkavat? Guantanamo detainee trials could be broadcast online thanks to House measure
"Kaikki sinunkin tekstarisi ja mailisi" tallentanut NSA saattaa pian käydä twattereiden (Twitter, FB, Google...) kimppuun: NSA Tackles 2020 Election Security
Tiihonen (PS): Mediapooli uhkailee ja ohjailee somevaikuttajia
Kelkka kääntyi: WHO warns against COVID-19 lockdowns due to economic damage
Ei Yleltä ihan sitä mitä pitäisi, mutta sinne päin - MOT: Näin europaja taikoo miljardeja tyhjästä
Q postasi "juuri" lukuja Covid-kuolemiin liittyen:
Halla-Ahon tuore twiitti (ketju): 1/ Elämme varmaan jonkinlaisia lopun aikoja. Intersektionaaliset feministit ovat vallassa, mikä näkyy mm. siten, että...
Kyllä se postiäänestys hyvä on (tämänlaisia uutisia tulee nyt joka päivä): Ballots Found in Trash Cans in California
Huippubiisi: Trilluminati - Ylikansallinen Kusetus
Tämä selittää sitä, miksi Trump saattaa olla "kadoksissa": Robert Steele: POTUS Assassination Threats: 4 Human Teams (Ho Hum), One Domestic Scalar Electromagnetic Energy Hit
Robert haastattelee kansalaisjournalistia, joka on 10 vuoden ajan työskennellyt WikiLeaksin (ja Julian Assangen) kanssa, ja joka parhaillaan seuraa paikanpäältä Assangen oikeudenkäyntiä Lontoossa: Julian Assange Update: Juan Luis Reports from the UK Courtroom
Ihmiskauppabisnes on 150 miljardia/vuosi Yhdysvalloissa (Kasvoi Obaman aikana - 2011: 30 miljardia):
Mitä Trump on tehnyt asian eteen? Tässä.
Miksi lahjoitukset Clintoneille "loppuivat" kun Hillary hävisi Trumpille?
Nevada on 7. osavaltio, jossa HCQ-kielto perutaan:
"Viimeksi" koronavirusrokote tappoi, kun rokotettu altistettiin virukselle:
Näin normalisoidaan pedofilia:
... Ja kuten tapana on, rokotevalmistajan ei tarvitse vastata tuotteensa aiheuttamista vahingoista:
Patent: Craft using inertial mass reduction device:
Yhdysvalloissa ennätysmäärä salaisia syytteitä - "Parissa vuodessa" yli 200.000 (5.000/kk). "Normivuosi" ennen Trumpia oli 1000/kk:
Missä Ruotsin kaikki Covid-kuolleet:
Kanadassa Covidkuolemat vs. "normi-influenssakuolemat":
Yhdysvalloissa yli 10 vuotta sitten kuolleille lähetetään äänestyslipukkeita:
James Woods postasi kuvan Bidenin "suuresta yleisöstä":
Onko Trumpilla "Covid", koska Hillaryn pidätys on ovella? [Now is the right time] To get her:
Aina mahtavia videoita tekevä IPOT selittää Haitia tässä. Haiti on todennäköisesti yksi tärkeimmistä ihmis- ja lapsikaupan keskuksista ja Clintonit on tiukasti linkitetty Haitiin (Hillaryn veli omistaa kultakaivoksia Haitissa - lapsia kuljetetaan tunneleita pitkin laivoihin) Teen jonkinnäköisen lyhennelmän videon sisällöstä lähipäivinä.
Yazkalta kaksi todella mielenkiintoista haastattelua:
Päivitys 6.1.2019: Q 6/1: https://www.foreignassistance.gov/explore�
Why, for decades, has the UN encouraged donor countries to contribute 0.7% of their gross domestic product (GDP) on foreign aid?
The corruption (infiltration) at the top (WW) has spread like cancer.
Listen again, carefully.
The Great Awakening.
Robert Steele (Ihmiskauppakomissaari): Onko Unicef satanistinen organisaatio, joka pitäisi ajaa ulos Yhdysvalloista?
Päivitys 7.11.2018: Raportti: YK:n palkkalistoilla 3300 pedofiilia - 60 000 raiskausta Lue myös: UNICEFin sairaat bileet joissa kerättiin rahaa lapsille
Päivitys 16.1.2017: 15.1.2017: Sata lasta syyttää YK:n rauhanturvaajia raiskauksesta Eikä tämä ole ensimmäinen kerta
Dokumenttielokuva The UN Deception. Suomenkielisen käsikirjoituksen voit lukea täällä. Osa 1 (kesto 10 minuuttia):
Tässä ote Pekka Lahtisen vuonna 1994 kirjoittamasta kirjasta Maailman Yhdentyminen. Koko kirjan voit lukea täällä:
Ensimmäisen maailmansodan jälkeen maailmaa yhdistävät taustavoimat yrittivät saada aikaan kansainvälisen hallituksen Kansainliiton (League of Nations) avulla. Kansainliiton toi rauhanomaisen yhteistyön nimessä julkisuuteen Yhdysvaltain presidentti Woodrow Wilson apunaan hänen neuvonantajansa eversti House. Kansainliiton peruskirja astui voimaan yhdessä Versaillesin rauhansopimuksen kanssa vuonna 1920. Kansainliittoon liittyivät monet maat mukaan lukien myös Suomi. Wilson, House ja salainen valtaeliitti kokivat kuitenkin nöyryyttävän takaiskun Yhdysvaltojen kieltäytyessä jäsenyydestä. Sen seurauksena Kansainliittomenetti mahtinsa. Vähitellen siitä tuli yhä heikompi, kunnes se lakkautettiin vuonna 1946. Sen sijalle tuli YK, joka myös peri Kansainliiton varat. YK on maailmanjärjestö, joka virallisesti pyrkii säilyttämään kansainvälisen rauhan ja turvallisuuden. Lisäksi se yrittää ratkaistapoliittisia, taloudellisia, sosiaalisia ja kulttuurillisia ongelmia. YK:n säännöt muotoiltiin San Franciscon konferenssissa keväällä 1945. Paikalla olleet Yhdysvaltojen valtuutetut olivat käytännöllisesti katsoen kaikki ulkomaansuhteiden neuvoston eli CFR:n entisiä, sen hetkisiä tai tulevia jäseniä. Säännöt astuivat voimaan 24.10.1945. Rockefellerin suku hankki YK:lle maa-alueen New Yorkista, minne sen päämaja rakennettiin vuonna 1951. Rockefellerin paneeliselostus vuodelta 1958 sisälsi lausunnon: "YK on lopulta symboli maailmanjärjestykselle, joka tullaan rakentamaan jonakin päivänä." YK ilmoitti toukokuussa 1974: "Me YK:n jäsenet julistamme juhlallisesti yhdistyneen päätöksemme tehdä hellittämättömästi työtä uuden kansainvälisen taloudellisen järjestyksen perustamiseksi." CFR:n johtajistoon kuuluva C. Douglas Dillon, joka toimi valtionvarainministerinä presidentti Kennedyn aikana, on todennut: "Tulee viemään aikaa ennen kuin ihmiset tässä maassa kokonaisuutena ovat valmiita luopumaan olennaisesti itsenäisyydestä maailmanlaajuisten ongelmien ratkaisemiseksi. Tulee kehittymään maailmanlaajuisia viranomaisia mahdollisesti YK:n tai vastaavien järjestöjen välityksellä." 1950-luvulla, jolloin Yhdysvallat oli hyvin kommunismin vastainen, YK:n palveluksessa todettiin olevan paljon kommunisteja. Kommunistinen puolue myös tuki YK:ta. Entinen kommunistisen puolueen johtohenkilö Joseph Z.Kornfeder paljasti vuonna 1955 tunnistavansa, että YK:n "suunnitelma" on kommunistinen. Hän oli ollut melkein kolme vuotta Moskovassa kommunistisen puolueen päämajassa, missä hän oppi heidän toimintamallinsa. YK:n taustavoimat eivät koskaan aikoneet tehdä siitä rauhanturvajärjestöä, vaan valtavan Troijan puuhevosen. Kornfeder on sanonut: "YK:n sisäinen rakenne, kommunistisesti suunniteltu, on sosiologisen valloituksen malli, malli joka on tarkoitettu palvelemaan kommunismin tunkeutumista länteen. Se on nerokas ja petollinen." Toimittaja William F. Jasper on tutkinut YK:ta perusteellisesti ja sanookin kirjassaan "Global Tyranny - Step by Step" (Maailmanlaajuinen sortovalta - Askel askeleelta): "CFR on täysin luonut YK:n ja suunnitellut, että siitä lopulta tulisi kaikkimahtavan maailmanhallituksen työkalu." Jasper on monen muun tutkijan ohella myös todennut, että YK:n ja sen alajärjestöjen antama kehitysapu on itse asiassa aiheuttanut paljon enemmän tuhoa kuin hyötyä kehitysmaissa. Samat yksilöt ovat käyttäneet samoja tuhoavia menettelytapoja lukuisissa kehitysmaissa samoin traagisin tuloksin. Ja hyödyn korjaavat aina samat yksilöt ja järjestöt. Miksi YK:n ulkomaanapuviranomaiset eivät opi virheistään? YK:n toimia Somaliassa on arvosteltu hiljattain. Lehdet kirjoittivat otsikoissaan, kuinka YK rikkoo ihmisoikeuksia, Amnesty arvosteli YK-sotilaita, YK:n helikopteri tulitti siviilejä jne. Klaanipäällikkö Mohamed Farah Aideedin syytteet somalien kansanmurhasta saattavatkin pitää paikkansa. Asiaan toi odottamatta valoa uutinen Radio Suomen Aamunpeilissä 9.12.1993, jonka mukaan Somalian nälänhätä oli voitettu jo ennen YK-joukkojen väliintuloa. Operaation sanottiin tapahtuneen USA:n sisäisten pyrkimysten takia. Uutisraportti perustui vastajulkaistuun kirjaan "Operaatio Somalia", jonka ovat kirjoittaneet suomalainen toimittaja Peik Johansson ja somalialainen toimittaja Abdulcadir Mohamed Diesow.
