NWO - New World Order

tunaman

Puck wrote:

So what's your plan?

I'm trying to wake people up to the many contradictions and inconsistencies, which makes "the official story" not only improbable, but an impossibility.

Are you too scared to find out who was really behind 9/11?

The_Minister

Tunaman, I'm tracking you location.......see that big black helicopter behind you?

tunaman

Firespinner wrote:

Tunaman, I'm tracking you location.......see that big black helicopter behind you?

No.

You haven't even got the balls to watch the video of the Senator, have you?

tunaman

slipss wrote:

I just think your going a bit to far with the ideaoligy that once a month they all travel to area 51 and sit around a big table with a pentagram drawn on it in blood and listen to Dracula, Satan and Mary Harney give the latest policy on how to be evil and destroy the innocent.

You said that, not me. That sounds a bit like the Bohemian Grove.

edanto

slipps wrote:

I'd actually be a subscriber to the theory that some of the worlds richest and most powerful people stay in some kind or regular contact with each other because they move in similar circles, and I'm sure they do each other favours for favours in return, because sometimes they might happen to have shared interests...

Undeniable and necessary. A good deal of the tunaman post I think is OTT, but there's no denying that the states have a clear plan for continuing their economic/political dominance. Any why wouldn't they? Sure, isn't it in their national interest.

Wikipedia have a good description of it, apparently it was one of the pages that was often vandalised from Capitol Hill before they cut off Wiki editing rights from the US parliament.

What tunaman is saying about dominance of the web may be alarmist, but it's laid out in black and white in stuff that the neocons have published, such as

Project for the New American Century policy document, 2000 wrote:

Control of space and cyberspace. Much as control of the high seas – and the protection of international commerce – defined global powers in the past, so will control of the new “international commons” be a key to world power in the future. An America incapable of protecting its interests or that of its allies in space or the “infosphere” will find it difficult to exert global political leadership.

I disagree with them that American political influence is a 100% good thing for the majority of the people in the world, but I don't think that they would have stooped to carrying out 9/11. But they didn't exactly shy away from chances to exert military dominance with weak intelligence and justification. Their efforts at fighting a concept will cause untold sh!t for the rest of us, but let's not bring terrorism into this debate if we can help it.

For me, Dadakopf hit the nail on the head. This is all about money. The US has just about the most, in many measures - have a look at the attachment. If you can find an image on the web where the the area of each country is proportional to the proportion of GNP they have, you'll see how unbalanced things are. And they're not going to share it out equally, not if they can continue to set the world trade rules and political tempo. Are all you flippant posters cool with that or was that just 'coz this is in After Hours instead of politics? And no, it's not a conspiracy theory, just kinda the way things are.

For now.:)

Terry

For me, Dadakopf hit the nail on the head. This is all about money. The US has just about the most, in many measures - have a look at the attachment. If you can find an image on the web where the the area of each country is proportional to the proportion of GNP they have, you'll see how unbalanced things are. And they're not going to share it out equally, not if they can continue to set the world trade rules and political tempo. Are all you flippant posters cool with that or was that just 'coz this is in After Hours instead of politics? And no, it's not a conspiracy theory, just kinda the way things are.

not for much longer, if the petro-euro continues to rise. but that's debatable.

tunaman

edanto wrote:

but I don't think that they would have stooped to carrying out 9/11. But they didn't exactly shy away from chances to exert military dominance with weak intelligence and justification.

http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf

But in that PNAC document was also the following...

"...the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor."

Chilling is the word that springs to mind.

jimmycrackcorm

I won't believe in the NWo until I see my spell checker spell Anglicised words by their lazy American equivalents like Color.

Color
Color
Color - Damn!

StupidLikeAFox

God id love a tuna sandwich right now

the_syco

tunaman wrote:

The most important task of a conspiracy is to convince it's victims that their is no conspiracy.

