By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - The David Gergen Love Thread!

akuma587 on 31 October 2008

Wasn't the New World Order a wrestling federation?



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
segajon on 31 October 2008
bigjon said:
I really don't care for him. He is boring. And he tries to be fair and balanced but it is easy to tell Obama gives him a tingly feeling up his leg.

On CNN I only really like Blitzer and AC. I also kinda like the guy who always does the electoral map, forgot his name.

John King

steven787 on 01 November 2008

Oh yeah, John King is good too. Larry King is funny, every time John King is on the show, Larry says, in the happy old-man-amazed-by-technology voice, something to the effect of: "Oh, I love your map, and no body can make it do those things quite like you, John King"

OK, on to the conspiracy argument:


Actually it is you who obviously is oblivious to the world around you because most people with common sense know (minus the ones follow the mainstream news like the bible) That govermnets and politicians are trying to usher in a World Governence over Economies, Currencies,ect. I provided you with facts, its as simple as that, things quoted from Elite (it was cited in Rockefellars own book), video footage of Politicians calling for World governance and still your make attempt to make an obsolete argument against it


This is what give's away the craziness. You keep saying global or world governance.

International government is of a different nature than sovereign nation-states. From the Peace of Westphalia (which was written by illuminati) through today, international government is all right there, in the open for everyone to read. International government is just a series of treaties (some of which set up organizations) that formalize the relations between countries. So, whether or not it's some secret plot doesn't really matter; international government is weak unless sovereign entities agree to let it not be weak. In the end they are still sovereign nations, most of the time they can ignore previous participation and it won't start a war.

(This has been a overly simplified explanation of international law and government, I could be more accurate but it would just be too much to write for free.)


Non of it is theory, it's called using your brain. Reading what these people are saying and taking it for what it is. Not making a hundred different excuses on how they meant this or that when it's clear by the actions and policies that they are doing what is said. When a group like the Club Of Rome puts out a "Roadmap To Ten Regions" and you see some of there plans already unfolding well.....here's a link for that mind you they use biblical references(Which is the main reason I beleive most of this stuff because it has been prophecised in scripture)


These secret organizations sure say a lot... and they have a nice website.
http://www.clubofrome.org/
It's a think tank.
Just like: http://www.newamericancentury.org/ which is way scarier.

There's a bunch of them (Secret Societies and think tanks), they are all bitching and moaning to get someone to listen, nd they don't all agree.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Okay, this is how all government works, whether local, sovereign or international:

Somebody has an Idea. The idea is developed and implemented. If it works, it stays. If it doesn't work, it changes.

I don't see how what you're describing is any different than that. It was thought up while burning an effigy? Government is about the powers to keep us from killing one another and function a little better as a team. This is why they say, "the pen is mightier than the sword." The question is, "does it work". (Cookie for whoever gets the reference... no Google.)

The Club of Rome thing is a bad choice for an example of subversive private groups, they PUBLISH ideas.

Because they used "ten" people link this to the Revelations, the ten-horned beast is suddenly a symbol for the ten regions. Please, and you get upset because I brought up aliens?

"But I didn't bring up the Apocalypse"

Then what is the problem with the plan? Do you know anything about it? What's bad about it?

I'm assuming it will be something along the lines of: "It will take away sovereignty and elected representation." Which is a valid complaint. But how is it secret or subversive. I went onto my library database and found 450,000 articles talking about the problems associated with the nation-state system evolving into a global system. (BTW the cause is actually "bottom-up", normal people are going online interacting, trading, and coexisting. A global system isn't on the way, it's already here and it has nothing to do with owls that have the voice of Walter Cronkite.)

If a secret organization is doing all of this, keeping us from killing each other, and I get a 42" TV and a good meal, I have to ask, "So what?"

Most of the world population is eating and not fighting.

If that is the work of secret organizations, then you should be thanking them.

Those good ol' boys can have a couple runaway teens per year.



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

Nirvana_Nut85 on 02 November 2008

Yes thats it, the Elite are so concerned for our well being that must be it. There agenda is to have everyone with and LCD and make sure there not killing each other. Wow, I think we might just have the next Bill O'Reilly on VGChartz. Seriously though, have you ever gone and researched what these people have said?Take a look of the policies being put through, the rights people are losing in the U.S

It seems like your just giving your opinion with out taking the time to looks things through. This isn't people just looking through bits of information and coming to ridiculous conspiracy theories. When you have for example like Bohemien Grove where they do mock Satanic sacrifices, dressed in what almost looks like a kkk outfit screaming and hollering well, shit. These are the people who are running the world. Most people who watch that would be concerned, even the othe 1 or 2 faboys David Gergen has out there,lol. I mean this doesn't even begin to scratch the surface, there is not enough forum to be able to even begin to

Here, lets take some quotes stated just by men in power from the U.S alone.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

."Military men are dumb, stupid animals to be used as pawns for foreign policy." Henry Kissinger

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

The commitment of government to deal with the population issue is of course essential...There are many ways to make the death rate Increase." Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense

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

The CFR, dedicated to one world government, financed by a number of the largest tax-exempt foundations, and wielding such power and influence over our lives in the areas of finance, business, labor, military, education, and mass communication-media should be familiar to every American..."
John R. Rarick, Lousiana Congressman

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

The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of US. sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all powerful, one world government". Chester Ward, Rear Admiral and former Navy Judge Advocate 1956 - 1960 and CFR member for 15 years

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

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

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

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 their 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 work is now much 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 autodetermination practiced in past centuries." David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991.

