Ardavasd

Armenia - Traitors in its midst

2006-01-31T08:36:00.000-08:00

The Armenian leaders in Yerevan, such as President Robert Kocharyan, ex-member of the Azerbaijan Communist Party; Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian (one world orator); “Defense” Minister Serg Sarkisyan (of Monte Carlo Casino fame); and Artur Baghdasaryan, sly speaker of Parliament, have placed Armenia’s destiny in jeopardy.

On October 21, 2003 when addressing the international conference “Armenia on the way to Europe,” held in Yerevan, Armenian Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian stated: “that having entered the Council of Europe, Armenia had fulfilled only the minimum of what was necessary to register membership of this organization. First of all, it is necessary for society to realize the fact that Armenia is a part of Europe, and integration has no alternatives. We must continue on our path and bring our state and its society to a logical end, becoming a full member of the European family.”

Since then Armenia has become a member of the Council of Europe as well as having close relations with the European Union and the Turkish loving West. This love affair of Oskanian’s with the artificially created European organizations has done nothing but created demands upon Armenia as to how they must govern their country. He is in essence dealing with the very entities that want to eliminate independent nations. In the meantime, Armenia’s brilliant leaders have accepted free money from the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank which has retarded Armenia’s economy.

For many years Armenia’s government has been having secret, behind the scenes discussions with masters of the world, willing to return hard won security of Nagorno Kharabagh for a promised (illusionary) peace. It has already been decided that the areas of Kelbajar, Fizuli, Dzhebrail, and Zangelan will be returned to Azerbaijan. If one were to study a map of present Kharabagh, they would find that those areas are west and southeast of Kharabagh. Azerbaijan refugees together with armed forces would occupy those lands. In the future, it would be ideal for attacking Kharabagh from every angle. As an example, Bosnia-Albanian Turks disregarded the Dayton Accord Agreement signed on October 5, 1995 which included multinational military implementation forces under the command of NATO. The Albanians continued killing Christian Serbs while the so-called peace keepers did nothing.

The president of Kharabagh, Arkady Ghoukassian, has consistently stated that there can be no agreement without Kharabagh’s involvement. If there are strong outcries from patriots upon the conclusion of signing the agreement, the government will say”the world powers forced us to sign.” It now seems that president Ghoukassian has been convinced by Yerevan to accept the agreement, because if he does not, the consequences would be more dangerous in the future. The truth is that after they return the lands, the consequences will be even sadder than dangerous. Would any Armenian in his right mind be willing to give ancient Armenian soil for a piece of paper with writing on it?

A number of years ago British Baroness Caroline Cox wrote an Open Letter to the Armenian People. Just a few quotes of that open letter would be very enlightening pertaining to present events. She stated:

“I write this letter as someone who has great love and admiration for the Armenian people. It is this love which compels me to raise the alarm.”

“A decade after regaining its independence, Armenia might be in such great danger that its independence and very existence may be threatened. The hope created by negotiations with Azerbaijan currently being pursued by the Armenian Government is deceptive. The Islamist forces in the Caucasus are determined decisively to ‘resolve’ the ‘problems’ of Armenia and Kharabagh by force. Nobody, least of all Azerbaijan and Turkey, will stand in their way. Given the enormity of this threat and the complexities of the international political and economic interests, it is imperative that the Armenian Diaspora rally urgently to help the homeland before it is too late. It is far more important, and a far greater challenge, to act now to prevent another genocide from being unleashed than later to mourn yet another holocaust.”

“The present leadership of Armenia is under tremendous pressure to strike a deal and seems to be succumbing to the point of betraying all those who shed their blood or who sacrificed their loved ones for Artsakh. Are you going to allow your political leaders to give away lands of Southern Armenia? Are you going to give away the buffer zone, which has protected your people throughout these years of cease-fire? Are you going to allow Artsakh to be returned to a precarious and vulnerable status, with nothing achieved for all the blood that has been shed?”

“If the present course of events is not stopped, your leadership in Yerevan will have fatally weakened and betrayed your country. You will be unable to defend yourself against those who proclaim their determination to conquer and to achieve an Islamist Caucasus; and all those who gave their lives for your historic land, will have died in vain.”

Has not the Armenian Government questioned Caroline Cox as to the sources of her thoughts?

It has always been said, and has been proven to be true: when you stand strong though you are small, you are respected. When you speak from a position of weakness, you are detested.

God Bless Hayastan.

Ardavast Avakian
January 30, 2006

Priorities: Recognizing Armenia's Problems

2005-12-21T13:26:00.000-08:00

A small booklet titled “A New Look at TARC” by Dr. Moorad Mooradian is an in-depth assessment of the Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC). Dr. Mooradian points out the errors that took place during the TARC fiasco of July 9, 2001 – April 15, 2004.

That conciliation effort by non-governmental officials (NGOs), with the involvement of the Armenian Assembly as well as the Armenian Government, included a demand that Turkey open its borders with Armenia.

It is not understood, that when the Turkish-Armenia border opens, it would mean free trade – free trade with a nation of 70,000,000 people. Within a few years two million Turks would be mingling and living in Armenia as traders and businessmen. They would not have to drop bombs to take over what is left of the country. Could it be a possibility that Turkey might create problems for the transportation of Armenian goods to the world’s markets through its country?

Unfortunately, Armenia’s economic policies were faulty from the beginning of 1990. The continuation of the communist economic mentality was carried over, while monies of the IMF and World Bank vultures whet the appetites of ready opportunists who took advantage of bribe money to govern the nation. Money that had strings attached, and designed to perpetuate economic stagnation. That created an exodus of the population from their ancient soil – just what the enemies of Armenia have wanted.

We should not worry about “reconciliation” until we have dealt with inadequacies of an unpatriotic Armenian government. A government that allows its Defense Minister, Serg Sarkisyan, to gamble away millions of dollars (the peoples’ money) in his treks to the Monte Carlo casino. His brother, Alexandr Sarkisyan, is preparing to move his family out of Armenia by buying multi-million dollar properties in California. Where did he acquire that kind of wealth in an impoverished country? A government that refuses to defend the nation’s culture by ignoring foreign contaminated cultures to infiltrate. A government that has allied itself with world-created organizations such as the European Union (diminished of Christian heritage) and the Council of Europe who dictate to Armenia as to how they must govern their country. Armenia’s Central Bank sold 1.4 tons of gold into the world market on May 5, 2004 for $400 per ounce. Where did they acquire the gold, and what have they done with the money after the sale?

After Armenia sold its gold reserve “The Armenian Central Bank no longer would accumulate gold,” Tikran Sarkissian, the Bank’s chief, announced at a press conference. Sarkissian said “The nation’s gold reserve was sold when prices reached USD 400.00 an ounce. Sarkissian also said “holding gold offers very little profit.” Now, gold at this time has risen to $510.00 per ounce.

The government sold the nation’s (people’s) gold mines to One World investors (vultures). The gold from those mines (from the sweat of Armenian miners) could have been support, or (backing) for the useless Armenian “paper” dram. The dram would have become one of the world’s valuable currencies, which in turn would have reduced migration of the populace to all corners of the world.

The Armenian Government is secretly talking behind the scenes with world powers about a Kharabagh agreement. Agreements are not necessary. All agreements ended with the sacrificing of 30,000 young Armenian lives; but the Armenian Government seems to care less. Talks of appeasement (the compromising of Armenian soil) should not be taking place just to look good to the whims of the world.

These are the types of subject matters that Armenian’s should be concentrating on. The Armenian people worldwide must be awakened to the fact that there exist truly patriotic individuals and movements in Armenia that are ready to die for the defense of the nation but are not able to confront powerful exterior financial forces that support their kind of Armenia. Let us all understand, if Armenia goes as a nation, nothing but nothing will have Armenian value.

Does not the patriotic Diaspora contribute financial as well as humanitarian aid for the good of the nation, while many large organizations within the vast Diaspora do not speak out about this unpatriotic government? Is it because they are afraid of losing their status and privileges? When you do not speak out against a dictatorial theocracy in your homeland, you are allowing it to weakening, while condoning it.

Dr. Mooradian states on page 13 of his TARC booklet, that “Mr. David Philips was not independent of the U.S. Government. In fact, Mr. Mark Grossman was the number three person in the U.S. State Department at that time.” These are the interveners and facilitators within TARC who have also been behind the scenes of influencing America into a pro-Turkish foreign policy. Their purpose of intervening and facilitating is to ingratiate themselves to the Armenian. Their compatriots have been training the armed forces of Azerbaijan and upgrading Turkey’s air force and tanks. Their kinsmen, the “Young Turks” in 1915 were the architects of the Armenian genocide. If we can not identify the enemy, we do not deserve to be a nation. It would be interesting to know which mind dreamt of a conciliation commission -- a Turkish mind or an Armenian mind.

You are only respected when you stand strong, even though you are small. When you speak weakly to the enemy, he has nothing but contempt for you. After having strengthened the nation, then the enemy will approach you to reconcile.

It is most important that our educated intelligentsia be capable of identifying the truth, but with an added ingredient of common sense. Then we will not have need for TARC, Mark, or Lark.

Ardavast Avakian
Boca Raton, Florida - December 4, 2005

Armenia - Thirteen Yeras of Freedom

2005-12-16T18:20:00.000-08:00

I have just returned from a three-week visit to Armenia. The visit was intended to be totally devoted to the political and social analysis of the nation. I have been asking visitors upon their return from Armenia what their impressions and observations of progress were. The general response has been: “many changes relative to previous visits.” I also returned noticing changes from a 1997 visit.

There was great activity pertaining to infrastructure such as roads, walks, building renovations, etc. Thanks to Kirk Kerkorian for upgrading the roads and underground pipes. May God bless him. Also, many elegant high-end restaurants were built, some having one on each three floors of a beautifully renovated building. It is possible to purchase anything from small personal stores or larger and upscale stores selling the world’s goods.

But there still exists begging on the streets. We constantly experienced requests for funds while walking. One evening a lady rang our apartment doorbell begging for money to feed her children. We visited a family living beyond the center of Yerevan on Taparashrgiknery Street. They migrated from Gumri where the earthquake struck and destroyed their home. The only housing they were able to afford was a ground floor, two room space for their family of five. Their bathroom was an outhouse without a tub or shower. The land that their home was built on in Gumri now has new homes constructed upon it. Gumri’s local government refused to pay for their land regardless of their pleas. In other words, their property was stolen from them.

During a drive, we passed through an area of newly constructed homes that would compete with homes over the one million dollar class in the United States. In essence, there virtually does not exist a middle class, which is always the backbone of any nation’s strength. The official poverty rate for Armenia at this time is 45 percent.

There is a great increase in chaotic, wild, and lawless traffic. The pedestrian has no rights to safety. I personally experienced an incident in which our taxi was stopped in the left lane of three lanes in heavy traffic. A most sweet girl was trying to cross in front of our stopped taxi and the lane next to us. While crossing the last empty lane nearest the curb, a vehicle traveling at great speed suddenly reached the girl. While braking hard, he still struck her. She managed to get up and onto the walk screaming with a broken arm hanging from her elbow. The driver hurriedly placed her in his vehicle and rushed off to a hospital.

There are virtually no laws for driving. The only laws that were visible were policemen next to their parked vehicles checking approaching drivers that changed lanes. They would flag down the driver and collect a fine on the spot. Innumerable small worn out taxis would drive at high speeds between other vehicles at breathtaking closeness from side to side and front to back. Your heart would be in your throat for the whole trip.

Changes were noticeable in television broadcasting. There are 29 channels to view. Nineteen of the 29 channels contain sexuality and violence in their programming. Two channels were licensed to America’s biased CNN showing the very same program. If you cancel these two channels, it would be 19 of 27. Approximately a year ago the Armenian government pulled the license of a quality independent Armenian channel, A1+, and gave the license to Sharm channel 17, Art 3, which broadcasts programming that has valueless subject matter, devoid of substance. Not one channel was devoted to classical music that Armenia has in abundance. That act of censorship by the government was the restriction of free speech of a supposed free nation. When governments encourage free speech, nations will blossom and flourish. When governments squelch free speech, there is tyranny. When governments ignore the existence of imported immorality into its society, that government itself becomes tainted with immorality.

While viewing television one evening, I saw mothers and fathers begging the government to not close their local school so that their children would not have to travel to a distant school. Little did those poor souls know that one of the major demands of the world banks for lending money is to reduce the number of schools and then revise the curriculum in those schools that remain. That curriculum will be devoid of teaching patriotism to the students. They will be indoctrinated into children of the world. Their target is patriotism, because they know that it is not possible to contaminate a nation that is patriotic. While the government is allowing the closing of schools, they are allowing the adoption of orphans and children of families who cannot feed their children to non-Armenians from all over the world. They are also ignoring the trafficking of girls and boys. This is by no means defending the nation. There is no effort to protect the girls that respond to promises for jobs in other nations including Turkey and then end up in the captivity of immorality.

Throughout Yerevan small groups of idle men were noticed on the streets, but on major corners such as Tigran Metz and Hanrapetutiun Street hundreds of men were loitering waiting for someone to pick them for employment. I heard time after time, “we were better off under Communism.” That does not say much for freedom. Whatever advancement of the economy that exists is not attributable to the government but rather the ingenuity and desire for survival of the populace. Governments don’t create wealth, people do. Instead of sending Armenia’s youth to schools that indoctrinate them into the economics of one world citizenship, they should send them to the Von Mises School of Austrian Economics being taught at Auburn University in the state of Alabama in the U.S.A. Armenia’s youth are being sent to the Fletcher School of Diplomacy at Tufts University in Boston, Massachusetts that brainwashes the acceptance of globalization (one world government) instead of nationhood. Effort should be expended in developing a diplomatic school at Yerevan State University where they will be taught world diplomacy, which would include the national Armenian ideologies and philosophies of General Karekin Nejdeh who secured Zangezour (present southern part of Hayastan) in 1920. Also, members of the government should know about Adam

Smith, who was a Scottish political economist and philosopher in 1776 and whose principles were used by America’s founding fathers to establish the foundation of the American republic. It would behoove Armenia’s political parties to study Adam Smith’s influential book, “The Wealth of Nations.”

There are those that are clamoring to open the border with Turkey in order to improve Armenia’s economy. Naively, little do they know that what economy exists in Armenia today would be deluged and dissipated into a huge Turkish economy. It would be an invitation to a terminal dependency on Turkey. It is sad that centuries of deceptive insatiable appetite of hatred by the Turk and their perennial accomplices against the Armenian has still not been identified and penetrated into the Armenian mentality.

I have stated many times that the most important step the government can take for the future economic stability of Hayastan would be to immediately repurchase the gold mines that were sold to outside entities. A ten-year payback should be negotiated with the present owners. After that, any and all gold mined shall be kept in newly built underground vaults defended by the army. In case of an economic emergency, the Armenian dram would then be backed by a percentage of gold.

I had an appointment with Prime Minister Antranig Markaryan at 3:00 p.m. Arriving on time, I had to wait an hour and a half with his secretary. Finally, three women emerged from his office. I was told they were championing human rights. That was an excellent example of the internationalists’ demands for women’s rights having permeated into Armenia via the United Nations. It must be noticed that what they never talk about is human responsibilities. The United Nations development program employs 100 people in Armenia, which is funded by United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA). One of their programs is to make women aware of abortion for regulating the size of the family under the guise of “education”.

I also had a lengthy conversation with an active member of the parliament Mr. Serj Mugerdichyan representing an area in Zangezour, who visited me at our apartment. He was filled with genuine patriotism. Unfortunately, the majority of the 131 parliamentarians are fearful for their personal security, which affects their voting for the good of the nation. I also spoke for over an hour with Karabagh’s Archbishop Barkev Mardirosian who happened to be in Yerevan. He was a most impressive individual. It is common knowledge that Serj Sarkisian the Defense Minister had gone to Monte Carlo on June 17 and lost huge amounts of money gambling. Armenia’s chairman of Customs, Armen Avetisian (who drives a $100,000 BMW), was authorized to send him government funds to bail him out. Now he is still visiting Belarus and the Ukraine with military officials discussing defense matters. What the government should have done was to leave him in Monte Carlo and appoint a patriotic, serious, battle hardened tactician for the post.

The Armenian Government thinks that by joining the European Union, the Council of Europe, the World Trade Organization, etc., Armenia will be accepted as a friend. On the contrary, what it does is allows these created world organizations to interfere into your internal affairs. They then tell you how you must govern your country, which is just what is happening. Armenia has become the testing grounds for all types of internationalist policies. Policies that other nations have rejected. The Armenian Government of today has not learned from history. There are forces that have already decided to eliminate Armenia as a state. Their tentacles have already penetrated into the nation with their bribery loans and the contamination of its culture. Armenia’s foreign ministry is naively playing into the hands of these forces thinking that if we speak sweet words we will be accepted. The reality is just the opposite. When you stand up protecting your nation, you are more respected regardless of how small your nation. When you kiss their boots, they have nothing but contempt towards you.

A news item from ArmenPress, October 23, 2003, stated: “A team of senior officials of the World Bank have arrived in Armenia to discuss with the government the Bank’s next four-year long strategic program to assist Armenia to continue the process of reforming.” The key is the word reforming (which means conditions). The Armenian parliament speaker Arthur Baghdasarian stressed the WB support to Armenia had singled out education and health sectors as targets of the continued reform. He should know that the World Bank is designed to control and dismantle nations.

An excellent example of defending the independence of a nation’s future destiny can be found in the country of Belarus. Elected president of Belarus, the former Soviet republic, in July 1994, Alexander Lukashenka has become a powerful beacon for anti-globalist fighters for almost 10 years. He is known for his expulsion of all World Bank and IMF representatives from his country. In 1995, Lukashenka began a privatization program, but, when it became clear that well-connected oligarchs were to take the lion’s share, plunging the country into poverty, the president recanted and placed much of the economy under state control. The result of his policies was a substantial rise in Gross Domestic Product (GDP). According to the UN, Belarus has the strongest national economy among the former Soviet republics. Unemployment is about 2.5 percent. Since the IMF was kicked out, GDP growth in Belarus has been on average between 6 percent and 4 percent annually. Wages have consistently risen, as has the basic economic standard of living.

Note the difference: defending his nation by the president of Belarus; and because of greed, Armenia’s leaders allowing the international bankers to dismantle Hayastan.

The opposition to Lukashenka has been small. Recently, before an anti-presidential demonstration in Minsk, opposition leaders predicted a “massive turnout of 20,000.” However, estimates of 1,000 actually showed up, waving anti-Lukashenka placards, conveniently, in English. The Soros Foundation, as well as the U.S. National Endowment for Democracy, are almost completely funding the “opposition.” On Sept. 9, 2001, 75 percent of Belarussian voters sent Lukashenka back to the presidential chair for another term. (The American Free Press, October 13, 2003.)

A Groonk news item by the newspaper “Ayots Ashkar” dated Tuesday, October 14, 2003, had the title: “Russia, USA Want No Strong Leaders in Armenia, Azerbaijan.” The reason for this is that they are able to control weak leaders. When the time comes for a Karabagh forced agreement Kocharian will say, “There was nothing I could do. The big powers forced the agreement onto me.”

Armenia’s government at this time is governing only for today and not the future. It is similar to the saying of the monkeys “who could not see, could not hear, and could not speak.” Armenia today has many enemies internally as well as externally, but fortunately there exist patriotic movements that are very alert to those dangers. They should know, because many of them fought on the front lines of the Karabagh war where 10,000 of their comrades gave their lives to protect the Armenian people. They are fully aware of the existence of dark forces threatening Armenia through the ages as well as today. Unfortunately, they are not able to get their message out because of a lack of funds. They deserve to be heard. Armenian wealth worldwide should refrain from building churches and museums, until that wealth first supports the genuine patriotic movements and the upgrading of the armed forces. After the nation has established its security in all aspects, then there will be time to add churches to the many churches that already exist.

