Has anyone heard of the NWO?

[myata]

If you want direct conversation, stay away from nutbar topics.

Hey, Dancer, should we appoint you as our local expert on nutbar topics? No? Then I recommend - no, insist, on your staying away from topics you've nothing of substance to contribute. Sounds fair?

[margrace]

Oh he can't do that myata, he's one of Harper's boys put on here to block access to information, did you hear about the loss of that too.

[Pliny]

Is it really so outlandish to suggest that some secret groups(Skull and Bones for one) and business partnerings (Rockefeller's Trilateral group for one) has an agenda beyond what we can see and what is published?

No. It is not outlandish to think there is an agenda beyond what we can see and what is published. It is however outlandish to assume you know what the agenda is if it is beyond what we can see and what is published.

May I make this point clear beyond all doubt?

It is the claim to the ownership of money which is the core of the matter. Any person or any organization who can create practically at will sums of money equivalent to the price values of all the goods produced by the community is the virtual owner of those goods, and, therefore, the claim of the banking system to the ownership of the money which it creates is a claim to the ownership of the country." - CH Douglas

I liked this paragraph. It strikes me as true if we understand the nature of money.

[Jerry J. Fortin]

I would not be surprised to find that the new world order is in fact a reality based upon a recreated class structure of global nature. I think that if one looked deep enough that the signs were already visible and as plain as day. The wealthy always have ruled our societies, I don't see this as something new at all.

[Pliny]

I would not be surprised to find that the new world order is in fact a reality based upon a recreated class structure of global nature. I think that if one looked deep enough that the signs were already visible and as plain as day. The wealthy always have ruled our societies, I don't see this as something new at all.

You are right, Jerry. I just don't like some of their plans. The "Wealthy", "Elite", "Illuminati", whatever one wishes to call them are getting a bit concerned about world conditions and when they are concerned we have to be concerned about how scared they are. If they are scared we will suffer. Their goals are of course obvious but their plans to achieve them are not so obvious and sometimes sacrifices are made, meaning some people have to pay the price for the common good or out of their sense of privilege - both bad things for us.

So their goals are, de-population, cutting down on the use of non-renewable resources, global warming and firming up and further centralizing global economic authority. Economic control is essential and De-population is prime because it aids in resolving all the other problems.

There is no conspiracy, there is only planning and engineering society, as any group of leaders would concern themselves with. One just needs to read the plans of the UN to know what's going on. We, of course don't know every little detail and there are personal interests we don't hear about, the usual back room deals of politics and governance but they are generally about using the system to personal advantage such as the Iraq Oil for Food program. A really bad scandal that most of the perpetrators escaped without any justice.

There is no necessity to believe in conspiracy theories when stupidity explains everything.

[Pliny]

I wonder how we can find out who these people are Spicy Pringles, they certainly don't want your topic on here. Sarcasm is a form of bullying you know.

Claiming Bullying has become a form of bullying, you know! There! Do you feel bullied? I guess "claiming bullying has become a form of bullying" is bullying! Sarcasm is sarcasm. It's an attempted humorous form of denial. You can't use "bullying" as a defense in a debate. Screaming and yelling and waving your arms in the air may be intimidating and could be classed as bullying but sarcasm is not bullying. When you feel crushed it is not because you are being bullied. It is because you have no, or a weak defense and may be even wrong.

[margrace]

As I said it is bullying whether you want it or not.

[Pliny]

As I said it is bullying whether you want it or not.

Is not. So there...ptthh! You're just being a bully!

[White Doors]

Yes buffycat, they rely on bullying to stop discussions on this. They also rely on complacent Canadians to swallow their propoganda.

Arrrgghhh!!! Arrgghhh Margrace!! arrggghhh!!

[Pliny]

Arrrgghhh!!! Arrgghhh Margrace!! arrggghhh!!

That seems to have stopped the discussion! Are you a bully?

PS I don't mean that sarcastically.

Edited May 9, 2008 by Pliny

[White Doors]

a Bully?

Do I intimidate you on a message board? lol

[margrace]

What's the use of talking to bullies?

[M.Dancer]

What's the use of talking to bullies...

...when small appliances cost so little?

[Drea]

Claiming Bullying has become a form of bullying, you know! There! Do you feel bullied? I guess "claiming bullying has become a form of bullying" is bullying! Sarcasm is sarcasm. It's an attempted humorous form of denial. You can't use "bullying" as a defense in a debate. Screaming and yelling and waving your arms in the air may be intimidating and could be classed as bullying but sarcasm is not bullying. When you feel crushed it is not because you are being bullied. It is because you have no, or a weak defense and may be even wrong.

You are wrong.

Bullying can take many forms, it is not necessarily something done physically to a person. You are obviously unaware of psycological bullying. Why do you think there is all kinds of info on the net warning parents that their kids are being bullied online? According to you, it's not bullying if it isn't physical.