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

The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight." President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - In a speech made to Columbia University on Nov. 12, 1963, ten days before his assassination .

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

Here's a great quote that applies to most people so I found it especially for you

The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists". J. Edgar Hoover, former head of the FBI

Anyways I guarentee you if you take the actualy time to read between the lines you be surprised at the conclusion you'll come too.



" Rebellion Against Tyrants Is Obedience To God"

steven787 on 02 November 2008


"In Haig's presence, Kissinger referred pointedly to military men as "dumb, stupid animals to be used" as pawns for foreign policy. Kissinger often took up a post outside the doorway to Haig's office and dressed him down in front of the secretaries for alleged acts of incompetence with which Haig was not even remotely involved. Once when the Air Force was authorized to resume bombing of North Vietnam, the planes did not fly on certain days because of bad weather. Kissinger assailed Haig. He complained bitterly that the generals had been screamin for the limits to be taken off but that now their pilots were afraid to go up in a little fog. The country needed generals who could win battles, Kissinger said, not good briefers like Haig."

Woodward, Woodward & Carl Bernstein,The Final Days, Chapter 14, p. 194


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

The commitment of government to deal with the population issue is of course essential...There are many ways to make the death rate Increase." Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense

“…There are only two possible ways in which a world of 10 billion people can be averted. Either the current birth rates must come down more quickly. Or the current death rates must go up. “There is no other way. “There are, of course, many ways in which the death rates can go up. In a thermonuclear age, war can accomplish it very quickly and decisively. Famine and disease are nature’s ancient checks on population growth, and neither one has disappeared from the scene….

“To put it simply: Excessive population growth is the greatest single obstacle to the economic and social advancement of most of the societies in the developing world.” —Robert McNamara, Oct. 2, 1979

This is the closest I came to finding that full quote.  Its from (I think) an issue of New Solidarity.  There are no online archives, or mentions of this magazine anywhere on the internet.

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

The CFR, dedicated to one world government, financed by a number of the largest tax-exempt foundations, and wielding such power and influence over our lives in the areas of finance, business, labor, military, education, and mass communication-media should be familiar to every American..."
John R. Rarick, Lousiana Congressman

Actually, despite John Rarick's belief, the CFR is actually not for a one world government, they are not staff by powerful people.   It is not staffed by powerful people, it's academics.  They are a think tank that tries to come up with solutions to problems. 

If you want to learn more about the organization, they have a pretty good website. 

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

The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of US. sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all powerful, one world government". Chester Ward, Rear Admiral and former Navy Judge Advocate 1956 - 1960 and CFR member for 15 years

Really, your quoting a former Rear Admiral as a power broker? Really?  I couldn't find any actual source that wasn't a conspiracy theory website that had this quote.  That doesn't mean it's wrong, but those sites usually are.

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

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

Actual quote from a four page article talking about the development of international policy:

"I'll bet that within the next hundred years, nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority."... half a page later....

"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."

He's a globalist, but I don't see how this quote is a conspiracy.


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,976015-1,00.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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 their 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 work is now much 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 autodetermination practiced in past centuries." David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991.

You do realize the Trilateral Commission think tank and lobby for the Banks, right? They do not want global government, because they make money off of international trade.  If there's a one world government, there's no currency exchange and no barriers to money movement, they would be out of business. On a side note, they were started, partially to counter CFR; they are competitive think tanks/lobbies... some members are in both, because they are donators to the think tank.  Some people think it is a good idea to have ideas generated from different places.

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

The high office of the President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American's freedom and before I leave office, I must inform the citizen of this plight." President John Fitzgerald Kennedy - In a speech made to Columbia University on Nov. 12, 1963, ten days before his assassination .

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Columbia+University+Speech.htm

Conspiracy!

The funny thing about this quote, is that it originally appeared as Nov. 13 at Columbus University.  Over the years it's appeared with all different dates and universities.

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

Here's a great quote that applies to most people so I found it especially for you

The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists". J. Edgar Hoover, former head of the FBI

Now, your quoting one of the biggest freedom haters in the world.   He's warning US about the future.  He was disgusting dark spot on American Civil Liberties...  BTW, the quote was about the communists.

"In August 1956, the Elks Magazine published an article about the communist threat to America written by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. In it, Hoover stated: "Yet the individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists."  John Birch's conspiracy theory on J.Edgar Hoover's conspiracy theory.


