“On the Brink?”
MARANATHA!
From canadafreepress.com

More than 60 years ago John F. Kennedy issued a warning about the “monolithic and ruthless conspiracy” that was using “covert means for expanding its sphere of influence.” He also warned us about the “very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon” by the perpetrators of this conspiracy to advance their agenda.
In 2020, the Covid 19 pandemic offered the would-be conspirators an ideal opportunity. The worldwide emergency enabled them to launch a decisive gambit to sidestep the legal strictures of democratic rule and attempt to create a global authoritarian police state. The experience was hugely distressing to the people in almost every nation, but it was also very revealing about the nature, methods and the objectives of the conspiracy. While the public response to the pandemic was unscientific and contrary to the established norms of public health policy, it was also nearly identical in most nations, suggesting that the incoherence was not an error, but an integral part of the planned policy response.
his policy, including the media-driven narrative and the draconian censorship of all dissent was clearly coordinated at a supra-national level. To achieve such policy coordination across the world could not have been achieved without a powerful force of coercion. But what force could explain such uniform compliance with the same destructive policy mistakes by nations large and small, rich and poor, powerful and weak all around the world? Who could force nations of the whole world to obey its dictate, and how?
We had the first glimpse of this force in action in June 2020 when Belarus’ president Aleksandr Lukashenko publicly snubbed a $940 million line of credit from the International Monetary Fund. He rejected it because the IMF conditioned the loan on Belarus imposing a strict Covid 19 lockdown policy and a curfew. Significantly, Lukashenko mentioned on several occasions that the IMF negotiators wanted Belarus to do “like in Italy.” Conditioning loans with terms that would severely impair the borrower’s ability to repay makes no economic sense, so the conditionality clearly had different objectives. Deep in debt and with collapsed tax revenues, most governments around the world needed loans, making them prey to the dictates of money power.
By April 2020, 85 nations have formally requested financial assistance from the IMF. To secure the needed funds they presumably accepted the terms, agreeing to follow the World Health Organization (WHO) dictate. As a result, they extended the lockdowns beyond all reason, destroying countless small and medium-sized businesses, shut down schools, created stasi-like contact-tracing programs, conspired to obscure effective treatments and instituted heavy-handed censorship of public discourse. They also agreed to promote vaccinations as the only way for us to return to normal life and cooperated on instituting Covid passes that would condition their own citizens’ freedom of movement on their compliance – first with the vaccine requirements, but ultimately with any demand that the global authorities might deem conducive to their agenda.
We only learned about IMF’s terms because the president of Belarus disclosed them publicly. Other governments quietly accepted the money and agreed to the terms. But in doing so and complying with the WHO policy dictate, government officials effectively took orders from an external power to the detriment of their own nations, economies, and populations.
A public health emergency must not be accepted as a defence. In all nations, taxpayers fund their governments, which keep many domain experts on their payrolls precisely to ensure that government policies are constructive, productive and lead to improvements in the life of their societies. Uncritically implementing policy measures that were clearly and egregiously contrary to the best interests of their own populations at the behest of external powers from which they accepted funding should in fact be regarded as high treason.
Given their positions of privilege as well as responsibility, they should not be able to invoke ignorance or inexperience in their own defence. The very nature of their office obliges them to source the best available expertise and apply discernment in serving their own constituents. In abdicating on these obligations while complying with the dictates of an external power they have effectively committed high treason and must be held accountable accordingly.
Public officials could not have done much damage without active and extensive complicity from the mass media and academic institutions. As we know, many of these organizations took funding from some of the same stakeholders who wield disproportionate influence at the World Health Organization, big pharma corporations and the global financial organizations.
What the world experienced over the last 30 months was the greatest crime against humanity ever perpetrated. But while many public officials, media moguls and corrupt academicians had complicity in this crime, the agenda was formulated and planned by those who had the means and the motive to set the wheels in motion. This “monolithic and ruthless conspiracy” clearly originated from the international banking cartel together with their agencies like the Bank of International Settlements, the IMF, World Bank, the Global Systemically Important Banks (GSIBs) and others who control the issue of money and credit with which they can bribe and co-opt almost any structure in society.
A famous member of that cartel boasted, “Permit me to issue and control the money of a nation, and I care not who makes its laws!” At money power’s receiving end, French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte understood that relationship all too well: “When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation.”
The bankers have long coveted the control of the world, its resources, and its populations. As Carroll Quigley warned us, “The powers of financial capitalism had [a] far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world. … The growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic control and use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and direct injury of all other economic groups.” Quigley wrote those words in his 1965 book “Tragedy and Hope,” suggesting that this conspiracy was discernible many decades ago. Indeed, over a century ago Lord Acton prophesized that, “the issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the bankers.”
