Debate about the authenticity of the NWO

[joe911]

Right,this thread has been started to debate the claims about the new world order. First of all is to prove thier existence.

Id like to ask you,what evidence you have that they exist,and how you came to the conclusions you have about them.

[tb303]

...and how you came to the conclusions you have about them.

Because 'they' keep telling us about it.

[kappy0405]

The way I view the term 'New World Order' is that it simply refers to World Government. It's basically just a more accurate word for syaing 'globalization', which almost everyone agrees is happening.

The only difference is that conspiracy 'theorists' (:rolleyes:) acknowledge that this 'globalization' is happening as a result of constant manipulation by corporate influence.

In that sense, there is no denying that the NWO is real.

Whatever group of people doing the manipulating is referred to as the 'Illuminati'. It shouldn't make any difference whether they call themselves that, it's simply the term applied to the 'hidden hand'.

I think multiple quotes by world leaders, particulary members of the corporate world, pretty much prove the reality of it.

For example, the famous Rockefeller quote:

"For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents for the inordinate influence we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it"

It's almost insane to deny the agenda for the NWO (World Government) after this quote became public. INSANE.

[joe911]

For example, the famous Rockefeller quote:

"For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents for the inordinate influence we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it"

It's almost insane to deny the agenda for the NWO (World Government) after this quote became public. INSANE.

That quote can be interpetated in other ways,i interperated that as that he wants a global political and econimic structure,thats what he says he's guilty if,not conspiring against the unites states.

I found these very interesting quotes attributed to him;

I am convinced that material things can contribute a lot to making one's life pleasant, but, basically, if you do not have very good friends and relatives who matter to you, life will be really empty and sad and material things cease to be important.

I believe that government is the servant of the people and not their master.

I think that the best hope for peace and prosperity in the world is greater cooperation among nations, which in turn will be produced if both our governments and the people of our countries travel more and get to know each other better.

I don't recall that I have said—and I don't think that I really feel—that we need a world government. We need governments of the world that work together and collaborate. But, I can't imagine that there would be any likelihood—or even that it would be desirable—to have a single government elected by the people of the world.

This doesnt prove that any agenda exists.It only proves that David Rockerfeller is a very intelligent man.

[kappy0405]

I found these very interesting quotes attributed to him;

I am convinced that material things can contribute a lot to making one's life pleasant, but, basically, if you do not have very good friends and relatives who matter to you, life will be really empty and sad and material things cease to be important.

I believe that government is the servant of the people and not their master.

I think that the best hope for peace and prosperity in the world is greater cooperation among nations, which in turn will be produced if both our governments and the people of our countries travel more and get to know each other better.

I don't recall that I have said—and I don't think that I really feel—that we need a world government. We need governments of the world that work together and collaborate. But, I can't imagine that there would be any likelihood—or even that it would be desirable—to have a single government elected by the people of the world.

This doesnt prove that any agenda exists.It only proves that David Rockerfeller is a very intelligent man.

Those are very honorable quotes, but I'm inclined to think it's just rhetoric. He's also stated, "We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order." Anyone making light of &/or anticipating a 'major crisis' as a means to an end can never again be considered a philanthropist, regardless of how charming they appear.

You've also got the Warburgs saying that World Government will be accomplished by conquest if not consent. This type of talk is common among the corporate nexus headed by the Rockefellers/Rothschilds.

That quote can be interpetated in other ways,i interperated that as that he wants a global political and econimic structure,thats what he says he's guilty if,not conspiring against the unites states.Unfortunately, that's not what it says when taken literally. We can interpret it if we'd like, but that would be assuming he fudged his wording. Not likely, imho.

[tb303]

This doesnt prove that any agenda exists.It only proves that David Rockerfeller is a very intelligent man.

No doubt he's a very intelligent man, but he is not a wise man.


"I don't recall that I have said—and I don't think that I really feel—that we need a world government. We need governments of the world that work together and collaborate. But, I can't imagine that there would be any likelihood—or even that it would be desirable—to have a single government elected by the people of the world."

Well, he has stated his desire for world government:

"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."

"But this present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for long. Already there are powerful forces at work that threaten to destroy all of our hopes and efforts to erect an enduring structure of global interdependence."

So, he's either very forgetful, or he's a bullshitter.

But let's look at the end of that first quote:

"But, I can't imagine that there would be any likelihood—or even that it would be desirable—to have a single government elected by the people of the world."

Indeed, people don't tend to vote for fascist dictatorships.

Oh, and one more gem from David Rockefeller:

"Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Maos leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history."

Do you know how many people died under Mao's reign of terror, Joe?

[infotruth]

David Rockefeller praising a mass murderer.

Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution,it has obviously succeeded not only in produciing more efficient and dedicated administration,but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history.

Defend that. Just try, because you'll fail in any way.

[leviathanstaar]

I'd say just about every 'cousin' from around washington now actually having come out and used the words Nwo on national television is more than enough to merit investigation.

I'd also say that Dr's, Lawyers, judge's , ex military,former politicians, ect, ect ,ect all reading the eugenics doc's and saying "by god it is real" also lends it good arguement.

You can easily find countless quotes from numerous books where these people declare this is exactly what they are doing. In some of them I believe they directly call us stupid for not seeing how evil they are.

[bemore]

I think where there is money there is a certain amount of power also. If you were to live in the uk like me then we could not ever get an appointment to meet with gordon brown. The chances are you WOULD get an appointment if you owned massive corporations that were a integral part of the running of a country.

My point is there are key figures that control huge aspects of life and how it is run.

I think that all of these people in there own respective countries DO get together and discuss how they can move forward and gain an advantage wherever they can in every single aspect of running there country. Certain countries get together with OTHER countries and have the same discussion on how TOGETHER they can press home an advantage to gain a foothold of control.

This will not go unnoticed by the countries that are not involved in the "NWO" group and although they may get bullied and manipulated into either becoming part of it in some way or co-operating i dont think they will. Not willingly anyway.

Obvioulsy terrorism is the main propaganda for trying to gain new powers and control but that will only work for a certain amount of time, I dont think terrorism will ever become a problem where ALL of the world unite under one roof and agree to be regulated by one single body (One World Goverment) unless of course there was something massive like a co-ordinated nuclear attack over most of the world. I can appreciate them crashing planes into twin towers but i dont think they will affect the infrastructure of there own country by Nuking themselves in any way.

If they could target culture and actually try to unite it in some way then there would be by definition no difference between any country around the world. Religion is a MASSIVE part of many cultures so targetting that could one way, maybe that will be the first step.

[cruise4]

Europe is a classic example of 'fruits'. The trend is clear, as it is in 1001 other scenarios.

[altruist551]

bemore,

The idea of nuclear war being used to force people to work together globally is real. This website is one person's presentation of the use of underground laboraties in North America and Japan.

http://www.int.washington.edu/talks/WorkShops/TAUP03/Plenary/People/Sinclair_D/Sinclair.pdf

A nuclear attack will not matter to Illuminati families if they have their own independent power source, living accomodations, and communications network established underground. The examples I can think of are in Iwo Jima, when the United States soldiers landed and quickly found that the Japanese had moved their operations underground, and the same holds true in the Vietnam War.

These families don't care if the masses die. They have already made public statements that the world is too crowded. I believe they are funding both sides of the major wars we endure. They do this for two reasons that I can think of: it trims the population, and it destroys religion. In a religious war, religious people die. In a secular war, people who believe in God or a spiritual source, loose their faith and become secular. The Illuminati is occult. The more they remove our choices, the more we are forced to use their choices. Their choices lead to our destruction and death, because they don't consider the masses to be human.

[joe911]

Those are very honorable quotes, but I'm inclined to think it's just rhetoric. He's also stated, "We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order." Anyone making light of &/or anticipating a 'major crisis' as a means to an end can never again be considered a philanthropist, regardless of how charming they appear.
Do you know where thats quoted from,please? :)

You've also got the Warburgs saying that World Government will be accomplished by conquest if not consent. This type of talk is common among the corporate nexus headed by the Rockefellers/Rothschilds.
I thought that was berntrand russel who said that?


Unfortunately, that's not what it says when taken literally. We can interpret it if we'd like, but that would be assuming he fudged his wording. Not likely, imho.
Then id say that the 'truth movment' has double standards,they took larry silversteins "pull it" and interperated it how they wanted. :rolleyes:

[joe911]

Well, he has stated his desire for world government:

"We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."

Can you provide a citation for that,please?


China under Chairman Maos leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history."

Do you know how many people died under Mao's reign of terror, Joe?

An important and successful leadership doesnt necessarily mean he agrees with it. Hitler was a succesful leader,a brilliant leader infact,doesnt mean i agree with what he did.

[kisatu]

How was he a brilliant leader?

His country was starting to fall apart and needed the war to come along.

[joe911]

How was he a brilliant leader?

His country was starting to fall apart and needed the war to come along.

Germany had been fucked over by the treaty of versailles,it was falling apart. It had;
No army.
No money.
No Jobs.
Germans were entrapped in land given to create poland and czecoslovakia.
It was in a right state,then hitler came along and turned Germany back into the great country it once was. Start a thread if you want to debate about hitler,this threads for debating the new world order,or not,as it may be.

[kisatu]

Well if you're going to say Hitler was a great leader you can back up your own claims. I disagree about your opinion but respect your wishes.

[joe911]

Well if you're going to say Hitler was a great leader you can back up your own claims. I disagree about your opinion but respect your wishes.

I dont agree that he was great in the way of he was a nice person,he was a wanker,but his leadership was second to none.

[infotruth]

Can you provide a citation for that,please?



An important and successful leadership doesnt necessarily mean he agrees with it. Hitler was a succesful leader,a brilliant leader infact,doesnt mean i agree with what he did.


The point is that it wasn't fucking successful!!! Millions of their own citizens died because of Hitler and Mao. David Rockefeller is no dummy, he knew what was going on. To praise Mao is just straight up wrong.

[joe911]

The point is that it wasn't fucking successful!!! Millions of their own citizens died because of Hitler and Mao. David Rockefeller is no dummy, he knew what was going on. To praise Mao is just straight up wrong.

Thats your opinion.

[infotruth]

Thats your opinion.

And my opinion is that you're a fucking moron.

[kisatu]

To help me, what do you consider the important criteria of their being an existence of (a) the NWO?

[joe911]

And my opinion is that you're a fucking moron.

wow thats a new one. I thought we were going to have a nice debate,yet you resort to petty name calling. I dont want this thread to end up in the rant room,so if you want to argue with me,my msn,yahoo and skype are there,argue with me on there,dont derail this thread,please.

[joe911]

To help me, what do you consider the important criteria of their being an existence of (a) the NWO?

When i think about it,to be politically correct a new world order would be a political idealism,rather than a group of people.

But to prove something like that exists,id say it needs;
Names,quotes [with citations],the "thousands of declassified documents" they supposedly have declassified.

To know what it is,we must also know what it isnt. [if it does exist]

[kisatu]

When i think about it,to be politically correct a new world order would be a political idealism,rather than a group of people.

But to prove something like that exists,id say it needs;
Names,quotes [with citations],the "thousands of declassified documents" they supposedly have declassified.

To know what it is,we must also know what it isnt. [if it does exist]

Okay interesting.

I agree to be able to prove something exists you need to know what it is. Is the NWO everything? Every decision for the larger motive? It's hard to believe that's true. Are they the influence behind the major decisions? I think that is closer to the truth.

Oliver Letwin, author of the party's manifesto, is to give up a £60,000 post with investment bank N M Rothschild ahead of the next election. David Willetts, the shadow Skills Secretary, will step down from his advisory role with Punter Southall later this year, costing him up to £80,000. David Gauke, a shadow Treasury minister, has given up a directorship with Ivobank, an internet bank. Shadow International Development Secretary Andrew Mitchell has resigned from his six directorships at Lazards. On the Labour benches, only Ian McCartney, a former trade minister, has announced he is to resign from his £113,000 consultancy job with the US nuclear energy firm, Fluor Corporation. He will do so before the 1 July deadline, after which all MPs will have to publish the exact pay from their second jobs and the amount of time they devote to them.
Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mps-squirm-as-the-spotlight-turns-on-second-jobs-1721546.html

When you have people who are able to make decisions employed by those who are in big business it makes you suspect the motive of these people. A friendship made for these ocompanies, will it be easily forgotten once in power? Hmm.

London, February 11: The British government's links to business came under scrutiny after reports Prime Minister Tony Blair backed a deal sought by an Indian businessman Lakshmi Mittal who gave a big cash donation to the Labour Party. But Blair played down the significance of the story, defying his critics to find evidence he had broken the rules.
Source: http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=7388

It ties in with the idea of neoliberalism. Bringing tax relief and advantages to big business and stretching the divide between the rich and the poor*.

So my point is that decisions are influenced by big business or an "elite".

Next thing you may go onto is, whether or not you believe current society is turning more draconian/orwellian and what laws proove/disprove this.

[kisatu]

Some extras:
The Bilderberg consensus is that national problems are best solved by an internationally oriented elite, that a global network of decision-makers should have a common language and that the boundaries are fluid between the monied and the political classes.

“To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair,” Lord Healey told the author Jon Ronson for his book Them: Adventures with Extremists. “Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn’t go on for ever fighting one another for nothing. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing.”

Another way of viewing the club is that of Metropolitan Seraphim, the bishop of Piraeus, who said that the Bilderbergers represented a “criminal cabal of world Zionism and its efforts to set up a cruel world dictatorship under the headship of Lucifer”. This line is quite common on the blogosphere, where the club’s secrecy is taken as evidence of evil intentions.

Whether Lucifer will be down there on the sun-loungers remains to be seen. But what we have been able to establish from a World Bank spokesman, Alexis O’Brien, is that the organisation’s president, Robert Zoellick, will be in Athens on unspecified business on May 14. And that US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner’s public schedule is mysteriously empty for the next two days. Jo Ackermann, head of Deutsche Bank, will be travelling “somewhere in Europe”. Jean-Claude Trichet, head of the European Central Bank, will not be around until the end of the week.
Source: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6283373.ece

I have learned this from the random searches, detentions, angry security goon proddings and thumped police desks without number that I've had to suffer on account of Bilderberg: I have spent the week living in a nightmare possible future and many different terrible pasts. I have had the very tiniest glimpse into a world of spot checks and unchecked security powers. And it has left me shaken. It has left me, literally, bruised.
Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2009/may/19/bilderberg-skelton-greece?commentpage=3&commentposted=1

n its report, the Lords constitution committee said growth in surveillance by both the state and the private sector risked threatening people's right to privacy, which it said was "an essential pre-requisite to the exercise of individual freedom".

People were often unaware of the scale of personal information held and exchanged by public bodies, it said.

"There can be no justification for this gradual but incessant creep towards every detail about us being recorded and pored over by the state," committee chairman and Tory peer Lord Goodlad said.
Source:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7872425.stm

Details of the times, dates, duration and locations of mobile phone calls, numbers called, website visited and addresses e-mailed are already stored by telecoms companies for 12 months under a voluntary agreement.

However, the Liberal Democrats said the government's plans were "incompatible with a free country and a free people".

In February, the Lords constitution committee said electronic surveillance and collection of personal data had become "pervasive" in British society.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8087530.stm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5215413/Every-phone-call-email-or-website-visit-to-be-monitored.html

So a few more examples. Take as much or as little as you want from the links.

[joe911]

Okay interesting.

I agree to be able to prove something exists you need to know what it is. Is the NWO everything? Every decision for the larger motive? It's hard to believe that's true. Are they the influence behind the major decisions? I think that is closer to the truth.
Thats alot more plausable,but that is how things have worked for centuries. Centuries ago it was only land owners who could vote,and be involved in politics,so the wealthy have always looked after thier own. I wouldnt say this is anything new.


Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/mps-squirm-as-the-spotlight-turns-on-second-jobs-1721546.html

When you have people who are able to make decisions employed by those who are in big business it makes you suspect the motive of these people. A friendship made for these ocompanies, will it be easily forgotten once in power? Hmm.

That is a fair point,but it sounds like you are assuming that big business' employs people in politics? or maybe i misunderstood? Politicians are usually sponsored,even ron paul,it would be impossible to know if the politician was serving thier sponsors best intrests.


Source: http://www.expressindia.com/news/fullstory.php?newsid=7388

It ties in with the idea of neoliberalism. Bringing tax relief and advantages to big business and stretching the divide between the rich and the poor*.

So my point is that decisions are influenced by big business or an "elite".

There has always been a divide between rich and poor. A thing we learned in media studies was that "The job of the upper class is to stay at the top,the job of the middle class is to become upper class,the job of the lower class is to stay there and work for those at the top"


Next thing you may go onto is, whether or not you believe current society is turning more draconian/orwellian and what laws proove/disprove this.

After more talk of thier existence,we can move onto thier agendas. :)

[nihil]

Proofs of the NWO?

Political proofs can be found in the starting of World Wars of the last century.
Just some royal families did start a war that saw millions of people die in
trenches.

World War II gives other examples in particular the books by Anthony Sutton
are really useful to understand what's behind. We then arrive to actual political
issues, thanks to the Bush family. Everyone should know that the grandfather
of George W. Bush was an intimate in business with the Nazi. Seems a plot of
horror? What about these avian flu and other flu that arise here and there?
Who sells the Panacea? We are considered as cattle, as long as we do not
realize this, we'll be slain again and again .

[kisatu]

Thats alot more plausable,but that is how things have worked for centuries. Centuries ago it was only land owners who could vote,and be involved in politics,so the wealthy have always looked after thier own. I wouldnt say this is anything new.

Wouldn't people argue that the illuminati (or what other guise we want to call them) have been around for centuries? These so called bloodlines?




That is a fair point,but it sounds like you are assuming that big business' employs people in politics? or maybe i misunderstood? Politicians are usually sponsored,even ron paul,it would be impossible to know if the politician was serving thier sponsors best intrests.

I meant that if these people are being employed by big business that when it comes to making a choice between a decision in favour of the populace or one for the big business they're more likely to choose the latter.



There has always been a divide between rich and poor. A thing we learned in media studies was that "The job of the upper class is to stay at the top,the job of the middle class is to become upper class,the job of the lower class is to stay there and work for those at the top"

Indeed. There has always been a divide. However in the last 50 years this gap has grown astronomically. From ceo's earning 7 to 1 now earning around 50 to the regular lacky. My source for this sadly is in a folder which I can't find.:o

FOUND IT:

Ceo's wages rose to 500:1 in 2000 from normal workers, it was 30:1 in 1970. (Rees,2006:101)

International bank lending has also grown dramatically. As a proportion of world trade it was 7.8% in 1965 byt by 1991 it had risen to 104.6% (Rees, 2006:92)

One of the primary effects of neoliberalism was the restroation of the income and wealth of the upper fractions of the owners of capital, whose property is expressed in the holding of securities such as shares bonds or bills. (Dunénil & Levy, 2005:14)

[joe911]

Wouldn't people argue that the illuminati (or what other guise we want to call them) have been around for centuries? These so called bloodlines?

I suppose so,but then f they have been controlling everything for centuries why have there been so many 'free presidents',if they had a penultimate agenda,why diddnt they do it back then,when we diddnt have things like the internet etc... also if people say woodrow wilson was a nwo puppet,how did they manage to have control then,only to loose it a few years later to jfk,or was he one too?


I meant that if these people are being employed by big business that when it comes to making a choice between a decision in favour of the populace or one for the big business they're more likely to choose the latter.

It all depends i suppose :) Maybe there is a balance?


Indeed. There has always been a divide. However in the last 50 years this gap has grown astronomically. From ceo's earning 7 to 1 now earning around 50 to the regular lacky. My source for this sadly is in a folder which I can't find.:o

But there are so many factors to consider about the lower classes. For example; Girls are getting pregnant at a younger age,and sometimes even going on to have 3/4 kids by her mid 20s,if those 3 kids did the same,you have a tree developing where instead of there been 2 people,2 kids,2 generations,you have many more,resulting in lower standards of living.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0yQunhOaU0

The opening to that film sums it brilliantly.

[kisatu]

I suppose so,but then f they have been controlling everything for centuries why have there been so many 'free presidents',if they had a penultimate agenda,why diddnt they do it back then,when we diddnt have things like the internet etc... also if people say woodrow wilson was a nwo puppet,how did they manage to have control then,only to loose it a few years later to jfk,or was he one too?

Maybe someone else can give you this answer as I'm not sure. :)

But there are so many factors to consider about the lower classes. For example; Girls are getting pregnant at a younger age,and sometimes even going on to have 3/4 kids by her mid 20s,if those 3 kids did the same,you have a tree developing where instead of there been 2 people,2 kids,2 generations,you have many more,resulting in lower standards of living.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0yQunhOaU0

The opening to that film sums it brilliantly.

Well the current system is aimed at expanding that gap further as my now edited end of the post shows.

[steevo]

Does the NWO exist ? Yes the idea does exist, and they are implimenting it RIGHT NOW, whist we wasting our time discussing if it exists.

[joe911]

Does the NWO exist ? Yes the idea does exist, and they are implimenting it RIGHT NOW, whist we wasting our time discussing if it exists.

Because there is the possibility that it doesnt exist.

[joe911]

Well the current system is aimed at expanding that gap further as my now edited end of the post shows.

But the system is been blamed for something beyond thier control. They cant physically force people to stop breeding,or show them how to lead better lives,because conspiracy theorists say "they have no right telling us how to live" which is true,but then they cant complain about the system if it genuinley is trying to help them.

[lightgiver]

Jordan Maxwell On The NWO.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EraDrnqVV7E

If Video disappears,Just quote it :)

There is nothing New under the sun.

[nihil]

Jordan Maxwell

What if the European Community, the EUR and other political issues were
plainly spoken between the Bilderberg Members years before they happened ??


---> Public Group on Scribd <--- (http://www.scribd.com/group/4342)


BXO • Core Globalists • Masters of Deception eXposure grOup • Group for the Disclosure of Hidden Institutions

[lightgiver]

What if the European Community, the EUR and other political issues were
plainly spoken between the Bilderberg Members ??


---> Public Group on Scribd <--- (http://www.scribd.com/group/4342)


BXO • Core Globalists • Masters of Deception eXposure grOup • Group for the Disclosure of Hidden Institutions

TBH there is that much deceit around it is better to be cautious about everything,I do not trust the elites 1 iota,CFR, Bilderberg the lot of em,they work for their own benefits not ours,I am having doubts about this whole truth inverted brackets thing going on also ;):D

It appears some are just lining their own pockets and have THEIR own agendas,I do like Jordan Maxwell though,even though he is a Freemason I feel something good about him.:)

I do not enjoy all these truth researchers slagging each other off,and Jordan I have never heard him do it<I could be wrong but have not heard or seen anything.

I have heard enough people slagging him off though for no real reason.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jieZKgQSN_k&feature=related

We should be focused on making ourselves a better person and focus less on all the negativity.

[steevo]

Because there is the possibility that it doesnt exist.

Yes. And it's possible that the EU doesnt exist, and that Britain doesnt exist and that England doesnt exist, and that Hull doesnt exist. The "New World Order" is a name given to their agenda of world domination and the enslavement of the populations (and that's putting it mildly).

[steevo]

Joe what WAS your radio show all about ?

[steevo]

Joe if you want to live in ignorance then that is your choice, I really dont care, cos it really isnt gonna effect anything. AT THE MOMENT, I think that the best solution for alot of people is to stay in ignorance. Seriously! But when the mass awakening happens (and it will), I feel that the ignorant (fearful) people will ALL suddenly see things differently, and they will see that ignorance is no longer "the norm" anymore. The ignorant will suddenly be the ones in the minority, and THAT is the thing that will change their minds. That's why alot of people refer to them as sheep-like.

[joe911]

Joe what WAS your radio show all about ?

It was a reflection of my beliefs at the time.

[joe911]

It appears some are just lining their own pockets and have THEIR own agendas,I do like Jordan Maxwell though,even though he is a Freemason I feel something good about him.:)

Maybe all freemasons are nice like that?

[lightgiver]

Maybe all freemasons are nice like that?

I see a lot more Friendlier and Nicer masons than so called truth seekers or whatever they go by,maybe a lot of Freemasons are fighting the NWO elite scum behind the scenes,for others not see.

It takes big boys to take on other big boys if you know what I mean ;)

[joe911]

I see a lot more Friendlier and Nicer masons than so called truth seekers or whatever they go by,maybe a lot of Freemasons are fighting the NWO elite scum behind the scenes,for others not see.

It takes big boys to take on other big boys if you know what I mean ;)

Lol there you have it then,there is no conspiracy ;)

[romas]

I think where there is money there is a certain amount of power also. If you were to live in the uk like me then we could not ever get an appointment to meet with gordon brown. The chances are you WOULD get an appointment if you owned massive corporations that were a integral part of the running of a country.

My point is there are key figures that control huge aspects of life and how it is run.

I think that all of these people in there own respective countries DO get together and discuss how they can move forward and gain an advantage wherever they can in every single aspect of running there country. Certain countries get together with OTHER countries and have the same discussion on how TOGETHER they can press home an advantage to gain a foothold of control.

This will not go unnoticed by the countries that are not involved in the "NWO" group and although they may get bullied and manipulated into either becoming part of it in some way or co-operating i dont think they will. Not willingly anyway.

Obvioulsy terrorism is the main propaganda for trying to gain new powers and control but that will only work for a certain amount of time, I dont think terrorism will ever become a problem where ALL of the world unite under one roof and agree to be regulated by one single body (One World Goverment) unless of course there was something massive like a co-ordinated nuclear attack over most of the world. I can appreciate them crashing planes into twin towers but i dont think they will affect the infrastructure of there own country by Nuking themselves in any way.

If they could target culture and actually try to unite it in some way then there would be by definition no difference between any country around the world. Religion is a MASSIVE part of many cultures so targetting that could one way, maybe that will be the first step.



I agree, I'm getting fed up with vague shit by truth movement, abuse of terms like "illuminati" "tptb" etc. when they can't explain certain phenomenon.

[joe911]

I agree, I'm getting fed up with vague shit by truth movement, abuse of terms like "illuminati" "tptb" etc. when they can't explain certain phenomenon.

Its like religions use god as an excuse when they cant explain things.

[romas]

bemore,

The idea of nuclear war being used to force people to work together globally is real. This website is one person's presentation of the use of underground laboraties in North America and Japan.

http://www.int.washington.edu/talks/WorkShops/TAUP03/Plenary/People/Sinclair_D/Sinclair.pdf

A nuclear attack will not matter to Illuminati families if they have their own independent power source, living accomodations, and communications network established underground. The examples I can think of are in Iwo Jima, when the United States soldiers landed and quickly found that the Japanese had moved their operations underground, and the same holds true in the Vietnam War.

These families don't care if the masses die. They have already made public statements that the world is too crowded. I believe they are funding both sides of the major wars we endure. They do this for two reasons that I can think of: it trims the population, and it destroys religion. In a religious war, religious people die. In a secular war, people who believe in God or a spiritual source, loose their faith and become secular. The Illuminati is occult. The more they remove our choices, the more we are forced to use their choices. Their choices lead to our destruction and death, because they don't consider the masses to be human.





You can't nuke the planet without long-term after effects, the problem of overcrowding is top soil, to much of it is used, well nuking will destroy even more top soil and biomass. After all even if we destroy wild-biomass we ourselves are still biomass, we're not radiation or toxic elements.

But I agree it's possible they are that so insane they could just do it, but I see it worse then overpopulation.

[lightgiver]

Lol there you have it then,there is no conspiracy ;)

The world is a stage ,francis bacon.

All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse's arms.
And then the whining school-boy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress' eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honour, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon's mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slipper'd pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side,
His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank; and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.

[romas]

Everything "secret" is a conspiracy, secret projects, underground bases, unaccounted budgets. I think anything the public who pays for those and has no knowledge of is a great conspiracy against said public.

There were enough public government officials mentioning "conspiracy" like good ol' Kennedy, Former FBI director, J. Edgar Hoover “The individual is handicapped by coming face-to-face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot be believe it exists.”

And I really don't think they had communism in mind, because communism is not a conspiracy it's polit-economy, just like capitalism.

[kappy0405]

Do you know where thats quoted from,please?
He said it at a UN (read: globalist) speech on September 14th, 1994. I'm looking for the primary source, but that always proves difficult, bare with me.. =)

I thought that was berntrand russel who said that?
No, it was James Warburg in the 50's. Bertrand Russel was a huge advocate of the Club of Rome's population reduction agenda, but I don't recall anything he said about the NWO specifically. The Warburg quote is from a speech he made on behalf of the CFR speaking towards the US Senate.

Again, finding the primary source is quite a drag though. =/

I suppose so,but then f they have been controlling everything for centuries why have there been so many 'free presidents',if they had a penultimate agenda,why diddnt they do it back then,when we diddnt have things like the internet etc... also if people say woodrow wilson was a nwo puppet,how did they manage to have control then,only to loose it a few years later to jfk,or was he one too?
Well, there is a difference between 'controlling' and having a massive amount of influence. The 'Illuminati' (or whatever you name you want to give them) simply has a huge amount of influence, imo, and that's proven by the current trend towards globalization we see happening every day. It could be said that they have 'control', but not complete control in the literal sense. So it would make sense that Presidents have done things that contradict the agenda. As far as JFK, there was a lot of involvement between his father and the Italian Mafia. A former Chicago Boss named Sam Giancana actually admitted this in a book he authored. According to the story, Giancana approached the Jewish Purple Gang (which was connected to the Rothschilds at the time) to lay off his father and help get JFK elected in return for certain political leverage.. I won't be bothered for a source right now, but Icke delves into this in "and the truth shall set you free" if you have that book available. Then you can cross reference his sources, etc. Unfortunately for them, JFK didn't fulfill his fathers promises for the system.

[kappy0405]

Yes. And it's possible that the EU doesnt exist, and that Britain doesnt exist and that England doesnt exist, and that Hull doesnt exist. The "New World Order" is a name given to their agenda of world domination and the enslavement of the populations (and that's putting it mildly).

+1 :)

The very fact that lobbying from Rockefeller/Rothschild' corporate influence resulted in 'global' centralized institutions like the UN and the EU is 100% proof that the agenda is real.

[cruise4]

It takes big boys to take on other big boys if you know what I mean

I predict BOTH will prove to be the problem. And it's very easy to ensure ignorance and claim you're a big boy. Nothing Big about it.

Priding oneself on the truth, and then not telling it must be a tricky resolution!

[noewhan]

Thats your opinion.

I'm startin' to think you are a fake.

For starters, go to youtube.

Type in a name of someone you want the quote from (i.e Obama, Henry Kissinger*) and you'll find them. It also works though Google.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD3BqK-9ZiU
(Listen closely, you might miss it ;) )

New World Order is just another name for their over all agenda, of control. If the public dislike it, they will just call it something else. Simple really.


This doesn't prove that any agenda exists.It only proves that David Rockerfeller is a very intelligent man.

Just think for 10 minutes, and realize how stupid that sounds.

As if David Rockerfeller has come up with any idea which could help humanity... And what? Nobody else has come up with better ideas?

I'm sure nearly anyone in this forum could come up with a helpful plan.
The thing is, look at the world today! He obviously has not carried out his 'helpful' plan. He's another pootard like Rupert Murdoch.

[dolores1]

Oh Joe 911,

You're right in our faces.

But you still hide. Is it because you and your clan must tell the truth within your hidden words? Your agenda?

Or only a wind up merchant? There are so many dissinformationists on this site, and you believe we can't spot you?

Bless you any way

[kappy0405]

Oh Joe 911,

You're right in our faces.

But you still hide. Is it because you and your clan must tell the truth within your hidden words? Your agenda?

Or only a wind up merchant? There are so many dissinformationists on this site, and you believe we can't spot you?

Bless you any way

meh.. don't be so harsh. joes a young lad and still has a lot to learn. It's actually good that he's doing some questioning. Though he should realize that most of us have already passed that stage (on the NWO in general, that is)

..and for the deniers out there... denial is NOT skepticism, which is a prerequisite to becoming an honest conspiracy theorist in the first place. ;)

[robindean]

To be honest Joe, I think you'll keep telling yourself the New World Order isn't a problem, no matter what we say.

So why are you wasting yours and everyone elses time?

Somehow, you've managed to wake up, then go back to sleep.

Maybe some people just prefer comfortable lies than uncomfortable truths.

This isn't a dig at you, Joe, all this just still amazes me.

[joe911]

I'm startin' to think you are a fake.
yep i am,im one of the very few people who doesnt hide behind a screen name,doesnt hide my pic,doesnt hide where im from,my background,my school,,but yea i am fake.


For starters, go to youtube.

Type in a name of someone you want the quote from (i.e Obama, Henry Kissinger*) and you'll find them. It also works though Google.

(Listen closely, you might miss it ;) )
The burden of proof is not on me,youtube is handy as raw videos can be uploaded,and i would class a raw unedited video as a valid source. Which brings me onto my next point. Why do people always assume that those 3 words together relate to the same idea/group?


Just think for 10 minutes, and realize how stupid that sounds.

As if David Rockerfeller has come up with any idea which could help humanity... And what? Nobody else has come up with better ideas?
Well according to cts,his family built the modern western world,where everyone is entitled to housing,medical care,education,security......" of course everyone has thier own ideas,but they usually go unheard.In my hairdressers there used to be a poster that said "the people who know how to run this country best,are stuck driving taxis or cutting hair".
[/QUOTE]

[joe911]

Oh Joe 911,

You're right in our faces.

But you still hide. Is it because you and your clan must tell the truth within your hidden words? Your agenda?

Or only a wind up merchant? There are so many dissinformationists on this site, and you believe we can't spot you?

Bless you any way

Actually,i was with mygrandparents all last week,and this week i have been uber busy with this mj tribute concert,all day rehersals. tonight is the first time i have been on properly and read through the threads i was active in while i was away.

I dont have an agenda.I was introduced to critical thinking,and started to re-evaluate my beliefs,and now i have a different outlook on the world. I am undecided on everything,,someone could post a video right now and it could completley pwn me,and i would admit i was wrong.

lol a disinfo agent,,funny how just a few weeks ago when i was running that radio show i was held in high regard,and the second i start to question the topics i covered i am a disinfo agent. Researching your beliefs can actually change them completlty,just like in the film prayers for bobby,for example.

[kasalt]

http://www.youtube.com/v/gorG2XYYZno

http://www.youtube.com/v/XRLPG_HplrA

President George Washington, in letters to addressed to George Washington Snyder, 1798:"I have heard much of the nefarious and dangerous plan, and doctrines of the Illuminati...(Link to source (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mgw:@field%28DOCID+@lit%28gw360346%29%29)) It was not my intention to doubt that the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism, had spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am." (link to source (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mgw:@field%28DOCID+@lit%28gw360395%29%29))Benjamin Disraeli, first Prime Minister of England, 1876:"The governments of the present day have to deal not merely with other governments, with emperors, kings and ministers, but also with the secret societies which have everywhere their unscrupulous agents, and can at the last moment upset all the governments' plans. "
Benjamin Disraeli, in a novel he published in 1844 called Coningsby:"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."
President Theodore Roosevelt, April 19, 1906:"Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people."
Felix Frankfurter, U.S. Supreme Court Justice:"The real rulers in Washington are invisible, and exercise power from behind the scenes."John F. Hylan, Mayor of New York (1918-1925), 1922:"The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen. At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties."
AMERICAN MERCURY MAGAZINE, December 1957, pg. 92:"The invisible Money Power is working to control and enslave mankind. It financed Communism, Fascism, Marxism, Zionism, Socialism. All of these are directed to making the United States a member of a World Government..."Henry Ford, Industrial giant:"The one aim of these financiers is world control by the creation of inextinguishable debts."Barry Goldwater, U.S. Senator, 1964: "The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States...and they will rule the future."David Rockefeller, in an address given to Catherine Graham, publisher of The Washington Post and other media luminaries in attendance in Baden Baden, Germany at the June 1991 annual meeting of the world elite Bilderberg Group:"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected the promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National auto determination practiced in past centuries."
Dr. Carroll Quigley, Professor of International Relations, Georgetown University Foreign Service School, Washington, D.C., author of the epic "Tragedy and Hope", advocate of one-world government and personal mentor of President William Clinton:"The CFR [Council On Foreign Relations, New York City] is the American Branch of a society which originated in England and believes national directives should be obliterated and one-world rule established. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years, and was permitted in the early 1960's to examine its papers and secret records."
Zbigniew Brzezinski, quoted from his book, Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era: "The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities."
William Fulbright, U.S. Senator, 1963:"The case for government by elites is irrefutable."
James Paul Warburg, February 17, 1950, before the U.S. Senate:"We shall have a World government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World government will be achieved by conquest or consent."
Congressman Ron Paul at an event near Austin, Texas on August 30th, 2003:"I think there are 25,000 individuals that have used offices of powers, and they are in our Universities and they are in our Congresses, and they believe in One World Government. And if you believe in One World Government, then you are talking about undermining National Sovereignty and you are talking about setting up something that you could well call a Dictatorship - and those plans are there!"