That post above mine -- bullying. Pure. Simple. Constantly belittling someone is bullying.

and really Dancer, if you are not going to contribute to the convo, why not just stay away from the thread? Why do you feel the need to wander around the board insulting folks? Does it make you feel good? Don't answer -- rhetorical question. You must have awfully low self esteem if you have to beat others down to make yourself feel good.

Edited May 9, 2008 by Drea

[Pliny]

...when small appliances cost so little?

Second best post of the month!

[Pliny]

What's the use of talking to bullies?

Ummm...ok! I give up!

[Pliny]

You are wrong.

Bullying can take many forms, it is not necessarily something done physically to a person. You are obviously unaware of psycological bullying. Why do you think there is all kinds of info on the net warning parents that their kids are being bullied online? According to you, it's not bullying if it isn't physical.

That post above mine -- bullying. Pure. Simple. Constantly belittling someone is bullying.

and really Dancer, if you are not going to contribute to the convo, why not just stay away from the thread? Why do you feel the need to wander around the board insulting folks? Does it make you feel good? Don't answer -- rhetorical question. You must have awfully low self esteem if you have to beat others down to make yourself feel good.

Ok. Now you are ganging up on me. I am really being bullied.

My point is simple. You cannot win a discussion, debate or argument on a forum by calling your adversaries bullies and claiming victim status. If you feel it is bullying, on a forum there are three courses of action to choose from. Ignore the bully, report the bully or lighten up. Pick one but don't be taking up space on the forum whining and complaining.

Bullying is serious and if you feel that strong about it then you have the above choices in doing something about it - or perhaps a fourth choice would be admitting you could be wrong the odd time....Nahh...too hard for the average individual. Do nothing about it but whine and it is nothing more than whining. I don't advise you to take up arms for anyone else but yourself, and I expect you to advise others to do that themselves. Otherwise they will always use your shoulder to cry on or the next suc....er....sympathetic person's shoulder.

Edited May 10, 2008 by Pliny

[Pliny]

You are wrong.

Bullying can take many forms, it is not necessarily something done physically to a person. You are obviously unaware of psycological bullying. Why do you think there is all kinds of info on the net warning parents that their kids are being bullied online? According to you, it's not bullying if it isn't physical.

That post above mine -- bullying. Pure. Simple. Constantly belittling someone is bullying.

and really Dancer, if you are not going to contribute to the convo, why not just stay away from the thread? Why do you feel the need to wander around the board insulting folks? Does it make you feel good? Don't answer -- rhetorical question. You must have awfully low self esteem if you have to beat others down to make yourself feel good.

Here is a good article on bullying.

http://www.inspirationline.com/EZINE/26APR2004.htm

Somehow my post got lost.

My point is simple. You cannot claim victory in a debate, discussion or argument by simply crying "bully" and claiming victim status.

Bullying is serious and if you feel this is the case then you have three courses of action on a forum. Well... four. You can ignore the bully, report the bully or lighten up... or...a very difficult thing to do is admit perhaps you are wrong once in a while.

I don't advise taking any steps towards resolving someone else's claims. I advise you to give them their options. If they do nothing they are just whining and being victims themselves and they are actually bullies themselves.

If you act for them they will always use your shoulder to cry on... or the nearest one.

Edited May 10, 2008 by Pliny

[Pliny]

What 'appen? It is ma-gic. Somehow my pos' is back and now I 'ave two pos that say almos' da same ting!

Oh well. There is a good reference in the second post.

[Jim]

They call it globalization now but still. Lots of people protest against globalization every time there is a leaders summit or g8 and all those things. I find it hard it hard to believe that those people would all be paranoid as well. Like the ones that preotested the OPEC summit in BC a few years ago when they got pepper sprayed by the police.

I read that it doesn't matter who gets into power because they will all do the same thing. They all have the same goal. The last election in the US was rigged, as both candidates were skull and bones members. That they have to be part of the plan and go along with it or they get killed, like JFK.

He spoke at length about secret goings on in the presidency and how they control the outcomes. Was he paranoid? Soon after this speech he was assasinated. He wouldn't go along with the plan. Speech can be heard here. It is quite interesting.

Enjoy, SP

Don't believe everything you read. You got the Big 3 in politics. Libs and Cons are one in the same. They are both corporate lap dogs and governed by corporate law. They are collectivists and as such, collectivists ALWAYS create their own opposition. Enter the NDP. They put on a good show, but not enough to get elected which pushes everyone back for another round getting screwed by the other 2 parties. Greens...don't know alot other than they say they oppose the SPP but if you look where their leader has been, you'll find alot of globalist organizations tied to her resume. You want to see a massive difference, get CAP in power. They're not corporate ruled, they're real people and they're not afraid to call it like it is and turn this country around. Otherwise, enjoy the oligarchy!

[HisSelf]

Great thread. The Chinese have an idea like this. One world one Party. One bullet one bill.

Hooray for the Olympics.

Of course you can probably read a post like this in China. Well maybe something like this. OK. Nothing like this.