Anyways I guarentee you if you take the actualy time to read between the lines you be surprised at the conclusion you'll come too.

 

 

Globalization, like I said in my last post, has nothing to do with governments and everything to do with people.  Trade, travel, and communication are breaking down sovereignty, not some secret society.

Not one of your quotes was sourced or checked.  Several were actually wrong, all were taken out of context.  As you can see above.

Your lack of desire to back up anything you say is disheartening.  For someone who's fighting for "the truth" I would expect you to try and use it.

 



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

Around the Network
Nirvana_Nut85 on 02 November 2008
steven787 said:



The commitment of government to deal with the population issue is of course essential...There are many ways to make the death rate Increase." Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense

“…There are only two possible ways in which a world of 10 billion people can be averted. Either the current birth rates must come down more quickly. Or the current death rates must go up. “There is no other way. “There are, of course, many ways in which the death rates can go up. In a thermonuclear age, war can accomplish it very quickly and decisively. Famine and disease are nature’s ancient checks on population growth, and neither one has disappeared from the scene….

“To put it simply: Excessive population growth is the greatest single obstacle to the economic and social advancement of most of the societies in the developing world.” —Robert McNamara, Oct. 2, 1979

This is the closest I came to finding that full quote.  Its from (I think) an issue of New Solidarity.  There are no online archives, or mentions of this magazine anywhere on the internet.

Yes, I believe he being clear on saying that he believes and is for population control but in the form of the government taking control of it.  The quote that I gave was in the full speech, and I wasn`t taking him By the way the date is wrong though it was in the New Solidarity, March 30, 1981. It is hard to find the whole article , will post the full thing when able to because from what i can tell your information is snippets as well.

 
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, despite John Rarick's belief, the CFR is actually not for a one world government, they are not staff by powerful people.   It is not staffed by powerful people, it's academics.  They are a think tank that tries to come up with solutions to problems. 

If you want to learn more about the organization, they have a pretty good website." 

Actually I wouldn't really call David Rockefellar, Dick Cheney (ex-director of the CFR, and here`s a video of him confirming this) http://www.videosift.com/video/Dick-Cheney-ex-director-of-CFR-talks-to-David-Rockefeller , Jimmy Carter, Paul Wolfowitz,Zbigniew Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger, Alan Greenspan,Bill Clinton,ect. I mean these people are intelligent but at the same time all hold high political power or wealth. I love this quote from the 50`s especially. 

" We shall have world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent." Statement by Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member James Warburg to The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17th, l950" 

The amount of time I read and researched information on the CFR and what there really about is more than sufficient. Unlike some people who look at the groups website and say oh, well there a think tank, it says so wirte on the page ( Try not to be so gullible, you need to do your homework on what these people are saying and their actions, not what their website says about them)

Lets not forget the 59 page document they released back in 2005 which gave the outlines to merge Canada, the U.S and Mexico or as they state (Building A North American Community).

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

Really, your quoting a former Rear Admiral as a power broker? Really?  I couldn't find any actual source that wasn't a conspiracy theory website that had this quote.  That doesn't mean it's wrong, but those sites usually are.

Actually, all you have to do as I pointed out in my previous statement is read what is being said by memebers of the CFR to understand what there intentions are and that there more than just a think tank.

I was giving different references to show different background and that it`s not just Bankers but Politicians, Big Business, Military,ect. It`s not just confined to one form of sect of government of economy.  

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

Actual quote from a four page article talking about the development of international policy:

"I'll bet that within the next hundred years, nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority."... half a page later....

"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."

He's a globalist, but I don't see how this quote is a conspiracy.


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,976015-1,00.html

It`s not necessarily a conspiracy at all and his statement wasn`t.

It`s called being hidden in plain view where as someone reading a four page article would not really  catch onto that necessarily but he makes it clear what his intentions are. The problem is that when people like this are holding high positions in the global economy they do have the ability to not only lobby for ideas of world government but push them through. Anyone affiliated whith such organizations,well there actions and statements reflect everything I've stated


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

You do realize the Trilateral Commission think tank and lobby for the Banks, right? They do not want global government, because they make money off of international trade.  If there's a one world government, there's no currency exchange and no barriers to money movement, they would be out of business. On a side note, they were started, partially to counter CFR; they are competitive think tanks/lobbies... some members are in both, because they are donators to the think tank.  Some people think it is a good idea to have ideas generated from different places.

Did you not read any of the statements I provided you? What Rockefellar has said in his books and quoted. I mean are you that ignorant of the facts or are you just bothered by it that you give a gerneral explation of how they desribe themselves on their website or better yet a Fox News version.It's not about making money. They have all the money in the world they need it's about gaining more power. Again "But, the work is now much 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 autodetermination practiced in past centuries - David Rockefellar" Do I have to dumb down what he is saying in this quote for you to understand? If he is the founder of this organzation and he states this is their goal......not to mention the fact that he was head of the CFR and is still a top member in that one as well.