Hankin kyseisen kirjan ja suosittelen sitä kaikille, jotka haluavat lukea suomenkielellä paljastuksia YK:n likaisesta pelistä Somaliassa sekä siihen liittyvistä harhaanjohtavista uutisista maailman tiedotusvälineissä. Kirjan mukaan Somalia-operaatio on esimerkki YK:n täydellisestä fiaskosta. YK ei ollut edes yrittänyt ratkaista ongelmia humanitäärisesti ja poliittisesti. YK:n toimesta tapettiin ja kidutettiin lukuisia siviilejä. YK:n sotilaat pommittivat myös täynnä potilaita ollutta sairaalaa, jolloin yli 60 somalia sai surmansa ja sadat haavoittuivat.
Kirjoittajat sanovat olevan monia syitä Yhdysvaltojen Somalia-operaatioon kuten syksyllä 1992 käyty presidenttipeli USA:ssa. Johansson ja Diesow mainitsevat kirjassaan myös todellisen syyn operaatioon: "Yhdysvallat on puhunut "uudesta maailmanjärjestyksestä" ja nyt oli helppo paikka todistaa maan kiistaton maailmanpoliisin rooli." Johansson ja Diesow eivät kuitenkaan ole ainoita, jotka ovat arvostelleet YK:ta Suomessa. Tekstikombinaatti Paavo Haavikko, Tuomas Keskinen ja Kimmo Pietiläinen julkaisivat joulukuun 1993 alussa ajankohtaiskirjan "Tässä sitä ollaan. Optimistinen arvio", jossa kirjoittajat paljastivat näkemyksensä YK:sta: "Martti Ahtisaari on kasvanut järjestelmässä, jonka koko olemassaolo on tarkoin harkittua propagandaa ja sitä seuraavaa päätöntä toimintaa muiden maksamin kustannuksin, jotka tahtovat jäädä velaksi. YK:ta ruokitaan kuin käenpoikasta, liian vähän." Aamulehti kirjoitti 9.4.1993: "Yli 7500 ammusta löytyi torstaina Bosnian saarrettuun pääkaupunkiin Sarajevoon pyrkineestä YK:n avustusrekasta, kertoivat YK-lähteet torstai-iltana. Kätkön löysivät tiesulkua vartioivat serbit. Löytö oli paha arvovaltatappio YK:lle, joka on kiistänyt serbien aikaisemmat väitteet avustuskuljetusten mukana olevista aseista." Kuinka rauhanturvajoukoilla voi olla aseita avustusrekassa? Tämä kirja on jo antanut ja tulee antamaan vielä yksityiskohtaisemman vastauksen.
Study Memorandum No. 7
A WORLD EFFECTIVELY CONTROLLED BY THE UNITED NATIONS
A Preliminary Survey of One Form of a Stable Military Environment
Lincoln P. Bloomfield
Prepared for IDA in support of a study submitted to the Department of State under contract No. SCC 28270, dated February 24, 1961
The judgments expressed in this Study Memorandum are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Institute for Defense Analyses or of any agency of the United States Government
Special Studies Group
INSTITUTE FOR DEFENSE ANALYSES
1710 H Street, N. W.
Washington 6, D.C.
March 10, 1962
This paper was prepared for project VULCAN, a study of Arms Control and a Stable Military Environment, which was made by the Special Studies Group of IDA for the Department of State under contract No. SCC 28270, dated 24 February 1961. Dr. J. I. Coffey was the Project Leader.
The author, Dr. Lincoln P. Bloomfield, a consultant to the Special Studies Group, has written extensively on the role of the United Nations in international politics. He is Associate Professor of Political Science and Director of the Arms Control Project at the Center for International Studies, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Judgments expressed are of course those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Institute for Defense Analyses or of any agency of the United States Government.
JAMES E. KING, JR.
A world effectively controlled by the United Nations is one in which "world government" would come about through the establishment of supranational institutions, characterized by mandatory universal membership and some ability to employ physical force. Effective control would thus entail a preponderance of political power in the hands of a supranational organization rather than in individual national units, and would assume the effective operation of a general disarmament agreement. While this supranational organization — the United Nations — would not necessarily be the organization as it now exists, the present UN Charter could theoretically be revised in order to erect such an organization equal to the task envisaged, thereby codifying a radical rearrangement of power in the world.
The principal features of a model system would include the following: (1) powers sufficient to monitor and enforce disarmament, settle disputes, and keep the peace —including taxing powers — with all other powers reserved to the nations; (2) an international force, balanced appropriately among ground, sea, air, and space elements, consisting of 500,000 men, recruited individually, wearing a UN uniform, and controlling a nuclear force composed of 50-100 mixed land-based mobile and undersea-based missiles, averaging one megaton per weapon; (3) governmental powers distributed among three branches so that primary functions would exist in some recognizable form in a bicameral legislative organ, an executive organ, and an expanded international judicial network; (4) compulsory jurisdiction of the International Court for both legal disputes and legal aspects of political disputes; (5) approximately 130 political subunits, all nominally independent states, within the system; (6) continued jurisdiction over cosmetic affairs by the national governments; and (7) unrestricted international inspection of all states against violation of the disarmament agreement, with permament (sic) inspection of nuclear research and power equipment, strategic areas and industries, administrative policies and operations, and other key and strategic points in the national economy.
The system of representation in the legislative body of the model government would have to include all the constituent units, with the voting procedure reflecting the relative size, power, and standing of the units. In the absence of individual veto rights, legislative power would be exercised on a weighted basis which acceptably combined population and capacity to contribute to the power of the system. No less important, and of crucial practicality in the effective operation of the model government, would be the financial problems. Finally, underlying the whole enterprise must be a realistic comprehension of the historical requirements for peaceful change.
Clearly, the structure of the model itself can be perceived more easily than the fundamental building blocks of consensus and community which would have to underlie it; although, should such a system ever come into being, it would thenceforth have its own inner dynamic. It is, nevertheless, the question of feasibility which is central to the realization of this model order: it may be unattainable when needed, and unneeded when attainable.
This paper is part of a larger study of Arms Control and a Stable Military Environment. We sketch out one particular form of a stable military environment — "a world effectively controlled by the United Nations," that is to say, by supranational institutions instead of primarily by national governments as at present.
The notion of a "UN-controlled world" is today a fantastic one. That it is even thought of as a hypothetical framework for politico-military planning grows, curiously enough, out of contemporary doctrines on arms control. Political scientists have generally come to despair of quantum jumps to world order as utopian and unmindful of political realities. But fresh minds from military, scientific, and industrial life, as they focus on the increasingly irrational arms race, have sometimes found the logic of world government — and it is world government we are discussing here — inescapable.
The details of international political control have rarely been made explicit in American disarmament positions. The 1946 United States plan for the international control of atomic energy assigned the international agency managerial control or ownership of "all atomic energy activities potentially dangerous to world security," plus "power to control, inspect and license all other atomic activities." To carry this out would have required extraordinary powers at the center. But it was still a distance from that to the political control of the world as a whole implied in the present topic. Throughout the sixteen-year negotiating period, even when programs were advanced for drastic reduction and limitation of armaments, there is no record of any concrete suggestion or even mention of a supranational political organization which would "effectively control" the world.
However, recent exchanges in the great power dialogue have reopened the larger political question. On September 19, 1959, Chairman Khrushchev announced to the UN General Assembly his plan for "general and complete disarmament" within four years. The American response was given by Secretary of State Herter on February 18, 1960, in a speech to the National Press Club. Mr. Herter said that the first goal of the United States in the forthcoming disarmament negotiations was the creation of a "stable military environment." To create such an environment he urged certain arms control actions, such as measures to guard against surprise attack and to curtail the spread of nuclear weapons.
The second stage of Mr. Herter’s counterproposal was that of general disarmament. Two American objectives existed within the disarmament stage. First, the creation of universally accepted rules of law, backed by a world court with effective means of enforcement — "that is, by international armed force." The second objective was disarmament itself — "to the point where no single nation or group of nations could effectively oppose this enforcement of international law by international machinery."