This fight is now upon us. The “monolithic and ruthless conspiracy” that JFK warned us about has unleashed an undeclared war on humanity. It will prove to be the ultimate struggle between our emancipation or our final enslavement. We do not have the choice to decline this struggle for in yielding, we would deprive our children and their children of liberty, condemning them to a lifetime of servitude. But in destroying the conspiracy and bringing the ruthless conspirators to justice we can free all of humanity from this servitude and reclaim the liberty and prosperity that is our birthright under God. We are the ones we have been waiting for, and we are many. Join us in this struggle for we will prevail! SOURCE
Brothers and sisters in Christ, I must add here that ‘winning’ the war against these evil entities would be best for our world, but we are in the end of the end days and Satan and his minions are waging war against humanity like never before.
Remember that God is in control! And remember the warnings Jesus gave us about these days.
And most importantly, remember Who wins!!
MARANATHA!

Here is a piece I wrote in 2018:
U.N. Projects 2030 As Year Globalism Comes to Fruition
I have been writing about the United Nations and George Soros, and their diabolical plan for a One World Government for many years. I want the reader to understand that the One World Government (OWG) IS the end game for the globalists.
Sustainable Development Goals
In September of 2015, a special meeting of the U.N. was held. They rolled out their Sustainable Development Goals. Among these goals was forced migration. We can see the devastating effects this forced and well-planned out migration of Muslims, mainly to European countries has caused.
The U.N. knows that Muslims never assimilate into the society where they migrate. They create parallel societies, all the time scheming to implement political jihad. The name of the game is to do anything and everything to nations to destabilize them. This will make it easier for “open borders” to exist.
Think: London.
THIS is why globalists detest Patriotism, and liken it to being “hitleresque.” Our president is a patriot. Victor Orban of Hungary is a patriot. This means that they love their countries and the people. This does not fit the narrative of the need for globalization. These people want NO borders. They want the citizens of each country to become Good Globalist citizens.
2030
At the U.N. SDG’s meeting, the year 2030 was brought up often. I knew that the date had to have great significance.
The election of President Donald Trump threw a huge wrench into the U.N. plan to have their OWG by 2030. I believe that is why we are seeing the globalists ramping up their rhetoric. We saw it in France when Macron declared that Nationalism is the opposite of Patriotism. He may not have looked directly at our president when he said those words, but make no mistake – his words were directed at Trump.
Macron wants to build a mighty EU Army to “Protect them from America (really?), China and Russia.” (From America ……..or from Donald Trump?)
It has been said in the U.N. that the only thing holding back World Globalism is a free and strong America. Why do you think that Soros has spent so many millions of dollars, funding the Honduran so-called “Caravan.”
Brethren – this invasion is only the start. The globalists goal is to destabilize America any way they can.
I watched a video today which showed a large group of Hondurans who had reached our border. They were throwing large stones at Americans. The police were hiding behind their cars. REALLY? From where are the police getting their orders?
Climate Change (Global Warming)
Isn’t it interesting that just a few years ago, this was always called “Global Warming.” They had to change the verbiage because too many people across the planet were were becoming wise to the deception.
Earth goes through cooling periods and warming periods. This has been happening since scientists began to keep track of temperatures. But it has NEVER been about temperatures. This has always been a ruse in the U.N. to eventually control the economies of all nations.
The regulations the U.N. wishes to impose on the nations of the world, would finally bring them all under the control of the U.N.
I wrote an article a few years ago about this very thing. I urge the reader to click below and read that article:
Climate Change Used as a Ruse To Control World’s Economies
You will notice that the video I embedded in this article was taken off of the internet. I found a replacement here:
From americanthinker.com
In the 1960s, an informed but naïve undergraduate, I was walking across the campus of the University of Pennsylvania with the Chairman of the Chemistry Department, Prof. Charles C. Price. He told me that he was president of the United World Federalists, and asked if I knew what that organization was. When I said that I did not, he replied that they believed in a one-world government that would grow out of the United Nations. I was nonplussed as I had never heard anyone suggest that idea before.
To me, the United Nations was a benevolent organization dedicated to pressuring the world community in the direction of peace, and to operating charitable programs to help the struggling, impoverished peoples of the world. I imagined the UN as a kind of United Way on a worldwide scale.How would Prof. Price’s vision of a new world government emerge?
Although there was a socialistic thread in its founding document, the United Nations was formed based on a vision of human rights presented in the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights” (UDHR) which placed the concept of rights at the forefront for the progress of the world body. And rights are the mainstay for uplifting human freedom and the dignity of the individual. The UDHR document followed many amazing documents that presented rights as the central concept of the post-feudal world: the English Declaration (or Bill) of Rights of 1689, the U.S. Declaration of Independence with its important and forceful assertion of inalienable natural rights, the powerful U.S. Bill of Rights enacted in 1791, and the French Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen (1789).