They were not founded to counter the CFR. It wouldn't make sense when you have the head of the CFR at the time (David Rockefellar) is the founder of the trilateral commission. 

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

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Columbia+University+Speech.htm

Conspiracy!

The funny thing about this quote, is that it originally appeared as Nov. 13 at Columbus University.  Over the years it's appeared with all different dates and universities.

Well of course they are going to deny it. It clearly is his voice. I`m a devout fan of kennedy quotes and speeches because the man was a real leader unlike these puppets who have been put into office after him. Have you even listened to the audio? Compare it with every other speech he has givien and you'll be able to tell there is no discrepancies. The biggest problem is that they are completely unable to discredit the speech. They just get some smart ass moron to give his own opinion on what he belives to be true and calls it a religion not history...right. It's clearly his voice and I am completely surprised that if the website itself

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

Now, your quoting one of the biggest freedom haters in the world.   He's warning US about the future.  He was disgusting dark spot on American Civil Liberties...  BTW, the quote was about the communists.

"In August 1956, the Elks Magazine published an article about the communist threat to America written by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. In it, Hoover stated: "Yet the individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists."

 

 

"Globalization, like I said in my last post, has nothing to do with governments and everything to do with people.  Trade, travel, and communication are breaking down sovereignty, not some secret society.

Not one of your quotes was sourced or checked.  Several were actually wrong, all were taken out of context.  As you can see above.

Your lack of desire to back up anything you say is disheartening.  For someone who's fighting for "the truth" I would expect you to try and use it."

I believe it's not my supposed lack of desire but more along the lines of you lack of common sense to even acknowledge the fact that these organizations, societies, politicians and elite are trying deperately to move towards a one world government when there ideas and words are put right in front of you.

The links you provided weren't credible to what you were trying to disprove, and again you completely ignored all statements from David Rockefellar and gave your own opinions of others. I gave you names of books and video's, and all you provided was one link. You keep calling globalization when in fact that is not the issue being disscussed I mean how many more statements or quotes from articles or books they`ve written will have to be posted for you to stop `thinking it`s globalization. Seriously what do you need to hear before you wake up.

Just watch the policies and staged events that cause us to believe that all of this is necessarily and what will be pushed upon the public over the next several years.

One las thing, what can we really define as credible? The shit that were fed through our major news outlets? or when an independent news source does there homework properly and uncovers whats really going on. I honestly highly suggest that you listen to the alex jones show. You can dl it on isohunt because his broadcasts usually get posted there and listen to the information that guy provides. The people he has on his show, the major news articles and documents he gives as sources. You'll be surprised.

 

 

 



" Rebellion Against Tyrants Is Obedience To God"

steven787 on 02 November 2008
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
steven787 said:



The commitment of government to deal with the population issue is of course essential...There are many ways to make the death rate Increase." Robert McNamara, Secretary of Defense

“…There are only two possible ways in which a world of 10 billion people can be averted. Either the current birth rates must come down more quickly. Or the current death rates must go up. “There is no other way. “There are, of course, many ways in which the death rates can go up. In a thermonuclear age, war can accomplish it very quickly and decisively. Famine and disease are nature’s ancient checks on population growth, and neither one has disappeared from the scene….

“To put it simply: Excessive population growth is the greatest single obstacle to the economic and social advancement of most of the societies in the developing world.” —Robert McNamara, Oct. 2, 1979

This is the closest I came to finding that full quote.  Its from (I think) an issue of New Solidarity.  There are no online archives, or mentions of this magazine anywhere on the internet.

Yes, I believe he being clear on saying that he believes and is for population control but in the form of the government taking control of it.  The quote that I gave was in the full speech, and I wasn`t taking him By the way the date is wrong though it was in the New Solidarity, March 30, 1981. It is hard to find the whole article , will post the full thing when able to because from what i can tell your information is snippets as well.

 No, the place where he said that, where there is proof of any thing like that at all is that date.  The issue of New Solidarity - your quote - is the one I can find no proof of existence or McNamara's involvement.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Actually, despite John Rarick's belief, the CFR is actually not for a one world government, they are not staff by powerful people.   It is not staffed by powerful people, it's academics.  They are a think tank that tries to come up with solutions to problems. 

If you want to learn more about the organization, they have a pretty good website." 

Actually I wouldn't really call David Rockefellar, Dick Cheney (ex-director of the CFR, and here`s a video of him confirming this) http://www.videosift.com/video/Dick-Cheney-ex-director-of-CFR-talks-to-David-Rockefeller , Jimmy Carter, Paul Wolfowitz,Zbigniew Brzezinski, Henry Kissinger, Alan Greenspan,Bill Clinton,ect. I mean these people are intelligent but at the same time all hold high political power or wealth. I love this quote from the 50`s especially.

You really do not have anyunderstanding of how these groups work.  You should join a lobby or think tank, learn something.  How is this a secret conspiracy and what does it have to do with what they do in their free time?