The Diaspora should know that if what is left of Hayastan as a nation is lost, nothing but nothing will have value. Oh! Lord, please fill our leaders (of the oldest nation in Christendom) with patriotism, wisdom, and integrity, so that it may take its righteous place among the world’s nations with dignity and respect.

Ardavast Avakian
Livonia, MI USA
October 27, 2003

Armenia - Not a republic

2005-12-16T18:19:00.000-08:00

In 1990, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, Armenia’s emerging leaders were not aware of what creates free market economies. The vacuum created a scramble for acquiring personal financial security for individual opportunists. It became a power struggle for administering from the top. After a number of years, a constitution was created which did not include checks and balances within its framework. Checks and balances would not have given a single individual the power to determine the future of the nation. Checks and balances were incorporated into America’s historical constitution two hundred years ago by wise and patriotic men. No one branch of government was made predominate over the other. It was a document created so that governments could never take away the breath of free air from the people. It is amazing why consideration was not given to America’s constitution as created in 1778, a model for Armenia’s form of government. The industriousness and creativity of the Armenian people would have, in a short time, brought about a more vibrant economy benefiting a larger percentage of its citizens.

The “emerging leaders” did not understand that only free people create great economies. Governments do not. They had not known about the limitations of government. They had only known that socialism created wealth. But wealth by plunder. Stealing from (producers) and giving to others. Government’s responsibilities are to protect, not manipulate the economy. Government’s only responsibilities are to protect and defend against domestic and foreign aggression the lives and property of the people under its jurisdiction, to settle disputes that arise, and leave the people free to pursue their various goals and ends of life. This approach would have brought about more abundance for the populace as well as respect and success for Armenia’s government. Instead, the government opting for expedience sake, decided to govern by borrowing (with intrusive and harmful conditions) from international financial institutions in order to govern. Of course there will be an ending to that system of governing, but it matters not to those few who are benefiting for the present. They have not been imbued with patriotism and sacrifice for the future well being of the nation.

An excellent example for not borrowing “slave money” was The Island of Guernsey, which is located in the English Channel, was an economic disaster 176 years ago. It had debts that were drowning the country. Fortunately, it had people who could think logically. One of them said, “our government is cutting our throats by borrowing the bank-note money of the Bank of England (a private bank). Instead, let’s have our own treasury and create our own currency”.

This resulted in a high standard of living. No unemployment, a modern infrastructure and no government debt. The Guernsey government printed their own treasury notes, which were debt and interest free. The notes were spent into the economy for Guernsey’s needs and taxing it back with small taxes. Taxes can be small when there is no interest to pay on government debt. Guernsey has continued to do this and never has inflation. They have rid themselves of all their debts. Prior to this they had debts so great they were paying 80% of their total income in interest alone. Their circumstances are geographically different than Armenia’s, but the principle is no different. Armenia’s banks are charging exorbitant interest fees for borrowing by property owners, and farmers. That, of course, is an excellent opportunity to steal their properties.

Today, the Armenian government has borrowed such huge amounts of funds from “one-world” banks that they will never be able to pay them back. The reason the international banks are anxious to loan funds is so that they can dictate to Armenia’s government its future and destiny. At some point soon, the constitution of Armenia must state that the government is forbidden to pay interest on foreign borrowed money. Armenia’s government should immediately begin printing their own money and regulating its value relative to gold. Selling control of their gold mines was a national criminal act. If there is any source of gold left they should immediately reclaim them with a parliamentary edict stating that no mined gold can leave the country. It should be stored in vaults and under the security of the army.

Frederick Bastiat, a French Statesman and economist in 1850 said: “God has given to men all that is necessary for them to accomplish their destinies. He has provided a social form as well as a human form, and these social organs of persons are so constituted that they will develop themselves harmoniously in the clean air of liberty. Away with their rings, chains, hooks, and pincers! Away with their artificial systems! Away with the whims of governmental administrators, their socialized projects, their centralization, their tariffs, their government schools, their state religions, their bank monopolies, their regulations, their restrictions, their equalization by taxation, and their pious moralizations! And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun? May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works”.

An excellent example that the Armenian government is not a republic is a communiqué to the press from the new parliament assembly of 2003 in which they proudly announce that they were “entitled to drive democracy a step forward in our fatherland, by enhancing the country’s legislative system to an internationally accepted level.” The key to that statement is the word accepted. If the Armenian government were a true republic it would not allow outside institutions to decide what is or is not “accepted level” for the Armenian government. Democracy (?), Democracy is government governed by men. Republics are governed by laws.

During the elections of February 19, 2003 certain political parties and candidates were financed by the Diaspora funds of wealthy individuals and organizations. Helping Armenia with Diaspora funds is to be commended. It would be wonderful If those funds were used for philanthropic or infrastructure purposes. If they were used for political candidates, campaigns, or inducements, it should then be totally illegal. The process and results of Armenia’s elections is the right of only the citizens within the country. If Armenia were a republic, those parameters would be strictly enforced, and if Armenia were a republic, there would be no need of exterior monitors to invade Armenia in order to guarantee free elections.

It is most important for Armenia to trade and cooperate with nations of the world, but it is most dangerous to deal with organizations created by individuals specifically for interfering into the internal affairs of free nations. Organizations such as Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), European Parliament, European Union, Council of Europe. It is none of their business how Armenia is governed, good or bad. All of these organizations have been created to erase individual nations and ethnicities of historical Europe. This is a preliminary to consolidation into their diabolical world government. Their present hidden agenda is to transform Hayastan into something unrecognizable. Armenia’s army (part of the world’s peacekeepers), their culture contaminated, Armenia’s National Church, a world church (World Council of Churches), non-existent national pride and patriotism.

The World Bank economist, Morin McLaughlin, speaking to a seminar in Baku on June 27, 2003 stressed that the system of education in ex-Soviet states needs reforming. By “reforming”, she really means brainwashing Armenia’s new generations into the kind of group link that will allow international organizations like hers to control Armenia more easily.

The new speaker of Armenia’s parliament, Mr. Arthur Baghdasarian, is now willing to introduce changes in Armenia’s civil criminal code to be in line with European legislation. Mr. Baghdasarian naively does not know that the European legislation was created to eliminate Europe’s nations so that they can eventually melt it into the “Worldwide Government” that they have been constantly dreaming about. This is an excellent example of asking exterior forces to determine your laws. Are not Armenians intelligent enough to create just laws for their own country?

Today Armenia is not a republic. It is in reality a plutocracy.

Oh! Lord God, please look down upon a re-awakening for Hayastan.

Ardavast Avakian
Livonia, Michigan USA
June 28, 2003

Armenian Naivete

2005-12-16T18:16:00.000-08:00

The history of Armenia is replete with episodes that have diluted and divided the “common strength”, always with disastrous results of the nation’s welfare. The present reduced size and precarious position of Armenia is a direct result of that very same “divide and conquer”.

The present Turkish-Armenian Reconciliation Commission (TARC) is an exact example of those historical scenarios being repeated today. History has shown that adversaries of the Armenian people have always been steadfast in any dialog or confrontation that has been created for “understanding”. One example was the acceptance of the Young Turks in the early 1900’s as “brothers” by the Armenians. The naiveté of those Armenians today who are promoting the TARC dialog are not aware of dark forces who have their own agenda that are behind the creation of an Armenian divide.

Armenia’s destiny is being determined by rulers and masters of the present world, in their own ways and means. We are forced to accept their values and concepts of living, such as “democratic state”, civil society, and “free individual”. Our Armenian state institutions, thanks to the concept of globalization, have become more and more dependent upon the world’s oligarchs. We should not be susceptible to influencing forces that want to change Armenia’s culture or dictate how it is to govern itself. That does not constitute “A Free Nation”.

To continue in this direction will surely come to a point soon, where the main concepts such as family, Fatherland and spiritual values will be considered old and backwardness. They will be replaced by different religious cults, deviants, sexual minorities, pacifists, deserters, and corrupt individuals that will form the elite of our society. Today, national resistance is absent. We are not willing to resist the enemy, but rather place ourselves at its mercy. The enemy is ruthless and merciless. The enemy is not only exterior, but ourselves as well. This crazy streak of self-demoralization and desperation must be stopped.

It is not for Armenian individuals or organizations to interfere into Armenia’s internal affairs and destiny. That is the realm of Armenia’s government, but a government that is fully aware of the existence of dark forces and created evil “One World” entities a government not influenced by foreign diplomatic schools and philosophies but rather by the use of its own wisdom for the national good. Today Armenia has enemies that are seen, and enemies that are not seen.

An example of an unseen enemy is the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank that are always anxious to fund Armenia’s economy. It is those very funds (conditions and strings attached) that are insidiously designed to keep Armenia’s economy depressed and stagnant. Armenia should be master of its own destiny by creating its own money backed by 50% gold and lending it for legitimate enterprises to its people with very low interest rates (3% -4%) instead of the unconscionable rates affected by the IMF-World Bank (money changers). If this system of an honest monetary policy were instituted in 1990, Armenia’s economy would have flourished beyond imagination.

The Armenian Assembly has been associating itself with influential forces for gain but the Assembly doesn’t realize those same forces are using the Assembly instead. The Armenian Assembly should stop transporting the American psyche into Armenia, transforming it into something that will not be identifiable in the future. It will then surely become a territory of the world. The Armenian Assembly has made a major blunder in the TARC meddling adventure that will not only harm Armenia’s future but also have an effect upon their own images of grandeur.

Ardavast Avakian
Boca Raton, FLOctober 2001

Only government money = National Economic Success

2005-12-16T18:15:00.000-08:00

THE ISLAND OF GUERNSEY, WHICH IS LOCATED IN THE ENGLISH CHANNEL, WAS AN ECONOMIC DISASTER 176 YEARS AGO. IT HAD DEBTS THAT WAS DROWNING THE COUNTRY. FORTUNATELY, IT HAD PEOPLE WHO COULD THINK LOGICALLY. ONE OF THEM SAID, “OUR GOVERNMENT IS CUTTING OUR THROATS BY BORROWING THE BANK-NOTE MONEY OF THE BANK OF ENGLAND (A PRIVATE BANK). INSTEAD, LET’S HAVE OUR OWN TREASURY AND CREATE OUR OWN CURRENCY.”

THIS RESULTED IN A HIGH STANDARD OF LIVING. NO UNEMPLOYMENT, A MODERN INFRASTRUCTURE AND NO GOVERNMENT DEBT. THE GUERNSEY GOVERNMENT PRINTED THEIR OWN TREASURY NOTES, WHICH WERE DEBT AND INTEREST FREE. THE NOTES WERE SPENT INTO THE ECONOMY FOR GUERNSEY’S NEEDS AND TAXING IT BACK WITH SMALL TAXES. TAXES CAN BE SMALL WHEN THERE IS NO INTEREST TO PAY ON GOVERNMENT DEBT.

GUERNSEY HAS CONTINUED TO DO THIS AND NEVER HAS INFLATION. THEY HAVE RID THEMSELVES OF ALL THEIR DEBTS. PRIOR TO THIS THEY HAD DEBTS SO GREAT THEY WERE PAYING 80% OF THEIR TOTAL INCOME IN INTEREST ALONE.

A PRIVATE CENTRAL BANK HAVING BEEN GIVEN THE POWER TO CREATE MONEY FROM THIN AIR, AND LENT TO GOVERNMENT WITH INTEREST, HAS THE POWER TO CONFISCATE THE WEALTH THAT ITS CITIZENS CREATE. IT ALSO PLACES A HEAVY BURDEN ON FUTURE GENERATIONS, FOR PAYING OFF THE CREATED INTEREST. THOMAS JEFFERSON (THIRD PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES) STATED “A PRIVATE CENTRAL BANK ISSUING THE PUBLIC CURRENCY IS A GREATER MENACE TO THE LIBERTIES OF THE PEOPLE THAN A ATTACKING STANDING ARMY.”

PEOPLE CARRY MONEY AND HAND IT TO ANOTHER WHEN THEY BUY SOMETHING, BUT MOST MONEY IS JUST FIGURES ON PAPER OR FIGURES IN A COMPUTER. NATURE DOES NOT CREATE MONEY; MAN’S BOOKKEEPERS CREATE MONEY. ONLY GOVERNMENT MUST MINT OR PRINT CURRENCY. UNBORROWED TREASURY NOTES (MONEY) BACKED BY BALANCING TAXES IS THE LOGICAL PAPER CURRENCY. THE KEY WORD IS TREASURY. THE GOVERNMENT CAN SPEND TREASURY-NOTE BILLS DIRECTLY OUT OF ITS TREASURY WITHOUT BORROWING.

THIS AVOIDS THE TRAP OF FORCED BORROWING OF MORE MONEY TO PAY THE INTEREST ON PREVIOUS BORROWINGS. GRADUATED INCOME TAXES SOUND JUST BUT MUST BE AVOIDED, BECAUSE IT CREATES GOVERNMENT TYRANNY AND PUNISHES INCENTIVE AND SUCCESS.

A GOVERNMENT CAN ESTIMATE HOW MUCH MONEY IT CAN SPEND BY HOW MUCH MONEY ITS CITIZENS ARE WILLING TO REPAY. IT IS A TRUISM THAT CITIZENS CAN PAY BACK MONEY THEIR GOVERNMENT SPENDS ON THEM, BUT CAN’T PAY IT BACK PLUS THE INTEREST, WHICH GOVERNMENT CREATES BY BORROWING FROM OUTSIDE SOURCES. A NATION’S ECONOMIC RECOVERY WILL BE MUST FASTER BY BORROWING TAX-FREE MONEY FROM ITS OWN GOVERNMENT AND TREASURY. ALSO, THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD NOT SELL ALL ITS GOLD, BUT RATHER PLACE A CERTAIN PERCENTAGE IN VAULTS FOR THE BACKING OF ITS CREATION OF MONEY.

TODAY, THE ARMENIAN GOVERNMENT HAS BORROWED SUCH HUGH AMOUNTS OF FUNDS FROM ONE-WORLD BANKS THAT IF THEY SOLD ALL OF HAYASTAN, THEY COULD NOT PAY THOSE LOANS BACK. THE REASON THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND AND WORLD BANK ARE LOANING THOSE FUNDS IS SO THEY CAN DICTATE TO ARMENIA’S GOVERNMENT, IN TURN AFFECTING ITS DESTINY ADVERSELY. AT SOME POINT SOON, THE CONSTITUTION OF ARMENIA MUST STATE THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS FORBIDDEN TO PAY INTEREST ON FOREIGN BORROWED MONEY. THE ONLY ROLE OF ARMENIA’S GOVERNMENT SHALL BE TO PRINT MONEY AND REGULATE ITS VALUE RELATIVE TO GOLD. THE GOVERNMENT SHOULD SAFEGUARD GOLD IN ORDER TO BACK ITS PRINTED MONEY.

AT THIS TIME IT WOULD BE MOST WISE AND PRUDENT FOR ARMENIA’S PARLIAMENT TO DECIDE TO PRINT ITS OWN CURRENCY FOR CIRCULATION, INTEREST FREE TO THE POPULACE, WHILE CONCURRENTLY REDUCING THE BURDEN OF DEBT CREATED BY BORROWING FROM THE THIEVERY OF INTERNATIONAL BANKING INSTITUTIONS.

ARMENIA MUST BE MASTER OF ITS OWN WEALTH.

ARDAVAST AVAKIAN
SEPTEMBER 20, 2001

History of the National and World Council of Churches

2005-12-16T18:12:00.000-08:00

The World Council of Churches since its inception has consistently equated the main mission of the church with involvement in social issues. Many ministers and religious leaders from all denominations began denying the value of the churches’ traditional mission. They began to join new movements, many of them practicing civil disobedience and social radicalism, rather than preaching the gospel and striving to motivate their people spiritually.

The social gospel had many expressions and spokesmen. Among the more prominent was Washington Gladden (1836 – 1918), for thirty-six years a congregational pastor in Columbus, Ohio. A champion of what he called “applied Christianity”. The outstanding prophet of the social gospel was Walter Rauschenbusch, a graduate of the University of Rochester and of Rochester Theological Seminary, which were Baptist institutions. His “Christianity and the Social Crisis”, published in 1907, brought him nation-wide recognition. Walter Rauschenbusch and Dr. Harry Ward formed the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America on December 2, 1908. They were leaders of the social action movements in the churches that decided to do away with Christian individualism and turn to outright collectivism, using the church as their instrument. Socialism then, was their first concern. And, like all other false prophets who have infiltrated religion through the centuries, they used a “front” or disguise. This disguise, as we have seen, was “The Kingdom of God.” The Kingdom was not pictured as a spiritual society into which men and women had to be born as individuals through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as Savior, but as a collectivist society which would be brought about by eradication of poverty, redistribution of wealth, correction of industrial inequities, and the bringing about of “economic justice.”

It was not only the clergy involved in this “social gospel”. Few present day churchgoers know that John Foster Dulles was a top-ranking officer in the Federal Council of Churches. He was Secretary of State under President Eisenhower. John Foster Dulles, Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White worked together in the State Department that planned the United Nations for the creation of a godless New World Order. It should also be recalled that Alger Hiss was responsible for convincing Roosevelt to present at Yalta the control of Eastern Europe to the Communist block, ignoring the Captive Nations, which included Armenia.

The Christians of America began to detect an evil anti-Christ influence in the Federal Council of Churches. Hearing of this, the Rothschild banking house of Europe in 1922, together with their brethren of the American banking monopoly (moneychangers of the temple), conceived and began financially supporting the teaching of secular humanism and the liberation theology in the major theological universities of America, in order to set the stage for cosmetically renaming the “Federal”…. to the “National” Council of Churches.

On November 29, 1950 the Federal Council of Churches was finally renamed the National Council of Churches (just a different wolf in sheep’s clothing). On September 30, 1952, amid great fanfare, a Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyrighted by the National Council of Christ in the United States of America (successor to the Federal Council) was presented to the American public. It omitted key passages in order to cast doubt on the divinity of Jesus and to remove passages unfavorable to the Jews.

The Geneva-based W.C.C. claims a membership of 263 Protestant and Eastern Orthodox churches in 90 countries. A large number of men and women who belong to the member churches feel that their denominations have turned their attentions away from questions of faith and are no longer speaking to their spiritual needs and concerns. Even a limited study of the aims of the W.C.C. will reveal the truth of these assumptions. The goal of the globalists was to use the church as an institution to promote the social gospel – basically the redistribution of wealth. Instead of looking to God, their family and the Christian community, they were looking for salvation from the state.

One of the movements which the W.C.C. has supported wholeheartedly is the ecumenical movement, which actually means (the union of all Christian denominations into one great ecclesiastical body), not for good, but rather for diverting true Christian thought. Dr. Eugene Carson Blake, who retired as the General Secretary of the W.C.C., delivered an address in the Riverside Church in New York City on November 21, 1972, in which he set forth his ideas of the ecumenical movement. The text of his address is quoted in some detail, for it gives a very good idea of the attitudes of the W.C.C. towards various phases of contemporary American life. Dr. Blake stated in no uncertain terms that “the chief ecumenical assumptions must be understood and accepted by American Christians if they wish their faith to be relevant to the real human problems of the last quarter of the 20th century!” Why this should be so, is not explained; it is simply assumed. “Human problems” was not the basis of Christ’s teachings and had nothing to do with His gospel. The tradition of the Christian Church is that Christ has come to give us the abundant life now and in the life to come.

The W.C.C. has long been committed to the social gospel, which means that it has accepted the socialist economic philosophy as the ideal way of life. The W.C.C. has often expressed deep concern over oppression and injustice especially, they say, as it exists in the capitalist countries. However, the W.C.C. has expressed little concern over the injustice and loss of individual liberty, which exists in Communist countries. Isn’t it ironic, the very capitalists that the W.C.C. denounce such as the Eli Lilley, Rockefeller and other foundations are financing more than 200 seminaries of America in teaching liberation theology. It seems that truth is not truth, but rather what present day moneychangers (such as those that Christ drove from the temple) want it to be. Truth should be simple. Truth is the foundation for all of life, whether for individuals, families, or nations.

