- The Group of Eight meeting that just ended in Evian,
France was the seventh meeting that I have reported on. I began covering
G8 meetings in 1996 with the Lyon G7 Summit, only missing the summit in
1999. Each year, the "presidency" of the G8 rotates to a different
member country. With the ending of the Evian Summit, President Bush was
just handed the presidency for the next twelve months. This year Russia
became a full member, officially changing its name to the Group of Eight.
- Since the 1996 Summit was my first glimpse of the world's
major ruling power structure, I was overcome with the depth, breadth and
reach of the seven presidents and prime ministers over all of the countries
of the world, because very little has been written about it. In order to
understand how entities are related, I like to make a chart. When I chart
the major entities that "rule the world", since the G8 does not
print or control the world's money, like the central banks do, they are
under the Bank for International Settlements-BIS, located in Basel Switzerland.
Under the G8 is the United Nations.
-
- Having said that, I have read 98% of the documents they
have issued throughout the twenty-eight years that they have been amassing
power. I have seen many different changes in their evolving structure.
In 1999 the central bank ministers started to meet with the G7 finance
ministers (in America our finance minister is the Treasury Secretary).
That means that when the G7 finance ministers meet, they are accompanied
by the real source of financial power-the central bank ministers who control
the amount of money a country has.
- The G8 presidents and prime ministers have the political
power because they are elected heads of state. When the G7 met in Birmingham,
England in 1998, I remember Tony Blair announcing that what every leader
discussed were the problems back home. He then announced that since they
all shared the same domestic problems, that they were going to work together
on common domestic problems in the future. >From then on I saw the language
of the documents change to "our peoples" and "our problems".
Do you see what I see? Such an innocent statement of grave concern-but
it basically says a whole lot politically. Words have meaning and meaning
is conveyed through words. Do you see "integration" or am I just
imagining it? Am I over zealous with regard to the power and position of
the Constitution?
-
- I have called the Group of Eight a "global board
of directors" and have stated that they have a "global cabinet".
However, I felt that it was about time I went to the horse's mouth. In
the last two press briefings with French President Jacques Chirac, I asked
about the position of the G8. The first time he replied, "The G8 is
a club, it is not an authority, not an institution. The G8 does not have
any particular legitimacy. At the outset it was made up of five countries
who wanted to get the top leaders together to work in concert. It [now
has] eight members. Working in concert remains its objective."
-
- In the final press briefing, I asked Mr. Chirac, "Yesterday
you said the G8 was not an authority or institution, yet the world has
followed your mandates for the past 28 years. You give your blessing to
all UN treaties and conventions and you have issued more statements and
mandates this year than in other years, you also spend the tax money of
the G8 countries. Is the G8 a Global Board of Directors with a Global Cabinet,
are you a new kind of UN or are you a new super-charged Security Council?"
-
- He replied, "Well that's a question which people
have been asking for the last 30 years and I don't know why. We are not
the UN. We are not a Board of Directors because we don't have any power
and we are not asking people for it. We are people with a positive resolve
who are aware that our actions for the world can be inconsistent or consistent.
If they are consistent it will be to everyone's benefit so our aim is to
ensure that our actions are consistent. We don't have any specific legitimacy."
-
- So let us take a quick look at some of their actions.
Over the years, their final statement or communiqué has expanded
from two pages to over 120 pages. They began meeting with only the finance
ministers. They have now added foreign, justice, education, labor, environment,
health, and development ministers who now meet separately from the Heads
of State and carry out their own responsibilities for the world. This year
over a dozen various statements, reports, action plans and communiqués
were issued on the topics of water, marine environment and tanker safety,
health, the market and the economy, fighting corruption, transport security
and control of man-portable air defense systems, trade, combating terrorism,
and weapons and materials of mass destruction.
-
- Some of the following phraseology is used: "We shall
consider," "We have also agreed to," "We support,"
"We reaffirm," "We welcome," "We call upon those,"
"We emphasize the importance of," "We will work together,"
"We commit to pursue," "We will jointly ask" and "We
direct our ministers and officials to." One of the reports from the
G8 Senior Officials Group states, " "Our leaders decided."
