There is nothing wrong with a One-World Government

The New World Order and its planners the Illuminati, are intent on making a dictatorship and reduce the worlds population to 500,000,000 by war, disease manifactured, and execution and advanced eugenics to design a master race....as designed by the Rockefeller Eugenics agenda....long long story short.

reply to post by depmode21


NO NO NO NO NO!

A One World Government will NOT do the world any good.
Read the Book of Revelation. Understand what it says. It foretells of such an event and the outcome of it.

I don't care if you believe what it says or not, the fact remains it says it. It is coming to pass. It will not be good .... and those like yourself who think it will be will be sadly disappointed in the end.

Originally posted by depmode21
reply to post by Amigori

 

We learned a long time ago that human beings at the core are savages and need to be PUT IN PLACE by more educated individuals. That was the POINT of religion and that is the POINT of government.



[edit on 5-4-2009 by depmode21]

Are you kidding me!!!!???? Humans are savages...no, sir. I respectfully disagree. Each person is endowed by his creator the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. This truth is predicated on the fact that each person has free will.

Savage behavior is a criminal response to the community around it. Crime against someones goods is caused by the desire for material gain and violent crime is caused by the desire for power. This savage behavior is caused by a lack of education and nurturing. All people have the desires, but the most civilized learn strategies for gain. They learn how to work hard to gain material goods, and they learn how to influence people to gain power. Crime is the resort for people who never learned the other way.

A one world gov will not eliminate these two social desires.

He will send them a great delusion that they should believe a lie because they don't seek truth.......we are in for a ride in the US very very soon.

They earned their trillions by the blood of innocents and death of millions by their evil intent and design using the Helgelian Dialectic and the evil plan for world revolution. this is an irrefutable fact based on scholarily research.....

"A one world gov will not eliminate these two social desires. "

*****By their own admissions it will allow a Luciferian World Order to exist that will murder millions.........

In response to the OP, a One World Government would not be bad if everyone on the planet still has the right to vote. That government still has to remain democratic. Unfortunately, I don't see this happening yet. Many of the people in charge have a record of being power hungry, greedy and work on self interest. What's happening is that they are making the global banking/economic system separate form political system especially the democratic political system. Democracy has problem too if the majority of its people are uneducated and decide to vote for a leader out of kinship than what is actually a better logical solution that's why education must be made mandatory for everyone so they can see the big picture. Also our leaders must become not only leaders but educators which leads to another human problem. Ethics. Ethics must be central to all education.

reply to post by Evisscerator

I wondered when someone was going to bring this up.

The book of Revelation is our guidebook to these times. I talked to a Catholic priest about it and he told me it is not for us to understand. I am catholic, but disagree with his reply. Jesus himself said we should be looking diligently for the signs so that we are ready.

I am ready. I will never never take a microchip or tattoo from the government. I would rather die.

Originally posted by MainframeII
In response to the OP, a One World Government would not be bad if everyone on the planet still has the right to vote.

No!!!!!!!!!

In your own community you can vote to damn a stream, you can vote to build a bridge, you can vote to determine how your small community decides to live in proximity of each other.

If the whole world had the right to vote, the rest of the world could decide that corn should be taxed at 90% and rice is not taxed at all. Why would this happen....because most people in the world can not grow corn and wheat as plentifully and easily as we can...and there are a billion more of them than us.
Your point is a naive argument like the abolition of the electoral college or states rights...power has to be given locally and in a balanced way. Without the electoral college only the needs of the most populated places would be represented in our US government. Also states rights balance these powers. It becomes impossible to find the brilliant balance the founded fatheres so carefully measured when the pie gets bigger and bigger.

reply to post by depmode21

The Bible talks about two "One World Governments": the first is the last human government before Jesus returns. The second is the after "the Second Coming" where "every knee shall bow and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord."

If you study the details of the first "One World Government", you will not welcome it. But at least the good news is it won't last long.

Two words.

Free Society.

In light of your user name, I believe Depeche Mode would like to tell you something...

Originally posted by Missing Blue Sky

Originally posted by MainframeII
In response to the OP, a One World Government would not be bad if everyone on the planet still has the right to vote.

No!!!!!!!!!

In your own community you can vote to damn a stream, you can vote to build a bridge, you can vote to determine how your small community decides to live in proximity of each other.

If the whole world had the right to vote, the rest of the world could decide that corn should be taxed at 90% and rice is not taxed at all. Why would this happen....because most people in the world can not grow corn and wheat as plentifully and easily as we can...and there are a billion more of them than us.
Your point is a naive argument like the abolition of the electoral college or states rights...power has to be given locally and in a balanced way. Without the electoral college only the needs of the most populated places would be represented in our US government. Also states rights balance these powers. It becomes impossible to find the brilliant balance the founded fatheres so carefully measured when the pie gets bigger and bigger.

