What is YOUR answer to this NWO question?

Originally posted by Xenoglossy

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
Mainstream science flat out denies the existence of the spiritual or other worldly, I don't see why it is unfair to be seen as another avenue of confining human though into a certain direction.

But unlike the average believer, scientists will demand EVIDENCE! If a scientist is going on a quest to prove the spiritual world, he would need overwhelming, superiour evidence. Why? Because all evidence we have right now, tends to suggest that there is nothing spiritual.

Well this kind of sums up how science is a prison religion, it demands evidence, when not everything can be seen or proven.

The enlightenment challenged religion but just led down another route of control, people who think there is absolutely nothing after death, hence peopleare fearful of death and the unknown, lacking faith etc.

Don't get me wrong, this is not a black and white debate, we are forced to make many generalisations but I can certainly see how mainstream science was a new form of control.

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
so the elite decided to create a new ideology to hide the truth, namely mainstream science?

That computer in front of you with the internet connection that you used to post this lunacy, is quite a powerful tool, isn't it? Making your (not really valuable) thoughts public, through the power of IDEOLOGY apparently.

Not scientific discoveries of electricity, the invention of various kind of computational hardware and software, and so on. No, sir. Science is just an Ideology like any other, right.

Think about this when you get ill or injured. Don't go see a doctor (who is a scientist). Go see some shaman or something else.

Originally posted by mikegrouchy
Back in the day...

There was a man who was the most famous man in the entire world.

He was Elvis, Einstein, Reagan, and Bill Gates all rolled into one.

Because for the first moment in world history
there were newspapers in every country,
and everyone wanted to read about
this one superstar.

The man who tamed the ghosts of the ancient worlds superstitions.
Who invented the lightning rod and tamed the heavens,
who discovered electricity and endorsed
the Leyden Jar.

The first modern Scientist. [color=gold] Benjamin Franklin. The first modern Statesman.

This man was so famous
that he was able to form his own country.
One that he wanted to make a safe environment for the study of science.

And he got it.

And the explosion in science is nearly unmeasurable.




The illuminati and the new world order are the sounds
of the uninventive gambling over who's going to own the inventions.



I don't think he was "in it" I think
the illuminati is a false light
trying to erase his shadow.

Modern America.

Mike Grouchy

Old World Order







[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/afda8c7d5b01.png[/atsimg]
New World Order

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/420c6eebe9fd.png[/atsimg]

Here is Franklins own currency design.
You tell me, who's side is he on
with his 1/3rd note?

The accountants? Or the inventors.


Mike Grouchy

notice this flag combined the british colors with the thirteen stripes.
also, i believe the thirteen stipes actually represent the corporations that ran the colonies and leased the land from the king such as the virginia company etc.

doesn't sound like much of a revolution.

reply to post by mikegrouchy




well with that big sundial on his currency he is obviously sided with the egyptian/ jewish pharaoh bloodlines.

and as such, a freemason.

Yeah, but
a 1776 revolution for science freemason
or a 1913 implement the Federal Reserve while everyone is on Christmas break freemason?


Mike Grouchy

reply to post by Wonderer2012

My question is, which scenario more likely explains the American Revolution?-

1- An orchestrated 'revolution' conducted by the elite banking families to create a nation that is controlled via covert measures under the guise of being a democracy...

Or-

2- A genuine revolution that broke free from the control of the British?

#2

reply to post by Wonderer2012


number 2 and tea and taxes.

Part of the problem is people believe the rhetoric as fact. They are married to the notion of the downtrodden Americans who just wanted to be left to rule their lives without the King. They wholly buy into GW fighting the good fight, freeing the oppressed from the shackles of their overseas oppressor. This was all written after the fact as a PR effort. When considering the facts, consider the controllers housed in GB simply gave up daily political control in favor of debt repayment as enslavement. We owe the Crown - London, more money then we can ever pay back, and it started they day the revolution ended. Those in charge at the time, not the King or GW, simply agreed to separate in a new way. We still owe the first dollar we borrowed due to compound interest - it has never be paid off and will never be paid off - ever.....

