A one-world government is inevitable, so why oppose it?

reply to post by MatheaticalPhysicist


I'm sorry my friend, but David Rockefeller, Bill Gates,George Soros, the Rothchilds, all have the Ultimate Power. It's called money. They can buy any law maker they want, and get any law enacted. It's just a matter of paying off the right politcians, going slow, and keeping a low profile. Glen Beck and others have pointed this out for years. The thing that slows them down are the citizens that stay informed and bring these movers and shakers out of the darkness, out from under the rocks and into the cold, hard light of day in order to expose them.

Like the the old joke goes. A man walks up to a woman and ask "Will you have sex with me of $1000?"
The woman replies, "Of course I would"
The man then asks "Would you have sex with me for $100?"
The woman became enraged and slapped the man.. "What do you think I am? A whore?"
The man smiled and said, "We've already established that as a fact. Now we're just negotiating the bottom line."

Same with the politicians, NWO or not. I prefer "not" since it makes them a LITTLE easier to control.

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist
David Rockefeller is a philanthropist and it is possible he may have said such statements, but like all philanthropists and humanists, his personal views only stop with him. He is not a politician, has no power, etc.

David Rockefeller has no power?

(too stunned to think of second line)

reply to post by MathematicalPhysicist


Why oppose it? For the same reason that a woman being raped fights back.

2nd

I oppose a new world order for the simple reason that it is evil in all its efforts.

Let's compare the coming one world government to being violently raped. While some could say, relax and enjoy it if you cant stop or resist the attack, but such a suggestion is ludicrous and clearly an attempt to say, just accept it and go along with it even if it is the rape of American values and freedoms.

I will never accept a negative because it is easier to do so. Anything that is morally wrong is wrong and calling it OK, acceptable or inevitable because we cant do anything about it is clear indication that no spine or back bone exists to continue fighting or resisting. To not fight and to give in to the rape, suggests that perhaps we don't care what happens as long as they don't kill us in the process of being raped.

Well, death, genocide, Agenda 21 and human depopulation is a program created by the NWO crowd. Anyone who thinks that accepting evil is alright because we cant stop it is deluded and perhaps deranged. All I know is that to tell a woman being raped to accept it and enjoy it is the height of cowardliness, insane submissive slave madness that some people clearly exhibit for all to see.

Oh well, live and let live, but I will never accept an attack on the human species as inevitable because that is what the sleeping herd thinks. As for me, well, I like to think that I am more awake than most and telling me to accept evil agendas because it cant be stopped is exactly what we don't need to hear from those that would enslave us and kill us with impunity.

It is the cowardly types, the chicken hawks that say don't complain, don't cry out for help when being raped because of course these same type of people seem to think that standing up for yourself or others is wrong and in my book, such spineless individuals are truly what is wrong with this world.

It helps to believe in something noble and to have values, morals and a sense of decency, but if anyone ever tells me to accept the crimes being committed against me and the rest of humanity, well, that is when I will have to stand up boldly and show some spine for others to see what it looks like, because I am going to fight until I cant fight any longer and then in facing my own death I can die knowing that I never gave in to evil, even if it did contribute to my own demise. I can then die knowing I never gave in to what was evil and morally wrong.

To accept evil is to embrace death and that is something I will never do willingly.

I oppose a new world order for the simple reason that it is evil in all its efforts.

Let's compare the coming one world government to being violently raped. While some could say, relax and enjoy it if you cant stop or resist the attack, but such a suggestion is ludicrous and clearly an attempt to say, just accept it and go along with it even if it is the rape of American values and freedoms.

I will never accept a negative because it is easier to do so. Anything that is morally wrong is wrong and calling it OK, acceptable or inevitable because we cant do anything about it is clear indication that no spine or back bone exists to continue fighting or resisting. To not fight and to give in to the rape, suggests that perhaps we don't care what happens as long as they don't kill us in the process of being raped.

Well, death, genocide, Agenda 21 and human depopulation is a program created by the NWO crowd. Anyone who thinks that accepting evil is alright because we cant stop it is deluded and perhaps deranged. All I know is that to tell a woman being raped to accept it and enjoy it is the height of cowardliness, insane submissive slave madness that some people clearly exhibit for all to see.

Oh well, live and let live, but I will never accept an attack on the human species as inevitable because that is what the sleeping herd thinks. As for me, well, I like to think that I am more awake than most and telling me to accept evil agendas because it cant be stopped is exactly what we don't need to hear from those that would enslave us and kill us with impunity.