" We shall have world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or consent." Statement by Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member James Warburg to The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17th, l950" 

This doesn't mean they want it.  Like I said, we are going to have it because of trade, communications, and travel improvements.  There is no stopping it. How is this a secret conspiracy and what does it have to do with what they do in their free time?

The amount of time I read and researched information on the CFR and what there really about is more than sufficient. Unlike some people who look at the groups website and say oh, well there a think tank, it says so wirte on the page ( Try not to be so gullible, you need to do your homework on what these people are saying and their actions, not what their website says about them)

Lets not forget the 59 page document they released back in 2005 which gave the outlines to merge Canada, the U.S and Mexico or as they state (Building A North American Community).

So they were supporting breaking down trade barriers and setting up sometype of arbitration board... that is exactly what they are trying to achieve.  How is this a secret conspiracy and what does it have to do with what they do in their free time?

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

Really, your quoting a former Rear Admiral as a power broker? Really?  I couldn't find any actual source that wasn't a conspiracy theory website that had this quote.  That doesn't mean it's wrong, but those sites usually are.

Actually, all you have to do as I pointed out in my previous statement is read what is being said by memebers of the CFR to understand what there intentions are and that there more than just a think tank.

I was giving different references to show different background and that it`s not just Bankers but Politicians, Big Business, Military,ect. It`s not just confined to one form of sect of government of economy.  

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

Actual quote from a four page article talking about the development of international policy:

"I'll bet that within the next hundred years, nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority."... half a page later....

"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."

He's a globalist, but I don't see how this quote is a conspiracy.


http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,976015-1,00.html

It`s not necessarily a conspiracy at all and his statement wasn`t.

It`s called being hidden in plain view where as someone reading a four page article would not really  catch onto that necessarily but he makes it clear what his intentions are. The problem is that when people like this are holding high positions in the global economy they do have the ability to not only lobby for ideas of world government but push them through. Anyone affiliated whith such organizations,well there actions and statements reflect everything I've stated


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

You do realize the Trilateral Commission think tank and lobby for the Banks, right? They do not want global government, because they make money off of international trade.  If there's a one world government, there's no currency exchange and no barriers to money movement, they would be out of business. On a side note, they were started, partially to counter CFR; they are competitive think tanks/lobbies... some members are in both, because they are donators to the think tank.  Some people think it is a good idea to have ideas generated from different places.

Did you not read any of the statements I provided you? Yes I did, and none of them had a viable source... in fact all of them came off the same list of Conspiracy Theory quotes that has been debunked over and over again that is all over the internet.  What Rockefellar has said in his books and quoted. I mean are you that ignorant of the facts or are you just bothered by it that you give a gerneral explation of how they desribe themselves on their website or better yet a Fox News version.It's not about making money. They have all the money in the world they need it's about gaining more power. Again "But, the work is now much 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 autodetermination practiced in past centuries - David Rockefellar" Do I have to dumb down what he is saying in this quote for you to understand? If he is the founder of this organzation and he states this is their goal......not to mention the fact that he was head of the CFR and is still a top member in that one as well.

They were not founded to counter the CFR. It wouldn't make sense when you have the head of the CFR at the time (David Rockefellar) is the founder of the trilateral commission. 

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

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Columbia+University+Speech.htm

Conspiracy!

The funny thing about this quote, is that it originally appeared as Nov. 13 at Columbus University.  Over the years it's appeared with all different dates and universities.

Well of course they are going to deny it. It clearly is his voice. I`m a devout fan of kennedy quotes and speeches because the man was a real leader unlike these puppets who have been put into office after him. Have you even listened to the audio? Compare it with every other speech he has givien and you'll be able to tell there is no discrepancies. The biggest problem is that they are completely unable to discredit the speech. They just get some smart ass moron to give his own opinion on what he belives to be true and calls it a religion not history...right. It's clearly his voice and I am completely surprised that if the website itself So you actually heard the speech...  has it been deleted off the internet?

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

Now, your quoting one of the biggest freedom haters in the world.   He's warning US about the future.  He was disgusting dark spot on American Civil Liberties...  BTW, the quote was about the communists.

"In August 1956, the Elks Magazine published an article about the communist threat to America written by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. In it, Hoover stated: "Yet the individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists."

 

 

 

 

"Globalization, like I said in my last post, has nothing to do with governments and everything to do with people.  Trade, travel, and communication are breaking down sovereignty, not some secret society.

Not one of your quotes was sourced or checked.  Several were actually wrong, all were taken out of context.  As you can see above.

Your lack of desire to back up anything you say is disheartening.  For someone who's fighting for "the truth" I would expect you to try and use it."

I believe it's not my supposed lack of desire but more along the lines of you lack of common sense to even acknowledge the fact that these organizations, societies, politicians and elite are trying deperately to move towards a one world government when there ideas and words are put right in front of you. Nobody's denying it; it's in everything, explain why it is bad.