The theme set forth by Mr. Herter was carried into the two proposals made by the United States in the spring of 1960, on March 15 and June 27. Under the latter proposal an International Disarmament Control Organization would be established within the framework of the United Nations in the first stage of disarmament. The second stage would include progressive establishment of an international peace force within the United Nations sufficient to preserve world peace under disarmament. The September 1961 US proposals follow the same pattern.
Here, then, is the basis in recent American policy for the notion of a world "effectively controlled by the United Nations." It was not made explicit, but the United States position carried the unmistakable meaning, by whatever name, of world government, sufficiently powerful in any event to keep the peace and enforce its judgments.
This paper is an attempt to sketch out the possible contours of such a system, followed by a discussion of the difficulties attending an enterprise of this nature. The question of feasibility seems so overwhelming in today’s world, and the common answer on the part of politically sophisticated people so invariably negative, that it may be wondered why the exercise is undertaken at all. It has three justifications. On policy grounds, it would be well to spell out with greater precision that to which this country has committed itself. On heuristic grounds, it may be worthwhile to apply analytical methods to a problem commonly approached on the basis of hunch alone.1 Finally, there is always the possibility that sophisticated people will turn out to have been wrong.
Some definitions and boundaries are needed of a "world effectively controlled by the United Nations." "World" means that the system is global, with no exceptions to its fiat: universal membership. "Effectively controlled" connotes government attributes — a relative monopoly of physical force at the center of the system, and thus a preponderance of political power in the hands of a supranational organization rather than in individual national units. "The United Nations" is not necessarily precisely the organization as it now exists. In theory a radical rearrangement of power in the world could be codified through revision of the existing UN Charter (as in the Clark-Sohn Plan); or a new constitution could be designed. Finally, to avoid endless euphemism and evasive verbiage, the contemplated regime will occasionally be referred to unblushingly as a "world government."
The model described below is obviously but one of many possible forms. Equally obviously, it is susceptible to almost infinite variation. But in general, this is what "a world effectively controlled by the United Nations" might look like.
A limited would government has powers sufficient to monitor and enforce disarmament, settle disputes, and keep the peace. All other powers are reserved to the nations. It possesses enforceable taxing powers to finance its political organs, its disarmament policing agency, and its international military force, which includes a nuclear component. The nations are disarmed to police levels.
The international force, balanced appropriately between ground, sea, air, and space elements, consists of 500,000 men, recruited individually and wearing the UN uniform. It controls a nuclear force consisting of 50-100 mixed land-mobile and undersea-based missiles, averaging one megaton per weapon. The land force is stationed and deployed in territorial enclaves equitably allocated among continents and areas, for minimum temptation and likelihood of seizure by any single nation.
Government powers are distributed to three branches. Without assuming that the Anglo-Saxon mold would necessarily be imposed on the new system, it can be assumed that primary functions would exist in some recognizable form, that they would be to some degree separated, and that each would be carried on through some appropriate organs or agencies.
A bicameral legislative organ is empowered to make decisions, on a weighted voting basis, within the scope of the organization’s powers for peacekeeping.
The executive organ is operated by elected personnel, with administrative services carried out by international civil service personnel. The executive council gives special weight — but without individual veto — to the most populous, industrially developed, and strategically significant states. Safeguards in the form of political supervision and rotation of personnel discourage usurpation of power by "Praetorian Guards."
All states are bound by compulsory jurisdiction of the World Court for both legal disputes and legal aspects of the political disputes. Justice is administered by an expanded network of international courts, with regional panels. States and international agencies, but not individuals initially, are subjects of international law. An equity tribunal system is created for settlement of primary political disputes, along with greatly expanded mediation, conciliation, and arbitration services, use of rapporteurs, and judgments by the courts ex aequo et bono. The constitution provides for the enforceability of decisions of the courts, for execution of the decisions of the executive, and for the carrying out of the laws passed by the legislature. The central authority itself can be sued, but like the US Government today cannot be forced to comply with court judgments. A human rights court modelled upon the comparable court under the European Community is empowered to hear individual complaints of violations of a covenant of civil rights which would accompany the constitution. Permissive and voluntary organs of cooperation exist in the economic, social, scientific and technological, and cultural fields as now, still without powers of compulsion except under special provisions dealing with essential services, health, public safety, and the like.
The model system contains approximately 130 political subunits, all nominally independent states (except such vestigial remainders of the colonial era as the Caribbean islands excluded from the West Indian Federation and the islands of Polynesia and Melanesia not subsumed under any possible federation or confederation succeeding the Trust Territory of the Pacific).
National governments continue to exist in these units, to make, execute and enforce domestic laws with respect to all areas presently in foro domestico except for the raising and provisioning of armed forces, the declaration and waging of war, and the unhampered research, development, and production of military material. These hitherto untrammeled rights are limited by the terms of the new international constitution to the right to maintain sufficient police forces to ensure domestic security. The formula for such forces is derived from the present size of local, civil, and state police, plus national law enforcement personnel such as federal marshals, customs agents, border patrols, law enforcement agents and investigators, and certain militia. (There are obvious discrepancies between states, depending on their internal security problems and practices.)
The states are open to international inspection against violation of the disarmament agreement, with permanent inspection of power and research nuclear reactors, accelerators and other high energy equipment, electronic industries, steel mills, aircraft and space vehicle production, ports, railheads, marshalling yards, major airports and rocket launching facilities, central budgeting, bookkeeping, accounting and auditing agencies, principal research and development operations and installations, and all other key and strategic points in the national economy.
The international inspectorate also monitors the atmosphere for clandestine explosions, for underground nuclear tests, primarily through robot seismic stations combined with on-site inspections of suspicious events, and against tests in outer space through sensing devices in internationally operated solar satellites. In general, space technology remains in national and in some cases (communications, broadcasting, transportation, messenger service, etc.) private hands, but under international inspection. The international authority owns and operates only those space vehicles required both as a military deterrence system and to monitor enforcement of the disarmament agreement. Satellite observation vehicles are equipped to observe optically, electronically, and with infra-red and other sensing and detection devices, and serviced by an internationally controlled ground detection and tracking network.
Largely because of the requirements of the disarmament program, a significant "UN presence" exists in all countries. The secondary aspects of this presence provide dissemination of impartial factual information as well as continuous liaison with local and national authorities.
There is no attempt here to spell out all the details of the proposed system. Three points, however, require elaboration. The system of representation is among the most difficult problems. The financial problem is of crucial practicality. And the whole enterprise rests on a comprehension of the historical requirements for peaceful change.
A legislative body representing all of the constituent units would, as indicated, "make the laws." It can be deducted from this that a voting system would have to be devised that would reflect the relative size, power, and standing of the constituent units. The present system of one-nation-one-vote in the UN General Assembly is not appropriate to a system commanding decisive military (and therefore political) power. It is excessively utopian (if shadings can be distinguished in the present exercise) to believe that under foreseeable historical circumstances representation largely proportionate to population alone would be politically acceptable to the principal powers. The legislative power would thus be exercised on a weighted basis that acceptably combines population and capacity to contribute to the power of the system. Such a formula must assure the United States (and presumably everyone else) that vital decisions would not be made by any but the most substantial majorities, including the United States.
Thus, while there can be no individual veto, the great power veto will in this partial sense be extended into a limited world government. The precise formula for ensuring appropriate weight to the principal contributors while protecting the rights of the smaller nations has many possible variations, some of which were embodied in the voting arrangements in the United Nations General Assembly and Security Council. A bicameral legislature excels, through its upper house, at protecting the rights of the smaller units, while a unicameral body can do the same for the larger members by means of a dual vote.
Under this model, a qualified majority — two-thirds or three-fourths or even four-fifths — would be necessary to avoid control by a numerical majority that commanded only a minor fraction of the world’s industrial power, financial ability, cultural level, etc. Further protection to the now vulnerable principal powers might take additional forms: for example, a legislative council in which the major nations would have a predominant vote (but no individual veto); a system of separation of powers between the branches of government as in the United States; and emphasis on the special position of the major nations on the executive branch.
The one design, however, which could not be applied successfully would be the Calhoun concept of the concurrent majority (in this case between the central authority and its constituencies) with its implied right of secession. "Effective control" has to mean the power to maintain the union.
Little understanding exists of the problem of civil war under a world government. The new regime will be faced with a continuous agenda of problems stemming from political ambition, inequalities, avarice, irrational behavior, the inhumanity of man to man, and the use or threat of violence to achieve political or social ends. This prospect can be ruled out only by the untenable assumption that history will have run its course and an end put to its dynamic, refractory, and otherwise troublesome qualities. Thus a world government, even if it could be created, would be subject to continuing pressures, the most clamant of which could lead to civil war on an international scale, accompanied by unbalancing evasions of the disarmament agreement.
In our model the crucial trick is to ensure that no large-scale civil war could take place to test the "union." For war on major scale would gravely threaten the system. It would revive production and, given the instability of such a situation, the probable use of weapons of mass destruction. In any event such a war would be no more tolerable under a world government that it would be today, and for precisely the same humanitarian reasons.
If there is a single answer, it is in the realm of peaceful change. In terms of its viability and durability, the compelling need for the world authority will be a rather more exigent version of the problem that pervades all modern history — the need for adequate provisions in the international system to accommodate the dynamic forces making for change, without allowing them to lead to war.
