Total Posts:12|Showing Posts:1-12
Jump to topic:

Drones, Black Choppers, RFIDs, Foreign Troops

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2012 2:21:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
...occupying American soil and taking our guns away, arresting innocent people for free speech, shutting down websites they don't like, arming Al Quida in Syria (admitted). But the conspiracy theorists are still wrong somehow.

"That'll never happen, youre a crazy conspiracy theorist."
*Happens*
"It's for our safety, theyre just going about it wrong."

No, actually you were wrong, wrong about everything.

.
.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Frederick53
Posts: 1,037
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2012 2:28:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Could you explain the foreign troops part?
In 1975, the Second Vietnam War began -1Historygenius

Like no wonder that indian dude rejected you.- Darkkermit to royalpaladin

Social Darwinism is a justification- 1Historygenius

Equal opportunity exists, so there is no problem- EvanK
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2012 2:28:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/29/2012 2:23:44 PM, FREEDO wrote:
None of those things are really considered conspiracy theories.

The NWO conspiracy theory is that:

We are moving towards a Big Brother police state
Destroying American sovereignty
Stripping away our rights

All of the things in the OP apply.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2012 2:31:34 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/29/2012 2:28:10 PM, Frederick53 wrote:
Could you explain the foreign troops part?

Foreign Troops to Confiscate American Guns Under UN Treaty

Article 15 of the UN Arms Trade Treaty, if ratified, provides for foreign "assistance to implement the Treaty," and mandates that nations who can provide requested support mustdo so if requested by member nations.

"Today Americans would be outraged if U.N. troops entered Los Angeles to restore order … tomorrow they will be grateful." -Attributed to Henry Kissinger during the 1991 Bilderberg meeting

http://www.infowars.com...
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2012 2:40:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It's funny because detractors admit two things:

"Yeah the elites said they want a New World Order, but not the one youre talking about. They want freedom and peace."

"Yeah, all those things are happening (more wars, freedoms stripped away, being spied on), but those aren't because of the New World Order, theyre just trying to do the right thing but theyre incompetent."

So let me get this straight:

- The elites have declared multiple times they are trying to make a New World Order.
- All of the bad policies that we said would be part of the New World Order are happening.

And yet there is no NWO, but if there was, it would be a benevolent one. Wow, ok.

.
.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2012 4:06:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
And I suppose that anytime any political action is taken which goes against this NWO plan, it can be attributed to the NWO pretending there is an opposite side with political influence?
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2012 4:17:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/29/2012 4:06:06 PM, Wnope wrote:
And I suppose that anytime any political action is taken which goes against this NWO plan, it can be attributed to the NWO pretending there is an opposite side with political influence?

It can be attributed to us winning the Infowar and/or Congress & Senate breaking from the status quo.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2012 4:27:20 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/29/2012 4:17:03 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 8/29/2012 4:06:06 PM, Wnope wrote:
And I suppose that anytime any political action is taken which goes against this NWO plan, it can be attributed to the NWO pretending there is an opposite side with political influence?

It can be attributed to us winning the Infowar and/or Congress & Senate breaking from the status quo.

Let's say, the Infowar interest group (i.e. people who would similarly wish to influence politics) wanted to fight the NWO in such a way that corresponds with the interests of, for example, domestic producer interest group. An would be when it comes to treaties which increase monetary and economic trade ties between North, Central, and South America. The increased competition from lowered trade barriers hurts domestic producers while being "NWO-ish."

How would an outside observer (with no access to the thought process of the people involved) know that Infowar and Domestic Producers are acting independently towards a goal that mutually benefits them as opposed to Infowar and Domestic Producers being part of a conspiracy aimed at destroying trade-based NWO goals?

What if Infowars and Domestic Producer Interest Groups physically met in some hotel/resort and talked strategy? Are they now part of a joint conspiracy?
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2012 4:52:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/29/2012 4:27:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Let's say, the Infowar interest group (i.e. people who would similarly wish to influence politics) wanted to fight the NWO in such a way that corresponds with the interests of, for example, domestic producer interest group. An would be when it comes to treaties which increase monetary and economic trade ties between North, Central, and South America. The increased competition from lowered trade barriers hurts domestic producers while being "NWO-ish."

How would an outside observer (with no access to the thought process of the people involved) know that Infowar and Domestic Producers are acting independently towards a goal that mutually benefits them as opposed to Infowar and Domestic Producers being part of a conspiracy aimed at destroying trade-based NWO goals?

What if Infowars and Domestic Producer Interest Groups physically met in some hotel/resort and talked strategy? Are they now part of a joint conspiracy?

I dont have to convince you, David Rockefeller explicitly admitted that he and his family are conspiring with others to create a one world government.

"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 (Memoirs, pg. 406)

"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 world 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."
-- David Rockefeller (Bilderberg meeting, 1991)

.
.
.
.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/29/2012 6:02:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/29/2012 4:52:22 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 8/29/2012 4:27:20 PM, Wnope wrote:
Let's say, the Infowar interest group (i.e. people who would similarly wish to influence politics) wanted to fight the NWO in such a way that corresponds with the interests of, for example, domestic producer interest group. An would be when it comes to treaties which increase monetary and economic trade ties between North, Central, and South America. The increased competition from lowered trade barriers hurts domestic producers while being "NWO-ish."

How would an outside observer (with no access to the thought process of the people involved) know that Infowar and Domestic Producers are acting independently towards a goal that mutually benefits them as opposed to Infowar and Domestic Producers being part of a conspiracy aimed at destroying trade-based NWO goals?

What if Infowars and Domestic Producer Interest Groups physically met in some hotel/resort and talked strategy? Are they now part of a joint conspiracy?

I dont have to convince you, David Rockefeller explicitly admitted that he and his family are conspiring with others to create a one world government.

"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 (Memoirs, pg. 406)

"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 world 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."
-- David Rockefeller (Bilderberg meeting, 1991)

I'm not asking you about NWO, I'm asking you about a hypothetical where two interest groups work together to achieve goals even though they may not share some ultimate goal (ex. some aspect of anti-NWO that in the long run conflicts with big business interests).

Also, the first bit on Rockefeller is an admirable example of quote-mining, since in context you realize what he is employing a basic rhetorical device (ex. what people accuse me of doing I do for love, and if love is a crime, I am guilty). It's rather foolish to take this as an indication of wanting world domination since he explicitly in interviews disagrees with this. Why on earth would he say differently in his memoir?

You might as well say the following quote suggests NWO:

"To say we were striving for a one-world government is exaggerated, but not wholly unfair. Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn't go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing."

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net...

It might prima facie seem convincing, but within context you realize it's part of an anti-conspiracy point.

Would you mind providing a source for that second quote? The closest I've ever seen is some French right-wing newspapers claiming to have covered a Bilderberg conference.
ScottyDouglas
Posts: 2,350
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/30/2012 5:21:49 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 8/29/2012 4:17:03 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 8/29/2012 4:06:06 PM, Wnope wrote:
And I suppose that anytime any political action is taken which goes against this NWO plan, it can be attributed to the NWO pretending there is an opposite side with political influence?

It can be attributed to us winning the Infowar and/or Congress & Senate breaking from the status quo.

Geo, keep posting this stuff, regardless of being labeled as a 'CRAZY'. Your right and people need to hear it. Maybe thier eyes will open up one day and you'll be the cause.
TheAsylum