The word “rights” appears in almost every sentence of the 1869-word UN document. The document is literally obsessed with rights, and one must assume they are likewise obsessed with the rights successes as manifested in the United Kingdom, the U.S., and France. However, there are some deviations from the rights usage we are all familiar with. In Article 3, Instead of the inalienable rights of “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” found in our Declaration of Independence, the UN declares everyone’s right to “life, liberty and security of person.” Are they implying that security will bring happiness? Or are they implying that happiness is too ephemeral a value, and too Western? Perhaps more mundane survival goals are needed by most of the world.
We see a reprise of items from our Bill of Rights such as condemnation of cruel and unusual punishment (Article 5), due process (Articles 6,7,8,9, 10, 11, 14, 17), illegal search and seizure (Article 12), and freedom of speech and assembly (Articles 19,20). But there are new rights introduced which, as early as 1945, were pointing the way towards intervention by the UN in the daily lives of people throughout the world. Throughout the document, they assert the right to food, clothing, medical care, social services, unemployment and disability benefits, child care, and free education, plus the right to “full development of the personality,” (imagine, the UN says I have the right to be me) and the “right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community… and to enjoy the arts” (we each have the right to enjoy a painting or a movie). However, they do not state the right to appear on the “Tonight Show” or “Saturday Night Live”, so there were limits to their largesse.
In 2015, seventy years after their original rights-based document, the UN took a giant step towards the global government that was only hinted at in their first organizing document. They issued a document entitled “Transforming Our World: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.” This document has 91 numbered sections of the UN’s program for world government. The UDHR is only referenced once in the entire document in Article 19. Unlike the original “mother document” that was under 1900 words, this document is 14,883 words. The 91 items are addressing issues under the five headings of People, Planet, Prosperity, Peace, and Partnership. Additionally, the document provides 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) to improve life on the planet.
What is meant by the term “sustainable?” The most often quoted definition comes from the UN World Commission on Environment and Development: “sustainable development is development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” The earlier ideas and ideals of rights, freedom, equality, and justice are subsumed under meeting of needs and an explicit environmentalism which emphasizes preventing the depletion of scarce planetary resources. Of course, the takeoff is the Marxist axiom that society should be organized around the idea of “from each according to his ability to each according to his needs.” Thus, Marxism is implicit in sustainability, but is nuanced by its alliance with seemingly scientific adjustments and goals related to environmentalism. A technical jargon is welded to Marxist intentionality to produce a sense of fittingness and modern progress.
The entire “Transforming Our World” document is cast in a stream of consciousness of pious platitudes for a utopian future. It is an outsize utopian dream. Five of the 17 items pertain to the environment. There are goals for the cities, for women, for the poor, and even for life under the water. Absolutely no sphere of human activity is exempt from control by the UN. The key word of course is no longer “rights” except the oblique reference in Article 19. In fact, this writer did not see the word rights even once in this document even though that word appeared in practically every sentence of the original UN document.
The one-worlders of the 1950s and early 1960s are now in the UN driver’s seat, and they have made their move. The overlay of Marxist talk about “meeting needs” has moved to center stage. The UN has assigned itself a time frame for moving forward in its plan for planetary hegemony.
This projected transformation detailing (yet without details) a new world order of environmental responsibility and a significant reduction of poverty and hunger never speaks to the practical dimension of vast manipulations of people by cynical leaders and ignorant bureaucrats who hold their positions through terrorism and bribery. They never discuss incompetence and corruption, twin brothers in the family of venality. The document portrays a sincere world where all those in power want to help humanity despite the daily evidence of the selfishness, corruption, murderous intents, devilish manipulations, thefts, personal immoralities, hatreds, and utter depravity of many governmental leaders in every country in the world, and among the leaders of business as well. Is not the Agenda for Sustainable Development itself one of those devilish manipulations?
The sustainability ideal is not wedded to a Christian worldview; instead, individual liberty is submerged in a scientifically determined collectivist mindset with final decisions in the hands of the devilish, all-knowing Big Brothers. The relevance of the individual is downplayed. It is being put forward by a UN that is no longer pro-western, a much larger body than existed in 1945. Will you accept it, or is it time, more than ever before, to begin rethinking our membership in that unsustainable body? source
Brethren, what we are experiencing today is an integral part of the New World Order plan to have the U.N. as the central, global government of the entire world. And then the stage is set for Antichrist to make his entrance.
But I have a feeling that a major event/catastrophe much like Covid 19, will once again envelope the world with disease; who knows, maybe we will be battling this virus for another ten years – horrible to consider, but these are times such as we have never known before.
An article I wrote in 2020:
Agenda 21 and the Plan to Depopulate our Planet by 95% by 2030
One thing for sure, brothers and sisters in Christ – we are living in extraordinary times!! Pray – Read His Glorious Word – and Tell unsaved family and friends about the Gospel of Jesus which can save their souls!
Shalom B’Yeshua
MARANATHA!!
Sri Lanka was the Canary in the Coal mine, and it doesn’t look good for the rest of the world
And of course, Bill Gates is involved.
From Crossroads with JOSHUA PHILIPP
MARANATHA!