It is the cowardly types, the chicken hawks that say don't complain, don't cry out for help when being raped because of course these same type of people seem to think that standing up for yourself or others is wrong and in my book, such spineless individuals are truly what is wrong with this world.

It helps to believe in something noble and to have values, morals and a sense of decency, but if anyone ever tells me to accept the crimes being committed against me and the rest of humanity, well, that is when I will have to stand up boldly and show some spine for others to see what it looks like, because I am going to fight until I cant fight any longer and then in facing my own death I can die knowing that I never gave in to evil, even if it did contribute to my own demise. I can then die knowing I never gave in to what was evil and morally wrong.

To accept evil is to embrace death and that is something I will never do willingly.

To ge some concessions beofre its is permanent

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist
The evolution of man dictates that a global, democratic government is inevitable in the foreseeable or distant future. We first started out as families, congregating into tribes and clans that had a set of rules or laws if you will and a primitive governing body, which became villages and small communities, eventually becoming cities and then the nation states we see today. Thanks to the internet, the global economy, and the information age which helps news travel around the world in such short time intervals, we have become more interdependent on each other. A flood in south-east Asia can produce profound impacts on the economy of western Europe, and a drought in parts of Africa can likewise affect the Chinese economy. As more and more people around the world interact through mediums such as the internet, media, and other possible informational devices that are developed, the world is starting to become more unified and integrated. Eventually, when all third-world countries industrialize (which is a matter of when, not if), we will see a world-government in the works.

So, why oppose it? Why oppose human evolution? I've heard all the arguments against a one-world government, and frankly, none of them hold any merit at all. The most common one, "There are simply too many religions, cultures, and ethnic groups to expect a democratic one-world government". The U.S also has a very diverse mix of ethnic groups, religions, and cultures and they happen to make it work and are democratic for the most part. Should the U.S become more decentralized, then? Should they split up into 50 countries, and then decentralize further into defining their borders by cities? That is what the argument implies. If the U.S can be a stable democratic nation, then a world government can be a stably democratic as well. Each nation would be a state, and the former presidents of that country would be its representative. There would be varying laws between the states, but a federal government to oversee such things as climate change, research and development, a space program, and education of all citizens.


If we are ever to colonize the stars, cure most diseases, solve poverty, and become a knowledge-based sentient species with a largely educated population, then a one-world government is of most importance. We spend trillions of dollars on military technology, our top scientists working on heavily funded military projects and weapons that specialize in killing and suffering, and there is the constant possibility of a nuclear war which could end civilization as we know it, not to mention documented climate change and the impacts it has on our planet. So, why oppose the one-world government? Albert Einstein was quoted to have said to the U.N: "IN ORDER to achieve the final aim - which is one world, and not two hostile worlds - such a partial world Government must never act as an alliance against the rest of the world. The only real step toward world government is world Government itself." Carl Sagan once said,"Human history can be viewed as a slowly dawning awareness that we are members of a larger group. Initially our loyalties were to ourselves and our immediate family, next, to bands of wandering hunter-gatherers, then to tribes, small settlements, city-states, nations. We have broadened the circle of those we love. We have now organized what are modestly described as super-powers, which include groups of people from divergent ethnic and cultural backgrounds working in some sense together--surely a humanizing and character building experience. If we are to survive, our loyalties must be broadened further, to include the whole human community, the entire planet Earth. Many of those who run the nations will find this idea unpleasant. They will fear the loss of power. We will hear much about treason and disloyalty. Rich nation-states will have to share their wealth with poor ones. But the choice, as H. G. Wells once said in a different context, is clearly the universe or nothing." Cosmos

Praise Mao!

Its not evolution it's global tyranny. What makes you think that when they institute this one world dictatorship that they would play nice for once and let us live free?

Nope. Makes too much sense for them to just turn every continent into the USSR,China or North Korea. Then the elites would get us and morality out of their hair for good.

I didn't read the op, but I think he's way off because the same ats member said I was off in a tread that he didn't even read properly.

Anyway, nothing can make me change my mind, people that want power always do it in ways that good men wouldn't go trough. The best leaders are chosen by the people not by themselves.

Humans that usually crave power can't even control their own lives properly.

I have to say, I never like the posts of MathematicalPhysicist. It's like he doesn't think far or something.