[3_3_3]

Id like to ask you,what evidence you have that they exist

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=10966

[kappy0405]

yep, not only did George Washington declare his satisfaction with the possibility of the Illuminati spreading in to the US. He said it was 'too evident to be questioned'.

Countless presidents, prime ministers, and other key politicians have warned us against the invisible powers of the 'money masters'. Kasalts post probably represents a mere .0001% of them. Many have even admitted their goal of centralized globalization. I'm sorry, but it's almost laughable to deny the NWO's existence for anyone who has done a fair amount of objective research.

For those who may have jumped into conclusions a bit too early, it's good to be questioning it now though. The truth will become self-evident soon enough if one continues to question everything.

[kappy0405]

Well according to cts,his family built the modern western world,where everyone is entitled to housing,medical care,education,security......"

:eek: Do you honestly think that's the case?

hundreds of thousands of people are homeless in the western world. A decent chunk of them are even war veterans who fought for their leaders business interests. That's not even conspiracy theory, thats WAR 101. Homeless people are hardly entitled to medical care, education, OR security. Thousands more lucky enough to have homes are still stuck in poverty. Capitalism basically guarantees that once someone gets out of that situation, another gets thrown in to it. It's a cycle that will never end in the western world. Granted, it IS a better place to live compared to a majority of the rest of the world, but that doesn't make it honorable.

[robindean]

Hundreds of thousands of people are homeless in the western world. A decent chunk of them are even war veterans who fought for their leaders business interests. That's not even conspiracy theory, thats WAR 101. Homeless people are hardly entitled to medical care, education, OR security. Thousands more lucky enough to have homes are still stuck in poverty. Capitalism basically guarantees that once someone gets out of that situation, another gets thrown in to it. It's a cycle that will never end in the western world. Granted, it IS a better place to live compared to a majority of the rest of the world, but that doesn't make it honorable.

True talk.

[dawnismygoddess]

Right,this thread has been started to debate the claims about the new world order. First of all is to prove thier existence.

Id like to ask you,what evidence you have that they exist,and how you came to the conclusions you have about them.


If you think the term is a new invention, you are mistaken.




The New World Order by Samuel Zane Batten (1919):


Book cover:

http://i883.photobucket.com/albums/ac37/EndoftheAeon/NWO1919.jpg


Title page:

http://i883.photobucket.com/albums/ac37/EndoftheAeon/NWOpage.jpg


Copyright date page:

http://i883.photobucket.com/albums/ac37/EndoftheAeon/copyrightdate.jpg






The New World Order by H.G. Wells (1940):

http://i883.photobucket.com/albums/ac37/EndoftheAeon/hgwells03-thenewworldorder2.jpg

[steevo]

Leave Joe to it. He is only 15 years old FFS. Let him have his beliefs, that is his RIGHT. This forum should not be a place where kids like him are ridiculed for having different beliefs to us. Personally, I am definetely not getting into a heated debate about the subject of the NWO with a kid of 15.

And besides, we dont need EVERYONE to wake up, we just need a percentage of people to do so. Give Joe a break and let him find his OWN way. Please bear in mind that he is only 15, BEFORE you start pushing YOUR beliefs onto HIM. Leave that to his parents.

[chris_com283]

Leave Joe to it. He is only 15 years old FFS. Let him have his beliefs, that is his RIGHT. This forum should not be a place where kids like him are ridiculed for having different beliefs to us. Personally, I am definetely not getting into a heated debate about the subject of the NWO with a kid of 15.

And besides, we dont need EVERYONE to wake up, we just need a percentage of people to do so. Give Joe a break and let him find his OWN way. Please bear in mind that he is only 15, BEFORE you start pushing YOUR beliefs onto HIM. Leave that to his parents.

Well said. I think we should have a word with his parents. He won't listen to use so he's left us no other alternative.

[rowan22]

Surely in the end it comes down to choice or the lack of choice. We have all been affected to one degree or anothet by the recent financial crisis. And this matter of degree is the hub for me to be honest.

If a person wants to speculate to make money then fine. Capitalism does after all generate a good deal of "relative" improvement on what preceeded it.

[dolores1]

How do you think they became wealthy?

[dolores1]

Steve,

I agree, nice judgement.

[romas]

How do you think they became wealthy?






Simply, deceit, cronyism and high motivation to win. I'd wager majority of wealthy population operate in the same manner.

[dawnismygoddess]

Surely in the end it comes down to choice or the lack of choice. We have all been affected to one degree or anothet by the recent financial crisis. And this matter of degree is the hub for me to be honest.

If a person wants to speculate to make money then fine. Capitalism does after all generate a good deal of "relative" improvement on what preceeded it.


Remember what John D. Rockefeller said: "Competition is a Sin".


Once they ruthlessly got to the top, they realized that they needed to buy out all their competition. When that didn't work, the went into "monopoly partnerships" WITH their competition.


This is known as a cartel . The Federal Reserve Banking System is the perfect example.


Some of the 7 men who plotted the Fed in 1910, were bitter economic enemies! They think big......really, really, really, big.

[noewhan]

Joe, if you think knowing someones identity is more important that actual knowing the identity of someone who claims their family to have created 'The Western World' while preforming genocide is okay, you are a fake.

Anyway, I haven't hidden myself. Also, you havn't asked, Joe. Whichever one you are in your DP:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/image.php?u=20946&dateline=1249761144

This is a plain example of how you cannot even research into someone on a forum.

Game over man, game over.

http://www.resentment.org/misc/other/queennose.jpg

[punxytawny]

Government SHOULD be a servant of the people - but it is not! It has become the master - and we must find a way to take this power away from it and return the power to "ourselves" - the people. I believe the way to do this must be non-violent - else, we too become like the war department of our government. One non-violent way to do this is through our mind and thoughts - our creative thinking - meditation - thousands and thousands of minds - and then millions and millions of minds - together creating on a higher plane to disband and break up the power of the government and its political powers we believe exist. Belief is 90 percent of the problem and talking about the "problem of our money and power-thirsty government" continues to give it power. Perhaps including a "meditation" course in our education would help by instilling in the young the ideas that their thoughts can create a better world. Would the educational system (also run by the government) allow this kind of an educational system to happen?? Maybe, start with the private schools? There must be a way to channel the thoughts of our young people away from negativism toward creative thinking and understanding that your thoughts can make a difference and create a change - albeit a slow one - but it will multiply - proportionally.
I am an American and would like to be proud of that again.
Punxytawny

[joe911]

Joe, if you think knowing someones identity is more important that actual knowing the identity of someone who claims their family to have created 'The Western World' while preforming genocide is okay, you are a fake.

Anyway, I haven't hidden myself. Also, you havn't asked, Joe. Whichever one you are in your DP:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/image.php?u=20946&dateline=1249761144

This is a plain example of how you cannot even research into someone on a forum.

Game over man, game over.

But its this "actual identity" that i fail to see. It seems as if none of this makes sense,unless it fits into this "bigger picture" which conspiracy theorists themselves created. Look at the conditions people lived in pre-1900s,and look at what we have today. If these people have created this then i applaud them. never before in history have we had the opportunities we have today,yes its not perfect,but we as the human race still have lots to learn about ourselves,and the planet we inhabit.

I have looked into this,infact its been my obsession for the past few years. The fact is any "substancial evidence" i found was always uncited,or misquoted etc...

And im the one with the camera,it was taken at k-fest a few weeks ago.

[skyver]

Right,this thread has been started to debate the claims about the new world order. First of all is to prove thier existence.

Id like to ask you,what evidence you have that they exist,and how you came to the conclusions you have about them.

It sounds as if you have doubts about there being a push for a New World Order.

Even the leaders keep saying it, they do not deny what they are aiming for.

Look all around you, no free press, staged terror attacks, being drawn into wars that are not justified. I know it has been going on for a while so maybe you thing "this is just how it is.." but it is NOT mean't to be like this. truthfully, if you can't see what is happening, then I'd saw no matter who posts on this thread, you may still have the same view that you hold now.

It is there...

[kasalt]

Look at the conditions people lived in pre-1900s,and look at what we have today. If these people have created this then i applaud them.

Henry Ford had more to do with improving the lot of the world than the people you give credit to, and here is what Ford had to say about them:"The one aim of these financiers is world control by the creation of inextinguishable debts."How right he was...

http://themicrocosm.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/brillig-nom-national-debt.gif

AMERICAN MERCURY MAGAZINE, December 1957, pg. 92: "The invisible Money Power is working to control and enslave mankind. It financed Communism, Fascism, Marxism, Zionism, Socialism..."

[skyver]

Leave Joe to it. He is only 15 years old FFS. Let him have his beliefs, that is his RIGHT. This forum should not be a place where kids like him are ridiculed for having different beliefs to us. Personally, I am definetely not getting into a heated debate about the subject of the NWO with a kid of 15.

And besides, we dont need EVERYONE to wake up, we just need a percentage of people to do so. Give Joe a break and let him find his OWN way. Please bear in mind that he is only 15, BEFORE you start pushing YOUR beliefs onto HIM. Leave that to his parents.

I don't think anyone was giving him a hard time. But at least at 15 he is asking questions. He has asked for people to show him either way if there is/is not a NWO conspiracy. As long as no one is being rude to him then there is no problem.

[noewhan]

But its this "actual identity" that i fail to see. It seems as if none of this makes sense,unless it fits into this "bigger picture" which conspiracy theorists themselves created. Look at the conditions people lived in pre-1900s,and look at what we have today. If these people have created this then i applaud them. never before in history have we had the opportunities we have today,yes its not perfect,but we as the human race still have lots to learn about ourselves,and the planet we inhabit.

I have looked into this,infact its been my obsession for the past few years. The fact is any "substancial evidence" i found was always uncited,or misquoted etc...

And im the one with the camera,it was taken at k-fest a few weeks ago.

...

Please stop being obsessed. It causes problems.

Like, active denial.

i found was always uncited,or misquoted etc...

Always? Or do you like to give the elite the benefit of the doubt?

If these people have created this then i applaud them.

Oh really?

15 years old

Joe will understand soon. I know for a fact, that I wouldn't have understood this stuff @ 15. Or even been slightly interested.

[brainfreeze]

He may be young but Joe is an astute lad with sound reasoning and questioning.

He's a breath of fresh air, wish I was that smart/seriously curious at his age.

He holds his own on here that you wouldn't guess he's a "young 'en". I thought him older at first.

Thanks for the thread Joe, I appreciate it because I've asked myself the same questions too, especially when names of people close to me are mentioned in the same breath as TPTB (common purpose), which I find rediculous and he found bloody laughable. Even the "experts" on here can get it wrong at times. We're all learning, some are simply more progressed than others. And some are truly delusional too :p ;) Who's who in the zoo?

[kappy0405]

A few questions for anyone in doubt of the existence of the NWO agenda..

1) Does the UN exist?

2) Where did the concept originate?

3) Who provided the backbone for its founding?

4) Does the EU exist?

5) Where did the concept originate?

6) Who provided the backbone for its founding?

7) Is lobbying for a centralized N. America a reality?

8) Where did the concept originate?

9) Who is doing the lobbying - providing the backbone for its founding?

All of these institutions are part of the NWO 'theory', but the very fact that these institutions originated with lobbying, funding, and organization by the international banking cartels & leaders of the corporate world (or their thinktanks) proves with 100% certainty that the NWO agenda is a reality. How sinister the agenda is IS still up for debate imo, but no skeptical person in the world can deny that the centralization of control over global politics (exactly what the NWO is) is happening blatantly before our eyes. From there, it's a moral issue. Some people are fine with an oligarchical system. ('After all look at how great the world is now!') Some people think an oligarchical system is essentially a form of slavery regardless of how 'in your face' it is.

To be denying it now just means that you jumped to conclusions too quickly. It's good to be questioning now, but don't confuse skepticism with denial. Just continue to research and you'll eventually realize you were right to begin with.

[joe911]

...

Please stop being obsessed. It causes problems.

Like, active denial.



Always? Or do you like to give the elite the benefit of the doubt?



Oh really?



Joe will understand soon. I know for a fact, that I wouldn't have understood this stuff @ 15. Or even been slightly interested.

I have a big folder,full of bits of "evidence" i collected since about december,and included all the articles i spoke about on the radio show,but going back through it,90% of it is un sourced,and for the ones that do give a citation,if you read the quotes in thier entireity it completley changes the context of the quote.

[joe911]

He may be young but Joe is an astute lad with sound reasoning and questioning.

He's a breath of fresh air, wish I was that smart/seriously curious at his age.

He holds his own on here that you wouldn't guess he's a "young 'en". I thought him older at first.

Thanks for the thread Joe, I appreciate it because I've asked myself the same questions too, especially when names of people close to me are mentioned in the same breath as TPTB (common purpose), which I find rediculous and he found bloody laughable. Even the "experts" on here can get it wrong at times. We're all learning, some are simply more progressed than others. And some are truly delusional too :p ;) Who's who in the zoo?

Thanks for that,Brainfreeze:)

Common purpose is a thing i beleive people like Brian Gerish have completley wrong,when i went around school asking some of the higer staff if they had ever been on common purpose courses they diddnt know what i was talking about,they said the common purpose that works in schools help set up things like options/taster days.

Maybe there are two common purposes? I dont know........

[joe911]

A few questions for anyone in doubt of the existence of the NWO agenda..

1) Does the UN exist?

2) Where did the concept originate?

3) Who provided the backbone for its founding?

4) Does the EU exist?

5) Where did the concept originate?

6) Who provided the backbone for its founding?

7) Is lobbying for a centralized N. America a reality?

8) Where did the concept originate?

9) Who is doing the lobbying - providing the backbone for its founding?

All of these institutions are part of the NWO 'theory', but the very fact that these institutions originated with lobbying, funding, and organization by the international banking cartels & leaders of the corporate world (or their thinktanks) proves with 100% certainty that the NWO agenda is a reality. How sinister the agenda is IS still up for debate imo, but no skeptical person in the world can deny that the centralization of control over global politics (exactly what the NWO is) is happening blatantly before our eyes. From there, it's a moral issue. Some people are fine with an oligarchical system. ('After all look at how great the world is now!') Some people think an oligarchical system is essentially a form of slavery regardless of how 'in your face' it is.

To be denying it now just means that you jumped to conclusions too quickly. It's good to be questioning now, but don't confuse skepticism with denial. Just continue to research and you'll eventually realize you were right to begin with.

But this is the problem,this whole "nwo conspiracy" only makes sense if a,b,c,d are all conspiring together,along with x,y,z and its only if you assume that these things are in on it,it makes sense.

Its like saying football is part of the nwo agenda because dean windass scored a cool goal which braught hull city into the premiership. You see the truth is dean is a mason,and he payed off the fa to move the game to the 13th because thats his nwo occult lucky number,and by sacrificing my little pony dolls to his norse god THOR he was able to evolve to a higher stage of consciousness to be able to ......... yawn im bored of that story,but you see my point?

[kappy0405]

But this is the problem,this whole "nwo conspiracy" only makes sense if a,b,c,d are all conspiring together,along with x,y,z and its only if you assume that these things are in on it,it makes sense.

I see what you're saying, but it's not much of an assumption that A (UN), B (EU), and C (NAU) have been proposed and/or implemented by the same group of people, so saying that A+B+C add up in this case isn't farfetched at all. All of these institutions have already centralized regional (& global) politics quite a bit. If ever integrated with one another, they're only a hop, skip & a jump away from what the NWO entails.

Its like saying football is part of the nwo agenda because dean windass scored a cool goal which braught hull city into the premiership. You see the truth is dean is a mason,and he payed off the fa to move the game to the 13th because thats his nwo occult lucky number,and by sacrificing my little pony dolls to his norse god THOR he was able to evolve to a higher stage of consciousness to be able to ......... yawn im bored of that story,but you see my point?

tehe.. :D Well, I think that many ARE a bit reactionary when adding pieces together to hypothesize on how sinister the NWO is.. for example, that they want to literally enslave us all and kill most of us.. or that they're secretly working for Satan or King Reptoid. I mean those things are possible, but they're not proven. The global centralization of political/economic control is happening before our very eyes though! ..and like I said in my last post, how sinister the NWO is IS still up for debate imo... and from there it's a moral issue--> Some people think hierarchical government is necessary; some think that alone equates to oppression. IMHO, if political control IS ever centralized on a global scale, then a totalitarian state is almost inevitable simply because more centralization means less power/representation for the majority as whole.

I guess what I'm saying is forget all the side theories for now. Forget about the Masons, forget about the Vatican, forget about the 'ruling bloodline', forget about the Aliens, forget about FEMA camps, forget about depopulation.. and just focus on the more 'realistic' side; the political aspect of it--> the centralization of influence/control over the planets political/economic institutions. This is essentially all the NWO is on the face of it.

Consider the following statements..

-The corporate world has influence in politics
-The corporate world is expanding this influence across the globe

(by 'corporate world' I mean the top bankers, the top oil barons, the top dogs in the media, etc.. & their systems of lobbying & influence)

If one agrees with those two statements, they're already accepting 90% of what the NWO is all about. The other 10% comes down to whether or not this global expansion is merely about making money (a natural result of Capitalism), or about integrating global politics and economics under one tent. I don't think the latter can really be denied if ones honest.

...and again, all the side theories are irrelevant for now anyway.

[rowan22]

All of what I read in these posts seems pretty well informed. But I don’t read anyone pointing to the worldwide apathy regarding Illegal wars which have killed tens if not hundreds of thousands of civilians. Where is the human indignation at this obscene loss of life?

Is someone going to use the oft cited rationalising that "terrorism must be contained" I have to say "bollocks".

Looking around for "evidence" for a malevolent N.W.O already means you must be pretty far gone if you ask me. If you don’t sense in your soul the commoditisation of everything from children to sexuality and everything in between I think that is unfortunate for you.

We have been seduced into thinking that everything should have a price tag. That human worth should be measured by our ability to generate revenue. That it is absolutely the primary objective of life to accumulate material possessions while people starve to death for the cost of one pair of the wool socks we buy.

That China can invade Tibet and murder its monks and decimate its holy places. Can exact cultural genocide and where are the cry’s from the so called liberal west?

Looking for evidence is about unfreezing your own soul and getting a feel for what tyranny actually "feels" like.

Human value is about teaching our children that external conditions of worth are a crime against human dignity. That valuing possessions above life is a crime and insane. That wars not fought in response to, and as a last resort to threat must be fought on humanitarian lines which cease at the first opportunity.

That nothing….nothing is more important than an individuals right to choose. Free will is the bedrock of what it is to be human without it we are marionettes jumping at the behest of puppet masters.

What we now regard as “marketing” is Psychological warfare. Its stated aim to undermine and negate our intrinsic sense of worth and well being and provide it with perpetual and insatiable symbolic replacements for actual needs.

We are free to be what ever we like so long as it isn't ourselves. We are free to believe what ever we like so long as we don’t protest or demonstrate too passionately.

We are free to endure economic privation created by breathtaking greed and corruptions and then we are free to pay for them!

We are free to defend ourselves in court, though in reality the measure of our justice is dependent not on the integrity of our case but on our ability to pay.

"How many fingers am I holding up Winston?"

[noewhan]

Sounds like Joe911's school probably isn't that great.

Joe, I sometimes question the truth movements theories... But the main goal is for a new independent investigation. The 9/11 commission report was a BS heap, yes? Or was it perfect?

[rowan22]

Sounds like Joe911's school probably isn't that great.

Joe, I sometimes question the truth movements theories... But the main goal is for a new independent investigation. The 9/11 commission report was a BS heap, yes? Or was it perfect?

That would be one place to start another would be someone explaining the "federal reserve" A.K.A. heads we win tales you loose inc.

[joe911]

Sounds like Joe911's school probably isn't that great.

Joe, I sometimes question the truth movements theories... But the main goal is for a new independent investigation. The 9/11 commission report was a BS heap, yes? Or was it perfect?

I will answer the longer posts later,im a little busy this week,but will address them shortly.

noewhan,i cannot answer your question about the 9/11 comission report,because i have not read it. I have read a few pages in a online pdf file,but not the full report.

Have you read it? If so what discrepancies did you find? and if you did find them,did you contact the authors of the report to discuss it with them?

Because one of the things i noticed is that the truth movement arent aware of the facts themselves,its a bold statment to say the 9/11 comission report is a lie,same with the nist reports. Of course i have my own questions about 9/11,but they are irrelivent in my day to day life,and one day when i have the time i will read the reports and address the questions.

[joe911]

I guess what I'm saying is forget all the side theories for now. Forget about the Masons, forget about the Vatican, forget about the 'ruling bloodline', forget about the Aliens, forget about FEMA camps, forget about depopulation.. and just focus on the more 'realistic' side; the political aspect of it--> the centralization of influence/control over the planets political/economic institutions. This is essentially all the NWO is on the face of it.

Consider the following statements..

-The corporate world has influence in politics
-The corporate world is expanding this influence across the globe

(by 'corporate world' I mean the top bankers, the top oil barons, the top dogs in the media, etc.. & their systems of lobbying & influence)

If one agrees with those two statements, they're already accepting 90% of what the NWO is all about. The other 10% comes down to whether or not this global expansion is merely about making money (a natural result of Capitalism), or about integrating global politics and economics under one tent. I don't think the latter can really be denied if ones honest.

...and again, all the side theories are irrelevant for now anyway.

But if you take out all the other theories,people would not fear a "new world order". People on here have said that a one world government isnt a bad thing,but because of x,y,z... etc.....

[all conspiracy theories aside] What is wrong with a global government?

[rowan22]

A worldwide government would be a government which extended the infiltration and control of business over Political and ethical considerations of human freedom.

The anxiety about it is derived directly from the observation that when a tension between profit for the minority and welfare for the majority is present, it is the former which predominates.

It is the recognition that oligarchic levels of wealth which are inevitably distilled into fewer and fewer hands create a minority control of the distribution of wealth and power. A control which has been exploited to destabilise the stock markets and profit from the resultant chaos which ensues time and again.

A situation where a "Federal Bank" can loan currency to a government so that every dollar printed comes with an immediate debt which must be paid by the working people in the form of tax.

And what happens to repay the debt?, more money must be printed since the gold standard was removed by private banking interests with the result that money is as valuable as the amount in circulation.

And you guessed it more money printed means more debt repayable to the "Federal Bank" which is a private company with share holders bleeding you and me to death like the parasitical scum they are in an inescapable catch twenty two.



"Give me the control of the credit of a nation, and I care not who makes the laws." The famous boastful statement of Nathaniel Meyer Rothschild,

[robdoo]

There's a problem in the OP and i would like to help clear something up.


The New World Order is an idea, not a group of people.

In terms of its existence we do not look for the use of the term "new world order" we look for the hallmarks and traits which are associated with the idea of a new world, completely different from our old ways and cultures.

We are now entering/or have entered this new world order.

An example of this can be found in the European constitution which has now been signed by 3 different British Prime ministers and the queen, for a total of six signatures from each department.

The most arousing and substantial quotes in regards to the new world order, would have to be from those well known speaches given by George Bush Snr and Mikael Gorbhachov(sp?). Both respected leaders from opposing forms of government (at the time) who spoke very clearly about a New World Order, a term which was simply unused before that time.

[robdoo]

But if you take out all the other theories,people would not fear a "new world order". People on here have said that a one world government isnt a bad thing,but because of x,y,z... etc.....

[all conspiracy theories aside] What is wrong with a global government?
Edit:...I made this post under the false pretence that you were pro-world governance, rather than just inquiring or collecting evidence.It may still be partially relevant so i wont delete it. :-)

What is wrong with global government?

Firstly: Are you aware of the struggles, hard work and courage shown by our ancesters from the British Isle's? Are you aware that many countries around the world despise the successful and tenacious attitude we the British Isle's people have? Now ponder for one moment, how if our country was amalgamated with these other European countries (which we have beaten in battles for centuries) will enact their revenge by weakening our structure through political upheaval and the strangulation of our trade....:confused:

If you want this nation to become just another state within a European geopolitical government, then i would ask you to remember those who died in battle in defense of this great nation.

They were not able to take us through battle, so they worm their way in through the back door's.

I believe todays the 70Th anniversary of the start of the second world war, and now we have people suggesting that we become partners, equals and co-horts with the German nation...I say: "Thanks, But no thanks"

[rowan22]

“Firstly: Are you aware of the struggles, hard work and courage shown by our ancesters from the British Isle's? Are you aware that many countries around the world despise the successful and tenacious attitude we the British Isle's people have?”

______________________



All good solid Anglo Saxon values? Or are they? Rights of the individual are taken even more seriously in Scotland, Ireland and Wales. The right to demonstrate and show passionate rejection of state control is so embedded within the French soul as to be regarded as the lifeboat of Europe at the moment. The German commitment to environmental awareness makes Britain look like a remedial relation. Sweden, Norway, Denmark. Iceland is spearheading the rejection of the world Banks attempts to bankrupt nation sates and usurp democratic control (Bless em!!). So taken all in all I say we need them just as much as they “may” still have some old standing resentment about a country whose “elites” pillaged the world for the better part of three hundred years, while working class people went around with no shoes on thier feet and were being transported to Australia for stealing bread to survive. Or being conscripted to fight the wars against other poor downtrodden people and cultures to keep the fat parasitic bastards in Port and cigars!!

[robdoo]

“Firstly: Are you aware of the struggles, hard work and courage shown by our ancesters from the British Isle's? Are you aware that many countries around the world despise the successful and tenacious attitude we the British Isle's people have?”

______________________



All good solid Anglo Saxon values? Or are they? Rights of the individual are taken even more seriously in Scotland, Ireland and Wales. The right to demonstrate and show passionate rejection of state control is so embedded within the French soul as to be regarded as the lifeboat of Europe at the moment. The German commitment to environmental awareness makes Britain look like a remedial relation. Sweden, Norway, Denmark. Iceland is spearheading the rejection of the world Banks attempts to bankrupt nation sates and usurp democratic control (Bless em!!). So taken all in all I say we need them just as much as they “may” still have some old standing resentment about a country whose “elites” pillaged the world for the better part of three hundred years, while working class people went around with no shoes on their feet and were being transported to Australia for stealing bread to survive. Or being conscripted to fight the wars against other poor downtrodden people and cultures to keep the fat parasitic bastards in Port and cigars!!

Yes, i agree with what your saying, especially about the Scandinavian countries being against this amalgamation. But i am also aware that most continental European countries seem to be more favourable towards a European superstate, maybe this is because of the fact that they share borders with one another and have closer ties through trade.

What I'm saying is that Britain is a power in its own regard, the British Isle's and the commonwealth never relied on Europe, because we have a superb location and many qualities which other Eauropean nations seem to lack. Its just a shame that we have been weakened from within, conspirators within our own government have been giving away our power in order to make our power base seem equal to all those other countries within Europe. I'm looking at people like Peter Mandelson and of course Gordon Brown. Traitors?

[kappy0405]

But if you take out all the other theories,people would not fear a "new world order". People on here have said that a one world government isnt a bad thing,but because of x,y,z... etc.....

[all conspiracy theories aside] What is wrong with a global government?

a ton of people dislike (I wouldn't call it fear) the NWO for the simple fact that it's a massive hierarchical structure. Even in the US, the 'land of the free', the people have little to no representation in their government.. meaning little to no say in how they live their lives. A global expansion of that system means centralization of wealth and power to point where we'll have absolutely no say at all.

People like to use the following analogy. (& I think I came across this here tbh)

---
If your school district does something you don't like, you get 12 angry parents, raise $100 and have a small chance of getting it changed.

If your town/city does something you don't like, you get 120 angry voters, raise $1000 and have a small chance of getting it changed.

If your state does something you don't like, you get 12,000 angry voters and $100,000 together and you have a small change of getting it changed.

If your country does something you don't like, you get 12,000,000 angry voters and $100,000,000 together and you have a small chance of getting it changed.

If the world government does something you don't like, you aren't going to get it changed.
---

There will be no more 'people' figured into the equation. It will be fascism at its fullest, at least based on the path we're currently taking there.

From all the lurking I've done here, most aren't really opposed to globalisation in itself.. but our progressions towards that are already blatantly oppressive imho.

[rowan22]

Yes, i agree with what your saying, especially about the Scandinavian countries being against this amalgamation. But i am also aware that most continental European countries seem to be more favourable towards a European superstate, maybe this is because of the fact that they share borders with one another and have closer ties through trade.

What I'm saying is that Britain is a power in its own regard, the British Isle's and the commonwealth never relied on Europe, because we have a superb location and many qualities which other Eauropean nations seem to lack. Its just a shame that we have been weakened from within, conspirators within our own government have been giving away our power in order to make our power base seem equal to all those other countries within Europe. I'm looking at people like Peter Mandelson and of course Gordon Brown. Traitors?

I agree with you there. History will be the most accurate judge of just where Mr "Megolomensons" loyalties "lie".

He seems to be a despicable human being, as do many of his cronies!

I also agree that we are being weakened from within, and I don’t think for one minute that is just us. When Franco was in control of Spain the Basque separatists were at the height of their claims for a separate regional and cultural identity. It's interesting that Franco’s solution was to flood the area with people from outside the region in a deliberate attempt to compromise their sense of social cohesion.

I believe this is an archetypal Fascist tactic. We have been accustomed to thinking of Fascism as the race hate of the Nazis, but Fascism is more about total control than about any specific allegiance to anything but power.

Fascists want instability, they want it at any cost, because this is what enables their agenda of repression and ultimately totalitarian control.

It serves many different functions simultaneously. It causes inter racial conflict and competition. It is the ideal stage upon which to script a pantomime of right wing tabloid prevarication. The right wing media moves its searchlight to wherever a particular story will generate the useful public perception and reaction that is required.

"Terror suspect held without charge" Hurray go the mob!

The favourite is the "sex offender". Once a member of our community has been identified who has having no status other than pariah he has no defenders, its simply a matter of cultivating public indignation and reactionary policy green light is the pay off. A precedent is now set for all.

No one will speak out for sex offenders because the implication for anyone who does so is obvious. It is no different from the McCarthyism of the nineteen fifties, a fact which the puppet masters are quick to exploit. As were the Nazi’s.

The Roman historian Tacitus wrote long and detailed descriptions of how tribes can be led to cut their own throats, Roman ingenuity was only surpassed by their cruelty, it seems the more things change the more they stay the same.

[kasalt]

Video link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSuWCIYi7T4)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSuWCIYi7T4

[rowan22]

Video link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSuWCIYi7T4)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSuWCIYi7T4

Get ready for the World War they have planned. Because "we aint seen nothin yet":eek:

[nihil]

I propose a democratic poll: do you believe a nwo is going to exist in your country?

[rowan22]

I propose a democratic poll: do you believe a nwo is going to exist in your country?

I live in the U.K and to be honest it's no longer a question of if it will happen, it's already here. The social manipulation which is endemic here is no longer subtle. "Business is good" there is no alternative vision which is acceptable as a possible challenge to that perception. And to my mind we could debate the nature of the N.W.O all day and some will only see the propagandised version that the elites are now peddling.

"Fostering closer trade links will enable a global marketplace in which all will prosper through free trade"

What I say is this, if this is the case why are twenty million people facing catastrophe in Bangladesh due to possible rises sea level and the "free trade" Utopia is disintegrating before our eyes with no prospect of either a short or a long term solution to the damage their greed has caused.

The truly amazing thing is that people are still looking for a new conspiracy theory to "prove" something which has always been right in front of us all, namely they don’t give a shit about people or suffering.

[suicidal_martyr]

For example, the famous Rockefeller quote:

[I]"For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents for the inordinate influence we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it".[I]

Yeh, he admits it and no actions taken against him that the funny part. If you ask me, I say the old fart needs tossed in a nursing home.

[3_3_3]

this was before brown became prime minister


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6277747.stm


Brown wants a 'new world order'

Gordon Brown
Mr Brown laid a floral tribute at the memorial for Mahatma Gandhi

Brown on challenges
Chancellor Gordon Brown has spoken of the need for a "new world order" to deal with future security and environmental challenges.

He called for a "new diplomacy" to go alongside military power to defeat terrorism, share prosperity and "win the battle of hearts and minds".

That meant strengthening Britain's global alliances but also reforming institutions such as the EU and UN.

Mr Brown was speaking in Mumbai on the latest stage of his tour of India.

The chancellor said he had been inspired by Mahatma Gandhi as he laid a wreath at the memorial to the former leader.

Mr Brown said he was not trying to compare himself to the founder of modern India but was inspired by his strength, courage and strong will.


I don't accept that what America has tried to do has failed
Gordon Brown

He also quoted Winston Churchill, in an interview with the BBC's Nick Robinson, saying "you cannot meet the challenges of the future by simply building the present in the image of the past".

He said the British people wanted a "more secure world," a safer environment and greater prosperity and "that will require new diplomacy in the next few years to build better institutions."

Mr Brown said he would not pledge to always seek UN approval before taking military action.

'Bigger role'

"Nobody's going to make that commitment," he said, adding that Britain tried to work through the UN in Iraq, where it now had a mandate.

"The American alliance we have, the European cooperation that we welcome and are going to strengthen in the years to come, and our role in the Commonwealth are the basis on which we move forward.

"But I believe that there is a collective interest that the world can be persuaded of, in the United Nations playing a bigger role in security, Nato playing a bigger role out of theatre, and also the European Union as a collective institution playing a fuller role in world politics."


BBC political editor Nick Robinson
I'm in one of Bollywood's top studios with the chancellor...
BBC political editor Nick Robinson

Read Nick's blog from India
The Chancellor rejected Northern Ireland Secretary Peter Hain's criticism that the US "neo-conservative" mission had failed.

"I don't accept that what America has tried to do has failed," he said.

Mr Brown also called for greater international co-operation and a stronger sense of national purpose in meeting the security threat.

"If we in Britain can have a stronger sense of what our national purpose is, that will enable us to face the challenges ahead.

"That would mean, in practice, we spend more time thinking about what can integrate us as a community and bring us together."

Earlier, Mr Brown said he has grown more relaxed speaking about the "big challenges" which will face him as the likely next prime minister.

He is widely expected to take over as prime minister when Tony Blair stands down this year.

'World leader'

He told the BBC: "It's the right thing to do, to talk about some of the big challenges for the future.

"I've been thinking about some of these big challenges. I see the potential for Britain to be a world leader in so many areas in the future.

"I also see that we can build that stronger sense of national identity in Britain that will give us strength to face the challenges of the future."

His three-day tour to India is being seen an attempt to move beyond fiscal policy and strengthen his international credentials.

But the visit has been overshadowed by the row over the alleged racist bullying of Indian actress Shilpa Shetty on the UK reality television show Celebrity Big Brother.

Mr Brown has already described as "offensive" the allegedly racist remarks and he faces possible further questions during a visit to a Bollywood film studio in Mumbai.

He is also expected to meet industrialists in the city, which is India's financial capital.

[rowan22]

Yeh, he admits it and no actions taken against him that the funny part. If you ask me, I say the old fart needs tossed in a nursing home.

I was nodding in agreement right up to the point where you said "nursing home" now if you had said pit of starving wolves, or tank of white sharks lol!

This is the problems isn't it, they really don't see that there is any problem with the creation of a "one world government". And when you think about it if you had virtually unlimited cash and as much freedom to do whatever the hell you wanted because you had created the "one world government" why would you complain?

Unfortunately for the other 99.99% of people who live on the planet this isn't the case. We actually have to live with the consequences of a failing economy and redundancy. We have to eat less when our job is "rationalised" to some third world country where they pay their employees four fifths of what they pay us to do the same job, after all it's not personal "it's only business".