All property taxes are instituted by the Crown, as payment for what we owe. Lincoln went to war not over slaves, that's PR, but over debt. The "north" refused to give up the notion of paying off the debt, the south did give it up. The south had all the rich ports, the north simply killed millions to take the ports and pay the Crown the money owed. The Crown cares nothing about what government you let rule you, as long as you pay the debt.

Consider this too. The Constitution is a contract, it is a formal contract between who? We know those who signed it, is the contract only for those who signed it, as most contracts are? Why didn't everyone sign it? Contracts are good for 99 years, no contract can go longer, so, when did the original contract expire? was it ever renewed? While many of you are going to say, "ah, jerk, it is a constitution, it is the law of the land for our government" you'll need to go WAY back and figure out how a piece of paper signed by people you don't know means such things. Had it not be signed, it would not be set to expire per law.

Watch the American public be taught to fear science and scientists.









Now they all want to be little princesses and stars.

Originally posted by Xenoglossy

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
so the elite decided to create a new ideology to hide the truth, namely mainstream science?

That computer in front of you with the internet connection that you used to post this lunacy, is quite a powerful tool, isn't it? Making your (not really valuable) thoughts public, through the power of IDEOLOGY apparently.

Not scientific discoveries of electricity, the invention of various kind of computational hardware and software, and so on. No, sir. Science is just an Ideology like any other, right.

Think about this when you get ill or injured. Don't go see a doctor (who is a scientist). Go see some shaman or something else.

Relax...

It is not my fault that you cannot understand something.

Science has many benefits, as does religion, but both can be used as forms of control. Science can, and has, molded societies because it challenges the idea of God and life after death etc. If you can take your mind out of the 'oh I need evidence' prison you have it in for 5 minutes and consider life during the time of the enlightenment, you would see the impact science and other religion challenging ideologies had on the world.

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
One of the key events in history, certainly something that has been a huge factor in the last 100 years in shaping the world we live in, has been the existence of America as in after the American Revolution.

My question is, which scenario more likely explains the American Revolution?-

1- An orchestrated 'revolution' conducted by the elite banking families to create a nation that is controlled via covert measures under the guise of being a democracy...

Or-

2- A genuine revolution that broke free from the control of the British?

Conspiracy authors cannot seem to agree on which is correct. It seems it took a long time to finally impose the Federal Reserve on America, over 100 years in fact, but what is the truth?

I think the question is key to understanding the NWO, there is plenty of evidence to suggest the French Revolution was orchestrated by the banking families in order to remove the power of the monarchy, but the American Revolution is far from clear cut.

Please feel free to share your answers, let's try and clear this up!

Number 1, surely.....
second

Originally posted by Wonderer2012
One of the key events in history, certainly something that has been a huge factor in the last 100 years in shaping the world we live in, has been the existence of America as in after the American Revolution.

My question is, which scenario more likely explains the American Revolution?-

1- An orchestrated 'revolution' conducted by the elite banking families to create a nation that is controlled via covert measures under the guise of being a democracy...

Or-

2- A genuine revolution that broke free from the control of the British?

Conspiracy authors cannot seem to agree on which is correct. It seems it took a long time to finally impose the Federal Reserve on America, over 100 years in fact, but what is the truth?

I think the question is key to understanding the NWO, there is plenty of evidence to suggest the French Revolution was orchestrated by the banking families in order to remove the power of the monarchy, but the American Revolution is far from clear cut.

Please feel free to share your answers, let's try and clear this up!

I think the the greedy folks saw it coming and didn't mind. They didn't have to do anything, just sweep in and take the spoils.

However, destabilisation started long before the creation of the US. So who knows, maybe the elites had a row with the royalty and decided to even the odds a bit.