The W.C.C. is concerned that ministers are failing to use the power of the pulpit to redress social grievances. But the W.C.C. had not used its good offices to champion the thousands of persecuted Christians in the Soviet Union, those people who merely wished to worship God in their own way and not follow the dictates of a state-controlled church. There should be only one mediator between God and man in a Christian culture, and that is Christ; not the Socialist State envisioned by the W.C.C., which created new terminology of words, such as “new structures for society”, “liberation”, “struggle for social justice”, and many others. It is God’s Holy Spirit, and definitely not the W.C.C., which Armenians should embrace and uphold. His truth, with our understanding and support, is what should help guide and strengthen the Armenian people spiritually into a bright 21st century.

There has continued for over two centuries, diabolical warfare against the Christian religion worldwide, the most recent being the decimation of Serbia, a Christian nation. Careful thought and questions should be given. Who were those that gave such passionate support of that war? Is America being used to promote an “evil world empire of domination?” Has it lost the good from its Christian heritage?

The W.C.C. has many documented files concerning the abuses of Christians by the Soviet government, but ignored them. Let us examine the obsession with socialist Marxism, which is dominant in the thinking of council leaders. Dr. Philip Potter, the council’s West Indian general secretary, in an official publication of the United Church of Christ and the United Presbyterian Church, contained a photograph of Dr. Potter with his hand raised in the clenched fist, which is the Communist salute. Dr. Potter, who said that he had visited Soviet Russia six or seven times, stated that each time he gained great inspiration during his visit!

With this background of the W.C.C., it is incomprehensible how the Armenian people, having always traditionally supported and defended our historically free and independent church, could stand by and allow this association to take place. Our church, throughout a great deal of its history, has been forced to represent the Armenian people as government (because of a lack of national sovereignty at times) but never with the anti-Gods. The Armenian Church is rich with its saints and martyrs who gave their lives for the true word of the Lord. The Armenian Church and its people should not abandon their sacrifices. Christ was not a compromiser of the truth, and so true disciples should not compromise Christ, yesterday, today, or tomorrow.

Our people have always been the defender of the Armenian National Church, so long as it maintained its independent national identity by teaching spiritual values as taught by our Lord God, instead of involving itself with the economic philosophies of socialism and the liberation theology. It matters not, as to how fully educated and oratorically dynamic our church leaders are, but rather how faithfully they follow the true gospel of Christ.

In December 1945 John D. Rockefeller, Jr., donated a million dollars to the Friends of The World Council of Churches. Several months later, in February 1946, a meeting was held in Geneva, Switzerland by this same provisional committee. Here it was announced that an international religious training center was to be set up in Geneva. Instructions would be given to students all over the world to prepare them for leadership in interchurch activities. The purpose of the commission: “To stimulate the churches of all nations to a more vigorous expression of the demand of the Christian conscience in relation to the political policies of governments.” These events affected the Near East School of Theology in Beirut, Lebanon. It became this association that Armenian churches (both Orthodox and Protestant) were first introduced to the fraudulent and anti-Christ World Council of Churches. Those who serve God with Christ’s words cannot serve man’s creations of deviationist church entities. Doing so is serving two masters.

The Apostle Peter never went to a seminary, never was a theologian, but only a fisherman who listened to God and the leading of the Holy Spirit, and who, -- would dare question his brilliance, in the word of God? If our Armenian theologians are trying to work with the likes of the W.C.C. in a spiritual detante, with the intent that they are going to change or find a common ground, be assured that it can be likened to placing a healthy apple into a bushel of rotten apples, hoping the rotten apples will turn healthy. You cannot make an alliance with evil without surrendering something in return.

Our church has been great because it has historically been free. It is said that we want to introduce our church to the world via the W.C.C. Let us illustrate this with an analogy. Imagine having guests for breakfast and wanting to impress them. We find that we have a few nice fresh eggs (the Armenian Church), as well as some older bad eggs (W.C.C.). We decide to hastily mix the two and prepare scramble eggs. Would that impress our guests?

Rousas J. Rushdoony (of Armenian descent), one of America’s well-respected Christian leaders, makes a very choice comment regarding this subject. “The concern of Christianity’s enemies is a New World Order, one without Christ. Man believes that he can, with his planning and controls, create a better, orderly arrangement than can the triune (trinity) of God. Of course, what he creates is not a cosmos, but rather a vast and evil disorder.”

The Armenian people should demand a return of their church to its historically free and independent status. It should concentrate its efforts on improving the religious and spiritual values of our people instead of supporting the enemies of Christianity. With that achieved, the world will then recognize the greatness of the Armenian Church and its people.

Let the Armenian Church stand only with its historically true way of the Lord.

Ardavast Avakian
36008 Ann Arbor Tr. September 8, 1999
Livonia, Michigan 48150
ardavast@att.net

Human Rights

2005-12-16T18:10:00.000-08:00

If one were to have followed the trials, tribulations and pains that Armenia has incurred from the day of its modern birth of September 21, 1991 till today, they would have noticed how quickly internationalist groups (busybodies) set up shop for the good of Armenians in Armenia.

Nothing can be more consternating than the existence of humanitarian, human rights activists and observation missions, whether from America’s State Department, the (O.S.C.E.) organization for security and cooperation in Europe, the United Nations, or any other do-gooder organizations with fine humanitarian sounding titles. Advocates of “human rights” never speak of “human responsibilities” in the same breath. It just makes their shrill of human rights more suspect.

Example No. 1: The United Nations development program employs 100 people in Armenia, which is funded by (UNFPA) United Nations Fund for Population Activities. One of their programs is to make women aware of abortion for regulating the size of the family under the guise of “education”. What they really mean by “education” as pertaining to the family is the communal raising of children. Dr. Mary Jo Bane, who is the Assistant Secretary of Administration for children and families in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, has stated: If we want to talk about equality of opportunity for children, then the fact that children are raised in families, means there’s no equality ---. In order to raise children with equality, we must take them away from families and community raise them”. That pronouncement provides the eerie echo of this directive, which was issued at a congress when a Russian Communist Party educator in 1918 said, “we must remove the children from the crude influence of their families. We must take them over and nationalize them”.

Then there are the human rights organizations, which are just another excuse for interfering into the internal affairs of nations. There exist over 5,000 human rights organizations worldwide. One should wonder – who finances these groups?

Example No. 2: A combined statement by the U.S. State Department, the (O.C.S.E.) organization for security and cooperation in Europe observation mission and the (N.D.I.) National Democratic Institute, headquartered in Ottawa, Canada, that evaluated the May 30, 1999 Armenian elections which pointed out to the government, suggestions for improving legislative and procedural shortcomings in its elections.

The Armenian people with their high academic capabilities and industriousness are most capable of governing themselves. Governing and learning to govern is their right, without coaching from the sidelines by outside forces that have an agenda. The world’s human rights movements have a history of being responsible for the dismantling of nations. An excellent example is the human rights activist humanitarians of 1917. Lenin, Trotzky, Zinoviev, and Kamenov and their likes who promised a utopian society with order. The result brought about more misery to more people in the next 65 years than man had ever known, and from which people today are trying to bring about real order from a social and economic disaster which was perpetrated 75 years ago.

These world organizations that are anxious and willing to give good professional (free) advice for the benefit of the Armenian government and its people would do well if they just folded up their tents and silently moved back to their respective countries for the “curing” of their own problems, which they have an abundance of. Another suggestion would be for them to acquire jobs that actually create true wealth instead of just giving advice that will eventually transfer into demands.

Ardavast Avakian
Livonia, Michigan
August 16, 1999

False Prophets

2005-12-16T18:09:00.000-08:00

Prior to a consultation gathering at the Armenian Apostolic Church in Antelias, Lebanon on November 17–20, 2003, the general secretary of the World Council of Churches (WCC) Dr. Konrad Raiser said: “We need to capture the original spirit that led to the founding of the World Council of Churches in order to reassess and reflect changing times.” Christ did not recognize “reassess” or “time”, but Dr. Raiser cares not. And change to what? Worldliness in place of Christ’s words?

Dr.Raiser’s goal is a “universal world religion.”

The idea of a universal “world” church is nothing new. It has been the dream of the anti-Christ dark forces for centuries. Like all other false prophets who infiltrated the Christian religion by creating “fronts” or “disguises” by deceptively using the “kingdom of God.” Their kingdom was not pictured as a spiritual society into which men and women had to be born as individuals through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as savior, but rather as a collectivist society, which would be brought about by “eradication of poverty”, “redistribution of wealth”, “correction of industrial inequities”, bringing about “economic justice”, while creating chaos and class hatred.

The teaching of Christ and his apostles was not of “this world”. Jesus did not come to liberate the Jews from the Romans. It was not a political or economic liberation but rather the liberation of the sinner from the sin. Spiritual liberation was the savior’s goal. He did not need a world council of churches to change, improve or “reassess” his religion.

There are many examples of past participation and support of violence by The World Council of Churches. Just one example was the inauguration of a program in 1970 to combat racism. Using money from a special fund, the (WCC) funded 19 “liberation” movements in Africa. When examination was made of the groups to be funded, it was found that out of the 19 receiving aid, 14 were engaged in guerrilla and terrorist activities.

Throughout the history of the ancient Armenian Church there were always defenders that did not allow emperors, kings, tsars or World Council of Churches to change or desecrate its national church. They defended it with their lives.

Today the predominate Armenian National Church leaders are enamored with voices that ring about “changing times”, because it feeds their personal egos. The criterion for Christian leaders should not only be for oratorical skills but rather how devotedly they embrace Jesus Christ. Only fearless defenders, while raising the spirituality of the flock, must lead the Armenian National Church. Oh! Khrimian Hairik, where art thou?

Ardavast Avakian
ardavast@att.net
August 20,2003

Armenia – Onslaught Upon Nationalism

2005-12-16T18:05:00.000-08:00

Attacks upon nationhood and patriotism have been raging over many years on many fronts. The culmination of those attacks is today having disastrous effects upon the nation of Armenia.

It has been the dream of man for control of the world and its wealth for centuries. They have succeeded in creating the United Nations. It was created ostensibly to bring about peace, love, unity, and tranquility to the world. The question should be asked: “but whose world”? The cry from their palatial glass house for peace has been deafening, while the preparation for wars have been yearly occurrences. Chaos is created so that sovereign nations will plead to be governed by this “one world humanitarian” body. The naivety of free man will place himself into its chains.

On July 14, 1856, British Prime Minister Disraeli, a brilliant statesman at the time, delivered a startling address in the House of Commons. He stated: “There is a power which we seldom mention in this House, I mean the secret societies. It is useless to deny, because it is impossible to conceal, that a great part of Europe, the whole of Italy, and France and a great portion of Germany, to say nothing of other countries, is covered with a network of these societies, just as the surfaces of the earth is now being covered by railroads. And what are their objects? They do not attempt to conceal them. They do not want constitutional government. They do not improve existing institutions. They want to change the tenure of land, to drive out the present owners of the soil and put an end to ecclesiastical establishments.”

These men that Disraeli was describing were not merely a conspiracy of the super rich to gain more riches. True, the Bible says that “The love of money is the root of all evil”, but these men’s inordinate passion for wealth, possessions, and the power that such riches bring, is not the first cause of their plot and conspiracy. The first cause was, and is today, their hatred and utter disregard for the most high God in heaven and his son Jesus Christ.

The major impediment of these men towards “one world” globalization is patriotism and nationalism. Their goal is to erase boundaries of nations and mix the races so that the enslaving of mankind will be made easier.

It is most difficult for a small nation such as Armenia to withstand one-world external forces that are harmful to its existence. One of the predominant methods used to weaken Armenia is to eliminate its sense of nationalism. This is done by contaminating the nation’s culture, the usage of money to create greed of its leaders, stagnate its economy in order to depopulate the nation, destroy its Christian religion by the introduction of cults, atheism, new age movements, world religion, homosexuality and immorality.

The national treasures of strong family structure, morals, culture, and religion must be protected by the people even if the government will not. The importation of immorality must stop. Protecting these values are the nation’s best weapons of defense since the enemies’ cannons are considerably larger, primarily because the dark forces are arming and training Armenia’s perennial enemies.

The “Open Letter to the Armenian People” by Baroness Caroline Cox, written a number of years ago, should be read again. She expresses great love and admiration for the Armenian people. She warns that “now you are in danger of losing the peace and your independence. If you do not act quickly you will lose not only the sacred land of Artsakh but Armenia too.” She continues, “If the present course of events is not stopped, your leadership in Yerevan will have fatally weakened and betrayed your country.” Does Baroness Cox know something that Armenia’s people and government do not know? If they do not know, should she not tell them, or should they not ask?

There is no doubt that the very same “dark forces” which destroyed Christian Serbia are today eyeing Christian Armenia. These very same forces were also responsible for placing Armenia in the category of “axis of evil” nations, which the American administration reversed (for the time being), because they did not need more opposition to their war in Iraq.

Fortunately, patriotism is still very much alive in Armenia. The spirit of General Garekin Nejdeh, the defender of Zangezour, is spreading. Garekin Nejdeh was born Garegin Ter Haroutunian in the village of Geznoud Nakhijevan, Armenia in 1886. In 1905 he was enrolled in the Bulgarian military academy. In 1912 Nejdeh joined a brigade as a 2nd lieutenant commanded by General Antranig to fight against the Turks. After the proclamation of the independent Republic of Armenia on May 28, 1918, Nejdeh busied himself with the organization of the Armenian army. In the fall of 1919 the Turko-Tartar intrigues were started in the province of Goghthan (or Gothn). The Armenian government appointed him commander of the region to suppress the rebellion and pacify the region. Thereafter, in 1920, he moved into Karabagh, and later to Zangezour where he remained to continue the fight against the Bolsheviks until July of 1921. This stand came to be known as the heroic stand of Siunik, or Mountainous Armenia, a glorious page in the history of Armenian struggle for freedom. This effort enabled the escape and rescue of thousands of Armenian intellectuals and national leaders from the vengeance of the Soviets in February of 1921. This act of rescue is considered the crowning glory of Nejdeh’s military career. He was as great an orator and organizer as he was a military leader.

To him the “zeal for the house of his Lord” was the fatherland of Armenia, the land of his forefathers, which he loved passionately. He spoke of the Armenian struggle of the centuries for liberation, the great Armenian Revolution, the unequal fights with the enemy, the heroic stands, the proclamation of the independent Republic, the loss of the Republic, the need of recovering the lost independence, the enemies of the Armenian people -- the Turk and the Soviet, and the compelling urge of arming the Armenian remnants with the armor of faith, and invincibility.

He spoke of the Armenian virtues, which flow from the national fountainhead, the people itself, the nation, the race, not in the morbid and abused sense of the concept, which the Nazis vitiated into racial superiority, but in terms of human dignity, pride and self-assurance. He was captured in Bulgaria during World War II and sent to Siberia where he died in 1955. His remains have been brought back to Armenia and buried near the Sbidagavor church monastery on Khousdoup Mountain. Notes that he wrote while in prison have been transferred to Armenia. There exists a newly written book in great detail about Nejdeh that is authored by Rafael Hampartzoumian, the chairman of the Nakhijevan Union. A boulevard in Yerevan is named after him.

At this time a brief history of territorial intrigues after the collapse of the Armenian Republic in the latter part of 1920 must be told. After the free Republic of Armenia became a Soviet Republic in December 1920, Azerbaijan sent a telegram to the Soviet Government of Armenia renouncing their claims to the territories of Kharabagh, Zangezour, and Nakjijevan to Armenia. Border disputes were declared resolved. On March 16, 1921 the Treaty of Moscow between the “dark forces” of the Bolsheviks of Russia and Turkey reversed the December 1920 agreement that Azerbaijan had made with Soviet Armenia. They took advantage of Armenia’s weak position to steal Armenia’s ancient lands. On October 13, 1921 the Treaty of Kars finally sealed the theft of Armenia’s Nakhijevan and Kharabagh. Thereafter, a cruel systematic effort took place in eradicating the substantially extensive Armenian population of Nakhijevan. Armenians from generation to generation worldwide must continually demand that all their ancient lands be returned.

Today there exists a little known but well organized movement in Armenia called the National Council of Nakhijevan Armenians. The movement is based upon the principles of Garekin Nejdeh’s philosophies. This Nakhijevan movement is challenging the illegal transfer of Armenia’s territory of Nakhijevan. They have appealed to the Russian Duma (Parliament) to declare null and void the illegal Bolshevik-Turkish Treaty of Moscow on March 16, 1921. This treaty was signed as the “friendship and brotherhood treaty”. Patriotic movements such as the Nakhijevan Union are those that deserve maximum attention from the Diaspora because they are the bulwarks against defeatism, and will die on the soil before leaving it.

Let us not forget that 10,000 Armenian boys died in the Kharabagh war to preserve our ancient lands. Should we who remain alive speak from a position of weakness and arbitrate soil that was secured with the blood of those present day Nejdehs? That act would fall into the category of treason.

The youth of Armenia must be indoctrinated with the armor of nationalism and patriotism, so that no enemy internally or externally can destroy the future destiny of the country. Let Armenians not forget the sacrifices of all its “Nejdehs” during the Kharabagh war.
“Aine oren yerp Hai-uh vakh-nal mah-en
aine oren odar-uh takavoretz Hai-astan-oum”

“The day the Armenian fears death s the day the odar becomes king of Hayastan”
General Garekin Nejdeh

“Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice”.
Senator Barry Goldwater (1964)

Major political parties, churches and organizations in the Diaspora, regardless of political differences or interests, must immediately call a “Council for the Nations Defense”. They should refrain from defending individual turf until the turf of Hayastan is secure. Nothing can be more critical than the calling for this council. Individual pride must be put aside and replaced by collective “national” pride. There will be very little to value after the nation has lost its sovereignty. Some patriotic entity must initiate the element of collective communication before it is too late.

Ardavast Avakian
Boca Raton, Florida
2-5-03

Dark Forces

2005-12-16T18:03:00.000-08:00

Throughout history there have been totalitarian forces that have disrupted the tranquility of man and destabilized nations by the creation of wars and ungodly secret societies. It is of utmost importance to review history briefly in order to understand the present world of globalization more clearly.

An examination of archaeological remains in North Africa today will reveal the existence of a thriving Christian civilization. The predominant individual of the era was St. Augustine in Carthage (today’s Tunisia). After the creation of the Muslim religion in 632, Carthage was conquered with the sword by hordes of Muslims in 752. By 1453 they had also laid waste to the Christian Byzantine Empire.

The power of globalization and visions of a “one world government” are nothing new. It has been envisioned by individuals throughout the centuries of time, but it was not until 1760 when it first came into existence under the name of “The Illuminati.” The Illuminati was conceived by Adam Weishaupt, born a Jew, who was converted to Catholicism and became a Jesuit, trained professor of canon law teaching at Ingolstadt University in Bavaria. He defected from the Christian faith in 1770, and was then hired by the banking firm of the Rothschilds to create and organize “The Illuminati” (bearer of false light). He completed the task on May 1, 1776. With “The Plan” inspired by the radical philosophies and instructed by a mysterious occultist named Kolmer from Denmark, Adam Weishaupt established an organizational structure to direct a worldwide attack upon Christianity and monarchies which he hoped would someday rule the world. There was an extensive article in the January 23, 2000 issue of the New York Times, titled “Masters of the Universe,” regarding the House of Rothschilds. It revealed that the Rothschilds had financed both sides of the French Revolution for 15 years. By 1694 they had taken over the banking system of England and imposed upon Christian Europe their system of pitting governments against each other by using their financial powers.

They also financed Karl Marx who, in 1848, freely prepared the concept of Communism for the world. The Rothschilds financed the dark forces that falsely created hatred of Russia’s leadership of the time. In 1917 they assassinated the Tzar, his wife, four daughters and son, as well as millions of Christians, leaving Russia in shambles and destitute for the next 65 years. In 1920 the dark forces controlling Russia met with the dark forces of Turkey to steal large areas of ancient Armenian lands while the silence of the world’s powers was deafening.

