Proof of a NWO

Post Reply New Topic

Are you able to communicate points to me without trying to beat me down with a giant stick? I'm fairly capable of intelligent discussion, could you at least give me that benefit of a doubt and debate your viewpoints in a more rational, intelligent manner?

Okay, to decipher this wall of text and counter or neutralize:

Why do you tell us not to consume so much if you insist we could offer plentiful resources if the world decided to work together? What would consuming less achieve? We will still be given our goods the exact same way, only there will be more wastage. And who's to say who is demanding the wrong things. Helloooo, our money our choice! Can you tell me what your lower consumption has achieved? What do you buy these days? What are you using right now to talk to us?

You quite clearly have never worked in the business world (or possibly at all), or had a desire to communicate with people far away for less money. We don't need these things but they are damn convenient. That is the purpose of technology, to advance us and also offer convenience. Why don't you go back to the age of the wheel and tell them why they need a wheel when they can carry the boulders themselves? And you seem to spend a lot of time looking at a screen yourself, WhiteWidow. Does looking at certain types of screens allow you to be more sanctimonious than people using a different type of screen?

1) Not just America, my friend. Think bigger (if you can). There are lots of developed and developing nations that are contributing to this thing you are spouting off about. Don't single out our big fat brother.
2) Desensitizing us to violence is a 2 way street. It not only makes us tolerant of unspeakable crimes but it also makes us very capable of them, too. I really don't think people would be wanting us to have that lack of compassion as a whole. There are plenty of nations proving why this would be a problem for governments right now.
3) They already do kill people in the open for breaking the law. Your point?

The internet is a break through. The computer is a break through. The phone is a break through

But a phone, with the internet which doubles as a computer
- is not a break through

I think you forgot to put "IMHO" in that sentence.

The whole idea of a "comments section" or a youtube account to have your ideas heard, or forums to vent your anger on the internet is also a major problem. It's taken away any responsibility to form grass roots organizations dedicated to boycotting brands or changing the environment aside from Greenpeace or Peta. It's a small fraction of the actual truth. Why can't everyone agree on the notion that we now consider everything in technology a break through, as opposed to critically thinking about what is actually necessary in our lives.

When was the last time you saw somebody hugging a tree?

The Amish have just such a way of thinking.



In some cases, sure. In other cases, the internet has been beneficial in the formation and strengthening of such organizations.

Hooray! Finally.

That's a choice people have made for themselves. They allowed themselves to be consumed by sloth. There are other organizations than the ones you know, btw, that make a conscious effort to do the things you care about. I won't go into the monetary side of charity again, though, as you know my stance on that one already.

It is possible to accept new technology is a breakthrough or at least an advancement, and also accept not all of it is applicable to every day life. Just because people are using tech you don't like doesn't mean they are blind to how unnecessary it is for them to exist or function. Did you ever play with toys when you were little? You certainly didn't need those, and I bet you didn't have some guy in a stripey shirt come over and point at you and tell you that. Seriously, quit policing people. You have already lost, because you are trying to police people at the micro management level which is what this government you hate so much has started doing since the 00's. You've become a little policeman in a way. Maybe not a replica of them, but the attitude and culture of it has trickled down onto you and you are pouring it onto others. Face it, you are part of the machine.

Ever hear of "inflation?" When you figure in for it, you go from what you must have been looking at:

Something like this (unadjusted for inflation:)
http://stockcharts.com/freecharts/histo ... a1900.html

To something like this (adjusted for inflation):
http://home.earthlink.net/~intelligentb ... j-infl.htm

Or an average inflation adjusted annual return of 1.9%, assuming the intelligent bear site is doing its calculations correctly. And as best I can tell, neither chart is accounting for dividends as part of the return.

One caveat: While I do agree the US gov'ts calculation of the inflation rate has been essentially useless since circa 1993, whether or not adding 2.7% to it gives you the right number is certainly debatable. And that is precisely what the intelligent bear site did. I'm guessing its close, though possibly a few tenths of a percent too high. This article:

http://www.shadowstats.com/article/consumer_price_index

explains the chicanery that occurred in 1993. (It is also linked to from the intelligent bear site.) Depressing reading, though the way the unemployment rate is calculated is at an even further remove from reality.

When the bars close around here, circa 2 AM on weekends, midnights during the week, I've seen more than my share of people hugging trees, mailboxes, telephone poles, you name it. Post-last call is probably the huggiest hour of each day. Perhaps it would give you a great opportunity to proselytize this whole NWO thingy, the huggy time from ejection from bar to said individuals climbing on their Harleys?

These are proof of nothing. Full stop.

i do hope you see the irony of you making this comment in a thread on a discussion forum that was started by you?

and also, not to indulge, but you are aware that organisations such as greenpeace and peta, but especially greenpeace, are seen as being part of the "problem" by many people who think similarly to yourself?

i would agree with you on some things, white widow, most specifically in that the planet is beset with problems and injustice on a massive scale. the problem, however, is that although many of these problems and injustices may be interconnected in some ways, i don't think it's prudent to attribute absolutely everything that is bad in the world as being the product of some nefarious and all encompassing plot hatched by a tiny cabal of bankers/uber rich/people of influence etc. who are set on controlling the world.

of course, as i've said in one of your other threads, there are indeed nefarious elements within the extreme upper socio-economic strata/ruling class. but they're not responsible for everything bad that happens. the planet is a very large and dynamic place. putting so much faith in this single meta conspiracy as you are doing invariably leads to a gullibility to believe anything.

some, for instance, believe that the entirety of modern culture is nothing more than a plot hatched by a group of evil psychologists at the tavistock institute to influence the course of 20th century history, and that the german theorist, theodor adorno, wrote the entire beatles catalogue from rubber soul onwards. do you believe this? some people think that government agents are hacking into their brains using microwaves, and that this behaviour causes society at large to ostracize and harass them. do you believe this?

before the advances of high technology, a man by the name of james tilly matthews, who functioned briefly as an mediator in the troubles between england and france in the late 18th century, came to believe that a nefarious group of people he referred to as "the air loom gang" had constructed an elaborate mechanical device called an "air loom" with which they influenced him remotely. do you believe this?

see this wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Tilly_Matthews

the ultimate conclusion of this line of thought is delusional beliefs that mental health services see as a hallmark of psychosis.

as some other posters have stated, even if this grand narrative is true, why focus on it? would not the best way to challenge it be to get out and about, mix with your peers, and encourage autonomy and independence among them?

as an aside, it's good to see that you are out volunteering, whatever it is that you are doing.

OP, two points:

First, you are confusing a scenario with reality. The Rockefeller Foundation is laying out a few possible events in order to assist with preparedness training. The fact that we live in a dangerous world, indicated by the security precautions which have been taken for the London Olympics, does not indicate that anyone in government has some nefarious scheme. Use Ockam's razor (parsimony or economy).

Second, when people (including myself) use the term new world order, we are using it to refer to the world as it exists now, not to some possible world government. Now, some folks (again, myself included) would like to see the new world order evolve into a kind of world governance or government. However, that idea continues to be debated. In any event, it is not a secret conspiracy. Those who recognize the changes in the world, and the need to move political and economic institutions into the 21st century, are very open about it.

When did all this happen?

ruveyn

Exactly, it didn't. It is preparedness training.

The Bilderberg Meetings are just a high-profile think tank (like the Club of Rome).

I understand the purpose of these meetings. The lack of transparency and disclosure to the public, not so much.

IMO, transparency is over-rated. Too much transparency means that people could not feel as free to express their thoughts.