GBTV - Where the Truth Lives

Election Season 2014

And it has brought us to this trainwreck called ObamaCare and we have bankrupted our kids and grandkids!

We are now headed into the 2014 Election Season and common sense and conservatism are on the rise. Please stand-up and be counted!

Reading Collusion: How the Media Stole the 2012 Election is a great place to start!

The Founding Father's Real Reason for the Second Amendment

And remember the words of Thomas Jefferson "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." See Video of Suzanna Gratia-Hupp’s Congressional Testimony: What the Second Amendment is REALLY For, below (u-tube HERE).

The Leaders Are Here... Palin, Cruz, Lee, Paul, Chaffetz....


Can You Really Still Believe That None of These People Would Have Done a Better Job???

Bloggers' Rights at EFF


Monday, October 4, 2010

Who Are We… and Is America Done?

Glenn was joined by 3-guests… former UN Ambassador John Bolton, Stuart Varney from Varney and Company, and British EU Parliamentarian and author Daniel Hannan to discuss the title  questions as well as the  US and EU report:  This is Global Governance 2025 by US & EU Intelligence Agencies

Video 1:  Who Are We… An Is America Done

Have we done all the things we were suppose to as a Country? Have we fulfilled our ‘divine destiny’?

“With firm reliance… we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honor"  was it a code by Jefferson??

If you believe we are not done… please take Glenn Beck’s 40-Day and 40-Night Challenge

Can we allow ourselves to be the generation who lost greatness and freedom for America… for our children… for our grandchildren?

The answer for most of us is:  No… We Can’t!!

We are standing at the edge… the beginning of the dark ages or the beginning of something new like the industrial revolution.  Which will we choose??

Video 2:  Who Are We… An Is America Done

This is what the government says the world will look like in 2025:

Please Read This Report  -  It is frightening and something everyone needs to know!

This is Global Governance 2025 by US & EU Intelligence Agencies

Yes, it is true.

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

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

“Global Governance” – in case you need to recheck your eyes and mind is coming in the minds of many in power.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

More to be published about this — including more excerpts — added to this Gulag Bound article, after further research.

-->  This is their plan… the question is what are we going to do about it? <--

We need to fight if we don’t want to find ourselves in the dust bin of history…


1.  Take Beck’s 40-Day and 40-Night Challenge

2. Vote and vote with knowledge behind your picks including weighing this information into your choices

3. Stand-up and say as Ghandi said:  We do not hate you… we just want you to leave!  Progressives and those promoting world governance… must go if we want America, free market capitalism and individualism to survive.

4. Educate yourself and your children in the Founding Fathers, the Constitution and Bill of Rights, the Bible and or your faith and let them see you stand-up and speak-up for what is right.

5. We must all agree that we are going to have to sacrifice and go through hard times if we want America to survive.  Our lives are going to change.  It is our choice whether we let the Progressive, the Globalists and Global Unions

There are people saying that China will be the future model and that we , America will be a second rate nation. However, Glenn’s guest feel that it can all be turned around if we stand-up together and say no!

Video 3:  Who Are We… An Is America Done

Glenn’s Guests today:

John Bolton – Former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations and author of: Surrender Is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and How Barack Obama is Endangering our National Sovereignty (Encounter Broadsides)  said,  “We need to have a serious conversation in the United States about how we feel about global government, global governance, the NWO or whatever they call it and seriously consider if that is what we want… and if not what we must do want and what we plan to do to save America!”

Bolton said that the Tea Party is a great thing and is very much part of what will save us, America, in this fight (that is why the left is so invested is destroying and belittling them as well as people who speak the truth and speak out for the Constitution and God and against Progressivism.)

Stuart Varney  -  From Varney and Company on the Fox Cable Business News Channel  says that  this Global Governance report report encapsulates Obama’s world view.

Varney says he sees that there is something happening, a wave, going on in America recognizing and rejecting global governance and government.  He says there is a need for some global regulation… but it is completely out of control, and Americans are finally recognizing it.

Obama is going against American interests by banning the drilling of oil, off shore as well as in Alaska,  or within the boundaries of the lower 48.  (If you read and watched The Roots of Obama’s Rage:  part 1 and part 2, you realize that the reason for Obama’s decision is his belief system steeped in anti-colonialism and liberation theology.)  And please read:  The Roots of Obama's Rage and do some research beyond the mainstream media and pay attention to what your children are being taught in school.