[sloloris]

Gordon brown said so himself on several occasion's that he wants a nwo.

[chris_com283]

Joe911, are episodes of your radio show still on the Internet?

[noewhan]

Yeh, I'd like to hear them too :)

[rowan22]

Joe911, are episodes of your radio show still on the Internet?

Interesting quote Chris. Could I ask where it is taken from? as I would be interested to read the rest of that. I've only ever seen Berlin quoted by Blair which I have to say has left me with a very jaundiced view of his work.

[joe911]

hey folks,havent forgot about this thread, just been uber busy,will reply to everyone shortly. :)

[anthony65]

http://www.youtube.com/v/gorG2XYYZno

http://www.youtube.com/v/XRLPG_HplrA

President George Washington, in letters to addressed to George Washington Snyder, 1798:"I have heard much of the nefarious and dangerous plan, and doctrines of the Illuminati...(Link to source (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mgw:@field%28DOCID+@lit%28gw360346%29%29)) It was not my intention to doubt that the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism, had spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am." (link to source (http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/r?ammem/mgw:@field%28DOCID+@lit%28gw360395%29%29))Benjamin Disraeli, first Prime Minister of England, 1876:"The governments of the present day have to deal not merely with other governments, with emperors, kings and ministers, but also with the secret societies which have everywhere their unscrupulous agents, and can at the last moment upset all the governments' plans. "
Benjamin Disraeli, in a novel he published in 1844 called Coningsby:"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes."
President Theodore Roosevelt, April 19, 1906:"Behind the ostensible government sits enthroned an invisible government owing no allegiance and acknowledging no responsibility to the people."
Felix Frankfurter, U.S. Supreme Court Justice:"The real rulers in Washington are invisible, and exercise power from behind the scenes."John F. Hylan, Mayor of New York (1918-1925), 1922:"The real menace of our republic is this invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy length over city, state and nation. Like the octopus of real life, it operates under cover of a self created screen. At the head of this octopus are the Rockefeller Standard Oil interests and a small group of powerful banking houses generally referred to as international bankers. The little coterie of powerful international bankers virtually run the United States government for their own selfish purposes. They practically control both political parties."
AMERICAN MERCURY MAGAZINE, December 1957, pg. 92:"The invisible Money Power is working to control and enslave mankind. It financed Communism, Fascism, Marxism, Zionism, Socialism. All of these are directed to making the United States a member of a World Government..."Henry Ford, Industrial giant:"The one aim of these financiers is world control by the creation of inextinguishable debts."Barry Goldwater, U.S. Senator, 1964: "The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States...and they will rule the future."David Rockefeller, in an address given to Catherine Graham, publisher of The Washington Post and other media luminaries in attendance in Baden Baden, Germany at the June 1991 annual meeting of the world elite Bilderberg Group:"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected the promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National auto determination practiced in past centuries."
Dr. Carroll Quigley, Professor of International Relations, Georgetown University Foreign Service School, Washington, D.C., author of the epic "Tragedy and Hope", advocate of one-world government and personal mentor of President William Clinton:"The CFR [Council On Foreign Relations, New York City] is the American Branch of a society which originated in England and believes national directives should be obliterated and one-world rule established. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years, and was permitted in the early 1960's to examine its papers and secret records."
Zbigniew Brzezinski, quoted from his book, Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era: "The technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities."
William Fulbright, U.S. Senator, 1963:"The case for government by elites is irrefutable."
James Paul Warburg, February 17, 1950, before the U.S. Senate:"We shall have a World government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World government will be achieved by conquest or consent."
Congressman Ron Paul at an event near Austin, Texas on August 30th, 2003:"I think there are 25,000 individuals that have used offices of powers, and they are in our Universities and they are in our Congresses, and they believe in One World Government. And if you believe in One World Government, then you are talking about undermining National Sovereignty and you are talking about setting up something that you could well call a Dictatorship - and those plans are there!"

Add to these...

Eisenhower and the military industrial complex...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY

Kennedy and the secret societies...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WSGwnz7XpY

David Icke goes into incredible detail to show the cycnical policital manipulation over centuries. Manipulation that has cost the lives of countless millions.

The past few years have seen numerous references to the New World Order, from Bush senior through to Gordon Brown and many others.

The New World Order is not even a secret. It is a very open work in process.

[rowan22]

Thanks for that post Anthony very useful.

[anthony65]

There are many, many quotes regarding the new world order and this post contains a link to a page with many of them, http://www.svpvril.com/nwo.html but for now I'd like to focus on just a couple.

Earlier in the thread Joe was referring to David Rockefeller as a clever bloke.

Do you also see Henry Kissinger as a clever bloke?

Do you still deny the existence of a conspiracy to create a new world order?

Do you still see the idea of a new world order created by people like Henry Kissinger as nothing to be concerned about?

I'm assuming you are aware of how much blood Kissinger has on his hands.

"The New World Order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down...but in the end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault." CFR member Richard Gardner, writing in the April l974 issue of the CFRs journal, Foreign Affairs.

"NAFTA is a major stepping stone to the New World Order." Henry Kissinger when campaigning for the passage of NAFTA

[joe911]

There are many, many quotes regarding the new world order and this post contains a link to a page with many of them, http://www.svpvril.com/nwo.html but for now I'd like to focus on just a couple.

Those sites never provide a citation,and googling the quotes only brings up more conspiracy sites.Never an original source,here's maybe why;
Props to Horatius for this;
They are usually either completely made up, or misrepresentations of what the quote intended to say. You'll also note that the CT sites rarely if ever provide citations for where these quotes were originally found, so that it is almost impossible to check their validity.

Here's a good example of why they avoid giving citations. They quote this:

Quote:

"In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all."

Strobe Talbot, President Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.
Now, as it turns out, Time Magazine has their back catalogue in a searchable database, And here's the context in which that quote was made:

Quote:
The human drama, whether played out in history books or headlines, is often not just a confusing spectacle but a spectacle about confusion. The big question these days is, Which political forces will prevail, those stitching nations together or those tearing them apart?

Here is one optimist's reason for believing unity will prevail over disunity, integration over disintegration. In fact, I'll bet that within the next hundred years (I'm giving the world time for setbacks and myself time to be out of the betting game, just in case I lose this one), nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. A phrase briefly fashionable in the mid-20th century -- "citizen of the world" -- will have assumed real meaning by the end of the 21st.

All countries are basically social arrangements, accommodations to changing circumstances. No matter how permanent and even sacred they may seem at any one time, in fact they are all artificial and temporary. Through the ages, there has been an overall trend toward larger units claiming sovereignty and, paradoxically, a gradual diminution of how much true sovereignty any one country actually has.

And then, way down the first page, we find:

Quote:
From time to time the best minds wondered whether this wasn't a hell of a way to run a planet; perhaps national sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all. Dante in the 14th century, Erasmus in the 16th and Grotius in the 17th all envisioned international law as a means of overcoming the natural tendency of states to settle their differences by force.

They've combined two different passages into one, to make it seem as if the thoughts are directed combined, even though one of them is clearly paraphrasing other people. Also, note that in the part about "the next hundred years", they didn't even quote the whole sentence, because it makes it clear that this is nothing more than his guess, and a guess that he admits is "optimistic" and is possibly wrong. The rest of the article is basically a history of history (), detailing some of the changes he's seen that leads him to this belief. There is nothing to indicate that this is the desired outcome of any sort of plan. He then sums up near the end:


Quote:
They are the disputatious representatives of a larger, basically positive phenomenon: a devolution of power not only upward toward supranational bodies and outward toward commonwealths and common markets but also downward toward freer, more autonomous units of administration that permit distinct societies to preserve their cultural identities and govern themselves as much as possible. That American buzz word empowerment -- and the European one, subsidiarity -- is being defined locally, regionally and globally all at the same time.

Humanity has discovered, through much trial and horrendous error, that differences need not divide. Switzerland is made up of four nationalities crammed into an area considerably smaller than what used to be Yugoslavia. The air in the Alps is no more conducive to comity than the air in the Balkans. Switzerland has thrived, while Yugoslavia has failed because of what Kant realized 200 years ago: to be in peaceful league with one another, people -- and peoples -- must have the benefits of democracy.

Yep, these NWO Thugs sound like a group of right bastards, they do.


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...6015-1,00.html


See? How hard was it to provide a cite? Now, go and see if I'm blowing smoke out my ass. Unlike some in this "debate", I'm not afraid of independent confirmation of my quotes.




Do you still deny the existence of a conspiracy to create a new world order?

Do you still see the idea of a new world order created by people like Henry Kissinger as nothing to be concerned about?


Yes,i dont see any conspiracy.You only see conspiracy if you look for one in something. Today i watched a german movie called "the wave";
During project week, a high school teacher, Rainer Wenger (Jürgen Vogel), discusses autocracy with his class. His students find it boring to repeatedly go over national socialism and believe that a dictatorship could not be established in modern Germany, so Wenger starts an experiment to demonstrate how easily the masses can be manipulated.

He begins by demanding that all students address him as "Herr Wenger", as opposed to Rainer, and changes the seating arrangement in a direction facing the front of the class, placing students with poor grades beside students with good grades - purportedly so they can cheat from one another and become better as a whole. If the students want to say something aloud, they must stand up and give swift and short answers. Wenger shows his students the effect of marching together in the same rhythm, motivating them by suggesting that they should really annoy the classroom below them.

The next step in the unification of the group is to choose a name, and they decide on "Die Welle" (The Wave). Every student in the group must wear white shirt and jeans, to remove class distinction and individuality. Two girls, Karo and Mona (Jennifer Ulrich and Amelie Kiefer), protest the actions of the group, in addition to three boys who leave the project. Eventually, two of the three boys return to class, while Mona, disgusted with how her classmates are embracing fascism, leaves the project group. The members of The Wave begin spray painting their logo around town, having parties where only Wave members are allowed to attend and generally ostracising and tormenting anyone not in their group.

One young man in particular, Tim, becomes very attached to the group, having finally become an accepted member of a social group in school. He burns his name-brand clothes after a discussion about how large corporations don't take responsibility for their actions. Tim later shows up at Wenger's house, offering to be a bodyguard. Wenger invites Tim in, saying he can have dinner, but no guarding is necessary. This puts further strain on Wenger's already tense relationship with his wife, who thinks the experiment has gone too far. Wenger finally ejects Tim from his house, only to find in the morning that the boy had slept on his doorstep.

Karo continues her attempts to expose the actions of The Wave, eventually earning the anger of many in the group, who approach her boyfriend, Marco (Max Riemelt), and ask him to do something about it. During their confrontation, Marco becomes angry and slaps Karo, which drives home to him the fact that the experiment has become out of control. Marco approaches Herr Wenger, and asks him to stop the project. Wenger tells Marco to leave it up to him, and calls a meeting of all Wave members to the auditorium.

Once in the meeting, Wenger has the doors locked and begins whipping the students into a fervour, shouting that they will roll over Germany and change things to the way they ought to be. All the students are cheering and applauding. Marco stands and speaks against their actions, at which point Wenger calls for the "traitor" to be brought to the stage. When four boys bring Marco on stage, the teacher finally confronts them with their actions, asking them how far they would have gone; if they would have killed this boy had he asked. He reminds them of their assertion at the beginning of the week that another dictatorship would be impossible in Germany, and the majority of the students seem to feel shame and remorse when they realise that they have been participating in just that. Unfortunately, Tim, who had come to believe The Wave was all he had, cannot accept its end and shoots another student, wounding him, before taking his own life.

The film ends with Wenger being taken into custody by police, while he looks about at the misery his experiment has caused.

Now this movie is amazingly thought provoking,and i took alot away from it. But some watching this would think "this is pure new world order propaganda."and rather than sit and think about its message would sit looking for pyramids,tiled floors and sun rises.


Ive yet to see any real evidence of a "new world order conspiracy",yes there are corrupt leaders,and maybe some do want a one world government,but that doesnt mean they all do,if a politician was a communist it wouldnt make the entier government communist would it.?

[anthony65]

Those sites never provide a citation,and googling the quotes only brings up more conspiracy sites.Never an original source,here's maybe why;
Props to Horatius for this;





Yes,i dont see any conspiracy.You only see conspiracy if you look for one in something. Today i watched a german movie called "the wave";


Now this movie is amazingly thought provoking,and i took alot away from it. But some watching this would think "this is pure new world order propaganda."and rather than sit and think about its message would sit looking for pyramids,tiled floors and sun rises.


Ive yet to see any real evidence of a "new world order conspiracy",yes there are corrupt leaders,and maybe some do want a one world government,but that doesnt mean they all do,if a politician was a communist it wouldnt make the entier government communist would it.?

Those sites never provide a citation,and googling the quotes only brings up more conspiracy sites.Never an original source,

I half expected you to come out with something like that Joe.

So you think all these quotes were made up and spread around the internet?

Kissinger didn't mention the New World Order?

Or Bush senior?

Or Gordon Brown?

David Icke has commented on many of these quotes and he always provides sources.

Do you stand by your comment that these citations are never based on an original source?

Or are you prepared to give a little ground and actually concede that some of these quotes are genuine?

Or most of them?

Or all?

If any of them were faked then I'd genuinely be pleased to know. Bullshit and make believe helps no-one, but your attitude is apparently to dismiss everything.

You do go on to write...

Ive yet to see any real evidence of a "new world order conspiracy",yes there are corrupt leaders,and maybe some do want a one world government,but that doesnt mean they all do

"Maybe some do want a one world government"

There you go. You do believe that there are influential people who want to establish a one world government.

"Ive yet to see any real evidence of a "new world order conspiracy","

But you just conceded that you have.

"maybe some do want a one world government,but that doesnt mean they all do"

Who ever said they all do?

Why would they need a conspiracy if they already controlled everything?

What is a conspiracy Joe? You seem to equate it with fantasy, but there is nothing more unlikely than a world without conspiracy. That is idiotic. There are conspiracies wherever people come together.

The question is what nature do these conspiracies take?

Who is involved?

Are there competing conspiracies?

Are the conspirators actually aware of the true agenda?

Are there different agendas at different levels?

What are the agendas at the different levels?

For example, do you think a newbie freemason is let into the same secrets as the 33rd degree masons? Do you think every 33rd degree mason knows the full agenda?

I could go on, but I won't for now.

Just a comment on the movie that you mention. Why do you assume that someone who believes that there is a new world order conpsiracy would ignore everything but the symbolism? You seem to give very little credit to many of the people you share this forum with. Do you think someone like David Icke watches a movie likes this and makes notes of the symbolism and nothing else?

There are messages on different levels. Every one of us will respond differently for example to the movie you mention. And we will respond differently today than we will the next time we watch it.

[rowan22]

"Putting a bold face on the matter, George Bush, arriving in Europe for the NATO consultations, said that the U.S is "prepared to move beyond containment towards a policy that works to bring the Soviet Union into the community of "nations". A worthy objective, doubtless, but some quarters remain.

There is a "community of nations", with an organised forum in which the world community has expressed some opinions about detente, about which Bush now offers his kind tutelage to the errant Soviet Union. This, while Reagan was being extolled (In the United States) for leading the world peace at the December 1987 Washington summit, where the INF Treaty was signed, the United Nations General Assembly, speaking for the "community of nations", voted a series of disarmament resolutions. It voted 154-1, with no abstentions, opposing the build up of weapons in outer space)Reagan’s star wars) and 135-1 against developing new weapons of mass destruction. The Assembly voted 143-2 for a comprehensive test ban, and 137-3 for a halt to all nuclear test explosions.

The U.S voted against each resolution , joined in two cases by France and Britain. None of this was reported in the free press, the "community of nations" being irrelevant when it fails to perceive the truth“.

The U.S alone boycotted a UN disarmament conference in New York in 1987 to consider how a reduction of armaments might release funds for economic development , in particularly the Third World. (Noam Chomsky, Deterring democracy p96 ISBN 0-09-913501-9)

_________________________

I wish to call your particular attention to this phrase:

"None of this was reported in the free press".

But why should this be?. Surely the press is objective in its reporting of world events? Surely only with all the accurate information can we, the electorate make decisions based on the true nature of what we regard as reality? Why this incongruence? In whose interest is this incongruence to be employed?.


I am interested to hear in regard to above extract why, as the winds of change blew across the Soviet Union, and the world, the United states among others, was so trenchantly committed to opposing any move towards what became "glasnost". Standing virtually alone with the so called "community" in its opposition to (Peace) effectively.

So lets just review one arms sale to a small country Thailand. And see if we can’t imagine why such opposition found its way to the heart of the “peace loving” U.S. Since 1987 the U.S has sold 3.4 billion dollars worth of arms to Thailand. I chose Thailand because its position as a client state is important, as it provides a similar platform against China to the one created by the Soviets on Cuba. A base John. F.Kennedy was willing to start WW3 over.

Now unless someone is wilfully ignoring the reality of history these facts seem quite obvious. The phrase "conspiracy" is a meaningless one. What we have is big business doing business, that’s it. You either believe that selling armaments to every junta and anti humanitarian dictatorship on the planet is a bad thing on ethical grounds or you don’t.

And if you don’t, then you are signing up for the implicit endorsement of genocide, Famine, slaughter, slavery, rape, murder. And that is the truth, for actions done in our name reflect upon us, no matter how many pairs of "phat trainers" we have. We are morally impoverished by a system of government which cares nothing about the uses made of its weapons once they have been paid for. These are not the actions of people whose moral compass is pointing towards respect for life as a categorical imperative.

To the contrary it is indicative of an amoral profit based culture where the rights of the individual are superseded by the interests of a minority of powerful men. Either as apart of a company or a collection of company’s.

Collections we call "conglomerates" or "multi Nationals". If one man has one vote then this is democracy. If one man who is the head of a corporation effectively exercises so much power and influence over the decision making processes of government as to become incalculable then democracy is replaced by dictatorship. No reliance on a term like "conspiracy" is even necessary for freedom to be just as effectively destroyed.

The arms industry in America elects the government, not the electorate. When the votes don’t add up judges deciding who is elected means no democracy. You don’t have to believe in any such arcane detail as the Masons or the Illuminati. The fact is bald faced right in front of your face.

"Its like handing out speeding tickets at the indi 500”.

[kingmonkey]

Kissinger didn't mention the New World Order?

Or Bush senior?

Or Gordon Brown?



It's a socio-political phrase that could address anything that happens on a global scale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_world_order

Hearing a political figure say the words "new world order" is not evidence of a secret cabal that runs - or wants to run - the world.


You do go on to write...

Ive yet to see any real evidence of a "new world order conspiracy",yes there are corrupt leaders,and maybe some do want a one world government,but that doesnt mean they all do

"Maybe some do want a one world government"

There you go. You do believe that there are influential people who want to establish a one world government.And? Wanting something is one thing, getting it is another. There are plenty of globalists wanting this kind of political setup; doesn't mean they go around committing false flags and manipulating world events. There are corrupt politicians on both sides of the global government issue. There are also different types of globalists. How is wanting world government a conspiracy?

You see every global issue as engineered to suit the globalists, when in actual fact the problem is the cause of global structure. Icke said it himself - Problem Reaction Solution...The only problem with that saying is it works for nornal problems that aren't engineered; if you have a problem, you have a reaction to it, then you try and solve it. Of course there is a PRS element to things; there always is. All these attributes of the nwo can be explained in perfectly rational ways.

"Ive yet to see any real evidence of a "new world order conspiracy","

But you just conceded that you have. Saying some people are corrupt and some want a world government is a different issue to admitting you've seen evidence of a conspiracy. Can you prove they're conspiring in some way? Take one aspect of global control - the corporations - are they conspiring in what they do? Or are they just doing business?

"maybe some do want a one world government,but that doesnt mean they all do"

There are conspiracies wherever people come together.And there it is...The paranoia of the conspiracy theorist. "I don't know what's going on, there must be a conspiracy"

For example, do you think a newbie freemason is let into the same secrets as the 33rd degree masons? Do you think every 33rd degree mason knows the full agenda?
Can you even prove there is an agenda to know about?

[anthony65]

Kingmonkey:

You made lots of points. I might not cover them all.

1) Paranoia?

No. I don't see conspiracies all around me, but I meant that there have always been and always will be conspiracies great and small; politics, business, school playgrounds. It's a natural thing that people get together and talk behind each other's backs. I'm not making a big deal about it, but it happens... Or do you disagree?

2) The New World Order is a socio-political phrase that could address anything that happens on a global scale?

You believe that Bush sr, Gordon Brown etc. mean it in that way?

Okay. You do. I don't.

3) Hearing a political figure say the words "new world order" is not evidence of a secret cabal that runs - or wants to run - the world.

On it's own, no it isn't, but given the wealth of evidence collected over decades it seems very likely that there are parties who seek global domination. A secret cabal or secret cabals running or trying to run the show? JFK thought so. You started a thread about the MIC, which Eisenhower saw as a masive threat, so you seem to think that there are conspiracies at high levels. Levels so high that Presidents of the United States were seriously concerned.

4) How is wanting world government a conspiracy?

It depends on who is saying it and why. If it is a member of the CFR, Bilderberg, Trilaterals etc. then yes I would describe it as a conspiracy.

You wouldn't?

5) You see every global issue as engineered to suit the globalists, when in actual fact the problem is the cause of global structure.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean here, but no I don't see the globalists as all powerful. I think they want to be. Some global issues are created, some just happen, but you can guarantee that even when they just happen the globalists will be out to get maximum benefit.

6) ...Can you prove they're conspiring in some way?

Proof? What would you see as proof? They've laid out their plans for global government in print and video. That isn't proof enough for you? If a small group of men push global government on the world. If they start wars and create terror to do so. It's amazing how much we do know, but we don't know everything.

7) Re: the Freemasons: Can you even prove there is an agenda to know about?

Can you prove there isn't?

You really don't think that there are different agendas at different levels of masonry?

[bendoon]

Joe, you are still in the states' brainwashing academy so you would find it difficult to understand whats actually happening in the world with all the crap they are spoon feeding you.

[kingmonkey]

Kingmonkey:

You made lots of points. I might not cover them all.

1) Paranoia?

No. I don't see conspiracies all around me, but I meant that there have always been and always will be conspiracies great and small; politics, business, school playgrounds. It's a natural thing that people get together and talk behind each other's backs. I'm not making a big deal about it, but it happens... Or do you disagree?

I agree completely, but there's the question of who, when, where and why; which in my experience all get used out of context by various "researchers" trying to push their own agenda and back up their own ideas. Most conspiracy theories go on a little bit of fact and a MASSIVE leap of faith/assumption.

2) The New World Order is a socio-political phrase that could address anything that happens on a global scale?

You believe that Bush sr, Gordon Brown etc. mean it in that way?

Okay. You do. I don't.

Yes, but even if they are referring to their own agenda, there's still the question of if they've been involved in criminal activity to forward it. Bush, Blair etc. are all set of lying bastards, I just don't know and can't prove what lengths they would go ot. Couple this with the fact that there are thousands of people watching their every move while in office, it would be difficult for them to get away with alot of what get accused of.

3) Hearing a political figure say the words "new world order" is not evidence of a secret cabal that runs - or wants to run - the world.

On it's own, no it isn't, but given the wealth of evidence collected over decades it seems very likely that there are parties who seek global domination. A secret cabal or secret cabals running or trying to run the show? JFK thought so. You started a thread about the MIC, which Eisenhower saw as a masive threat, so you seem to think that there are conspiracies at high levels. Levels so high that Presidents of the United States were seriously concerned.

Maybe there are conspiracies, but is their a grand one to run the world by a certain group? That's not the same question as the MIC trying to
lobby congress for favours and deals. One consp.
doesn't prove the existence of others. It might indicate that there are others but it doesn't prove them.

4) How is wanting world government a conspiracy?

It depends on who is saying it and why. If it is a member of the CFR, Bilderberg, Trilaterals etc. then yes I would describe it as a conspiracy.

You wouldn't?


These are thinktanks that are accessing ways of dealing with global problems etc. and yes, they may be discussing more than we know about, and perhaps they should be open about it. But accusing them of planning genocide etc. is going a bit far when in actual fact no one knows what they discuss. Again, it's just jumping to worst case conclusions

5) You see every global issue as engineered to suit the globalists, when in actual fact the problem is the cause of global structure.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean here, but no I don't see the globalists as all powerful. I think they want to be. Some global issues are created, some just happen, but you can guarantee that even when they just happen the globalists will be out to get maximum benefit.


I mean that if something happens or appears, it's allegedly down to them; terrorism, climate change etc. and they made it up to further some agenda, when in actual fact it's the other way round. It happened, they set an agenda to deal with it. Do they try to come up with agendas that suit them politically? Probably, but again, no evidence of foul play. Most solutions in the world revolve around being cost effective, which in my book is a major problem that's never gonna end unless we can move away from a market based structure. Greedy people making bad decisions for the world but suit them.

6) ...Can you prove they're conspiring in some way?

Proof? What would you see as proof? They've laid out their plans for global government in print and video. That isn't proof enough for you? If a small group of men push global government on the world. If they start wars and create terror to do so. It's amazing how much we do know, but we don't know everything.

Show me a good example. All I've ever seen is doctored youtube videos and out of context quotes.



7) Re: the Freemasons: Can you even prove there is an agenda to know about?

Can you prove there isn't?

You really don't think that there are different agendas at different levels of masonry?

You can't prove a negative.

All I see re: freemasonry are a bunch of overgrown kids thinking they're better than everyone and know more than everybody else. They probably do each other favours etc. but that goes for all groups. There are thousands of very powerful people in the world and most of them are not masons.

[anthony65]

Thanks for the replies Kingmonkey! :)

I really appreciate a civilized debate.

Just a couple of observations regarding the influence of the secret societies:

1) What were the mathematical / betting odds on a US Presidential election being fought out between two members of the same secret society, skull and bones, which has a very small intake each year.

The Bush v Kerry election was a pisstake.

2) What does the continuing infleunce of Kissinger and Brzezinski in global politics tell us?

Each of them has a long list of what I would describe as either criminal behaviour or piss poor policies...

Kissinger is viewed as a war criminal in some countries. ZB is the man who gave us al quaeda.

Both men are members of some of the big globalist organizations: CFR, Trilateral, Bilderberg, etc.

How influential are these men?

And who is pulling their strings?

You are starting to very high at this stage, but it clearly isn't the top.

There are a number of historical examples that demonstrate that the influence of the secret societies goes very high indeed.

I mentioned the JFK and Eisenhower speeches already.

Add the example of the federal reserve bank.

Examine the background to the world wars... and the post-war cold war conflict.

The clues always lead back to the same small group of men; the banksters.

Are the banksters the top of the pyramid or are they reporting to others above them?

By all accounts it seems that the Rockefellers report to the Rothschilds.

Are the Rothschilds the top of the pyramid?

Or are they reporting to the black nobility?

By it's very nature we are not supposed to know exactly who or what controls the top of the pyramid, but there clearly is a pyramid structure of command and control that enables a very small group of people to exert an influence completely out of proportion to their numbers.

Yes, it starts to get very speculative at the very top, but we have hard, historical facts at the level of US presidents, global institutions, global political figures.

You mentioned the term gobalists, so I assume that you acknowledge that there are globalists who believe in the centralization of global power in the hands of a few.

Modern technology is providing them with the means to execute their plan.

Z Brzezinski described this as the technotronic era.

I would describe it as slavery.

[noewhan]

Where's Joe?
Hmm. Maybe he's re-thinking his approach, or something. Maybe he's just 'used' to this system and thought it was always like this. Sometimes, people can't believe it when their rug of belief is pulled from underneath them.

He should start off with the basic films, like 'SiCKO'.

[joe911]

Where's Joe?
Hmm. Maybe he's re-thinking his approach, or something. Maybe he's just 'used' to this system and thought it was always like this. Sometimes, people can't believe it when their rug of belief is pulled from underneath them.

He should start off with the basic films, like 'SiCKO'.

Joe's a little tied up at the moment with coursework and cant be bothered arguing with people who allready have thier minds made up about this. The only "proof" people have of this "new world order" are quotes they have mined,or taken out of context,or they have invented themselves. It would be like me making a theory up,creating my own sources and asking you to debunk it. Besides even if we were to engage in a serious debate,people would always pull the age card or the "your been brainwashed by the common purpose system at your school,we dont expect you to understand" crap. Its better this debate be left alone,you cant prove it exists,thus i cant prove it doesnt as i cant prove a negative.

[kappy0405]

Joe's a little tied up at the moment with coursework and cant be bothered arguing with people who allready have thier minds made up about this. The only "proof" people have of this "new world order" are quotes they have mined,or taken out of context,or they have invented themselves. It would be like me making a theory up,creating my own sources and asking you to debunk it. Besides even if we were to engage in a serious debate,people would always pull the age card or the "your been brainwashed by the common purpose system at your school,we dont expect you to understand" crap. Its better this debate be left alone,you cant prove it exists,thus i cant prove it doesnt as i cant prove a negative.

One can prove it (an agenda for world government/NWO) exists simply through the blatantly observable fact that economic/social politics are becoming more centralized year after year, almost always as a result of the influence of the corporate/banking elite through their thinktanks & lobbying.

That continental and global institutions exist today, which originated as an idea by the same people who went on to fund it, employ it, and who are still there today, is proof enough.

Again, we can't prove how sinister the agenda is - if global oligarchy isn't sinister enough that is - but that the agenda itself is real isn't up for debate anymore.

It would be like me saying the European Union exists, showing you the official website, and asking you to believe it's true. :cool:

[rowan22]

We should also bare in mind that the observation of a global elite is not dependent on the concept of a "New World Order" for it to be an historically relevant phenomena.

The royal family’s of Europe are intermarried and related by blood. This is just a matter of observation and empirical fact. The royal family in Britain for instance is the largest landowner in the country. They did not acquire this real estate by the application of free market Capitalism, they looted it from its owners and shared it out amongst those loyal to their dynasty.

This ownership which is derived from the battle of Hastings and the resultant Norman conquest of 1066 still largely determines who are the richest (groups) in modern British society. And since Britain exported everything of its own culture to the colony’s, it also exported its allegiances and royal nepotisms into that colony as it did in every other acquisition for the crown.

The "democratic" aristocracy of the United States has its lineage back into the Monarchism of Europe. "Old money" in America still controls much of the fortune five hundred blue chip company’s.

So leaving aside the "constitution" written with noble intent before the war of independence, what America should be thought of is a franchise of the old world. A franchise where the written word has been so elevated that it replaces peoples actual experience of the land thy live in.

A land where although "All men are created" they are not equal enough to have health insurance, or an education that would allow them to actually compete in the way which Adam Smith assured them would be the road to true liberty.

In order that the constitution be more than a piece of paper, it must be a living entity. And since the recent banking collapse has lead to banks who for the legal reasons are accorded individual status. They being bailed out at tax payers expense. A direct violation of constitutional statutes on equality of treatment.

So why the bailouts for banks and the apparent frenzy of foreclosure on the individual homeowner?

Homeowners who, are in many cases paying the government taxes, which are then being used to bail out the banks, who in turn are foreclosing on the same people when they can't pay their mortgage, because they are paying the taxes!!

Where is Adam Smith is all this? A market which must be "bailed out" is neither free nor fair. It violates its own economic paradigm and violates every ethical notion of a moral economy by establishing a constitutionally violating precedent for business against the individual.

A New World Order? More accurate to call it "A New, Old world order".

[noewhan]

Joe's a little tied up at the moment with coursework and cant be bothered arguing with people who allready have thier minds made up about this. The only "proof" people have of this "new world order" are quotes they have mined,or taken out of context,or they have invented themselves. It would be like me making a theory up,creating my own sources and asking you to debunk it. Besides even if we were to engage in a serious debate,people would always pull the age card or the "your been brainwashed by the common purpose system at your school,we dont expect you to understand" crap. Its better this debate be left alone,you cant prove it exists,thus i cant prove it doesnt as i cant prove a negative.

Joe, stop debunking yourself. Maybe you don't have the time, or you can't be bothered... (geez, not even time for SiCKO, sad sad times indeed.)

So let's just move on. Joe does not have the time to look into this stuff. Come back when you do Joe.

[jamjim]

Would the 354 documents mentioning "New World Order" or 16,800 documents mentioning "globalization" all directly from the United Nations website be a good enough source for you Jo? Straight from the horses mouth as it were

Here is the first page of United Nations docs mentioning "New World Order" the full list is here: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&source=hp&q=%22New+World+Order%22+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.un .org%2F&btnG=Google+Search&meta=&aq=f&oq=&emsg=NCSR&ei=jYESS4_2NOO7jAfzoNT5Aw
#
LIPSTICK IMPERIALISM AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER: WOMEN AND MEDIA AT ...
LIPSTICK IMPERIALISM AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER: WOMEN AND MEDIA AT THE CLOSE OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY Margaret Gallagher Paper prepared for Division for the ...
www.un.org/documents/ecosoc/cn6/1996/media/gallagh.htm - Cached
#
IRELAND
6 Sep 2000 ... There was much talk some years ago of a "new world order". A new order is indeed dawning. The capacity of globalisation to transform our ...
www.un.org/millennium/webcast/statements/ireland.htm - Cached - Similar
#
UN Chronicle | ESSAY: Towards a Regional World Order
The challenge is that in line with the complexity of the emerging new world order, any proposal to rethink multilateralism in such a way that it ...
www.un.org/Pubs/chronicle/2004/issue3/0304p12.asp - Cached - Similar
# [PDF]
STATEMENT BY HIS EXCELLENCY MR. OSMAN SALEH MINISTER OF FOREIGN ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
28 Sep 2009 ... into a “new world order” should not only be gilded in reform, it should be solidly genuine to the effect that it portends peace, ...
www.un.org/ga/64/generaldebate/pdf/ER_en.pdf
#
UN General Assembly - President of the 62nd session
Reflecting on what may be the reason that prevents us from establishing a new world order – whether political or economic in nature -- I believe it is ...
www.un.org/ga/president/62/.../carnegiecouncil101207.shtml - Cached - Similar
#
Cambodge
Fifth, Cambodia agrees with the initiative to push for the creation of a new world order by establishing a new institution and putting forward a new agenda ...
www.un.org/millennium/webcast/statements/cambodge.htm - Cached
# [PDF]
63rd Session of the United Nations
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
in the beginning of a new world order. A world order that would not only be more ... At the same time, some people predicted that this new world order would ...
www.un.org/ga/63/generaldebate/pdf/morocco_en.pdf
# [PDF]
CROATIA
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - View as HTML
24 Sep 2009 ... It is up to us to embark now on the enormous task of creating a new world order - not returning to anything that existed before, ...
www.un.org/ga/64/generaldebate/pdf/HR_en.pdf
#
KAZAKHSTAN
6 Sep 2000 ... Today, however, there is also no question that globalization, which is shaping the contours of the new world order and clearly represents a ...
www.un.org/millennium/webcast/statements/kazakhstan.htm - Cached - Similar
# [PDF]
Statement
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
25 Sep 2009 ... The United Nations will continue to play a significant role in this new world order, particularly in mobilising the political will and the ...
www.un.org/ga/64/generaldebate/pdf/KI_en.pdf



Here's the first page of the 16,800 United Nations documents mentioning "globalization", the full list is here: http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=globalization+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.un.org%2F&btnG=Search&meta=&cts=1259504324412&aq=f&oq=

#
Youth at the United Nations: World Programme of Action for Youth ...
Globalization, roughly defined as the global integration of economies and ... Four effects of globalization on the lives of young people are discussed below ...
www.un.org/esa/socdev/unyin/wpayglobalization.htm - Cached - Similar
#
Globalization
... Climate Change, Disarmament, Drug Abuse, Education, Girl Child, Globalization, Governance, Human Rights, International Law, Preventing Conflicts ...
www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/briefing/globalization/index.htm - Cached - Similar
# [PDF]
GLOBALIZATION
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
“The greatest challenge we face today is to ensure that globalization becomes a ... Inclusive globalization must be built on the great enabling force of the ...
www.un.org/cyberschoolbus/briefing/globalization/globalization.pdf
#
Globalization and governance
This is the world of globalization — a new context for and a new connectivity among economic actors and activities throughout the world. ...
www.un.org/millennium/sg/report/ch1.htm - Cached
#
Department of Economic and Social Affairs ECOSOC Support and ...
Jump to Side-events on globalization and interdependence‎: Assembly Special Events on Globalization and Interdependence organized by OESC: ...
www.un.org › ... › DESA › OESC - Cached - Similar
#
Implications of globalization for security
Many commentators see an important association between the spread of economic liberalism, which is one of the hallmarks of globalization, and the expansion ...
www.un.org/Docs/SG/Report99/implicat.htm - Cached - Similar
# [PDF]
Panel discussion on "Globalization and Health"
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
The impact of globalization on health is complex, but it is clear that, with globalization, health has become increasingly a key consideration in foreign ...
www.un.org/ga/second/63/globalization.pdf - Similar
# [PDF]
asdf Globalization
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
ensuring that globalization is managed so as to advance economic growth and sustainable ... cerns about globalization and sustainable development. ...
www.un.org/jsummit/html/media_info/.../fact9_globalization.pdf - Similar
# [PDF]
Globalization and Rural Poverty Reduction: The Role of the United ...
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
to the debate on the impact of globalization on (rural) poverty reduction. .... linkage of globalization to rural poverty reduction is less clearly ...
www.un.org/esa/socdev/social/papers/paper_gudgeon.pdf - Similar
by PS Gudgeon - Cited by 3 - Related articles - All 3 versions
# [PDF]
Globalization, Poverty and Empowerment of Women
File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View
To do so we first look at the broad facts of globalization and note a ... presumed impacts of globalization on economic growth, poverty and human welfare. ...
www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/csw/empower/documents/Razavi-BP.pdf
by U Shahra Razavi - Related articles - All 7 versions

---------------
First page of links from number10.gov.uk (you're own governments website) mentioning "New World Order". Including links to you're own Prime Minister mentioning it numerous times in speeches:
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22new+world+order%22+site%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.nu mber10.gov.uk%2F&btnG=Search&meta=&cts=1259506587279&aq=f&oq=

Or the World Banks website mentioning it : http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&q=%22new+world+order%22+site%3Awww.worldbank.org&btnG=Search&meta=&cts=1259506892612&aq=f&oq=

--------------------

You might want to try reading and understanding the United Nations document known as "Agenda 21" the whole PDF is here:http://www.cuttingthroughthematrix.com/articles/Agenda21.pdf

Or you can read "The First Global Revolution" issued by the NGO / global think tank, advisers to the United Nations et all - The Club of Rome. Link: http://ia311020.us.archive.org/3/items/TheFirstGlobalRevolution/TheFirstGlobalRevolution.pdf

Or any of these documents also issued by The Club of Rome, you'll have to look for those yourself as I can't be bothered.

