In 1984, the People’s Republic of China and the government of the United Kingdom initialed the draft text of an agreement on the future of Hong Kong. Hong Kong had been a British colony since the middle of the 19th century. In a history of the Sino-British Joint Declaration that was posted on the Hong Kong Baptist University website, the author attributed the agreement between China and Britain to the United Nations Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries adopted in 1960. China made clear it’s intention to reclaim sovereignty over Hong Kong in a letter to the UN Special Committee on the Situation in 1972. To the right, there is an excerpt of significant passages in the Declaration. As you read it, keep in mind that the United States was founded by the British initially as a colony until the war for independence.
On the European Front
• In January 1967, President Lyndon Johnson announced that the Soviet Union had begun to construct a limited Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) defense system around Moscow. . .Johnson therefore called for strategic arms limitations talks (SALT), and in 1967, he and Soviet Premier Alexei Kosygin met at Glassboro State College in New Jersey.
• On August 15, 1971, President Richard M. Nixon announced his New Economic Policy, a program “to create a new prosperity without war.”
• Soviet President Leonid Brezhnev and U.S. President Richard Nixon, meeting in Moscow, sign the Strategic Arms Limitation Talks (SALT) agreements. . . Nixon and Brezhnev seemed unlikely candidates for the American and Soviet statesmen who would sign a groundbreaking arms limitation treaty. . .by 1972 both leaders were eager for closer diplomatic relations between their respective nations.
• In 1975, after the coup on Nixon’s administration, Gerald Ford signed the Helsinki Final Act with the Soviet Union.
Hong Kong was an economic powerhouse in Asia. It was a thriving manufacturing and technology hub. To make the deal palatable, China agreed to a deal of one country – two systems. Hong Kong would remain an autonomous region except for defense and foreign affairs.
The final agreement ended a century and a half of British rule over Hong Kong – turning it over to China effective at midnight on June 30th, 1997.
On June 1, 1997, Robert A. Manning of the Progressive Policy Institute published an article titled, The Meaning of Hong Kong. In the article, Manning wrote:
The agreement also allows Hong Kong autonomy as an international actor, declaring that it “may on its own maintain and develop economic and cultural relations and conclude relevant agreements with states and relevant international organizations.” Hong Kong, for example, is (and will continue to be) a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum.
One Country, Two Systems
So Hong Kong was the model of the “one country, two systems” concept. One system being the Communist Chinese nation-state, the other Chinese sovereign territory but with Hong Kong as an administratively independent customs territory. With that in mind, note the following timeline:
April 1989, Tiananmen Square massacre (read more)
In July of 1989, President George Bush sent Lawrence Eagleburger and Brent Scowcroft on a secret mission to China. That secret trip was discovered inadvertently in December of 1989 when Brent Scowcroft gave a toast at a Washington DC event. Congressional hearings were held in early 1990 about the trips (there were two secret trips). (see Tiananmen Square link above).
November 1989, the Berlin Wall opens (read more)
December of 1989, a meeting between Gorbachev and Bush was scheduled to be held in Malta to discuss – now what?
Early in December, Lawrence Eagleburger made an appearance on C-Span to talk about the upcoming Malta meeting (summit). The significance of what Eagleburger had to say was in his reference to condominium.
A condominium under international law is a territorial power (governing) sharing agreement between one or more nation-states.
An abstract from the Oxford Public International Law definition is as follows:
1 A condominium is a territory over which two or more States jointly exercise governmental authority. (see also Governments). The word coimperium is also sometimes used in this context. There is no formal distinction between the two words.
2 Traditional condominiums involved the joint exercise of sovereign authority (see also Sovereignty); modern instances frequently involve joint exercise of more limited authority. The States exercising the condominium may administer the territory jointly or they may retain common authority only over major decisions…
The United States-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992
Mitch McConnell, his wife Elaine Chao and Prince Charles
In 1992, Senator Mitch McConnell sponsored S.1731, the US-Hong Kong Policy Act of 1992. It became Public Law 102-383 on October 5, 1992. This legislation defined how U.S. policy would accommodate the One Country, Two Systems agreement between China and Britain.