-
- Lastly, let me provide you with some of the specific
topics and directives. On combating terrorism, they reaffirmed the UN Security
Council's Counter-Terrorism mandates that include counter-terrorism legislation,
the establishment of border controls, drafting legislation on immigration
controls and standards for travel documentation, implementing bilateral
and multilateral co-operation on extradition, procedures for national police
forces for counter terrorism. Furthermore, they implemented new international
standards for flight deck doors and are going to explore experience gained
from installation of on-board television monitoring system to control the
security inside passenger aircraft and support the G8 Rome and Lyon groups
Statement on Biometric Applications for International Travel
-
- On marine environment, they want the ratification and
implementation of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea that provides
for the overall legal framework for oceans. This calls for the co-ordination
and cooperation among national agencies and international organizations
such as the International Maritime Organization, the Food and Agriculture
Organization and the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission. I have
studied this Treaty and it will set up a complete international legal entity
to "guard" the oceans and seas. No country or person could fish
unless they had a permit from this authority. Furthermore, it will have
its own legal system for lawsuits. The US has not ratified it.
-
- With regard to international trade, they "stress
faith in and commitment to the multilateral trading system. The Doha Development
Agenda is central to the G8's approach to energizing the global economy,
increasing employment, spurring sustainable development, improving international
governance and eradicating poverty." Lastly, with regard to the global
markets, they singled out corporations and corporate governance, social
responsibility and the need for the Financial Stability Forum to work with
other relevant organizations on market stability.
-
- If the G8 is only a club, then how come they tell others
what to do? How come all of the countries of the world that do not abide
by their wishes are penalized? Why are all their mandates implemented?
Why are the parliaments and, in particular, the U.S. Congress, so free
with transferring their power instead of reigning in their leaders? If
a duck looks like a duck, quacks like a duck and walks like a duck, is
it a dog? No.
-
- Comment
-
- From Michael Karcher
thefifthseal@lycos.com
6-12-3
-
- Dear Joan Veon/Rense.com,
-
- Our caretakers are looking out for us...
-
- Just for an historical recap of more recent evidence:
In 1970, Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Carter's National Security Advisor,
published a book, 'Between Two Ages,' in which he suggested a "Movement
toward a larger community of the developed nations...through a variety
of indirect ties and already developing limitations on national sovereignty"
by the US and other nations. This statement echoed the proposal by Richard
Gardner in the Council On Foreign Relations publication "Foreign Relations,"
in which he stated in his article "The Hard Road to World Order"
(April 1974), that a single leap into world government via an organization
like the U.N. is unrealistic. He called for an "end run around national
sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece." He mentioned the IMF, the
World Bank, a UN military force, World Food Conference and others, to
help accomplish this goal. You recall that the CFR was founded by Edward
Mandell House, a Marxist, in 1921, who stated in his book
-
- "Philip Dru: Administrator," that he was working
for "Socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx." House was the chief
advisor to Woodrow Wilson and advocated the US giving up its sovereignty
to the League of Nations. Later in the 20th century, the 70's, David Rockefeller
founded the Trilateral Commission, based very much on Brzezinski's ideas,
and coinciding in agendas, philosophies, and social circles with CFR personalities.
Early literature from the Rockefeller's Tri Com, for example, stated that
advanced communist countries could become partners in an alliance with
America, Asia and Europe (the Trilateral areas) toward an eventual world
government. Europe seems to be solidifying in a unity (developing EU)
more readily these days, marketed as economically beneficial. Isn't Rockefeller
a banker?
-
- In the Veon article, the Tony Blair comments regarding
social problems of various nations, refered to as "our problems,"
is clearly a touching and obvious example of the G8's mentality...(remember
"We are the world"--80's MTV video--pop culture even helps).
The EU's being formed specifically for economic benefit to solve economic
problems. Don't socialist's contend that most, if not all, problems stem
from poverty and economic inequity? The Chirac comment that "We are
not the UN..." is a code phrase for "We are not the UN but we
can use the UN for our goals." Remember Richard Gardner's tactic for
his/their establishment of 'world order' (NEW world order?) in the '74
article above.
-
- It's coming along nicely, it would seem...
-
- Regards,
Michael
|