"GLOBALIZATION AND CULTURE", "WORLD ECONOMIC AND ENVIRONMENTAL ORDER", "RESHAPING THE INTERNATIONAL ORDER", "A NEW WORLD ORDER WITHOUT IDEOLOGIES"

[romas]

We should also bare in mind that the observation of a global elite is not dependent on the concept of a "New World Order" for it to be an historically relevant phenomena.

The royal family’s of Europe are intermarried and related by blood. This is just a matter of observation and empirical fact. The royal family in Britain for instance is the largest landowner in the country. They did not acquire this real estate by the application of free market Capitalism, they looted it from its owners and shared it out amongst those loyal to their dynasty.

This ownership which is derived from the battle of Hastings and the resultant Norman conquest of 1066 still largely determines who are the richest (groups) in modern British society. And since Britain exported everything of its own culture to the colony’s, it also exported its allegiances and royal nepotisms into that colony as it did in every other acquisition for the crown.

The "democratic" aristocracy of the United States has its lineage back into the Monarchism of Europe. "Old money" in America still controls much of the fortune five hundred blue chip company’s.

So leaving aside the "constitution" written with noble intent before the war of independence, what America should be thought of is a franchise of the old world. A franchise where the written word has been so elevated that it replaces peoples actual experience of the land thy live in.

A land where although "All men are created" they are not equal enough to have health insurance, or an education that would allow them to actually compete in the way which Adam Smith assured them would be the road to true liberty.

In order that the constitution be more than a piece of paper, it must be a living entity. And since the recent banking collapse has lead to banks who for the legal reasons are accorded individual status. They being bailed out at tax payers expense. A direct violation of constitutional statutes on equality of treatment.

So why the bailouts for banks and the apparent frenzy of foreclosure on the individual homeowner?

Homeowners who, are in many cases paying the government taxes, which are then being used to bail out the banks, who in turn are foreclosing on the same people when they can't pay their mortgage, because they are paying the taxes!!

Where is Adam Smith is all this? A market which must be "bailed out" is neither free nor fair. It violates its own economic paradigm and violates every ethical notion of a moral economy by establishing a constitutionally violating precedent for business against the individual.

A New World Order? More accurate to call it "A New, Old world order".




This is very good post I fear will get overlooked due to it's length.

In essence I agree with all you said, but I must add, this new world order is a little advanced version of old world order, advanced I mean in the corporate sense, you can understand that from the docu(The Corporation), how this relatively new power structure was created.

It's the new "Divine Right" obviously the old version was undermined by a public that gained new consciousness and awareness. Today we have corporate power structure that is ABOVE any government in the world. It's a genius construct. It's a far bigger pyramid there ever was before and the chief corner stone is somewhere up there flying and you can't see it, but it can see you! Soon with new tech it will be able to control you with ever increasing amount.

The French revolution wasn't about killing some individuals, it was about toppling an old world power structure and change of social system. I think US independence is the actual beginning of this new world order.

The new world order is not or are not any particular individuals, it is the system, a system that is pushed by individuals who are CURRENTLY being empowered by it, simple as that.

[ericbs5247]

The term"New World Order" is very general and vague. I think that what we are really trying to figure out is whether or not human events are random and accidental, or if they are being influenced in some way by an external source.

Author Gary Allen sums up this conspiratorial view in "None Dare Call It Conspiracy":

"When you think about it, there are really only two theories of history. Either things happen by accident neither planned nor caused by anybody, or they happen because they are planned and somebody causes them to happen."

Let's start with income inequality and the statistical proof that the distribution of income is skewed towards the benefit of the elite:

Income Inequality, Proofs of A Conspiracy (http://ericbs5247.blogspot.com/)

Most of what we call "credible" sources are documents, quotes, interviews, documentaries, and the speculation of authoritative figures. Here are dozens of quotes from the mouths of the elite themselves highlighting the conspiracy:

New World Order Quotes (http://newworldorderquotes.blogspot.com/)

Here is an excellent blog describing the origins of the esoteric societies and their modern counterparts (CFR, Bilderberg Group, Round Table Groups, Ect.). There are many videos, documentaries, book excerpts, and quotes posted to back up the claim that these groups do in fact determine the outcome of human events:

Occult Mystery Schools - Illuminati - NWO (http://occult-mystery-schools-illuminati.blogspot.com/)

In case you whole-heartedly subscribe to the materialist/Newtonian view of reality, please check out this blog on quantum physics. Quantum physics has proved that the material universe that we perceive to be real is actually malleable and consistent with the occult sciences. It may be off topic, but will be worth your time to explore. Once you have been exposed to this subject you may understand why people of such prominence are occult followers:

Occult Quantum Physics (http://occult-quantum-physics.blogspot.com/)

The elite's greatest weapon in exercising control is through the manipulation of the money supply and fractional reserve banking:

Money as Debt - Debt Slavery (http://money-as-debt-debt-slavery.blogspot.com/)

Without control of the media, those in power would not be able to stay in power very long. This blog describes how the media is controlled and used to dumb down the population:

Dumbing Down of Humanity (http://dumbing-down-of-humanity.blogspot.com/)

Still not convinced? Here's more information about interlocking directorships and how a melding of corporate and gov't powers has occurred over time consolidating power in the hands of fewer and fewer men and women:

NWO - Interlocking Directorships (http://nwo-interlocking-directorships.blogspot.com/)

This is how the world banking system is used to enslave the 3rd world:

Globalization - Empire in the NWO (http://globalization-empire-in-the-nwo.blogspot.com/)

Here's how these concepts have culminated in our modern economic crisis:
Modern Economic Crisis (http://modern-economic-crisis.blogspot.com/)

Just for the hell of it, here's a refutation of the "official story" of the events of 9/11. I think the 9/11 conspiracy is relevant to our discussion of the "deliberate engineering of human events: version of history:

9-11 Truth Conspiracy (http://9-11-truth-conspiracy.blogspot.com/)

Here's the motivation behind the engineering of the events of September 11, 2001:

NWO Today - Police State (http://nwo-today-policce-state.blogspot.com/)

Please be aware that we can never prove the "accidental" version of human history to be true, nor can we prove the "Engineered" version of human history to be true. All we can do is weigh the evidence supporting each version and decide for ourselves which is more likely.

At the very least this is an exercise in critical thought. The public's ability to think critically being the elite's worst fear of course!

[romas]

Ok but still when the knight enters dragons cave, slays him and takes over his treasure, he becomes the new dragon? We're still all made out of stars, so what are we fighting, bad ideas?

[noewhan]

No need for an authenticity debate. The NWO is staring us right in the face.

[the cosmos]

Right,this thread has been started to debate the claims about the new world order. First of all is to prove thier existence.

Id like to ask you,what evidence you have that they exist,and how you came to the conclusions you have about them.

Oh ffs. Are you even real ? Go do your homework. :rolleyes:

[joe911]

Oh ffs. Are you even real ? Go do your homework. :rolleyes:

If you had done your homework on me then you'd already know Im 100% legit,and have a complete understanding of conspiracy theorists "new world order". I used to be one,I ran a website and a radio show about it,although it seemed i was meerly repeting what i thought i had learnt from other "truth" sources,when infact alot of it is just right wing nuts spinning things,quote mining,creating an enemy for them to fight.

There is no such group as the new world order,as this thread proves,nothing but quote mining,word twisting,making things up ect...

[ed benzedrine]

Gordon Brown doesn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence

George Herbert Walker Bush doesn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence

Baruch (his 'real' name ) Obama doesn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence

Bill Clinton doesn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence

David Rockefella doesn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence

Zbignew Brizinski doesn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence

Henry Kissinger doesn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence

Rham Emmanuel doesn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence

Tony Blair doesn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence

Ronald Reagan didn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence

George W Bush doesn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence

Rudi Guiliani doesn't seem to think theres any debate about it

Frankin Delano Roosevelt didn't seem to think there was any doubt about it


Aaron Russo didn't seem to think there's any debate about its existence.. after he was invited into it by another Rockefella scumbag, that believes us to be the 'Goyen' ...

this list goes on, and on and on and on ..............


But you.. All-Seeing-all knowing Joe, has decided in your vast experience, that it is a fallacy.

Sorry to busrt your bubble lad... and "hello" by the way, never met ya or heard your stuff or anything.. but if you know knothing else this new year, know that the NWO is here, its been here for one hell of a long time, its not gonna go away in any great hurry despite our best efforts.. there can be absolutely zero doubt about this... they no longer wish or see the need to attempt to hide it, its beyond any question nowadays.
To believe anything to the contrary is to be a proverbial ostrich.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a9Syi12RJo

and as if that lowlife saying it wasn't enough...
here's a couple of quotes that can succinctly illustrate the point.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptcp07v_w-w

How can anyone seriously attempt to put forward a case to say that this is a mass figment of a bunch of nutcase's imagination ?

Catch yourself on, lad.... dont be ridiculous.

Cheers,
Ed.

[romas]

The one with Nixon explains it easy, pyramids from various nations kiss kiss and make up to continue milking their own flocks, instead of fighting all the time like they used to.

[noewhan]

If you had done your homework on me then you'd already know Im 100% legit,and have a complete understanding of conspiracy theorists "new world order". I used to be one,I ran a website and a radio show about it,although it seemed i was meerly repeting what i thought i had learnt from other "truth" sources,when infact alot of it is just right wing nuts spinning things,quote mining,creating an enemy for them to fight.

There is no such group as the new world order,as this thread proves,nothing but quote mining,word twisting,making things up ect...

Whoa.

Ok everyone, it's been debunked by a kid on the internet. No need to worry any more. Obviously, if I say 'I will press Submit Reply' it means that I didn't even though it's clear that I did. Because you're reading this post.

[dogsmilk]

I confess I haven't read all the thread but it does pose an interesting question. Has anyone on it yet demonstrated there is such a thing as the New World Order? By that I mean not just wheeling out quotes where politicians or whoever use the term; the term 'new world order' is a generic phrase that all kinds of people use e.g. in relation to football.



Manchester City Establish A New World Order

http://www.footballtransfertavern.com/premiership/city-establish-a-new-world-order


Americans stand firm to uphold new world order

Equality between the sexes in United States soccer came a step closer yesterday as the American men's team overcame Mexico and swept into territory that was previously exclusive to their female contemporaries -- the quarter-finals of a modern World Cup.

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/internationals/americans-stand-firm-to-uphold-new-world-order-645604.html



* Sport
* Football
* Euro 2004

Euro 2004: Special report
Football's new world order

Football has conquered the world. Some of the brightest stars in Portugal this summer will have been born in Africa and Latin America, and top European clubs increasingly sign players from every continent. Martin Jacques talks to players, fans, businessmen and the head of Fifa to discover how globalisation is changing football - for better and worse - and why international competitions may yet save the game from rampant greed


http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2004/jun/06/euro2004.sport6

That's not to say something called 'The New World Order' couldn't exist but it can't be demonstrated just by politicians etc using a generic term which does not in itself imply some kind of global elite organisation, particularly as they use it in very different ways - H.G.Wells' notion of his 'new world order' was a different vision to what George Bush snr was talking about in his famous use of the term.

And a lot of these quotes presented are (when they're not misquotes or invented quotes) lifted out of context and taken to assume some secret cabal that remains consistent through all of them. Take that Woodrow Wilson quote you see a lot -

Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.


This appears in -

And do our laws take note of this curious state of things? Do they even attempt to distinguish between a man's act as a corporation director and as an individual? They do not. Our laws still deal with us on the basis of the old system. The law is still living in the dead past which we have left behind. This is evident, for instance, with regard to the matter of employers' liability for workingmen's injuries. Suppose that a superintendent wants a workman to use a certain piece of machinery which it is not safe for him to use, and that the workman is injured by that piece of machinery. Some of our courts have held that the superintendent is a fellow-servant, or, as the law states it, a fellow-employee, and that, therefore, the man cannot recover damages for his injury. The superintendent who probably engaged the man is not his employer. Who is his employer? And whose negligence could conceivably come in there? The board of directors did not tell the employee to use that piece of machinery; and the president of the corporation did not tell him to use that piece of machinery. And so forth. Don't you see by that theory that a man never can get redress for negligence on the part of the employer? When I hear judges reason upon the analogy of the relationships that used to exist between workmen and their employers a generation ago, I wonder if they have not opened their eyes to the modern world. You know, we have a right to expect that judges will have their eyes open, even though the law which they administer hasn't awakened.

Yet that is but a single small detail illustrative of the difficulties we are in because we have not adjusted the law to the facts of the new order.

Since I entered politics, I have chiefly had men's views confided to me privately. Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.

They know that America is not a place of which it can be said, as it used to be, that a man may choose his own calling and pursue it just as far as his abilities enable him to pursue it; because to-day, if he enters certain fields, there are organizations which will use means against him that will prevent his building up a business which they do not want to have built up; organizations that will see to it that the ground is cut from under him and the markets shut against him. For if he begins to sell to certain retail dealers, to any retail dealers, the monopoly will refuse to sell to those dealers, and those dealers, afraid, will not buy the new man's wares.

And this is the country which has lifted to the admiration of the world its ideals of absolutely free opportunity, where no man is supposed to be under any limitation except the limitations of his character and of his mind; where there is supposed to be no distinction of class, no distinction of blood, no distinction of social status, but where men win or lose on their merits.

I lay it very close to my own conscience as a public man whether we can any longer stand at our doors and welcome all newcomers upon those terms. American industry is not free, as once it was free; American enterprise is not free; the man with only a little capital is finding it harder to get into the field, more and more impossible to compete with the big fellow. Why? Because the laws of this country do not prevent the strong from crushing the weak. That is the reason, and because the strong have crushed the weak the strong dominate the industry and the economic life of this country. No man can deny that the lines of endeavor have more and more narrowed and stiffened; no man who knows anything about the development of industry in this country can have failed to observe that the larger kinds of credit are more and more difficult to obtain, unless you obtain them upon the terms of uniting your efforts with those who already control the industries of the country; and nobody can fail to observe that any man who tries to set himself up in competition with any process of manufacture which has been taken under the control of large combinations of capital will presently find himself either squeezed out or obliged to sell and allow himself to be absorbed.

There is a great deal that needs reconstruction in the United States. I should like to take a census of the business men,—I mean the rank and file of the business men,—as to whether they think that business conditions in this country, or rather whether the organization of business in this country, is satisfactory or not. I know what they would say if they dared. If they could vote secretly they would vote overwhelmingly that the present organization of business was meant for the big fellows and was not meant for the little fellows; that it was meant for those who are at the top and was meant to exclude those who are at the bottom; that it was meant to shut out beginners, to prevent new entries in the race, to prevent the building up of competitive enterprises that would interfere with the monopolies which the great trusts have built up.

What this country needs above everything else is a body of laws which will look after the men who are on the make rather than the men who are already made. Because the men who are already made are not going to live indefinitely, and they are not always kind enough to leave sons as able and as honest as they are.

The originative part of America, the part of America that makes new enterprises, the part into which the ambitious and gifted workingman makes his way up, the class that saves, that plans, that organizes, that presently spreads its enterprises until they have a national scope and character,—that middle class is being more and more squeezed out by the processes which we have been taught to call processes of prosperity. Its members are sharing prosperity, no doubt; but what alarms me is that they are not originating prosperity. No country can afford to have its prosperity originated by a small controlling class. The treasury of America does not lie in the brains of the small body of men now in control of the great enterprises that have been concentrated under the direction of a very small number of persons. The treasury of America lies in those ambitions, those energies, that cannot be restricted to a special favored class. It depends upon the inventions of unknown men, upon the originations of unknown men, upon the ambitions of unknown men. Every country is renewed out of the ranks of the unknown, not out of the ranks of those already famous and powerful and in control.

There has come over the land that un-American set of conditions which enables a small number of men who control the government to get favors from the government; by those favors to exclude their fellows from equal business opportunity; by those favors to extend a network of control that will presently dominate every industry in the country, and so make men forget the ancient time when America lay in every hamlet, when America was to be seen in every fair valley, when America displayed her great forces on the broad prairies, ran her fine fires of enterprise up over the mountain-sides and down into the bowels of the earth, and eager men were everywhere captains of industry, not employees; not looking to a distant city to find out what they might do, but looking about among their neighbors, finding credit according to their character, not according to their connections, finding credit in proportion to what was known to be in them and behind them, not in proportion to the securities they held that were approved where they were not known. In order to start an enterprise now, you have to be authenticated, in a perfectly impersonal way, not according to yourself, but according to what you own that somebody else approves of your owning. You cannot begin such an enterprise as those that have made America until you are so authenticated, until you have succeeded in obtaining the good-will of large allied capitalists. Is that freedom? That is dependence, not freedom.

We used to think in the old-fashioned days when life was very simple that all that government had to do was to put on a policeman's uniform, and say, "Now don't anybody hurt anybody else." We used to say that the ideal of government was for every man to be left alone and not interfered with, except when he interfered with somebody else; and that the best government was the government that did as little governing as possible. That was the idea that obtained in Jefferson's time. But we are coming now to realize that life is so complicated that we are not dealing with the old conditions, and that the law has to step in and create new conditions under which we may live, the conditions which will make it tolerable for us to live.

Let me illustrate what I mean: It used to be true in our cities that every family occupied a separate house of its own, that every family had its own little premises, that every family was separated in its life from every other family. That is no longer the case in our great cities. Families live in tenements, they live in flats, they live on floors; they are piled layer upon layer in the great tenement houses of our crowded districts, and not only are they piled layer upon layer, but they are associated room by room, so that there is in every room, sometimes, in our congested districts, a separate family. In some foreign countries they have made much more progress than we in handling these things. In the city of Glasgow, for example (Glasgow is one of the model cities of the world), they have made up their minds that the entries and the hallways of great tenements are public streets. Therefore, the policeman goes up the stairway, and patrols the corridors; the lighting department of the city sees to it that the halls are abundantly lighted. The city does not deceive itself into supposing that that great building is a unit from which the police are to keep out and the civic authority to be excluded, but it says: "These are public highways, and light is needed in them, and control by the authority of the city."

I liken that to our great modern industrial enterprises. A corporation is very like a large tenement house; it isn't the premises of a single commercial family; it is just as much a public affair as a tenement house is a network of public highways.

When you offer the securities of a great corporation to anybody who wishes to purchase them, you must open that corporation to the inspection of everybody who wants to purchase. There must, to follow out the figure of the tenement house, be lights along the corridors, there must be police patrolling the openings, there must be inspection wherever it is known that men may be deceived with regard to the contents of the premises. If we believe that fraud lies in wait for us, we must have the means of determining whether our suspicions are well founded or not. Similarly, the treatment of labor by the great corporations is not what it was in Jefferson's time. Whenever bodies of men employ bodies of men, it ceases to be a private relationship. So that when courts hold that workingmen cannot peaceably dissuade other workingmen from taking employment, as was held in a notable case in New Jersey, they simply show that their minds and understandings are lingering in an age which has passed away. This dealing of great bodies of men with other bodies of men is a matter of public scrutiny, and should be a matter of public regulation.


http://www.gutenberg.org/files/14811/14811-h/14811-h.htm

It looks to me like he's talking about the rampant power of monopolistic corporations. So what? Like that's big news. Do people really expect corporations to behave any differently if they're allowed to? He's bemoaning a lack of opportunity and a corporate stranglehold. Your average anarchist or commie would similarly critique the corporate stranglehold but be seeing things from a viewpoint of overthrowing the entire system as opposed to levelling the playing field. It doesn't prove any grand conspiracy bent on global domination, it's just criticising the way the system has played out.

So what evidence is there that there is some kind of cabal that calls itself 'The New World Order' meaning a set group with an identifiable membership with set objectives with definable parameters? And what are its demonstrable objectives? (bearing in mind people 'intuit' all kinds of goals for 'the agenda' that range from 'promotion' of homosexuality to 'promotion' of mixed race marriage - it seems that people see 'the agenda' as invariably consisting of what they don't personally like or reflects their prejudices).

I can buy the term in terms of a kind of catchphrase - Noam Chomsky used it after Bush senior invoked the term in a sarcastic way but I don't think he meant there's an organisation that calls itself the New World Order working to an 'agenda' spanning decades or centuries.

If you take Bilderberg, it demonstrably exists. It has a known membership, it has known meetings, it has minutes. On one hand people claim it meets to rule the world, on the other it's said it's to try to get cooperation between the powerful outside the media circus. Of course if powerful people meet up, whatever decisions they make can potentially affect millions of people and I'd say it's highly questionable as to whether elected representatives have any right to make any decisions outside the public gaze. So really the conspiracy and non-conspiracy views don't have to be that different - it depends on the level of confidence you have in powerful people to routinely serve the public interest (not much in my case). But ultimately, Bilderberg is an identifiable entity and there are people who freely state they are Bilderbergers. I can't see any comparison existing with the New World Order.

What I'd really like to know is exactly where The New World Order comes from. I still have not discovered exactly who first used the term to describe some kind of elite cabal; who, as it were, 'discovered' the existence of the New World Order - I would have thought that would be very important to 'students of the New World Order'. I find it perplexing that people who consider the issue incredibly important often seem to have little or no knowledge of the history and evolution of 'New World Order studies'. Though from what I have read it seems to be a fundamentally American notion, typically right wing.

So is it real? Or is it just a phrase used to invoke aspects of the way society is perceived to be heading you don't like? Is there a specific body that refers to itself and identifies itself as being the New World Order.

And to be absolutely clear, you don't need to invoke The New World Order to be annoyed about income inequality or the rape of the third world or whatever. It's hardly a new idea that powerful interests tend to be self-serving.

Please be aware that we can never prove the "accidental" version of human history to be true, nor can we prove the "Engineered" version of human history to be true. All we can do is weigh the evidence supporting each version and decide for ourselves which is more likely

And why can't it be both? The world is immeasurably complex but people try to exert control over it and other people. Why do people think in terms of 'the elite'? Empires rise and fall, ideologies come and go - people quite naturally fall out and form alliances at different times and in different circumstances. Why do people feel the need to conceptualise a Big Conspiracy as an alternative to random events? Shit happens, people are unpredictable and plans go awry. But people with a lot of power will try to shape events to what they want, and perhaps what they arrogantly but genuinely think is for the best for everyone. And other people with a lot of power may conflict with them or they may not. Why do people feel the need to believe there is a small group who can somehow make enormous plans that run like clockwork, apparently over centuries, in stark defiance of everything we know about human fallibility? Isn't it just that there are competing and converging interests at different times and in different places?

[romas]

Cause basic people want basically ordered world view, they want to define ""enemies"" and ""friends"" clearly so they can get on with their pigeonhole life.

[dogsmilk]

Cause basic people want basically ordered world view, they want to define ""enemies"" and ""friends"" clearly so they can get on with their pigeonhole life.

I think that's a good point. The notion of the New World Order is a fundamentally Manichean narrative that pits one all-encompassing evil against the populace generally. It reduces the complexity of the world into the Rebel Alliance versus the Empire.

[ed benzedrine]

I confess I haven't read all the thread but it does pose an interesting question. Has anyone on it yet demonstrated there is such a thing as the New World Order? By that I mean not just wheeling out quotes where politicians or whoever use the term; the term 'new world order' is a generic phrase that all kinds of people use e.g. in relation to football.


I do understand the methodology behind your thinking, but for me personally, I am not so naive as to believe that all members of the elite of the world such as can be found within the eschelons of the TriLateral Commission, the Council on Foregin Relations, The Bilderbergers, the Club of Rome, the various political party's covert ''Friends of Israel" groups etc are not working to a common agenda in terms of what is geneically understood to be whats meant by the NWO.

Again, I'd point you to this series of 3 videos, by way of illustration.
I would be astonished if, after watching this alone, anyone would be in much doubt as to the existence and indeed agenda of these tyrants, but of course that is only my view.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptcp07v_w-w

This is only a tiny example.
There is no shortage of evidence both online, and elsewhere to draw on,
and 'digest'.
Obviously, you have to 'research', and then draw your own conclusions and form your own beliefs and opinions based upon what you find.
Bear in mind of course, that there are plenty of 'collaborators' who will do their utmost to derail your journey and attempt to 'taint' the scent trail.... but there's nothing new or unusual in that, and I'm sure you have all your back teeth. ;)

Good luck !

[dogsmilk]

I do understand the methodology behind your thinking, but for me personally, I am not so naive as to believe that all members of the elite of the world such as can be found within the eschelons of the TriLateral Commission, the Council on Foregin Relations, The Bilderbergers, the Club of Rome, the various political party's covert ''Friends of Israel" groups etc are not working to a common agenda in terms of what is geneically understood to be whats meant by the NWO.

Again, I'd point you to this series of 3 videos, by way of illustration.
I would be astonished if, after watching this alone, anyone would be in much doubt as to the existence and indeed agenda of these tyrants, but of course that is only my view.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ptcp07v_w-w

This is only a tiny example.
There is no shortage of evidence both online, and elsewhere to draw on,
and 'digest'.
Obviously, you have to 'research', and then draw your own conclusions and form your own beliefs and opinions based upon what you find.
Bear in mind of course, that there are plenty of 'collaborators' who will do their utmost to derail your journey and attempt to 'taint' the scent trail.... but there's nothing new or unusual in that, and I'm sure you have all your back teeth. ;)

Good luck !

I haven't watched all the videos yet, but I did watch the first one. And, apart from Carol Quigly who did have a more specific claim to make, it seems to be a lot of people just saying 'new world order' again. Like that Nixon quote - why is it supposed to be significant he uses that phrase?
One of my main points is that this is a not uncommon phrase you can find used in a variety of contexts. I can see nothing dramatic whatsoever about its use unless it can be plausibly demonstrated when powerful people use it it has a specific meaning that alludes to some vision they somehow all share and work towards. It needs to be demonstrated they are using the phrase 'new world order' in a specific way that transcends general usage and that this interpretation makes more sense than just interpreting it as a fairly common use of language. Otherwise, you may as well find lots of quotes of politicians and business types talking about 'the bottom line' or something and claim they are all part of 'the bottom line' which is a specific entity.

Secondly, assuming they're all genuine anyway, there's a tendency not to give context. When we quote people, particularly with regard to making a strong case for something, the onus is on understanding the context of the quote. A quote is usually illustrative - so we may use quotes to illustrate a point we are making or demonstrate someones opinions or whatever, but when we do so we should (and I know we're all guilty of not always doing so but this a large, strong claim that needs good backing) understand the background to the quote and why it illustrates our point. A lot of the NWO quotes I've seen sound very sinister, but when I've checked them out they are not what they superficially appear to be. A classic example is the H G Wells quote mine Alex Jones shamelessly puts at the start of that endgame crap.
The video posted does not present anything coherent - it's just culling bits and pieces and shunting them together more or less at random.
What I don't see with this NWO stuff is a coherent narrative.

Thirdly, a lot of the quotes you get are quite old. It seems that for years people have been claiming or allegedly announcing one world government is just around the corner. The NWO always seems poised to take control and ship people to FEMA camps or whatever soon. And people argue the NWO plans long term to 'explain' this. I am thus reminded of people spending the last two thousand years claiming the return of Jesus is just about to happen. He just never quite gets round to it, just as the NWO never quite get round to fulfilling their evil plans. The 'one world government' stuff seems to me to just reflect the boogeyman of nationalists anyway. Being influenced by anarchism I'm not myself too fond of the idea, but since we're all human if we are to be governed the idea has its merits. Nation states tend to war with one another - governing the planet as a whole is actually a fairly rational idea. As it is, there is nothing special about countries and 'national sovereignty' - nation states are artificial constructs forged by the powerful in the first place.

I am not arguing powerful people do not seek to exert control in the world. I am not arguing we should blindly trust our leaders. I am not arguing people should not feel aggrieved about injustice and oppression and pretend all is well in the world. But are these things not systemic? I mean really - in what way are the powerful different from the rest of us other than they have power?

[romas]

Imo if you want intelligent opinion on current events stay clear off alex jones crowd, Giullietto Chiesa provides his views in a realistic and structured manner. This is probably as close to what people call nwo as it gets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPIqfYXl1o8&feature=player_embedded#

[dogsmilk]

Imo if you want intelligent opinion on current events stay clear off alex jones crowd, Giullietto Chiesa provides his views in a realistic and structured manner. This is probably as close to what people call nwo as it gets.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RPIqfYXl1o8&feature=player_embedded#

Well he certainly comes across as a likable, rather grandfatherly chap. And I'd certainly agree his gentle manner is preferable to Jones' ranting, not to mention asking people to cough up a quarter of a million dollars 'money bomb' so he can rant more effectively and presumably carry yet more adverts on his websites and sell yet more merchandise.
But Chiesa seems to be preoccupied with American power more than anything else and kind of contradicts New World Order narratives by seeing America being concerned about emerging powers such as China and India - I thought the NWO controlled the world. He certainly doesn't seem to invoke the standard narrative beyond his 911 trutherism which he doesn't really go into detail about in the video. His comments about the media have a sort of vague Chomskianism about them.

It's sort of ironic he's got a big commie background - a lot of NWO stuff expresses immense fear and loathing for anything it feels it can class, however spuriously, as 'socialism'. I mean, what would Mr Jones say, given he sells t-shirts - sorry "infogear" - like this?

http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/infowars-shop_2082_107265314

Oh noes! Perhaps Mr Chiesa is really an agent of the New World Order!:p:)

[noewhan]

Maybe we should debate the authenticity of the Old World Order. :rolleyes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JTmDYwn_Trg

[1776]

Right,this thread has been started to debate the claims about the new world order. First of all is to prove thier existence.

Id like to ask you,what evidence you have that they exist,and how you came to the conclusions you have about them.

Click the 'Labyrinth of Truth' link in my signature. It's all you need to figure out that the 'New World Order' agenda is alive and well, and being ushered in now on many flanks and campaigns. I highly recommend you watch it if you're creating a thread like this.

[romas]

http://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/infowars-shop_2082_107265314

Oh noes! Perhaps Mr Chiesa is really an agent of the New World Order!:p:)




That t-shirt is for complete idiots and you can find plenty in AJ crowd.

[the cosmos]

If you had done your homework on me then you'd already know Im 100% legit,and have a complete understanding of conspiracy theorists "new world order". I used to be one,I ran a website and a radio show about it,although it seemed i was meerly repeting what i thought i had learnt from other "truth" sources,when infact alot of it is just right wing nuts spinning things,quote mining,creating an enemy for them to fight.

There is no such group as the new world order,as this thread proves,nothing but quote mining,word twisting,making things up ect...

I also know a guy who used to believe David Icke, Credo Mutwa etc. without reservation, then he decided one day all this stuff is rubbish.

This happens when you get over analytical, amongst other things.

[dogsmilk]

That t-shirt is for complete idiots

No argument from me.

[dogsmilk]

Click the 'Labyrinth of Truth' link in my signature. It's all you need to figure out that the 'New World Order' agenda is alive and well, and being ushered in now on many flanks and campaigns. I highly recommend you watch it if you're creating a thread like this.

I watched part 1 of that and it seems it's the sort of thing that only works if you're into the Bible.
It seems to be claiming English is becoming the universal language - more people still speak Chinese than English and what about all the millions of Spanish, Russian, Arabic, Hindi etc etc etc speakers? I'd say way more more people don't speak English in this world than do.
It seems to think the Freedom Tower being 1776 feet high has something to do with the Illuminati - it's the year of American Independence, a big event for Americans.
It claims some painting of an "unfinished tower", I guess the tower of Babel, in Babylon looks just like the EU parliament building - well they're both round but the similarity seems to end there. But what's utterly absurd is any depiction of the tower of Babel is solely the product of the artist's imagination. It's just as valid to say it looked like this (assuming it ever existed).

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:CTfAFDX4M3jOoM:http://www.jimnicholsufo.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/tower-of-babel.jpg

Saying the EU parliament building looks like the tower of Babel is about as rational as saying Coventry has the same layout as Atlantis.

[kasalt]

There is no such group as the new world order,as this thread proves...

http://balancingacts.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/ostrich_head_sand21.jpg

[trev1]

He just never quite gets round to it, just as the NWO never quite get round to fulfilling their evil plans. The 'one world government' stuff seems to me to just reflect the boogeyman of nationalists anyway.

What are you talking about there even admitting the creation of a global
goverment - Henry Van Ronpuy just said it a few weeks ago in Copenhagen -
infact its all over the mainstream news, global governement this, NWO that...
so what is it you dont get about this?
The fcuking Bilderbergers, 120 of the worlds elite do not just meet up to play
tiddlywinks ! Why all the secrecy? Why no main stream mendia coverage?
Please WAKE UP !

You need to be de-programmed !

[trev1]

The NWO was never a 'group' more of the 'AGENDA' of tptb, i.e.
the Bilderbergers

[ed benzedrine]

Amen to that, Bro !:)

[dogsmilk]

What are you talking about there even admitting the creation of a global
goverment - Henry Van Ronpuy just said it a few weeks ago in Copenhagen -
infact its all over the mainstream news, global governement this, NWO that...
so what is it you dont get about this?

He did? And exactly when is this 'global government' going to appear? What will it look like? Are the Chinese on board? The Indians? The Russians?
Can the EU forge global governments, or is he privy to something else?
Assuming you're into the concept of government, what is intrinsically bad about this notion anyway? We're all humans aren't we? How could you have wars with a one world government? Or does it just mean the dreaded, if ever elusive, phenomenon of international co-operation?
'One world government' narratives basically arise from a nationalist perspective - for some bizarre reason you get this thing where people think Nation States aren't arbitrary entities forged by the powerful in the first place and subscribe to irrational concepts like 'patriotism'. I'm not a fan of governments generally, so I don't really want a global one, but I can't see what's so fucking great about nation states.
As it is though, I think the evidence that countries with national governments are going to stop existing or something is zero.
And can you evidence that there has been any talk of The New World Order beyond people talking about a new world order because it's common language?


