It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the galactic federation a distraction?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2005 @ 10:35 AM
link   
Cuz both the greys\reptilians and the federation want a NWO.I googled galactic federation and it came up with the illuminati.Should we trust the galactic\space federation?.The weird thing is that the bible predicts about NWO and its destined failure,the second fake comming and the real second comming.Imo we can only trust our creators(aldebarans or Elohims).Earth sister could you clear that the galactic federation want a one world govt cuz if they want then it is destined to fail.
here are the links
www.luisprada.com...
home.iae.nl...
"These Illuminati families want to impose and maintain "super capitalism" and with it their de facto world government. This alien organization —called the Galactic Federation— also wants a world government but they want it based on the opposite of super capitalism. The Galactic Federation want an open democratic socialist government where all peoples live in freedom, wealth, abundance and love and certainly don't support the concept of a handful of billionaires running the planet"

[edit on 15-5-2005 by warthog911]

EDIT: removing siren

[edit on 17-5-2005 by Gazrok]




posted on May, 16 2005 @ 01:23 AM
link   
I wouldn't trust any of them.


I used to be a Trekker back in the day. They made it sound so benevolent...to be a member of the United Federation of Planets, your planet had to be completely unified--one government. (Think NWO.) Then you get to thinking, wow, must be so nice, one government, everyone living in harmony, then we can be in partnership with other lifeforms....

Of course this is based on the "man is inherently good" lie, and the evolution lie. The Bible tells us that man's heart is wicked, I think it's in Jeremiah 17:9 (off the top of my head here).

As much as I love the exploration aspect of Star Trek, I just can't watch it and enjoy it, knowing what reality is.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 01:48 AM
link   
you got it almost right

Jer17:9 the heart [mind] is decietful above all things, and desperatley wicked: who can know it?

i find it hard to belive that something that calls itself a FEDERATION (a centralized collection of DIFFERENT MEMBER STATES) would need earth to be unified. its probably all a load of nwo mind control bs anyways. i mean really is velcro that hard to invent?



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 02:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by NuTroll
you got it almost right

Jer17:9 the heart [mind] is decietful above all things, and desperatley wicked: who can know it?


Thanks for helping out there!
At least I remembered what chapter and verse!



i find it hard to belive that something that calls itself a FEDERATION (a centralized collection of DIFFERENT MEMBER STATES) would need earth to be unified. its probably all a load of nwo mind control bs anyways. i mean really is velcro that hard to invent?


That's pretty much why I hardly, if ever, watch any Star Trek anymore. My husband still watches it and he tapes "Enterprise."

Besides, instead of having the TV rot my brain, I can use my brain for more worthwhile pursuits...like ATS....



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 04:44 AM
link   
Well the one disturbing angle of Star Trek is the fact that they no longer use currency and work for the greater good of mankind. that smacks of communism !



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Didn't you always wonder....

What's the incentive for a janitor aboard the Enterprise?

Some type of monetary system has to exist unless robots are going to do all of the menial tasks.

While not a believer in the Reptoid/Gray NWO theory, it would make sense that a planet need to be unified to join such a federation.

For example:
1. It shows a certain level of "maturity" for the planet, if able to live in peace with each other.
2. Can you imagine if a non-unified planet were allowed to join? Each govt would want it's OWN reps to the Federation!
3. This would mean one world could have dozens of reps, while each other had one, and well, I think we could see what would happen from there. Wars have started for far less.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 11:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
For example:
1. It shows a certain level of "maturity" for the planet, if able to live in peace with each other.
2. Can you imagine if a non-unified planet were allowed to join? Each govt would want it's OWN reps to the Federation!
3. This would mean one world could have dozens of reps, while each other had one, and well, I think we could see what would happen from there. Wars have started for far less.


However, a unified world government for humans at this point would only mean oppression on a global scale. While a singular government would be a sign of maturity, in reality we're not yet that mature. If we were unified now, we'd only be masquerading as adults.


Originally posted by Wirral Bagpuss
Well the one disturbing angle of Star Trek is the fact that they no longer use currency and work for the greater good of mankind. that smacks of communism !


I'm not a fan of communism, but I find capitalism even more detestable.

I, too, would find it very difficult to trust a 'Federation.' Federation, to me, means "Organized way to control everyone."



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 11:20 AM
link   
Not that I believe in any galactic federation thing,
I dont have a problem with a unified planetary government, nor do I have a problem with phasing out the monetary system.