Of course local government would still exist (that includes national government). The scope of where a decision pertains should be localized so local government should still exist, but one world government would deal with the global scope.

for those of you checkin this thread i please urge you to also check out count66's thread on communism it is on the frontpage still and is under the name "its time to defeat the powers that be- with communism please i urge you all to take part in that discussion and please flag and keep it alive

An unelected One World Government is a Dictatorship . That is what the free people of the world have fought against for a hundred years.
There is only one enemy for the One World Government ...thats us the people. With no balance in the Political Wolrd there can only be tyrrany. Who would stand up to tyrrany ? Where would the oppressed seek Assylum ? How can you be so gullable ? Do you believe the Communist North Koreans would agree with Japan ? Would the Islamic Saudis apply Human Rights for women or Aetheists or Christians .No. Would the Free thinking People of Estonia, Latvia or even New Zealand accept a Marxist Dictatorship with Chinese Troops enforcing the will of a dictatorship.

A One World Government would have a one world Army and the largest Army is Chinese . Thus a one world Govenment would have to have a Chinese Military leadership. Would the Vietnamese accept orders from a Chinese General ? . No. Would American Troops Obey the orders of a Communist Atheist General??. No. All Empires fracture. History has taught us that. There will be Warlords fighting for power and purges and Who would be President ? A Saudi or a Chinese ? or a Somalian ? No there would be ethnic upsings , religious uprisings or cultural uprisings. There is no way a Muslim will accept an Aetheist World President. There is no way the Israelis will accept a Moslem World President . The real Christians would never accept a Druid World President . Can you imagine the World President Stalin or World President Mao or World President Pol Pot ??? ...or World President Hitler.??

Only thse who have not studied history properly would want a One World Government of BANKSTAS...these people caused the wars and economic crisis. Where is freedom and free speech in a world run by unelected Banking Families ? This New World Order is not New it is the Old World Order of the Middle Ages . It will be a world of SERFS & Lords . Theier Political Philosophy is Neo Feudalism. Will you be a SLAVE ? Will the African Americans or Brazillians allow the reintroduction of SLAVERY ?

Originally posted by depmode21
reply to post by Amigori

 

Dude, I'm from Afghanistan. Both of my parents emigrated here during the Soviet War, and I was born in the US. Your trying to tell me I don't know about the history of my own country?

Problem. You were born in the US, making you an American, first and foremost. Your heritage is Afghani. No disrespect there. If you renounced your US Citizenship and moved back to Afghanistan for the majority of your life, then you can say you are from Afghanistan. Otherwise, you are an American.

You just read a couple pages of Afghanistan's Wikipedia article and try to bring up points I WASN'T TALKING ABOUT IN THE FIRST PLACE. You brought up the 70's and Communism era, none of which took place in the last 20 years. The only point I brought up was post-Soviet war which was Anarchy that took place starting 1989 until the Taliban came into power.

The points I brought up are relevant to this discussion regardless if you talked about them or not. The Wikipedia article is a great summary for other members who may not be familiar with the history of Afghanistan. And nowhere in your previous posts have disclosed that you are "from" Afghanistan. After completing several university senior-level projects detailing the history and economy of Afghanistan, I believe that I have good standing on the subject, but I do not claim to be an expert. And when most people around here think of one world government, they think of 1 of 3 concepts, NWO/corporate/banking fascism, dictatorships/totalitarianism, or communism. I'm only 28, but I believe that events that happened during my lifetime are still relevant. People have long memories.

Do you even know any Afghans? They hated communism and will continue hate communism for the rest of their lives. So it wasn't flowers and singing brother, don't try to look at YouTube videos and Wikipedia articles and think your some kind of expert about that region because your not.

Nope. But please explain in detail why people who hated communism will welcome and accept a one world government, that chances are, has very little cultural, political, or economical connection to that of Afghanistan.

...We learned a long time ago that human beings at the core are savages and need to be PUT IN PLACE by more educated individuals. That was the POINT of religion and that is the POINT of government.

I am an educated (in your sense) person and I have no right to put ANYONE in their place. I'm entitled to my opinions and beliefs, which here in the states are protected by our founding documents.

None of the # you guys think will happen will EVER happen. The only thing that will happen is that some form of a One World Government will come soon and everybody will enjoy it. And you guys will slap yourselves for wasting so much of your time, worrying about nothing.

I'm not trying to be disrespectful here, but tell this (your entire argument) to your parents. They fled the powers that were trying to establish this type of government and control in your "home" country. Of the 180ish (1980s) / 200ish (now) countries in the world, they choose to seek asylum in the USA, probably for specific reasons. If they were of your opinion, they would have stayed and welcomed the Soviets or later on the Taliban. Afterall, from the Soviet or Taliban perspective, they were trying to establish a One World Government. Eventually, the West would fall and they would move in to impose their idea of a master government on the globe.