The fcuking Bilderbergers, 120 of the worlds elite do not just meet up to play
tiddlywinks ! Why all the secrecy? Why no main stream mendia coverage?
Please WAKE UP !

You need to be de-programmed !

Are you remotely surprised powerful people meet up to talk about stuff in private beyond the public gaze? I think it sucks, but you don't have to believe in global conspiracies to not be happy with the way powerful people behave.
Bilderberg may consist of powerful and influential people, but it does not include all wealth and power and it has a US/European membership. It does not run the world.

My question on this thread is about The New World Order - because I cannot see that it means anything other than a catchphrase; and a vague one that means different things to different people. There is no such thing as The New World Order. That does not mean the powerful should not be scrutinised and critiqued - there are numerous perspectives from which this can and is undertaken and it may surprise you to learn that New World Order conspiracists are not the only people who have a thing or two to say about political and corporate power.

What are you suggesting I "wake up" to? Believing a specific conspiracy narrative you happen to subscribe to?

[dogsmilk]

Oh right, you mean this load of waffle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hXWeOa-FuyM

So G20 and Copenhagen somehow represents a step towards one world gubmint in the evil NWO sense - how does that work?

I don't think I need to ask how it constitutes "admitting the creation of a global government". Because it doesn't.

[trev1]

We're all humans aren't we? How could you have wars with a one world government?

Did you ever hear of a civil war? Plus its ALL about the 'control' of the people
by power crazed elite.

what is intrinsically bad about this notion anyway?
Because you won't know who is making the laws that you live by !
- nameless faces right? It would be a waste of time voting at a country
level because most of the laws will be international laws anyway. Even now
75% of the laws we live by are International EU laws. Ireland is not
a republic anymore because we dont set our own laws but they are
DICTATED to us by a few bureaucrats in Brussells that set the legislation..
History has shown that a few controlling the many is never a good idea!

'One world government' narratives basically arise from a nationalist perspective
Well our soverign rights are been taken away. I dont know about you but
I am proud of my CULTURE.

As it is though, I think the evidence that countries with national governments are going to stop existing or something is zero
Fair enough, but with what power if all the laws are been drawn up by
an EU superstate we call the EU? Ireland will be akin to someplace
like California State

Are you remotely surprised powerful people meet up to talk about stuff in private beyond the public gaze? I think it sucks, but you don't have to believe in global conspiracies to not be happy with the way powerful people behave.
Bilderberg may consist of powerful and influential people, but it does not include all wealth and power and it has a US/European membership. It does not run the world
It rules the western world then!

If you go to Jordan Maxwells website you will find numerous
quotes from elite people regarding a new world order from a long time back. Look up some of the quotes expecially from David Rockerfeller, The House of Rothschild and Henry Kissinger to name but three. So dont tell me that the NWO doesnt exist (I couldnt be bothered to list the quotes here bu do your own HOMEWORK) -Alex Jones has also a STACKFUL of documents available on
Prisionplanet.com that totally proves to me the existence of the NWO.
And the NWO is an Agneda of the ruling elite that :
1. Plan to (or have!) create a ONE world government
2. Have a ONE world currency
3. Have an RFID Micro-Chipped Population (already happening! - theres
an RFID chip on most passports)

- the above 3 points form the basis of David Ickes message! If you dont
consent to this, why waste your time on the David Icke forum ?

No offence but lets agree to differ please !

[romas]

World government is inevitable, what you ought to be doing is looking how they make sure that these new "rulers" don't end up in corporate pockets just like normal nation states today. Small countries aren't even in the decision making equasion as their economic power is miniscule compard to major global players.

Even US government is knee deep in corporate pocket, people are to dumb and distracted, truth movement is distracted with illuminati bullshit and normal people are focused on the terrorism and flue and other stupid, made up shit to look how their freedom of speech is about to be taken away.

[noewhan]

Listen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zCdaRuZrKWw

Buckminster Fuller, ftw.

Ffwrd to 7:22 :)

World government is inevitable, what you ought to be doing is looking how they make sure that these new "rulers" don't end up in corporate pockets just like normal nation states today. Small countries aren't even in the decision making equasion as their economic power is miniscule compard to major global players.

Even US government is knee deep in corporate pocket, people are to dumb and distracted, truth movement is distracted with illuminati bullshit and normal people are focused on the terrorism and flue and other stupid, made up shit to look how their freedom of speech is about to be taken away.

Since when was looking into & researching illuminati - bullshit? How is it normal to only focus on 'other stupid, made up shit'? I know what you mean, but poor choice of words.

Plus, here's a good list of books and such, which mention the New World Order & other agendas:

http://www.scribd.com/groups/documents/3429-resist-the-new-world-order-conspiracy

[1776]

I watched part 1 of that and it seems it's the sort of thing that only works if you're into the Bible.
It seems to be claiming English is becoming the universal language - more people still speak Chinese than English and what about all the millions of Spanish, Russian, Arabic, Hindi etc etc etc speakers? I'd say way more more people don't speak English in this world than do.
It seems to think the Freedom Tower being 1776 feet high has something to do with the Illuminati - it's the year of American Independence, a big event for Americans.
It claims some painting of an "unfinished tower", I guess the tower of Babel, in Babylon looks just like the EU parliament building - well they're both round but the similarity seems to end there. But what's utterly absurd is any depiction of the tower of Babel is solely the product of the artist's imagination. It's just as valid to say it looked like this (assuming it ever existed).

http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:CTfAFDX4M3jOoM:http://www.jimnicholsufo.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/tower-of-babel.jpg

Saying the EU parliament building looks like the tower of Babel is about as rational as saying Coventry has the same layout as Atlantis.

Nice try. How many pics of the other one did you have to skim by before finding that one to prove your incorrect point? :p

Tower of Babel - EU Parliament

http://www.biblelight.net/tower-painting-parliament.jpg


Fail :D

[dogsmilk]

Did you ever hear of a civil war? Plus its ALL about the 'control' of the people
by power crazed elite.

Well civil war is always conceivable, but the point is that nation states fight each other with far more frequency that civil wars erupt.
How do you know the individual motivation of everyone who is in a position of power? The elite are, after all, just people at the end of the day. The truly scary thing is they are not some sort of separate species but just fallible humans the same as the rest of us. In a way, ascribing all sorts of narratives that set them apart kind of reinforce the notion that powerful people are somehow something other than just people who happen to have power and are not intrinsically more intelligent or able than everyone else.
I have known people who have sat on those govt steering panels in matters relating to social care - and the feedback is they haven't got a clue what they're doing. I personally do not see any grand conspiracy - I think government works a lot more like how it is portrayed in the thick of it. That's not to say dark deeds and secret acts do not exist. They are just not part of a grand design.


Because you won't know who is making the laws that you live by !
- nameless faces right? It would be a waste of time voting at a country
level because most of the laws will be international laws anyway. Even now
75% of the laws we live by are International EU laws. Ireland is not
a republic anymore because we dont set our own laws but they are
DICTATED to us by a few bureaucrats in Brussells that set the legislation..
History has shown that a few controlling the many is never a good idea!

What's really the point of voting at a national level? Once every 4-5 years you cast one vote in a constituency of thousands. To endorse a party to act on every single issue. Though they are under no obligation to do what they claim they will in their manifesto anyway.
Your own MP is responsible for an enormous number of people and their interests and can't even vote how they want if the whip is employed.
I don't know where a lot of legislation comes from anyway - loads of stuff is 'debated' in a virtually empty House of Commons populated by a few people who look half asleep anyway. Labour have passed so many laws it's impossible to keep track of them all.
I don't know where you get your 75% from and I don't really understand exactly how the EU is supposed to dictate major domestic policies.


Well our soverign rights are been taken away. I dont know about you but
I am proud of my CULTURE.

I am not entirely sure what you mean by "sovereign rights".
I don't feel proud of my culture (however that is exactly defined) - a lot of it is just attitudes I've inherited by being raised in a particular social context.


Fair enough, but with what power if all the laws are been drawn up by
an EU superstate we call the EU? Ireland will be akin to someplace
like California State

I think most Californians don't have a problem with being part of the United States so I'm not sure that's a great comparison.
I see it from both angles - I agree that it is problematic for legislation to emanate from greater distances, but I also appreciate why people think European economic and political co-operation is desirable. Europe has a history of being ravaged by conflict culminating in the most destructive war in human history. And Europe combined is an economic powerhouse that can be seen as in the national self interest of its members.


It rules the western world then!

I think that's too simplistic. I don't like these guys either. As I said before, from a non-conspiracy perspective it is inevitable that when powerful meet, they will make decisions. If I go to a conference, I will network with people and may link up with people to further my goals in terms of my job. It's natural. These people's decisions can affect millions of people and I don't think politicians have any right to make any decisions outside of public scrutiny, however much they may feel the herd get in the way. But I think that they don't sit round making big plans to dominate the globe Ming the Merciless style - politicians think they are acting in the 'national interest'. I think it's more about arrogance and self importance than malice.


If you go to Jordan Maxwells website you will find numerous
quotes from elite people regarding a new world order from a long time back. Look up some of the quotes expecially from David Rockerfeller, The House of Rothschild and Henry Kissinger to name but three. So dont tell me that the NWO doesnt exist (I couldnt be bothered to list the quotes here bu do your own HOMEWORK) -Alex Jones has also a STACKFUL of documents available on
Prisionplanet.com that totally proves to me the existence of the NWO.
And the NWO is an Agneda of the ruling elite that :
1. Plan to (or have!) create a ONE world government
2. Have a ONE world currency
3. Have an RFID Micro-Chipped Population (already happening! - theres
an RFID chip on most passports)

- the above 3 points form the basis of David Ickes message! If you dont
consent to this, why waste your time on the David Icke forum ?

No offence but lets agree to differ please !

I have read a lot of these quotes. My issues with them are a follows -

* Some are made up or distorted
* They are often presented out of context
* They often simply consist of people saying 'new world order' - as I already pointed out this is a fairly common phrase and it needs to be clearly evidenced the New World Order is different to a new world order - many of these people are talking about totally different things from different perspectives - which is why these quotes tend to omit context.

Mentioning Alex Jones, an instance of shameless distortion I've mentioned previously is his use of H.G.Wells at the start of Endgame. It says.

Countless people will hate the new world order and will die protesting against it

Sounds very sinister, Sounds like the NWO will mow down all opposition. But the actual quote is

Nor does it alter the fact that even when the struggle seems to be drifting definitely towards a world social democracy, there may still be very great delays and disappointments before it becomes an efficient and beneficent world system. Countless people, from maharajas to millionaires and from pukkha sahibs to pretty ladies, will hate the new world order, be rendered unhappy by frustration of their passions and ambitions through its advent and will die protesting against it. When we attempt to estimate its promise we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of them quite gallant and graceful-looking people.

Ant it will be no light matter to minimise the loss of efficiency in the process of changing the spirit and pride of administration work from that of an investing, high-salaried man with a handsome display of expenditure and a socially ambitious wife, into a relatively less highly-salaried man with a higher standard of self-criticism, aware that he will be esteemed rather by what he puts into his work than by what he gets out of it. There will be a lot of social spill, tragi-comedy and loss of efficiency during the period of the change over, and it is better to be prepared for that.


http://www.theforbiddenknowledge.com/hardtruth/new_world_order_hgwells _pt2.htm

* Jones blatantly distorts the quote, giving no indication he's abbreviated it, presumably because he doesn't want to give any hint he's deliberately tried to make it sound more sinister and imply people being killed which Wells in no way suggests. So he starts his film with basically a lie. Unfortunately, this is not out of character for Jones.
* It's a 'my ideal world piece' - if Wells had called it My big idea for a totally kick-ass political system, nobody would notice it. It's hardly unique for people to advance their big political vision. There is no evidence whatsoever this piece is of any significance beyond it being Wells' beliefs.
* Just look at the awful plans he has!

In order to be as clear as possible about this, let me submit a draft for your consideration of this proposed Declaration of the Rights of Man - using "man" of course to cover every individual, male or female, of the species. I have endeavoured to bring in everything that is essential and to omit whatever secondary issues can be easily deduced from its general statements. It is a draft for your consideration. Points may have been overlooked and it may contain repetitions and superfluous statements.

"Since a man comes into this world through no fault of his own, since he is manifestly a joint inheritor of the accumulations of the past, and since those accumulations are more than sufficient to justify the claims that are here made for him, it follows:

"(1) That every man without distinction of race, of colour or of professed belief or opinions, is entitled to the nourishment, covering, medical care and attention needed to realise his full possibilities of physical and mental development and to keep him in a state of health from his birth to death.

"(2) That he is entitled to sufficient education to make him a useful and interested citizen, that special education should be so made available as to give him equality of opportunity for the development of his distinctive gifts in the service of mankind, that he should have easy access to information upon all matters of common knowledge throughout his life and enjoy the utmost freedom of discussion, association and worship.

"(3) That he may engage freely in any lawful occupation, earning such pay as the need for his work and the increment it makes to the common welfare may justify. That he is entitled to paid employment and to a free choice whenever there is any variety of employment open to him. He may suggest employment for himself and have his claim publicly considered, accepted or dismissed.

"(4) That he shall have the right to buy or sell without any discriminatory restrictions anything which may be lawfully bought or sold, in such quantities and with such reservations as are compatible with the common welfare."

Oh noes! He wants to destroy us all!
Of course Wells was a socialist which to Jones makes him the devil incarnate, but Jones is an American right wing talk radio host who cites ludicrous cold war propaganda flick red dawn as his favourite film. Of course to people like Jones poor people having access to a doctor for free without lining the pockets of a multinational corporation is 'socialism', so I can see why he would be twitchy about Wells advocating universal medical care.
People like Jones do not operate in a political vacuum. For all his carping about 'overcoming the left right paradigm', Jones is simply a reactionary paleo-conservative IMO about as radical as Mary Whitehouse. He is pushing his own political beliefs - as is his right - but beyond all his hysterical claims about 'Luciferians' and wotnot all he wants is a traditional right wing America with its 'fuck the poor' ethic.
And he is selling a product. He has asked people to give him a quarter of a million dollars just so he can buy a better studio. For a man with such a negative opinion of social welfare, he seems to have little reservations about asking for a major handout for the advancement his own little media and retail empire.
He will not retire a poor man; I think that is pretty much guaranteed.

And the NWO is an Agneda of the ruling elite that :
1. Plan to (or have!) create a ONE world government
2. Have a ONE world currency
3. Have an RFID Micro-Chipped Population (already happening! - theres
an RFID chip on most passports)


1/How is this supposed to even work? What exactly would it look like? The world is big place with lots of competing interests.
2/How will that work? I'm sure some people would like this and it sort of makes sense but I can't see it happening. The UK hasn't even adopted the euro.
3/RFID implants already exist and are made by Verichip. But I can't see passports having RFID chips in them indicates anything about mass implants. I have seen no realistic indication there is an actual plan to chip everyone. The ridiculous UK biometric ID card scheme has already been a total farce and will hopefully end up consigned the the dustbin of Epic Fail.

- the above 3 points form the basis of David Ickes message! If you dont
consent to this, why waste your time on the David Icke forum ?

No offence but lets agree to differ please !

I'm not aware of it being mandatory to subscribe to any particular dogma in order to post here. I think Icke is a sincere guy who is honestly trying to make the world a better place, but that doesn't mean I don't think a lot of what he says is bollocks.

[dogsmilk]

Nice try. How many pics of the other one did you have to skim by before finding that one to prove your incorrect point? :p

Fail :D

I simply do not understand what the point is supposed to be.
1/The two buildings are round. Otherwise they look very different.
2/A sixteenth century painting of the tower of Babel is simply what the painter imaged what it might have looked like if it ever existed. It is in no way shape or form an accurate depiction of this mythological building. There is a multitude of artistic depictions and I cannot see how one can be deemed to be more valid than another.



http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/thumbnail/184994/1/The-Building-Of-The-Tower-Of-Babel.jpg

http://www.ling.su.se/ASV/cleve.jpg

http://www.bestpriceart.com/vault/dore5.jpg

http://www.wga.hu/art/m/master/bedford/buil_bab.jpg

http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/thumbnail/134073/1/The-Destruction-Of-The-Tower-Of-Babel.jpg

http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/thumbnail/184997/1/The-Building-Of-The-Tower-Of-Babel,-1595.jpg

http://www.lib-art.com/imgpainting/3/0/17903-the-tower-of-babel-german-unknown-master.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QVgpeh5qsr4/SvmK5QRaOrI/AAAAAAAAAso/ktcNNogszAw/s400/Tower-Of-Babel.jpg

[trev1]

Dogmilk as I said we should agree to differ on this

We could spend the rest of our live debating this..

We just have two totally different perspectives so..

You think that these secret societies elite are
meeting innocently without any agenda for
world domination go ahead. Your entitled to
do that. Personally I have some to the opposite
conclusion. You probably think they all gather
at bohemian grove to worship an owl but it
doesnt mean anything -there just having fun
right?

I totally believe that people in the shawdows
that we cant see have the controls and the
people put in front of the masses are just actors
or no more than salesmen.

Have you not ever wondered why your
governemnt as always lied to you? Why , no
matter who gets in power nothing seems to
change?

We live in a Big Brother state , all you need to
do is take a look around you. So dont dismiss
the Microchip.

You say too the elite are only like you and me or
me or whatever. I disagree im of the opinion that
they are of a genetic bloodline and have passed
down acient knowledge that the average joe Public
of the masses doesn't have. People call this the
illuminati due to them having knowledge the rest
of us dont have. Thats why IMO they put an the
fre masonic all seeing eye on the dollar bill and also
an owl too. This is my belief at this time.

Finally I reckon your been harsh on Jones. You can
pick literally anyone any pick holes in them. BUt
of course your entitled to your opinion.....

[romas]

Since when was looking into & researching illuminati - bullshit?





It's like smoke screen, looking for the devil while the real action involves certain people. People come and go and history only teaches of those who are already gone, like Gulf of Tonkin Incident, same with 9/11 and current war/pollution profiteers.

[dogsmilk]

Dogmilk as I said we should agree to differ on this

We could spend the rest of our live debating this..

Sure, but I suppose it doesn't hurt either of us to think about our worldview.


We just have two totally different perspectives so..

You think that these secret societies elite are
meeting innocently without any agenda for
world domination go ahead. Your entitled to
do that. Personally I have some to the opposite
conclusion. You probably think they all gather
at bohemian grove to worship an owl but it
doesnt mean anything -there just having fun
right?

I don't think people necessarily meet 'innocently', but it depends what you think they're trying to achieve. Countries may aim for 'world domination' economically and/or militarily. I just don't think it's some kind of sci-fi plot to be Lords of the World, more people trying to pursue their 'national interest'. Even to the level that it's a stark fact we in the West who have a steady income live like kings globally and historically - if basically slave labour in other countries didn't churn out clothes, food, electronics etc we can buy dirt cheap, this just wouldn't be sustainable. The horrible thing is we materially benefit from Western dominance.
I think Bohemian Grove is just a big budget example of blokes acting daft because they can. But frankly I couldn't give a shit if they really do worship an owl. Who cares? If every Grover dropped dead tomorrow, their positions would just be filled by other people who don't worship an owl but would carry on the same because they believe in the political and economic system they live in.
If Grovers really do worship an owl I'd say that would just be a bit sad. You'd think men of that age would know better. I've loved Satanic extreme metal since its early days, but I grew out of taking it remotely seriously pretty quickly



I totally believe that people in the shawdows
that we cant see have the controls and the
people put in front of the masses are just actors
or no more than salesmen.

I'd certainly agree there's a lot of acting and salesmanship going on and I'd say your average MP is not clued up on loads of stuff their government is up to.
I just don't think there's some big spider at the centre of some web though. If you consider your average big company, there will be all kinds of office politics, backstabbing, people from one department keeping things secret from another, people covering up fuck-ups, people making little plans to advance their careers, managers imposing stupid policies on other people they don't have to implement themselves etc. I can't see how government isn't just a scaled up version of how people behave in any organisation. Indeed, I really struggle with the notion that any small group could hold everything together.
I also subscribe to the notion that it is actually more cheery to believe in the Grand Conspiracy - that it's actually more alarming to think that the paternal figures in their lofty heights really don't have it all worked out and are making it up as they go along, negotiating various pressures from different angles while looking out for themselves. Or indulging their vast egos and Messiah fantasies (I just thought of Tony Blair so felt I had to add that).
I have heard that some Bilderbergers enjoy reading Bilderberg conspiracy theories. That wouldn't surprise me in the slightest. Apart from anything else, it would bolster their own feelings of self-importance.
The 'elites' do not have magical powers. They do not have esoteric knowledge. They are no better than the rest of us. They were born, eat, shit, fuck, die and want their mum to make it all better same as normal people. I sometimes think the Grand Conspiracy puts them on the kind of pedestal they want people to think they're on. Kissinger is just some bloke. The queen is just some old lady not fundamentally different to someone's gran pushing their trolley round Lidl. These are not some kind of superbeings; though that's probably what they'd like you to think they are.


Have you not ever wondered why your
governemnt as always lied to you?

No.
Regular people lie, why would I expect people desperate to hold on to their job - which they have pursued because they think they should be helping make laws etc because their opinions are so great - not to? They are engaged in a popularity contest and have a history of arrogantly thinking the 'bewildered herd' don't know what's good for them anyway.


Why , no
matter who gets in power nothing seems to
change?

Well on one hand I'd disagree - the last 150 years ago have seen enormous changes.
But the current status quo is working for the people that run it, and I would think in their opinion for their population, so they don't want change.
And it depends what sort of changes you do want.


We live in a Big Brother state , all you need to
do is take a look around you. So dont dismiss
the Microchip.

I'd certainly agree we have become very complacent about our civil rights which were hard fought for and are being eroded. I think the processes behind their erosion are far more complicated than just some big plot though (can't be arsed to go into my view now, may do if conversation continues).
Beyond that, it needs to be remembered that things like sick pay, universal healthcare, the eight hour day, the right to strike etc were not just granted from on high. And much of the world still has very little in the way of such rights. I think we shouldn't ignore these things either.


You say too the elite are only like you and me or
me or whatever. I disagree im of the opinion that
they are of a genetic bloodline and have passed
down acient knowledge that the average joe Public
of the masses doesn't have. People call this the
illuminati due to them having knowledge the rest
of us dont have. Thats why IMO they put an the
fre masonic all seeing eye on the dollar bill and also
an owl too. This is my belief at this time.

I'd say if you're born into a wealthy, powerful, well-connected family, odds are you'll be wealthy, powerful and well-connected yourself. You can view this in terms if the Luciferian Illuminati, but another way of looking at it is is simply in terms of class.
I don't know what "ancient knowledge" these people are supposed to have.


Finally I reckon your been harsh on Jones. You can
pick literally anyone any pick holes in them. BUt
of course your entitled to your opinion.....

I think he's probably fairly sincere and probably really believes his own hype, but I think his politics suck and he's not proposing anything other than conservatism. It gets on my tits the way you get all this rhetoric about 'the resistance' and 'revolution' from tired old reactionaries, kind of the American version of middle Englander daily mail readers. His "info" is unreliable at best.
He's not as bad as Rense though, I'll give him that.
America has stacks of right wing talk radio hosts, but Jones has managed to carve himself a little media empire.

[trev1]

The 'elites' do not have magical powers. They do not have esoteric knowledge. They are no better than the rest of us. They were born, eat, shit, fuck, die and want their mum to make it all better same as normal people. I sometimes think the Grand Conspiracy puts them on the kind of pedestal they want people to think they're on. Kissinger is just some bloke. The queen is just some old lady not fundamentally different to someone's gran pushing their trolley round Lidl.

Well I would have agreed with you 3-4 months ago, but now I dont.
And this make not get into yours or a lot of others 'Reality Boxes' but
Have you read Sichins book the 12th planet? You will then realise that
the Sumarian texts speak of a repilian bloodline ET (the annunaki) who game here millions of years ago and genitially manipulate the apeman
of the time to create a human-et hybrid. These hybrids had the 'ancient wisdom' that has been passed down through secret societies and rule the
world today. I'd really recommend the book 'The Gods of Eden'
by William Bramley or anyting by Jordan Maxwell who has reseached this stuff for 50 years and knows what hes talkng about.... John A Keel, the author
of the Mothman prophecies mentioned in his book his suspicions that the ETs were 'reptilian' in nature. So Sichin, Bramley, Maxwell and Icke all have
reached the conclusions that an ancient et race are still around and have infiltrated the major governments of the world. Three months ago I would have told you that they were 'nuts' if they said this to me. I know
realise though the power of a 'preconcieved notion'!

Also the Queen has been seen at Satanic Rituals by reliable
witnesses (Icke has interviewed them, forget the names)...
and so has most presidents of america. And I think it defo matters
if these people are owl worshippers or whatever. The run our
countries and have great influence.

The bottom line is I dont believe in coincidence. Too many things
have happened and ive read that just dont add up or make sense
until you actaully as Ickey say 'Join The Dots'. I have read so much
on this subject, looked at numerous you tube videos and research on
the net. I'm 36 and not some kid thats reached a stupid conclusion.
Yes, the facts are lacking. But so many examples from even Icke that
are brilliant and show you how the system works. Because I lived in the
system or 35.5 years and couldnt make sense of it - why does this or that
happen. Along my journey I started seeing things that I didnt before.
Some things now are so predictable. Like the detroit underwear bomber
the minute I heard it I suspected 'False Flag'., of course just an excuse to
increase security on joe public. Thats just one example but the Lisbon
Treaty Irish Referendum is just another example. The way it all played
out ... just so predictable.

And I totally believe it possible for a few to control the many. It
is like Russian Dolls. Its just the very few at the top of the pyramid
that have the control. Names like the Rockerfellers, Rothschilds and
Kissingers just keep appearing everywhere and when you see what
they are behind inclusing wars, then when they appear at bilderberg
meetings using logic tells you their up to no good.

Its like when people say to me 9-11 could not have been an inside
becau too many people would have been involved. However I totally
believe the way this thing work through covert operations is quite
possible. As Icke says it works like a pyramid and those at that
level at the piramid know what they need to know, infact even icke
says 90% of othe people part of it proabaly dont even know about the
overall agenda. Just the small few at the top. Im totally convinced that
these people at the top work through secret societies such as the
illuminati, skull and bones, bohemian club, bilderbergers, etc. As I said
I dont believe in co-incidences...... too many US presidents and
people in power have come from these groups. For example the
bushes were part of the skull and bones. Regan and Bill Clinton part of
the bohemian club. Even Obama and Hillary Clinton attended a
Bilderdeger meeting last year..... come to think about it even Henry
Von Ronpuy the new EU president is a Bilderberger. In other words
you dont get in a position of power unless your part of some of these
groups.

Anyway good discussing this with you ! Im not
100% on this becuase if I was I would be like a
some religous person out thri who wont hear any
other point of view and if they do you insult them.
I've always been an open minded person and
willing to listen to people takes on things and
philisophoies. Unfortunately I only really get to
do this on this forum cause most people I know
are too programmed by their tv sets to talk about
anythin much other than X factor or other
celebrity nonsense (i.e. Tiger Woods screwing around!)

Sorry about the spelling but I typed this in a rush

[1776]

I simply do not understand what the point is supposed to be.
1/The two buildings are round. Otherwise they look very different.
2/A sixteenth century painting of the tower of Babel is simply what the painter imaged what it might have looked like if it ever existed. It is in no way shape or form an accurate depiction of this mythological building. There is a multitude of artistic depictions and I cannot see how one can be deemed to be more valid than another.



http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/thumbnail/184994/1/The-Building-Of-The-Tower-Of-Babel.jpg

http://www.ling.su.se/ASV/cleve.jpg

http://www.bestpriceart.com/vault/dore5.jpg

http://www.wga.hu/art/m/master/bedford/buil_bab.jpg

http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/thumbnail/134073/1/The-Destruction-Of-The-Tower-Of-Babel.jpg

http://www.1st-art-gallery.com/thumbnail/184997/1/The-Building-Of-The-Tower-Of-Babel,-1595.jpg

http://www.lib-art.com/imgpainting/3/0/17903-the-tower-of-babel-german-unknown-master.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_QVgpeh5qsr4/SvmK5QRaOrI/AAAAAAAAAso/ktcNNogszAw/s400/Tower-Of-Babel.jpg

They built the EU Parliament to resemble the images of the ancient Tower of Babel. This is fact.

If you cannot see the resemblance, and the intent of the 'builders', than you are simply profane, a sheeple. Wake up.

[noewhan]

Also the Queen has been seen at Satanic Rituals by reliable
witnesses (Icke has interviewed them, forget the names)...



Are you thinking of Brandon Corey? That documentary was admitted to be a 'mocumentry', but Icke was featured in it.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=88356&highlight=Brandon+Corey

[trev1]

Are you thinking of Brandon Corey? That documentary was admitted to be a 'mocumentry', but Icke was featured in it.

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=88356&highlight=Brandon+Corey

NO it was a woman who gave Icke the interview
She describes a ritual that takes place in 6
different locations in the US on Holloween night.
Something about the high council of 13....a satanic
ritaul. The person she describes as playing the part
of satan is a former lead singer for the rock group
Iron Butterfly. She also talks about the child sacrafice
of John Benet Ramsey..?

any names?

[dogsmilk]

Well I would have agreed with you 3-4 months ago, but now I dont.
And this make not get into yours or a lot of others 'Reality Boxes' but
Have you read Sichins book the 12th planet? You will then realise that
the Sumarian texts speak of a repilian bloodline ET (the annunaki) who game here millions of years ago and genitially manipulate the apeman
of the time to create a human-et hybrid. These hybrids had the 'ancient wisdom' that has been passed down through secret societies and rule the
world today. I'd really recommend the book 'The Gods of Eden'
by William Bramley or anyting by Jordan Maxwell who has reseached this stuff for 50 years and knows what hes talkng about.... John A Keel, the author
of the Mothman prophecies mentioned in his book his suspicions that the ETs were 'reptilian' in nature. So Sichin, Bramley, Maxwell and Icke all have
reached the conclusions that an ancient et race are still around and have infiltrated the major governments of the world. Three months ago I would have told you that they were 'nuts' if they said this to me. I know
realise though the power of a 'preconcieved notion'!

Apart from John Keel (who I like - the mothman prophecies is a cracking read - but take with a huge pinch of salt) and to some extent Icke (and my major criticism with him is he seems to subscribe to just about every theory he ever comes across) this is stuff I'm not very familiar with so I can't comment on the details of their writings. But I looked at Jordan Maxwell's website (see below).


Also the Queen has been seen at Satanic Rituals by reliable
witnesses (Icke has interviewed them, forget the names)...
and so has most presidents of america. And I think it defo matters
if these people are owl worshippers or whatever. The run our
countries and have great influence.

Well I don't know the details but you'll be unsurprised to hear I'm sceptical, though you would respond that is just preconditioned thinking. But I don't know the details, so can't really say anything about it.
To be honest though end times Christians seeking to bring about the Rapture getting into power I find more concerning than Owl worshippers.

On a side note, you say she claimed

The person she describes as playing the part
of satan is a former lead singer for the rock group
Iron Butterfly.

That's bit lame isn't it? Couldn't she have said it was Gaahl from Gorgoroth or Glenn Benton from Deicide or somebody?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUNOIHz2QQU

Satan thinks his minions should write punchier tunes and wear sillier make-up than Iron Butterfly

Sorry, couldn't help myself :)


The bottom line is I dont believe in coincidence. Too many things
have happened and ive read that just dont add up or make sense
until you actaully as Ickey say 'Join The Dots'. I have read so much
on this subject, looked at numerous you tube videos and research on
the net.

I struggle not to believe in coincidence - I don't know about you but I've experienced a multitude of coincidences in my life, many of them very mundane. Of course not everything can just be written off as coincidence, but to me it's about recognising that some things are not coincidences, some things just are.

Like a lot of this symbolism stuff seems to me to be grasping at straws. Like the tower of Babel stuff on this thread which makes no sense to me whatsoever.

I looked at Jordan Maxwells website and saw this -

http://www.jordanmaxwell.com/articles/bits/index.htm

Where he says

Using a torch in the Olympics was Adolph Hitler's idea.

Which is false.
His 'footnotes' link to a New York Times article which is just going on about how the 1936 games was the first time there was a relay from Greece to the games - of course the Olympic torch itself dates back to the origin of the games. Where they wouldn't have needed to take it anywhere anyway.
But bizarrely, his second 'footnote' links to a google search. Unsurprisingly one of these is to the relevant wiki page on which we read

The torch relay of modern times which transports the flame from Greece to the various designated sites of the games had no ancient precedent and was introduced by Carl Diem at the controversial 1936 Berlin Olympics.

Indeed, in the introduction to Nazi games by David Clay Large we read (slightly contradicting wiki which kind of implies it was Diem's idea) the relay was -

initially proposed by the Nazi Propaganda Ministry and orchestrated primarily by Carl Diem

Though Diem was clearly well into the idea -

...as if to provide an illustrious pedigree for the new Germanic empire envisaged by Hitler, the relay quite overtly and ostentatiously posited a symbolic bridge between modern Germany and classical Greece. According to Diem the Olympic flame was an ancient "symbol of purity" prefiguring the purity of the modern German nation. He saw the torch relay as a reawakening of the mythic cult surrounding Prometheus, whose theft of fire from the gods for the betterment of mortals had been honored in antiquity by torchlight parades. But Diem got a little confused in his imagery. As a logo for the relay he selected a relief from the Palazzo Colonna in Rome, supposedly depicting "torch runners at the finish line". In fact the "runners" in question were two putti, usually associated with erotic love

But beyond Maxwell getting his first assertion wrong, what does any of the Nazi effort to look cool in front of the world matter?
Maxwell says

Quite naturally, America uses the torch symbol as well.

http://www.jordanmaxwell.com/articles/bits/images/rooseveltdime.jpg

Well yeah - it signifies liberty like in the statue, a notion the Americans are very big on (however hypocritically). It's accompanied by an olive branch and an oak branch - why are they not mentioned?

It was designed by a guy named John Sinnock
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_R._Sinnock
- Is there any evidence whatsoever he was influenced by the 1936 Olympics in his coin design ten years later?

The torch has ancient Olympic associations and it can mean other things too - without some kind of evidence that the torch on the Roosevelt dime was actively influenced by the 1936 Olympics in a Nazi stylee and why the accompanying flora fits with this, what Maxwell has bothered to put on his website is pointless. He may as well have said the Nazis are the basis for the National Association of Black Engineers golden torch awards.

http://national.nsbe.org/Portals/0/images/Golden-Torch-Awardsw.jpg

http://national.nsbe.org/Programs/GoldenTorchAwards/tabid/471/Default.aspx

He accompanies this with what looks suspiciously like a de-contextualised quote-mine and Edwin Black's IBM and the Holocaust. I just can't understand why anyone is surprised IBM would not have exploited a profitable business opportunity just because the Nazis were bad eggs. All it says is that big corporations aren't arsed about dealing with dictatorships if there aren't damaging PR consequences because they do, after all, exist to make money - looking round the world today is enough to confirm this. IIRC Black doesn't claim Thomas Watson had any ideological affinity towards Nazism.

On this curiously isolated page, Maxwell seems to play the same trick as with the coins -

http://www.jordanmaxwell.info/J4.jpg

http://www.jordanmaxwell.info/

Well hang on a minute - 'the dawning of a new day', 'a new day dawning' - that's just a standard cliche. People aren't going to say 'vote for me for a pitch black night' or 'for a new night falling' - it's standard, generic symbolism with positive connotations. The satirical film Bob Roberts depicts an inane TV campaigning ad by having one commercial, a few seconds long, simply showing a sunrise accompanied by voices singing for a new day dawning followed by "Vote Bob" in big letters. The crunch is that aside from the ridiculous claims of Archie Bunker types perpetually locked in some kind of 1950s style red scare, as perfectly captured in this characteristically asinine David Dees 'artwork',

http://www.borderfirereport.net/dees/marx_dees.jpg

America is in no way communist or even socialist. It's like calling Nazi Germany a bleeding heart liberal hippy commune - though admittedly some people on this forum have come pretty close to trying to make that claim as well.