The dark forces that were created by Adam Weishaupt eventually were planted in the new American republic during its formative years. In 1791 the Rothschilds were able to create a monopoly of a banking cartel in America. This 20-year charter ended in 1811, at which time England started the War of 1812 against the United States, with the intention of forcing the United States into accepting the 20-year continuation of a second private central bank. In 1828 Andrew Jackson was elected President by stating “I do not believe that a national bank is a blessing, but rather a curse to a republic.” After being elected President for a second term, he vetoed the second bank act on July 10, 1832. There did not exist a private monopolistic bank until 1861, prior to which the nation prospered with no debts. The introduction of large numbers of slaves into America was financed by the Rothschilds, starting in 1722 from the island of St. Eustatius into Charleston, South Carolina, eventually becoming the cause of the Civil War which had a brutalizing effect upon America. The Spanish-American War was the first entry of internationalists to condition America for foreign wars. Since then, foreign interventionism for America has become the norm, contrary to George Washington’s warnings. He understood that interference in the internal affairs of other nations would someday be disastrous to the American Republic.

For the last 100 years “America the Good” has been transformed from a nation with a Christian majority to a nation of secular humanism. It has lost its common law legal system, based upon Christ’s laws, to a system of law dictated by the personal feelings of judges. There had existed the purity of life under God for the first 100 years of America’s history.

Alexis de Tocqueville (a French statesman), after traveling through America during its early history, stated, “America is great because America is good. When America ceases to be good, America will cease to be great.” (Democracy in America, 4 volumes, 1835-40).

The beginning of the 20th century saw the gradual interjection of the dark forces into “America the Good.” In 1913 they foisted a private banking system of usury titled the “Federal Reserve.” It gave the right of international bankers to print money and charge interest on it, subsequently giving them access (stealing) the wealth that the American people created. In 1965 the power of government was used to forbid prayers in schools or reading of the Bible, while encouraging more liberal dress codes and sexual immorality. Government funding of education constantly increased while standards decreased. Increasing governmental socialism caused an increase of pollution in the nation’s culture. Christian seminaries were infiltrated by the teaching of human secularism which also had its influence upon the National Church of Armenia and its leaders. Unknowing America has been captured and is being used by dark forces; to not only change the character of its soul but to interfere with the internal affairs of nations, resulting in the creation of an unloved America.

The cry of a prominent Armenian Church leader has been heard to say: “An urgent necessity to restructure the Middle East Council of Churches.”
Answer: There is no necessity of involving the Armenian Church in a restructuring together with other churches and religions. Just preserve the independence of the 1700 - year old Armenian Church with Biblical truths.

Cry No.2: “Christianity is a religion of non-violence.”
Answer: The phrase “non-violence” is a creation of the dark forces. Christianity proclaims the truth and opposes evil. Secular humanism is mental warfare against Christ’s truth.

Cry No.3: “The United Nations is the right mechanism and the legitimate framework to embark on such a global combat.”
Answer: The United Nations is the tool of the dark forces to create a one-world political and economic slave system, Tower of Babel. It should be the last mechanism used for combat.

The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians Chapter 3, Verses 10-11

10. According to the grace of God, which is given unto me, as a wise master builder,
I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon.

11. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.

Just one example of the many anti-Christian dark forces existing is the following:
The occult organizations “World Goodwill” and “Lucis Trust” were founded by Alice Bailey, a theosophist (a religious theory based on mystical insight into the nature of God). They have created a propaganda leaflet titled “The Challenge of International Unity.” It carefully explains that the United Nations must be supported in its efforts to unify all nations and erase existing forms of nationalism. It is stated: “Christians are uninvolved and therefore negative and destructive. There can be no world peace until they are dealt with. They are either going to have to change or die.”
Answer: Christian Armenians will not change, and will not die.

Armenia shall gain by not duplicating the errors made by “America the Good.” Armenia must get back to its roots without ignoring the world that exists. It must be able to identify the dark forces of today so that it can defend itself against them successfully. It was the goodness of Armenia’s roots that sustained the race through the centuries. The character of its soul must be protected from diluting forces. Defense of heritage is not a vice, defense of false prophets is. Its belief in the Lord’s Word (not ecumenism) is what made the family structure strong. The Armenian Church must protect the purity of its Christian faith against devious exterior influences. Armenia’s monetary system must be honest and not usury based. Armenia should eliminate its present status of “beggar nation” (indebted to the IMF and World Bank for billions) before it becomes a “slave nation”. It must drive the moneychangers from the temple in order to taste the fruits of freedom and abundance, which it deserves.

Ardavast Avakian
Boca Raton, FL
January 2002

ARMENIA - THE REALITIES

2005-12-16T18:00:00.000-08:00

It has been eleven years since Armenia attained national independence. Isn’t it amazing that after a decade of independence, with people who are educated and industrious by nature, the country is still in the throes of an economic disaster. It is true that Armenia is landlocked, but regardless, the essential important ingredient necessary for a successful and flourishing economy of a nation is wise leadership that is not only imbued with national patriotism and the self-sacrificing spirit, but also knowledgeable about the true nature of man. From the very beginning, in 1991, the leaders of a sudden fledgling free country were not aware of what constituted the creation of a successful economic system. If they had given the people total freedom to fend for themselves, the economy would have soon blossomed beyond imagination. Only a free people create long-lasting wealth, if it is not insidiously siphoned off by Government.

A most important ingredient for creating national wealth is for the establishment of a non-usury (honest) money system ideally backed by a percentage of gold reserve system. If the people have gold or have the guaranteed right to freely convert their government-created paper money into gold upon demand, then they have what is called veto power over the spending plans of their political rulers. Without the right of converting paper money into gold, then a country’s political leaders can control the populace and easily enslave them. The real issue is who will control whom; will the politicians control the people, or will the people control the politicians? It was a major error in allowing foreign ownership of Armenia’s gold mines.

A Republic is the most perfect form of government devised by man. A Republic is created by establishing a constitution that gives equal (but separate) enumerated powers to the major branches of government: Legislative, Executive and Judiciary. In other words, no branch is subordinate to the other. The Legislature should be voted upon within local areas by the people of those areas minus interferences. No single individual should have the power to determine the destiny of the nation. Instead, what is taking place today is not only an element of individual greed, but more important, the acceptance of the financial aid for the economy of Hayastan from sources that appear tempting and easy, but in reality are addictive and dangerous.

Many burdensome interest payments must be paid to the I.M.F. (International Monetary Fund) and the World Bank, which are instruments for destroying nations economies. The stringent conditions they place upon a country are such that it retards the creation of wealth, forcing the government to place burdensome taxes upon the nation’s assets. With the suffocation of high taxes placed upon small-privatized industry and agriculture they are not able to survive, consequently they become victims of international speculators (example: George Soros foundations) to move in and purchase them (the nation’s jewels) for virtually nothing. The government in turn continues to beg for I.M.F./World Bank funds in order (in their minds) to run the country, as well as keep themselves in power, while the economy continues its stagnation.

Another effect of external financing and the importing of cultures into the newly established nation was the creation of additional institutions that educated and prepared young intelligentsia to more readily immigrate to other nations of the world. There already existed excellent domestic Armenian institutions of high standards that deserved financial assistance and were able to educate future generations with the Armenian character, and still be prepared to relate to the world. In short, a combination of fiat (falsely created) I.M.F./World Bank funds, creating a stagnant economy, together with foreign influences on the Armenian culture, culminates in a so-called “brain drain” that weakens the fledgling Armenian nation.

This process is designed to eventually destroy the Armenian psyche and race, by reducing Armenia to “international world territory” status, while reducing its population. In case the government refuses to accept I.M.F. (World Bank funds), the young nation can be confronted with war or the financing of a nearby nation to war upon them.

It should be noted that when the Armenian Government is not able to pay back the loans, the I.M.F./World Bank threatens to withhold further funds. After a time period of threats, they then get into an act of “humanitarian gesture” and become anxious in forcing loans upon the intended victim nation.

A most enlightening article by Michael Chossudovsky, professor of economics at the University of Ottawa, Canada, explains in great detail how the I.M.F. (International Monetary Fund) and the World Bank are manipulating the destruction of a nation’s economy and social fabric as well as reducing it to slave status. The complete article can be attained on the Web: www.emperors-clothes.com/articles/chuss/instru.htm

A few statistics and notes:

1. The I.M.F. discourages the establishment of large industries, such as the intended General Motors plant, which was to be built in Armenia that was allegedly canceled by the U.S. State Department.

2. Peter Nicholes, World Bank Senior Officer for Armenia and Azerbaijan, has linked loans based on a Kharabagh resolution. That constitutes extortion by external forces.

3. The Armenian Government as well as foreign internationalist interests are favoring major industries to be privatized to foreign control.

4. The Armenian Government only allows subsidies to small service businesses, demanding future taxes to be paid in advance, while ignoring the shadow economy.

5. Armenia has borrowed approximately $170,000,000 from the I.M.F. since 1994, and has paid $17.0 million in interest.

6. Armenia has borrowed approximately close to a billion dollars from the World Bank as of 2001.

7. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has granted to Armenia $1.3 billion dollars from 1992 to 2001.

The question now becomes: “Is Hayastan going to relinquish complete control of its destiny to an un-elected global bureaucracy, dedicated to preserving the pathological system that has already created worldwide economic chaos, or does Hayastan want to reclaim the right to elect a government with the power to protect its own people and natural resources from the ruthless exploitation of international financial capitalism, and without curtailing its participation in world commerce”?

Some will say, “There is no other way”. An example of the other way was refusal of internationalism’s financing, set by Maylasia’s premier, Dr. Mahathir Mohamed, who ‘opted out’ of the internationalist system, and which has proved beneficial to their country’s economy while still securing their independence.

The international financier, George Soros, has stated that “the correct solution to the crisis would be to convert debts in stricken countries in equity, giving creditors (banks) a share stake in the vulnerable concerns.” In other words, the productive industries and the public utilities of the once free nations of the world - real wealth created by the real efforts of generations of their people - should be handed over to foreign bankers to dispose of as they see fit, even though many of those ‘debts’ have already been paid off several times over through the interest payments which have crippled their economies.

The warning couldn’t be much plainer. The world stands at a crossroads. It must choose between popularly chosen national governments, which strive for the best interests of their people and are free to cooperate with other countries when it is advantageous to all concerned, or a global dictatorship of super-capitalists. There is no ‘third way’; the Marxist ‘alternative’ is dead. The choice is between national values and freedom, or the feudalism of the international Banksters’ Imperium.

How can we say we are honoring our Christian forefathers and still take money from a corrupt monetary system, when Christ threw the false moneychangers from the temple that led four days later to his crucifixion? Christ was not a compromiser. The people of every nation must find their own way towards a stable, sustainable society free from the shackles of global debt slavery.

Ardavast Avakian
Boca Raton, FL
11-26-01

Beware Armenia, Know Thy “One World Friends”

2005-12-16T17:58:00.000-08:00

By Ardavast Avakian and Antranig Bedrossian

Let us Armenians not only know the critical importance of unity and cohesiveness for the future existence and survival of the Armenian nation, but also be able to identify the existence of forces that are influencing and guiding the foreign policies of the major world powers, which, in turn, could affect Armenia.

For the last eighty years there has existed a gradual transformation of the major nations into worldwide meddling giants. Today they have created a “New World Order”, as was uttered by President George Bush during the Gulf War in Iraq.

The real meaning of the “New World Order” is the convergence of all nations into one, for the creation of the economic control of the world. Free and sovereign nations are an anathema to the supporters of the New World Order. By the development of international and regional institutions, interwoven with each other and linked to a common world center, states and nations would be governed by a “world government” which would have its final say in world matters to the best interests of the powerful. In practice, the priorities of weaker states would be subordinated to those of stronger states. Major powers would try to forcefully convince that their priorities are also the priorities of every other state.

Under this New World Order, international borders would become irrelevant and territorial disputes would be perceived as outdated, a threat to the security of the New World. As a consequence, policies and actions would be taken by the proponents of the New World Order to weaken the national consciousness of nations, for the benefit of world cosmopolitan upbringing, disguised under the concepts of “globalism” and “internationalism.” The formation of multi-ethnic states would be encouraged, and the creation of ethnic (national) states discouraged. Within such states, the development of systems and laws would encourage and even accelerate meddling of populations, so that no one ethnic group could claim ownership of a particular territory, neither on ancestral or demographic basis.

The fewer the number of states, the easier to govern the world; the fewer ethnic groups and minorities exist in the world, the smaller the number of interethnic conflicts will be; the more cultures and languages integrate and disappear, the easier to do business and market similar products all across the planet. International communications systems, controlled by the same “global” forces, are also working in that direction.

National liberation struggles by oppressed and small peoples, seeking their emancipation and self-determination, would be perceived as the new “evil” that the international community under the leadership of leading major powers should fight. This is confirmed by declarations made recently by US Secretary of State Madeline Albright who said, “NATO is now facing a new enemy: the instability of states, caused by poverty, border problems and ethno nationalism.” An army of think tanks is ready to identify theoretical descriptions of national liberation struggles under the euphemism of “ethnic conflict.” They purposefully confront and involve themselves in these struggles with the purpose of destabilizing an area and minimizing the possibility of any one strong sovereign state emerging from the conflict. That would be a threat to their eventual world domination.

In practice, this could mean assistance by major world powers to states, which have border problems, and particularly self-determination struggles to counter within their otherwise contestable borders. This could also mean more bloodshed in the name of territorial integrity of states to the detriment of peoples seeking their emancipation.

This world transformation accelerated during World War I through the creation of a group of one hundred forward-looking social engineers that masterminded the Versailles Peace Treaty. This group formed the nucleus of “The Institute of International Affairs” which was to have branches in New York and London. "The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and “the Royal Institute of International Affairs,” respectively. Since then, this structure, representing powerful economic and political interests, has grown into today’s Group of

Seven and at present is attempting to engineer the inclusion of Russia as its eighth member.

The vehicle by which this convergence of power was created was the United Nations. It was established ostensibly for the illusion that it would end wars. (Then why have wars taken place in Korea, Vietnam, Argentina, the Persian Gulf, Somalia and Bosnia, etc. etc.?) In addition, NATO, which includes, Turkey, has been turned into the enforcement arm of the United Nations. This should explain the support being given today to both Turkey and Azerbaijan by the Group of Seven, namely, Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Canada, Japan and US.

NATO is only another creation of the one worlders, identified in their charter as a defensive organization. Today, its true colors have been exposed as an offensive tool for punishing a nation who wants to remain free of interference by outside forces. The Serb attack once started was not to fail, otherwise NATO’s image will be tarnished and their dreams of world control would be dashed.

The Armenian government should ask the question: “Do we want to be next on the list of small nations to be forced into complying with outside forces, dictating whether we grow or how we are to govern ourselves?

The appropriate answer to this New World Order is a more powerful army for both the Republic of Armenia and Karabagh, supported by a strong economy (by printing and establishing the value of its own money), firm united national ideology, and involving a complex network of communication structures both regionally and internationally.

Ardavast Avakian Sept. 1997
ardavast@att.net

Antranig Bedrossianantranig@net.com.ca

Armenia - Its Church and Clergy

2005-12-16T17:55:00.000-08:00

When the Armenian Church was founded in the year 301 AD, it was faithful to God and His son Jesus Christ. It was the soul of the nation’s spirit. It survived through many dynasties and assaults upon its people. The people understood the true purity of life here on earth, and in the thereafter, as Christ had taught. In the realm of Christian biblical scholars, Armenia’s bible translation was highly valued and regarded for its accuracy.

Before proceeding towards an analysis of the Armenian Church and its clergy of today, it is imperative to expose the Armenian people to historical facts relative to the creation of today’s New Christianity.

The most successful assault upon God’s orderliness was brought about by Adam Weishaupt, who was born on February 6, 1748 in Ingolstadt, a city in Bavaria, Germany. Weishaupt felt that human society had grown hopelessly corrupt and that it could only be saved by a complete overhaul. He was the first utopian to think on a global scale, and he looked forward to the day his group would bring about the “Novus Ordo Seclorum” (The New World Order). His organization, the Illuminati, had six main goals, including 1) abolition of monarchies and all ordered governments, 2) abolition of private property and inheritances, 3) abolition of patriotism and nationalism, 4) abolition of family life and the institution of marriage, 5) the establishment of communal education of children, and 6) abolition of all religion.

Even prior to 1750, the banking house of Rothschilds, as well as other world banking cartels, began financing godless intellectualism over purity of Christian thought within the world’s universities. The power of wealth was used to fund Christian seminaries worldwide in order to inculcate into the minds of young seminarians socialist theology, which came to be termed the Social Gospel.

The Scofield Bible
Cyrus I. Scofield was born in America in 1843 and died in 1921. He conceived the revision of the original King James Bible. His efforts in revising the Bible served to popularize a dispensationalist (changes made which did not favor the historic Christian point of view of theology). Financial support for revising the Scofield Reference Bible (as it came to be known) came from a conspiratorial group of six individuals out of Boston, Massachusetts. This Scofield Bible was printed in 1909 by the Oxford University Press in London. His ideas for this revision of the Bible were pulled out of context from various places in scripture and pasted together. This effort in theological revision gave birth to the popularly known phrase “Judeo-Christianity.” There is absolutely no mention in the Christian Bible of “Judeo-Christianity.” It was not enough that he exerted effort in re-doing the Bible; it also opened the door for other disbelievers of Christ to manipulate further changes of the Scofield Bible after his death.

The Gospel was subject to revisions by social-minded clergy. Among the more prominent was Washington Gladden (1836-1918), who was a Congregational pastor in Columbus, Ohio for 36 years, and a champion of what he called “applied Christianity.” Another outstanding prophet of the Social Gospel was Walter Rauschenbusch, a graduate of the University of Rochester and Rochester Theological Seminary, which were Baptist institutions. His “Christianity and the Social Crisis,” published in 1907, brought him nation-wide recognition. Walter Rauschenbusch and Dr. Harry Ward formed the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America on December 2, 1908. They were leaders of the social action movements in the churches that decided to do away with Christian individualism and turn to outright collectivism, using the church as their instrument. Socialism was their first and only concern. And, like all other false prophets who have infiltrated the Christian religion through the centuries, they used fronts or disguises. These fronts or disguises were promoted as the “Kingdom of God” on earth. Their kingdom was not pictured as a spiritual society into which men and women had to be born as individuals through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as Savior, but as a collectivist socialist society.

It was the Oxford School of Theology in London where the young Bishop Karekin Sarkissian of the Cilician See was sent in the 1950s, in order to obtain a supposedly higher theological education than what the ancient centuries-old Armenian Church could give him. After his indoctrination at Oxford, he eventually became Catholicos of the See of Cilicia and finally Catholicos of the Mother See of Etchmiadzin, Armenia. He became a great champion of the World Council of Churches. This invented One World Church, like all other false prophets that have infiltrated Christianity, is no different than the disguises of false gods used through the centuries by those who totally hated Christianity. Our enlightened “New Age” clerical leaders have forgotten the true Kingdom of God because they have been taught in seminaries financed and influenced by the wealth of the world’s moneychangers. They are being taught secular humanism and (socialist) liberation theology within these tainted seminaries. Secular humanism is contrary to the Lord’s Word. Jesus’ words were not a social relationship of this world. His words were a relationship with God, a spiritual one. Christ was not a worldly Marx, but rather the light of mankind.

The road towards a One World Government, together with its One World Council of Churches, has already been disastrous for the nation of Armenia -- economically, culturally and religiously. The church of Etchmiadzin at the present time is supporting the government’s creation of a social security number and associated identification card. That is the beginning of identification for control of the populace. It paves the way for graduated income taxation by a tyrannical government. Graduated income taxes were proposed in Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto. This is an excellent example of how the highest order of the Armenian Church is practicing socialist liberation theology when it involves itself with government. The heads of the Armenian National Church, as well as the Armenian Protestant churches, are also intermingling secret occult societies with the church.