In 1962 nuclear weapons have temporarily suppressed a significant fraction of the pressures which in other times might well have expressed themselves violently. Without that kind of deterrent situation, violence could become the order of the day unless there existed effective provisions for peaceful change. Flexibility and capacity to adapt to change in time and with foresight would be particularly needful in view of the proposed nuclear monopoly in the hands of the central authority. Otherwise the nightmare prospect is of world order at the price of world tyranny — a kind of global Holy Alliance to preserve the status quo. The system must, through its legislative action, its executive implementation, and its judicial interpretation, allow for changes in fact, in law, and in the system itself.
No attempt is made here to cost the model. But some orders of magnitude can be suggested by comparing the present annual cost of the UN system — roughly 0 million — with the figure used by Clark and Sohn as a sample budget for limited world government in 1980 — billion (a figure well below their own estimate of maximum available UN revenue, billion, calculated on the basis of 2-1/2 per cent of every nation’s Gross National Product). The Clark-Sohn plan assumes a UN Peace Force of 400,000 with a reserve of 900,000 costing some .6 billion per annum. Other costs of the organization they estimate at billion. To this they add approximately billion for economic development purposes.2
Some figures of a lesser magnitude were recently developed by Colonels Cannon and Jordan. They estimate the cost to the UN of international military personnel per man per day with minimum equipment as eight to ten dollars. A lightly armed brigade of 7,000 men would cost million per year, not including capital costs for bases, etc.3 A balanced force of half a million could well cost up to the Clark-Sohn figure of billion if it must buy, build, maintain, and modernize a broad arsenal of equipment and personnel for world-wide missions.
Finally, technical developments could revise upward the Clark-Sohn billion figure for operating costs, which include those of maintaining disarmament agreements. Recent estimates today speak of a cost of .5 billion to install inspection machinery for a test ban alone, and 0 million per year to operate it.
The picture we have sketched out, even with self-conscious efforts to be conservative, strains our credulity. But it would be beyond all reason without certain basic assumptions.
Continuing in as conservative a vein as can plausibly be applied to the topic, let us make explicit the basic assumptions that underlie our model, both as to the technical state of the art, and as to the political preconditions.
To make the problem manageable, it is assumed that at the time the new regime comes into being there has been no technical breakthrough such as would make meaningless the centralization of effective power. This assumption rules out devices that would enable a single individual or small group to terrorize the world, i.e., such potentially unbalancing developments as the controlled use of antimatter, the creation of a Kahn-type Doomsday machine, or the achievement of universally effective magical powers through psychological or biochemical means.
But it must also be assumed that direction of modern science and technology is essentially irreversible. It can perhaps be slowed down or even stopped, either by some universal catastrophe or under a disarmament agreement that curtails the intensive allocation to armaments of economic and human resources. But the processes of fission and fusion, the cultivation of viruses of high toxicity, and the design of engines of delivery cannot be unlearned. Moreover, assuming as we must that atomic power may become economical and fusion power when harnessed even more so, all of these technologies will be practiced under total disarmament in their peaceable aspects. So however comprehensive a disarmament agreement, however much political power is transferred to a world government, and even if no significant manpower is actually working on nuclear, chemical, and bacteriological weapons, or on constructing military aircraft, ships, rockets, or space vehicles, there will always remain implicit in technically advanced societies the capacity to turn again to the production and fabrication of engines of war, probably with fair rapidity.
On any count, it is unsafe to assume that the ideological and power struggle between communism and the West will not continue indefinitely. This assumption of course throws into question any program requiring that both sides subordinate to a supranational authority themselves, their power, and their ambitions. This is the central dilemma of world politics today, and it applies with ultimate force to the proposition of world government. The logical trap is completed with the familiar paradox: given a continuation unabated of communist dynamism, the subordination of states to a true world government appears impossible; but if the communist dynamic were greatly abated, the West might well lose whatever incentive it has for world government.
For purposes of this exercise, we assume that, if the communists would agree, the West would favor "a world effectively controlled by the United Nations." The remaining question is then how to transform and tame the forces of communism, in any event to the point where the present international system might be radically reshaped. Such a transformation is theoretically possible, but only under two conditions: first, that through evolutionary processes communist doctrine becomes drained of its messianic quality, foregoes its imperialistic ambitions, and comes to accept the notion of a higher authority — a notion traditionally anathema to its doctrine. The other condition, which puts the possibility within a more foreseeable time span, is a crisis, a war, or a brink-of-war situation so grave or commonly menacing that deeply-rooted attitudes and practices are sufficiently shaken to open the possibility of a revolution in world political arrangements. The assumption has to be made here that one or the other of these conditions has come about and that the communists have consequently been brought to a significant mitigation of their doctrine.
Thus we assume a world in which relations between East and West are characterized by significantly higher degrees of mutual trust, internationalist spirit, and unaggressiveness. But there is little in history to justify the belief that, without the communist threat in its present form, the world political environment would be inherently stable. We have postulated by necessity a willing acceptance of limited world government by the great powers. We then further postulate either acceptance by or imposition on all other nations of such a regime. This at once sets up future instabilities. Today the foci of instability are in third areas, centering on economic disparities and nationalistic strivings for independence, which of course Soviet and Chinese policies purposefully exploit. There is no reason to assume the disappearance under limited world government of the dynamic factors — the intergroup competitions, the racial and ethnic tensions, and the gross economic inequalities — which permeate human history and create the conditions for political upheaval. History, short of catastrophe, is not discontinuous. To modify von Clausewitz, limited world government is a form of international conflict carried on under other institutional arrangements than unlimited state sovereignty. Thus, as the framework for international stability becomes established under a benign form of world order, the detailed disputes of a chronic or secondary nature can confidently be expected to re-emerge.
A crucial feature of the system would be its universality. The inclusion of all presently divided countries could come about in one of two ways: through their unification or through alterations in the issues that had once divided them. These conditions would have to apply across the board. It is conceivable that a world order could embrace divided Germany, Korea, and Vietnam, the Arab states still at war with Israel, Formosa and mainland China still in conflict, and apartheid remaining South Africa’s policy. But what has to be assumed as a condition sine qua non is that the parties to such conflicts have either explicitly or tacitly concluded not to attempt to settle them by force. In the case of the lesser powers, there must be the conviction that they will not be permitted to settle their disputes by force. It might be argued that this reasoning is tautological: that "effective UN control" is impossible without solution of the most acute political disputes or, conversely, that such centralization of power automatically ends such disputes. No such assumption is made here, on the ground that a limited world government, to be even theoretically practical, must be embodied in a realistic environment in which old unsolved problems still exist, along with a host of new ones. Above all, we are assuming that it is not historically impossible to transform one kind of international system into another, profoundly different kind, characterized by the centralization of effective power.
For the United States, as well as for the other countries, a threshold will have been crossed from one historical condition to another, drastically different one. However many stages it takes, however tacit or explicit the labels, however gradual or violent the process, there is a Rubicon that divides the Gaul of basically untramelled national sovereignty from the Tuscany of meaningful supranational authority. Nothing could be more dangerous to sound thinking and planning than to elide this fundamental truth.
By whatever process, and under whatever name, the agency that is to "effectively control" world affairs requires in the most important ways the design customarily associated with government. A central authority with effective powers in the realms of disarmament and the settlement of international disputes, and with the capacity to deal effectively with breaches of the peace and acts of aggression, and above all in possession of the most vital attribute of government — a preponderance of military power — is a government, however limited. But it need not be assumed that the organization would have to take on all or even most of the functions of government, particularly in the economic and social realm. The United States Constitution, while granting great powers to the Federal Government, reserves to the states the powers not explicitly delegated. Our model does the same. After physical security and integrity, the most sensitive areas of national sovereignty usually involve such matters as economic and trade policy, immigration practice, civil rights, social welfare, education, and the like. Our model excludes those matters traditionally barred from international cognizance as being essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of the constituent states.
Under the first of our alternative roads — the pacific evolution of the Communist world, including China — it is difficult to foresee a limited world government within twenty-five years at the earliest, fifty years more conservatively. If, however, it came about as a result of a series of unnerving trips to or over the brink, it could come about at any time. The assumption here, chiefly for logical convenience, is a time period of five to fifteen years from now.
NATIONAL VERSUS INTERNATIONAL FORCE
What is the basis for the apportionment of forces earlier suggested between center and parts? Strategic analysis supplies the tentative answers.
"Effective control" connotes a relative monopoly of political power, accompanied by preponderant military force, at the center of the system. The world (sic) "relative" indicates that the power relationship between the center and the parts is one of degree. Some examples illustrate the equation. In the United States the people have the constitutional right to "keep and bear arms"; the government monopoly is legally abridged to this extent. In the Congo Republic the central army is, or was, in fact overmatched by provincial forces; there was thus no effective central government. In Kuomintang China the military power of the National Government was often balanced by the military power of the warlords; the writ of the government thus could not extend uniformly through the country.
So under a supranational government the degrees of relative power as between center and parts can occupy a wide range. This range can be more systematically illustrated along a scale of military power on both sides (as in figure A.).