Then he starts going on about the remake of V because the same phrase appears in it. By this logic, after doing a google search on the phrase, he should therefore be claiming that A New Day Dawning by Wyonna Judd (whoever she is)

http://g-ecx.images-amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/cd/cf/99b8729fd7a09ff6b9c4d010.L._AA240_.jpg

is some kind of reference to commie reptilians or something because his sole point of reference is a common cliche.

Though V, I guess, is seen to be significant because the aliens are reptiles. But aliens are depicted as just about anything you can imagine, so surely it's inevitable they will be depicted as reptiles and even if you're into this reptoids stuff, why should it be assumed it means anything when they are?

http://www.videodetective.com/photos/037/001586_36.jpg

"We have discovered the aliens are plant based so we can disregard our relevance to conspiracy research"

So from his stuff on the net at least, I am not impressed with this guy.

But to me it exemplifies 'joining the dots' arbitrarily in such a way that if you followed the method faithfully you'd be thinking your cereal packet is cloaked in Illuminati symbolism.



I'm 36 and not some kid thats reached a stupid conclusion.
Yes, the facts are lacking. But so many examples from even Icke that
are brilliant and show you how the system works. Because I lived in the
system or 35.5 years and couldnt make sense of it - why does this or that
happen. Along my journey I started seeing things that I didnt before.
Some things now are so predictable. Like the detroit underwear bomber
the minute I heard it I suspected 'False Flag'., of course just an excuse to
increase security on joe public. Thats just one example but the Lisbon
Treaty Irish Referendum is just another example. The way it all played
out ... just so predictable.

But just about everything gets written off as a 'false flag' the moment it happens.
(had a paragraph in mind to write here, but written too much today)


And I totally believe it possible for a few to control the many. It
is like Russian Dolls. Its just the very few at the top of the pyramid
that have the control. Names like the Rockerfellers, Rothschilds and
Kissingers just keep appearing everywhere and when you see what
they are behind inclusing wars, then when they appear at bilderberg
meetings using logic tells you their up to no good.

Its like when people say to me 9-11 could not have been an inside
becau too many people would have been involved. However I totally
believe the way this thing work through covert operations is quite
possible. As Icke says it works like a pyramid and those at that
level at the piramid know what they need to know, infact even icke
says 90% of othe people part of it proabaly dont even know about the
overall agenda. Just the small few at the top. Im totally convinced that
these people at the top work through secret societies such as the
illuminati, skull and bones, bohemian club, bilderbergers, etc. As I said
I dont believe in co-incidences...... too many US presidents and
people in power have come from these groups. For example the
bushes were part of the skull and bones. Regan and Bill Clinton part of
the bohemian club. Even Obama and Hillary Clinton attended a
Bilderdeger meeting last year..... come to think about it even Henry
Von Ronpuy the new EU president is a Bilderberger. In other words
you dont get in a position of power unless your part of some of these
groups.

If you're proper posh and go to Yale, chances are you'll get to join the Skull and Bones. Where you'll meet other proper posh dudes. Just as normal people look out for their mates, a guy setting up a window cleaning business might give his cousin a job, it's natural to expect these guys to form little networks. Why wouldn't they? I don't dispute powerful people have their little clubs for a second, nor do I think it's a good thing. I don't dispute some people wield massive influence and don't use this to deliver a happy smile to every household.
I don't think it's a coincidence presidents come from these groups either. America may pitch itself as a 'haul yourself up by your bootstraps' meritocracy with a black president and everything, but I see no reason why old money families would wish to relinquish their presence in the corridors of power. I just don't see why it has to be assumed they're omnipotent, infallible or secretly in cahoots with Satan.
It sometimes seems like there's an assumption that if you disposed of 'the elite' and just got rid of the federal reserve or whatever everything would be dandy because these people are evil and not human and that's why so much fucked-up stuff goes down. It seems to me like it's trying to say they are just a completely different species to us, yet you can see exactly the same kind of behaviour in miniature all around you. I think the systems that govern our lives are in actuality more important than the individuals that happen to be top dog. Like if you did away with Kissingers, Rockerfellers and Rothchilds tomorrow, would Nike suddenly start paying people in the third world proper wages? Would companies stop selling automatic rifles and shock batons to tinpot dictatorships? Would people stop screwing each other over to get that managerial position with the fat salary? Would we stop pushing Orangutans towards extinction just because we want to grow palm oil where they live?
I know it's a cliche but though sure we can blame people at the top for what they do, I think we have to look to ourselves as well because they are us and we are them in different circumstances and I think turning them into caricatures of evil obscures this. Though how we can have a world that somehow simply works for the collective benefit of its occupants I cannot say and would probably be very famous if I could.
Right now there is a controversy raging concerning this very forum which you are not allowed to talk about on here. Indeed, I'll probably get a warning or banning for even mentioning that which cannot be named - loads of people have been banned for expressing their opinions about it, including some real stalwarts. The irony is, it involves a sort of microscopic version of the sort of stuff this forum is supposed to be against, as has been repeatedly pointed out. And you wonder why people with actual power let it go to their head...?

edit - apart from a thread in the rant room I have discovered.



Anyway good discussing this with you ! Im not
100% on this becuase if I was I would be like a
some religous person out thri who wont hear any
other point of view and if they do you insult them.
I've always been an open minded person and
willing to listen to people takes on things and
philisophoies. Unfortunately I only really get to
do this on this forum cause most people I know
are too programmed by their tv sets to talk about
anythin much other than X factor or other
celebrity nonsense (i.e. Tiger Woods screwing around!)

Sorry about the spelling but I typed this in a rush

I assumed I would get a torrent of abuse and be denounced as a shill for challenging New World Order narratives on this forum, so I would like to thank you for taking the time to have a rational discussion. And it makes a nice change to talk to someone who appears not to be totally obsessed with Jews.

[dogsmilk]

They built the EU Parliament to resemble the images of the ancient Tower of Babel. This is fact.

If you cannot see the resemblance, and the intent of the 'builders', than you are simply profane, a sheeple. Wake up.

But how is it "a fact"? Just because an artist happened to imagine it looking (in your opinion) something like it? Why didn't they build it to look like one of the other multitude of images?
Hell, there are so many artistic representations of the tower of Babel, they'd probably have had to have worked quite hard to make sure the EU building didn't look anything like at least one of them.

[trev1]

I assumed I would get a torrent of abuse and be denounced as a shill for challenging New World Order narratives on this forum, so I would like to thank you for taking the time to have a rational discussion. And it makes a nice change to talk to someone who appears not to be totally obsessed with Jews.


No worries mate, enjoyed the debate :)

[noewhan]

NO it was a woman who gave Icke the interview
She describes a ritual that takes place in 6
different locations in the US on Holloween night.
Something about the high council of 13....a satanic
ritaul. The person she describes as playing the part
of satan is a former lead singer for the rock group
Iron Butterfly. She also talks about the child sacrafice
of John Benet Ramsey..?

any names?

Arizona Wilder
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=59474&highlight=Arizona+Wilder
(Claims to have seen many members of the Royal Family shapeshift.)

Cathy O'Brien
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iu5EtbyPNS8
(She was abused ritualistically, not sure if she mentions the Queen / reptiles.)

[trev1]

Well hang on a minute - 'the dawning of a new day', 'a new day dawning' - that's just a standard cliche. People aren't going to say 'vote for me for a pitch black night' or 'for a new night falling' - it's standard, generic symbolism with positive connotations. The satirical film Bob Roberts depicts an inane TV campaigning ad by having one commercial, a few seconds long, simply showing a sunrise accompanied by voices singing for a new day dawning followed by "Vote Bob" in big letters. The crunch is that aside from the ridiculous claims of Archie Bunker types perpetually locked in some kind of 1950s style red scare, as perfectly captured in this characteristically asinine David Dees 'artwork',

Well I think you really underestimate the importance of
symbology. It was of utmost importance in the ancient
world and I reckon its carried though right to now. Terms
like ' Dawn of a new day ' have a lot of meaning that you
don't realise. You very quick to poo-poo Maxwell without
looking into it more. If you google most things he says or
get a wiki explanation , sure you will find a rational explanation
for everything he says , but then again what cant you
find a rational explanation for? - the answer is everything and
anything if you want to. Its up to all of us to use logic
and put 2+2 together. As I said I dont believe in co-
incidences. Everything in my opinion happens for a reason.
Because this whole thing is run by secret societies its hard
to get to the bottom of, because their just that ' SECRET'
societies. You would be really suprised how easy the few can
control the many. As I said already the most blatant example
of this happening is within the EU.

Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and all of the
modern day US presidents use the same
symbols and said the same things. Look
up something called 'Pattern Recognition'.

[kblood]

So it is questioned whether there is a New World Order or a conspiracy to gain world domination? Since before it was named a new world order there are some very clear examples on plans to make one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_World_Order_(conspiracy_theory)#Protocols_of_t he_Elders_of_Zion

Here are many "theories" summarized. Especially these Protocols of Zion (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/480269/Protocols-of-the-Learned-Elders-of-Zion) has interested me. I do not believe that Jews are the top of the pyramid, although the Rothschild family sure seems to hold much power in the world back then, and today as well. I do not agree that their actions speak for all Jews, and I do not know any Jews myself, but I would rather put names to something than blame a group of people or a religion. Religions are only as bad or as good as its followers make them.

But I read these protocols (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/480269/Protocols-of-the-Learned-Elders-of-Zion), and I have not finished them yet, but it is rather scary how well they fit into our history. They planned several world wars, taking over the media, controlling the banking system and much more which seems to have fallen into place just as they planned, and it all began within 20 years after the plans were made.

Some more background history Here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Protocols_of_the_Elders_of_Zion).

I have looked much into these protocols, because I used to not think much of them. And all I have read seems to contradict them.
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=77604&page=9

Here is the first post where I begin researching these protocols, in a thread about the Dead Sea Scrolls (sorry about derailing that thread a bit :o but it was about forgeries and how they seem to be covered up in very similar ways). My conclusion is that these protocols, however antisemitic they might be, actually is close to a historical record of our last 100 years. The goals have all been accomplished and I guess a few might still be on going. But all the research into why these Protocols are a hoax seems to be about how their source is a hoax, and I do find it very likely that their source probably is not what they are claimed.(might not be Jewish). That would explain why they ever got put to paper and public. Of course they could also just have been an inspiration to the actual Illuminati and other secret societies back in 1903 and the years after.

They do not go into how they were wrong in what was said to happen, and what actually happened. Just how they make Jews sound like evil people trying to conquer the world through deceit, which is probably true for the Rothschild. Although whether they are really Jews is questionable.

And another "hoax" is the Report from Iron Mountain (http://www.mega.nu/ampp/ironmtn.html). Some backgrounds on the here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Report_From_Iron_Mountain) which is wiki and as usual agrees about it clearly being a hoax even though the facts add up (well I havent read the wiki page, I guess I could still end up surprised), but here (http://www.philipcoppens.com/ironmountain.html) is another background on it, which goes into how it seems that it could be a bit more than just a satire as the proclaimed author said it to be.

And here is the link again to The Report from Iron Mountain (http://www.mega.nu/ampp/ironmtn.html) in its full. In case you want to research it a bit yourself.

But this is about, what might be a byproduct of these plans. The political new world order (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_world_order_(politics)): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_world_order_(politics)

Which clearly goes into how "the new world order" has helped the plans in the Protocols of Zion to come true and probably the same for the Report from Iron Mountain. Barack Obama is the latest president to use the term "new world order" about what he would try to make of the future. Oh wait, he is also the current president :D I guess it is something these presidents just like to blurt out now and then. Catches the attention of the voters I guess.

But does it really matter if their are people planning on world domination? Well, I do not like that there are cameras set up everywhere, all money being made digital and with no basis in real assets, biometric passports, body scanners in the airport, fingerprints taken when going to other continents or the possibility that we might have to be chipped in the future. So far it seems it is only our passports that will be chipped though.

But aside from that, as long as your digital person is not assassinated, then I am okay with it. All this digital stuff makes it easier to pay and you do not have to worry about being robbed of real money, only hackers and other cyber pirates. Well being robbed for real is probably still a problem, but those robbers must begin to feel a bit outdated.

In general, so far this might annoy me a bit but I am not worried about it. I do not think it is nothing either though, some people do seem to like the idea of controlling everything. And so far I guess I might be too willing a slave.

[romas]

It's still a meaningless term, vague demagogue like:

Iran, Syria 'to create new world order,' says Ahmadinejad (http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/302545,iran-syria-to-create-new-world-order-says-ahmadinejad.html)

It's a sort of political laymen term to describe things in whole even when those things aren't connected directly. For example Russias new world order might be very different idea to USA one(Plan for new American century?).

[kblood]

It's still a meaningless term, vague demagogue like:

Iran, Syria 'to create new world order,' says Ahmadinejad (http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/302545,iran-syria-to-create-new-world-order-says-ahmadinejad.html)

It's a sort of political laymen term to describe things in whole even when those things aren't connected directly. For example Russias new world order might be very different idea to USA one(Plan for new American century?).

But they repeat saying this. That they are creating a new world order. Its been ongoing for decades now. Almost a century even. If you research it enough, it is rather connected and the goals planned long ago is still getting closer and closer to fulfillment.

[noewhan]

But they repeat saying this. That they are creating a new world order. Its been ongoing for decades now. Almost a century even. If you research it enough, it is rather connected and the goals planned long ago is still getting closer and closer to fulfillment.

I don't see how people can't realise we are in the 'Old World Order'. A 'New World Order' is just a streamlined version of the old one.

Was humanity ever free? In some aspects, yes. But ultimately, we have always been used by corrupt individuals who have a common goal.

[kblood]

I don't see how people can't realise we are in the 'Old World Order'. A 'New World Order' is just a streamlined version of the old one.

Was humanity ever free? In some aspects, yes. But ultimately, we have always been used by corrupt individuals who have a common goal.

The way I see it, Christianity and its "pay for your Sins and you will have salvation" amongst other schemes were another way to take over nations and it worked very well. The Church really surpassed the roman empire when it came to conquering the world. The whole religion has been tailored for this exact purpose. Today it has lost some of its power and is just one of the ways to try and do so.

Before the Church most attempts on world domination was through war only, and it seems to me that it was first in the 20th century that they got smart about it, and had new goals for wars and seems to have archived them ever since. Through that which David Icke calls Problem Reaction Solution.

What is hard to say these days is how well the elite is really working together. Is there really an Illuminati like conspiracy of powerful people that is manipulating all religions and nations with a common purpose for this one world government? Well to me it seems so anyway.

Those with power wants more power, power corrupts and this ends up with a power mongering elite that has the choice of going in on at least parts of this conspiracy and become much more powerful from it or not be part of the conspiracy, and mostly still ends up being manipulated by them.

[romas]

The way I see it, Christianity and its "pay for your Sins and you will have salvation" amongst other schemes were another way to take over nations and it worked very well. The Church really surpassed the roman empire when it came to conquering the world. The whole religion has been tailored for this exact purpose. Today it has lost some of its power and is just one of the ways to try and do so.

Before the Church most attempts on world domination was through war only, and it seems to me that it was first in the 20th century that they got smart about it, and had new goals for wars and seems to have archived them ever since. Through that which David Icke calls Problem Reaction Solution.

What is hard to say these days is how well the elite is really working together. Is there really an Illuminati like conspiracy of powerful people that is manipulating all religions and nations with a common purpose for this one world government? Well to me it seems so anyway.

Those with power wants more power, power corrupts and this ends up with a power mongering elite that has the choice of going in on at least parts of this conspiracy and become much more powerful from it or not be part of the conspiracy, and mostly still ends up being manipulated by them.




Yep and today money is that new/old tool, when Church of Rome cronies saw that even religion can't dominate the whole world, because some people refuse to be completely dumbed down, they began the money game, USA capitalism is the real christian capitalism, the Vatican way of doing things and corporations are just mirror images of Vatican system itself. The big oil and the big steel etc, they were all heavily tied to US christian societies. Just as peasants were religious consumers most of us are corporate product consumers.

[kblood]

Yes, I agree. I also think this is why one of the major goals of these protocols of Zion were about taking over all banks in the world and finances. Even before the protocols they knew how important this was, and it was probably from the experience of how it could be done, and how good the Rothschild were at it, that this became an objective. The Rothschild knew very well that if you control a nations money, you control the nation and are well known for having said that.

[dogsmilk]

Well I think you really underestimate the importance of
symbology. It was of utmost importance in the ancient
world and I reckon its carried though right to now. Terms
like ' Dawn of a new day ' have a lot of meaning that you
don't realise. You very quick to poo-poo Maxwell without
looking into it more. If you google most things he says or
get a wiki explanation , sure you will find a rational explanation
for everything he says , but then again what cant you
find a rational explanation for? - the answer is everything and
anything if you want to. Its up to all of us to use logic
and put 2+2 together. As I said I dont believe in co-
incidences. Everything in my opinion happens for a reason.
Because this whole thing is run by secret societies its hard
to get to the bottom of, because their just that ' SECRET'
societies. You would be really suprised how easy the few can
control the many. As I said already the most blatant example
of this happening is within the EU.

Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and all of the
modern day US presidents use the same
symbols and said the same things. Look
up something called 'Pattern Recognition'.

I'm not saying symbols aren't important - of course they are. In today's world just look at the power corporate brand symbols can wield - kids can get bullied at school if they don't have the correct symbol on their pumps. And look at how worked up people get about their national flag.
But it's the intentionality behind them and what they actually mean to people.
Many symbols have near universal resonance because they just make sense. If you want to convey strength/courage/nobilty, it is natural to use a lion or an eagle as opposed to a slug or a chicken because we naturally associate them with these properties.
I've been looking at some Maxwell lecture and he just makes things up, ascribing meaning totally arbitrarily. Like here -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TC9JeBEhZU&feature=related
He just declares the eagle represents the sun - says who?
He draws significance from the Nazis using the eagle, apparently unaware the eagle is a traditional German symbol which of course the Nazis would use because it represents their country, resonates with the populace and invokes patriotism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_eagle
He says the wings of the eagle represent left and right wing - he's made that up. That has no basis in reality that I'm aware of. Indeed, "left wing" and "right wing" are relatively modern concepts, coming far, far later than the eagle being a popular symbol.
Later on he declares the Republicans are Nazis and the Democrats are communists - the fact they quite simply are not seems to have escaped him.

Indeed, I've watched most of and it's totally incoherent. Apart from the fact he uncritically cites a load of disconnected and rather dubious sources, he doesn't actually explain how these various supposed connections fit together - like what have communists got to do with the Golden Dawn? Communists aren't known for their love of esoteric occult stuff. He says the Bavarian Illuminati were communists - since when? He starts with some congressional investigation thingy from the 1950s which he just accepts uncritically without even considering its context - a time of 'reds under the bed' - despite it, as far as I'm concerned at least, spouting a load of rubbish.

Some of what he says is unbelieveably bizarre. Here
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0pfg_zagKuw&feature=related
He claims "communist" Hollywood "made movies to glorify the rise of communism" as well as apparently glorifying Nazism, anything "filthy, degenerate" (!) He has a poster for the film reds - never seen it - but it's just a film about John Reed. Well exactly what are all these films glorifying communism and Nazism/fascism? Where was he in the eighties? Did he miss those big cold war propaganda flicks like Rambo and Top Gun? He mentions Red Dawn which is fiercely anti-communist and all-American, pretty much the epitome of red scare cinema featuring the ridiculous spectacle of Cuban forces invading America with the Soviets.
And I can't say I've ever seen a Hollywood film glorifying Nazism - what does he think of films like American History X or The Believer or Holocaust films?

Indeed, he seems to think just because he can find references to commies using the universal imagery of the 'dawn of a new day' being a positive thing that therefore means it's communist. It would take all day to go into all the things wrong with this assumption.
But he also says the Shell logo represents the sun - it looks rather like a shell to me.

If you google most things he says or
get a wiki explanation , sure you will find a rational explanation
for everything he says , but then again what cant you
find a rational explanation for? -

Well though I do use the term myself, I do think it is a bit loaded - I doubt you think your take on things is irrational.

But I do think you have to step back with some notions. Like Maxwell takes all kinds of logos and symbols from a wide array of companies, religious organisations etc and declares anything featuring a sunrise or referring to the dawn of a new day is communist symbolism - I'd say that is utterly absurd.

So for a start this means that 'secret societies' have somehow - obviously there is no explanation whatsoever as to how this mammoth task was achieved - actively engineered the logos designed by a multitude of people for a vast array of organisations to convey communism. Despite the fact no-one apart from Maxwell thinks the very concept of the dawn of a new day represents communism, they aren't thinking about communism when they see it and the imagery is routinely used by people who are in no way communists, don't like communism and live in countries that aren't communist: So it's totally pointless anyway - it can't possibly promote communism if no-one associates with communism. I have never met anyone in my life (including hardcore lefties) who thought the concept of 'the dawn of a new day' is a commie one.
Assuming he was actually right, it would simply be a totally futile and utterly ineffectual exercise - surely any Illuminati would have better things to do with their time?
It just doesn't make any sense. Frankly, I find it hard to begin to say how preposterous what he's asserting seems to me.

On top of all this, he goes on about sun imagery being popular since ancient times (with bald assertions, sweeping statements and I think a few factual inaccuracies along the way but there you go), but then apparently this imagery suddenly means communism!

Isn't the blatant fact that the dawn of a new day is just a very popular positive image to the point of cliche a far more obvious explanation for its pervasiveness??

I mean, in this segment
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bsCHRRpiU5M&feature=related
he says the Illuminati are "bringing about the dawn of a new day which is world communism" - well they're doing a pretty shit job of it if that's the case.

What I'm not getting as well is the why.
People will act due to varying motivations - they may be fiercely ideological, staunchly religious, nakedly and cynically self-interested etc. And all of us have our particular worldview.
I think this is very pertinent to conspiracies because I think people infuse them with their belief systems. A crude example would be some of the stuff that people claim is 'the agenda' on this forum - so you can get people round here asserting race mixing or homosexuality becoming acceptable are part of 'the agenda' - it strikes me that 'the agenda' has an uncanny knack of representing exactly what people don't like. Like I'm not surprised Christians (though not just Christians say this I hasten to add) tend to be particularly into notions of the Illuminati being 'Satanic', a new 'one world religion', prophecies etc because they view things from that framework. Indeed, if you put together all the things people claim 'the agenda' is about you'd just have an enormous mess of confused and contradictory notions.

But people in power are like everyone else - they may have their own particular hobbyhorses and obsessions. Beyond that though, I can't understand why there are supposed to be all these weird plots that do not represent the world that these Illuminati supposedly control. Like if they want to bring about communism, why is communism in such a moribund state and what was American foreign policy up to the fall of the Soviet Union - including fighting wars and sponsoring terrorists to 'fight communism and spread democracy' all about? Why has 'socialist' become practically an insult even in the UK? If they're so Satanic, you'd kind of expect Satanism to be a major religion by now.
Why are there all these devilish plots that never seem to happen? It's not like if you're very rich and powerful the world doesn't work very nicely thank you for you already. It's like when people claim the Illuminati want to bring about world war III - what the fuck for???

Everything in my opinion happens for a reason.
Because this whole thing is run by secret societies its hard
to get to the bottom of, because their just that ' SECRET'
societies. You would be really suprised how easy the few can
control the many. As I said already the most blatant example
of this happening is within the EU.

But there can be a multitude of reasons for things.
I think the few can control the many, but their subordinates do usually notice. And there are always limits to power - I think Maxwell takes this to absolute extreme by suggesting various disparate organisations are pushing communism in their logos.

Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini and all of the
modern day US presidents use the same
symbols and said the same things. Look
up something called 'Pattern Recognition'.

I think there are significant differences in their pitches that reflect their different ideologies. But I think it's inevitable there'll be some similarities in their rhetoric because they are all leaders.
And why wouldn't they use some of the same symbols? There's a finite stock of cool symbols that resonate well with people and their traditional use can stretch back many years.

I hope this post hasn't come across as rude. I am just really struggling to get my head round this Maxwell stuff because it makes no sense to me - maybe I just don't 'get it' I dunno.

[kblood]

Has communism not already been beaten dead with a stick some time ago? Does Russia still claim to have communism? I hope China do not, because that sure would be a lie these days. Still I guess they do let the state do everything, but they live after capitalistic standards.

[romas]

Imho true comunism never existed, those attempts ended up with plain mass robbery/murder and the new masters who sticked to old ways and mistakes ended up being tyrants, they kept waiting for the "new man"

[1776]

Debate this!

http://i46.tinypic.com/23r79xw.jpg

:D

[noewhan]

Debate about the authenticity of the One Dollar Bill & Novus Ordum Seclorum.
Maybe joe911 thinks the bill was never printed. It's just in our heads, right?

[kblood]

Debate about the authenticity of the One Dollar Bill & Novus Ordum Seclorum.
Maybe joe911 thinks the bill was never printed. It's just in our heads, right?

Hehe, that is a good one. Had forgotten about that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novus_ordo_seclorum
The phrase Novus ordo seclorum (Latin for "New Order of the Ages") appears on the reverse of the Great Seal of the United States, first designed in 1782 and printed on the back of the American dollar bill since 1935. The phrase also appears on the coat of arms of the Yale School of Management, Yale University's business school. The phrase is often mistranslated as "New World Order," for which the Latin would be Novus Ordo Mundi.

It is also the beginning of democracy which seems to be the final choice for the NWO. I think they were undecided whether it should be communism or democracy. In my country (Denmark) I think we were won over to democracy only because the US gave a big wad of dollars to all who choose democracy.

[noewhan]

he says the Illuminati are "bringing about the dawn of a new day which is world communism" - well they're doing a pretty shit job of it if that's the case...

...It's like when people claim the Illuminati want to bring about world war III - what the fuck for???

...I hope this post hasn't come across as rude. I am just really struggling to get my head round this Maxwell stuff because it makes no sense to me - maybe I just don't 'get it' I dunno.

A shitty job which enabled them to steal over 50 trillion. Yeh, shitty job.

War always = profit for TPTB.

It is confusing. Made to be. It also depends on who's explaining the situation. Maxwell is good, but not the best.

[dogsmilk]

A shitty job which enabled them to steal over 50 trillion. Yeh, shitty job.

War always = profit for TPTB.

It is confusing. Made to be. It also depends on who's explaining the situation. Maxwell is good, but not the best.

I don't think it's confusing, I think it's nonsensical.
Like I said, maybe I don't 'get it', but Maxwell seems to me to have got well carried away with himself chasing windmills. He seems to have a very cavalier attitude to checking his facts too.

Some people do make money off wars, but wars are destructive, unpredictable and can adversely affect rich and powerful people too. I don't think anyone, no matter how powerful, wants bombs falling anywhere near where they live.
World War II was the most destructive conflict in human history - one can only speculate at the devastation a conflict on that scale would cause now.
I think there is an apocalyptic strain in this kind of stuff that reminds me of end-times Christianity.

I don't get what's supposed to be so amazing about the dollar bill either.

[noewhan]

I don't think it's confusing, I think it's nonsensical.
Like I said, maybe I don't 'get it', but Maxwell seems to me to have got well carried away with himself chasing windmills. He seems to have a very cavalier attitude to checking his facts too.

Some people do make money off wars, but wars are destructive, unpredictable and can adversely affect rich and powerful people too. I don't think anyone, no matter how powerful, wants bombs falling anywhere near where they live.
World War II was the most destructive conflict in human history - one can only speculate at the devastation a conflict on that scale would cause now.
I think there is an apocalyptic strain in this kind of stuff that reminds me of end-times Christianity.

I don't get what's supposed to be so amazing about the dollar bill either.

Some say Maxwell is controlled, and he might be to an extent.

Wars are destructive, I don't disagree. But then again, what kind of war? Since WW2 there have been many developments in slow death weapons (in food & drink) or Neutron bombs, which Jimmy Carter agreed to use for depopulation.

The all seeing eye of Lucifer might not amaze you. It surely doesn't amaze me. But not in your sense. It's a very old symbol, and it's just a way of cults, they brand what they want to own - or think they own.

[kblood]

I don't think it's confusing, I think it's nonsensical.
Like I said, maybe I don't 'get it', but Maxwell seems to me to have got well carried away with himself chasing windmills. He seems to have a very cavalier attitude to checking his facts too.

Some people do make money off wars, but wars are destructive, unpredictable and can adversely affect rich and powerful people too. I don't think anyone, no matter how powerful, wants bombs falling anywhere near where they live.
World War II was the most destructive conflict in human history - one can only speculate at the devastation a conflict on that scale would cause now.
I think there is an apocalyptic strain in this kind of stuff that reminds me of end-times Christianity.

I don't get what's supposed to be so amazing about the dollar bill either.

Why wars? Well the Rothschild found the best way to get their banks into other countries, and gain control of the banks they had. Wars.

Wars are destructive? Indeed and that really kicks off the economy. Banks do not thrive when the market becomes fat and predictable. They do not thrive when buildings and cars get to last as long as expected. Or maybe you thought so? And it is easier to convince a country that they should borrow money from then, when the country just spent all their capital on rebuilding after a war. In fact they value exactly this much more than profit, because they know it is a very worthwhile investment in the long run. To own a country through its debt that is.

This Maxwell person does not exactly sound like he is spot on though. Or maybe he wrote what he did 50-70 years ago? Sounds like it might have been true back then. But they still had archived just about every planned goal in the Protocols of Zion after WW2. The state of Israel, International armies, control of the banks and bank control of many more countries. And many more goals that I probably already went into in the thread were I did some more extensive research into these Protocols of Zion.

And it probably is not so strange if it reminds you of end time Christianity, since the Revelations part of the Bible (oh wait, that is not part of the Bible), but that part is about the apocalypse, and people today still believe in it. Even help create it. Jews are likely to suffer even more for it, because there are people like the Rothschild family having these goals. Not that the Jews are and / or will be the only to suffer.

[hadabusa]

Why wars? Well the Rothschild found the best way to get their banks into other countries, and gain control of the banks they had. Wars.

Wars are destructive? Indeed and that really kicks off the economy. Banks do not thrive when the market becomes fat and predictable. They do not thrive when buildings and cars get to last as long as expected. Or maybe you thought so? And it is easier to convince a country that they should borrow money from then, when the country just spent all their capital on rebuilding after a war. In fact they value exactly this much more than profit, because they know it is a very worthwhile investment in the long run. To own a country through its debt that is.

This Maxwell person does not exactly sound like he is spot on though. Or maybe he wrote what he did 50-70 years ago? Sounds like it might have been true back then. But they still had archived just about every planned goal in the Protocols of Zion after WW2. The state of Israel, International armies, control of the banks and bank control of many more countries. And many more goals that I probably already went into in the thread were I did some more extensive research into these Protocols of Zion.

And it probably is not so strange if it reminds you of end time Christianity, since the Revelations part of the Bible (oh wait, that is not part of the Bible), but that part is about the apocalypse, and people today still believe in it. Even help create it. Jews are likely to suffer even more for it, because there are people like the Rothschild family having these goals. Not that the Jews are and / or will be the only to suffer.

well said.

but ...isnt denmark a monarchy?:D

[dogsmilk]

Why wars? Well the Rothschild found the best way to get their banks into other countries, and gain control of the banks they had. Wars.

Wars are destructive? Indeed and that really kicks off the economy. Banks do not thrive when the market becomes fat and predictable. They do not thrive when buildings and cars get to last as long as expected. Or maybe you thought so? And it is easier to convince a country that they should borrow money from then, when the country just spent all their capital on rebuilding after a war. In fact they value exactly this much more than profit, because they know it is a very worthwhile investment in the long run. To own a country through its debt that is.

Well I'm not an expert on banking (or the history of the Rothchilds) - in fact I'm not hot on economics at all - so I'm not really in any position to start going on about exactly what makes banks turn a profit, the last 100 years of their history or a review of post war finances. Though I didn't think countries actually spent all their capital on rebuilding - I thought the world bank played a big part in that.
And this kind of suggests banks were behind the world wars. Which is news to me.


This Maxwell person does not exactly sound like he is spot on though. Or maybe he wrote what he did 50-70 years ago? Sounds like it might have been true back then. But they still had archived just about every planned goal in the Protocols of Zion after WW2. The state of Israel, International armies, control of the banks and bank control of many more countries. And many more goals that I probably already went into in the thread were I did some more extensive research into these Protocols of Zion.

The videos I were commenting on were pretty recent - they were going on about Obama.
The Protocols are bullshit. I don't even know why people think they're uncannily prescient or remotely convincing - the satire they plagiarised was designed to resonate with people in the 19th century - the sort of themes within them people commonly cite are not new. I don't think it's coincidence they include an attack on liberalism - that very much fits with the times.
And they are unequivocally supposed to be about the Jews. That's dandy if people are into Jew theories, but that's who they were written to target. And loads of it is just obvious cack, e.g. -

FREEDOM OF CONSCIENCE HAS BEEN DECLARED EVERYWHERE, SO THAT NOW ONLY YEARS DIVIDE US FROM THE MOMENT OF THE COMPLETE WRECKING OF THAT CHRISTIAN RELIGION: as to other religions we shall have still less difficulty in dealing with them, but it would be premature to speak of this now. We shall set clericalism and clericals into such narrow frames as to make their influence move in retrogressive proportion to its former progress.


Apart from the fact it's just obvious bollocks, it just reeks of playing to its audience.

And it probably is not so strange if it reminds you of end time Christianity, since the Revelations part of the Bible (oh wait, that is not part of the Bible), but that part is about the apocalypse, and people today still believe in it. Even help create it. Jews are likely to suffer even more for it, because there are people like the Rothschild family having these goals. Not that the Jews are and / or will be the only to suffer.

Well I agree some people might want to help the apocalypse along if they're into that kind of stuff.
But I'm thinking in terms of the huge apocalypse that is always just around the corner, the master plan always just about to come to fruition and the incorporation of everything into the big conspiracy. A lot of the stuff you get today is just rehashed versions of stuff from 100 years ago or more.

[eternal_spirit]

Originally Posted by dogsmilk http://www.davidicke.com/forum/images/buttons_green/viewpost.gif (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?p=1058543983#post1058543983)


Some people do make money off wars, but wars are destructive, unpredictable and can adversely affect rich and powerful people too. I don't think anyone, no matter how powerful, wants bombs falling anywhere near where they live.



What do we owe the honour posting on a different topic for once must be a blue moon.

I agree, banks make enough killings on Mortgages plus other borrowing alone.

[eternal_spirit]

Let's face it with crazy insane religions and political movements is enough and has been a part of history the cause of disgareements and wars long before any hidden hand or NWO etc. What I'm trying to say divsions have always been there and no need for any hidden hands to interfere to cause division.

People blame the CIA/MI5 Masons etc for all the world's evils (it's bullshit wars and divisions etc have been around long before any of these groups existed)

[dogsmilk]

Let's face it with crazy insane religions and political movements is enough and has been a part of history the cause of disgareements and wars long before any hidden hand or NWO etc. What I'm trying to say divsions have always been there and no need for any hidden hands to interfere to cause division.

People blame the CIA/MI5 Masons etc for all the world's evils (it's bullshit wars and divisions etc have been around long before any of these groups existed)

Well I think I'd agree that divisions are very old and people are pretty good at them - just look at the bitch fight you're having on that separatism thread.

[kblood]

well said.

but ...isnt denmark a monarchy?:D

It is. Not sure what you are hinting at with that, but Denmark has been a monarchy for centuries. Still very possible to control a country with money, and at least the last 50 years it seems our royal family is mostly there for show. They do have very real power because if there is people the queen did not like personally she seems to be signing agreements on just about everything that happens. She could just stop doing that, no more passport and that sort of thing. Also most political decisions have to be accepted by the queen.

All that said Denmark is still a democracy, and became so very much because the US gave "aid to countries in need after the war", because USA was by far the strongest economy after WW2. To get the economy going again they gave these aid packages, meaning money if you choose or keep choosing democracy.

Well I'm not an expert on banking (or the history of the Rothchilds) - in fact I'm not hot on economics at all - so I'm not really in any position to start going on about exactly what makes banks turn a profit, the last 100 years of their history or a review of post war finances. Though I didn't think countries actually spent all their capital on rebuilding - I thought the world bank played a big part in that.
And this kind of suggests banks were behind the world wars. Which is news to me.