And I'd rather worry about the future of my livelihood and my country than go do something superficial or distracting.

reply to post by becomingaware


LOL, it's so funny that you sent me a Depeche Mode video.

They have been my favorite band since I was 3 years old.

I'm catching them in NYC, LA, & Europe this summer.

Dave Gahan has been my hero since I was a baby.

DEPECHE MODE IS THE NEW WORLD ORDER!! SPREAD THE WORD!!

BE PREPARED!! THERE WILL BE FEMA CAMPS AT THEIR CONCERTS!!

THEY HAVE BRAINWASHING WATERMARKS IN THEIR AUDIO!!

AHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!! PEDRO, RUN FOR THE HILLS!!!

Tea Party on April 15th, be there or be square.

Otherwise just accept the NWO and be done with it.

1) I actually sat in a US History class discussing this; the trickle down theory doesn't work! It screws up.. And guess what? Most nations spend unimaginable amounts of money on military... I doubt that would change, even with a One-World government.

2) You do realize they would have to get rid of... Oh I don't know, millions on millions of people? Hmm... how would I get rid of millions of people...

3) Heh. No weapons = no resistance to any future corruption in your purty One-World government.

4) Project Bluebeam. You have made me make up my mind.. Im starting my own school of thought


Honestly, if this was done in an ideal world, with ideal people, and ideal conditions, then it would be great.

But.. Have you forgotten we're human beings? We screw things up...



[edit on 5-4-2009 by ShoopDaWhoop]

Im sorry, but I totally have to disagree with you. When the governement starts to determine how many children you should have based on your income level I think that would make the U.S citizens very upset. Although I do agree that there are far to many children in poverty, I still dont think that gives some one with "authority" to descide on weather or not I should have children...Its my right to have children and as many children as I want. When I was in second grade and heard how china only allows two children per family I thought that was ridiculous. Who has the right over my reproduction? NO ONE BUT ME... and as far as violence goes...are you kidding me? People fight all the time, for looking at some one the "wrong way" to stepping on their new shoes...Violence and crime will always be around..it shouldnt take a new world government to bring "peace" to the world .... it should be left up to the people in it.. if everyone was more aware of their actions and how every action has a re-action we wouldnt have poverty we wouldnt have violence and we wouldnt have crime.

Originally posted by MainframeII

Originally posted by Missing Blue Sky

Originally posted by MainframeII
In response to the OP, a One World Government would not be bad if everyone on the planet still has the right to vote.

No!!!!!!!!!

In your own community you can vote to damn a stream, you can vote to build a bridge, you can vote to determine how your small community decides to live in proximity of each other.

If the whole world had the right to vote, the rest of the world could decide that corn should be taxed at 90% and rice is not taxed at all. Why would this happen....because most people in the world can not grow corn and wheat as plentifully and easily as we can...and there are a billion more of them than us.
Your point is a naive argument like the abolition of the electoral college or states rights...power has to be given locally and in a balanced way. Without the electoral college only the needs of the most populated places would be represented in our US government. Also states rights balance these powers. It becomes impossible to find the brilliant balance the founded fatheres so carefully measured when the pie gets bigger and bigger.

Of course local government would still exist (that includes national government). The scope of where a decision pertains should be localized so local government should still exist, but one world government would deal with the global scope.

You assume too much.
No- local control could not exist as it does now... i am talking about SOVEREIGNTY. OWG erases sovereignty. Sovereignty means no one has veto power over you. OWG could tell you "no you can not damn that river because the nationstate south of you depends on that water. The OWG could say, your community uses too much water and power...we will now turn it off from 3pm to 2am each day...etc etc etc. I am not interested in discussing "if we have a OWG, what are the nuances which will make it palatable..."

It is against all human interest. It is a negative force to all the laborers and inventors and builders and teachers who built up the great civilization of the western world. Just because the rest of the world does not have what we have, we do not have to stop everything reorganize and hand it over. They need to build it.

[edit on 4/5/2009 by Missing Blue Sky]

This is going to be a long thread because it seems that everyone has an opinion on this topic. The sad fact is that, despite our individual opinions, the movement of civilization is towards a consolidation of power. We already have a one-world economy, a one-world government is the next natural phase.

I have tried to come up with an example from nature of a species that has a ruling class and a servant class but I can't. The closest thing I can think of is the various mythologies regarding the ancient gods. When one traces the myths back, the line ends at Sumer and the Annunakis.

When it comes to civil organization, we are more like the Annunakis than anything else in the natural environment of the Earth. Constant intrigue, deception, manipulation and eventually, War and destruction.

vBreezo