SCALE OF RELATIVE NATIONAL-INTERNATIONAL POWER
a) Nuclear only
b) Nuclear and conventional
c) Modest conventional and nuclear
d) Large conventional
e) Low conventional
Six main types can be seen:
(a) At the minimal level of supranational power, the system could conceivably be in a fine balance: central authority might be able to exercise "effective control" on the basis of its sole possession of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction (a variant of the case under the 1946 Acheson-Lilienthal-Baruch plan), with the constituent nations retaining conventional armaments up to present high levels or even higher. The principle of control would be one of almost pure deterrence, based on the theory that the absence of war is due to the threat of nuclear retaliation.
However, as the doctrine of massive retaliation demonstrated rather quickly, such a scheme labors under great handicaps stemming from two factors. One is that under an umbrella of fear of general war, all sorts of mischief can be made by powers who ordinarily have no such leverage. The second classic flaw is the unpromising prospect of vast devastation as the only available response to assaults on the integrity of the system. In this sense the United Nations would only be taking the place of the United States in attempting to enforce the peace, with the same drawbacks plus the additional one that failure to enforce its writ would undermine the whole system. The questions of credibility of threat and of rigidity of both doctrine and means combine to rule out this solution.
(b) The central authority might possess both a nuclear and conventional capability, while the constituent national units would also possess conventional forces. This situation for the UN would be to some degree analogous to several situations today: the US vis a vis Communist China and West Germany, or the Soviet Union vis a vis China.
Such an apportionment of power does not seem sufficiently stabilizing to add up to "effective control." Given equally balanced conventional forces, the only difference is at the margin, in the possession of nuclear capabilities. Again, the self-deterring nature of such power encourages the constituent parts of the system to frustrate its effective working. In this case, however, the destabilizing factor is not the central authority’s possession of nuclear weapons. It is the retention of significant conventional forces in the hands of the constituent units.
(c) Next in line would be a combination of modest conventional and nuclear capacity at the center, with disarmament down to internal security levels among constituent nations. This is commented on at the end of the section.
(d) This and the next two possible combinations would involve the total elimination of all nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, but retention of some military power both at the center and in the parts, yet of significantly different orders of magnitude. In the first such case, the central authority, unlike Chiang Kai-shek in Nanking (and Chungking), would by its preponderance of conventional forces hold a decisive edge over any predictable combination of "provincial" forces (always subject to the possibility of civil war in the shape of sufficiently widespread defection from the central authority). In theory, such an arrangement would bring the world back to prewar conditions, but with two significant differences. For the first time there would exist a central authority with at least an initial preponderance of force. Second, the Pandora’s box of nuclear (and viral and bacterial and radiological) knowledge will still be no guarantee against hidden stockpiles. Thus this scheme would provide no deterrent whatever to the commission of nuclear crimes after secret preparations.
(e) Still lower down the relative force scale would be a central authority equipped with a modest level of conventional forces vis a vis national units completely disarmed down to the levels of internal security contemplated by typical proposals for general and complete disarmament. The same disabilities apply.
(f) Lowest on the scale would be a totally disarmed world in which no significant military forces were in being at any level. This was the first inference that could logically be drawn from the September 1959 proposal of Premier Khrushchev (as well as the 1927 and 1933 Soviet antecedents of the proposal). Presumably, under such a scheme there would be police-type forces at both levels, lightly armed with nothing of higher caliber than machine guns, plus riot-type devices. (At true zero on the scale there might be nightsticks, perhaps supplemented by bottles of itching powder, tanks of laughing gas and mild dysentery germs, and airguns designed to shoot pellets of tranquillizing drugs.)
On the basis of the assumption made earlier, the conclusion is inescapable that the central authority, in addition to its conventional military capacity, will have to offset the inherent possibility of evasion by being equipped with nuclear weapons, along with delivery systems adequate to deal with the realistic possibilities of violation (i.e., alternative c). For the very logic of "effective control" requires placing in the hands of the central authority military forces adequate to deal with breaches of the peace and acts of aggression, through whatever means are necessary to preserve a preponderance of power at the center, even against the contingency of clandestine production of nuclear weapons. Ex hypothesi, the central authority would need to retain a nuclear capability adequate to deter any reasonable expectation of clandestine violation and consequent attempt to destabilize or even destroy the new system.
It can be seen that even under a radically designed system of authority in a disarmed world, the problem of deterrence will persist, including some of the features that characterize it today. The situation facing the central authority would not be too different from that confronting the United States in its need to be equipped with forces, both conventional and nuclear, adequate to deter any likely combination of hostile forces. Indeed, this is the problem inside any society. But the special feature in the new situation would be an element of profound uncertainty. Today, defensive forces are designed to deter known quantities or qualities of war-making capability. But our postulated regime, even with a good inspection system, will be to a degree uncertain whether nuclear weapons are hidden or being secretly made, some highly potent nerve agent being developed in an isolated biological laboratory, or some commanding weapon secreted illicitly into the payload of a communication, weather, navigation, and other satellite. These possibilities, however statistically improbable, would pose anew the problem of deterrence in a different calculus, both for the general authority and for individual states such as the United States in making its own calculations.
One mad tribal ruler in a future Congo might not be able to bring the rest of the world to its knees. But twenty-five rockets, with megaton warheads previously secreted or secretly produced in Soviet or Chinese facilities, could supply to those nations an inordinate amount of political and strategic power. Adequate inspection would of course be designed to preclude such a development. But deterrence from the center is the second line of defense, the ultimate safeguard: deterring in the first instance from clandestine production, in the second from political threat, and ultimately from actual military use.
To sum up — a world government must be in a position to deter the unknown possibility of clandestine evasion. This means that the central authority must have a nuclear capability. (It might well also mean maintaining stockpiles of chemical agents, much as national governments have done in the past, against the possibility of a future "gas attack — or its late twentieth century counterpart.) Otherwise, given the low base point (zero) from which honest nations start in a disarmed world, a nuclear capability that at 1962 levels would be marginal, scarcely useful as more than a political irritant, would come to assume incommensurate proportions in terms not only of destructive capacity but as a potent means of psychological warfare.
The problem of deterrence, in short, will exist under a disarmament agreement even if the religious wars of our age come to resemble less the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and more the seventeenth and eighteenth.
The appropriate degree of relative force would, we conclude, involve total disarmament down to police and internal security levels for the constituent units, as against a significant conventional capability at the center backed by a marginally significant nuclear capability.
PRINCIPAL PROBLEMS IN ACHIEVING A WORLD ORDER
Some of the major difficulties have already been cited or implied in the course of discussion. Others can be noted. They are summarized briefly under this heading.
Perhaps the most provocative feature of our futuristic landscape is the subsidence of communist expansionism along with its doctrinal hostility to all elements of the world not under its writ. The picture of a disarmed, centrally governed world is intolerably romantic without the assumption we have made — perhaps equally romantic — that this limited but crucial degree of supranational authority is genuinely accepted by communist nations as strategically safe and ideologically palatable. To an important degree the same would be true of the United States, of such prideful nations as France, and of the many countries only now undergoing the exhilaration of intense nationalism. Is it possible that the Soviet Union and China could be brought to abandon their messianic ambitions and subordinate themselves to the writ of a higher authority — a notion which runs counter to all the teaching of communist doctrine? Would only a damaging war make China a willing party in the foreseeable future? Above all, even if the Soviet leaders genuinely desired a disarmament agreement, is there any chance that they would accept its corollary — detente, and international security arrangements to substitute for national force—conditions which the West tends to assume are indispensable accompaniments to disarmament? The difference is of course profound: Soviet doctrine repudiates the status quo and apparently conceives of disarmament as a cheaper, safer way to carry out its policies; the Western position requires that those who disarm accept a new order policed at least as effectively as in an armed world, with supranational power substituting for national.
For that matter, would the United States itself seriously consider disbanding its own armaments and abrogating to an international authority beyond its direct control the authority and the power to do those things which in modern history have been the prerogative of the nation? It is not simply a question of good faith by the policy-makers. Would the United States Senate ratify such a scheme? So long as communism persists as a threat to American society, is there any chance of such a scheme being agreed to? (And if there were no communist menace, would anyone be worrying about the need for such a revolution in international political arrangements?)
The quick answers to these questions, so put, tend to be negative. For the one sound basis of community — genuine consensus — is not yet apparent between the chief actors on the world stage. This finding needs to be examined more closely.
We accept here the equation according to which wholesome community building at any level is a process in which consensus (consent and acquiescence in the general ground rules and overall values of the system) comes first. It may then be followed by development of a community with some organic coherence. Such community in turn is the base on which edifices of government and, finally, of law can be erected. A "normal" historical process, in which ever-larger units evolve through customs unions, confederation, regionalism, etc., until ultimately the larger units coalesce under a global umbrella, could take up to two hundred years, on past performance figures, and even this may be optimistic.
It is technology which requires us to accelerate the process. Yet nothing in technology has yet shown itself capable of altering the elements of the basic equation. Conceivably the rate of cultural and political change will henceforth increase as a function of enlarged ability to educate, inform, and bring together large numbers of people. But even if mass media, cultural exchange, and generally better international communication were to succeed in lessening the incidence and virulence of nationalism and xenophobia, the internationalizing process confronts a built-in obstacle — the immense vested powers, interests, and traditions of government. In virtually every country there exists an establishment that carries from generation to generation the legacies of the national past.