What becomes clear in McConnell’s legislation is that it provided the means for technology transfer to communist China and provided them a tunnel through which they could burrow their way into the United States – in a sense laundering communists – kind of an island sheep dip pit.
The Communist Enabling Act
Excerpts from S.1731, McConnell’s Hong Kong Policy legislation:
• The United States should respect Hong Kong’s status as a separate customs territory, and as a contracting party to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, whether or not the People’s Republic of China participates in the latter organization.
• The United States should seek to maintain and expand economic and trade relations with Hong Kong and should continue to treat Hong Kong as a separate territory in economic and trade matters, such as import quotas and certificates of origin.
• The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People’s Republic of China, beginning on July 1, 1997, will continue to enjoy a high degree of autonomy on all matters other than defense and foreign affairs.
• There is provision for implementation of a `one country, two systems’ policy, under which Hong Kong will retain its current lifestyle and legal, social, and economic systems until at least the year 2047.
• The legislature of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region will be constituted by elections, and the provisions of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, as applied to Hong Kong, shall remain in force.
• Provision is made for the continuation in force of agreements implemented as of June 30, 1997, and for the ability of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region to conclude new agreements either on its own or with the assistance of the Government of the People’s Republic of China.
• The United States should continue to support access by Hong Kong to sensitive technologies controlled under the agreement of the Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls (commonly referred to as `COCOM’) for so long as the United States is satisfied that such technologies are protected from improper use or export.
• The United States should invite Hong Kong to maintain, after June 30, 1997, its official and semi-official missions in the United States. . . The United States should invite Hong Kong to open and maintain other official or semi-official missions to represent Hong Kong in those areas in which Hong Kong is entitled to maintain relations on its own, including economic, trade, financial, monetary, aviation, shipping, communications, tourism, cultural, and sport areas.
• The United States should recognize passports and travel documents issued after June 30, 1997, by the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
• The United States should negotiate a bilateral investment treaty directly with Hong Kong, in consultation with the Government of the People’s Republic of China.
SEC. 104. TRANSPORTATION.
• It is the sense of the Congress that the following, which are based in part on the relevant provisions of the Joint Declaration, should be the policy of the United States after June 30, 1997, with respect to transportation from Hong Kong…
Mitch McConnell’s wife, Elaine Chao was a Deputy Secretary in the U.S. Department of Transportation at the time. She was present for the 1990 announcement of a new paradigm in transportation in the U.S. The new paradigm included technology and communications for the facilitation of cross-border trade and an organizing principle for transportation around the concept of intermodalism – special administrative zones for commerce – essentially modeling the Hong Kong system of Special Administrative Regions within the territorial United States.
Taken all together, it seems to this writer that what Britain and Communist China with the help of Mitch McConnell and his wife, Chairman Chao, did was to replicate the British system of empire but with the U.S. as the target. The British Empire – the British Commonwealth – was a maritime empire – they controlled ports (special administrative zones) for commerce all over the world. Today the name of the association is the Commonwealth of Nations, but it is still led by the British.
Robert Hawke, Prime Minister of Australia
On June 23, 1988, Australian Prime Minister Robert Hawke was invited to speak to a joint session of Congress. The subject of his Address was the relationship with the U.S., trade issues and structural adjustment. Special note should be taken of the fact that Australia had been working with the OECD since 1971 the significance of which becomes apparent later in this article. Hawke gets to the purpose of the Address at about the 15 minute mark.
In January of 1989, Robert Hawke proposed creating an organization for economic cooperation during a visit to South Korea. In November of 1989, the first meeting of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) organization was held in Canberra, Australia. Meeting documents for the first meeting of APEC were found on the International Labor Organization’s Bureau for Workers’ Activities in Turin, Italy. The page had to be recovered from the archive but it’s clear from all the documents for the first meeting, that the purpose of the APEC organization was for international commerce – to harmonize the regulatory systems and to establish a borderless world for commerce.