The links you provided weren't credible to what you were trying to disprove, and again you completely ignored all statements from David Rockefellar and gave your own opinions of others. I gave you names of books and video's conspiracy theory books and videos, not credible sources, and all you provided was one link. Actually, I provided three sources, the first one you deleted because I proved it totally wrong.  The other two were links.  The second of those was a link to the debunking. You keep calling globalization when in fact that is not the issue being disscussed I mean how many more statements or quotes from articles or books they`ve written will have to be posted for you to stop `thinking it`s globalization. Seriously what do you need to hear before you wake up.  Actually it's being discussed in almost every field of academic, economic and political study.  It's being discussed around the dinner table as the US fights two wars, have a global financial crisis and eat off a table made in China or Sweden.

Just watch the policies and staged events that cause us to believe that all of this is necessarily and what will be pushed upon the public over the next several years.

One las thing, what can we really define as credible? I explained credible but I'll reword it.  A primary source, a letter, speech, or article written by the person and secondary sources that are accepted for publication in an academic journal. Inaccurate quotes without a citation are not credible.  The shit that were fed through our major news outlets? I didn't cite a single MSM source... you did...  Time Magazine.  or when an independent news source does there homework properly and uncovers whats really going on. I honestly highly suggest that you listen to the alex jones show. You can dl it on isohunt because his broadcasts usually get posted there and listen to the information that guy provides. The people he has on his show, the major news articles and documents he gives as sources. You'll be surprised. What mass media are you watching.  Global issues are all over the place... you don't even know what Globalization or global government mean...   I remember explaining it in the first post.  It doesn't mean a traditional government like the US or even the UN, it's the culmination of all the interactions and treaties of sovereign nations. 

There is not going to be some global king, president, or council who wields an unconfederated autocratic power.   Do you really think that that is what it means?

 

 

 



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

Nirvana_Nut85 on 04 November 2008
steven787 said:
Nirvana_Nut85 said:
steven787 said:



 No, the place where he said that, where there is proof of any thing like that at all is that date.  The issue of New Solidarity - your quote - is the one I can find no proof of existence or McNamara's involvement.

That quote is in that article, he's clearly giving his opinion on depopulation, which he seems to be heavily in favour for.  You claim you can't find proof of the article then where did you get part of the article. If most people were aware of the methods they use today to depopulize the world they would be very disturbed, but thats a whole other conversation, so yah, please provide a link to where you found those comments.

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

This doesn't mean they want it.  Like I said, we are going to have it because of trade, communications, and travel improvements.  There is no stopping it. How is this a secret conspiracy and what does it have to do with what they do in their free time?

Here, let me make it easy for you to understand. it's not to improve trade, travel or communications. Any idiot with half a brain understands that. It seems like your going on what these groups websites state instead of their actions or words. It was considered a conspiracy for the longest time but now they are fully implementing it in plain view and unfortunately because it's too much shock for they average person, people like you will deny it when it shown to you as clear as day. Even the mainstream news is now reporting this, hell all you have to do is turn on your t.v

It's not about making life easier it about power for those behid the close doors who are pulling the strings.

So they were supporting breaking down trade barriers and setting up sometype of arbitration board... that is exactly what they are trying to achieve.  How is this a secret conspiracy and what does it have to do with what they do in their free time?

They aren't breaking down trade barriers. They already did that with N.A.F.T.A, they want to form a North American Union (like in Europe) with Canada, U.S, and Mexico. It isn't some type of arbitriton board. The President went without congress approval as well as the Canadian Prime minister without our approval and signed the peace in prosperity act which likterally outlines a North American Union. Hell that was mone of the main missions by the CFR to implement this. THe problem with this is that like in Europe which they almost passed and will next time around, is that there going to have a group of politicians and they will have a puppet President who will govern the region.

 

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

Yes I did, and none of them had a viable source... in fact all of them came off the same list of Conspiracy Theory quotes that has been debunked over and over again that is all over the internet. 

I don't see how video's of actual politicians in the E.U stating they want world government, giving references like actual quotes straight from Rockefellars own published memoirs, Alex Jones confronting David Gergen on Bohemien Grove where there's documented footage of these Elite practicing occult rituals to an idol, and you have debunked any of the quotes I provided.

You either make a statement, well there just globalists, or I can't find the article. The unfortunate thing about the New Soliditary article is that it is hard to find and I'm still looking for the whole thing (thats the only thing I'll give you). Besides that your argument is basically just your opinion with not really great references. 

Those quotes have not been debunked over and over again, it's just people like you who have a hard time coming to terms with reality and say, well thats not what they meant or he's just a globalist. I thank god the number of people like you who buy into the b.s is decreasing.

 


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

 So you actually heard the speech...  has it been deleted off the internet?

No it hasn't been deleted off the internet and I was sure that I provided a link. There are many links to the speech actually so here is one for you.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/374938/john_f_kennedy_speech_on_secret_societies/

 

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

Now, your quoting one of the biggest freedom haters in the world.   He's warning US about the future.  He was disgusting dark spot on American Civil Liberties...  BTW, the quote was about the communists.