Originally posted by NuclearPaul

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist
David Rockefeller is a philanthropist and it is possible he may have said such statements, but like all philanthropists and humanists, his personal views only stop with him. He is not a politician, has no power, etc.

David Rockefeller has no power?

(too stunned to think of second line)

Yeah he doesn't have power...but lots of money.

OP, you make some decent points but some outright fallacies. I respect where you're trying to go, but you need to be set straight on a few points.

1) We are not a democratic nation. We are, technically, a constitutional republic. There is a world of difference and it's that misunderstanding which forms the foundation of your arguement that you've made multiple times about the 50 states breaking up. America was never formed as a true democracy, nor should it be understood or thought to be one. Being a Literati/Intelligencia, you should know better.

2) There are a great many documents which provide very conclusive proof of conspiracy over at least a hundred years to subsume power from the people and concentrate it into a corporate plutocratic class. Here's a good place to catch up: www.abovetopsecret.com...

3) Absolute power corrupts absolutely; the goal of one world government is idyllic at best. The reality is that while people maintain their current moral and ethical structures that the nearer we approach such a beast, the more likely we will break out into faction warfare or coups. The lure of ultimate power over humanity would as such simply be too much. Unless of course we can isolate psychopathy out of our genetic pool or develop a benevolent synthetic intelligence to serve as permenant president ;P

So while I can see what you're getting at, to answer your question - the reason to fight a one world order is that it's not the one world order that we believe is the ideal solution. Frankly if it was a freedom-based constitutional republic as the founding fathers had intended in liber I'd be very much on board. But the reality is that it is not.

Everyone knows this quote..

"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 subjected to the 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." ." - D. Rockefeller

But not everyone knows this one:

"Everything is in place - after 500 years - to build a true 'new world'
in the Western Hemisphere... And what happens if we don't pass NAFTA?
I truly don't think that 'criminal' would be too strong a word for
rejecting NAFTA." - D. Rockefeller


As I stated before; I'm not opposed to a world order - just one run by the likes of D. Rockefeller and criminals like him. These people actively support and encourage dictatorships and tyrannical government. Our meddling in the middle east (ongoing current events)and south america (school of the americas) should serve sufficient proof of that. Or Kissinger's perennial love of the chinese government (along with mao's genocide www.youtube.com... - not a GB fan, but it's a good vid).

I hope you can understand why as such most people are leery of ANY world government, especially given your plainly sympathetic viewpoint towards the current 'movers and shakers'. I hope you take the time to understand that not everyone is a crackpot here; that many are just scared - scared of seeing what many of us have researched for in some cases decades come to fruition in such rapid fashion. A great many of us are just checking off the checklist of 'world tyranny' as it goes at this point, watching the current bid for power and feeling powerless to stop it. We watch as more people wake up and hope that they are aware enough to understand the grave threat we face - not the movement.. but the people in charge of it. The in-bred, strangely occult, HUGELY powerful figures who run the helm of this great ship of humanity.

What we need are people like you to stop being obstacles and start being advocates.

if we as humans are to enter into any type of relationship with other worlds, we need to show that we are an advanced enough species that we are united as one.
why would any off-world race want to even initiate contact without knowing that "humans" can at least be civil toward their own kind. without that prerequisite, contact, and being welcomed into the much larger group of different worlds and their own species of advanced life is not going to happen.
maybe, the goal all along has been to unite all of us humans into a broadbased and all inclusive group, leaving behind the dark and dangerous phobias and fears of our past.

So you are basically saying that becoming slaves to an elite few on a global scale is "evolution"?

Screw you. No offense.

Death is inevitable, yet I oppose it.

I oppose the NWO. I am prepared to oppose it with force. You had better stand clear, jack.

The Georgia Guidestones (carved in stone)

1.Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.
2.Guide reproduction wisely – improving fitness and diversity.
3.Unite humanity with a living new language.
4.Rule passion – faith – tradition – and all things with tempered reason.
5.Protect people and nations with fair laws and just courts.
6.Let all nations rule internally resolving external disputes in a world court.
7.Avoid petty laws and useless officials.
8.Balance personal rights with social duties.
9.Prize truth – beauty – love – seeking harmony with the infinite.
10.Be not a cancer on the earth – Leave room for nature – Leave room for nature.

