Hank McIntyre

Why did the whole world go to war in 1914 when Archduke Ferdinand was shot?

Why did Truman start the Korean War, then suddenly claim he didn't want to risk American lives, thereby destroying the possibility of victory? He fired MacArthur (who wanted to force the retreat of the incoming Chinese forces, and ultimately defeat the North Koreans to prevent a continuation of the war) and pulled back our troops in order to allow the communists to keep their original borders.

Why did the Pentagon demand that our men be drafted and sent to Vietnam, but refuse to provide them with the means and strategies to win?

All of the crazy, unexplainable history we've witnessed and read about in the last 150 years leaves writers, reporters and filmmakers with a lot of freedom to paint their own picture of "What really went on behind the scenes", and create heroic fantasies about our presidents and military leaders... since there is no logical explanation for any of it.

Except that there is. The largest banking families in the world have, for generations, striven to establish a world without borders, without nations... So that banks and corporations can become de facto sovereign world powers operating without any resistance from the laws of this or that nation.

They had to weaken the citizen's image of his belonging to a "strong" or sovereign country. They do this by supporting one side for a few years, and then shift their support to the other side. In 1948, Israel was given the United Nation's support (the NWO's support) for "good and noble" reasons - but were those the real reasons? Once Israel became strong, support was shifted toward the PLO - just enough to insure continued strife and turmoil in the region. Israel's independence was originally supported by the NWO to help erode the virtually impenetrable "sovereignty" mindset of the Islamic states. Israel developed its own sense of sovereignty in its years of existence. (Sovereignty is the toughest nut for the international financier to crack. It scares him: It is something that money alone cannot quickly break.) So by giving power to both Israel and the Palestinians, while both parties remain face-to-face within these tight borders, it guarantees years of turbulence, eroding any sense of sovereignty existing on either side.

Why was Taiwan created? Wasn't it encouraged to challenge Communist China with the promise of American military support? And now what's happening? The U.S. has turned its back on them, leaving them dangling before the Communists (whom we support with trade and tacit political consent) after nearly 5 decades of belligerent shouting made to one another. What do you suppose the "People's Liberation Army" will do to those Taiwanese who had believed in the integrity of the U.S.'s promises and commitments?

The cause of all these events is not to create a powerful nation on one side or the other of a conflict... it's only to create turmoil, uncertainty and fear.

Why? So when a large-scale civil war breaks out among a nation of demoralized, confused, impoverished people, the Almighty U.N. can step in - and actually be welcomed - and control that country with foreign troops (who can more easily fire upon those citizens than could an army of their countrymen.)The result: The end of sovereignty, the end of self-respect, the end of freedom for the individual. The U.N. was designed to be the One-World-Government that the world's bankers had ached for over the last 5 centuries, and the more often these crazy "unexplainable" events take place in our world today, the closer the U.N. comes to being the most powerful military body in the world: Ready and able to implement that One-World-Enslavement.

The "most powerful military"? What about America?

America created the U.N., America is the U.N. Our government built it, flew its flag over our wars and let it pass resolution after resolution insuring their, the U.N.'s, authority over our military (and the military of every other nation) should they, the U.N., determine that the time is right for them to take charge.


World War II was conducted in a way that prolonged the fighting and increased loss of American and Allied life.

Failure to build up our military, which should have started when Hitler began invading in 1939, insured that the first years of American involvement in the war would be wracked with defeats and heavy losses. (Critics say the American people would have rejected a military buildup prior to the war, that everyone wanted to stay out of the war at all costs, and Roosevelt feared losing the election if he did openly prepare for war. But history shows that nothing gets the public's patriotism going faster that talk of a need for war. Look at "Desert Storm": Who cares about Kuwait? But everyone in America was Gung-Ho about it once war was mentioned. The same is the case for all wars at the beginning, provided that they're presented right: As indignant responses to abuses and insults directed toward America from the offending nation. And politicians were (and are always) savvy enough to know how to rally support for a war in this way. They certainly could have done it then.)

They assured that Japan would attack us by freezing Japanese assets in American banks, blockading oil, and moving our fleet to Hawaii (closer to their sphere of interest). Japan was unquestionably evil in its conduct: Attacking non-belligerent countries in Asia and torturing and killing civilians, and other acts of treachery. But the point here is, that the top people in our government knew that Japan was going to attack in response to this pressure.