Also, if communism is working for the greater good of humankind, well, than I'm a communist.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 11:37 AM
link   
I guess Unified could mean control or cooperation.
It's a matter of attitude and perception isn't it.
For example. The culture of the plains indian tribes before the westward exspansion was one of cooperation. The attitude was not that they were controlled and forced to work for the good of the tribe. Their veiw was that this was the sane and reasonable thing to do. There was no wealth, no money. Leaders were recognized for their wisdom and clear thinking, but the individuals of the tribe were not compelled to do what they were told.
By contrast, the experience of Comunism is that of control. As is the case with our government. Wouldn't you agree?
If everyone had the attitude that working and sharing was the sane and reasonable thing to do, for the good of all those on the planet, then it's cooperation. If you are forced to work and share while others don't then that is control.
To me it's just a matter of perception and the attitude of the participants. Yes it is Utopian by today's standards. But even today there are primitive cultures who operate this way.
Ask some of the old Montignard people in your community that came here after the Vietnam war. Their culture very closely resmbled the cultures of the pre-westward exspansion indian tribes.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Seriously, I'm the only one who's wondered why anyone, if money was no longer used, would be a janitor aboard the Enterprise?



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 01:41 PM
link   
In the original Star Trek series, they did have "credits" which they used as money...in Star Trek:TNG, they said that the ship cleans itself...I don't know how much that helps.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 01:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
Seriously, I'm the only one who's wondered why anyone, if money was no longer used, would be a janitor aboard the Enterprise?


the union benefits ?
seconds on Kirks green babes ?
the lesser known vulcan back massage ?



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   
If money is not the object, all things being equal, I'd like to be a janitor on the Enterprise.
Easy job, No stress, No major responsibilities. just keep the tribbles out of the air ducts and enjoy the ride.
Am I right? Wasn't the cute little furry things called tribbles?

[edit on 16-5-2005 by freddieb]



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 02:35 PM
link   
Ahh...you're missing the point.


The point is, if money didn't exist, and basic needs were provided for, what would be the INCENTIVE to be just one in the crowd, versus simply lying around doing nothing? Sure, one could argue that such individuals went into Starfleet Academy, wanting to explore, etc., but upon doing badly enough to warrant say, the guy who does nothing but crawl through Jeffreys tubes looking for out circuits, to just not go, "crap, didn't make it, guess I'll go back home now".

The no money concept really came about in STNG, I believe. I remember Picard using the phrase often...(despite the Ferengi use of gold-pressed latinum). Ok, I'm not even a big Trek fan, but my inner geek is showing...



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 02:44 PM
link   
kurt vonneguts first book was about that very concept. (player piano) computers have made everything cheap, automatic and plentiful. Most people have no job, but also have no need. 5 engineers run the whole city of schenectady NY. In this book, the people with nothing to do feel worthless, and are desperate for work. What happens is the people become second rate machines themselves, and rebel against the system

I think its basic human nature to feel a purpose, a worth from work, whatever that may be.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 02:48 PM
link   
Well I suppose, by that time, we are supposed to be spiritually and socially advanced enough to want to do our best and excel just for the good of the whole.
Or am I still missing your point.
I'm sorry, I'm home from work today due to a case of food poisoning. I'm still a little washed out.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
Not that I believe in any galactic federation thing,
I dont have a problem with a unified planetary government, nor do I have a problem with phasing out the monetary system.

Also, if communism is working for the greater good of humankind, well, than I'm a communist.


I think you ought to read George Orwell's Animal Farm. Communism is not what it's cracked up to be.



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
Ahh...you're missing the point.


The point is, if money didn't exist, and basic needs were provided for, what would be the INCENTIVE to be just one in the crowd, versus simply lying around doing nothing? Sure, one could argue that such individuals went into Starfleet Academy, wanting to explore, etc., but upon doing badly enough to warrant say, the guy who does nothing but crawl through Jeffreys tubes looking for out circuits, to just not go, "crap, didn't make it, guess I'll go back home now".

The no money concept really came about in STNG, I believe. I remember Picard using the phrase often...(despite the Ferengi use of gold-pressed latinum). Ok, I'm not even a big Trek fan, but my inner geek is showing...


That reminds me of Star Trek: First Contact where that 21st-century woman, Lily, says to Picard, "No money? You mean you don't get paid?"


I kept thinking Picard and his bunch needed LOTS of hazard pay having to deal with the likes of the Borg, Q, the Romulans, etc....



posted on May, 16 2005 @ 02:59 PM
link   
iori,
Communism as described by the Utopian works, Bacon, Marx, and Lenin fail to take into account the nature of man. to wit, greed, lust for power...etc.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join