CHAIRMAN’S SUMMARY STATEMENT
A key theme which has run through all our deliberations in the last two days is that the continuing economic success of the region, with all its implications for improved living standards for our people, depends on preserving and improving the multilateral trading system through progressive enhancement of, and adherence to, the GATT framework. By contributing to that effort through the Uruguay Round and beyond, this region can not only help assure its own economic future but improve economic prospects globally. We are all agreed that an open multilateral trading system has been, and remains, critical to rapid regional growth. None of us support the creation of trading blocs.
On the APEC website, on the About Page, there is a description of the organization and its purpose. A text only copy of the page was made to remove the distractions between the paragraphs. The following are excerpts:
What Does APEC Do?
APEC ensures that goods, services, investment and people move easily across borders. Members facilitate this trade through faster customs procedures at borders; more favorable business climates behind the border; and aligning regulations and standards across the region. For example, APEC’s initiatives to synchronize regulatory systems is a key step to integrating the Asia-Pacific economy. A product can be more easily exported with just one set of common standards across all economies.
Sustainable and Inclusive Asia-Pacific
APEC works to help all residents of the Asia-Pacific participate in the growing economy. For example, APEC projects provide digital skills training for rural communities and help indigenous women export their products abroad. Recognizing the impacts of climate change, APEC members also implement initiatives to increase energy efficiency and promote sustainable management of forest and marine resources.
The forum adapts to allow members to deal with important new challenges to the region’s economic well-being. This includes ensuring disaster resilience, planning for pandemics, and addressing terrorism.
. . .
APEC Capacity Building Projects
Capacity building projects play an important role in helping translate APEC’s goals into reality. By enhancing members’ capacity through skills training and technological know-how, APEC-funded projects strengthen members’ readiness to adopt new initiatives from electronic customs processing to regulatory reform. APEC projects also target specific policy areas from enhancing small and medium enterprise competitiveness to facilitating the adoption of renewable energy technologies in the region. The APEC Project Management Unit oversees APEC-funded projects in collaboration with working groups. Funding for projects is made possible by contributions from APEC members. The APEC Policy Support Unit provides policy research, analysis and evaluation to assist in the implementation of APEC’s agenda.
Note: The Immigration Act of 1990 included the definition of EB-5 visas. The EB-5 must have been the mechanism for APEC funded or sponsored projects. THE CORE.
The United States was a co-founder of APEC with Australia and ten other Pacific Rim countries. At the July 1990 meeting of APEC, Secretary of State James Baker III proposed as his first priority to add transportation as an area of focus for APEC. The other policy areas Baker mentioned was: “We are particularly pleased to see areas such as human resources, energy and telecommunications included.”
Hong Kong was not a member of APEC but Communist China was. They joined APEC in 1991. So Communist China was a participant in the APEC agenda which was facilitation for cross-border trade and harmonization the regulatory systems and Hong Kong was the gateway to launder communist “human resources” and money thanks to Mitch McConnell. And we can thank Congressman Norman Mineta for the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 which established five “research centers” for transportation at our universities, a transportation system centered around the concept of transportation zones mirroring the Hong Kong special administrative zone, the concept of a fully telecommunications-enabled transportation system, the first reference to a Pan-American highway system, and more.
Global Economic Development Planners
In 1960, President John F. Kennedy signed and the U.S. Senate ratified the Convention on the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD). The OECD was a reconstitution of the Organization for European Economic Co-Operation (OEEC) which was established to execute the Marshall Plan for rebuilding Europe. The two organizations – OECD focused primarily on the Atlantic side of the world and APEC focused on the Pacific side of the world, together become the global COMMUNIST economic planners for the world and the center focus for their COMMUNIST planning is the transportation system and all “governance” areas that can be drawn into the plan (think Agenda 21, Metropolitan Planning Organizations, Airport Authorities, etc).
Cannibalization of the Nation-State
Writing this is like watching one of those horror flicks where you can see the innocent unsuspecting family on a picnic and you can see the psychopath monster behind the tree watching them, ready to pounce. You can scream a warning to them but they don’t hear you.