On August 11, 2003, the General Secretary of the World Council of Churches, Rev. Dr. Konrad Raiser, called for a consultation on “Reconfiguring the Ecumenical Movement” to take place November 17-20, 2003 in Antelias, Lebanon. The consultation was hosted by the Armenian Catholicos Aram I, who has become amorous with the World Council of Churches. A phrase used was “Overcoming Institutionalism.” What does this mean? It means to nullify institutions such as the “old-fashioned” Armenian Church. The word “Ecumenical” means universal. Do we, as Armenians, want our church to become a part of a universal church? If so, why did we celebrate 1700 years of our ancient “independent” church? It must be understood, that the World Council of Churches was created by the powerful (unbeliever) moneychangers of today. Catholicos Aram I should know that Christ did not accept other Lords, but Lord himself. As a Christian, it is not possible to serve two (or three) masters at the same time. We are now beginning to see the effect of our church leaders’ relations with the World Council of Churches for the last 50 years. Armenian clergy who possessed God-given dynamic oratorical skills became influenced by pseudo-Christian theological institutions, which stressed social action movements in churches and also espoused the elimination of Christian individualism by turning to socialist collectivism, using the church as their instrument. It should be remembered that Archbishop Tiran Nersoyan authored the book “A Christian Approach to Communism” in 1942 while residing in London.

The Apostle Peter never went to a seminary, he was never a theologian, but merely a fisherman who listened to God and the Holy Spirit; and who would dare question his brilliance, in the Word of God? St. Peter and other disciples were craftsmen who served but a three-year apprenticeship with Christ, the master. If our Armenian theologians are trying to work with the likes of the World Council of Churches in a spiritual detente with the intention of changing or finding a common ground, be assured that it can be likened to placing a healthy apple into a barrel of rotten apples, hoping the rotten apples will turn healthy. You cannot make an alliance with evil without surrendering something in return.

Rousas J. Rushdoony (a descendant of Armenians from Van), one of America’s most well respected Christian leaders, makes a very choice comment regarding this subject. “The concern of Christianity’s enemies is a New World Order, one without Christ. Man believes that he can, with his planning and controls, create a better, (more) orderly arrangement than can the triune (trinity) of God. Of course, what he creates is not a cosmos, but rather a vast and evil disorder.”

Revisionism will only de-nationalize the Armenian Church with the acceptance of a globalized church. It will hasten the day of extinction for the most historically free, unique, and ancient church of Christendom. The Armenian people should demand a return of their church to its historically free and independent status. It should concentrate its efforts on improving the religious and spiritual values of our people instead of supporting the enemies of Christianity. With that achieved, the world will then recognize the greatness of the Armenian Church and its people.

Let the Armenian Church return to its early Christian roots to regain God’s blessings and thus again be a true godly Christian people, and the light to a confused world.

Excerpts of “The Law”

2005-12-16T17:46:00.000-08:00

By Frederic Bastiat (1850), French Statesman and Economist

Compiled by Ardavast Avakian
April 16, 2002

Life Is a Gift from God

We hold from God the gift which includes all others. This gift is life---physical, intellectual, and moral life.

But life cannot maintain itself alone. The Creator of life has entrusted us with the responsibility of preserving, developing, and perfecting it. In order that we may accomplish this, He has provided us with a collection of marvelous faculties. And He has put us in the midst of a variety of natural resources. By the application of our faculties to these natural resources, we convert them into products, and use them. This process is necessary in order that life may run its appointed course.

Life, faculties, production---in other words, individuality, liberty, property---this is man. And in spite of the cunning of artful political leaders, these three gifts from God precede all human legislation, and are superior to it. Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.

What is Law?

What, then, is law? It is the collective organization of the individual right to lawful defense.

Each of us has a natural right---from God---to defend his person, his liberty, and his property. These are the three basic requirements of life, and the preservation of any one of them is completely dependent upon the preservation of the other two. For what are our faculties but the extension of our individuality? And what is property but an extension of our faculties?

If every person has the right to defend---even by force---his person, his liberty, and his property, then it follows that a group of men have the right to organize and support a common force to protect these rights constantly. Thus the principle of collective right---its reason for existing, its lawfulness---is based on individual right. And the common force that protects this collective right cannot logically have any other purpose or any other mission than that for which it acts as a substitute. Thus, since an individual cannot lawfully use force against the person, liberty, or property of another individual, then the common force---for the same reason---cannot lawfully be used to destroy the person, liberty, or property of individuals or groups.

The Proper Function of the Law

And, in all sincerity, can anything more than the absence of plunder be required of the law?
Can the law---which necessarily requires the use of force---rationally be used for anything except protecting the rights of everyone? I defy anyone to extend it beyond this purpose without perverting it and, consequently, turning might against right. This is the most fatal and most illogical social perversion that can possibly be imagined. It must be admitted that the true solution---so long searched for in the area of social relationships---is contained in these simple words: Law is organized justice.

A Just and Enduring Government

If a nation were founded on this basis, it seems to me that order would prevail among the people, in thought as well as in deed. It seems to me that such a nation would have the most simple, easy to accept, economical, limited, non-oppressive, just, and enduring government imaginable---whatever its political form might be.

Under such an administration, everyone would understand that he possessed all the privileges as well as all the responsibilities of his existence. No one would have any argument with government, provided that his person was respected, his labor was free, and the fruits of his labor were protected against all unjust attack. When successful, we would not have to thank the state for our success. And, conversely, when unsuccessful, we would no more think of blaming the state for our misfortune than would the farmers blame the state because of hail or frost. The state would be felt only by the invaluable blessings of safety provided by this concept of government.

It can be further stated that, thanks to the non-intervention of the state in private affairs, our wants and their satisfactions would develop themselves in a logical manner. We would not see poor families seeking literary instruction before they have bread. We would not see cities populated at the expense of rural districts, nor rural districts at the expense of cities. We would not see the great displacements of capital, labor, and population that are caused by legislative decisions.

The sources of our existence are made uncertain and precarious by these state-created displacements. And, furthermore, these acts burden the government with increased responsibilities.

The Complete Perversion of the Law

But, unfortunately, law by no means confines itself to its proper functions. And when it has exceeded its proper functions, it has not done so merely in some inconsequential and debatable matters. The law has gone further than this; it has acted in direct opposition to its own purpose. The law has been used to destroy its own objective: It has been applied for annihilating the justice that it was supposed to maintain; to limiting and destroying rights which its real purpose was to respect. The law has placed the collective force at the disposal of the unscrupulous who wish, without risk, to exploit the person, liberty, and property of others. It has converted plunder into a right, in order to protect plunder. And it has converted lawful defense into a crime, in order to punish lawful defense.

Property and Plunder

Man can live and satisfy his wants only by ceaseless labor; by the ceaseless application of his faculties to natural resources. This process is the origin of property.

But it is also true that a man may live and satisfy his wants by seizing and consuming the products of the labor of others. This process is the origin of plunder.

Now, since man is naturally inclined to avoid pain---and since labor is pain in itself---it follows that men will resort to plunder whenever plunder is easier than work. History shows this quite clearly. And, under these conditions, neither religion nor morality can stop it.

When, then, does plunder stop? It stops when it becomes more painful and more dangerous than labor. It is evident, then, that the proper purpose of law is to use the power of its collective force to stop this fatal tendency to plunder instead of to work. All the measures of the law should protect property and punish plunder.

But, generally, the law is made by one man or one class of men. And since law cannot operate without the sanction and support of a dominating force, this force must be entrusted to those who make the laws.

This fact, combined with the fatal tendency that exists in the heart of man to satisfy his wants with the least possible effort, explains the almost universal perversion of the law. Thus it is easy to understand how law, instead of checking injustice, becomes the invincible weapon of injustice. It is easy to understand why the law is used by the legislator to destroy, in varying degrees, among the rest of the people, their personal independence by slavery, their liberty by oppression, and their property by plunder. This is done for the benefit of the person who makes the law, and in proportion to the power that he holds.

Victims of Lawful Plunder

Men naturally rebel against the injustice of which they are victims. Thus, when plunder is organized by law for the profit of those who make the law, all the plundered classes try somehow to enter---by peaceful or revolutionary means---into the making of laws. According to their degree of enlightenment, these plundered classes may propose one of two entirely different purposes when they attempt to attain political power: Either they may wish to stop lawful plunder, or they may wish to share in it.

Woe to the nation when this latter purpose prevails among the mass victims of lawful plunder when they, in turn, seize the power to make laws!

Until that happens, the few practice lawful plunder upon the many, a common practice where the right to participate in the making of law is limited to a few persons. But then, participation in the making of law becomes universal. And then, men seek to balance their conflicting interests by universal plunder. Instead of rooting out the injustices found in society, they make these injustices general. As soon as the plundered classes gain political power, they establish a system of reprisals against other classes. They do not abolish legal plunder. (This objective would demand more enlightenment than they possess.) Instead, they emulate their evil predecessors by participating in this legal plunder, even though it is against their own interests.

It is as if it were necessary, before a reign of justice appears, for everyone to suffer a cruel retribution---some for their evilness, and some for their lack of understanding.

The Results of Legal Plunder

It is impossible to introduce into society a greater change and a greater evil than this: the conversion of the law into an instrument of plunder.

What are the consequences of such a perversion? It would require volumes to describe them all. Thus we must content ourselves with pointing out the most striking.

In the first place, it erases from everyone’s conscience the distinction between justice and injustice.

No society can exist unless the laws are respected to a certain degree. The safest way to make laws respected is to make them respectable. When law and morality contradict each other, the citizen has the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense or losing his respect for the law. These two evils are of equal consequence, and it would be difficult for a person to choose between them.

The nature of law is to maintain justice. This is so much the case that, in the minds of the people, law and justice are one and the same thing. There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are “just” because law makes them so. Thus, in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary for the law to decree and sanction it.

How to Identify Legal Plunder

But how is this legal plunder to be identified? Quite simply. See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong. See if the law benefits one citizen at the expense of another by doing what the citizen himself cannot do without committing a crime.

Then abolish this law without delay, for it is not only an evil itself, but also it is a fertile source for further evils because it invites reprisals. If such a law---which may be an isolated case---is not abolished immediately, it will spread, multiply, and develop into a system.

The person who profits from this law will complain bitterly, defending his acquired rights. He will claim that the state is obligated to protect and encourage his particular industry; that this procedure enriches the state because the protected industry is thus able to spend more and to pay higher wages to the poor workingmen.

Do not listen to this sophistry by vested interests. The acceptance of these arguments will build legal plunder into a whole system. In fact, this has already occurred. The present-day delusion is an attempt to enrich everyone at the expense of everyone else; to make plunder universal under the pretense of organizing it.

Socialism Is Legal Plunder

Mr. de Montalembert has been accused of desiring to fight socialism by the use of brute force. He ought to be exonerated from this accusation, for he has plainly said: “The war that we must fight against socialism must be in harmony with law, honor, and justice.”

But what does not Mr. de Montalembert see that he has placed himself in a vicious circle? You would use the law to oppose socialism? But it is upon the law that socialism itself relies. Socialists desire to practice legal plunder, not illegal plunder. Socialists, like all other monopolists, desire to make the law their own weapon. And when once the law is on the side of socialism, how can it be used against socialism? For when plunder is abetted by the law, it
does not fear your courts, your gendarmes, and your prisons. Rather, it may call upon them for help.

To prevent this, you would exclude socialism from entering into the making of laws? You would prevent socialists from entering the Legislative Palace? You shall not succeed, I predict, so long as legal plunder continues to be the main business of the legislature. It is illogical---in fact, absurd---to assume otherwise.

The Seductive Lure of Socialism

Here I encounter the most popular fallacy of our times. It is not considered sufficient that the law should be just; it must be philanthropic. Nor is it sufficient that the law should guarantee to every citizen the free and inoffensive use of his faculties for physical, intellectual, and moral self-improvement. Instead, it is demanded that the law should directly extend welfare, education, and morality throughout the nation.

This is the seductive lure of socialism. And I repeat again: These two uses of the law are in direct contradiction to each other. We must choose between them. A citizen cannot at the same time be free and not free.

A Confusion of Terms

Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.

We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.

The Superman Idea

The claims of these organizers of humanity raise another question, which I have often asked them and which, so far as I know, they have never answered: If the natural tendencies of mankind are so bad that it is not safe to permit people to be free, how is that the tendencies of these organizers are always good? Do not the legislators and their appointed agents also belong to the human race? Or do they believe that they themselves are made of a finer clay than the rest of mankind? The organizers maintain that society, when left undirected, rushes headlong to its inevitable destruction because the instincts of the people are so perverse.

The legislators claim to stop this suicidal course and to give it a saner direction. Apparently, then, the legislators and the organizers have received from Heaven an intelligence and virtue that place them above and beyond mankind; if so, let them show their titles to this superiority.

They would be the shepherds over us, their sheep. Certainly such an arrangement presupposes that they are naturally superior to the rest of us. And certainly we are fully justified in demanding from the legislators and organizers proof of this natural superiority.

Politics and Economics

Now let us return to a subject that was briefly discussed in the opening pages of this thesis: the relationship of economics and of politics---political economy.

A science of economics must be developed before a science of politics can be logically formulated. Essentially, economics is the science of determining whether the interests of human beings are harmonious or antagonistic. This must be known before a science of politics can be formulated to determine the proper functions of government.

Immediately following the development of a science of economics, and at the very beginning of the formulation of a science of politics, this all-important question must be answered: What is law? What ought it to be? What is its scope, its limits? Logically, at what point do the just powers of the legislator stop?

I do not hesitate to answer: Law is the common force organized to act as an obstacle to injustice. In short, law is justice.

Proper Legislative Functions

It is not true that the legislator has absolute power over our persons and property. The existence of persons and property preceded the existence of the legislator, and his function is only to guarantee their safety.

It is not true that the function of law is to regulate our consciences, our ideas, our wills, our education, our opinions, our work, our trade, our talents, or our pleasures. The function of law is to protect the free exercise of these rights, and to prevent any person from interfering with the free exercise of these same rights by any other person.

Since law necessarily requires the support of force, its lawful domain is only in the areas where the use of force is necessary. This is justice.

Every individual has the right to use force for lawful self-defense. It is for this reason that the collective force---which is only the organized combination of the individual forces---may lawfully be used for the same purpose; and it cannot be used legitimately for any other purpose.

Law is solely the organization of the individual right of self-defense which existed before law was formalized. Law is justice.

Law and Charity Are Not the Same

The mission of the law is not to oppress persons and plunder them of their property, even though the law may be acting in a philanthropic spirit. Its mission is to protect persons and property.

Furthermore, it must be said that the law may be philanthropic if, in the process, it refrains from oppressing persons and plundering them of their property; this would be a contradiction. The law cannot avoid having an effect upon persons and property; and if the law acts in any manner except to protect them, its actions then necessarily violate the liberty of persons and their right to own property.

The law is justice---simple and clear, precise and bounded. Every eye can see it, and every mind can grasp it; for justice is measurable, immutable, and unchangeable. Justice is neither more than this nor less than this.

If you exceed this proper limit---if you attempt to make the law religious, fraternal, equalizing, philanthropic, industrial, literary, or artistic---you will then be lost in an uncharted territory, in vagueness, and uncertainty, in a forced utopia or, even worse, in a multitude of utopias, each striving to seize the law and impose it upon you. This is true because fraternity and philanthropy, unlike justice, do not have precise limits. Once started, where will you stop? And where will the law stop itself?

Let Us Now Try Liberty

God has given to men all that is necessary for them to accomplish their destinies. He has provided a social form as well as a human form. And these social organs of persons are so constituted that they will develop themselves harmoniously in the clean air of liberty. Away, then, with quacks and organizers! Away with their rings, chains, hooks, and pincers! Away with their artificial systems! Away with the whims of governmental administrators, their socialized projects, their centralization, their tariffs, their government schools, their state religions, their bank monopolies, their regulations, their restrictions, their equalization by taxation, and their pious moralizations!

And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun: May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works.

The European Union and Armenia

2005-12-08T14:22:00.000-08:00

The International Monetary Fund and World Bank were created separately from the United Nations, but both have since been merged into the United Nations system as affiliates. The creation of a single world financial system, including a world central bank and a single world currency, was the ultimate goal of the conspirators.

Financial Insiders developed a long-range strategy to organize the world into regional economic blocs, with regional currencies and regional central banks that could later be consolidated into a single global entity, One World Government.

The Insiders have already made considerable progress toward this goal. They began in Europe with the creation of the Common Market in the 1950s. Though many European countries were worried that the Common Market might endanger their sovereignty, they were assured by suave Insiders that the Common Market was nothing more than a “free trade” organization. But as the years passed and more countries joined the Common Market, the organization began to look and act more and more like a regional government. It changed its name first to European Economic Community (EEC), then to the European Community (EC), and finally to the European Union (EU), and agitated continuously for new powers. A European Central Bank was established in Frankfurt, Germany, in 1998, and on January 1, 2002 a new currency, the euro, was launched among the nations of the EU. National currencies, some of them centuries old, disappeared, including the franc, the mark, and the lira.

EU dignitaries are now planning the next stage of what they call “integration,” that is the destruction of remnants of the sovereignty of Europe’s once independent nations, and the melting of the races. In the works is a European Constitution, to give the force of law to the already-existing European parliament, council, and courts.

Eventually the goal is to eliminate nations and races.

The European Union
“Under the Sign of the Scorpion” by Juri Lina (page 415)

The European Union was founded on November 1, 1993. Unfortunately, there are many parallels between the former Soviet Union and the European Union (EU).

1) The EU Parliament is simply an advisory organ with no legislative powers.
· The powers of the former Soviet Union (the Supreme Soviet) also had no legislative power.

2) The EU Council (the government) is dependent upon propositions from the EU Commission in order to make its decision.
· The Ministerial Council of the Soviet Union, too, was unable to make decisions without directives from the Politburo.

3) The EU Commission has the real power and can make decisions with 8 out of 17 members present. The deliberations are not public and the minutes are classified.
· The supreme organ of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union, the Politburo (normally with 15 members), also held the real power. Their deliberations were likewise kept secret.

4) When the EU was founded on the November 1, 1993, the chairman of the EU Commission, Jacques Delors (a Socialist occultist), was given more power than the existing governments of Europe’s nations. All the candidates for the post of commissioner have to be approved by the chairman.
· The General Secretary of the Soviet Politburo also held totalitarian power, which, in part, is reminiscent of the powers invested in the chairman of the EU Commission when it was founded in 1992.

5) There are many high ranking EU officials who are involved with organized crime within the framework of the occult movements, according to information from Brian Freemantle’s book “The Octupus: Europe in the Grip of Organized Crime” (London, 1995).
· High ranking party functionaries in the Soviet Union also organized crimes together with criminal organizations.

There are voices in Armenia today clamoring to join the European Union. They think they are going to acquire international status. Instead, Armenia will be governed by the EU. Little do those naïve voices realize that the EU is similar to the web of the spider. Once the fly gets caught in the web it can not escape, and eventually will be eaten.

Armenia should cure the immorality within the nation before aggrandizement of its leaders trying to become part of the EU and the New World Order, whose real goal is to eliminate national sovereignties. Armenia’s leaders are devoid of patriotism when it comes to defending the nation’s culture, honor, and external moral influences. Example: Imprisoning (for one month) a female trafficker of Armenian girls to foreign nations, as against imprisoning (for two months) a Kharabagh War patriot who was identifying the enemies of the Armenian people.

The Trilateral Commission

The Trilateral Commission was established in 1973 by private citizens of Western Europe, Japan and North America. The founder of the Commission was the famous billionaire David Rockefeller, who owns and chairs the Chase Manhattan Bank as well as various other banks throughout the world. Its goal is to develop mutual cooperation between these three sectors. Although no official government has ever given authority to the private citizens who founded and now run the Trilateral Commission, their goals and decisions reach far beyond their private interests and affect the entire world.

Political power is the main goal of the Trilateralists. It allows them to order the world according to their tastes, and their best possible profits. Such power enables them to control the world’s economy.