Europe can no longer be considered a Judeo-Christian society.  They are more or a pagan society whose faith has already been stolen by the government, said British born Varney.  (Our faith in God, the Bill of Rights including the right to bear arms, and common sense are all at the center and needed for us to win the fight we now find ourselves in.)

Daniel Hannan  -  Member of European Parliament and Author of  The New Road to Serfdom: A Letter of Warning to America, an important read!

Hannan says people make it sound like global governance is a conspiracy theory… it is not!  It is real!  European and American leaders are now already talking about it out in the open everywhere (like it is a done deal)… and like with Obama’s rhetoric, too many Americans are not really listening or are too distracted to pay attention! 

Hannan also says that you can’t have global governance and democratic votes and freedoms at the same time!

He added that European press is showing the tea party as toothless yokels supporting unelectable candidates.

Hannan said that Chris Christy is exactly the kind of Politian we need to do what needs to be done and to win in these times.

Our choice is that we give up… or we fight!!

Bilderberg 2010: Out of the darkness, into the light

Groups like the Bilderbergers, the CFR, the Trilateralists and others that pull the strings and control us through mechanisms like the Federal Reserve and many other things are coming out of the darkness and admitting their goals.

    Dr Henry Kissinger at Bilderberg 2010.Dr Henry Kissinger at Bilderberg 2010.   Photograph:   Quierosaber

    I found out this week, as I always deep-down suspected, since the age of about four, that I'm actually a spy working for Her Majesty's Secret Service. I'm annoyed that I didn't know sooner, as I would have used my immunity from prosecution and begun bumping people off much sooner. I can't wait to get back to the UK. I've got a serious backlog.

    The revelation emerged during an impromptu news conference on a hot roundabout, with one of the more famous Bilderberg documentarians, Daniel Estulin. Someone had mentioned one of my articles, and he said: "Forget about that guy, he's an MI6 agent." If you think it was a surprise for me, you can hardly imagine how my handlers in Whitehall took it.

    There's no greater shame for an agent than a blown cover. It's worse than throwing the wrong person off a multi-story car park. If I'm not careful, I'm going to find myself spending the next 18 months decrypting Russian interceptions on a north sea trawler.

    I think Daniel Estulin is annoyed with me because I'm not Daniel Estulin. I rather suspect that he sees the dawning new world order as a giant metaphysical battle between lone crusader Daniel Estulin and the ranged powers of evil.

    Which doesn't mean to say that he's wrongheaded about what goes on in Bilderberg. His sources are good. It's just that he loves playing to the crowd, and is prone to making statements which are as bold and flashy as his silk trousers.

    Turns out I'm in good company: Estulin also branded Jon Ronson as MI6, which is an even more fantastical assertion. Ronson, as everyone knows, is MI5.

    So yes, I'm a government agent. It really is a gun in my pocket, and I'm not pleased to see you. I half thought a bit of disinfo-mud might be slung my way, but I wasn't expecting it from this side of the police tape. (Not helpful, Mr Estulin. Really not helpful....)

    The word "Bilderberg" attracts mud like lazy thought processes attract idiots. For decades now, one mention of "Bilderberg" has been enough to brand you a nut. An ultra-left/right/whoknowswhat-wing paranoid nut with some kind of existential dysmorphia and a coathanger wrapped round your head so you can pick up drivetime radio on Neptune.

    These days, it's changed. These days, if you don't know what Bilderberg is, you look out of touch. If you chuckle it off, and say it's just an over-70s golf weekend, you sound ill-informed. If you think it's a "conspiracy" you need to flick back a few pages in the dictionary. The word you're looking for is "conference".

    A four-day conference held in secret, with a €10m security budget, run by David Rockefeller, Henry Kissinger and the Queen of the Netherlands. Nothing weird about that. Nothing to see here. Move along. What undoubtedly was weird about Bilderberg 2010 is that Kissinger chose to hold it in Spain. He's not exactly on Spain's Christmas card list.

    "If he was here now, if Henry Kissinger was here, I was arrest him, and it would be" – and here the police officer noosed his fingers around his throat, and delivered the universal sound of a wrung neck – "it would be kkkkkrrrchkk".

    The policeman didn't seem to see the absurdity of the situation. He was a Spanish policeman who'd just spent four days standing outside a Spanish hotel, protecting a man wanted for questioning in Spain about war crimes. People were getting arrested for trying to take photographs of someone who should have been getting arrested. Some comfort: at least we got the photos. (Well done Quierosaber, it was worth the dehydration cramps).