This has gotta be the biggest load of BS [strike]we've[/strike]I've ever come across. [strike]We're[/strike] I'm going to just ignore it, and advise everyone else to do likewise. And no, [strike]we're[/strike]I'm not part of the NWO. Nothing to see here, move along now... [/sarc]

Puck

tunaman wrote:

I'm trying to wake people up to the many contradictions and inconsistencies, which makes "the official story" not only improbable, but an impossibility.

Are you too scared to find out who was really behind 9/11?

No, why would I be? But after you've "woken people up", then what? Just suppose everything you're saying is true, then what?

Goodshape

Puck wrote:

No, why would I be? But after you've "woken people up", then what? Just suppose everything you're saying is true, then what?

Then start shouting about it. Where are the answers to the questions raised by the Painful Deceptions documentary? (which, it does have to be said, is painfully repetitive at times).

Even without going all 'wacko' consipirecy theory on it, there's some fairly obvious issues which should be addressed. It's fairly obviously not a Boeing that hit the Pentagon. Building 7 shouldn't have collapsed. The twin towers (more than likely) shouldn't have collapsed.

Has nobody thought to ask Larry Silversteen (sp?) what he meant when he said 'pull it'?

The thing that I'm most skeptical of when I hear these theories is that surly of all the people you'd need to pull of an oporation like this, at least one of them is bound to have some sort of conscience.

And lets not forget Operation Northwoods. There's no fiction or theory there. It's real.

DapperGent

tunaman wrote:

How many people on here know about the secret society Skull And Bones?

Bush and Kerry have both admitted they are members so it is based on fact, therefore is a reality.

Don't blame me, I voted for Kang.

tunaman

Goodshape wrote:

Has nobody thought to ask Larry Silversteen (sp?) what he meant when he said 'pull it'?

Well he said it in a documentary called America Rebuilds. At a later date he claimed he meant to pull out the firefighters, but they never went into WTC building 7.

The thing that I'm most skeptical of when I hear these theories is that surly of all the people you'd need to pull of an oporation like this, at least one of them is bound to have some sort of conscience.

FBI Agent Slams Bosses at Moussaoui Trial

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060321/ap_on_re_us/moussaoui_13

ALEXANDRIA, Va. - The FBI agent who arrested Zacarias Moussaoui in August 2001 testified Monday he spent almost four weeks trying to warn U.S. officials about the radical Islamic student pilot but "criminal negligence" by superiors in Washington thwarted a chance to stop the 9/11 attacks.

Under questioning from MacMahon, Samit acknowledged that he had told the Justice Department inspector general that "obstructionism, criminal negligence and careerism" on the part of FBI headquarters officials had prevented him from getting a warrant that would have revealed more about Moussaoui's associates. He said that opposition blocked "a serious opportunity to stop the 9/11 attacks."

Samit's complaints echoed those raised in 2002 by Coleen Rowley, the bureau's agent-lawyer in the Minneapolis office, who tried to help get a warrant. Rowley went public with her frustrations, was named a Time magazine person of the year for whistleblowing and is now running for Congress.

Samit revealed far more than Rowley of the details of the investigation.

For each nugget of information, MacMahon asked Samit if Washington officials called to assess the implications. Time after time, Samit said no.

MacMahon introduced an Aug. 31 letter Samit drafted "to advise the FAA of a potential threat to security of commercial aircraft" from whomever Moussaoui was conspiring with.

But Maltbie barred him from sending it to FAA headquarters, saying he would handle that, Samit testified. The agent added that he did tell FAA officials in Minneapolis of his suspicions.

Kernel

slipss wrote:

lol well tunaman, leaving out all the science fictiony x-file crap, you are basically talking about capitalism, the form of gouvernment which is responsible for you having money and and a home and a job, what was your point again?

Actually I fully agree with what tunaman has said, he has clearly done more research into these topics than anyone else here who so easily dismisses his points as paranoia. Tunaman, I would point you to also check out Henry Kissinger (a long time big player in the NWO) and the trilateral commission. Such organisations as the trilateral commission, bohemia grove, council on foreign relations and bilderberg group are branches from the tree of the NWO. You would probably get less uninformed criticism in the conspiracy theories forum.

