GLOBAL GOVERNANCE MYTH OR FACT?

humanji

This is where the problem lies. Where is the proof? The first video is bush saying the world needs an NWO. That doesn't mean one exists. It may exist, but that isn't even evidence that it does.

And why post the second video?

Penn

If the Bush family, or anyone else, was a member of a secret society, you wouldn't know about it. It's a secret. You even name the society as 'Skull and Bones'. It's obviously not a secret society then. It's just a meeting. And I'm sorry, but they don't have to allow cameras or journalists into every meeting they have.

aurelius79

humanji wrote: »

Have they said that there's a need for a new world order, or have they said they're part of a secret society hell bent on controlling every aspect of humanity through nefarious means?

humanji wrote: »

This is where the problem lies. Where is the proof? The first video is bush saying the world needs an NWO. That doesn't mean one exists. It may exist, but that isn't even evidence that it does.

And why post the second video?

I posted the second video in an attempt to illustrate the possibility that the Bush regime and the people behind him were/are trying to finish what Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party started.

This new world order did not start with George Bush, far from it. You could probably trace the ideas behind it back to unification of China. The acquisition of sovereign nations by means of force has been the goal of empires throughout history. The United States is simply the most recent empire to employ these methods.

The goal of the current NWO is the acquisition and subjugation of all sovereign nations on the planet. This is quite evident in U.S. foreign policy, beginning with the expansion of the colonies and the genocide and displacement of millions of native Americans and Mexicans and subjugation of southern states through the U.S. Civil War. This continued with the Korean war, the Vietnam war, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, covert operations in Central and South America, Africa, Iran, the list goes on and on.

The U.S. is not alone in this endeavour. With the creation of the European Union, the Chinese acquisition of Tibet, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, the attempt by the Russian Federation to stifle descent, we are slowly but surely heading towards a single global government. The administrative, financial, an military infrastructure is already in place with the UN, World Bank, NATO, and other multinational organizations. All that's missing is a global threat that would force the world's governments to unite under one flag.

indough

i think youll find that the will to give over power is also missing, as well as the will of the people to let it happen

aurelius79

indough wrote: »

i think youll find that the will to give over power is also missing, as well as the will of the people to let it happen

The will of the people has no relevance when the people in control will stop at nothing to achieve their goal. The slaughter of innocent civilians means nothing to them. Genocide and destruction in the name of global unity and absolute power.

As the radiation from the tons of depleted uranium used in Iraq spreads to every part of the country, it will become an uninhabitable wasteland. The only people you will find there will have to wear anti-radiation suits to work on the oil rigs which have just been auctioned off to the world's biggest oil companies. There is no future for the Iraqi people.

King Mob

aurelius79 wrote: »

As the radiation from the tons of depleted uranium used in Iraq spreads to every part of the country, it will become an uninhabitable wasteland. The only people you will find there will have to wear anti-radiation suits to work on the oil rigs which have just been auctioned off to the world's biggest oil companies. There is no future for the Iraqi people.

That's not how depleted uranium works.

The main concern is from the toxicity of the shells not it's radioactivity.
They aren't actually that radioactive, you're able to block most of it's radioactivity with a sheet of paper.
Even if they laced the entire surface area of Iraq with depleted uranium you wouldn't need a radiation suit.

But why use such misleading/misinformed rhetoric against people you think are misleading people?
Is that not counter productive?

aurelius79

King Mob wrote: »

That's not how depleted uranium works.

The main concern is from the toxicity of the shells not it's radioactivity.
They aren't actually that radioactive, you're able to block most of it's radioactivity with a sheet of paper.
Even if they laced the entire surface area of Iraq with depleted uranium you wouldn't need a radiation suit.

But why use such misleading/misinformed rhetoric against people you think are misleading people?
Is that not counter productive?