Clearly, the OECD-APEC central planners were in competition with government even if our government didn’t see it (how could they not?) Regardless of whether they saw it or not, the agreements to participate in a Customs Union is a direct assault on national government by an entity that seeks to accrete power from it.
It was during the George Bush 41 administration that the “reforms” of government began – first with the transportation plan, the education system (Charlottesville Summit) and the health care system. When Bill Clinton was sworn into office, the reform plans proceeded with new names and new rhetoric but without change to the designs. Clinton and Gore were a little more up front with the plans when they announced a revolution and a reinvention of government.
It was the Office of Management and Budget that was leading the effort to redesign government. In 1996, Alice Rivlin was the Director of the OMB. She was the Chair of the OECD Ministerial meeting in Paris, the subject of which was the future of public services (i.e. government administrative processes).
Ministerial Symposium on the Future of Public Services
As you read it, when you read about the devolution of power, keep in mind that local officials through the MPO’s and Airport Authorities were the targets of the APEC transportation plans and APEC funded projects. This is how they get to One Country, Two Systems in the U.S. which was really just a step towards disintegration of the United States as a nation-state.
In previous work, I documented the conversion of our government into a kind of corporate basterdized entity responsible for the management of social problems and costs while releasing the wealthy and multinational corporations to become self-governing – free to exploit everything and everyone in the country. I’m not going to carry over that research here. I’ll just provide the links:
The Alliance for Redesigning Government (Note: Neal Pierce died recently. He is famous for his promotion of the concept of Citistates – exemplified by the Hong Kong model.)
So who is running the administrative agencies of government within the bowels? Are they Americans or not? My bet is not.
Proposal by Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev
United Nations Audiovisual Library of International Law
The question of a declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples was initially proposed for inclusion in the agenda of the General Assembly by Nikita S. Khrushchev, the Chairman of the Council of Ministers of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), during his address to the Assembly on 23 September 1960. . . MORE
Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples
General Assembly resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960
Considering the important role of the United Nations in assisting the movement for independence in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories,
Recognizing that the peoples of the world ardently desire the end of colonialism in all its manifestations,
Convinced that the continued existence of colonialism prevents the development of international economic co-operation, impedes the social, cultural and economic development of dependent peoples and militates against the United Nations ideal of universal peace,
Affirming that peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law,
Believing that the process of liberation is irresistible and irreversible and that, in order to avoid serious crises, an end must be put to colonialism and all practices of segregation and discrimination associated therewith, . . .
Convinced that all peoples have an inalienable right to complete freedom, the exercise of their sovereignty and the integrity of their national territory,
Solemnly proclaims the necessity of bringing to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all its forms and manifestations;
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966
International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights
General Assembly resolution 2200A (XXI) of 16 December 1966
3 Comments
D L Williamson
Thank you for exposing one more very large rabbit hole that has needed to be exposed. Onward through the FOG…
Vicky Davis
That one is an especially deep rabbit hole but it’s central to the global plan of control. Transportation hubs, Fusion Centers and Foreign Direct Investment and with it, Foreign “workers”. It’s a brilliant and quiet occupation strategy – especially since the media demonizes the patriots who stand up for their country against the onslaught.
walker.gallupuc@yahoo.com
I appreciate you analogical thought experiment to the killer behind the tree and the family not hearing, but I think you need to rewrite that scene: the Killer (the progressive educators and planner who are all in on their projects to the exclusion of everyone or everything, mineral, vegetable, animal or human) who doesn’t here you because he is caught in his scheme and is psychotic (he is compartmentalized in his thinking completely due to his psychopathy) and the family does hear you ) slightly and raises the heads and look around to find out what is happening, but they don’t quite get it yet, and can’t comprehend what you’ve said in warning.
This is where most of humankind, with lip service paid by the elites’ to the environment, cause they need the earth, and want to possess it exclusively. Like mythological (?) Satan who would rather rule in hell than truly obey the authority of a Supreme Authority in Heaven.
Life is a race between “hearing” the warning (learning) and history as it plays the tune. Sorry for being preachy, but it is what it is. And thanks for your work in “The Jigsaw Puzzle”.