Capitalism is a system of control. A method for the few wealthy idividuals at the top of the pyramid to exert control over the masses which make up the larger bottom area of the pyramid. Wake up wage slave, and realise the modern day serfdom you are embroiled in. Having money and a home and a job are all possible without selling your soul to capitalism - a system unfairly stacked to favour those who already are rich and don't need to sell their labour and their lives to survive. A system which is responsible for pollution which is destroying our environment, and has caused millions to starve to death and die of easily treatable illnesses - all in order to protect market share and profit margin.

Capitalism, in it's current incarnation, is evil.

Dilly1

its those NWO bastards that make me have to get up for work every monday morning !!

Freelancer

Goodshape wrote:

Even without going all 'wacko' consipirecy theory on it, there's some fairly obvious issues which should be addressed. It's fairly obviously not a Boeing that hit the Pentagon.

Excuse me? Based on what? Your Non 737 had to fly over a eight lane highway before it hit the pentagon. It'd be like flying a missile over the redcow roundabout at nine 9am and telling everyone it was a plane.

Building 7 shouldn't have collapsed. The twin towers (more than likely) shouldn't have collapsed.

Again all the "blah blah blah" conspiracy theory evidence ignores the fact that all the stress models didn't factor in

a) a second plane hitting the second tower, and the resulting heat from that explosion.

b) that the planes would be full of fuel, accelerating, and aiming for the tower.

Tunaman I do so love how conspiracy theorists work, deriding government incompetence with one mouth, and then gullible believing that they are capable of the most elaborate and complext webs the next.

Cactus Col

There's the Bildeberg group, that meets once a year, and is made up of 100 of the most influential people from North America and Europe (hence 100 of the most influential people in the world!)

Which includes bankers, defence experts, royalty, heads of state, and mass media barons!

Goodshape

Freelancer wrote:

Excuse me? Based on what? Your Non 737 had to fly over a eight lane highway before it hit the pentagon. It'd be like flying a missile over the redcow roundabout at nine 9am and telling everyone it was a plane.

Yea. That's exactly what it's like. The one and only thing that makes me think it was a Boeing 737 is the fact that that's the offical word on the matter. Everything else I've seen or heard about the event leads me to believe it was something else. Have you watched any of the (many, many) doumentaries about it? Or are you just so certin that they couldn't possibly be lieing to us that you don't feel the need?

Again all the "blah blah blah" conspiracy theory evidence ignores the fact that all the stress models didn't factor in

a) a second plane hitting the second tower, and the resulting heat from that explosion.

b) that the planes would be full of fuel, accelerating, and aiming for the tower.

They do, in fact, take these details into account and many more -- such as the maximum tempature at which jet fuel burns being considerably lower that what is required to melt steal. And the fact that no fire in history has ever caused a building to collapse. There was no second, or even first, plane that hit Building 7. No 'resulting heat from that explosion', no 'accelerating, and aiming for the tower'. Why did it go down so uniformly?

Tunaman I do so love how conspiracy theorists work, deriding government incompetence with one mouth, and then gullible believing that they are capable of the most elaborate and complext webs the next.

I don't think he's ever said they are incompetent. Just bloody evil.

Freelancer

Goodshape wrote:

Yea. That's exactly what it's like. The one and only thing that makes me think it was a Boeing 737 is the fact that that's the offical word on the matter. Everything else I've seen or heard about the event leads me to believe it was something else. Have you watched any of the (many, many) doumentaries about it? Or are you just so certin that they couldn't possibly be lieing to us that you don't feel the need?

No see I have an e-mail dated the 12th of sept 2001 from friend of mine, a highly respected documentary editor (y'know someone who has a keen visual memory) who was in a traffic jam on the road by that side of the Pentagon who said she saw a jumbo jet crash into the pentagon. Along with several hundred people.