"In August 1956, the Elks Magazine published an article about the communist threat to America written by FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover. In it, Hoover stated: "Yet the individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists."

 Exactly, he was quoting the alleged communist threat to American. Their own director of the FBI  stating that, makes you think.

 

 

  Nobody's denying it; it's in everything, explain why it is bad.

The reason why world government is bad is because of they measure's there taking to set it up. Staging false flag terror attacks, designing the collapse of the economic and financial system, and literally trying to destroy from the inside any idependant free think nations. A one world government would take away nation soveriegnty and yes, they would establish it like a government except you would choose the leaders, the elite would. I could go on for hours of why it's bad :)

When you look at the people who are fronting this movement and you do your homework it's very easy to see what there true intentions are.

 conspiracy theory books and videos, not credible sources, Actually, I provided three sources, the first one you deleted because I proved it totally wrong.  The other two were links.  The second of those was a link to the debunking.

I don't recall you providing any links debunking any quotes. You gave a time magazine news source and that was about it. You didn't prove anything wrong with that just further helped my argument by stating that "he/'s just a globalist" which is your excuse for everything. PLus the only thing I delte is when something was responded to or if it was my answer, then I re-paste you comment and add my own.

 Actually it's being discussed in almost every field of academic, economic and political study.  It's being discussed around the dinner table as the US fights two wars, have a global financial crisis and eat off a table made in China or Sweden.

No globalization is a very loose term and inacurate in our current modern day situation. Unforrtunately people will believe everything they hear and deny anything that makes them feel uncomfotable. For example with the global financial criss. You had senators coming out and stating that they were going to threaten martial law and using fear tactics to make congress pass the bailout. I mean it's being used as a front by saying the global community which is what they've been using for the past few years and it has progressed to World Governance. not Globalization. Listen to what the people in power are actually saying like the video of Sarkozy and EU chief Barasso.

I explained credible but I'll reword it.  A primary source, a letter, speech, or article written by the person and secondary sources that are accepted for publication in an academic journal. Inaccurate quotes without a citation are not credible.  

You can bable on about credibility and innacuracy all you want but it's not helping your argument. I provide you proof on more thna one thing I brought up and you just say oh it's just globalization or their own private business or a think tank, when clearly it's not. I mean all your doing is bascially giving your opinion so please think before making "innacurate statements like these"

 What mass media are you watching.  Global issues are all over the place... you don't even know what Globalization or global government mean...   I remember explaining it in the first post.  It doesn't mean a traditional government like the US or even the UN, it's the culmination of all the interactions and treaties of sovereign nations. 

Well steve, you can regurgitate what the state on there websites but I'll actaully listen to their words. I know what globalization is, the basis of it and that they state it as their goal. As I told you before they've been doing that for a while, but if you listen to what is being said today it is way beyond that, but then again you'd probably make a ridiculous comment like "well as long as I have a 42" tv.

There is not going to be some global king, president, or council who wields an unconfederated autocratic power.   Do you really think that that is what it means?

Never said there would be a global king, there will be a global government in place that passes the policies and legislature that will affect all regions of the world and I disagree with that because I believe in maintaining national soveriegnty. The Eu promised they wouldn't have a President but if you recall the last issue that was voted down (only thanks to Ireland) would have gave that EU council the power to elect a President and have a ruling body make decisions for all of the E.U memebers. Most of the countries are willing to go ahead with it despite Ireland's objections. 

When you look a little further down the rabbit hole you'll be amazed at the reality that lies beneath.

 

 

 

 

 



" Rebellion Against Tyrants Is Obedience To God"

steven787 on 04 November 2008

November 3, 2008
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/03/for-obama-bigger-is-much-much-better/
For Obama, bigger is much, much better

David Gergen | BIO
AC360° Contributor
CNN Senior Political Analyst

With victory almost in his grasp, the looming question for Barack Obama is whether he will squeak by or whether he can roll up the score. It will matter enormously to his leadership as President.

For Obama supporters, just climbing to the top of the mountain with 270 electoral votes has always seemed daunting enough. And they are right. After all, Democrats have seen triumphs slip away from them so often — they have lost 7 of the past 10 presidential elections — that they are extremely uneasy that the Republicans can pull an upset this time, too. It seems unlikely after a raft of national polls this weekend showed Obama with a national lead of around 7 points — and by some estimates in double digits. Still, there were also unsettling state polls last night by the Mason Dixon firm showing McCain closing in fast in North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio and Missouri. Who can say for sure that Pennsylvania will remain blue. It ain’t over ’till it’s over.

But when the dust clears and if the Democrats have pulled it off, the Obama team will care a great deal about the size and breadth of victory. Much of his early presidency will hang in the balance.

