the NewWorldOrchestra

ok, the rest of you internet feigns like myself have read conspiracy theories galore. only a small handfull do most skeptics end up putting much stock in. i would like to bring up one aspect of the 'supposed' NWO plot to enslave humanity. now, this thread is inspired by my recent viewing of one of jones' films. i apologize, but i think alex is very convincing - however annoying and boistrous he may be.

anyways, while viewing the film 911:martial law, towards the end on the added UN segment, alex is explaining how the UN was created by the big banks to avert the socialists attention away from good ole' american capitalism and into support of this 'world-governing' body; (the UN). well in line with the "problem-reaction-solution" trick that we are all becoming very familiar with, alex explains that the same people who pull strings in the US arena (big banks, conglomerates etc) are the very same people who pull many of the strings in the UN arena. well, if you control both sides to a conflict, you can certainly control the outcome. deeper we delve.

ok, on the video - alex illustrates some ideological conflicts of interest between the UN and the US. particularly the UNs support of Chinas 1 child policy. It is said that the UN has awarded China for its policy. Even after China began to realize the unatural environment created by its ridiculous male to female ratio, (like 100 to 1 or something) the UN urged them to continue. Alex continues to explain that the UN has been involved in sterilization programs all over the 3rd world. Its seems natural that the global organization that the UN is, would want to address global topics like overpopulation, but sterilizing people?...

anyways, the China comment raised some questions - why would the same people who control most of europe and north america want China to overpopulate its country with males?

mind you, these are the 'globalists' we're talking about. people advocating a One world government. Trilateral commission, Council on Foreign Relations and the like. well, to fully recognize their one world government, the US sovergnty would need to be dismantled. the dumbed down american citizenship wouldnt be as lazy to just hand it over - we would still put up a bit of a fight. but who would be the enforcer?

maybe those 'chinese troops on the mexican border' scares are actual practice runs for the future to come? americans are gonna need a face to put on that enemy afterall. what i mean is, maybe in a smoky room somewhere there really is a handfull of cigarsucking elitists who are beefing China up to be pitted against the US. just a little more time for the bull# plot to unfold (think "WoMD!!" or something along those lines) and an improvoked attack, and tadaaa! you got WW3! thoughts anyone?




[edit on 6-6-2005 by lost]

China Birth rate:
at birth: 1.12 male(s)/female

That's roughly 9 men for every 8 women, shockingly not near your 100/1 idea. The whole "Male" child, idea is only happening in the rural parts of China not in the larger built up areas.

Also it's two children, per family.

ok, i apologize for the bad info. i am not familiar with chinas children policies anymore than the heresay i pick up randomly. my numbers were WAY off sorry. this article puts it at about 120 men to every 100 women.

www.euthanasia.com...

i think the point i was trying to make is correct in this statement:

The resulting shortage of women has meant that tens of millions of men remain unmarried and childless.

big army .

im not sure but i think their army numbers 200 million. not that they can get them to taiwan even.

Even after China began to realize the unatural environment created by its ridiculous male to female ratio, (like 100 to 1 or something)

Whoa hold up there. Its more like 1.something men to every female. Here's a page about it. For the total population its 1.06 : 1

Tho I see that this has been addressed.

would want to address global topics like overpopulation, but sterilizing people?

Its voluntary. People who have already had a number of kids get sterilized, vasectomys, ligations, etc. Its not a bad idea at all, especially in parts of the world where the amount of human suffering and misery is practically directly related to the population size. Peopel in the west, like alex jones, can't 'get their heads around' that idea apparently.

want China to overpopulate its country with males

The US opposes UN abortion and sterilization programs because the domestic politics in the US are heavily anti-abortion. Americans think its bad, and therefore won't support anything like it.

people advocating a One world government. Trilateral commission, Council on Foreign Relations and the like.

These two groups do not advocate a one world government. The trilaterals were just a couple of BTO's in the business world who got together to address issues like open markets and global development. The CFR is just a group that discusses foreign policy for the US, and also publishes a journal that has a very wide range of opinions on these matters.

these are the 'globalists'

Globalism need not have anything to do with a one world government, indeed, short of conspiracy theory, most people talking about gobalism mean nothing of the sort. Globalism is about international trade, ensuring the movement of capital thru all the worlds markets, and the intergration of those markets. Its about World Development, ie protecting civil society and promoting sustainable agriculture and scientific progress in the third world.

thanks for the reply nygdan,

Its voluntary. People who have already had a number of kids get sterilized, vasectomys, ligations, etc. Its not a bad idea at all, especially in parts of the world where the amount of human suffering and misery is practically directly related to the population size. Peopel in the west, like alex jones, can't 'get their heads around' that idea apparently.

