It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by bigbert81
reply to post by 5aret
Uggggh, just because we here don't have "proof" about the NWO doesn't mean it should be dismissed. If the only thing you look at is "proof", then you're missing out on a lot of knowledge. The problem with skeptics, you know, is that unless there is "proof", they won't even LOOK or consider the possibility of something else. Remember, O.J. got off.
Needless to say, if proof is the only thing your interested in, you might want to open your mind a bit and realize that maybe we don't know as much as we should.
The Bush Administration did exagerate on certain points to invade Iraq. If they hadn't, then most likely they would have not been able to invade Iraq. However, sometimes exagerating on certain points is required if you wish to preserve the security of the nation. There was reasonable evidence that Saddam was possible testing with chemical and nuclear weapons. He kicked out UN Weapons Inspectors and acted as if he had something to hide. In a post 9/11 world, the Bush Administration could not risk having a 2nd terrorist attack just because they were once again to blind to see the signs.
Originally posted by bigbert81
I honestly don't know how to really "prove" the NWO. George Bush could come out and just plain admit it, and there would still be a large number of people saying it's not "proof".
Originally posted by windwaker
If what Greenspan says is true, I would imagine that someone who would willingly participate in killing hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians, profit from the act, and lie about the motives for his actions, must have very, very low self-esteem.