Yes, Rothschild profits very well from war, and usually supports both sides. It makes them care less about who wins or looses, they are still likely to loan more money from them after.

The videos I were commenting on were pretty recent - they were going on about Obama.
The Protocols are bullshit. I don't even know why people think they're uncannily prescient or remotely convincing - the satire they plagiarised was designed to resonate with people in the 19th century - the sort of themes within them people commonly cite are not new. I don't think it's coincidence they include an attack on liberalism - that very much fits with the times.
And they are unequivocally supposed to be about the Jews. That's dandy if people are into Jew theories, but that's who they were written to target. And loads of it is just obvious cack, e.g. -

Then please link these similarities with that French satire? I have not been able to find it in its actual text form, and as I stated in the thread were I researched these protocols, even if they were a plagiarism it does not at all change the fact that they did foretell the next 50-100 years very detailed.

I take it you have not read them and compared them with historical facts since you still take the conclusion Wiki and other sources try to make us believe. The protocols really speak for them selves, and if they did not originate as the protocols that would explain a lot.

Apart from the fact it's just obvious bollocks, it just reeks of playing to its audience. [/QUOTE]

This part is not about a quote of something I wrote it seems. Cant answer it.

Well I agree some people might want to help the apocalypse along if they're into that kind of stuff.
But I'm thinking in terms of the huge apocalypse that is always just around the corner, the master plan always just about to come to fruition and the incorporation of everything into the big conspiracy. A lot of the stuff you get today is just rehashed versions of stuff from 100 years ago or more.

Yes, the game plan never really changes much and they are just perfecting how to control the world. Not that I do believe they are succeeding that well or in the end, I am just saying some of these things does happen for a reason. And those reasons are rather obvious when you research these things.

Just like these protocols, they have been debunked so many times, but always in the same way. They are a plagiarism of a satire from some other country. Well woop di doo. Then whatever it was plagiarizing was very spot on then, although I doubt whatever it was plagiarizing said the Jews would get their country back. I am not saying the Jews control the world, it seems strange to me that Israel does not even seem to be populated much by real Jews. Most of them are German Jews. I have even heard most real Jews have a hard time getting to Israel even these days, but that is a rumor and I have no facts to support it other than a lack or dark skinned Jews in Israel.

And it ought to be obvious that both Jesus and the Jews ought to have dark skin, but for some reason that changes at some point. I am guessing after Rome adopted the Jesus religion they thought it more appropriate to depict him as white. That is almost off subject but does show how most the history of our world truly is told by those who won. Whether it was wars, financially or politically.

[dogsmilk]

Yes, Rothschild profits very well from war, and usually supports both sides. It makes them care less about who wins or looses, they are still likely to loan more money from them after.

I am not sure what you mean by "supports both sides".
Any form of business will be liable to deal with any side if they can though because they exist to make money.


Then please link these similarities with that French satire? I have not been able to find it in its actual text form, and as I stated in the thread were I researched these protocols, even if they were a plagiarism it does not at all change the fact that they did foretell the next 50-100 years very detailed.

I take it you have not read them and compared them with historical facts since you still take the conclusion Wiki and other sources try to make us believe. The protocols really speak for them selves, and if they did not originate as the protocols that would explain a lot.

You can read the dialogue here and form your own conclusion
http://www.notbored.org/dialogue-in-hell.html

I don't think they did foretell the next 50-100 years. This passage in the dialogue

I would divide into three or four categories the papers devoted to my power. In the first rank, I would place a certain number of newspapers whose tone would be frankly official and which -- at every turn -- would defend my actions to the limit. These would not be, let me tell you, the ones that would have the most influence on public opinion. In the second rank, I would place another phalanx of newspapers whose character would no longer be official and whose mission would be to rally to my power the masses of lukewarm or indifferent people who accept without scruple what exists, but do not go beyond their political religion.

It is in the following categories of newspapers that the most powerful levers of my power would be found. Here the official or unofficial tone would be completely lost -- in appearance, of course -- because the newspapers of which I speak would all be attached by the same chain to my government: a visible chain for some; an invisible one to others. I would not undertake to tell you what would be their number, because I would assign a dedicated organ to each opinion, in each party; I would have an aristocratic organ in the aristocratic party, a republican organ in the republican party, a revolutionary organ in the revolutionary party, an anarchist organ -- if need be -- in the anarchist party. Like the God Vishnu, my press would have a hundred arms and these arms would place their hands upon all the nuances of opinion throughout the entire country. One would be of my party without knowing it. Those who believe they speak their language would [actually] be speaking mine; those who believe they were acting in their party would be acting in mine; those who believe they were marching under their flag would be marching under mine.

is one the Protocols rips off (IIRC the Protocols also uses the reference to the many arms of Vishnu, a bit odd for zealous power mad Jews)

And what it's saying will have similar resonance. Except it's intended as a commentary directly relevant to the time it was published in.


This part is not about a quote of something I wrote it seems. Cant answer it.


It was a quote from the Protocols.


Yes, the game plan never really changes much and they are just perfecting how to control the world. Not that I do believe they are succeeding that well or in the end, I am just saying some of these things does happen for a reason. And those reasons are rather obvious when you research these things.


Just like these protocols, they have been debunked so many times, but always in the same way. They are a plagiarism of a satire from some other country. Well woop di doo. Then whatever it was plagiarizing was very spot on then, although I doubt whatever it was plagiarizing said the Jews would get their country back. I am not saying the Jews control the world, it seems strange to me that Israel does not even seem to be populated much by real Jews. Most of them are German Jews. I have even heard most real Jews have a hard time getting to Israel even these days, but that is a rumor and I have no facts to support it other than a lack or dark skinned Jews in Israel.

No Jews getting their country back was not plagiarised - the Dialogue isn't about Jews, and the return to Israel has always been a big theme in Judaism. I suppose ultimately you're going to get back to 'there's no such thing as coincidences' or things happened they way they did because they did. Which really leads to you to the causation of events. Like some people think that Israel happening after world war II means something about the causation of the Holocaust (or a holohoax). People will always debate the causation of events, but fundamentally it's about what we know about what has happened and why. And I think these are very large and complicated subjects with loads of different factors.
I think another issue is that of weighting. I tend to think people get carried away with the significance of Israel globally. Partially because of Israel's behaviour towards the Palestinians, attack on Lebanon etc and great antipathy towards it from Muslims and partially because of the wealth of Jew related conspiracy material on the internet (and the crossover between them) , there is a massive volume of stuff going on about Zionists/Jews online. People are going to respond to what's in front of them in the same way they will talk about what's in the daily paper.
I think they can be criticised in other ways, such as their generalised nature and really uselessness as some kind of actual practical plan. Some themes in both just show political preoccupations of the time - like I said, the attack on liberalism is a prime example. If satire is judged to be spot on then that's what satire endeavours to be.
Aside from it being set in overt totalitarianism, 1984 is very perceptive and resonates with people, as evidenced by the amount of concepts it has brought into the English language, like "Orwellian", "Big Brother state", "doublethink" etc. But I think it would be ludicrous to suggest it's anything other than a novel by a clever bloke.
I don't know anything about Israel being 'mostly German Jews'. How many actually went to Israel?
I'm not sure what a "real" Jew is supposed to be.


And it ought to be obvious that both Jesus and the Jews ought to have dark skin, but for some reason that changes at some point. I am guessing after Rome adopted the Jesus religion they thought it more appropriate to depict him as white. That is almost off subject but does show how most the history of our world truly is told by those who won. Whether it was wars, financially or politically.

I suppose at a fundamental level - beyond a white Jesus being the obvious choice when Europe was fundamentally racist - you're going to have a tendency to portray you Lord and Saviour, who was a man, as looking like you. One of the Tower of Babel pictures I posted earlier is a medieval one that has all the dudes looking like medieval Europeans - it might not even have occurred to have them looking like anything else. I don't think that's about 'who won' as opposed to making your myths fit your location and culture. I'd say modern Christians will tend to know Jesus would have been a dark skinned chap, but I happened to see a fairly recent Mormon video a while ago and Jesus still looked like a model Aryan.
Given some Jews are converts and Jews spread out all over the world, I don't see why they should be expected to be dark skinned.

[hadabusa]

hey,kb, you misquoted me twice there,np,just saying.


merely mentioned monarchy bc youve said democracy:o

dogmilk, you mustnt understand economy to know theres something unfair when some ppl print "money" out of nothing(holding monopoly ), and issue it as debt(2be paid back with interest,hence pyramid system or unpayable debt).
while the peasants/wageslaves are paid with that "money " for labour.
to pay back interest, new debts created trough inflation.look what a dollar buyed 30yrs ago and what it buys today.


"you can enslave nations with the sword or by debt"napoleon

[kblood]

I am not sure what you mean by "supports both sides".
Any form of business will be liable to deal with any side if they can though because they exist to make money.

During war companies usually stops trade with the opposing countries, say your company originates from the UK. This is one of the reasons why Rothschild's wants a central bank in every country. The war with Napoleon helped the Rothschild family to gain majority in the Bank of England. Now they are even seated in one of the most powerful places in England and even today acts as the queens advisor, if I am not mistaken. Now why is this? Guess they are just such smart people they are nice to have as allies. The money and knowing how to use it probably helps as well.

Other countries traded with both sides, but Rothschild has a habit of giving the loans the countries needs to buy weapons, then after they have wreaked havoc on each other, more money is loaned to rebuild. The victor might even have money to pay off some of this debt, but I expect the Rothschild family and other banking families would like them not to do so.

Iraq is a country who knows what it means to own money to the world bank. They were forced to do this through trade embargo's and obviously the war on Iraq which was the final blow that forced them to loan money after being forced to sell money to get food, at less than half its price in "food currency".

Still they managed to pay back these loans within a decade, because they know what they are up against and what the world bank really wants from them.

You can read the dialogue here and form your own conclusion
http://www.notbored.org/dialogue-in-hell.html

I don't think they did foretell the next 50-100 years. This passage in the dialogue

[the quote]

is one the Protocols rips off (IIRC the Protocols also uses the reference to the many arms of Vishnu, a bit odd for zealous power mad Jews)

And what it's saying will have similar resonance. Except it's intended as a commentary directly relevant to the time it was published in.

Here in Denmark, satire and poetry has often been used to have hidden messages. To freedom fighters for example or to oppose the Nazi control at the time. They made a popular song about lost love which was really about lost freedom, or something like that. It is the same with satire. "Report from Iron Mountain" is the same. Released then later said to be a hoax and a satire by the self claimed author. Others have tried claiming to be the author later but could not.

I believe this satire was the same and thanks for linking it :) The protocols still seems to have refined it a bit more, with more clear goals in it. I have researched many of the news agencies during the first and second world war, one of them being Reuters, which the Rothschild family is claimed to have purchased. Have not found any documented proof of it anywhere though.


And again: I don't think they did foretell the next 50-100 years. This passage in the dialogue

These are footnotes from the translator:

[5] Compare this idea with Karl Marx, who during this sam period imagined that capitalism would exploit and impoverish the working classes to the point of starvation and death.

[6] A remarkable anticipation -- a hundred years in advance! -- of Guy Debord's The Society of the Spectacle.

[7] Here we recall that, as part of his duties as an agent of the Russian secret police, Matvei Golovinski (the man who created The Protocols of the Elders of Zion by plagiarizing Maurice Joly) wrote pro-Czarist articles for Le Figaro.

[8] Perhaps including speculations on the international Jewish conspiracy to take control of the world through capitalism!

And to go into what the 6th footnote was about:

Machiavelli: Every day my newspapers would be filled with official speeches, reviews, reports to the ministers, reports to the sovereign. I would not forget that I live in an era in which believes oneself able to resolve all of society's problems through industry, in an era in which one ceaselessly occupies oneself with the improvement of the lot of the working classes.[5] I would be very devoted to such questions, which are a very fortunate distraction from the preoccupations of domestic politics. Among the southern peoples [of Europe], it would be necessary for the governments to appear ceaselessly occupied; the masses consent to be inactive, but on the condition that those who govern them provide them with the spectacle of an incessant activity,[6] a kind of fever; that they constantly attract their eyes with novelties, surprises and dramatic turns of events; this would perhaps be bizarre, but, once again, it would be necessary.

I do not know if this was how Journalism was back in the 19th century, but it certainly is more than ever, how it turned out in the 20th century.

It was a quote from the Protocols.

Aah, sorry I did not notice. If you gave a link to the protocols before or after that quote it would be easier to see. That is why I usually do that.

No Jews getting their country back was not plagiarised - the Dialogue isn't about Jews, and the return to Israel has always been a big theme in Judaism. I suppose ultimately you're going to get back to 'there's no such thing as coincidences' or things happened they way they did because they did. I don't know anything about Israel being 'mostly German Jews'. How many actually went to Israel?
I'm not sure what a "real" Jew is supposed to be.

I suppose at a fundamental level - beyond a white Jesus being the obvious choice when Europe was fundamentally racist - you're going to have a tendency to portray you Lord and Saviour, who was a man, as looking like you. One of the Tower of Babel pictures I posted earlier is a medieval one that has all the dudes looking like medieval Europeans - it might not even have occurred to have them looking like anything else. I don't think that's about 'who won' as opposed to making your myths fit your location and culture. I'd say modern Christians will tend to know Jesus would have been a dark skinned chap, but I happened to see a fairly recent Mormon video a while ago and Jesus still looked like a model Aryan.
Given some Jews are converts and Jews spread out all over the world, I don't see why they should be expected to be dark skinned.

Exactly, the "race" of Jews are hardly Jews anymore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew#Ethnic_divisions

These Ashkenazim, or "Germanics" (Ashkenaz meaning "Germany") are the same "sub race" of Jews as the Rothschild family:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_family

Other notable ones are Einstein and Freud.

But unless it is just rumors, the Rothschild family is said to have been part of a country that was caught in between a Muslim and Christian conflict. To avoid being part of it, they became Jews and therefore neutral.

These who choose to be Jews seem to actually be the ones that might be outnumbering the ones I would call real Jews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizrahim These seem more likely to be part of the actual Jewish lineage.

Its just food for thought. I believe all of them can be good people, but the part of the Jews that might truly be that is likely the minority today.

hey,kb, you misquoted me twice there,np,just saying.


merely mentioned monarchy bc youve said democracy:o


Sorry, I sometimes take huge chunks of quote away and put in "..." to show there is a chunk missing :) Not sure if that is what you are referring to. Also I copy paste the quotation markers so I might have mis copies some...

But as I think I already mentioned, Denmark is a Democracy made upon a Monarchy, for the sake of tradition I guess. The Danes probably would not know much differences if the royal family was there or not, other than the millions their estates cost each year for the state. They do not pay for themselves as it seems England's royal families does. Not sure about that either though. They could if they wanted to anyway.

[hadabusa]

nono, theres stuff that dogmilk wrote but the quote labels it as my post.
its funny, bc i cant remember ive ever agreed on anything with dogmilk.
:)


wait, freud wasa rothschild?:eek:

[dogsmilk]

hey,kb, you misquoted me twice there,np,just saying.


merely mentioned monarchy bc youve said democracy:o

dogmilk, you mustnt understand economy to know theres something unfair when some ppl print "money" out of nothing(holding monopoly ), and issue it as debt(2be paid back with interest,hence pyramid system or unpayable debt).
while the peasants/wageslaves are paid with that "money " for labour.
to pay back interest, new debts created trough inflation.look what a dollar buyed 30yrs ago and what it buys today.


"you can enslave nations with the sword or by debt"napoleon

I did already say I'm not an economist. And unless the unlikely event arises I feel compelled to get into it, I won't have a great deal to say about it, or banking which isn't something I've spent any time studying.
But I don't think it's fair someone can get paid a dollar for making something that is sold for a hundred dollars in another country. Loads of things aren't fair. I don't think things not being fair says a single thing about the supposed existence of any New World Order.

[rodin]

What do we owe the honour posting on a different topic for once must be a blue moon.

I agree, banks make enough killings on Mortgages plus other borrowing alone.

Blue moon was Hogmanay

Eclipse 2

[rodin]

nono, theres stuff that dogmilk wrote but the quote labels it as my post.
its funny, bc i cant remember ive ever agreed on anything with dogmilk.
:)


wait, freud wasa rothschild?:eek:

Aren't they all?

[hadabusa]

I did already say I'm not an economist. And unless the unlikely event arises I feel compelled to get into it, I won't have a great deal to say about it, or banking which isn't something I've spent any time studying.
But I don't think it's fair someone can get paid a dollar for making something that is sold for a hundred dollars in another country. Loads of things aren't fair. I don't think things not being fair says a single thing about the supposed existence of any New World Order.

well, thats politics rather then economy imo.

not2come asa smartass, but check "the money masters" to see the influence/power money can have.

[romas]

Money ultimately rules everything, there is no conspiracy behind it, it's plain fact.

[dogsmilk]

During war companies usually stops trade with the opposing countries, say your company originates from the UK. This is one of the reasons why Rothschild's wants a central bank in every country. The war with Napoleon helped the Rothschild family to gain majority in the Bank of England. Now they are even seated in one of the most powerful places in England and even today acts as the queens advisor, if I am not mistaken. Now why is this? Guess they are just such smart people they are nice to have as allies. The money and knowing how to use it probably helps as well.

Other countries traded with both sides, but Rothschild has a habit of giving the loans the countries needs to buy weapons, then after they have wreaked havoc on each other, more money is loaned to rebuild. The victor might even have money to pay off some of this debt, but I expect the Rothschild family and other banking families would like them not to do so.

Companies may still operate within warring countries. A famous example would be Coca-Cola making Fanta in Germany.
Otherwise, I'm not familiar with the history of the Rothchilds and have no idea where you've got this 'loans to both sides' from or how you've decided it's a Rothschild thing. Britain borrowed loads off the US for world war II. The lend lease scheme helped arm Britain (and others). Like I said, not my bag, but I'm rather sceptical of this notion of the Rothchilds running round funding all the wars.
I was under the impression the queen has a bunch of advisors - who they all I don't know, but you'd expect them to be high powered.



Iraq is a country who knows what it means to own money to the world bank. They were forced to do this through trade embargo's and obviously the war on Iraq which was the final blow that forced them to loan money after being forced to sell money to get food, at less than half its price in "food currency".

Still they managed to pay back these loans within a decade, because they know what they are up against and what the world bank really wants from them.

Loads of criticism has been directed at the world bank from numerous directions. I'm not sure what this has to do with anything.


Here in Denmark, satire and poetry has often been used to have hidden messages. To freedom fighters for example or to oppose the Nazi control at the time. They made a popular song about lost love which was really about lost freedom, or something like that. It is the same with satire. "Report from Iron Mountain" is the same. Released then later said to be a hoax and a satire by the self claimed author. Others have tried claiming to be the author later but could not.

I'm sure you can hide messages in anything if you want, but most satire I'd say is, well, satire. There's only any point in hidden messages if the recipient knows they are there and there is a reliable means of understanding them. So for most satire this would be entirely futile.


I believe this satire was the same and thanks for linking it :) The protocols still seems to have refined it a bit more, with more clear goals in it. I have researched many of the news agencies during the first and second world war, one of them being Reuters, which the Rothschild family is claimed to have purchased. Have not found any documented proof of it anywhere though.

I think that Rothchild/Reuters thing is one of those regular myths. I have a vague memory of looking at it in a Jew theory argument ages ago. But I could be misremembering.


And again:

These are footnotes from the translator:

The only actual foretelling I'm seeing there is them thinking it anticipates what Guy Debord went on to say. I'm not familiar with Debord, but if it's footnoting that other passage I have an idea my cultural theorist mate might not agree with it based on things I've heard him going on about. But meh.
But otherwise I don't know what page they're from so I don't know what they're footnoting.



And to go into what the 6th footnote was about:


I do not know if this was how Journalism was back in the 19th century, but it certainly is more than ever, how it turned out in the 20th century.

I'm not sure he's really talking about journalism in that passage.


Exactly, the "race" of Jews are hardly Jews anymore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jew#Ethnic_divisions

These Ashkenazim, or "Germanics" (Ashkenaz meaning "Germany") are the same "sub race" of Jews as the Rothschild family:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rothschild_family

Other notable ones are Einstein and Freud.

I'm not sure why any of this matters.


But unless it is just rumors, the Rothschild family is said to have been part of a country that was caught in between a Muslim and Christian conflict. To avoid being part of it, they became Jews and therefore neutral.

These who choose to be Jews seem to actually be the ones that might be outnumbering the ones I would call real Jews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mizrahim These seem more likely to be part of the actual Jewish lineage.

Its just food for thought. I believe all of them can be good people, but the part of the Jews that might truly be that is likely the minority today.

Again, I'm not sure it matters. I don't think it has ever been meaningful to call Jews a 'race' as I don't think they ever were.

[dogsmilk]

well, thats politics rather then economy imo.

not2come asa smartass, but check "the money masters" to see the influence/power money can have.

I don't see how it's politics. Labour is a variable overhead you want to keep as low as possible and if the labour cost per unit is a fraction of the retail price you're making lots of money. Where's the politics?

I have never got round to watching the money masters. If I did I'd have to start researching banking and stuff - I've never understood why people think these internet videos are inherently any more reliable than tabloid newspapers.

[hadabusa]

I don't see how it's politics. Labour is a variable overhead you want to keep as low as possible and if the labour cost per unit is a fraction of the retail price you're making lots of money. Where's the politics?

I have never got round to watching the money masters. If I did I'd have to start researching banking and stuff - I've never understood why people think these internet videos are inherently any more reliable than tabloid newspapers.

seriously, its a good documentation,its basic and,imo,unbiased.
doesnt require previous knowledge nor afterward studies.
its one of few docus where i felt the time was well spent.


the monster from yekil s island goes deeper into the the matter, but tmm is pretty enjoyable.

[romas]

I have never got round to watching the money masters. If I did I'd have to start researching banking and stuff - I've never understood why people think these internet videos are inherently any more reliable than tabloid newspapers.



Cause tabloid never really explains anything, they usually make statements and escape the mechanics/logic part and why not a documentary?(Fact that it's available on internet is pretty irrelevant) If a serious journalist wants to reach current generation a documentary is perfect.

I knew next to nothing about the finance game, it was perfect intro.


"Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler." -
-- Albert Einstein

[kblood]

Companies may still operate within warring countries. A famous example would be Coca-Cola making Fanta in Germany.
Otherwise, I'm not familiar with the history of the Rothchilds and have no idea where you've got this 'loans to both sides' from or how you've decided it's a Rothschild thing. Britain borrowed loads off the US for world war II. The lend lease scheme helped arm Britain (and others). Like I said, not my bag, but I'm rather sceptical of this notion of the Rothchilds running round funding all the wars.
I was under the impression the queen has a bunch of advisors - who they all I don't know, but you'd expect them to be high powered.

Loads of criticism has been directed at the world bank from numerous directions. I'm not sure what this has to do with anything.

True, Coca Cola is one of the companies on both sides. I believe this company is American though, no? And they joined the war much later. After that Coca Cola had good excuses as for why they could not stop their company due to the war and being cut off from the US... but of course any company that could get away with it did so. Germans were not evil people just because they were at war with others, although their leaders did not seem to have intentions you could be covered in under the "Christmas spirit"

But getting back to these Rothschild's. They do not make their war fundings official... oh wait actually some of them they do:

http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/N-M-Rothschild-amp;-Sons-Limited-Company-History.html

Key Dates:

1765: Meyer Aemschel Rothschild establishes his business in Frankfurt, Germany.
1798: Son Nathan M. Rothschild opens business in Manchester.
1808: N M Rothschild opens a London office.
1814: Rothschilds provides funding for Wellington's army.
1815: Company backs the English, Dutch, and Prussian allies at Waterloo
1825: Rothschilds provides backing to prevent collapse of Bank of England.
1871: Rothschilds organizes French repayment of war indemnity.
1875: The loan for the British acquisition of Suez Canal is provided by Rothschilds.
1931: Company helps save the troubled Austrian Creditanstalt.
1941: Rothschilds Continuation is formed as a holding company to ensure continuity of family involvement in banking.
1967: Establishes N M Rothschild & Sons (Australia).
1970: Rothschilds incorporates as private limited company.
1973: Offices in Hong Kong and Singapore are opened.
1979: An office in Chile is opened.
1982: Company creates Rothschild Incorporated in the United States.
1986: Rothschilds backs British Gas privatization.
1989: Offices in Germany and Italy are opened; Rothschilds Canada Inc. subsidiary is established.
1995: An office in Shanghai, China, debuts.
1998: 200th anniversary of Nathan Mayer Rothschild's arrival in England.

And this is just the official stuff. How often have they saved countries from collapses? And backed up some of the most historically important business deals?

1875: The loan for the British acquisition of Suez Canal is provided by Rothschilds.

Certainly was a very important deal, especially since this was to become a major trade route, and still is. Hmmm... I just noticed:

1814: Rothschilds provides funding for Wellington's army.
1815: Company backs the English, Dutch, and Prussian allies at Waterloo
1825: Rothschilds provides backing to prevent collapse of Bank of England.
1871: Rothschilds organizes French repayment of war indemnity.

This does directly state they supported all sides did it not? There is a whole not more of official Rothschild history on this page. Since it says allies I guess it does not really say so though. They sure were not friends of Napoleon, so they did have an interest in seeing the British win.

And if you do not think its a credible site then look at its front page:
http://www.fundinguniverse.com/

They are doing a good job at putting up a hoax site if that was the case. But seeing as they are supporting the Rothschild family's own official history, I guess it is official. They even claim they lost power when the US got into power, although (if the conspiracy rumors are correct) they controlled the Federal Reserve by then through their US relations with the Rockefeller family. If I remember correctly. Not sure if it was Rockefeller who got control over the Reserve.

Ohhh, found what I was looking for:

http://www.rothschildarchive.org/textguide/?doc=/textguide/articles/000_401_filelist

Their own records.

stating:

000/401A/3 1822 Neapolitan Government Loan 5% £2,000,000 / 16,000,000 Ducats. Copy contract present, original wanting. 1822

000/401A/4 Agreement between NMR and the Bank of England for NMR to borrow 3,000,000 Spanish Dollars. Copy; original wanting. 1823

So shortly after Waterloo in 1815, they help the French economy back up again. One war got them 4-5 countries in their pockets. And because of having these countries in their pockets, they got in on some of the most attractive business deals after that.

As this might show, I am not new to researching this family :) The real proof is not that hard to find. That is except the real proof of Rothschild's buying the press. They do own more than one company though, and one of the father of all Rothschild's most important advice was to never let anyone know exactly how wealthy they really were. Which became rather difficult after many more taxes were introduced on properties and such, which is why the Dutch banking systems became important to them, and outsourcing a bit to other families.

Still cannot prove Rothschild control of Reuters, only that Reuters became a British subject in 1857, which is after Rothschild had gotten its foot in and very firmly as well. I guess it is not supposed to have an influence on Reuters though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters
In 1865, Reuter's private firm was restructured, and it became a limited company (a corporation) called the Reuter's Telegram Company. Reuter had been naturalised as a British subject in 1857.

Reuter's agency built a reputation in Europe for being the first to report news scoops from abroad, like the news of Abraham Lincoln’s assassination. After many decades of progress, almost every major news outlet in the world subscribes to the Reuters company's services. It operates in at least 200 cities in 94 countries, supplying news text in about 20 languages.

Some more up to date news about the Rothschild family and the respect it gets. These are given by Reuters.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BH0N020091218

I guess that might make the news a bit colored since the Rothschild family might actually own them. I cannot find anything about who the major stockholders really are when it comes to Reuters, but they did make some arrangements that made it impossible for any one company to have majority... although how to you do exactly that? And I guess it will then just be about trying to see what the relations of these companies are with the Rothschild family.

They were also to have bought Hamas and Wolf. Two companies that my research tells worked in close relation with each other and Reuters.

And I found a nice article about it from 1989, linking Reuters with the Rothschild family:

http://www.yamaguchy.netfirms.com/7897401/mullins/reuter.html

Sir Roderick Jones took over Reuters and as this article shed some light on, Reuters was Jewish... It probably should not surprise me but it did:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Julius_Reuter

If Wiki even says so, it is probably true. Seems much of these protocols actually came to pass even before they were public, but then they were inspired by even earlier works were they not?

Seems the close relationship with Havas and Wolf is not really a secret either when looking at Reuters wiki bio. Well at least it states Reuter worked for Havas before he started his own news agency which could explain why they worked together during World War I and II even though they officially did not. Before and after they officially did so again though. They did print battle report that was in fact from the enemy side sometimes. News agencies are impartial anyway, so what would it matter? ;) I have to do some digging to find the proof of that again.

I'm sure you can hide messages in anything if you want, but most satire I'd say is, well, satire. There's only any point in hidden messages if the recipient knows they are there and there is a reliable means of understanding them. So for most satire this would be entirely futile.

Not that hard to create a reliable means to understand them as in satire they actually do not have to hide any of it. They can just spell out almost exactly their ideas, because if they are brilliant and extreme ideas they pass as satire all by themselves. Make it about two historical people discussing something, then they already have something they both stand for (these two people) and it makes it more fitting for a play.

After having a few people in power watch the theatric plays based on this satire, how hard is it for them to discuss taking it from satire and putting it to actual practice?

So is it really that futile? Seems it takes the intelligently written play into new heights, that might have had a lot to say in how the world turned out.

I think that Rothchild/Reuters thing is one of those regular myths. I have a vague memory of looking at it in a Jew theory argument ages ago. But I could be misremembering.



The only actual foretelling I'm seeing there is them thinking it anticipates what Guy Debord went on to say. I'm not familiar with Debord, but if it's footnoting that other passage I have an idea my cultural theorist mate might not agree with it based on things I've heard him going on about. But meh.
But otherwise I don't know what page they're from so I don't know what they're footnoting.

Which is why I linked what they were footnoting. At least the 6th one :)

"And to go into what the 6th footnote was about:"

I'm not sure he's really talking about journalism in that passage.

Yes, the quote is a bit unclear, but all of dialogue 12 is about the press:

http://www.notbored.org/dialogue-in-hell-XII.html

It is of course not only about journalism, but what they are discussing is using the press to control people. That seems to be the whole topic between these two in the satire.


I'm not sure why any of this matters.



Again, I'm not sure it matters. I don't think it has ever been meaningful to call Jews a 'race' as I don't think they ever were.

Nah, all the Jewish racial background stuff does not matter, but you were asking about what I meant about real Jews. I would hardly say there are any real Jews left, but I guess it does not really matter. There is a country for Jews now, so they can make a Jewish race if they feel like it. If it was not true before I guess it is now. Although I guess you and I might just call them Israelites? :)

[kblood]

Cause tabloid never really explains anything, they usually make statements and escape the mechanics/logic part and why not a documentary?(Fact that it's available on internet is pretty irrelevant) If a serious journalist wants to reach current generation a documentary is perfect.

If knew next to nothing about the finance game, it was perfect intro.

All true I guess, both this and what Dogsmilk wrote. And although it is really hard to make good research on the Internet, then it sure helps when there are corporation web pages that actually back it up. It took more than an hour to piece together my last post, but it should link together the Rothschild's financing wars and probably in league the the german Jew Baron Reuter who created Reuters and the next in charge of Reuters got knighted. Rather fishy after Rothschild got so high influence on Britain.

With the help of some fast news carriers I might add ;) I wonder if it was Reuters himself who brought those news of the outcome of Waterloo? :D

Since the Rothschild family had the news of the victory a full day before the rest of England, the rest of England still believed they might be about to loose the war. So the Rothschild family bought up papers from the Bank of England very cheap from everyone they could these 24 hours before the news reached the rest of the population. After this they could sell them again and make a huge profit. Of course this is what later caused the Bank of England to almost go bankrupt, but the ever generous Rothschild family helped it through its crisis. What would the world have become without these generous people always being there ready to loan money to those in need?

[romas]

it sure helps when there are corporation web pages that actually back it up. It took more than an hour to piece together my last post, but it should link together the Rothschild's financing wars and probably in league the the german Jew Baron Reuter who created Reuters and the next in charge of Reuters got knighted. Rather fishy after Rothschild got so high influence on Britain.



Good point, I have a copy of MODERN MONEY MECHANICS - A Workbook on Bank Reserves and Deposit Expansion

This complete booklet is was originally produced and distributed free by: Public Information Center Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago P. O. Box 834 Chicago, IL 60690-0834 telephone: 312 322 5111 But it is now out of print. Photo copies can be made available by monques@myhome.net.


Who Creates Money?
Changes in the quantity of money may originate with actions of the Federal Reserve System (the central bank), depository institutions (principally commercial banks), or the public. The major control, however, rests with the central bank.
The actual process of money creation takes place primarily in banks.(1) As noted earlier, checkable liabilities of banks are money. These liabilities are customers' accounts. They increase when customers deposit currency and checks and when the proceeds of loans made by the banks are credited to borrowers' accounts.
In the absence of legal reserve requirements, banks can build up deposits by increasing loans and investments so long as they keep enough currency on hand to redeem whatever amounts the holders of deposits want to convert into currency. This unique attribute of the banking business was discovered many centuries ago.
It started with goldsmiths. As early bankers, they initially provided safekeeping services, making a profit from vault storage fees for gold and coins deposited with them. People would redeem their "deposit receipts" whenever they needed gold or coins to purchase something, and physically take the gold or coins to the seller who, in turn, would deposit them for safekeeping, often with the same banker. Everyone soon found that it was a lot easier simply to use the deposit receipts directly as a means of payment. These receipts, which became known as notes, were acceptable as money since whoever held them could go to the banker and exchange them for metallic money.
Then, bankers discovered that they could make loans merely by giving their promises to pay, or bank notes, to borrowers. In this way, banks began to create money. More notes could be issued than the gold and coin on hand because only a portion of the notes outstanding would be presented for payment at any one time. Enough metallic money had to be kept on hand, of course, to redeem whatever volume of notes was presented for payment.

[dogsmilk]

True, Coca Cola is one of the companies on both sides. I believe this company is American though, no? And they joined the war much later. After that Coca Cola had good excuses as for why they could not stop their company due to the war and being cut off from the US... but of course any company that could get away with it did so. Germans were not evil people just because they were at war with others, although their leaders did not seem to have intentions you could be covered in under the "Christmas spirit"

It's just one example I know. And I don't think it has anything to do with the Germans. Business is business.


But getting back to these Rothschild's. They do not make their war fundings official... oh wait actually some of them they do:

http://www.fundinguniverse.com/company-histories/N-M-Rothschild-amp;-Sons-Limited-Company-History.html



And this is just the official stuff. How often have they saved countries from collapses? And backed up some of the most historically important business deals?

1875: The loan for the British acquisition of Suez Canal is provided by Rothschilds.

Certainly was a very important deal, especially since this was to become a major trade route, and still is.

Well actually, in terms of the world and the timespan it covers, that list is microscopic and stuff like opening offices in Hong Kong isn't exactly dynamite.
I don't see why lending money for the Suez Canal is significant either.


Hmmm... I just noticed:

1814: Rothschilds provides funding for Wellington's army.
1815: Company backs the English, Dutch, and Prussian allies at Waterloo
1825: Rothschilds provides backing to prevent collapse of Bank of England.
1871: Rothschilds organizes French repayment of war indemnity.

This does directly state they supported all sides did it not? There is a whole not more of official Rothschild history on this page. Since it says allies I guess it does not really say so though. They sure were not friends of Napoleon, so they did have an interest in seeing the British win.

It doesn't say supported all sides, no, it says supported one side.


Ohhh, found what I was looking for:

http://www.rothschildarchive.org/textguide/?doc=/textguide/articles/000_401_filelist

Their own records.

stating:


So shortly after Waterloo in 1815, they help the French economy back up again. One war got them 4-5 countries in their pockets. And because of having these countries in their pockets, they got in on some of the most attractive business deals after that.

Based on what you've posted, I think you're overstating things somewhat; them issuing a loan is not necessarily helping them get the French ecomony back up again, it's a bank making a loan. What was the overall financial situation in France at that time? How large was this loan relatively speaking (it does look like an awful lot)? What were the negotiations? Who else did they borrow from? I don't think you can draw any conclusions about any of this without having a full understanding of the situation. And in what way were Britain etc "In their pockets"?