-alex specifically explained that some of their sterilization programs have been expiremental and covert. In my lack of documentation - we will just have to 'trust' that nobody is taking advantage of and shaping the 3rd world.

Globalism need not have anything to do with a one world government, indeed, short of conspiracy theory, most people talking about gobalism mean nothing of the sort. Globalism is about international trade, ensuring the movement of capital thru all the worlds markets, and the intergration of those markets. Its about World Development, ie protecting civil society and promoting sustainable agriculture and scientific progress in the third world.

ok, you realize this is a conspiracy theory right? anybody can wave 'official' rhetoric to dispute a conspiracy. heck to get everybody on the same page, we could just centralize our news into an outlet for 'official' stories. sorry, i for one am fed up with 'official' stories. you claim that "globalization need not have anything to do with a one world gov." -ok, it need not, but it does. "most people talking about globalism are refering to international business etc..." Yes, this is true. But I am talking about everything being connected. What- globalization effects business but not corruption? I find this narrowminded. At different stages in any development those involved will discover that not all the rules have yet been written for that playing field. Those who cover the territory first write the rules. Its a brave new world my friend and you are way too trusting of our leaders. I do not have enough oversight to say that our computer savvy society hasnt created whole new backdoors for corruption.

I should make it very clear that this conspiracy, and like most others is very loudly incinuating that multiple somebodies in the ruling circles of politics have ILL INTENT for the rest of us and infact promote official stories that are no more than LIES.

understand that if we evaluate a "what if" based on 'official storydom' well, the outcome is pretty much predetermined.

I myself am quite convinced that there are lies surrounding the official 911 story. (if you yourself are not, how do you reconcile faith in so much failure?!) Convinced of those, I projected a "what if" and thought that maybe the same people who lie here are lying elsewhere about other things. Very possibly lying about sterilization programs.

What about MKULTRA in america? you dont think they can taint a couple needles in uganda? is it sooo backwards to see them for what they are?

But then again, we people need proof. Please ponder yourself 'what constitutes proof today?'

-i would suggest that NOTHING constitutes proof anymore -except video feed of the crime in action. the global atrocities we are presented with today always have a front group and if the group is found guilty there is a couple of fall guys within that get creamed. the real culprits go find another front group. well, im fed up.

basically, our brave new world has rendered us very vulnerable to the hidden control mechanisms throughout our society.

IT IS QUITE TIME WE STARTED QUESTIONING THE OFFICIAL STORIES.

Originally posted by lost
sorry, i for one am fed up with 'official' stories. you claim that "globalization need not have anything to do with a one world gov." -ok, it need not, but it does.

Go to the store and pickup a copy of Foreign Affairs and see how often anything like a 'one world government' pops up.

Globalisation needn't have anything to do with a one world government, and in theory and fact, it does not have anything to do with it.

What- globalization effects business but not corruption?

I don't think that anyone claims this.

Its a brave new world my friend and you are way too trusting of our leaders.

I'll have to take your word for it

I do not have enough oversight to say that our computer savvy society hasnt created whole new backdoors for corruption.

and infact promote official stories that are no more than LIES.

They're not stories, they're whats actually happening. Alex jones says that internationalist organizations are kidnapping people and forcibly sterilizing them and performing abortions on them against their will. Thats great. WTF does alex jones know? Nothing. Does he have investigative journalists in asia right now, watching these acts, interviewing the abductees, medical examiners confirming their stories? No. He has a radio-show, that the all too credulous seem to like to call in on and tell them 'what they've heard'.

understand that if we evaluate a "what if" based on 'official storydom' well, the outcome is pretty much predetermined.

I myself am quite convinced that there are lies surrounding the official 911 story. (if you yourself are not, how do you reconcile faith in so much failure?!) Convinced of those, I projected a "what if" and thought that maybe the same people who lie here are lying elsewhere about other things. Very possibly lying about sterilization programs.

What about MKULTRA in america? you dont think they can taint a couple needles in uganda? is it sooo backwards to see them for what they are?