Depleted uranium is only 60% less radioactive than naturally-occurring uranium. While it is not as dangerous as other radioactive materials, it's wide scale use within urban areas is still extremely dangerous. As these rounds of ammunition break down, they will be distributed throughout the surrounding environment and carried on the wind and through ground water. Anyone who is in those areas will be required to wear protective clothing to avoid contamination.

Either way, your reply was way off topic. Please try to respond to the main issues. If your only intention is to discredit me or make me appear foolish, I'm afraid you have failed miserably.

King Mob

aurelius79 wrote: »

Depleted uranium is only 60% less radioactive than naturally-occurring uranium.

And most of the radiation from uranium is alpha radiation which can be blocked by a sheet of paper.

aurelius79 wrote: »

While it is not as dangerous as other radioactive materials, it's wide scale use within urban areas is still extremely dangerous. As these rounds of ammunition break down, they will be distributed throughout the surrounding environment and carried on the wind and through ground water. Anyone who is in those areas will be required to wear protective clothing to avoid contamination.

This is a problem of toxicity, not radiation.
Lead has the same problem.

Use of depleted uranium will not lead to Iraq becoming uninhabitable or force people there to wear radiation suits like you claim.

aurelius79 wrote: »

Either way, your reply was way off topic. Please try to respond to the main issues. If your only intention is to discredit me or make me appear foolish, I'm afraid you have failed miserably.

I thought it's very on topic.
You brought up this misinformed, hyperbolic rhetoric.

Making ridiculous claims like "Iraq will be a radioactive wasteland" does not do you any favours when you are claiming that the NWO is using similar misinformation.

aurelius79

The level of radioactivity has no relevance when the material is inhaled or ingested. It is still stored in the body and causes genetic mutation. With a half-life of 4.5 billion years, it will be recirculated through the environment until it affects every person who comes in contact with it.

Do not dare play down the lethality of DU and the threat to future generations. The U.S. military is using this knowing full well the consequenses of it. This is genocide, pure and simple. Not just the genocide of one or two generations, it is the destruction of countless generations to come.

King Mob

aurelius79 wrote: »

The level of radioactivity has no relevance when the material is inhaled or ingested. It is still stored in the body and causes genetic mutation. With a half-life of 4.5 billion years, it will be recirculated through the environment until it affects every person who comes in contact with it.

Do not dare play down the lethality of DU and the threat to future generations. The U.S. military is using this knowing full well the consequenses of it. This is genocide, pure and simple. Not just the genocide of one or two generations, it is the destruction of countless generations to come.

I'm not playing down the actual dangers of depleted uranium. I'm saying you making claims like "Iraq with be a radioactive wasteland" and this new gem "it is the destruction of countless generations to come" is the exact same thing you think the NWO are doing: spreading misinformation and using rhetoric.
And as a consequence detracting from the actual dangers of DU.

So instead of making grand rethorical sweeps maybe you should stick to the facts.

For example: can you provide some scientific evidence that the DU being used is effecting the environment in Iraq (other than shooting it up, of course)?

And why exactly get all bothered because you think I'm down playing the dangers but have no problem accusing thousands of people of being guilty of deliberate genocide?

humanji

aurelius79 wrote: »

I posted the second video in an attempt to illustrate the possibility that the Bush regime and the people behind him were/are trying to finish what Adolf Hitler and the Nazi party started.

This new world order did not start with George Bush, far from it. You could probably trace the ideas behind it back to unification of China. The acquisition of sovereign nations by means of force has been the goal of empires throughout history. The United States is simply the most recent empire to employ these methods.

The goal of the current NWO is the acquisition and subjugation of all sovereign nations on the planet. This is quite evident in U.S. foreign policy, beginning with the expansion of the colonies and the genocide and displacement of millions of native Americans and Mexicans and subjugation of southern states through the U.S. Civil War. This continued with the Korean war, the Vietnam war, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, covert operations in Central and South America, Africa, Iran, the list goes on and on.