    It's an odd thing. George Osborne goes four times in a row to Kissinger's long and lavish conference, no one raises an eyebrow. But if he so much as popped his head into Broadmoor for Peter Sutcliffe's birthday party, there'd be an outcry. I don't get it.

    Another thing I don't get: the consensus that Bilderberg is supposed to form and its relationship to all our welfares. But that discussion is for another time – perhaps sooner rather than later. For now, it's just incredible that we can talk about Bilderberg at all: we can start addressing its agenda (as published on its website). We can examine its role in the formation of public policy.

    These are questions for serious people: the spectrum of political debate must expand to fit the facts. Morons will still twirp out their "tin hat" halfwitticisms, but they sound oddly dated.

    I don't want to sound too much like Carlos Castaneda, but there's been a shift in consciousness. The word "Bilderberg" has broken out into the awareness of the press and public, exactly like Robbie Williams never did in America. For the first time, the press took note, camera crews made the journey, and last shreds of secrecy and shame were torn away by our photos of the delegates.

    I've never quite understood the shame of attending Bilderberg. The jacket sleeves in front of the face, the blackened limos. Back before it started, we overheard some conference organisers saying that there were fewer delegates this year, because "many of them were worried about the publicity". Heaven forbid someone should see you at Bilderberg! The very thought!

    That sort of thing feels very "old politics", very pre-coalition, jarring with the openness of Cameron, the transparency of Clegg. David Cameron attended Bilderberg in 2008. I'm sure he'd be glad to talk about it, and not stoop to what Tony Blair did (Bilderberg 1993) and lie to parliament about going.

    The lies of Bilderberg are melting away as it steps out into the Spanish sunshine.

    The question of how Bilderberg has remained so long in the shadows is a big one, and not to be dismissed with a lame little: "no one's interested in the natterings of a retirees' lunch party".


Kissinger in 2008:  There will be “Bipartisan” Push for New World Order, Whoever Is Elected President  -  Why? Because both Obama and McCain we Progressives.  The Democratic party has been virtually taken over and transformed by the Progressives, but there are Progressives with the Republican ranks as well.  Americans must educate themselves and then vote accordingly.  Remember what Jefferson said… in order for our Republic to survive… the populace must be educated and involved~

Rothschild and CIA Publications Attack “Constitution-worshipers”… think about it:  Rothchild and the CIA on the same side against Constitutionalists and tea party people… really?

Video:  Obama on Dr.  Zbigniew Brezinski  - Globalist, NWO Engineer  -  If you are not familiar with Brezinki… you might want to do your homework

United Nations to Fully Implement Agenda 21, Obama to Endorse Plan at 9/20-22 Summit  -  Where was the coverage

United Nations General Assembly NotesPDF

Global Cooling and the New World Order

A US State Department document, #7277 revealed plans to give the #UN control of our Armed Forces & nuclear weapons

“Nothing is unchangeable but the inherent and unalienable rights of man.”  …Thomas Jefferson


For those who have friends and family who still can’t make the leap to the facts or as Daniel Hannan said, “People still make it sound like global governance is a conspiracy ‘theory’… it is not!  It is real!”  Or those that think because there is a conspiracy involved that it must not be real or be just a theory… they need to do their homework… and quickly!

There is a relatively new show on AMC called Rubicon.  The first episode was introduced with a question: “An invisible empire has been set up above the norms of democracy. Who said this? Ted Kaczynski (the Unabomber) or Woodrow Wilson (28th president of the United States)?” The correct answer is Wilson, justifying the mantra of the series, “Not every conspiracy is a theory.”

Rubicon has been praised by a number of critics. But the Chicago Tribune, for example, asked rhetorically and somewhat cynically—“Is Rubicon—the excellent AMC spy drama where characters puzzle things out rather than blow things up—too smart for TV?” The answer is no, and indeed that’s not where problems associated with the program are likely to lie, in its being “too smart” for the American public. It is safe to say that, on the contrary, the program is a response to widely held suspicions about the intelligence apparatus, secret power groups and politicians.  However the fact that the elites and media would ask a question like this proves that they think the people are ignorant or already too dumbed down to think or notice.  It is what Progressives have worked toward and counted on for 100+ years, but especially since the 1060’s.

Sadly, however, many in our culture and society, especially among the young, seem ‘not’ to be able to wrap their minds around information they are not familiar with, don’t read and have convinced themselves that history and politics are boring and not for them.  If you know people like that perhaps watching Rubicon is a good place for them to start, enabling their thought process to go into the needed direction to make the leap…?

No comments:

Post a Comment