But then again, we people need proof. Please ponder yourself 'what constitutes proof today?'
I think long and hard about what constitutes proof on several different levels. Then I come here and hear about how the CFR is an evil globe spanning monstrous arm of the many tentacles NWO, then I pick up a copy of Foreign Affairs and see that people have really missed the mark, and that they really don't understand what is going on.

well, im fed up.

So you have decided to just accept the conspiracies without any credibility?

basically, our brave new world has rendered us very vulnerable to the hidden control mechanisms throughout our society.

Man's inability to think rationally about the world around him, and tendency to make utterly illogical conclusions about the situation he finds himself in, leads to falsehood and folly.

IT IS QUITE TIME WE STARTED QUESTIONING THE OFFICIAL STORIES.

YOu are not questioning anything, you are simply credulously accepting 'contra' stories, and considering anything that disagrees with them as 'official' and tainted. You also have stated that there is no real ability to question these things anyway, and that nothing can be done about the situation, short of accepting the conspiracy theory without sufficient reason and seeing if it comes true.

Globalization: To make global or worldwide in scope or application.

The word depends on the context in which you decide to use it, it can mean a global government, movement, business, etc, etc

Go to the store and pickup a copy of Foreign Affairs and see how often anything like a 'one world government' pops up.

No need, I have a copy in my room. But I fail to understand how the magazine 'Foreign Affairs' use or nonuse of the term 'one world gov' determines anything.

well, im fed up.

So you have decided to just accept the conspiracies without any credibility?

i hope you know thats hardly what i am advocating. keywords were "what-if"

basically, our brave new world has rendered us very vulnerable to the hidden control mechanisms throughout our society.

Man's inability to think rationally about the world around him, and tendency to make utterly illogical conclusions about the situation he finds himself in, leads to falsehood and folly.

Amen. I should not blindly trust anyone, should it be Alex, Bush, or whoever. Everyone should do their own research etc... Ok, research; what does that entail? Sources. Who are your sources? Are your sources trustworthy? Well I submit that it is indeed wise to reserve some doubt for all sources BECAUSE our society has rendered NOBODY trustworthy. So basically, at some point you have to make the call. Consider all sources, and make a judgement call. Call me crazy, but I have incorporated a newagish tool into my research methods; its called intuition. When I come across discrepencies and holes in the 'official' stories, I begin to look for other sources. I am open to the reality that Alex is wrong. But my openess to official storydom - is dying fast.

YOu are not questioning anything, you are simply credulously accepting 'contra' stories, and considering anything that disagrees with them as 'official' and tainted. You also have stated that there is no real ability to question these things anyway, and that nothing can be done about the situation, short of accepting the conspiracy theory without sufficient reason and seeing if it comes true.

I am not credulously accepting 'contra' stories. I am speculating at their reality. I am saying "what-if" the situation was really this way etc... these purported facts start to peice an akward puzzle. etc."

If you want me to aknowlege the possiblity that the official stories are indeed correct, and the rest are nothing but conspiracy theories; DONE.

Are you willing to consider the reverse?

anyways, I found it uncanny that China is commended for its child regulation, while rumors abound about troops on the mexican border. All the while everybody calls America the sleeping giant. *WHAT IF those who would do away with the giant are secretly building their own while it sleeps?

edit: I would particularly like to thank Odium for the watchfull eye he has kept on this thread, keeping it factual. Whether he sides one way or another, his posts are straight to the point and appreciated. thanks.

[edit on 8-6-2005 by lost]

update:

in responce to your suggestion Nygdan;

Go to the store and pickup a copy of Foreign Affairs and see how often anything like a 'one world government' pops up.

....i found this completely by accident:

December 15, 1922 -- The CFR endorses World Government in its magazine Foreign Affairs. Author Philip Kerr, states:

"Obviously there is going to be no peace or prosperity for mankind as long as [the earth] remains divided into 50 or 60 independent states until some kind of international system is created...The real problem today is that of the world government."

and this:

July, 1948 -- Britain's Sir Harold Butler, in the CFR's Foreign Affairs, sees "a New World Order" taking shape:

"How far can the life of nations, which for centuries have thought of themselves as distinct and unique, be merged with the life of other nations? How far are they prepared to sacrifice a part of their sovereignty without which there can be no effective economic or political union?...Out of the prevailing confusion a new world is taking shape... which may point the way toward the new order...That will be the beginning of a real United Nations, no longer crippled by a split personality, but held together by a common faith."

source: www.khouse.org...