There are three keys to watch on Tuesday night:

1. Percentage of the national vote. Right now, there is a solid prospect that Obama can rack up 51 percent or more of the total vote. If so, he would be the first Democrat since Jimmy Carter to win a majority of the national vote (Carter had 50.1 percent) and only the second Democrat since Franklin Roosevelt to claim a majority (Lyndon Johnson was the other). That historic standing would give Obama a fresh boost as the president-elect and would mean that he could run ahead of Members of Congress in their own states. In Washington, that gives a president extra power.

2. Number of red states won. In recent campaigns, Democratic presidential contenders have won mostly on the east and west coasts and the upper midwest. John Kerry only won 19 states plus the District of Columbia, and one could get on a plane at Dulles and fly to Los Angeles without flying over a state that the Democrats won.

Obama has had a vision since his convention speech in 2004 of Democrats becoming a national party, getting beyond the traditional red/blue divides. And he now has a good chance of doing it. If he can win a couple of southern states, plus two or three states from the Rocky Mountains, not to mention more Midwestern areas, he can claim a true national victory — and he would have the makings of a new, majority coalition for the Democrats, something they have lacked for decades.

3. The size of Democratic wins in the Senate and House. The Democrats were heading toward significant pick-ups with or without a presidential win, but if Obama racks up a convincing victory and is accompanied by nine or more new Democratic Senators and a couple of dozen new House members, that will give him muscle on Capitol Hill that few Presidents have enjoyed. I was working for Ronald Reagan in 1980 when he trounced Jimmy Carter and Republicans swept to 12 pick-ups in the Senate and 33 in the House. Reagan was much more respected — and effective — in working with Congress because of that thumping victory.

So, the eyes of the Obama team will be focused on getting to 270 electoral votes tomorrow night, but those who care about governing — and Obama cares more than most appreciate — will be watching, too, to see how big and broad a victory he can achieve. It could be an historic night in more ways than one.

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/03/for-obama-bigger-is-much-much-better/



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.

steven787 on 04 November 2008

Nirvana you've deleted my other sources twice now.

Here they are again:

1. "In Haig's presence, Kissinger referred pointedly to military men as "dumb, stupid animals to be used" as pawns for foreign policy. Kissinger often took up a post outside the doorway to Haig's office and dressed him down in front of the secretaries for alleged acts of incompetence with which Haig was not even remotely involved. Once when the Air Force was authorized to resume bombing of North Vietnam, the planes did not fly on certain days because of bad weather. Kissinger assailed Haig. He complained bitterly that the generals had been screamin for the limits to be taken off but that now their pilots were afraid to go up in a little fog. The country needed generals who could win battles, Kissinger said, not good briefers like Haig."

Woodward, Woodward & Carl Bernstein,The Final Days, Chapter 14, p. 194

It's called a book, they don't (all) have links... it has a limited preview on google books, but the page in question isn't on there. They have it

2. http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Columbia+University+Speech.htm

3. the time article that you didn't cite. because it was misquoted.


Lastly, I want to draw your attention to this. JFK did give that speech, but it wasn't at Columbia University 10 days before he was killed. It was given to a press association at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel  New York City, April 27, 1961. - He was assassinated 2 and a half years later on November 22, 1963


Once again, the speech from your source cuts out several minutes and is not cited with the right date.

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/Archives/Reference+Desk/Speeches/JFK/003POF03NewspaperPublishers04271961.htm

or here, since you don't trust the government:

http://www.archive.org/details/jfks19610427

The speech was about secret societies and government secrecy, he was promising to have an open administration... which he didn't. It was in response to the failed secret operation "the Bay of Pigs", the Secret Societies were an example of secrecy being frowned upon in the U.S.*

http://www.newspaperarchive.com/LandingPage.aspx?type=glpnews&search=jfk%20april%2027,%201961&img=\\na0039\6792714\49410620_clean.html

http://www.newspaperarchive.com/LandingPage.aspx?type=glpnews&search=jfk%20april%2027,%201961&img=\\na0042\6802005\54645712_clean.html

http://www.newspaperarchive.com/LandingPage.aspx?type=glpnews&search=jfk%20april%2027,%201961&img=\\na0005\6779379\35494854_clean.html

http://www.newspaperarchive.com/LandingPage.aspx?type=glpnews&search=jfk%20april%2027%2c%201961%20new%20york%20times&img=\\na0037\6792299\49230728_clean.html

I found it in microfiche at my schools library, and here in MIME:

http://content.ancestry.com/browse/view.aspx?dbid=50001&iid=NEWS-PA-TH_GE_TI.1961_04_27_0023&desc=JFK+April+27,+1961&veil=1&o_xid=18704&o_lid=18704&offerid=0%3a7797%3a0

There are hundreds more, it was in almost every newspaper.

*I cited newspapers to prove what date the speech was made on not to substantiate any of the claims made by JFK, Nirvana, myself, or the press.

Edit: I just realized you need a subscription to see those...  well goto the library and look them up on microfilm.



I would cite regulation, but I know you will simply ignore it.