Literally the scenario presented by conspiracy theorists, is that at 9am infront of thousands of communters someone fired a missile into the pentagon and they all saw a plane.

They do, in fact, take these details into account and many more -- such as the maximum tempature at which jet fuel burns being considerably lower that what is required to melt steal. And the fact that no fire in history has ever caused a building to collapse. There was no second, or even first, plane that hit Building 7. No 'resulting heat from that explosion', no 'accelerating, and aiming for the tower'. Why did it go down so uniformly?

Because they don't factor in the force of the impact, the speed of the plane, the damage which caused the structural impact, and as for the no fire in history bit :rolleyes: how many builidng fires in history have been caused by flying a 737 at speed into such a tall structure?

Because no conspiracy theorist offers a more adequate explanation for what happened?

I don't think he's ever said they are incompetent. Just bloody evil.

Come off it government incompetence is legendary I'm just fascinated that you seem to think that organisations like the US government who screw up so regularly and massive corporations are into some vast conspiracy instead of applying Occum's razor.

SpAcEd OuT

julep wrote:

not for much longer, if the petro-euro continues to rise. but that's debatable.

werent Iraq about to change to the petro-euro just before America invaded?

shroomfox

Why is Ireland overrun with tinfoil hat lefties who babble constantly about the New World Order and blah blah blah. I've yet to see any reliable evidence about the New World Order, and I've yet to see any credible thinkers give it any serious thought. Any evidence I have seen is typical conspiracy theorist baloney, with sensationalist ideas drawn from dubious sources.

There's the Bildeberg group, that meets once a year, and is made up of 100 of the most influential people from North America and Europe (hence 100 of the most influential people in the world!)

Which includes bankers, defence experts, royalty, heads of state, and mass media barons!

Aaaargh! Run for the hills! Aaaargh!

What's your point?

The Neocons say they want to dominate everything. It's true. It's horrible. And I say: So? Do they dominate everything? No. Will they dominate everything? No. Anybody can say they want to dominate everything, and they might be in a position of power, but it's still a stupid thing to say.

Bush and Kerry were in the same secret society. It's true! So? Big deal! These are all preppy rich kids who get off on the idea of being in some stupid society with a goth-wannabe name.

I could go on all day. What a load of rubbish.

SpAcEd OuT

Freelancer wrote:

Literally the scenario presented by conspiracy theorists, is that at 9am infront of thousands of communters someone fired a missile into the pentagon and they all saw a plane.

actually a lot of conspiracy theorists do believe it was a plane although a much smaller one and certainly not a commuter jet, how could your friend be able to tell wether it was a 737 jet when it is travelling at that speed, surely she only had a split second to see it as it was travelling 500mph over the motorway, why did US officials take the only known footage of the initial impact away from a gas station across the road and not show it to any of the worlds media??

if a 737 jet flew over the motorway at as a low a height as it was doing, cars would been flung off the ground by the sheer force, this never happened why?

The_Minister

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

why did US officials take the only known footage of the initial impact away from a gas station across the road and not show it to any of the worlds media??

I highly doubt that a petrol station cctv camera was at the right angle to see the crash, since the crash happened at the top of the building. How do you know that this footage existed.

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

if a 737 jet flew over the motorway at as a low a height as it was doing, cars would been flung off the ground by the sheer force, this never happened why?

Low does not mean 2 metres, it means roughly higher than a tall tree.

DapperGent

Seriously like:

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

'tards.

Terry

SpAcEd OuT wrote:

werent Iraq about to change to the petro-euro just before America invaded?

as far as i remember, they had already changed over to selling in euro's. they were doing a lot of business with france, russia and germany and the americans were seeing noneof the action.
next stop, iran. they are about to start selling oil in euro's.