Most "peace movements" assert that "peoples" regard each other as brothers, in contradistinction to governments and their vested establishments, seen as forces of resistant conservatism. If this is so, the only agency requiring a genuine change of heart is government. But the thesis is not entirely convincing. It is by no means certain that the American people, for example, are presently ready to vote the national military establishment out of existence in favor of an international agency controlled by a combination of nations.
The international north-south conflict, characterized by bitter racial resentments and vast economic disparities, is an equally obstructive roadblock to the denationalization of power, unless those at the short end of the social or economic scale become convinced that they would come into what they regard as their birthright more quickly or more surely under a would government. Possibly this could be demonstrated on the basis that the voice of the presently power-lacking states would increase in the uses of world power. But power could not be simply transferred from those who now hold it to those who do not, under the guise of a world government. The safeguards and weightings cited earlier would indeed be designed to see that this did not happen. Only significant reduction in the tensions growing out of recent colonial relationships and the economic disparities could overcome this barrier to achievement of the model.
A related problem is that at least a third of the countries in the world are only now beginning to traverse the stages of nationalism which traditionally precede, accompany, and follow national independence. If some of them are also going to experience the acute pathology of malignant nationalism in the fashion of Germany, Italy, and Japan in living memory, the prospect is dim for consensus leading to formation of a universal community with a preponderance of power at the center.
I have suggested that an alternative road may bypass the main path of history, shortcircuiting the organic stages of consensus, value formation, and the experiences of common enterprise generally believed to underlie political community. This relies on a grave crisis or war to bring about a sudden transformation in national attitudes sufficient for the purpose. According to this version, the order we examine may be brought into existence as a result of a series of sudden, nasty, and traumatic shocks. But does this sufficiently lay the basis for genuine community, adequate to create a durable world order? The transforming experience, whether evolutionary or revolutionary, must, to achieve the foundation of consensus requisite for community, be enough to reach and move great masses of people, many of whom are not now touched by governmental processes, or a fortiori by international relations. In the end, the question of feasibility can only be answered with a prediction: once critical mass had taken place, however tentatively or suspiciously, a new and essentially unpredictable dynamic would have been set in motion, sufficient to confound predictions made from this side of the line.
National disarmament is a condition sine qua non for effective UN control. Yet the known difficulties of general disarmament are overwhelming. This is not the place to argue its desirability or undesirability. What we have assumed is that perhaps as a consequence of a massive crisis it is neither inherently nor technically impossible to design a program whereby all nations scrap their armaments down to the police level, with a reasonable probability of detecting significant evasion of violation through inspection arrangements. Security for the United States, as well as for other nations, could — again in theory — be assured by phasing out national forces only as international forces were satisfactorily in position and under the effective control of a "responsible" agency (although it should be clear that the notions of even a weighted majority as to what is "responsible" will not coincide every time with those of the United States). Technology may contribute to making the inspection task less onerous and less intrusive than at present, through robot mechanisms even now foreseeable. The political hurdle attending penetration of the Soviet Union may be further mitigated by such a move as unilateral American creation of an open world, so to speak, by making available to the United Nations all pictures taken by SAMOS and other observation satellites, of both the Soviet Union and the United States.
But none of this implies that total disarmament is a political possibility in the foreseeable future even though it is technically possible, and even though it is not unthinkable strategically given adequate supranational surrogates for national arms. It is to say that, without it, effective UN control is not possible.
The present roadblocks to universality in the United Nations are, first, the China problem, and second, the unwillingness of the Western powers to formalize the division of Germany, Korea, or Vietnam by consenting to their admission. As for the remaining areas not yet represented (now that the United States has held its nose and swallowed the admission to the UN of Outer Mongolia, as a source of potential nationalistic tension between China and Russia), virtually any territory that gains its independence, however small, nonviable, or incapable of governing itself, is fairly sure to be admitted to the society of nations under the present UN dispensation.
So to achieve the necessary universality, China and the divided countries would have to be either unified, or admitted to participation as presently divided. Unification of Germany, Korea, and Vietnam, and acceptance by each of the other’s continued existence, can be brought about only by conditions which are presently unlikely. To make disarmament and effective UN control dependent on solutions of those problems renders both prospects illusory (and it is indeed this logic which tends to discourage any serious thinking about either).
However, a global authority established with the consent of the great powers, even if those special problems had not yet been solved, could by its prima facie universality resolve the problem of representation. For unlike the conventional American view of the United Nations, membership in the new regime, far from being a privilege, would be mandatory. As indicated earlier, none of these problems would by themselves have to be finally solved in order to set up such an organization. But they would no longer be solvable by force.
The difficulty today of raising million per month to finance the United Nations Congo operation contrasts vividly with a scheme whose monthly budget, according to our estimates, would be approximately a hundred times as great. All one can say is that, if agreement were reached on disarmament, with the great financial savings ensuing, and on the arming of an international authority, provisions would have to be made for funding it. Doubtless, those provisions would have to improve on the present method, and might work on a semi-automatic basis through percentages of national tax collections. In addition, revenue sources not tied to individual nations might be assigned to the central authority — e.g., tolls on international water-ways and revenues derived from res communis such as Antarctica, petroleum reserves under the high seas, space rights, etc. The point is that, if we can assume one, we have to assume the other. The same is true for other questions that arise in the implementation of the basic agreement. Provisions would simply have to be made for territorial enclaves adequate for the headquarters, military establishment, and the inspection organization. Other details would involve recruitment, deployment, procedure, codes, transport, communications, and the thousand and one details of government. Each of these matters poses inordinate difficulties. But the point is that they are not the first and prime matters to be solved. If the solution of the prior question can be assumed, there will be time enough for detailed blueprints.
As indicated earlier, there is no theoretical reason why the present United Nations could not be transformed by extensive Charter amendment into an instrument of effective global control. Alternatively, the process could be a completely new start, in the way the Articles of Confederation were scrapped to write the American Constitution. But it is not a terribly important point which method is used. The essential point is the transfer of the most vital element of sovereign power from the states to a supranational government.
It is clear that, under the hypothetical circumstances, even the problem of amending the present Charter (subject to the veto) is not particularly meaningful, for it puts the matter in the wrong perspective. The paramount issue in creation an "effective UN" would not be first of all the difficulty of amending the Charter, but that of reaching the political agreement and establishing new ground rules about the possession and use of military power in the world. If this were feasible, it would surely be a secondary question whether to incorporate the changes in the present Charter, or to write a new one. The overwhelming central fact would still be the loss of control of their military power by individual nations. If this becomes achievable, the details will not be insurmountable.
EXPECTED PERFORMANCE OF THE MODEL
The model finally needs to be tested against major threats to its stability and integrity. This we can do using as criteria half a dozen familiar types of threats emanating from expansionist, imperialist, revolutionary, or other aggressive forces. First, however, a word about the source of such threats.
Among the prime assumptions made here is that the present ideological and power conflict may continue indefinitely into the future. But it is not enough of a test of the viability and durability of different kinds of international political and governmental arrangements that they be capable of countering communist aggression. The communist threat grows out of the existing world system and feeds on its weaknesses and imperfections. The inadequacy of the present system engenders tension and conflict which must be dealt with wholly apart from the communist problem. The degree to which any international system has stability and operates within a tolerable equilibrium defines the situation with which communism must deal, and thus the field within which communism (or any other political force) can operate aggressively.
The ability of a system to deal with such aggressive behavior depends to an important extent on the means by which it can resolve instabilities and disequilibria, the extent to which this is done preventively, the extent to which it can apply generally acceptable notions of justice, and its capacity to adapt flexibly to a changing environment. Thus an international system built and aimed exclusively at countering possible communist aggression, even through in the short run it performs its mission successfully, would not by itself satisfy the requirement for a durable and viable system. For a world system by definition addresses itself to the whole fabric of relationships between nations, between cultures, and between economic units; over time; and in the face of changing problems.
While the hypothetical system elaborated earlier must be tested against its capacity to respond to the kinds of threats we can presently envisage, there may be a different and unforeseeable order of threat to cope with, once one assumes a vastly different political setting. This dynamic quality could affect both communist threats and threats from other sources equally designed to disequilibrate, capture, or destroy the new system.
Finally, the choice is not necessarily between an international system incapable of coping with important threats and one which can deal successfully with every contingency in the spectrum. At one end of the scale, the present international system has some capacity to cope, even with communist menaces. At the other end of the scale, we can guess that there would be finite limits to the capacity of a supranational system to handle such maximum challenges as international civil war. A civil war, domestic or international, can gather such force as to end the preponderance at the center. The system impressionistically sketched out in this paper, while its capacities go significantly beyond those presently in sight, remains subject to the basic laws of political life.
How, then, might our model be expected to cope with major destabilizing actions on the part of individual nations?
The proposed system would explicitly forbid national possession of weapons of mass destruction, of the means of delivery, and of the trained personnel required to mount an attack. Thus the component nations would not have the capability to wage strategic war as we now conceive it. The inspection system would be designed to minimize the possibility of successful evasion or violation of this prohibition. A capacity to threaten nuclear war would arise under two circumstances. One would be a successfully executed violation that evaded the detection system. The reserve nuclear deterrent at the center would be designed to deter surprise attack of this scale, and thus discourage such attempts in the first place.