In Europe, some alert politicians clearly saw the T.C.’s intentions to create its own New World Order, and put all their efforts to rapidly establish the European community. The euro was given gold coverage and was designed to increase the use of gold as exchange unit. Thus, the European monetary exchange will be protected from speculation and freed from the tutelage of the American paper dollar, which lacks real coverage of true wealth. The dollar’s true value is equal to the value of the paper on which it was printed and the value of the printing itself, which comes to little more than a few cents.

Gold

In August 2004 John Embry, Chief Investment Strategist for the prestigious Sprott Asset Management in Toronto, Canada, was interviewed regarding the world gold cartel. He put out a report on the systematic manipulation of the gold market. Something he believes has been going on for a long time. He delved into the seamy underworld of international finance, where banks report phantom gold and the world’s most powerful financiers cut secret deals with each other to advance their agendas. The actions of the “gold cartel,” challenging conventional wisdom that gold trades under market forces.

The situation now he states, is similar to the late sixties and early seventies, when a conglomerate of European banks known as the London Gold Pool joined forces with the U.S. Federal Reserve to keep gold price fixed at $35/oz. Member banks contributed gold bullion in a pool that could be sold onto the market when the gold price started to rise. Thus any sign of gold run ups were stopped dead. Central banks today are similarly flooding the market periodically with gold. The difference is that then “the management of gold price was out in the open,” whereas today “everything is occurring secretly.”

The result would be further deterioration in the financial situation of the world. To keep this whole debt bubble going they’re going to have to create more paper. That’s the fundamental reason why people will move from paper to gold. Then you set that against the backdrop of falling mine supply creating a huge gap with natural demand. Once the central banks aren’t in a position to fill that gap, the result will be disastrous.

I also think there are other central banks that do not have the same point of view as the western central banks such as China, Russia, etc. I think they’re buying gold every time the western banks sell. When the day comes and everybody opens their books up, there’s going to be very little gold left in the western central banks. It will all be in the eastern central banks. That’s when the price will really get marked up.

As for Armenia, since 1991 the government not only sold the nation’s assets to international financial vultures for a pittance, but also sold the gold mines as well. That gold was the life blood of the nation. On May 5, 2004 Armenia sold its gold reserve and “the Armenian Central Bank no longer would accumulate gold,” Tigran Sarkissian, the bank’s chief, announced at a press conference. Sarkissian said “the nation’s gold reserve of 1.4 tons was sold when gold prices reached USD 400.00 an ounce. The resulting profit was USD 5.5 million. Gold is considered a means of accumulating wealth. At the same time, holding gold offers very little profit,” Sarkissian said. The question becomes: How was the 1.4 tons of gold acquired, and where did the USD 5.5 million go? The backing of Armenia’s paper dram with gold would have created confidence in the people’s money. It would have brought about economic stimulus to the nation instead of stagnation by IMF World Bank manipulating (strings attached) bribe money.

The creation of the European Union together with the purposeful suppression of gold’s value by the world’s “money changers” banking cartel, are both an integral part of the diabolical plan to create their “One World Government.” At this time in history it should be most obvious to previous skeptics (regarding the one world) that a slow transitional goal by the “One Worlders” is being revealed through present day world events. Constant wars are the bankers’ harvest and an important part of the “One Worlders” dreams.

Ardavast Avakian
Boca Raton, Florida
April 29, 2005

The United Nations

2005-12-08T14:18:00.000-08:00

World government has been the dream of man for centuries, but it was not until a wintry afternoon in 1891 when three men were engaged in earnest conversation in London, England. The leader was Cecil Rhodes, a most important person in South Africa. The second was William T. Stead, a famous journalist. The third was Reginald Baliol Brett, later known as Lord Esher, a friend and confidant of Queen Victoria, and later to be the influential advisor of King Edward VII and King George V. From that conversation were to flow consequences of the greatest importance to the British Empire and to the future of their world.

Cecil Rhodes was a fabulously wealthy man. He mercilessly manipulated South Africa and took lands and wealth from the black peoples. Only in theory are black people back in political control of Africa; the real decisions are still made by the European and American elites through their South African black puppet presidents and leaders. Independence is only an illusion.

Cecil Rhodes was a member of a group of high-born graduates at Oxford and Cambridge universities. They were fervent apostles of the ultra socialist professor John Ruskin, who together envisioned a “secret society,” which was finally created after Rhodes’ death in 1902. Rhodes called it the “Society of the Elect.” One of the important instruments Rhodes created to advance his “Global Vision” was the Rhodes scholarships given to bright young men in their prime from all over the world to study at Oxford University in England. The purpose was to inculcate and perpetuate his dream of world domination. Rhodes admitted that his plan for dominion was a scheme to create the government of the whole world, in other words, a conspiracy. He envisioned the creation of a world governing body over all nations which would have an irresistible military force.

In his third will, Rhodes left his entire estate to Freemason Lord Nathan Rothschild as trustee. (The very Rothschilds, who finance rulers of nations). Rhodes stipulated that his gigantic fortune was to be used by disciples worldwide that would carry out the program he envisioned. Rothschild appointed a Freemason Alfred Milner to head up the secret society for which Rhodes’ first will made provision.

After his appointment, Milner recruited a group of young men from Oxford and Toynbee Hall to assist him in organizing his administration of the new society. All were English Freemasons. Among them were Rudyard Kipling, Arthur Balfour, Lord Rothschild, and some Oxford College graduates known as “Milner’s Kindergarten.” It was this group in 1909, together with some other English Masons, who founded the “Round Table.” This gave birth to the grandfather of all British Masonic “think tanks.”

Three powerful think tank offshoots of the Round Table are (1) the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIA), organized in 1919 in London; (2) the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), organized in 1921 in New York City; and (3) the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR), organized in 1925 consisting of twelve countries in what is called the Pacific Rim.

The purpose of these think tanks was to influence the direction of England’s and America’s foreign policies towards increasing world involvement independent of the world’s masses. The intent was:

(1) To create and establish a One World Government with a common unified church and monetary system under their direction.

(2) To bring about the utter destruction of all national identity and national pride, which was a primary consideration if the concept of a one-world government was to succeed.

(3) To engineer and bring about the destruction of existing religions and, more especially, the Christian religion, except their own interpretation of religion.

(4) To establish the ability to subtly influence each and every person through means of media control.

(5) To encourage, and eventually legalize the use of drugs and make pornography an “art form” which would be widely accepted and, eventually, become quite commonplace.

(6) To weaken the moral fiber of nations and demoralize workers in the labor class by creating mass unemployment. Discouraged workers will resort to alcohol and drugs. The youth of the land is encouraged by means of rock music and drugs to rebel against society, thus undermining and eventually destroying the family unit.

(7) To penetrate and subvert all governments, and work from within them to destroy the sovereign integrity of nations that wish to be free and independent. Nationhood and patriotism would be their enemy.

On September 17, 1796, George Washington in his farewell speech said: “It is our true policy to stay clear of permanent alliances with any portion of the foreign world.” He warned the American people not to get embroiled in the affairs of Europe. He understood that interference in other nations’ internal affairs would also create enemies and hatred of America; but in 1914 it was not to be. Rhodes scholars had already established themselves within governments of the world who had been indoctrinated with Cecil Rhodes’ dreams.

Up until World War I (1914) the United States had maintained its neutrality and steered clear of major entanglements around the world. The first attempt to create an international body based on the principle of “collective security” came in the aftermath of World War I. It was in 1919 when President Woodrow Wilson championed the creation of “The League of Nations,” but America was not yet ready to abandon its sovereignty and endanger its constitution.

The United States Senate refused to ratify The League of Nations agreement at the end of World War I. The American people were suspicious of entanglements with the constant warring European powers and wanted no part of submersion in a world super-state. They saw through the complex and seductive “peace” appeals. They believed that any league strong enough to “enforce peace” globally would also possess the power to impose tyranny worldwide. There would then be no way to limit its power.

In direct repudiation of Washington’s warnings, Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan and others during Woodrow Wilson’s administration manipulated America’s involvement into World War I. It was an excellent opportunity for the newly formed Council on Foreign Relations to begin promoting “world government” as being a desirable solution to the problems of the world. The Council on Foreign Relations was formed on July 29, 1921 by a group of “intellectuals” who felt that there was a need for world government devoid of nationhood, even though the people of America were not ready for it. Since the CFR was a semi-secret think tank, the American people could not see their subtle conspiratorial efforts toward world government.

To convince the people of the world to give up their sovereignty and turn it over to a world government was a monumental task. However, the planners did not feel it was insurmountable. One of those who foresaw the problem had also offered a solution. Dr. Brock Chisolm, Director of the World Health Organization, is on record as stating: “To achieve world government, it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, loyalty to family tradition, national patriotism and religious dogmas, the very moral basics that made the American ‘Republic’ so successful for the first 150 years of its existence.”

Those, who read the CFR quarterly Foreign Affairs and study the editorial stance of CFR- controlled American media organs, know exactly which are the favored views and attitudes to support. The CFR and several like-minded groups can be expected to support the following: more pacts; treaties and agreements that compromise U.S. sovereignty; continued praise for the reliance on the United Nations; piecemeal transfer of U.S. military forces to U.N. supervision and command; more and newer forms of foreign aid (bribery); undermining and isolation of any national leader who does not favor world government under a “new world order”; and submission to the radical demands of environmental extremists, population planners, and human rights crusaders who will never be satisfied until the United States no longer exists as a free and independent nation.

The United Nations

The United Nations has been in existence for more than a half century, but its origins and goals are poorly understood. The following only touches upon the hard reality of the UN system and its purpose.

Initial plans for the United Nations were drafted in 1943 by the Informal Agenda Group (IAG), a secret steering committee set up by President Roosevelt’s Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, at the UN’s founding San Francisco Conference. Virtually all 43 individuals were members of the CFR. The top acting Secretary-General was Alger Hiss, not only a CFR member but also a secret Marxist Soviet agent who drafted the charter.

John Foster Dulles, a founding member of the CFR and early supporter of the United Nations, became President Eisenhower’s Secretary of State in 1953. He had taken part in formulating the League of Nations Conference in Paris on April 29, 1919. He was disgusted with members at the conference who were defending nationalism, which resulted in the rejection of the League of Nations. He then went to a meeting in Oxford and found a different atmosphere. He found in Cecil Rhodes’s teachings that the Christian religion could be the impediment to the cause of world government.

Christian religion played no real part in John Foster Dulles’s life. Under the guise of “world peace,” Dulles realized he could use Christian churches to achieve the goals of a one-world government. He became involved in the creation of the National and World Council of Churches. He was the most significant agent in subverting true Christianity as a tool for social change, leading to a one-world slave system. Dulles was a leader in the ultra liberal anti-Christian group the Federal Council of Churches, the predecessor of the National Council of Churches (NCC). Bent on separating the church from the Bible, Dulles also carried that philosophy into American diplomacy.

It would be very difficult to enumerate the hundreds of United Nations agencies that exist, but let us just review a few of them:
- United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF)
- United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO)

The real nature of UNICEF’s professed interest in children might surprise many people. Both UNICEF and UNESCO, two of the most visible organs of the UN, have long had histories of exploiting children for political gain. Behind the benign UN veil lurks a consistent premise that children are ultimately the property of the state. UN bureaucrats view the family as an institution competing with governments for the loyalties of children. One of the UN’s most important objectives is instilling in children an allegiance to the globalist cause, while sabotaging their natural affection for family, country, and the principles of liberty and traditional morality.

The UN has been a major sponsor in the campaign of inculcating innocent schoolchildren the twisted values of the ongoing “sexual revolution.” Worst still, UNICEF has been part of a revolting network of pedophiles and child pornographers who used their UN-sanctioned access to children to find victims for their twisted trade. In 1987, Joseph Verbeek, a Belgian who headed the Belgian office of UNICEF, and Michel Fetu, a UNICEF volunteer, were arrested and charged with using the UNICEF facilities in Brussels for child prostitution and production of child pornography. Their international ring was called Center for Research and Information on Children and Sexuality. They had taken UNICEF’s motto, “Every Child is Our Child.”

The most powerful body in the United Nations is the Security Council. It consists of 15 members of the United Nations, of whom five – the United States, China, France, Russia, and Great Britain -- are permanent members, while the other ten are elected by UN member states for two-year terms. The UN charter clothes the Security Council with both legislative and executive authority. The Council has the power to deliberate and to issue resolutions, which, from the point of view of the United Nations, have the force of law and must be observed by all UN member states. If any offending nation disregards such resolutions, the Security Council then has the authority to use all measures, including unlimited war, to enforce the will of the United Nations, articles 41 and 42 of the charter, which spell these powers out very plainly.

The Security Council, in other words, has, according to the UN charter, final authority over all international disputes as well as domestic problems that it decides “are threats to the peace,” “breaches to the peace,” or “acts of aggression.” And to enforce its will, the Security Council has the power to make war in order to prevent war. A very curious provision for an organization supposedly charged with keeping the peace.

NATO: the UN’s Military Arm

Articles 52-54 of the UN charter authorize forming “regional arrangements,” precisely what NATO (The North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is. It was marketed to the American people as only a military alliance designed to check any westward movement of the Soviet bloc. NATO won immediate approval in the U.S. Senate. When the USSR supposedly dissolved, NATO should have as well but its founders had other plans.

On March 19, 1949 U.S. Secretary of State, Dean Acheson (CFR), stated that the pact was “designed to fit precisely into the framework of the United Nations,” that it was “subject to the overriding provisions of the United Nations Charter, and that it “is an essential measure for strengthening the United Nations.”

In November of 2002 NATO added seven more nations to membership and now has a total of 26. By joining, the thinking of smaller nations is that they will be more secure. Little do they know that now fewer nations will be able to stand up against NATO’s military power. In reality, they have signed their death certificate, as Christian Serbia did. In this process the United Nations will have acquired its own military army with fewer nations to deal with.

In the fall of 1996 former German Foreign Minister, Hans-Dietrich Genscher, stated in a Washington Times column: “NATO’s decision to send forces to Bosnia based on a UN Security Council decision is to be applauded.” NATO was then, and is still today, the UN’s military force.

An excellent example of NATO’s totalitarian terrorism was the lying that took place during the war on Serbia. Robert Hayden, Director of the University of Pittsburgh’s Center for Russian and East European Studies, said, “There have been many discrepancies in the official stories …” He dismissed reports of 100,000 - 500,000 Albanian men massacred as “just ludicrous.” Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) political science professor, Barry Posen, who specializes in the history of warfare, pointed out that, because so little independent scrutiny of NATO’s atrocity stories has taken place, “NATO is able to absolve itself and make great use of very tragic pictures of people in very tragic circumstances to say, ‘See, this is why we fought the war, to reverse this’.”

The war was the destruction of Christian Serbia by NATO. The so-called Kosovo Liberation army KLA is tightly connected to the Albanian Marxist narco-mafia terrorists. According to Ben Works, Director of the Strategic Issues Research Institute of the United States (SIRIUS), “The KLA’s Islamic veneer helps explain the group’s alliance with renegade Saudi millionaire, Osama Bin Laden. There is no doubt that Bin Laden’s people have been in Kosovo helping to arm, equip and train the Turkish Albanian KLA.”

NATO’s war against Yugoslavia was a terrorist enterprise that reflected a totalitarian mind-set. From President Clinton on down, NATO’s aerial bombardment of Radio Television of Serbia (SRT) represented a disturbing embrace of one of the fundamental tenets of totalitarianism: Government, in this case NATO’s ruling elite, was entitled to define how people think and punish those who commit “thoughtcrime.” “Yes, Serbian television could be hateful, biased, bad,” commented Robert Fisk, Belgrade correspondent for the London Independent. “It was owned by the government. But once you kill people because you don’t like what they say, you have changed the rules of war.” The war was the intended destruction of Christian Serbia by NATO. According to Ben Works, the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) is tightly connected to the Albanian narco mafia.

Environmentalism

During the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), the so-called Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Dr. Dixy Lee Ray, an eminent scientist, boldly challenged the absurd claims and dangerous proposals of the environmental fanatics. As a distinguished professor of zoology and commentator, former chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission, former governor of the State of Washington, and recipient of many awards, she exposed some of the dangerous UNCED policies and proposals. She alerted many Americans to the perils of the global green agenda. In her publication Environmental Overkill, she wrote: “First, we must recognize that the environmental movement is not about facts or logic. More and more it is becoming clear that those that support the so-called “New World Order” or World Government under the United Nations have adopted global environmentalism as a basis for the dissolution of independent nations and the international realignment of power.”

Following are notes about Maurice Strong from the book “The United Nations Exposed” by William Jasper.

The master of world environmentalism is billionaire socialist of Canada, Maurice Strong. He is an industrialist, radical environmentalist, New Age spiritualist, United Nations plutocrat, fervent one-world socialist, a critical and provocative globalist, a great patron of Israel, and close friend of David Rockefeller and Mikhail Gorbachev. In 1990 a Canadian journalist, Daniel Wood, interviewed Mr. Strong at his sprawling Colorado estate. During the course of Wood’s visit, Strong told him of a novel he had been planning to write. It was about a group of world leaders who decided the only way to save the world was to cause the economies of the industrial countries to collapse. In describing the background of the novel, he starts by explaining the yearly meeting of the World Economic Forum which convenes in Davos, Switzerland. Over a thousand CEO’s, prime ministers, finance ministers, and leading academics gather in February to attend meetings and set economic agendas for the year ahead. With this as a setting, Strong then says: “What if a small group of these world leaders were to conclude that the principal risk to the earth comes from the actions of the rich countries? And if the world is to survive, those rich countries would have to sign an agreement reducing their impact on the environment. Will they do it? The group’s conclusion is ‘no’. The rich countries won’t do it. They won’t change. So, in order to save the planet, the group decides: ‘Isn’t the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse?’ “Isn’t it our responsibility to bring that about?”

Wood wrote: “At that point the amateur tycoon novelist makes a slight motion with his fingers as if he were flicking a cigarette out the window.” Meaning, the fates of hundreds of millions, even billions, of people callously sealed with the flick of the finger – their livelihoods, life savings, jobs, businesses, homes, and dreams, all for a good cause (“to save the planet”) of course. Wood wrote: “I sat there spellbound. This is not any storyteller talking. This is Maurice Strong. He knows these world leaders. He is, in fact, co-chairman of the Council of the World Economic Forum. He sits at the pinnacle of power. He is in a position to do it.”

Perhaps more important is that, from everything we know about the eminent Mr. Strong, he is very likely inclined to do it! Maurice Strong is the model global-elitist, a super-wealthy collectivist of uncontrolled arrogance, who believes that he and a select few others have been chosen to run the world and refashion it according to their utopian designs. It should be noted that, in 1917, Trotsky also thought what was good for Russia.

Recipe for Tyranny

Many supporters of an empowered United Nations sincerely believe that a global government would eliminate wars and establish world peace. But the utopian facade put forward by globalization advocates hides an ugly reality. Namely, a government with the strength to enforce world peace would also have the power to enforce global domination. Void of any provisions safeguarding against the abuse of power, the UN would become a war-making machine capable of stripping individuals of their rights. Under the guise of peace, global tyranny would be delivered.

The plan to establish a world federation under the UN banner is inherently flawed because it is based on the presupposition that rights come from government. The problem with this view, of course, is that if government is the source of our rights, then government may properly redefine, restrict, or eradicate rights whenever it chooses to do so.

The UN holds that government grants rights. But governments are not formed for the granting of natural rights; they are formed to ensure the protection and security of rights. In 1850, French economist, Frederic Bastiat, emphasized this essential principle in his treatise The Law. “Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws,” Bastiat observed. “On the contrary, it was the fact that they existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” To illustrate his point, Bastiat cited America as the nation that best exemplified this ideal. “Look at the United States,” he said. “There is no country in the world where the law is kept more within its proper domain: The protection of every person’s liberty and property.” Bastiat could make this observation because America’s Founding Fathers, with incredible insight, formed a government that not only embodied the ideals of the Declaration of Independence, but ensured their lasting protection as well.