To be honest, I think the only way to mend the world in some way would be a all out revolution in the entire western world, de-throwning every single politician and royalty by the force of the people. Might as well take down the banks at the same time.
Rebuilding systems takes time and hurts but sometimes a complete restart is the only way to destroy the cancer of greed and power that engulfs the free will of man.

reply to post by Wonderer2012


The elite bankers are the guardians of the Vaticans wealth.. So the best place to start would be with the Jesuits who are apparently in control of the Vatican including the pope himself at any given time.

Lafayette (1757-1834; French statesman and general. He served in the American Continental Army under the command of General George Washington during the American Revolutionary War. He said:

“It is my opinion that if the liberties of this country – the United States of America – are destroyed, it will be by the subtlety of the Roman Catholic Jesuit priests, for they are the most crafty, dangerous enemies to civil and religious liberty. They have instigated MOST of the wars of Europe.”

Lincoln said:

“The war [i.e., the American Civil War of 1861-1865] would never have been possible without the sinister influence of the Jesuits.”

Samuel F.B. Morse, inventor of the telegraph, said:

“The Jesuits…are a secret society – a sort of Masonic order – with super-added features of revolting odiousness, and a thousand times more dangerous.”

“[The Jesuits] are the deadly enemies of civil and religious liberty.” – R. W. Thompson (Ex-Secretary, American Navy)

Napolean said:

“The Jesuits are a MILITARY organization, not a religious order. Their chief is a general of an army, not the mere father abbot of a monastery. And the aim of this organization is power – power in its most despotic exercise – absolute power, universal power, power to control the world by the volition of a single man [i.e., the Black Pope, the Superior General of the Jesuits]. Jesuitism is the most absolute of despotisms [sic] – and at the same time the greatest and most enormous of abuses…”

“[U.S. President] James Buchanan was poisoned [in 1857] and almost died. He lived because he knew that he had been given arsenic poisoning and so informed his doctors. He knew that the Jesuits [had] poisoned [Presidents] Harrison and Taylor [with arsenic]. The Jesuit Order fulfilled their oath again that they would poison, kill, or do whatever was necessary to remove those who opposed their plans. From 1841 to 1857, we saw that three [U.S.] Presidents were attacked by the Jesuits as outlined in the Congresses of Vienna, Verona, and Chieri. Two died and one barely escaped [death]. They [i.e., the Jesuits] allow nothing to stand in their way of total domination of America, and the destruction of the [U.S.] Constitution.” - Bill Hughes (From his book The Secret Terrorists)

Above all I have learned from the Jesuits. And so did Lenin too, as far as I recall. The world has never known anything quite so splendid as the hierarchical structure of the [Roman] Catholic Church. There were quite a few things I simply appropriated from the Jesuits for the use of the [Nazi] Party.” - Adolf Hitler

If they have played a part in the majority of famous conflicts, wars, you can bet they also had some sort of influence in the American civil war. But I guess this is some crazy internet stuff that cannot be verified though so don't take it as truth..

There are two ways the founding fathers could have part of a conspiracy.

1 they were in on it

2 their behavior was predicted and expected, independance was treated as plan B.

For example, George Washington appearently held the Continental Army together by his moral will, awesome presence, and sound judgement. However, he established the precedent of a single American political entity. With out Washington and the Continental Army, the colonies would have kept a higher degree of independance from each other.

We could have fought the whole war like we slew the Redcoats from Concord to Boston. That would have been truely American. Instead we adopted a European style of war, and Washington kept that style in play.

Perhaps the revolution kept the frontier from becoming too independant and free from all governmental control. The British wanted to keep all land west of the Appalachian Mountains free of settlers. All people of european descent living west of the mountains could not legally be citizens of any colony, and so were potentially beyond rule of any kind.

A real "anachist" state could have evolved there, using the Ohio and Mississippi river systems to access the outside world for trade, and remaining free of any hierarchical political system.

So the powers that be, like reeling in a huge fish, let it go for awhile till it got tired, and then reeled it in.