The U.S. is not alone in this endeavour. With the creation of the European Union, the Chinese acquisition of Tibet, Hong Kong, and Taiwan, the attempt by the Russian Federation to stifle descent, we are slowly but surely heading towards a single global government. The administrative, financial, an military infrastructure is already in place with the UN, World Bank, NATO, and other multinational organizations. All that's missing is a global threat that would force the world's governments to unite under one flag.

You completely misread my post. I'm saying are they saying the world could use a new world order, or are they saying there is a new world order that is evil and doing all sorts of stereotypical bad guy things?

One means absolutely nothing and the other is actual evidence towards teh existence of said NWO. Do you see the difference?

And for a secret organisation, they're not very security consious, are they? I mean, you've just told us all their plans. Surely they're not going to let everyone know their plans? This is why people have trouble believing it. If you look at the bigger picture absolutely none of it makes a lick of sense.

aurelius79

King Mob wrote: »

I'm not playing down the actual dangers of depleted uranium. I'm saying you making claims like "Iraq with be a radioactive wasteland" and this new gem "it is the destruction of countless generations to come" is the exact same thing you think the NWO are doing: spreading misinformation and using rhetoric.
And as a consequence detracting from the actual dangers of DU.

So instead of making grand rethorical sweeps maybe you should stick to the facts.

For example: can you provide some scientific evidence that the DU being used is effecting the environment in Iraq (other than shooting it up, of course)?

And why exactly get all bothered because you think I'm down playing the dangers but have no problem accusing thousands of people of being guilty of deliberate genocide?

Pictures of birth defects caused by DU
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=1777
http://mindprod.com/politics/iraqdubabiespix.html
http://www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/VISIE/extremedeformities.html

Gulf War veterans personal testimony regarding DU
http://www.gulfwarvets.com/du.htm

Scientific research into effect of DU is largely covered up by the WHO
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6105726.stm

aurelius79

humanji wrote: »

You completely misread my post. I'm saying are they saying the world could use a new world order, or are they saying there is a new world order that is evil and doing all sorts of stereotypical bad guy things?

One means absolutely nothing and the other is actual evidence towards teh existence of said NWO. Do you see the difference?

And for a secret organisation, they're not very security consious, are they? I mean, you've just told us all their plans. Surely they're not going to let everyone know their plans? This is why people have trouble believing it. If you look at the bigger picture absolutely none of it makes a lick of sense.

There's no point trying to convince someone who doesn't wish to be convinced. You are only going to see what you want to see. Maybe the idea that the events of the past 80-90 years is leading to complete global control is too much to deal with so you just block out any evidence which may lead you to believe it's true. Not really sure what else I can say.

King Mob

aurelius79 wrote: »

Pictures of birth defects caused by DU
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=1777
http://mindprod.com/politics/iraqdubabiespix.html
http://www.xs4all.nl/~stgvisie/VISIE/extremedeformities.html

Oh wow, deformed babies. Classy.
But you realise that isn't scientific research right?
It's more like a an attempt to twist the issue with emotion.
A bit like how the US justified the war with images of 9/11 and so forth.

aurelius79 wrote: »

Gulf War veterans personal testimony regarding DU
http://www.gulfwarvets.com/du.htm

SO we're clear these are the same veterans you claim are deliberately committing genocide?

You do know what a anecdote is right? And you do know that's it's not scientific evidence right?

aurelius79 wrote: »

Scientific research into effect of DU is largely covered up by the WHO
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6105726.stm

Found the operative word here.

The research was not included in the WHO report, and Dr Baverstock believes it was blocked.

Any chance you can provide this paper?

So I ask for scientific evidence, you instead provide appeals to emotion and anecdotes that cloud the issue.
Ain't that what you think the NWO did with the WMDs etc?

And to be clear are you still standing by your ridiculous claim of a "radioactive wasteland"? Cause none of your (dubious) sources seem to support it.

