Entry in progress—B.P.
 
New York (NY) Times
The chance for a new world order
By Henry A. Kissinger
Published: Monday, January 12, 2009
(...)
Even the most affluent countries will confront shrinking resources. Each will have to redefine its national priorities. An international order will emerge if a system of compatible priorities comes into being. It will fragment disastrously if the various priorities cannot be reconciled.
 
The nadir of the existing international financial system coincides with simultaneous political crises around the globe. Never have so many transformations occurred at the same time in so many different parts of the world and been made globally accessible via instantaneous communication. The alternative to a new international order is chaos.
   
VDare.com
A Very Real New World Order
By Chuck Baldwin on January 27, 2009 at 2:00am
(...)
Remember, too, that it was G.W. Bush who, back in 2005, committed the United States to the Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP), which is nothing more than a precursor to the North American Community or Union, as outlined in CFR member Robert Pastor’s manual, Toward a North American Community.
 
If there is no such thing as an emerging New World Order, what was G.W. Bush talking about when he referred to “a hemispheric family” and an “international order”?
   
YouTube
Obama Calls for a New “International Order”
Uploaded by fairinfowar on May 22, 2010
Obama Calls for a New “International Order” also says “we have a role to play. We cannot leave it to those in uniform to defend this country—we have to make sure that America is building on its strengths.”
 
REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT
AT UNITED STATES MILITARY ACADEMY
AT WEST POINT COMMENCEMENT TRANSCRIPT: http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2010/05/obama_at_west_point_graduation.html
   
Fox News
Obama Call for ‘International Order’ Raises Questions About U.S. Sovereignty
Published May 24, 2010
President Obama is facing criticism for his declaration over the weekend that he would seek a new “international order,” with some questioning how much U.S. sovereignty the administration is willing to cede in exchange for more global cooperation.
 
Obama, delivering the commencement speech Saturday at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, said that “stronger international standards and institutions” and stronger alliances can “resolve” challenges ranging from terrorism to nuclear proliferation to climate change to economic decline.
 
“Our adversaries would like to see America sap its strength by overextending our power,” Obama said. “So we have to shape an international order that can meet the challenges of our generation.”
   
Liberty News online
OBAMA’S NEW WORLD ORDER MANIFESTO
06-27-2010 4:42 pm - Joseph Farah - WorldNetDaily
Lost in all the chaos of the Gulf oil spill is Barack Obama’s 52-page manifesto for a New World Order.
 
I invite you to read for yourself his misnamed “National Security Strategy” – misnamed because it is actually a blueprint for running the whole world like he’s been running the United States since January 2009.
(...)
The last seven pages of the document are about this new “international order” Obama wants to build – a pretty ambitious agenda for a guy who has never run any business or served in any executive capacity before assuming the presidency. But don’t worry. His plan is to bring in some people with lots of experience running things – the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, to name a few.
 
Victory Post
Posted on October 24, 2012
Obama Doctrine: The New International Order
The global elite boldly advance their world government agenda into America’s National Security Strategy.
By Lucas Bowser
(...)
While initial use of the phrase “shape an international order” is purposefully broad, further examination of the report clarifies its language of “shape” to be synonymous with “create,” and is used in the document interchangeably with the word “build.” The report’s primary use of the term “international order” is not to generically describe the existing international system or community, but rather to denote a new world system or architecture, led by the United States. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton described it as a “new global architecture” that the administration has “begun to build” during “a new American moment” in international affairs “when our global leadership is essential, even if we must often lead in new ways.”
 
The NSSR (National Security Strategy Report—ed.) uses the term “international order” in the same way that the more controversial term “new world order” has been used in the past to describe a system of global governance centered around international institutions and organizations including the IMF, WTO, NATO, G20, the World Bank and the UN. Many high profile politicians have publicly used the phrase in relation to these institutions, as a way to signal large political changes in world affairs.
(...)
The terms “new international order” and “new world order” are nothing more than public relations buzzwords and marketing catchphrases that function as euphemisms working to portray the agenda as a modern arrangement that has something to offer the rest of the world. In reality it is a return to imperialist systems of the past, representing a return to serfdom and slavery for the masses. The modern world order system of independent sovereign nation states we have had since the Treaty of Westphalia is being abolished and replaced by a neo feudal corporate world empire run by Anglo-American finance oligarchs and elite global corporatists.