Roosevelt promised that troops and supplies were coming to the American forces in the Philippines when the war started, even though he knew that no such support was coming and indeed never came. So the Americans were ordered to fight an impossible battle with the Japanese as supplies dwindled (while the American general in charge, MacArthur, rode a yacht to Australia). This prolonged the fighting even though those in charge knew the battle was lost. This resulted in the Death March and 4 years of torture and starvation for those troops. It's an example of "Anything to make the war worse than it has to be," the guiding philosophy that governed U.S. conduct of the war throughout its duration.

"The U.S. will accept nothing less than total surrender...", this being the ultimatum issued to Germany (before the Allies really achieved a position of full strength in the war). What's wrong here? If a country knows you're going to completely take it over, even those citizens who are against their own government will become willing to fight simply to keep their homeland. Generally, EVERYONE will fight harder and with greater urgency. This stupid comment was unnecessary: Once the Allies were in a winning position, they could just go ahead and occupy the country and knock-out the government without announcing their intention to do so. But, again, Americans had to receive the highest possible shock value from the war. Why was that?


The "One-Worlders" were desperate to get their "United Nations" going. Americans wouldn't accept the "League of Nations" after the First World War, so, this time, the people had to be exposed to as much death and grief as possible to soften them up into accepting anything that was presented as being a "peace-keeping" instrument. And it worked. The U.N. was established as a world power in 1946 and determined that any nation's sovereignty had to meet with their approval ... or they, the U.N., would declare that nation to be a threat to world peace and initiate a "police action" (read: "war").


The 1929 stock market crash (and subsequent "Great Depression") caused an impoverished American populace to be willing to accept unconstitutional government controls in exchange for a promise of "relief". It became illegal for citizens to own gold or silver (which would enable them to buy and do business even if the currency became weak or worthless... instead of being totally at the mercy of government provisions in order to survive). Another of these unconstitutional government controls: Registering and identifying all citizens officially, in the guise of the "Social Security Act". This increased the government's ability to directly manage the actions of the individual citizen, something critical for them in order to implement "One-World" controls over the people, to quickly locate and identify any "renegade" freedom-lovers who'd rather live in the hills than work in a U.N. salt mine with a foreign soldier's bayonet at his back.

The government actually encouraged people to invest in the Stock Market up through 1929, declaring that, in this "new economy", with its endless new inventions being marketed, it was essentially impossible to lose money. To make matters worse (and to reveal the true intentions of the government), the Federal Reserve actually HIKED interest rates significantly 2 years into the depression, when the economy was well into its death throes, guaranteeing increasing joblessness and starvation. What American could resist any promise of government aid under such extreme conditions (which appear to have been substantially caused by that same government)? And the government wasn't slow to take advantage of the vulnerable state of the American citizen: They quickly slipped-through several unconstitutional laws that allowed them, the government, to seize personal property ...when they decided it was necessary. Of course, they weren't going to show their hand by announcing that they had passed such laws, or by blatantly displaying any immediate seizures of property at that point. They were content that these laws were now there, and could just lay around on the law books until the next level of One-World Government was ready to be put into force. And now, several decades later, we have seizures of money, property, homes, and other items by the government... under the guise of "Drug-Enforcement": Except it is used on people not even charged with, or suspected of, drug possession. And upon proving their innocence, the Government does not return the "confiscated" money, nor is it required to do so! How is this? Those lowly "Emergency Powers" acts put into force way back in the depths of the depression.

What to do? Ultimately, there has never been an ideal government, so there's no point in griping about these discoveries about our own government or about the U.N. We've been educated to recite phrases like "Land of the free" , "Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness..." and such, as though these things were a natural part of life. It is best to be aware that there is always something going on that threatens our personal liberties, and not be shocked when we find that this is the case.

Our response to this is to be personally prepared for prohibitions on our freedom, and to be psychologically, financially, and spiritually prepared to endure these situations and to even thrive in them as much as possible. Don't let fear grip your consciousness at such news. Our "kingdom" should never be that of any earthly government, but rather the "Kingdom" of YHWH Elohiym, the God of creation. When we can see ourselves standing in that Kingdom in a real and eternally-existing way, we can avoid getting shaken-up by the villainous tactics being perpetrated by these temporary authorities that we deal with in this physical world.

Copyright © Hank McIntyre

PROOF: A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE "NEW WORLD ORDER" - Facts & statements revealing the existence & nature of the One World Government movement


News, Archived & Pending Articles