UN human rights instruments also promise social-welfare “rights” such as the right to a job, to an education, to medical care, etc. The problem is that such “rights” can only be provided through socialistic government controls. This perversion of the law would transform the UN world government into a tool of injustice. Bastiat emphasized that the law, if it is to protect individual rights, must be just. Any law that infringes on the basic, natural rights of mankind would render it unjust. In determining such laws, Bastiat advises: “See if the law takes from some persons what belongs to them, and gives it to other persons to whom it does not belong.”

The unjust socialist program of “sharing the wealth” in practice is a program of “controlling the wealth, wealth created by humans working.” Wealth must first be confiscated before it can be redistributed. Let us understand, a state that has become powerful enough to confiscate wealth by the tyranny of taxation, cannot be forced to redistribute that which it has confiscated.

The enforcement by a UN world government of unjust law would require the use of a substantial international police force, equipped with the ability to suppress any opposition that could arise. Upon succeeding in globalization, the UN would be free to use its standing global army as a tool of oppression. The disarmament of nations, citizen disarmament included, would indeed eliminate the ability of nations to war against each other but would replace such wars between nations with a new type of war – war made against an all but defenseless population by the UN. The UN standing army would then be used as a “peacekeeping” force. Supreme in firepower and numbers, the UN army would be unstoppable, making it impossible for former nations and individual citizens to defend themselves from aggression. The global state, in eliminating international wars, would inevitably replace them with a singular war fought by the global nation. Soldiers would be, by necessity, “quartered among us” in the endless battle against revolt. The end result is the establishment of totalitarian rule under the UN.

Financial Deception
From “Inside the United Nations” by Steve Bonta

A month before the Dumbarton Oaks conference in 1944, a secretive gathering took place at the Mount Washington Hotel in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire. The gathering was formally called the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference. Its purpose was to create an international system to control world finances complementing the United Nations’ framework for political and military control.

Much of what took place at Bretton Woods is still unknown. Records and transcripts of the meetings are spotty, and participants were tightlipped about many of the proceedings. Representing the United States was a delegation by Harry Dexter White, Roosevelt’s Assistant Treasury Secretary (later unmasked as a Communist agent), and Raymond Mikesell, who wrote a short memoir about the goings-on at the conference. Harry Dexter White did not consider himself accountable to any higher authority within the U.S. Government.

At Bretton Woods, White presented a grand scheme: He wanted to create an organization to control international finance, destroy the financial independence of nations of the world, and distribute wealth from the rich to the poor countries. He called his scheme the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF was promoted as an instrument for international peace rather than international socialism. By tying Bretton Woods to the peace movement, the U.S. Treasury Department, with the rest of the administration, was able to get the American public to support the International Monetary Fund.

The IMF was sold to Congress and the American people as “stabilizing” international trade and currency exchange rates. The people assumed that stability would be a blessing in those chaotic times. But, in reality, the IMF was intended to create instability, by sucking the world’s poorer nations into total dependence on IMF loans, and by financially weakening the wealthy countries, especially the United States. The chaos created by such destabilization would allow the insiders to integrate all countries, both rich and poor, into a single global economic and financial system. These loans, however, come with strings attached: The IMF often imposes harsh conditions on debtor nations, requiring them to increase their tax rates, heap more regulations on private enterprise, revise the educational system, etc.

Government-administered foreign aid is morally reprehensible, whatever its defendants say. Foreign aid is not charity, even though it is often portrayed that way. Charity is given voluntarily to those genuinely in need. Foreign aid, by contrast, is taken forcibly from American taxpayers of every income level and given to those in poor countries who need it least – the corrupt elites who occupy the halls of their government. It therefore strengthens only those entrenched interests and individuals who are most responsible for their countries’ hardships in the first place. It encourages corruption and dependency – and dependency on the emerging global welfare state is exactly what the architects intended.

Although the IMF and World Bank were created separately from the United Nations itself, both have since been merged into the United Nations’ system as affiliates. The creation of a single world financial system, including a world central bank and a single world currency, was the exact goal of the insiders at Bretton Woods. The financial insiders have developed a long-term strategy to organize the world into regional economic blocs, with regional currencies and regional central banks that could later be consolidated into a single global entity. The insiders have already made considerable progress towards this goal. They began in Europe with the creation of the Common Market in the 1950s. Though many European countries were worried that the Common Market might endanger their sovereignty, they were assured by suave insiders that the Common Market was nothing more than a “free trade” organization. But as the years passed and more countries joined the Common Market, the organization began to look and act more like a regional government. It changed its name first to European Economic Community (EEC), then to the European Community (EC) and finally the European Union (EU), and agitated continuously for new powers. A European Central Bank was established in Frankfurt, Germany, in 1998, and on January 1, 2002 a new currency, the Euro.

EU dignitaries are now planning the next stage of what they call “integration” - that is, the destruction of the remnants of the sovereignty of Europe’s once independent nations. They are now considering a European Constitution to give the force of law to the already existing European parliament council, and courts. Their plan is to replicate the European model elsewhere, using regional economic blocs as the foundation for regional governments, and then the final region, the world.

America’s 60-year-long involvement with the United Nations’ system, the entire military, legal, financial, and social international octopus, has brought us nothing but trouble. The UN has involved us in wars, sapped our financial and economic resources, worked to change our laws, and gradually undermined our national sovereignty. Instead of peace, we have gotten almost incessant war. Instead of international financial stability, we have gotten chaos. And instead of independence, we have gotten the false promises of what internationalists like to call “interdependence.”

But the UN system itself is not yet independent either. It relies for sustenance on the one source of health and vigor that can keep it alive: the United States of America, with all of its military, political, and economic clout. Like a biological parasite, the United Nations has fastened itself onto a larger, more powerful organism, relying for its continued survival on tapping the vitality of its host. The UN parasite depends for its military power on American weaponry, technology, military intelligence, and personnel, especially in places like the Balkans and the Middle East. The UN’s international financial system is heavily supported by money extracted from U.S. taxpayers. The UN’s headquarters are located on the U.S. soil. And the United Nations derives much of its operating funds, the money with which it pays for its lavish East River headquarters and numerous regional offices, as well as the inflated salaries of its thousands of employees.

Civilian Disarmament

The goal of UN disarmament programs is to take weapons away from private citizens as well as national militaries, giving the world body a monopoly of power. The 1995 report “Our Global Neighborhood” of the UN-funded Commission on Global Governance (CGG) called for global measures to crack down on “the rampant acquisition and use of increasingly lethal weapons by civilians seeking a means of defense against street gangs, criminals, political opposition groups, or terrorist organizations. When it comes to disarming civilians, the UN does not accept “No!” to mean “No,” but rather “not yet.” This was clear to retired U.S. Congressman, Charles Pashayan, who attended the Small Arms Conference as a delegate. “This is the opening skirmish of a war,” warned Pashayan. “All of this has to be understood as part of a process leading ultimately to a treaty that will give an international body power over domestic and national laws.”

Throughout history, would-be tyrants have sought to disarm their subjects. Literally tens of millions of human beings have learned, too late, that civilian disarmament is often a prelude to genocide.

World Taxation

Advocates of global government are pushing schemes for global taxation, one step at a time, as part of the plan to mold the United Nations into a world government.

The first and most concrete proposal for worldwide taxation was advanced by Yale University economist, James Tobin, in the 1970’s. Tobin proposed a uniform worldwide levy on international currency exchanges. It was intended to throw some sand in the wheels of excessively efficient international money markets and to pave the way for an eventual common currency, common monetary fiscal policy, and economic integration.

In his original proposal, Tobin suggested that the role of tax collector be played by either the IMF or the World Bank. Modern versions of the plan call for the erection of an entirely new tax collection bureaucracy. In either case, the final beneficiary will be the embryonic UN-centered world government.

The radical environmental movement has recently thrown its weight behind various global taxation schemes. The so-called carbon tax is a prominent example. Exploiting concerns over global warming, the carbon tax would punish alleged nations to global warming by increasing the price of fossil fuels proportionate to their carbon content. The aim of such a tax would not only be to raise revenues for globalist projects, but also to coerce industrialized nations to knuckle under to the megalomaniacal objectives of the radical environmental lobby. In other words, no level of taxation on human activity will satisfy those who regard the human race as a blemish on the surface of Mother Earth. And of course Harvard professor, Richard Cooper, recommends that the international community (embodied in the UN) be the recipient of any such environmental taxation proceeds.

If we think that the air we breathe is free, think again. Kevin Baumert of the UN-Affiliated Global Policy Forum outlines the deceptive strategies used by proponents of global taxation, which makes it clear that the globalist cartel hopes to tax every conceivable human activity; by definition, the “global commons” belongs to and must be administered by them.

By slow, incremental steps, the “patient gradualism” of which the architects of world order are so fond is to be shackled to a regime of heavy, arbitrarily defined international taxation, for which the sky is literally no limit. By exploiting radical initiatives at local levels and using carefully coordinated talking points and devious words, globalists intend to foist upon us a brave new world of tax-and-spend on a grand scale.
The United Nations is a war organization, not a peace organization. Perpetual wars for perpetual peace.

The United Nations is the enemy of all freedom-loving peoples.

Compiled by Ardavast Avakian
Boca Raton, FL USA
December 26, 2004

Armenia - Borrowing into Poverty

2005-12-08T14:11:00.000-08:00

Economic genocide has been committed against Hayastan since the declaration of its sovereignty from the Soviet system. The application of the International Financial Institutions (IFI) structural adjustment programs that have been put in place favor the internationalism of macro-economic policy under the direct control of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. At no time in history has the “free” market played such an important role in shaping the destiny of a supposed “sovereign” nation.

Since the early 1980s the “macro-economic stabilization” and “structural adjustment” programs imposed by the IMF and the World Bank on developing countries (as a condition for the renegotiation of their external debt) had led to the impoverishment of hundreds of millions of people. Contrary to the spirit of the Bretton Woods Agreement which was predicated on “economic reconstruction” and the stability of major world exchange rates, the structural adjustment program has contributed largely to destabilizing national currencies and ruining the economies of developing countries. Its social impact has been devastating.

There are many ways by which the IMF and World Bank lending to Hayastan has been able to retard the development of its economy.

The IMF tightly monitors and provides resources for the restructuring of the Central Bank. This means that the IMF rather than the government controls money creation, and so becomes the vehicle able to paralyze the financing of real economic development. Incapable of using domestic monetary policy to mobilize its internal resources, the country becomes increasingly dependent on international sources of funding which has the added consequence of increasing the level of external indebtedness.

Policy-based Lending:
There is a close relationship between debt-management policy and macro-economic reform. Data management is confined to ensuring that the individual debtor nation continues formally to abide by their financial obligations. Through “financial engineering” and the careful art of debt rescheduling, repayment of the principle is deferred while interest payments are enforced. Debt is swapped for equity and “new” money is lent to the nation on the verge of bankruptcy to enable them to pay off their interest arrears on “old” debts so as to avert default. In this process the formal loyalty of the debtor is paramount. The creditor (bank) accepts to reschedule only if the debtor nation abides by the “policy conditionalities” attached to the strict loan agreements. The objective consists in enforcing the legitimacy of the debt servicing relationship while placing the debtor nation in a stronger straitjacket which prevents them from embarking upon an independent national economic policy.

Ownership and Privatization of Agricultural Land:
World Bank reforms consist of issuing land titles to farmers, while at the same time encouraging the concentration of farmland into fewer hands. Customary land rights are also affected. The tendency is towards mortgaging of land by small farmers, which only increases the growth of the agro-business sector, with a subsequent formation of a class of landless seasonal agricultural workers.

The conditionalities and nature of these loan agreements do not favor the real economy, since none of the money is channeled into internal investment. Another important objective is served, however: The adjusted loans divert resources away from the domestic economy and encourage Hayastan to keep on importing large quantities of consumer durable goods and luxury items (Mercedes Benzes). In other words, tariffs are eliminated in favor of imports over exports. The result of this process has been stagnation of the domestic economy, enlargement of the balance of payment crisis and the increasing growth of the debt burden.

Engineering the Collapse of State Investment:
Under the public investment program (PIP), all project loans require a system of procurement and international tender (competitive bidding) which allocates the entire execution of public works projects to international construction and engineering firms. These firms in turn skim off large amounts of money into a variety of consulting and management fees. Local Armenian companies (whether public or private) tend to be excluded from the tendering process although much of the actual construction work will be undertaken by local companies (using local labor at very low wages). In other words, loan money earmarked for infrastructural projects is largely “recycled” in favor of multinational contractors.

An interesting conditionality of macro-economic reform upon social programs is the insistence that their funds are not to be used for free health services. Patients are charged a $40.00 tax paid in advance for hospital services. It is known that after a particular hospital had administered free aid the electricity was turned off to the hospital because it was not able to pay its electrical bill.

Divestiture and Privatization of State Enterprises:
Structural adjustment constitutes a means of taking over the real assets of the indebted country through the privatization program. The privatization of state enterprises (selling of the nation’s assets at give-away prices) is invariably tied to the renegotiation of the countries’ external debt. The most profitable assets of the nation are taken over by foreign companies in exchange for paying off the debt. The Nobel Prize winner in economics, Joe Stiglitz, was the chief economist of the World Bank until 1999. He has gone on record in the London Observer with the observation that the International Monetary Fund and U. S. Treasury fixed Russian elections during Yeltzin’s administration. He also expressed discontent of the brand of globalization endorsed by every president since Roosevelt. He stated that: “National leaders do not usually object to the sell off of state industries. Instead, they use World Bank demands to silence local critics. The 10 percent commissions paid to local ministers seem to satisfy their dreams of wealth. All they do is shave a few million off the price, and wire it to a Swiss bank account. The U.S. Government knows this.” Of course, as long as the leader of the country goes along with the loan agreements they will finance his re-elections.

To put it simply: Hayastan’s leaders must sell assets of the nation in order to pay (only the interest) on the money they are borrowing for running the government It is under these conditions that Hayastan is not able to build its economy based upon its natural national creativeness.

For 65 years Hayastan did not have total control of its destiny under the Soviet system. Now, after so called freedom of over 10 years, the International Financial Institutions (IFI) are in control of its destiny. The only difference is that the population is forced to leave the country, making it more vulnerable for extinction as a nation. That, of course, is the intent of the internationalists. The remaining populace is influenced by exterior social influences, which slowly affect the character of the nation. A “One World Government” is their goal. Nationalism is their only impediment. The only consolation is that there exist nationalist groups and patriots in Hayastan that know the truth and will die on the soil before leaving it.

Armenia must wean itself slowly from the clutches of the internationalists, but must first prepare the groundwork very carefully. To begin with, leadership must have the sacrificing patriotic spirit. They must make it abundantly clear that foreign investment would be welcome as well as secure. The only exception would be to renegotiate the previous agreements made regarding the sale of gold mines and transfer total control to Armenia’s parliament. Armenia must untie the dram from created debt funds and float its own national money backed by gold. This, of course, will infuriate the internationalists, and Hayastan will be blacklisted and confronted with demonization which will cause disruptions in its already precarious economy. Once the confidence of the populace has been established, that their money is sounder than borrowed money, the nation’s economy will blossom in a steady and healthy manner. There are two choices: Either you continue on the present course which will lead to slave status and extinction, or fight for your existence as a nation.

Ardavast Avakian
Boca Raton, Florida U.S.A.
Feb. 2002

Armenia - Not a republic

2005-12-08T14:09:00.000-08:00

In 1990, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, Armenia’s emerging leaders were not aware of what creates free market economies. The vacuum created a scramble for acquiring personal financial security for individual opportunists. It became a power struggle for administering from the top. After a number of years, a constitution was created which did not include checks and balances within its framework. Checks and balances would not have given a single individual the power to determine the future of the nation. Checks and balances were incorporated into America’s historical constitution two hundred years ago by wise and patriotic men. No one branch of government was made predominate over the other. It was a document created so that governments could never take away the breath of free air from the people. It is amazing why consideration was not given to America’s constitution as created in 1778, a model for Armenia’s form of government. The industriousness and creativity of the Armenian people would have, in a short time, brought about a more vibrant economy benefiting a larger percentage of its citizens.

The “emerging leaders” did not understand that only free people create great economies. Governments do not. They had not known about the limitations of government. They had only thought that socialism created wealth. But wealth by plunder. Stealing from (producers) and giving to others. Government’s responsibilities are to protect, not manipulate the economy. Government’s only responsibilities are to protect and defend against domestic and foreign aggression the lives and property of the people under its jurisdiction, to settle disputes that arise, and leave the people free to pursue their various goals and ends of life. This approach would have brought about more abundance for the populace as well as respect and success for Armenia’s government. Instead, the government opting for expedience sake, decided to govern by borrowing (with intrusive and harmful conditions) from international financial institutions in order to govern. Of course there will be an ending to that system of governing, but it matters not to those few who are benefiting for the present. They have not been imbued with patriotism and sacrifice for the future well being of the nation.

An excellent example for not borrowing “slave money” was The Island of Guernsey, which is located in the English Channel, was an economic disaster 176 years ago. It had debts that were drowning the country. Fortunately, it had people who could think logically. One of them said, “our government is cutting our throats by borrowing the bank-note money of the Bank of England (a private bank). Instead, let’s have our own treasury and create our own currency”.

This resulted in a high standard of living. No unemployment, a modern infrastructure and no government debt. The Guernsey government printed their own treasury notes, which were debt and interest free. The notes were spent into the economy for Guernsey’s needs and taxing it back with small taxes. Taxes can be small when there is no interest to pay on government debt. Guernsey has continued to do this and never has inflation. They have rid themselves of all their debts. Prior to this they had debts so great they were paying 80% of their total income in interest alone. Their circumstances are geographically different than Armenia’s, but the principle is no different. Armenia’s banks are charging exorbitant interest fees for borrowing by property owners, and farmers. That, of course, is an excellent opportunity to steal their properties.

Today, the Armenian government has borrowed such huge amounts of funds from “one-world” banks that they will never be able to pay them back. The reason the international banks are anxious to loan funds is so that they can dictate to Armenia’s government its future and destiny. At some point soon, the constitution of Armenia must state that the government is forbidden to pay interest on foreign borrowed money. Armenia’s government should immediately begin printing their own money and regulating its value relative to gold. Selling control of their gold mines was a national criminal act. If there is any source of gold left they should immediately reclaim them with a parliamentary edict stating that no mined gold can leave the country. It should be stored in vaults and under the security of the army.

Frederick Bastiat, a French Statesman and economist in 1850 said: “God has given to men all that is necessary for them to accomplish their destinies. He has provided a social form as well as a human form, and these social organs of persons are so constituted that they will develop themselves harmoniously in the clean air of liberty. Away with their rings, chains, hooks, and pincers! Away with their artificial systems! Away with the whims of governmental administrators, their socialized projects, their centralization, their tariffs, their government schools, their state religions, their bank monopolies, their regulations, their restrictions, their equalization by taxation, and their pious moralizations! And now that the legislators and do-gooders have so futilely inflicted so many systems upon society, may they finally end where they should have begun? May they reject all systems, and try liberty; for liberty is an acknowledgment of faith in God and His works”.

An excellent example that the Armenian government is not a republic is a communiqué to the press from the new parliament assembly of 2003 in which they proudly announce that they were “entitled to drive democracy a step forward in our fatherland, by enhancing the country’s legislative system to an internationally accepted level.” The key to that statement is the word accepted. If the Armenian government were a true republic it would not allow outside institutions to decide what is or is not “accepted level” for the Armenian government. Democracy (?), Democracy is government governed by men. Republics are governed by laws.

During the elections of February 19, 2003 certain political parties and candidates were financed by the Diaspora funds of wealthy individuals and organizations. Helping Armenia with Diaspora funds is to be commended. It would be wonderful If those funds were used for philanthropic or infrastructure purposes. If they were used for political candidates, campaigns, or inducements, it should then be totally illegal. The process and results of Armenia’s elections is the right of only the citizens within the country. If Armenia were a republic, those parameters would be strictly enforced, and if Armenia were a republic, there would be no need of exterior monitors to invade Armenia in order to guarantee free elections.