But One World Government, right?

LOL.

[Remiel]

I forget what it originally applied to, but for the most part NWO has a very conspiracy theory kind of connotation. You could, however, talk about the idea of a single world government without having to bring up any of that garbage. I suppose it would be interesting to have a (more or less) intelligent thread on the subject, but I am not sure you can really do that when the NWO conspiracy stuff was the topic of the OP.

[GostHacked]

Remember the term, 'don't put all your eggs in one basket'?

Remiel,,

I suppose it would be interesting to have a (more or less) intelligent thread on the subject, but I am not sure you can really do that when the NWO conspiracy stuff was the topic of the OP.

Let's start back about 60 years or so. When the idea of a united Europe under one common government was considered a nutbar tinfoil topic, but yet here we are in 2008 and we have not only seen the European Union come about. We also have the African Union. Most of us here have heard about the SPP and the North American Union. You will also see unions of several countries in the Pacific and Asia get together.

When the pitch of the SPP and the NAU was first thought about, it was to harmonize the economies between Canada, the US and Mexico. Making free trade easier between the countries. This was presented as the government leaders making deals on behalf of big buisiness. The only way for any country to be economically viable is to produce a product, commodity, or service to sell to other countries. This also creates investment into each other through each countries nationalized banks. The centralized banks hold the cash of the corporations that want to do buisiness with each other. And internationaly it is only done through those nationalized central banks in their respected countries. You really do not need many key players to make a lot of changes that have such a drastic sweeping effect over a whole continent. And with the technology of computers and the Internet, it makes all this happen that much faster and way more efficient. We are told that free trade offers better oppourtinities for The People of the countries involved. Another aspect the SPP is the security which is proposing a joint militarty security effort of North American with an open borders policy. Free flow of not only products, but people and yes, money.

If you looked back in the 1970's and 80's there were a few large corporations buying up everything they could get their hands on. Conglomerate corporations was demonized as the big bad entity. One company controlling all within it's reach, all it's affilliates, subsidiaries, contractors, ect ect ect. The People complained because it was not allowing the small business to thrive and succeed anymore. There was no competition, which does not provide much growth and diversity. Government stepped in, and broke many of those large corporations up. Providing again the arena for competition and growth and diversity.

In the late 1990's and early 2000's, many of these corporations got bigger and gobbled up more smaller corporations, just like 15-20 years previous. General Electric is one of the largest corporations on the planet. They make everything from dishwashers, to irons, to jet engines to television shows. GE is also just one of many corporations who have their own vehilce for selling their own products by means of media like print, television and the Internet. They can tell you how great they are because the paid spokesperson said so. GE has lobbyists to influence the government to futher their cause. GE also can afford many top lawyers to find loopholes in order to cut corners because making the dollar is top priority over everything. So the government changed the rules because of the financial gains that could be gained. And all this cannot happen with out at least some cohesional cooperation between leaders in governments, CEOs and big financial investers.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7484639.stm

Here is an interesting thing I read recently. Two large worker unions, one in Britian, and one in the US, will join up to be one international intercontinental union. Really everything we see going on around us is consilidation of power. Just imagine the impact this would have, if they decided to strike. Not just one country is affected, but two.

So everything again is a consolidation of power on every level. Government, financial (world bank) and corporate. So a full on one world government is not only being acheived, it is being done slowly and behind closed doors and yet we see the results right in front of us. But there is another saying, 'can't see the forest for the trees'.

[Remiel]

I am not big on the corporate agenda. Of course there are huge and glaring problems with the idea of a world government, but remember what Winston Churchill said about democracy. As our ability to destroy ourselves increases exponentially, it only becomes easier for a few small actors to screw things up for everyone. A single world goverment would mean an end to state level conflict, and its global jurisdiction would be the most capable of keeping the most dangerous weapons under wraps and persuing those who would use them to cause massive destruction.

As for the problems, a world government would not really be more powerful than current states are, because hypothetically there is no " power above " in the current system. States are sovereign. Of course, this point is somewhat debatable, but in essence a world government with an appropriate system of checks and balances would be little different from what he currently have, except for scale. After all, how can you really draw a distinction between a government of three hundred million and a government of six and a half billion when the primary moral agent is the individual? Incidentally, in a world government, individuals could become the most important actors (as opposed to states being the most important now, it seems), which is a rather liberal goal.

[M.Dancer]

Corporate Agenda:

6:30 AM Golf at the Hunt Club with friends

9:30 AMConference call with merchant bankers enroute to airport.

11:00 Air Canada to Montreal, Prepare notes for luncheon presentation for German Investment House

12:00 AM Land at Montreal, Limo to PVM

1:00 PM Luncheon with Greman Trade commision-investors

3:00 Meeting with legal council

5:00 Call family

6:00 Dinner at Moishe's with IR team and Finance

9:00 Air Canada to Toronto

11:00 Plan one world governement

11:01 Make love to wife