The other potential for strategic war would arise from the deliberate, overt repudiation of the new order and the political system representing it. The erection of a system of government presupposes the will on the part of its members and its governing institutions to make it work. Making it work includes the enforcement of the laws and, above all, the organic law which gives the government both legitimacy and its relative monopoly of force. If the system did not abort such violation by imposing timely sanction upon a violator in the form of immediate seizure of the forbidden facilities, punishment of those responsible, etc., the danger to the nations who relied upon it would clearly be immense. To abdicate responsibility for self-preservation through a failure of nerve would confront the world with far worse perils than it now faces, given the marginal nature of the authority’s nuclear force. The ultimate question would then be the utilization of the international force after failure to use it preventively. The failure to make early use of initially superior forces to overcome a major violation of the established order is reminiscent of the 1930s. The details of such a scenario in the future are difficult to foresee. Can one postulate this time a more purposeful and intelligent governing mentality? The experience of the postwar period makes for moderate optimism on this score (offset, however, by the new dimension of war by accident).
In the end, dangers in such breakdowns of the system need to be measured against the dangers of breakdowns in the current international system, at the present level of armaments. On balance, if there were any reasonable chance of achieving the system adumbrated here, the hazards inherent in its possible later collapse through failure of nerve or will may well be out-weighed by the possibility that it would in fact work.
It would seem far more plausible for a threat to arise to the system in the form of hostile movements of armed men, i.e., through conventional warfare. Particularly in the first years after the establishment of the system, large numbers of trained men would exist in reserve in numerous countries. Even with internal security forces limited to sidearms and light field weapons, it would not be difficult for sizeable numbers of men to be recruited and armed clandestinely with (or even conceivably without) the connivance of national governments. Soviet man-power could under these circumstances make real the picture that always leapt into the Western mind when the Soviets called for nuclear disarmament: that of Soviet hordes overrunning Russia’s neighbors in Europe and the Middle East.
Once more, of course, the real test of the capacity of the system to cope with such a threat is a function not only of its military capability but of the purposefulness and determination behind it. Here again, history supplies mixed evidence. Under NATO, for example, the argument for a nuclear "shield" has been the threat of overwhelming conventional forces from the East. But, as in the 1930s, the truth is that the free nations actually enjoy a clear superiority, even in numbers of military-age youth, if only the West were to make use of it. If an act of aggression were to occur under the world government, and the responsible powers best able to influence the actions of the organization refused to use its powers, or were hopelessly divided, or were unable to enlist adequate support from the necessary majority of nations, the system would not respond "effectively." No voting arrangements, however ingenious, could force a decision from an unwilling majority. In this sense the key to effective response does not lie in international parliamentary arrangement, any more than the problem in the 1930s was the requirement for unanimity in the League Assembly, or the reason for failure to act in Hungary in 1956 the Soviet veto in the Security Council.
If the political organs were unresponsive, it could not be expected that the civil servants of the proposed organization could automatically respond to aggression, any more than General MacArthur, for example, automatically responded to the Korean aggression without Washington’s orders, or Dag Hammarskjold responded with such powers as he then possessed to the British-French-Israeli military attack on Egypt in 1956. Constitutional arrangements and parliamentary rules, after all, go only a fraction of the total distance in determining the way in which the body politic as a whole will respond to a crisis. For purposes of analysis we assume that the system would work. We assume that its principal actors will have the determination to make it work in the face of a major assault on its integrity, in the same way the leaders of the Union reacted in 1861 or de Gaulle a century later. How, then, would the system cope with an armed attack by one nation on another or on the international force itself on a scale that could be plausibly prepared and executed by a nation subject to the system of inspection built into the program?
My undocumented conclusion is that trained and mobile conventional forces contemplated here should be adequate to counter a single surprise thrust of moderate dimensions. Ten air-transportable divisions, for example, trained for vertical envelopment and armed with the latest field weapons, transport, and communications should be able to cope with the sort of secretly prepared attack across one nation’s borders of the dimension likely under the circumstances. Beyond that, the strategic nuclear deterrent in the hands of the central authority would presumably deter conventional attack on a massive scale in the same fashion as in American hands it presumably deterred Soviet conventional aggression in Europe in the late 1940s and early 1950s. (The latter analogy rests of course on an unproved hypothesis, as does the doctrine of massive retaliation associated with the preponderance in nuclear weapons.)
The international force would be decreasingly capable of coping with higher levels of aggression involving several countries, up to a point describable as true international civil war. This scenario is somewhat easier to depict. An outbreak of violence in many places of the globe, with national armies springing up, internal insurrection breaking out, national borders crossed in many places, and so on, poses an ultimately impossible task for the international force, even if it had not by that time been pre-empted, divided, or isolated.
The problem of United States security under such circumstances would then be acute. In some ways it would be analogous to the late 1930s, in other ways to the time of the Korean invasion. The alternatives confronting the United States would not be historically unfamiliar: the simple decision to rearm; whether to escalate the action on the ground with tactical nuclear weapons, or strategically with megaton weapons; or whether to beat a retreat, as in Indochina in 1954, Hungary in 1956, Tibet in the late 1950s, and Laos in 1961. These decisions in turn would depend on variables too numerous and complex to analyze here (although it would be illuminating to experiment with this novel policy problem through political gaming).
Just as aggression by proxy leaves an escape hatch for the great power sponsoring it, so it enables an opposing power to intervene without seeming to challenge its adversary directly. The inhibitions on effective counteraction if Russia or China (or the US) were the aggressor might be appreciably less if done by proxy. In the Greek Civil War and the Korean action the doors remained open at all times for a truce or settlement without either great power having to admit defeat. US support of the rebel forces in Cuba in 1961 involved no real commitment.
If all nations were equally disarmed, however, proxy aggression takes a somewhat different meaning. One power cannot feed significant amounts of war material for use in a third area without soon establishing an observable violation — assuming, as we do, as efficient policing of disarmament. Proxy aggression thus seems an unlikely contingency.
This section and the next deal with the sort of conflict generally labelled "indirect aggression," characteristically ambiguous as to national involvement, formal crossing of borders, and the like. Unconventional warfare between nations and, perhaps, against the central authority may well be the most characteristic type of conflict besetting our proposed system. Ability to cope with it will be subject to the same baffling complexities, uncertainties, and difficulties as torment us today in numerous areas. Whatever the international regime, we cannot safely predict an end to situations of civil war, rebellion, and other forms of internal instability. Nothing about a world government by itself alters the relation between blacks and whites in the Union of South Africa or Southern Rhodesia, or between French and Moslems in Algeria, leftists and rightists in Laos, between Serbs and Croats, Georgians and Great Russians, Austrians and Italians, Israelis and Arabs, Tibetans and Chinese, Moslems and Hindus, Turks and Kurds, etc.
So far as guerrilla warfare is concerned, a well-equipped and purposefully led guerrilla movement conducting irregular operations, living off the country, sabotaging a la Maquis, and, above all, favored by significant elements of the population, could tie up an international army just as easily as a national one, rendering its most potent weapons useless because inapplicable. Indochina, Malaya, Laos, and Lebanon all shared these characteristics in an important degree. None was a pure case of external aggression. All had international and internal ambiguities.
At the political level, the prospects for decisive management of this type of conflict are no clearer. For it must be assumed that ideological, racial, or cultural cleavages would divide a supranational legislature on such ambiguous charges of indirect aggression precisely as a United Nations General Assembly is today divided, and with the same disabling effects when it comes to preventive or enforcement action favoring one side or the other. No international system except a total tyranny complete with the apparatus of a police state would be capable of dealing with certainty with this type of disorder. The answer, if there is one, lies perhaps in peaceful change procedures to the extent that justice and equity can be meted to contending factions. Peaceful change procedures would also be relevant for legislating territorial changes where justified, as Israel, for example, was converted by UN statesmanship from a guerrilla force to a proponent of the established order. Procedures of this sort should, ideally, assure greater economic and social justice. (The international authority would, as noted, probably be limited in its powers to intervene in internal matters of domestic politics and economic and social policy, except insofar as international peace and security were jeopardized.)
On balance, provisions on a global scale for peaceful change and for responsive economic and social programs would go some distance toward removing the sources of conflict that characteristically underlie guerrilla war situations. But there remain the less complicated acts of aggression in the form of guerrilla warfare by a hostile, expansionist force such as international communism. An example might be the Huks in the Philippines in the 1940s. The international force should include a paramilitary capability to be used in appropriate circumstances. But there is no confidence that readier solutions would exist than at present. A system which limits the field of military action to guerrilla-type operations is probably an improvement over the present. But no system can wholly avoid the possibility of guerrilla-type problems arising from either source. It is not likely that an international authority would be more clearly capable of dealing effectively with all such threats than national governments have been able to do.
Everything that has been said about unconventional warfare applies here as well. At one extreme, a central authority might in theory operate a pervasive countersubversion net, creating a political-civil effect somewhere between the Holy Alliance and the Gestapo. At the other extreme, a world authority equipped only with carefully circumscribed powers to deal with formal acts of military aggression and breaches of the peace, even in a wholly disarmed world, would not be capable of coping at all with political subversion.