As this might show, I am not new to researching this family :) The real proof is not that hard to find. That is except the real proof of Rothschild's buying the press. They do own more than one company though, and one of the father of all Rothschild's most important advice was to never let anyone know exactly how wealthy they really were. Which became rather difficult after many more taxes were introduced on properties and such, which is why the Dutch banking systems became important to them, and outsourcing a bit to other families.

I'm not sure what is supposed to have been proved. The long list you posted of their major issues doesn't exactly suggest world financial domination and is light years away from demonstrating anything about funding loads of wars and stuff.


Still cannot prove Rothschild control of Reuters, only that Reuters became a British subject in 1857, which is after Rothschild had gotten its foot in and very firmly as well. I guess it is not supposed to have an influence on Reuters though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reuters


Some more up to date news about the Rothschild family and the respect it gets. These are given by Reuters.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE5BH0N020091218

I guess that might make the news a bit colored since the Rothschild family might actually own them. I cannot find anything about who the major stockholders really are when it comes to Reuters, but they did make some arrangements that made it impossible for any one company to have majority... although how to you do exactly that? And I guess it will then just be about trying to see what the relations of these companies are with the Rothschild family.

They were also to have bought Hamas and Wolf. Two companies that my research tells worked in close relation with each other and Reuters.

And I found a nice article about it from 1989, linking Reuters with the Rothschild family:

http://www.yamaguchy.netfirms.com/7897401/mullins/reuter.html

Sir Roderick Jones took over Reuters and as this article shed some light on, Reuters was Jewish... It probably should not surprise me but it did:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Julius_Reuter

If Wiki even says so, it is probably true. Seems much of these protocols actually came to pass even before they were public, but then they were inspired by even earlier works were they not?

Seems the close relationship with Havas and Wolf is not really a secret either when looking at Reuters wiki bio. Well at least it states Reuter worked for Havas before he started his own news agency which could explain why they worked together during World War I and II even though they officially did not. Before and after they officially did so again though. They did print battle report that was in fact from the enemy side sometimes. News agencies are impartial anyway, so what would it matter? ;) I have to do some digging to find the proof of that again.

You kinda lost me a bit here. But Eustace Mullins is a full on Jew theorist and skimming the article, it seems his big connection is someone having lunch with a Rothschild.
And I don't think a Jew starting Reuters means the Protocols are true.


Not that hard to create a reliable means to understand them as in satire they actually do not have to hide any of it. They can just spell out almost exactly their ideas, because if they are brilliant and extreme ideas they pass as satire all by themselves. Make it about two historical people discussing something, then they already have something they both stand for (these two people) and it makes it more fitting for a play.

But there is no point in publishing a satire for the public (whose purpose is well known) with secret hidden messages (when Joly had no reason to do so) - why not just have a meeting or something?
I assume Bilderberg don't circulate their minutes via cryptic messages hidden in private eye.


After having a few people in power watch the theatric plays based on this satire, how hard is it for them to discuss taking it from satire and putting it to actual practice?

So is it really that futile? Seems it takes the intelligently written play into new heights, that might have had a lot to say in how the world turned out.



I didn't know it had been turned into a play. And to be honest I kinda doubt people would need or want to do this - it seems a very strange way of plotting world domination, watching a play and then thinking "Yeah! We'll do that!"



Which is why I linked what they were footnoting. At least the 6th one :)

"And to go into what the 6th footnote was about:"



Yes, the quote is a bit unclear, but all of dialogue 12 is about the press:

http://www.notbored.org/dialogue-in-hell-XII.html

It is of course not only about journalism, but what they are discussing is using the press to control people. That seems to be the whole topic between these two in the satire.

I interpret it as containing some sniping at 'liberal' governments.
It doesn't matter what the 12th dialogue is about - it may have ripped it off, but it did change it as well.

[kblood]

It's just one example I know. And I don't think it has anything to do with the Germans. Business is business.



Well actually, in terms of the world and the timespan it covers, that list is microscopic and stuff like opening offices in Hong Kong isn't exactly dynamite.
I don't see why lending money for the Suez Canal is significant either.



It doesn't say supported all sides, no, it says supported one side.



Based on what you've posted, I think you're overstating things somewhat; them issuing a loan is not necessarily helping them get the French ecomony back up again, it's a bank making a loan. What was the overall financial situation in France at that time? How large was this loan relatively speaking (it does look like an awful lot)? What were the negotiations? Who else did they borrow from? I don't think you can draw any conclusions about any of this without having a full understanding of the situation. And in what way were Britain etc "In their pockets"?



I'm not sure what is supposed to have been proved. The long list you posted of their major issues doesn't exactly suggest world financial domination and is light years away from demonstrating anything about funding loads of wars and stuff.



You kinda lost me a bit here. But Eustace Mullins is a full on Jew theorist and skimming the article, it seems his big connection is someone having lunch with a Rothschild.
And I don't think a Jew starting Reuters means the Protocols are true.



But there is no point in publishing a satire for the public (whose purpose is well known) with secret hidden messages (when Joly had no reason to do so) - why not just have a meeting or something?
I assume Bilderberg don't circulate their minutes via cryptic messages hidden in private eye.



I didn't know it had been turned into a play. And to be honest I kinda doubt people would need or want to do this - it seems a very strange way of plotting world domination, watching a play and then thinking "Yeah! We'll do that!"



I interpret it as containing some sniping at 'liberal' governments.
It doesn't matter what the 12th dialogue is about - it may have ripped it off, but it did change it as well.

Why would they make it into a play instead of making just meeting? Because this was before they made thinking tanks like the Bilderberg group. The Bilderberg group was inspired by a satire like this. But since in the time of the satire and the protocols of Zion they did not own most countries, in fact none I think, they still had to be covert. Even from the press and country leaders.

And I guess you do not realize the power it gives to be the owner of a countries loan. One thing is 3-5% of a million dollar loan actually pays off rather well, but another thing is that the loan makes can choose to be nice and less nice about getting their money back. Which is why the Rothschild are famously quoted for not caring who was the kings leaders of a country as long as they controlled the debt and therefore the money.

If you cannot see the significance of this:
1825: Rothschilds provides backing to prevent collapse of Bank of England

I am not sure it is possible for me to prove anything to you. You can just state it does not seem significant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suez_Canal#Construction_by_Suez_Canal_Company

The canal had an immediate and dramatic effect on world trade. Combined with the American transcontinental railroad completed six months earlier, it allowed the entire world to be circled in record time. It played an important role in increasing European colonisation of Africa. External debts forced Said Pasha's successor, Isma'il Pasha, to sell his country's share in the canal for £4,000,000 to the United Kingdom in 1875, but French shareholders still held the majority. Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli was accused by William Gladstone of undermining Britain's constitutional system, due to his lack of reference or consent from Parliament when purchasing the shares with funding from the Rothschilds.[45]

And if you read up on the link, this canal is of major strategic importance when it comes to war in the Middle East, and much importance to world trade as well. That is why it is significant, and because it was a 4 billion pound loan the Rothschild gave to make it possible which they are no doubt probably still cashing in on.

000/401D/1 1875 Suez Canal Share purchase by the British Government. 1875

I am curious why this is on the Rothschild finances as if it was their own purchase? :p

http://www.rothschildarchive.org/textguide/?doc=/textguide/articles/000_401_filelist

If you look up on this canal, it actually started out being Napoleon who controlled the area the canal was made in. He even started making it, but had to put the project on hold.

Some nice quotes from this Napoleon guy btw:
[Medicine is] a collection of uncertain prescriptions the results of which, taken collectively, are more fatal than useful to mankind.

Napoleon Bonaparte

So true and probably even more so today. Many funny quotes as well. Most being both clever and funny. Although that is a bit off topic. I was looking for his quotes on the Jesuits and maybe his relations to the Rothschild.

But it seems you truly fail to see why they needed to put countries in debt. The reason being that after doing so, they could get another central bank gaining control of this country. And the World Bank.

It is quite simple really. Just prove to me a war any country, Europe or the US has declared, where the target country was indebted to the central banks or the world bank. Should be quite impossible according to Ian Crane and other researchers. I think David Icke might be onto some of this as well. But the thing is these wars are mainly about control of resources and countries. Because they want them all to accept the World Bank as the bank for controlling the debt of all countries.

Recent example that just recently got into fruition... and you do remember there was a war against Iraq?
`
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/IRFFI/Resources/DatasheetNovember2009Final.pdf

This is how long it took the UN, EU, US and the World Bank to convince Iraq to let them take control. It has been a long battle, but Iraq had much independence due to its oil reserves, so that it took about 20 years of trade embargoes and a few wars to crack this country fully. Hmm, I think it has even been 25 years probably.

What is the history of this World Bank?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Bank

1945–1968

From its conception until 1967 the bank undertook a relatively low level of lending. Fiscal conservatism and careful screening of loan applications was common. Bank staff attempted to balance the priorities of providing loans for reconstruction and development with the need to instill confidence in the bank.[5]

Bank president John McCloy selected France to be the first recipient of World Bank aid; two other applications from Poland and Chile were rejected. The loan was for $987 million, half the amount requested and came with strict conditions. Staff from the World Bank monitored the use of the funds, ensuring that the French government would present a balanced budget and give priority of debt repayment to the World Bank over other governments. The United States State Department told the French Government that Communist elements within the Cabinet needed to be removed. The French Government complied with this diktat and removed the Communists coalition government. Within hours the loan to France was approved.[6]

The Marshall Plan of 1947 caused lending by the bank to change as many European countries received aid that competed with World Bank loans. Emphasis was shifted to non-European countries and until 1968, loans were earmarked for projects that would enable a borrower country to repay loans (such projects as ports, highway systems, and power plants).

So it was made just after WW2. You were saying that this list only covered a short period of time?
http://www.rothschildarchive.org/textguide/?doc=/textguide/articles/000_401_filelist

That is because After 1937 (okay I am making a theory), they had some shady loans made to fund both sides of WW2. When the war was over, they had the World Bank. After this for some reasons these archives stop? Maybe because they had stopped making their loans as N M Rothschild. After this they just became "advisors" and stopped loaning money out. Officially it seems it is. I am guessing that it is because it actually takes quite a lot of time to control the assets of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund which is part of it, while also controlling their own bank.

Simply put, they were busy outsourcing and covering their tracks. Although officially, for the first time in history, the Rothschild family supposedly came out at a financial loss after a war... I really doubt that though.

Check this out:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund#Impact_on_access_to_fo od

We need the World Bank, the IMF, all the big foundations, and all the governments to admit that, for 30 years, we all blew it, including me when I was President. We were wrong to believe that food was like some other product in international trade, and we all have to go back to a more responsible and sustainable form of agriculture.

– Former US President Bill Clinton, Speech at United Nations World Food Day, October 16, 2008 [35]

A presidents regrets for his partaking of the crimes of the IMF and the World Bank. This is how much power it has gotten today. Mostly they do not even need a war to get countries in their pocket these days, because they have much more powerful political tools these days. Like buying oil for food after not allowing a country to get food from other countries, as it is a "product". Also the IMF buys this oil for food only half the actual value of the oil. So they sell food which there is an abundance off really, and profits of it. They even sell it at twice its price.

And I cant be bothered finding the proof of this just now. It is on the IMF website.

But to get back to the question on actually disproving this NWO. Any wars made against countries already owning money to the World Bank, the Central Banks or the IMF? (The IMF being part of the world bank, but just to making it easier to find out).

[fratoue]

The OP is just trolling. A crap thread designed to stir the shit; what proof is there the NWO exists? a absurd question

[kblood]

I interpret it as containing some sniping at 'liberal' governments.
It doesn't matter what the 12th dialogue is about - it may have ripped it off, but it did change it as well.

Not sure if you are on about the Protocols of Zion now or the satire it was inspired by. But please, do disprove the Protocols of Zion. I have not seen any actual good attempts at doing that at all.

All the so called accepted "debunks" of the Protocols of Zion are all about them being based on a satire or other worthless comments on it. None of that changes the fact that you cannot really find anything that proved to be untrue in these Protocols. Find something in them that proved to be a wrong "prediction" about the future. Something they miserably failed at, if there were people actually fulfilling these Protocols to the letter?

I have spent most my hours away from work proving it. You havent done much to disprove my claims, only come up with what I wrote not being complete proof. Well then it should not be that hard to answer my questions, should it? The other question being asked in my last post.

The OP is just trolling. A crap thread designed to stir the shit; what proof is there the NWO exists? a absurd question

Yea, but I do find it entertaining and was looking for a thread to put my research together about all this stuff anyway. Also I guess maybe he might come up with some good counter arguments. I hope so anyway, but until then he is still making my own research come along nicely. Filling a few more holes in my research so far.

Okay the counter arguments are not even all that bad really, I am just getting tired from a day of reading through many web pages. If they were bad, my research would not have come any further than last time I dug into it.

[noewhan]

The OP is just trolling. A crap thread designed to stir the shit; what proof is there the NWO exists? a absurd question

Yeh.

Joe still hasn't presented his radio interviews. And just last year he was something like, only 16 years old. So I'm not sure if he's telling the truth or I misread something. Not that it's odd for a kid to host a radio show - I just don't think he did, based on him making this absurd thread.

If Joe911 actually had the time to research - (Which apparently he doesn't, but he loves to pop in and out again) - would quote David Rockefeller in the interview with Benjamin Fulford. That's if Joe911 thinks it was a legit interview or whatnot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaCKBLpU16I

Paraphrase:
'We don't need a Global Government'- Rockefeller ('because the secret government is all they want' - Fullford)

[joe911]

Yeh.

Joe still hasn't presented his radio interviews. And just last year he was something like, only 16 years old. So I'm not sure if he's telling the truth or I misread something. Not that it's odd for a kid to host a radio show - I just don't think he did, based on him making this absurd thread
Pm the regular listeners,Tracker,diamonddogz,cafetimes1991,fairye lfdog. To name a few. I had recordings of some of the good interviews,i cant find them,but i do remember cutting down this segment from a call with tracker on the show a few days after MJ died.
Link (http://wecansee.co.cc/trackers%20call.wma)


If Joe911 actually had the time to research - (Which apparently he doesn't, but he loves to pop in and out again) - would quote David Rockefeller in the interview with Benjamin Fulford. That's if Joe911 thinks it was a legit interview or whatnot.

I had time then,i dont anymore. Last year of school is a busy time you know. In the shows i often had the folder next to me with archived documents,news articles ect.. im sure someone who watched on the camera can vouch for that too.
As for the interview you speak of,is there an audio link for it? Or video? I googled Benjamin Fulford and it came up with various conspiracy theorist websites,so im sure you understand what Bias means,and from the bit you quoted,thats what it sounds like. People have twisted peoples words before,and often quote mine things,so you can see why i dont jump on the bandwagon of beleiving because someone on the internet says it so it must be true.

As for the guy calling me a troll. I diddnt start this thread to troll,I started it to see wether someone could prove,with real proof [not quote mined,or from a source like infowhores] that such a group existed. Something i was very interested in at the time,now i really couldnt give a shit to be honest,people can beleive what they want,ive got more important things going on.

Edit to add:
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=69935
http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=69883

[kblood]

Well, if you read through the thread, there should be some evidence now. Or you could look into Ian Crane, because he does not call this Conspiracy theory anymore he says it conspiracy fact. He does so because he has done a good job of gathering the actual facts, and people like him and David Icke is what has inspired me to look deeper into these things myself.

Take the posts of those calling you a troll as constructive critisism ;)

Kudos on making a radio program while still in school. No reason to wait and sounds like a good way of spreading stuff. There are certainly some people who got success that way.

[aussiegirl]

Right,this thread has been started to debate the claims about the new world order. First of all is to prove thier existence.

Id like to ask you,what evidence you have that they exist,and how you came to the conclusions you have about them.

it is quoted by politicians that they want a world government

[noewhan]

I'm not sure why the Icke forum just removes links... Odd. Sometimes they show, sometimes they don't.

Here...

http://www. youtube. com/watch?v=iaCKBLpU16I

Remove spaces.

Joe, where do you draw the line between an innocent death and a murder? It's been proven that MJ was being fed prescription drugs - for money.
Some people will do anything for money. You have to think about the corrupt mindset. The love of money, rules some peoples lives. With money you can pay people off. Pretty basic.

[aussiegirl]

honestly you guys think to much about the rockefellers and rothschild..they are not everything..

[noewhan]

honestly you guys think to much about the rockefellers and rothschild..they are not everything..

True indeed, and there are a lot more families & groups involved.

But he's very influential:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WlT3iR5jKLQ

Chairman/Honorary Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations (Chairman: (1970-1985);

Chairman of the Chase Manhattan Bank (1969-1981);

Founder and North American Chairman (1977-1991), Honorary Chairman of the Trilateral Commission;

A U.S. founding member, life member, and member of the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Group (1954-);

Founding Chairman of the Partnership for New York City (PFNYC) (1979-1988);

Board Director, B. F. Goodrich & Co. (1956-64), Punta Alegre Sugar Corp., The Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States (1960-65);

Chairman/Chairman Emeritus of the Museum of Modern Art (1948-, Chairman: 1962-1972, 1987-1993);

Founder and Chairman/Honorary Chairman of the Council of the Americas (1963-);

Honorary Chairman and Life Trustee of The Rockefeller University (Chairman: 1950-1975);

Trustee/Life Trustee of the University of Chicago (1947-1962, 1966-);

Director of the Peterson Institute (Formerly: The Institute for International Economics);

President and Chairman of the Executive Committee of the Harvard College Board of Overseers (1954-1960, 1962-1968);

President of the Board of Overseas Study at Harvard University;

Member, American Friends of the London School of Economics;

Co-founder and Chairman of the Chase International Advisory Committee';

Chairman, Chase International Investment Corporation (1961-1975);

Class A Director of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York;

Leading member of the Russian-American Bankers Forum (1992);

Chairman of the New York Chamber of Commerce and Industry;

Director of the New York Clearing House (1971-1978);

Founder and Chairman of the Center for Inter-American Relations (CIAR) (Cultural adjunct of the Council of the Americas, 1965);

Founder and Chairman/Honorary Chairman of the Americas Society;

Co-founder of the Chairman's Latin American Advisory Council;

Founder of the Forum of the Americas;

Honorary Chairman of the Japan Society;

Chairman of the Downtown-Lower Manhattan Association;

Director of the World Trade Center Memorial Foundation;

Co-founder of The Business Committee for the Arts (BAC) (1967);

Chairman of Morningside Heights, Inc.;

Board member of the Westchester County Planning Commission;

Board member of the Commerce Committee for the Alliance for Progress (1961);

Founder of the Emergency Committee for American Trade;

Director of the Overseas Development Council;

Director of American Overseas Finance Corporation;

Member of Reagan's President's Commission on Executive Exchange (1981);

Director of the US-USSR Trade and Economic Council;

Vice-Chairman of the Advisory Council for U.S.-China Trade;

Founder of the Emergency Committee on American Trade (ECAT);

Vice-Chairman of the Advisory Council on Japan-United States Economic Relations;

Chairman of the U.S. Advisory Committee on Reform of the International Monetary System;

Founding member/Honorary member of the Commission on White House Fellows (1964-1965);

A Trustee of the John F. Kennedy Library;

An Honorary Trustee and Chairman of the Executive Committee of International House of New York;

A Trustee of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (1947-1960);

Primary Founder/U.S. Executive Committee, Dartmouth Conference;

Founder and Chairman of the International Executive Service Corps (IESC) (Chairman: 1964-1968);

Co-founder of the Synergos affiliated Global Philanthropists Circle;

Honorary Advisor/International Advisor of Praemium Imperiale;

Member of the Peace Parks Foundation;

Trustee of Historic Hudson Valley (1981-);

Chairman of the Stone Barns Restoration Corporation;

Chairman of Rockefeller Financial Services;

Chairman, The Rockefeller Group Inc. (1983-1995);

Chairman, Rockefeller Center Properties Inc. (1985-1992);

Co-founder and Advisory Trustee of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund (RBF) (1940) (Chairman: 1981-1987);

Co-founder and Honorary Trustee of the Rockefeller Family Fund (RFF) (1967);

President of his father's Sealantic Fund;

Founder of the David Rockefeller Fund (1989);

Founded and funded the David Rockefeller Global Development Fund (RBF) (2006);

Founded the David Rockefeller Graduate Program at Rockefeller University;

Co-founded, funded and on the Advisory Committee of the David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies (DRCLAS) at Harvard (1994-).

Gordon Brown song
http:// www.youtube.com/ watch?v=2B5JHSTOrdU

[romas]

Almost every country has it's form of aristocracy that's very much loving idea of NWO, because they have that illusion to always stay in power, if not them then their spawn etc.

[kblood]

honestly you guys think to much about the rockefellers and rothschild..they are not everything..

They are just parts of the puzzle, but hard to prove the NWO without them. If you want to, then please go ahead. To put everything together and show the time line of all this, and proving that it is there, then it is hard not to get around the subject of the Rothschild and Rockefeller family.

I have been posting in 2-3 other threads at the same time as this one, and most those posts do not even mention these families. They are not exactly my only focus. But due to this thread, I have begun researching them again, because most people seem to think there is nothing to it for some reason.

Apparently that is what makes most people just ignore this and ignoring what is really happening in the world. We are very much part of how mistreated countries in the Middle East are, just because they have oil and diamonds. Gangsters are outdated, today we have the UN, the World Bank, the EU and the US robbing smaller countries of what they have.

But sure, lets think about something else, we should not let their misery bother us. As long as they do not send suicide bombers our way everything is probably fine.

And do not take this the wrong way, this is not something to focus most of your time on, it is still worth paying attention to when you are choosing who to vote for and whatever else influence we have on our governments. Those supporting the World Bank and the wars the US are making, do not vote for them.

[the cosmos]

honestly you guys think to much about the rockefellers and rothschild..they are not everything..

Not everything, but they are alot.
It's their money that's keep the NWO propaganda machine rolling. So, that in itself means a massive slice of the pie.

[lizzy]

dear kblood.. :)

I just want to say how much I have appreciated all your posts , I just read thro' the thread.......(the initial title was off-putting ......authenticity???)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3NW8m3qNMU&feature=email

101 .I know.......

.........had the Rothchildes' and his FIVE sons never existed , the world I believe would be a much much better place. They are the top villians.

[kblood]

dear kblood.. :)

I just want to say how much I have appreciated all your posts , I just read thro' the thread.......(the initial title was off-putting ......authenticity???)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G3NW8m3qNMU&feature=email

101 .I know.......

.........had the Rothchildes' and his FIVE sons never existed , the world I believe would be a much much better place. They are the top villians.

Thanks :)

And yes, the Rothschild certainly at the least laid out the foundation of the NWO today. I can even understand the people who does not believe it, because how could they do it so well? I cannot really explain it, but hard to dispute something that was already written in text more than 100 years ago and has been followed to the letter.

Lets take an example of why the Protocols of Zion are hard to dispute. You have to disprove the plans in the Protocols and how they have not been fulfilled today to truly disprove the protocols, to just say its clearly just plagiarizing that is just loosing focus on the bigger picture. Yes, it seems to be plagiarized from a French satire, but people should really ask them selves, was it just a satire? And that is why I ask people to look into the Report from Iron Mountain. That was the cover up for that report as well, which again cannot be refuted for its ability to foretell the next 100 years. Not because some fortune teller wrote it, no it was really written by one of these think tanks they have set up, to plan the best course of action for the NWO to control the world and make the world accept this control, instead of revolting against it.

Here is a book written in 1933. It is about the 3 news agencies (owned by the Rothschild family, although not mentioned in these books) and some of their important history before World War 2. Before 1933 obviously. Because this was before news came from central news agencies like Reuters are today. These 3 agencies has been working closely together for many years, not sure if Havas and Wolff exists today. I cannot find them on the Internet, so I doubt it. No wiki articles on them either. At least not on Wolff.

http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/hadamovsky.htm

(Try to find any negative article on the Rothschild family put out by Reuters ;) )

Protocol 10 of the protocols on the subject us news:
http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/przion4.htm#protocol No. 12

WE CONTROL THE PRESS

4. NOT A SINGLE ANNOUNCEMENT WILL REACH THE PUBLIC WITHOUT OUR CONTROL. Even now this is already being attained by us inasmuch as all news items are received by a few agencies, in whose offices they are focused from all parts of the world. These agencies will then be already entirely ours and will give publicity only to what we dictate to them.

So it was planned to centralize news agencies. This was in 1900 or before that it was decided. 33 years later a book is written on how some news agencies got to have monopoly on news even in several countries. Quite a coincidence? Today we have many news agencies, but try looking at where these news really come from? Here in Denmark, Ritzau (http://www.ritzau.dk/english/) is the national news agency. Journalists today knows very well that the press has not been free in their lifetime. They have rules upon rules to follow, and editors that make sure they wont get work anywhere else as a journalist if they do not follow orders. The editor of a news agency does not need to know what makes good news, all he needs to know is what is allowed to come into print.

Another is how to control politics:

5. TO SECURE THIS WE MUST HAVE EVERYBODY VOTE WITHOUT DISTINCTION OF CLASSES AND QUALIFICATIONS, in order to establish an absolute majority, which cannot be got from the educated propertied classes. In this way, by inculcating in all a sense of self-importance, we shall destroy among the GOYIM the importance of the family and its educational value and remove the possibility of individual minds splitting off, for the mob, handled by us, will not let them come to the front nor even give them a hearing; it is accustomed to listen to us only who pay it for obedience and attention. In this way we shall create a blind, mighty force which will never be in a position to move in any direction without the guidance of our agents set at its head by us as leaders of the mob. The people will submit to this regime because it will know that upon these leaders will depend its earnings, gratifications and the receipt of all kinds of benefits.

And who is not allowed to vote today? Of course it is a good thing everyone is allowed to vote, that is if those votes was not just put up for vote again if it did not turn out in their favor. Here in Denmark we have voted for the EU at least 3 times by now. They finally got us accepting it if we got to keep our DKR (Danish Krone) as currency. And since Denmark is doing somewhat well, we actually saved ourself millions with this choice. Still we came in the clutches of the EU.

11. We shall replace the money markets by grandiose government credit institutions, the object of which will be to fix the price of industrial values in accordance with government views. These institutions will be in a position to fling upon the market five hundred millions of industrial paper in one day, or to buy up for the same amount. In this way all industrial undertakings will come into dependence upon us. You may imagine for yourselves what immense power we shall thereby secure for ourselves ....

This is before the stock market really came into play. Since the telegraph system and this kind of control of the stock market:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stock_market#Crashes

5 stock market crashes, since the protocols, and none before? At this time of course 500 million sounded like more than you can imagine almost. And still it was understated, because it came to be billions flung around, and causing these crashes.

A stock market crash is often defined as a sharp dip in share prices of equities listed on the stock exchanges. In parallel with various economic factors, a reason for stock market crashes is also due to panic and investing public's loss of confidence. Often, stock market crashes end speculative economic bubbles.

There have been famous stock market crashes that have ended in the loss of billions of dollars and wealth destruction on a massive scale. An increasing number of people are involved in the stock market, especially since the social security and retirement plans are being increasingly privatized and linked to stocks and bonds and other elements of the market. There have been a number of famous stock market crashes like the Wall Street Crash of 1929, the stock market crash of 1973–4, the Black Monday of 1987, the Dot-com bubble of 2000, and the Stock Market Crash of 2008.

Currency is something everyone knows off today. What was it back in 1900?

3. States announce that such a loan is to be concluded and open subscriptions for their own bills of exchange, that is, for their interest-bearing paper. That they may be within the reach of all the price is determined at from a hundred to a thousand; and a discount is made for the earliest subscribers. Next day by artificial means the price of them goes up, the alleged reason being that everyone is rushing to buy them. In a few days the treasury safes are, as they say, overflowing and there's more money than they can do with (why then take it?) The subscription, it is alleged, covers many times over the issue total of the loan; in this lies the whole stage effect - look you, they say, what confidence is shown in the government's bills of exchange.

The plan in the protocol was this. Making making the money of countries have their own stocks. What happened later?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Currency#Early_currency
By 1900, most of the industrializing nations were on some form of gold standard, with paper notes and silver coins constituting the circulating medium. Private banks and governments across the world followed Gresham's Law: keeping gold and silver paid, but paying out in notes. This did not happen all around the world at the same time, but occurred sporadically, generally in times of war or financial crisis, beginning in the early part of the 20th century and continuing across the world until the late 20th century, when the regime of floating fiat currencies came into force. One of the last countries to break away from the gold standard was the United States in 1971. Prior to this final, President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized the confiscation of all private holdings of gold, and permitted the private banks to confiscate gold deposits pursuant to Presidential Executive Order number 6102, which effectively confiscated all privately held gold in the United States on April 5, 1933.[citation needed]

No country anywhere in the world today has an enforceable gold standard or silver standard currency system.

So the gold standard was removed. Today they print money with no regard to any actual assets to back those money up.

22. YOU ARE AWARE THAT THE GOLD STANDARD HAS BEEN THE RUIN OF THE STATES WHICH ADOPTED IT, FOR IT HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SATISFY THE DEMANDS FOR MONEY, THE MORE SO THAT WE HAVE REMOVED GOLD FROM CIRCULATION AS FAR AS POSSIBLE.

Stated in Protocol 20. So they planned this around 1900, before the gold standard was even adopted by all nations? That sure is thinking ahead in my book.

It took almost 100 years but as my last wiki quote just stated:

No country anywhere in the world today has an enforceable gold standard or silver standard currency system.

Which gives all power to the Central Banks. Lets get back to those stock market crashes. What was the name of the first stock market crash in 1929?

WE CAUSE DEPRESSIONS

14. The State exchequer will have to maintain a definite complement of reserve sums, and all that is collected above that complement must be returned into circulation. On these sums will be organized public works. The initiative in works of this kind, proceeding from State sources, will bind the working class firmly to the interests of the State and to those who reign. From these same sums also a part will be set aside as rewards of inventiveness and productiveness.

15. On no account should so much as a single unit above the definite and freely estimated sums be retained in the State Treasuries, for money exists to be circulated and any kind of stagnation of money acts ruinously on the running of the State machinery, for which it is the lubricant; a stagnation of the lubricant may stop the regular working of the mechanism.

16. The substitution of interest-bearing paper for a part of the token of exchange has produced exactly this stagnation. The consequences of this circumstance are already sufficiently noticeable.

17. A court of account will also be instituted by us, and in it the ruler will find at any moment a full accounting for State income and expenditure, with the exception of the current monthly account, not yet made up, and that of the preceding month, which will not yet have been delivered.

18. The one and only person who will have no interest in robbing the State is its owner, the ruler. This is why his personal control will remove the possibility of leakages or extravagances.

19. The representative function of the ruler at receptions for the sake of etiquette, which absorbs so much invaluable time, will be abolished in order that the ruler may have time for control and consideration. His power will not then be split up into fractional parts among time-serving favorites who surround the throne for its pomp and splendor, and are interested only in their own and not in the common interests of the State.

20. Economic crises have been produced by us for the GOYIM by no other means than the withdrawal of money from circulation. Huge capitals have stagnated, withdrawing money from States, which were constantly obliged to apply to those same stagnant capitals for loans. These loans burdened the finances of the State with the payment of interest and made them the bond slaves of these capitals .... The concentration of industry in the hands of capitalists out of the hands of small masters has drained away all the juices of the peoples and with them also the States .... (Now we know the purpose of the Federal Reserve Bank Corporation!!)

They planned crashing markets and bankrupting nations, and it happened.

21. The present issue of money in general does not correspond with the requirements per head, and cannot therefore satisfy all the needs of the workers. The issue of money ought to correspond with the growth of population and thereby children also must absolutely be reckoned as consumers of currency from the day of their birth. The revision of issue is a material question for the whole world.

22. YOU ARE AWARE THAT THE GOLD STANDARD HAS BEEN THE RUIN OF THE STATES WHICH ADOPTED IT, FOR IT HAS NOT BEEN ABLE TO SATISFY THE DEMANDS FOR MONEY, THE MORE SO THAT WE HAVE REMOVED GOLD FROM CIRCULATION AS FAR AS POSSIBLE.
GENTILE STATES BANKRUPT

23. With us the standard that must be introduced is the cost of working-man power, whether it be reckoned in paper or in wood. We shall make the issue of money in accordance with the normal requirements of each subject, adding to the quantity with every birth and subtracting with every death.

24. The accounts will be managed by each department (the French administrative division), each circle.

25. In order that there may be no delays in the paying out of money for State needs the sums and terms of such payments will be fixed by decree of the ruler; this will do away with the protection by a ministry of one institution to the detriment of others.

26. The budgets of income and expenditure will be carried out side by side that they may not be obscured by distance one to another.

27. The reforms projected by us in the financial institutions and principles of the GOYIM will be clothed by us in such forms as will alarm nobody. We shall point out the necessity of reforms in consequence of the disorderly darkness into which the GOYIM by their irregularities have plunged the finances. The first irregularity, as we shall point out, consists in their beginning with drawing up a single budget which year after year grows owing to the following cause: this budget is dragged out to half the year, then they demand a budget to put things right, and this they expend in three months, after which they ask for a supplementary budget, and all this ends with a liquidation budget. But, as the budget of the following year is drawn up in accordance with the sum of the total addition, the annual departure from the normal reaches as much as 50 per cent in a year, and so the annual budget is trebled in ten years. Thanks to such methods, allowed by the carelessness of the GOY States, their treasuries are empty. The period of loans supervenes, and that has swallowed up remainders and brought all the GOY States to bankruptcy. (The United States was declared "bankrupt" at the Geneva Convention of 1929! [see 31 USC 5112, 5118, and 5119).

Turns out as such a big post when going into this :( Sorry about the walls of text. But I guess I can try to highlight the most obvious by itself.

[white horse]

Right,this thread has been started to debate the claims about the new world order. First of all is to prove thier existence.

Id like to ask you,what evidence you have that they exist,and how you came to the conclusions you have about them.

Hey Joe,

It is a very good question, and it has forced members here to search for concrete evidence to back the claims of a NWO.

What is the NWO?

We often use various phrases around here...

NWO
Illuminati
PTB

as general terms, and then there are the supposed players like;

Rockerfella/Rothschilds, and other 'Elite' families, the Vatican, Jesuits, Masons... etc

and groups like

Bilderberg
Club of Rome
Trilateral Commision

etc etc

We know a lot of persanalities involved who are members of one or more of these groups; like Bush (Daddy), Rumsfeld, Cheney, Blairs, Kissenger, Murdoch, and their ilk - we know these people 'run the world' in the public eye and fuck us all to hell. We also suspect that there are far more powerful figures behind them in the shadows.

We also knwo that there are many many foot soldiers who tow the line and 'follow orders' without even knowing that they are following orders. The BBC and teh MSM is full of them.

I watched a video recently of David Bellamy talking about AGW hoax -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kU_AZ--tg7Y

One phrase he used that struck me - he said that he was 'ousted' from front-line TV because he did not tow the line of the 'Modern Orthodoxy'

I thought this was brilliant and concise way to sum up all of the groups described above and in thsi thread that we call the NWO - from the highest elite to the common foot soldier and the man on the street (unkindly refered to as a sheeple - you knwo the type - the Sun reader who 'backs our boys' and will call you a nuttar if you question 911 etc etc.) All these people are suscribing and following a new modern orthodoxy. That includes 911, Global Warming, Big Brother, the Bullshit Broadcasting Corporation, Elites and Sheeple, MSM, etc.

The Modern Orthodoxy.

Thanks David (childhood hero) that is an excellent way to sum this up - because it is not really about people it is about attitudes - the NWO is the Modern Orthodoxy.

How about that?!

[lyricusmagna]

Right,this thread has been started to debate the claims about the new world order. First of all is to prove thier existence.

Id like to ask you,what evidence you have that they exist,and how you came to the conclusions you have about them.

I think this is enough proof of that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KbU_Po4sfnw&feature=fvst

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bKwH3kJew4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD3BqK-9ZiU&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CWBTL33MpA&feature=PlayList&p=0C4EB74A0926D5E2&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=6

They do say it themselves.

Debate about the authenticity of the NWO

I would have to say, which one?