King Mob

aurelius79 wrote: »

There's no point trying to convince someone who doesn't wish to be convinced. You are only going to see what you want to see. Maybe the idea that the events of the past 80-90 years is leading to complete global control is too much to deal with so you just block out any evidence which may lead you to believe it's true. Not really sure what else I can say.

Or you could be wrong?
Have you considered that possibility?

aurelius79

King Mob wrote: »

Oh wow, deformed babies. Classy.
But you realise that isn't scientific research right?

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/24.html

There's enough research at the bottom of that page to reinforce my stance on the issue.

King Mob wrote: »

SO we're clear these are the same veterans you claim are deliberately committing genocide?

As I'm sure you are well aware, soldiers do not make the decisions regarding which ammunition to use in a conflict.

Now let me ask you one question. How many Iraqi insurgents have you seen driving tanks and armored personnel carriers? How many Taliban fighters? DU is used specifically for it's ability to penetrate heavy armor. If the enemy has no heavy armor whatsoever, what is the justification for using it? There must be another reason to use it then.

aurelius79

King Mob wrote: »

Or you could be wrong?
Have you considered that possibility?

Better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it. If I'm wrong then we all go around living our lives as normal. If I'm right then we're in for an existence described in novels like 1984.

King Mob

aurelius79 wrote: »

http://www.bandepleteduranium.org/en/a/24.html

There's enough research at the bottom of that page to reinforce my stance on the issue.

You don't seem to understand what I'm asking for.
I'm asking you to back up your claim that the use of DU will turn Iraq into a unliveable wasteland.
None of those papers have anything to do with that.
I'd wager that most of them don't even support your conclusion, just that the titles sound scary.

And how many of these papers have you read exactly?
I took one at random and noticed something odd....
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12121782
This one was conducted by:

Applied Cellular Radiobiology Department, Armed Forces Radiobiology Research Institute

So are you now trusting a paper publish by people in the empoly of the US army?

aurelius79 wrote: »

As I'm sure you are well aware, soldiers do not make the decisions regarding which ammunition to use in a conflict.

Ah my mistake.
When people make board generalising rhetoric it's sometimes hard to see who they are aiming it at.

aurelius79 wrote: »

Now let me ask you one question. How many Iraqi insurgents have you seen driving tanks and armored personnel carriers? How many Taliban fighters? DU is used specifically for it's ability to penetrate heavy armor. If the enemy has no heavy armor whatsoever, what is the justification for using it? There must be another reason to use it then.

Simple.
Shooting guys through walls and other hard materials.
Not to mention it gives weapons more stopping power.

But if you are now claiming that the NWO want to just kill off Iraqis for some reason, why bother with depleted uranium?
Why not bioweapons?

But you don't seem to want to address the idea that you are using the same things you accuse the NWO of using.
You're supplying information for biased sources, using appeals to emotion, making sweeping and hyperbolic rhetoric as well as making arguments for ignorance.

Have you ever stopped and thought you might be spreading misinformation yourself?

King Mob

aurelius79 wrote: »

Better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it. If I'm wrong then we all go around living our lives as normal. If I'm right then we're in for an existence described in novels like 1984.

This reasoning seems oddly familiar.
Wasn't it the reasoning for nuclear stockpiles?

humanji

aurelius79 wrote: »

Better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it. If I'm wrong then we all go around living our lives as normal. If I'm right then we're in for an existence described in novels like 1984.

So do you admit that it's not a certainty? That's the point I'm trying to get across. I don't know if there is an NWO. And I'm almost 100% positive that nobody else on this site knows for sure either. But the simple fact is that there has been no proof of the existence of an NWO and the only evidence given is ambigous at best.

humanji

King Mob wrote: »

This reasoning seems oddly familiar.
Wasn't it the reasoning for nuclear stockpiles?

And the reasoning to keep the Jews in the ghettos.

aurelius79

humanji wrote: »

So do you admit that it's not a certainty? That's the point I'm trying to get across. I don't know if there is an NWO. And I'm almost 100% positive that nobody else on this site knows for sure either. But the simple fact is that there has been no proof of the existence of an NWO and the only evidence given is ambigous at best.