It is most important for Armenia to trade and cooperate with nations of the world, but it is most dangerous to deal with organizations created by individuals specifically for interfering into the internal affairs of free nations. Organizations such as Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), European Parliament, European Union, Council of Europe. It is none of their business how Armenia is governed, good or bad. All of these organizations have been created to erase individual nations and ethnicities of historical Europe. This is a preliminary to consolidation into their diabolical world government. Their present hidden agenda is to transform Hayastan into something unrecognizable. Armenia’s army (part of the world’s peacekeepers), their culture contaminated, Armenia’s National Church, a world church (World Council of Churches), non-existent national pride and patriotism.

The World Bank economist, Morin McLaughlin, speaking to a seminar in Baku on June 27, 2003 stressed that the system of education in ex-Soviet states needs reforming. By “reforming”, she really means brainwashing Armenia’s new generations into the kind of group link that will allow international organizations like hers to control Armenia more easily.

The new speaker of Armenia’s parliament, Mr. Arthur Baghdasarian, is now willing to introduce changes in Armenia’s civil criminal code to be in line with European legislation. Mr. Baghdasarian naively does not know that the European legislation was created to eliminate Europe’s nations so that they can eventually melt it into the “Worldwide Government” that they have been constantly dreaming about. This is an excellent example of asking exterior forces to determine your laws. Are not Armenians intelligent enough to create just laws for their own country?

Today Armenia is not a republic. It is in reality a plutocracy.

Oh! Lord God, please look down upon a re-awakening for Hayastan.

Ardavast Avakian
Livonia, Michigan USA
June 28, 2003

History of the National and World Council of Churches

2005-12-08T14:06:00.000-08:00

The World Council of Churches since its inception has consistently equated the main mission of the church with involvement in social issues. Many ministers and religious leaders from all denominations began denying the value of the churches’ traditional mission. They began to join new movements, many of them practicing civil disobedience and social radicalism, rather than preaching the gospel and striving to motivate their people spiritually.

The social gospel had many expressions and spokesmen. Among the more prominent was Washington Gladden (1836 – 1918), for thirty-six years a congregational pastor in Columbus, Ohio. A champion of what he called “applied Christianity”. The outstanding prophet of the social gospel was Walter Rauschenbusch, a graduate of the University of Rochester and of Rochester Theological Seminary, which were Baptist institutions. His “Christianity and the Social Crisis”, published in 1907, brought him nation-wide recognition. Walter Rauschenbusch and Dr. Harry Ward formed the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America on December 2, 1908. They were leaders of the social action movements in the churches that decided to do away with Christian individualism and turn to outright collectivism, using the church as their instrument. Socialism then, was their first concern. And, like all other false prophets who have infiltrated religion through the centuries, they used a “front” or disguise. This disguise, as we have seen, was “The Kingdom of God.” The Kingdom was not pictured as a spiritual society into which men and women had to be born as individuals through a personal relationship with Jesus Christ as Savior, but as a collectivist society which would be brought about by eradication of poverty, redistribution of wealth, correction of industrial inequities, and the bringing about of “economic justice.”

It was not only the clergy involved in this “social gospel”. Few present day churchgoers know that John Foster Dulles was a top-ranking officer in the Federal Council of Churches. He was Secretary of State under President Eisenhower. John Foster Dulles, Alger Hiss and Harry Dexter White worked together in the State Department that planned the United Nations for the creation of a godless New World Order. It should also be recalled that Alger Hiss was responsible for convincing Roosevelt to present at Yalta the control of Eastern Europe to the Communist block, ignoring the Captive Nations, which included Armenia.

The Christians of America began to detect an evil anti-Christ influence in the Federal Council of Churches. Hearing of this, the Rothschild banking house of Europe in 1922, together with their brethren of the American banking monopoly (moneychangers of the temple), conceived and began financially supporting the teaching of secular humanism and the liberation theology in the major theological universities of America, in order to set the stage for cosmetically renaming the “Federal”…. to the “National” Council of Churches.

On November 29, 1950 the Federal Council of Churches was finally renamed the National Council of Churches (just a different wolf in sheep’s clothing). On September 30, 1952, amid great fanfare, a Revised Standard Version of the Bible, copyrighted by the National Council of Christ in the United States of America (successor to the Federal Council) was presented to the American public. It omitted key passages in order to cast doubt on the divinity of Jesus and to remove passages unfavorable to the Jews.

The Geneva-based W.C.C. claims a membership of 263 Protestant and Eastern Orthodox churches in 90 countries. A large number of men and women who belong to the member churches feel that their denominations have turned their attentions away from questions of faith and are no longer speaking to their spiritual needs and concerns. Even a limited study of the aims of the W.C.C. will reveal the truth of these assumptions. The goal of the globalists was to use the church as an institution to promote the social gospel – basically the redistribution of wealth. Instead of looking to God, their family and the Christian community, they were looking for salvation from the state.

One of the movements which the W.C.C. has supported wholeheartedly is the ecumenical movement, which actually means (the union of all Christian denominations into one great ecclesiastical body), not for good, but rather for diverting true Christian thought. Dr. Eugene Carson Blake, who retired as the General Secretary of the W.C.C., delivered an address in the Riverside Church in New York City on November 21, 1972, in which he set forth his ideas of the ecumenical movement. The text of his address is quoted in some detail, for it gives a very good idea of the attitudes of the W.C.C. towards various phases of contemporary American life. Dr. Blake stated in no uncertain terms that “the chief ecumenical assumptions must be understood and accepted by American Christians if they wish their faith to be relevant to the real human problems of the last quarter of the 20th century!” Why this should be so, is not explained; it is simply assumed. “Human problems” was not the basis of Christ’s teachings and had nothing to do with His gospel. The tradition of the Christian Church is that Christ has come to give us the abundant life now and in the life to come.

The W.C.C. has long been committed to the social gospel, which means that it has accepted the socialist economic philosophy as the ideal way of life. The W.C.C. has often expressed deep concern over oppression and injustice especially, they say, as it exists in the capitalist countries. However, the W.C.C. has expressed little concern over the injustice and loss of individual liberty, which exists in Communist countries. Isn’t it ironic, the very capitalists that the W.C.C. denounce such as the Eli Lilley, Rockefeller and other foundations are financing more than 200 seminaries of America in teaching liberation theology. It seems that truth is not truth, but rather what present day moneychangers (such as those that Christ drove from the temple) want it to be. Truth should be simple. Truth is the foundation for all of life, whether for individuals, families, or nations.

The W.C.C. is concerned that ministers are failing to use the power of the pulpit to redress social grievances. But the W.C.C. had not used its good offices to champion the thousands of persecuted Christians in the Soviet Union, those people who merely wished to worship God in their own way and not follow the dictates of a state-controlled church. There should be only one mediator between God and man in a Christian culture, and that is Christ; not the Socialist State envisioned by the W.C.C., which created new terminology of words, such as “new structures for society”, “liberation”, “struggle for social justice”, and many others. It is God’s Holy Spirit, and definitely not the W.C.C., which Armenians should embrace and uphold. His truth, with our understanding and support, is what should help guide and strengthen the Armenian people spiritually into a bright 21st century.

There has continued for over two centuries, diabolical warfare against the Christian religion worldwide, the most recent being the decimation of Serbia, a Christian nation. Careful thought and questions should be given. Who were those that gave such passionate support of that war? Is America being used to promote an “evil world empire of domination?” Has it lost the good from its Christian heritage?

The W.C.C. has many documented files concerning the abuses of Christians by the Soviet government, but ignored them. Let us examine the obsession with socialist Marxism, which is dominant in the thinking of council leaders. Dr. Philip Potter, the council’s West Indian general secretary, in an official publication of the United Church of Christ and the United Presbyterian Church, contained a photograph of Dr. Potter with his hand raised in the clenched fist, which is the Communist salute. Dr. Potter, who said that he had visited Soviet Russia six or seven times, stated that each time he gained great inspiration during his visit!

With this background of the W.C.C., it is incomprehensible how the Armenian people, having always traditionally supported and defended our historically free and independent church, could stand by and allow this association to take place. Our church, throughout a great deal of its history, has been forced to represent the Armenian people as government (because of a lack of national sovereignty at times) but never with the anti-Gods. The Armenian Church is rich with its saints and martyrs who gave their lives for the true word of the Lord. The Armenian Church and its people should not abandon their sacrifices. Christ was not a compromiser of the truth, and so true disciples should not compromise Christ, yesterday, today, or tomorrow.

Our people have always been the defender of the Armenian National Church, so long as it maintained its independent national identity by teaching spiritual values as taught by our Lord God, instead of involving itself with the economic philosophies of socialism and the liberation theology. It matters not, as to how fully educated and oratorically dynamic our church leaders are, but rather how faithfully they follow the true gospel of Christ.

In December 1945 John D. Rockefeller, Jr., donated a million dollars to the Friends of The World Council of Churches. Several months later, in February 1946, a meeting was held in Geneva, Switzerland by this same provisional committee. Here it was announced that an international religious training center was to be set up in Geneva. Instructions would be given to students all over the world to prepare them for leadership in interchurch activities. The purpose of the commission: “To stimulate the churches of all nations to a more vigorous expression of the demand of the Christian conscience in relation to the political policies of governments.” These events affected the Near East School of Theology in Beirut, Lebanon. It became this association that Armenian churches (both Orthodox and Protestant) were first introduced to the fraudulent and anti-Christ World Council of Churches. Those who serve God with Christ’s words cannot serve man’s creations of deviationist church entities. Doing so is serving two masters.

The Apostle Peter never went to a seminary, never was a theologian, but only a fisherman who listened to God and the leading of the Holy Spirit, and who, -- would dare question his brilliance, in the word of God? If our Armenian theologians are trying to work with the likes of the W.C.C. in a spiritual detante, with the intent that they are going to change or find a common ground, be assured that it can be likened to placing a healthy apple into a bushel of rotten apples, hoping the rotten apples will turn healthy. You cannot make an alliance with evil without surrendering something in return.

Our church has been great because it has historically been free. It is said that we want to introduce our church to the world via the W.C.C. Let us illustrate this with an analogy. Imagine having guests for breakfast and wanting to impress them. We find that we have a few nice fresh eggs (the Armenian Church), as well as some older bad eggs (W.C.C.). We decide to hastily mix the two and prepare scramble eggs. Would that impress our guests?

Rousas J. Rushdoony (of Armenian descent), one of America’s well-respected Christian leaders, makes a very choice comment regarding this subject. “The concern of Christianity’s enemies is a New World Order, one without Christ. Man believes that he can, with his planning and controls, create a better, orderly arrangement than can the triune (trinity) of God. Of course, what he creates is not a cosmos, but rather a vast and evil disorder.”

The Armenian people should demand a return of their church to its historically free and independent status. It should concentrate its efforts on improving the religious and spiritual values of our people instead of supporting the enemies of Christianity. With that achieved, the world will then recognize the greatness of the Armenian Church and its people.

Let the Armenian Church stand only with the true way of the Lord.

Ardavast Avakian
36008 Ann Arbor Tr. September 8, 1999
Livonia, Michigan 48150
ardavast@att.net

Armenia - Nationhood within globalization

2005-12-08T14:04:00.000-08:00

In his famous “Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death” oration at St. Johns Church in Richmond, Virginia on March 23, 1775, Patrick Henry said: “For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst and provide for it.”

This famous phrase must be the spirit by which the Armenian Government should govern. The present government seemingly not aware of the truth places itself in a position not to provide for the worst. They have not understood the nature and role of government towards the successful creation of a free nation within the encroachment of insidious globalizers.

To begin with, it must be determined that man requires rights either from man himself or someone external to man himself, a creator. Unless there is a higher authority, man will always be tempted to enslave man. William Penn, America’s first great champion for liberty and peace wrote: “If man will not be governed by God, then they must be governed by tyrants.”

It seems that Armenia’s government has not been able to provide for the worst, because they are not able to envision impediments to nationhood relative to the creation of the ”One World Government.” Instead they have entangled themselves with the very internationalist world organizations that are in reality opposed to the existence of small sovereign nations.

Following are a few of the many globalization entities dedicated to world control:

1. United Nations (UN)
The United Nations we have been told, is the world’s “last, best hope for peace.” Peaceful resolution of conflicts and harmony among nations are noble aspirations shared by all decent people. The UN, though, has been an utter failure as a vehicle to bring about world peace. Hundreds of wars afflicted humanity since the world body’s founding in 1945. Interstate warfare, guerilla insurrections, and terrorism continue to claim their bloody toll (The New American, October 22, 2001, pg. 13). All these human calamities have been cause for increasing UN organizational entities towards their intended goal: world control. There are those knowing that for the UN to grow into a socialist world government envisioned by its founders, the world body must gain control over a military force powerful enough to impose its will. This is being successfully accomplished by individual nations (including Armenia) providing their military forces to participate in joint training exercises. These joint military exercises are nothing more than opportunities to dilute the nationalist mentality of Armenia’s soldiers, preparing them to think as the world’s armed forces. The United Nations is the vehicle towards globalization, where the world’s ethnicities and cultures will evaporate. The UN is planning a world tax. In The Global Taxman by Steve Bonta, he states: “Advocates of global government are pushing schemes for global taxation as part of the plan to mold the United Nations into a world government one step at a time” (The New American Special Report - October 22, 2001).

2. Club of Rome
The Club of Rome is a most influential world think tank whose primary purpose is to reduce the world’s population by 2 billion people through war, famine, disease and any other means necessary. The basis for their population goals is to use the environmentalism hoax. In Dr. Jacqueline Kasun’s book War Against Population she documents the shocking account of the multi-billion dollar movement of population controllers and their efforts to enforce global population control. Thomas Ferguson, the Latin American case officer for the U.S. State Department’s office of population (OPA) stated: “We will go into a country, and say, here is your no damn good development plan, throw it out the window. Start looking at the size of your population and figure out what must be done to reduce it. If you don’t like that, if you don’t want to choose to do it through (family) planning, then you’ll have an El Salvador or an Iran, or worse, a Cambodia” (Executive Intelligence Review (EIR) – March 10, 1961). It is noted he does not volunteer to be one of the 2 billion people.

3. Council of Europe (CE)
After the Armenian Government anxiously became a member, the Council of Europe’s Secretary-General Walter Schwimmer classified Armenia as a “nation at war” and threatened them to conclude an agreement with Azerbaijan regarding Nagorno Karabagh (Arminfo – Yerevan – June 2002). Now, how can Armenia be at war since there have been no hostilities for seven years? Didn’t the leadership of Hayastan realize that once becoming a member of a globalist entity they would lose control of governance? Walter Schwimmer also said, “We live in a century of globalization and the closure of borders is a natural disaster for everybody (Arminfo – Yerevan – July 2, 2002).” The question becomes: Why is the head of the Council of Europe so concerned about Armenia’s borders? If Mr. Schwimmer is so concerned about closed borders, shouldn’t he speak to those that have closed Armenia’s borders? Regarding borders, history has shown that others have always determined Armenia’s borders. If Mr. Schwimmer were concerned about Hayastan’s future, he would not be identifying it as a “pupil” and, “is moving in the right direction.” Since Mr. Schwimmer has been chairman of the Inter-Parliamentary Union Friendship Group Austria-Israel of the Austrian Parliament from 1976 to 1999, could he not convince the Israeli Government to cease training the Azerbaijan armed forces? “Israel in high level bid for Azerbaijan projects” (Jane’s Defence Weekly 12-22-99). Is Mr. Schwimmer going to govern Hayastan, or are the Armenian people going to govern themselves? Journalist Gevorg Sarkisyan, in the July 12, 2002 issue of Hayots Ashkar newspaper, reports, “Armenia is a country that supports Europe.” This has the same ring, as when Armenians hugged and embraced the young Turks in 1908 saying, “we are now brothers.” Armenia can and should relate to Europe but not be dictated to by the Council of Europe.

4. Radio Free Europe (RFE)
Radio Free Europe today is not broadcasting freedom. A certain Max Liberty, broadcasting into Armenia in December 2001, promoted bisexualism, porn stars, and religious cults, as well as advising young Armenian youth to practice free sex (Azg, December 10, 2001). This is only one of many ways to destabilize a culture that does not deserve to be contaminated. Does not the Armenian Government notice this? If so, why don’t they file an official complaint to America’s State Department? What is the Armenian Government doing to protect the national character? The United States Government finances Radio Free Europe.

5. International Criminal Court (ICC)
This world court is located in The Hague, Netherlands. It was adopted by globalists at an international conference in Rome, Italy on July 17, 1988. This world court will have the authority to override any existing nations’ courts. For example, defending rights of women and rights of children against their parents, both designed for dismantling the family structure. The ICC could declare Karabagh’s government officials as war criminals and bring them to trial. They also would have the authority to try any member of Armenia’s armed forces, overriding Armenia’s courts of justice. Historical genocides, such as the Armenian genocide, will not qualify for judgment. This international court is nothing more than another myriad of world organizations put into place for the United Nation’s enforcement capabilities.

Other examples of intrusion into Hayastan’s social fabric:

United States Agency for International Development (USAID)
This is an American Government financed agency that sent nine black students from North Carolina to Armenia. They taught Armenian youngsters the American electric-slide and hoky-poky dances (ArmeniaWeek Web page, July 5, 2002). This agency’s primary intent is to use the do-gooder environmentalist scare as a weapon “to change a nation’s national economic development strategies consistent with their environmental goals.” What goals are they speaking of? Shutting down Armenia’s atomic power plant? Following is one of their statements of intent relative to the world’s nations: “Has a comprehensive environmental policy framework been established that is appropriate to changing economic and social circumstances?” Isn’t it odd that these nine young folks were not sent to Africa to experience “changing their economy and social circumstances?”

Controlling Armenia’s News Media
The Armenian Government’s denial of television stations A1+ and Noyan Tapan of their broadcast licensing was an example of government tyranny manipulating free speech. It was replaced by a company called Sharm that had no experience and whose programming is to consist of sports, fashion shows, and music. The Armenian Government, instead of silencing a quality Armenian television station and news media, should close up CNN and send it back to where it came from. While in Hayastan during 1997, it was noted that CNN programming had subtle mind molding world news programming with a mixture of immorality. It had nothing to add to Armenia’s intellectual or national stature. Only nations with freedom of thought are able to withstand adversity.

Conclusion
Isn’t it a shame that a number of very successful Armenians in the Diaspora having great love for their people brought their enterprises into Hayastan for the country’s survival, while the government is burdening the country by borrowing the nation into debt and selling the nation’s assets such as its goldmines.

What makes us proud of being Armenian in this period of history? Are we proud of being saddled with the anti-Christ World Council of Churches after 1700 years of Christianity? To be scattered all over the world losing our identity within two generations, while in Hayastan survival of the race is in the realm of pragmatism instead of protecting national values? Fortunately there is not a shortage of patriots in Hayastan. They will die on the soil before leaving it. They have grasped the only weapon for survival of the race by indoctrinating youth with the national spirituality of General Karekin Nezhdeh, who in 1920 was responsible for securing Zangezour (the southern half of what constitutes present Hayastan), by confronting Russian Communist forces for 40 days. These patriots are imbued with the breath of Karekin Nezhdeh, who not only was a great military leader, but a giant of philosophical thought and unselfish devotion to the future of the race. While imprisoned in Siberia by the Soviets, his writings in prison have been acquired and incorporated into a volume, which is today being extensively read in Hayastan. A few statements made by him deserve repeating: “When signing a treaty, use some of my blood for the signature.” “In my life, besides my conscience, I got to know two other judges – God and the people. I sinned against God, but never against the people.”

These present day patriots are fully aware of the untenable landlocked geographical situation the nation is in, but they are proud of those patriots that secured Karabagh against all odds. These are the individuals and groups that should be encouraged and supported, so that the fabric of the nation remains intact. Then, with physical and intellectual patriotism in place, all national and international interactions could be wisely resolved.

Boca Raton, Florida USA7-23-02