Well for No. 1, who is going to volunteer for the firing squads, and other effective means of drastically lowering the planet's population.

That's the kicker, and it won't be by volunteering. It will be, as Henry Kissinger calls 'us'....the 'useless eaters'....and done by any means possible, vaccines, flouride, chemtrails, tsunamis, hurricanes, earthquakes (HAARP, you know). I believe that comes to about 6.5 billion to be genocided?

....But the Global élite have their mansions and palaces in the deep underground and have to live there for only 5 years after they nuke the planet.

I find it hilarious how the vast majority of people on here would love decentralization to the point where we define our borders with cities. I wouldn't be surprised if the vast majority of people on here are uneducated, as well. It seems only the educated and the intelligent are for such a concept. The many scientists and educated people who support a global government speaks for itself.

So, tell me, what would you do when an alien threat presents and starts attacking the world? Let me guess, the free-market and liberty will take care of it, after all, human liberty is more powerful than beings who are capable of interstellar travel?

I am not calling for a global government immediately, as clearly we are not ready as people and there is still some needed evolution. However, once we are ready and industrialized or interstellar travel has been made possible and we have colonies in space, then and only then can a democratic world government be implemented. This can take anywhere from 200-1000 years. Obviously, I am fully aware that a one-world government in today's time will just not work, but it will be of greater importance in the distant future. That is all I am saying, so what is to hate about that? None of you will be alive to see it, either way.

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
So you are basically saying that becoming slaves to an elite few on a global scale is "evolution"?

Screw you. No offense.

Death is inevitable, yet I oppose it.

I oppose the NWO. I am prepared to oppose it with force. You had better stand clear, jack.

You can continue to keep being paranoid, taking quotes out of context, and listening to youtube videos created by drug-addicted conspiracy theorists, but there is no NWO. There is no "ultimate plan" for global governance. There won't be anything to fight, and out of your paranoia, you may just end up shooting innocent people and claiming they were apart of the "NWO" and trying to take away your freedom and liberty.

There won't be a world-government anytime in the near future, perhaps the distant future once we accomplish manned interstellar travel. By then, of course, it will be feasible and necessary. I suggest you stop being so paranoid. The harsh reality of the world is that there is no one controlling it, or molding all global events perfectly without anything going wrong. Let me guess, you believe Satan is behind all of this, don't you?

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist
The harsh reality of the world is that there is no one controlling it, or molding all global events perfectly without anything going wrong. Let me guess, you believe Satan is behind all of this, don't you?

Wrong again, Einstein. Out.

reply to post by MathematicalPhysicist


Yeah right.

And how you gonna do it? By force?

You gonna destroy the planet in attempt to mold it to some fallacious ill thought of idea?

It will never work without the cooperation of the people of the world.

And the way it's lookin, the only way a "Global governemnt" would ever even dream of happening is through force and destruction which is only counter productive and... STUPID!!!

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Wrong again, Einstein. Out.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Have any form evidence I can analyze, aside from youtube videos and specific quotes taken out of context?

Originally posted by MathematicalPhysicist

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
Wrong again, Einstein. Out.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Have any form evidence I can analyze, aside from youtube videos and specific quotes taken out of context?

Out. Troll somewhere else.

Originally posted by BanMePlz

Yeah right.


And how you gonna do it? By force?

Nope, it is isn't going to be by force. Once all countries have industrialized and are on the same level in terms of development, assimilation will be simple.

Originally posted by BanMePlzYou gonna destroy the planet in attempt to mold it to some fallacious ill thought of idea?

No, because this will be necessary for the sustained survival of the human race when it becomes necessary and feasible. Was the U.S destroyed once all 50 states were assimilated under a singular government?

Originally posted by BanMePlzIt will never work without the cooperation of the people of the world.

Agreed, but they will be the people who want it and push for it, not the politicians. Politicians would always prefer that we remain separate nations.

Originally posted by BanMePlzAnd the way it's lookin, the only way a "Global governemnt" would ever even dream of happening is through force and destruction which is only counter productive and... STUPID!!!

Never did I imply that we need a global government now. Of course, I am fully aware of the fact that we are not ready. Clearly, we aren't. Human evolution still has a few centuries to go before a democratic and ideal world government can be implemented. The one thing that intrigues me, however, is that: Why are you so against a world government being implemented centuries into the future, when it comes feasible and necessary? You won't even be alive, then. What is with all this irrational hatred?