Well, there's nothing in this life you can be 100% certain about. That's why this conversation is in CT and not politics. You say there's no evidence but I see quite a bit of evidence. What is the function of the Bilderberg Group, World Bank, NATO, UN, etc.? In my opinion, it's to assert more power by the world's wealthiest people. More power to do what? To control every aspect of international relations to suit their own agenda. What's their agenda? To become the most powerful people on Earth. What happens after that is anyone's guess, but I don't think they'll get that far. People can only be pushed so far before they start pushing back.

King Mob

aurelius79 wrote: »

What is the function of the Bilderberg Group, World Bank, NATO, UN, etc.? In my opinion, it's to assert more power by the world's wealthiest people. More power to do what? To control every aspect of international relations to suit their own agenda.

I seem to remember the UN not approving of the War in Iraq but being able to do **** all about it.
Just for show I take it?

King Mob

Oh hey I just realised: you're going on about a corrupt regime who maybe be using dangerous chemical and nuclear weapons and maybe conspiring with other organisations that are plotting against our well being.
You're also saying information may be faulty but it's better to be safe than sorry.

Where have we heard this before?

indough

aurelius79 wrote: »

The will of the people has no relevance when the people in control will stop at nothing to achieve their goal. The slaughter of innocent civilians means nothing to them. Genocide and destruction in the name of global unity and absolute power.

pure fantasy

aurelius79

King Mob wrote: »

Oh hey I just realised: you're going on about a corrupt regime who maybe be using dangerous chemical and nuclear weapons and maybe conspiring with other organisations that are plotting against our well being.
You're also saying information may be faulty but it's better to be safe than sorry.

Where have we heard this before?

So what's your point exactly? If you believe the invasion of Iraq had anything to do with WMDs or a threat to the west then I have to laugh. Did you know that Saddam Hussein began selling Iraq's oil in euros in November of 2000? Did you know that this was converted back to dollars directly after Saddam was captured?

Did you know that in July 2000 the Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar, declared that growing poppies was un-Islamic and banned the cultivation of it in Afghanistan? Did you know that by 2007, poppy cultivation grew to three times it's previous amount in "liberated" parts of Afghanistan?

Did you know that just before this nuclear energy controversy in Iran, President Ahmadinejad declared he would also begin selling his oil with euros? In fact, he had ceased selling any oil for U.S. dollars in early 2008. Now we're looking at a possible invasion on the pretense some threat of nuclear weapons production. Sound familiar?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/30/business/main4057490.shtml

Coincidence? To someone like you, I'm sure this is all just coincidence.

aurelius79

indough wrote: »

pure fantasy

Ah yeah, and I guess those millions of people around the world protesting the war in Iraq are just figments of my imagination. Millions of figments...

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/jan-june03/protests.html

King Mob

aurelius79 wrote: »

So what's your point exactly? If you believe the invasion of Iraq had anything to do with WMDs or a threat to the west then I have to laugh. Did you know that Saddam Hussein began selling Iraq's oil in euros in November of 2000? Did you know that this was converted back to dollars directly after Saddam was captured?

Did you know that in July 2000 the Taliban leader, Mullah Mohammed, declared that growing poppies was un-Islamic and banned the cultivation of it in Afghanistan? Did you know that by 2007, poppy cultivation grew to three times it's previous amount in "liberated" parts of Afghanistan?

Did you know that just before this nuclear energy controversy in Iran, President Ahmadinejad declared he would also begin selling his oil with euros? In fact, he had ceased selling any oil for U.S. dollars in early 2008. Now we're looking at a possible invasion on the pretense some threat of nuclear weapons production. Sound familiar?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/30/business/main4057490.shtml

Coincidence? To someone like you, I'm sure this is all just coincidence.

So when faced with a point you can't refute or address you instantly throw up red herrings.

You keep going on about how the NWO is using misinformation and underhanded tactics, but then use the exact same to support your claims.

I've asked you to back up your claim that Iraq will be a radioactive wasteland.
Can you or can you not support that claim?
Or will you admit that it was hyperbolic rhetoric?

indough

aurelius79 wrote: »

Ah yeah, and I guess those millions of people around the world protesting the war in Iraq are just figments of my imagination. Millions of figments...

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/features/jan-june03/protests.html

which has fu(k all to do with the point

aurelius79

indough wrote: »

which has fu(k all to do with the point

And what is the point exactly? You seem unable to express any sort of opinion whatsoever. If you have something to say then by all means say it. If you're just looking for an argument you came to the wrong place.

mysterious

humanji wrote: »

And the reasoning to keep the Jews in the ghettos.

i'm very serious now and I'm shocked right now, what exactly do you imply this point..........

humanji

mysterious wrote: »

i'm very serious now and I'm shocked right now, what exactly do you imply this point..........

aurelius79 wrote:

Better to have a gun and not need it than to need a gun and not have it. If I'm wrong then we all go around living our lives as normal. If I'm right then we're in for an existence described in novels like 1984.

It was the fear of the Jews overthrowing their country and enslaving them that made it so easy for the German people to willingly persecute them. Aurelius79's reasoning seems to be along the same lines: "It may not be nice, but I'm sure it's being done for the right reason." If you're afraid of a dystopian future, then it's thinking like that that has to be stamped out.

mysterious

aurelius79 wrote: »

We know that the Bush family belongs to at least one secret society, possibly more. Skull and Bones is one such society.

Here's and interesting video concerning the Bush family and the Nazis. I don't think anyone could refute this conspiracy "theory".

Not only that, they are involved in the bilderburgs, and George Senior Bush was head of the CIA. And Alister crowly the father of them all, was a freemason.


The only issue here is people obvious denial of the obvious.

mysterious

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aPOqHA36Umc&feature=sub


This explains what 666 is and what the beast is.

indough

aurelius79 wrote: »

And what is the point exactly? You seem unable to express any sort of opinion whatsoever. If you have something to say then by all means say it. If you're just looking for an argument you came to the wrong place.

the point is that the people in power would never get away with seizing control of the whole world in some sort of massive coup, of course governments were allowed get away with invading a FOREIGN land because the public didnt care enough to actually do anything effective about it

on the other hand if the majority of subjects in a nation are agrieved enough by the government, say for instance if they were trying to dissolve all governments and take over the world or something, then theres no way any government would be able to withstand the pressure exerted by the people either politically or through violent acts if need be

also there is no way the war in iraq can be classed as a genocide, as injust as it is, if you actually believe that then you either dont understand the meaning of the term or you borrowed your imagination from baron munchausen or something

aurelius79

humanji wrote: »

It was the fear of the Jews overthrowing their country and enslaving them that made it so easy for the German people to willingly persecute them. Aurelius79's reasoning seems to be along the same lines: "It may not be nice, but I'm sure it's being done for the right reason." If you're afraid of a dystopian future, then it's thinking like that that has to be stamped out.

Actually, there is an unpopular conspiracy theory regarding the persecution of the Jews which implicates the wealthy Zionist elite in Europe. We dare not speak of this though for fear of prosecution and imprisonment. Anyone that does not accept or even questions the official history of that time is immediately labeled an "anti-Semite" and charged with "hate crimes" or some such nonsense.

I've never accepted that millions of people were murdered just because Hitler and the Nazis hated the Jews. That's like saying "terrorists" attacked the WTC because they hate Americans.

King Mob

aurelius79 wrote: »

I've never accepted that millions of people were murdered just because Hitler and the Nazis hated the Jews. That's like saying "terrorists" attacked the WTC because they hate Americans.

So why exactly did he kill them?
****s and giggles?

And what are you basing this on exactly?
Personal incredulity again?