Terry

DapperGent wrote:

Seriously like:

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

'tards.

as much as i don't believe in a new world order, i have to point out that snopes is a site run by nerds with absolutely nothing else to do but debunk myths. i wouldn't rely on everything that site has to say.
remember, it's an independently run site with no basis in fact, other than what they point out to you. how do you know that they are telling you all the facts?

shroomfox

Actually, there's a good article about petrodollars/petroeuros here by Greg Palast (one of the great journalists around today - first uncovered the story of the Florida election fraud).

tunaman

shroomfox wrote:

The Neocons say they want to dominate everything. It's true. It's horrible. And I say: So? Do they dominate everything? No. Will they dominate everything? No. Anybody can say they want to dominate everything, and they might be in a position of power, but it's still a stupid thing to say.

An intelligent American who calls himself painter wrote the following...

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=1025

You're afraid this could go "too far"? You're afraid "this thing" could go too far and "cause permanent damage to our way of life"? You'd better wake the hell up.

Near permanent damage has already been done to "our way of life." 9/11 was a catalyst to manipulate the American people into accepting the War on Terrorism ™, "a war that will not end in our lifetimes." A "war" that means the transfer of hundreds of billions of dollars of wealth from our treasury into the hands of a relatively small group of people; a war that has already killed 6,000 Americans and uncounted tens, if not hundreds of thousands of other people, that is being used to justify the rape of children and torture of their parents, the incarceration of people without trial or legal representation, the spying on thousands of American citizens without warrant, the manipulation of our society by a corporate owned media whose sole interest is its bottom line, and these are just the things we KNOW about.

Once you begin to pull back the covers a bit and see that our political system has been completely compromised to the point where we no longer know whether our votes are counted as intended, where Senators are assassinated with impunity--where thousands of Americans can be sacrificed without consequences--where people can be made into sheep by not asking obvious questions, such as how could a bunch of 'rag-heads' wielding box cutters out-smart our entire national air defense system and yet NOT ONE PERSON is held accountable for this breech of our TRILLION DOLLAR defense and intelligence system -- man when you add all that and much more together I'd say our "way of life" has already been compromised to near destruction. Problem is, most people don't know it yet because the final couple of shoes have yet to be dropped. BUT THEY ARE ON THEIR WAY. Mark my word on that. Very soon we're all going to have a lot more to worry about than who did 9/11 and how.

No, the problem isn't that this is likely to go "too far", the problem is we may never even get it off the ground. The problem is this country has a Constitution, a pretty good one, but the power and authority of which has been completely undermined by the european central banks through the Federal Reserve (a PRIVATELY OWNED central bank). These banking institutions work on a 'boom' followed by a 'bust' scenario and have for hundreds of years. Right now we are in DEEP DEEP FINANCIAL **** and they are about to pull the rug out from all of us by sinking the dollar. They want to make us into slaves because our founding fathers DARED oppose the European oligarchs. They want to bring an end to Democracy once and for all.

As I said in my first post, most people, even people here, do not have the historical background to understand that 9/11 was a part of an on-going chain of historical events. It didn't just happen 'out of the blue' as they would have us believe; nor was it perpetrated by Muslim fundamentalists (however much they may have employed those patsies to create a back-story).

No, this is a much bigger struggle my friend. We've already lost our country. We're already subjects of financial and corporate despotism. What we have to do now is take our Constitution back and that is NOT going to be easy.

Are you with us or are you with them, that is the question you have to answer for yourself.

tunaman

That problem most people really have, is what is being said, and not who is saying it.

However if they label the man who is making the claims insane, then they can ignore him as just some raving lunatic.

Ironically all the so-called "conspiracy" theories regarding 9/11 were brought to light by engineers, pilots, police, firefighters, etc. Not a bunch nutcases as assumed by debunkers.

In the end who are the nutjobs that reject science brought forth by experts?

Is Senator Mark Dayton just another in the long line of nutjobs who have asked many difficult questions, which have never been properly answered?

Can you say conflicts of interest?

http://globalresearch.ca/images/911CommissionConflicts.jpg