Under a system of reserved powers, subversion directed against a single government would be a problem for local authorities as before. Only if it involved more than one government would it become an international problem. If it were of the ambiguous type charged to the United Arab Republic (through Syria) in 1958, the appropriate counteraction would, as in Lebanon, appropriately take the form of observation along a border, or in a capital as in Amman in 1958, rather than the deployment of military force. International forces of a non-fighting variety could be utilized as adjuncts of the pacific settlement procedures by the organs of political investigation and pacific settlement, as the Security Council and Assembly used United Nations forces in Lebanon and, for that matter, in the Congo. Our postulated central authority would be as capable as the present United Nations to take such a situation under its cognizance and send observers to report. But we should be clear that its capacity would probably not be appreciably greater in a situation that resembled the Lebanese case in 1958, where a domestic population was almost evenly divided in a bitterly contested election.
For all the disorders of the oblique variety discussed in this and the previous section, it will undoubtedly remain true that the most meaningful answer lies in healthy, politically and socially coherent communities where conditions favoring internal disaffection and receptivity to subversion are held to a minimum. For the other kind — the malignant external pressure not primarily reflecting a lack of internal integrity and cohesion — there is an additional capacity that in the hands of the international authority would enable it to react effectively. That is the means to monitor and report to the executive authorities on hostile propaganda. The authority might also have in hand technical countermeasures, either direct jamming or adequate means of independent transmission, perhaps by 24-hour hovering satellites which would saturate the affected area with continuous FM or television information programs (although probably the rest of the world — at least one-third of it — would have to watch, too). One could conceive of simultaneous translation equipment in the receiving facilities. These possibilities, it should be said, exist today or will in the near future. World government is not needed to utilize them more effectively against subversive action in the form of international propaganda.
As of April 1961, the Soviet Union had threatened nuclear destruction against various nations over 120 times. Without nuclear arms, or for that matter, any significant arms at all, such a policy would lose its present potency. The threat might well remain, but it would be a different one. It would lie in a given nation’s capacity to generate in secret enough of an independent military capability to impose — or threaten to impose — its will on other nations, on the central authority, or on the community in general. The ability to commit such a violation would depend on the comprehensiveness of the inspection system. The ability to get away with it would depend on the nerve and will of the rest of the community. To face down a Soviet or Chinese threat, backed by a suddenly unmasked stockpile of megaton rocket weapons, would require a high order of political courage and determination to resist.
It is conceivable that under such threat the United States would find that the community as a whole was paralyzed or at least bitterly divided as to whether to call the bluff. In this case the threatening power might safely take what it wanted. The threat, that is to say, might work. If the organs of the community failed to save its integrity, if above all the international force were not a guarantor against successful threat or blackmail, there might well be an irresistible demand within this country that the United States cease to reply on the world organization and once more look to its own defenses.
All of these contingencies depend on the Soviets — or anyone else — successfully concealing a violation to the point where a serious threat could be made. The inspection system might of course be inefficient, or incomplete, or even subverted. But we should, I think, also assume that the United States would continue to rely primarily on its own intelligence sources as a powerful supplement to the international monitoring of disarmament.
It seems hardly likely that any disarmament scheme would be acceptable otherwise. If this be assumed, then it becomes far more difficult to take the world by surprise with a military capacity in position, operational and targeted, sufficient to impose its will on the system, without having been discovered in preparation. Under these circumstances early discovery would be likely. In that case the violation would be either aborted or disavowed. If it were not, it must be assumed that appropriate sanctions would be undertaken unless the nations were totally unwilling to make their system work.
Thus a hypothetical model can be constructed, fulfilling the characteristics of "a world effectively controlled by the United Nations." But we are left with profound unanswered questions about it. There is the dilemma of its feasibility — the paradox that it is unattainable when needed, and unneeded when attainable. We concluded that in theory it could come about in the short, medium, or long run by a brink of war — or a war — combined with the development of evolutionary trends that might favor it as the time span stretches out.
The dilemma of scope is related. A global security system which comes about in the short-run future through crisis or by war, its ground rules agreed to at the moment of maximum strain, is likely to be very limited in its non-security functions (as well as being unpredictable in terms of future stability and viability). Conversely, a supranational authority that developed more naturally over time, since it would be more likely to rest on genuine consensus and would thus represent a truer community, would probably encompass more non-security functions, and would be more likely to live comfortably over time with the ground rules embedded in its enabling instruments. But that gets into a time period of no interest to us here.
There is the Aristotelian dilemma of corruption of government into tyranny and there is the potential conflict between a centralized authority and the deep American values of pluralism, diversity, and home rule. As with the American Constitution in the Federal period, once the constituent units relinquish their vital powers to the center, the extent to which encroachment is subsequently resisted, "states’ rights" maintained, and tyranny prevented will depend on factors other than the constitutional provisions agreed to. The lesson of historical experience is that how this happens depends not so much on the language of the organic instrument as on the degree of genuine consensus which went into its making. To the extent that the community is an artificial one, resting largely on fiat, or imposed on one important part of the whole by another important part — to that extent its real underpinnings are so much in doubt that its survival potential could not be predicted.
There is the dilemma of depending for effective world order on total national disarmament. Without disarmament, such a world system is probably unattainable. If general disarmament were ever a reality, a scheme such as that outlined in this paper will need to accompany and follow it. Otherwise, there will be no means to prevent exploitation of a disarmed world in a way which would almost surely bring on a war. The crucial point here is the provision for an effective international force equipped with approximately a half million men and a nuclear capability sufficient to deter any likely level of clandestine violation, a combination most likely to create a stable military environment.
And for the central authority to have nuclear weapons poses one of the most difficult questions about world government: quis custodiet ipsos custodes? And perhaps even more to the point, how keep the keepers relatively insulated from the inevitable efforts to control them, wholly apart from the issue of their supervision?
But the details apart, two problems are sovereign. First is the quantum jump such centralization of military power would mean in historic terms. Second is the presently insurmountable difficulty of bringing into a world-wide system the messianic forces of the communist imperium so long as it is on the historic make. At present the very notion of a politico-military rubric superior to both East and West seems remote. By and large, there has been doctrinal continuity between Litvinov’s assertion that only angels can be impartial and Khrushchev’s statement to Walter Lippmann in April 1961 that there may be neutral nations but there are no neutral men. There are occasional indications that the Soviet Union agrees to an international force after disarmament (as in the third stage of the Soviet proposal of June 2, 1960). But it would be subject to the Security Council veto, and no real advance over Article 43 of the UN Charter agreed to in 1945. In addition, presently insurmountable problems seem to exist as to the sequence of disarmament and control.4
In sum, the structure of the model can be perceived more easily than the fundamental building blocks of consensus and community which would have to underlie it. But we must end by repeating that if such a system ever came into being, even in grave crisis, it would thenceforth have its own inner dynamic. New forces could be set into motion which we cannot now comprehend, leading in the direction of constitutional and organic development that might bear as little resemblance to the first stage as the United States system in 1961 bears to the thirteen colonies under the Articles of Confederation.
Miten Suomi tuhotaan:
Uutisiani luettuasi ymmärrät paremmin sitä, miten globalistit toteuttavat suunnitelmaansa yhden maailmanhallituksen saavuttamiseksi, ja miksi Suomeenkin tulee koko ajan lisää turvapaikkaturisteja ja terroristeja.
Ex CBS:n toimittaja: Kuinka Wikipedia ja valevaltamedia meitä manipuloivat:
Edellinen video bitchutella tässä.
30 miljoonaa yhdysvaltalaista pitää QAnonia hyvänä - Miamin yliopiston professori Foxilla 12/2019:
#QAnon is the fact checking community for #FakeNews, and they HATE it/us.
Rinta-Joupin autoliikkeiden valomainostauluilla nähtiin kesäkuussa 2020 useita "Q-mainoksia" ympäri Suomen. Kuvia jaettiin somessa satojatuhansia kertoja:
Fox: Vaalit 2Q16:
Maaliskuussa 2020 avaamani Twitter-tili tässä. (Lukeminen ei vaadi tiliä)
Globalistien käsikirjasta: Luo ongelma, johon sinulla on ratkaisu.
Ehdoton katsottava (39:37):
Suomen Sosiaali- ja terveysministeri Aino-Kaisa Pekonen ja joukko muita "ministereitä" lukevat saman rokotemainoksen kansalle. Ketkä ovat tuon rokotemainoksen takana? Amazing polly kertoo aiheesta: The Global Health Mafia Protection Racket
Videolla osoitetaan mm. se, kuinka SAMAT tahot, jotka olivat lokakuisen "koronaepidemiaharjoituksen" takana, saavat nuo kerätyt varat käyttöönsä. Videolla myös EU-komission pj. Leyen ylistää YSTÄVÄÄNSÄ, KIINALAISTA NAM:n (=WHO ja Maailmanpankki) johtajaa tri. Dzauta, ja sanoo myös ettei "varojenkeruu" olisi onnistunut ilman häntä. Kuvassa NAM:n logo, jossa KÄÄRME ja selvästi 666: