The New World Order (Novus Ordo Seclorum)
-
You frequent GlobalResearch and the works of William Engdahl, surely you must be familiar with the lying that goes on in the mainstream.
Global reserach , William Engdahl where got talk about Illuminati/NWO?
They didn't.
They are serious folks not conspiracy cranks.
Our state media designed to depoliticise, so how you tell me?
Pro-USA some more.
You expect them to go and criticise USA?
Talk about USA crimes, corporate greed?
-
Because as I've pointed out in my first post, the corporate-political elites in government have been steering the world towards world government, being guided along by organisations like the CFR and the Bilderberg Group. As the US is still the dominant political and military power in the world, any attempts to create a world government would inevitably stem from that once-great Republic, though it does not necessarily mean that the US would head it, given that the US is being systematically destroyed by corporate interests. The present head of the Rockefeller dynasty, David Rockefeller said this in 1991 at the Trilateral Commission, another globalist organisation:
"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 subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much 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."
<!-- /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:SimSun; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-alt:宋体; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 135135232 16 0 262145 0;} @font-face {font-family:"\@SimSun"; panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1; mso-font-charset:134; mso-generic-font-family:auto; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 135135232 16 0 262145 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:""; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun; mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} -->
"For more than a century, ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents... to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that is the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." -- David Rockefeller, as quoted in his "Memoirs", page 405
Am I attributing the NWO conspiracy to solely David Rockefeller? No. But is he a significant figure in this conspiracy? Yes.
Have you looked at the evidence I've offered? It seems you've not, and just ignored it (my first post). Are you one of those people who never considers the possibility that they're wrong and thus, stubbornly ignores the viewpoints of others. If so, this is a waste of my time since you're never willing to even look and respond to my evidence and just continuing to question me on my opinion just because it contradicts yours.
-
I have one question for you: What is it about a one world government conspiracy that you disagree with? I would really appreciate it if you could address that and my earlier question.
There are many political groups openly and publicly pushing for world government since 1920.
There is no evidence that there is secret group pushing for world government.
-
Have you looked at the evidence I've offered?
Okay, you go and list down all the evidence.
-
Bilderberg strikes again
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/front
William Engdahl on Bilderberg:
The Bilderberg annual meetings first began, in utmost secrecy, in May, 1954, by an Anglophile group which included George Ball, David Rockefeller, Dr. Joseph Retinger, Holland's Prince Bernhard, George C. McGhee (then of the US State Department and later a senior executive of Mobil Oil). Named for the place of their first gathering, the hotel de Bilderberg near Arnheim, the annual Bilderberg meetings gathered top elites from Europe and America for secret deliberations and policy discussion.
Consensus was then "shaped" in subsequent press comments and media coverage, but never with reference to the secret Bilderberg talks themselves. This Bilderberg process became one of the most effective vehicles of postwar Anglo-American policy-shaping...
http://earth.prohosting.com/~jswift/engdahl.html
Leaked 1999 Bilderberg minutes:
http://www.schnews.org.uk/bilderberg/
Bilderberg as a discussion and policy coordinating group among american-european elites is probably true, but link it with some larger NWO, one world government agenda is probably exaggerating.
But of course, conspiracy people will 100% connect them with that.
-
I don't think you can deny that the average person will have heard of the Bilderbergers or in any case, seen the media mentioning it. What is the message sent when 125 of the world's most powerful business and political elites meet in secret under armed guard? (Please answer this- is this not a conspiracy by definition?)
Whatever issues you have such constructive reasoning based on quotes by prominent people, it signifies intent which they have publically admitted, while people like you absolutely refuse to pay heed to. In any case, since you Googled that article for me, I guess you didn't even read it, I'll quote from it.
"The Bilderberg group - which took its name from a Dutch hotel - was founded in 1954 by Prince Bernhard from the Netherlands. German-born Bernhard was a card-carrying Nazi and member of the SS. As it is well-known, Prescott Bush was an officer of W A Harriman & Co, which financed Adolf Hitler and the Nazis with the help of Averell Harriman and German tycoon Fritz Thyssen. Alden Hatch wrote a biography of Prince Bernhard where he insists that Bilderberg was the cradle of the European Community - later rebranded European Union. He describes Bilderberg's ultimate goal as a one-world government. [Regional integration here]
Bilderberg's membership is heavily crossed with the Council on Foreign Relations, the Pilgrims Society, the Trilateral Commission and the famous "Round Table" - a British, Oxford-Cambridge elite group crystallized in the homonymous journal of empire founded in 1910. The Round Table - which also denied its existence as a formal group - called for a more efficient form of global empire so that Anglo-American hegemony could be extended throughout the 20th century"You're asking me to list down the evidence? Even if I'm repeating myself, its in my first post (Your intransigence is amazing). As for the civil liberties issue, please infer. In a one world government, how are the authorities supposed to keep track on opposition? Monopolising Power 101, or in any case, Sun Tzi, would say know your enemy.
Of course insiders would say that Bilderberg is not a one-world government conspiracy. But reseachers like Daniel Estulin who has written several books about the Bilderbergers has proven that world government is their aim.
"Bilderberg as a discussion and policy coordinating group among american-european elites is probably true, but link it with some larger NWO, one world government agenda is probably exaggerating."
Is this not semantic deception? "Discussion and policy coordinating among american-european elites" in secret, shielded from the press, and under armed guard. Is this not a conspiracy?
Its so ironic that although the Internet gives people like you so much power of information, you disregard it on the basis that it is derived so easily.
-
"The Bilderberg group - which took its name from a Dutch hotel - was founded in 1954 by Prince Bernhard from the Netherlands. German-born Bernhard was a card-carrying Nazi and member of the SS. As it is well-known, Prescott Bush was an officer of W A Harriman & Co, which financed Adolf Hitler and the Nazis with the help of Averell Harriman and German tycoon Fritz Thyssen. Alden Hatch wrote a biography of Prince Bernhard where he insists that Bilderberg was the cradle of the European Community - later rebranded European Union. He describes Bilderberg's ultimate goal as a one-world government. [Regional integration here]
Bilderberg's membership is heavily crossed with the Council on Foreign Relations, the Pilgrims Society, the Trilateral Commission and the famous "Round Table" - a British, Oxford-Cambridge elite group crystallized in the homonymous journal of empire founded in 1910. The Round Table - which also denied its existence as a formal group - called for a more efficient form of global empire so that Anglo-American hegemony could be extended throughout the 20th century"You're asking me to list down the evidence? Even if I'm repeating myself, its in my first post (Your intransigence is amazing).
So?
Politics is made up of many lobby groups, influencial networks.
What's conspiratorial about all that?
It's part and parcel of the political world.
USA also have "neo-con" group, want to influence USA foreign policy.
There's nothing new with that.
Neocon group rises again
WASHINGTON -- The Project for a New American Century, the nonprofit foundation that conspiracy theorists -- not to mention many Democrats -- believe hatched the US invasion of Iraq has re-emerged on the Internet, sparking Beltway chatter that neoconservatives may soon have their old perch back to criticize President-elect Barack Obama's foreign policy...
-
There are so many groups.
Just don't mess them up and connect everything into one big chunky NWO crap.
There is no evidence for all that.
Each political group have their own agenda to push.
There are hundreds of groups fighting for influence, push their propaganda etc.
Connect all and link all into one single theory is the sure sign of a lazy researcher or crackpot.
-
As I said, the idea of a NWO is not a conspiracy. The movement that is pushing for a NWO like the Bilderbergers are, the very hidden nature of their meeting marks them as a "conspiracy". And that separates them from other political lobbies. You are right to say that there are small political movements that have their own agenda. In my first post, I explained how this globalist group, in engineering WWI, WWII and the Cold War (in fact most 20th Century wars) intentionally created conflict to get the change they wanted- global organisations- rooted in the UN.
About 1 of your earlier posts, you discredited this movement just because I was able to mix some quotes in with facts. Quotes are themselves a kind of source. Let's assume that we have two people; 1 of them David Rockefeller and some unknown guy in a forum. David Rockefeller is quoted verbatim as saying "The supranational sovereignty of an international elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries." in addition to the admission that he made in his Memoirs. Now, compare the thrust of his message to the forum guy who says "horseshit" in response to it. While the forum-guy is a nobody, unconnected to the highest echelons of politics, Rockefeller wields uncanny political and economic power in the US and round the world, who definitely has a clear understanding of the trends taking place today, and has the guts or audacity to admit this plan of the elites. Who would anyone believe? I'm sure its clear.
If it were so secret, why is the Internet filled with "NWO/Illuminati" (a very sweeping term) information? Because its the Internet. Unlike our controlled media, the Internet allows freedom of information and expression. Surely that does not mean that any "conspiratorial" information found on the Internet is the result of some "crackpot". It is precisely because the Internet gives people the power to spread information alongside huge news corporation (net neutrality) that information about this conspiracy can be spread. Of course, as you pointed out, you can find almost anything on the Net. Am I asking you to believe everything you read? No. Any rational person will first examine the evidence, verify it and form his own conclusion.
Now, you like to use "NWO/Illuminati" implying that the conspiracy is made absurb by the involvement of some occult group. However, the notion of "Illuminati" is so vague and distorted by pop-culture that its real significance has been lost. The Illuminati connection to the NWO is simply: In 1776, an intellectual group called the Illuminati (the enlightened ones) was set up in Bavaria (in present-day Germany). Their goal was to eradicate the nationalist form of government in Europe and dominate the world. Big ambitions for people in a technology-less world in the 18th Century. However, their plans were leaked and the Baravian authority cracked down on them and the group fragmented. But people still link the NWO and the Illuminati because of the similarity of the concepts involved. Of course, if one is curious, there are occult connections behind major corporate-political powers, such as the Skull and Bones secret society and the Bohemian Club.
If you're so uncomfortable with the word "conspiracy", then I won't use it. The very development in the present geopolitical realm of "progressive regionalisation" (Brezesinki) is a foretaste of a world government. Think about it, the old world order just means the world order that has lasted about 350-400 years after the peace of Westphalia, aka, the age of nationalism. Thus, the new world order simply means a new alignment of power around internationalism. That is why politicians are having a field day with words like "new world order", "global village", and "globalism". I admit it is too impulsive to connect them with a conspiracy just because of those words, but the trend is clear. From independent countries, they merge to give sovereignty to a regional bloc like the EU, and before long, it is evitable that these blocs will merge to form some kind of world government.
Look at yourself, you Google and Youtube the phrase "NWO/Illuminati" and assume that everyone of them talks about the same thing. As if there are no disinformation campaigns or people talking about an alien conspiracies (the "greys", on which I'm not as arrogant to dismiss them, but I don't read about) to sift out from the truth. If there isn't a hidden agenda, then why is the Bilderberg so secretive about their meetings? Why has the EU leadership so resolved about total European integration even when their people (the Irish) have refused to give up their sovereignty? Is this not a organised effort to build a global government? Its not conspiracy theories, rather conspiracy facts. And "facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored" (Aldous Huxley). Since you're so apt at this, by all means, show me the illogicality of my reasoning and deconstruct them.
Now how about a game. Which conspiracy crackpot said this:
"We shall have world government whether or not you like it. The only question is whether world government will be achieved by conquest or consent."
If you guessed Alex Jones, you were wrong. It was said before a Senate committee by James Warburg in 1950.
"The drive of the Rockefellers and their allies is to create a one-world government combining super-capitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under their control. Do I mean conspiracy? Yes I do. I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations in planning and incredibly evil in intent."
If you guessed Ron Paul, you were wrong. Quote from Congressman Larry McDonald.
"The 'house of world order' will have to built from the bottom up rather than the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing confusion', ... but an end run around national sovereignty eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault." (emphasis added) -Richard Gardner, in "The Hard Road to World Order", 1974.
Gardner was the US Ambassador to the UN, Italy and Spain not to mention deputy secretary of state for international organisation affairs as well as other important political posts. Are you calling him a "crackpot"?
Last one,
"The powers of financial capitalism [this is where corporate globalisation comes in] had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole." (emphasis added) -Professor Carrol Quigley [Georgetown University], in "Tragedy and Hope", 1966
Let me say again, quotes are sources, depending on the person from whom you quote from. From these sources, one gets the impression that there is a movement to create a world government. But it is not an open movement, but a hidden one, one that excludes citizens from the discussion where only corporate-political elites have a say in.
Let me end with a quote from a fictitious character since you think that the NWO movement is a pile of "bullshit".
"Do you want to know what it is? The Matrix is everywhere. Even now, in this very room. You can see it when you look out the window or when you turn on the television. You can feel it when you go to work, when you go to church, when you pay your taxes. It is the world that has been pulled over your eyes to blind you from the truth."
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
Above is complete and total horseshit.
i agree.... -
No surprise. The average person is conditioned to dismiss anything that challenges the status quo and the beliefs that society has indoctrinated him with.
"We are governed, our minds formed, our ideas suggested, our tastes formed largely by men we have never seen before." -Edward Bernays, in his book "Propaganda"
-
The average person is conditioned to dismiss anything that challenges the status quo and the beliefs that society has indoctrinated him with.
You also indoctrinated with Illuminati/NWO propaganda crap on internet wah.
So are you voting for PAP?
-
Don't try to change the subject. If you cannot even address the alleged illogicality that you constantly remind me of, your insults hold little weight. Merely dismissing something because it FEELS or SEEMS crazy and MUST (you think) be the result of mental instability points towards indoctrination. And no, I'm not voting for the PAP given their track record of oppression.
-
If you cannot even address the alleged illogicality that you constantly remind me of
Like what?
-
Eh but i thought NWO is the Hulk Hogan, Kevin Nash and Scott Hall that one?
-
-
Originally posted by Poh Ah Pak:
Like what?
That there is a conspiracy dedicated to ushering in a one-world government for which I've substantiated. And please don't use "NWO/Illuminati" because that just shows you don't do your homework and is a misleading phrase. Besides explaining the connection, I've not brought in any occult-related information to explain this movement.