[edit on 9-6-2005 by lost]

Compulsory sterilization programs sprouted up in many countries at the beginning of the 20th century, usually as part of a program of "negative" eugenics -- to prevent "undesirable" members of the population reproducing. They generally specified that an institution or legal body could order that an individual be operated upon, for the purpose of preventing further procreation, against their will (and sometimes without their knowledge).

Usually such programs advocated sterilization by means of vasectomy in males and salpingectomy or tubal ligation in females, as they were not operations which significantly affected sexual drive or the personality of the individuals operated upon (unlike, for example, castration). This increased the seemingly innocuous nature of the operations, adding a veneer of scientific objectivity.

Plans for forced sterilization for the purposes of avoiding overpopulation are sometimes, but not usually, directly related to any eugenic intent. Please see Population Control for more information on this type of sterilization.

United States of America

The first significant country to undertake compulsory sterilization programs for the purpose of eugenics was the United States of America. The principal targets of the American program were the mentally retarded and the mentally ill, but also targetted under many state laws were the deaf, the blind, the epileptic, the physically deformed, and even orphans, the homeless, and homosexuals. Some sterilizations also took place in prisons and other penal institutions, targeting criminality, but they were in the relative minority. In the end, over 65,000 individuals were sterilized in 33 states under state compulsory sterilization programs in the United States.

The first state to introduce compulsory sterilization legislation was Pennsylvania, in 1905, but it was vetoed by the governor. Indiana became the first state to enact sterilization legislation in 1907 followed closely by Washington and California in 1909. Sterilization rates across the country were relatively low until the 1927 Supreme Court case Buck v. Bell which legitimized the forced sterilization of patients at a Virginia home for the mentally retarded. The number of sterilizations performed per year increased until another Supreme Court case, Skinner v. Oklahoma, complicated the legal situation by ruling against punitive sterilization in 1942.

After World War II, public opinion towards eugenics and sterilization programs became more negative in the light of the connection with the genocidal policies of Nazi Germany, though a significant number of sterilizations continued in a few states until the early 1960s. The Oregon Board of Eugenics, later renamed the Board of Social Protection, existed until 1983, with the last forcible sterilization occuring in 1981.(www.open.org...) The U.S. insular area Puerto Rico had a sterilization program as well. Some states continued to have sterilization laws on the books for much longer after that, though they were rarely if ever used. California led the pack, responsible for over a third of all sterilization operations. Information about the California sterilization program was produced into book form and widely disseminated by eugenicists E.S. Gosney and Paul B. Popenoe, which was said by the government of Adolf Hitler to be of key importance in proving that large-scale compulsory sterilization programs were feasible.

In recent years, the governors of many states have made public apologies for their past programs. None have offered to compensate those sterilized, however, citing that few are likely still living (and by definition would have no affected offspring) and that inadequate records remain by which to verify them. At least one compensation case, Poe v. Lynchburg Training School & Hospital (1981), was filed in the courts; on the grounds that the sterilization law was unconstitutional it was rejected because the law was no longer in effect at the time of the filing. However the petitioners were granted some compensation as the stipulations of the law itself, which required informing the patients about their operations, had not been carried out in many cases.

Germany
The most infamous sterilization program of the 20th century took place under the most infamous regime of the 20th century: the Third Reich. One of the first acts by Adolf Hitler after achieving total control over the German state was to pass the Gesetz zur Verhütung erbkranken Nachwuchses ("The Law for the Prevention of Hereditarily Diseased Offspring") in July 1933. The law was signed in by Hitler himself, and over 200 eugenic courts were created specifically as a result of the law. Under the German law, any doctor in the Reich was required to report patients of theirs who were mentally retarded, mentally ill (including schizophrenia and manic depression), epileptic, blind, deaf, or physically deformed, and a steep monetary penalty was imposed for any patients who were not properly reported. Individuals suffering from alcoholism or Huntington's Chorea could also be sterilized. The individual's case was then presented in front of a court of Nazi officials and public health officers who would review their medical records, take testimony from friends and colleagues, and eventually decide whether or not to order a sterilization operation performed on the individual, using force if necessary.

By the end of World War II, over 400,000 individuals were sterilized under the German law and its revisions, most within its first four years of being enacted. When the issue of compulsory sterilization was brought up at the Nuremberg trials after the war, many Nazis defended their actions on the matter by indicating that it was the United States itself from whom they had taken inspiration.

Other countries
Dozens of countries around the world, especially in Europe, also had similar sterilization programs, though very few had rates as high as the United States, much less Germany. In recent years it has come out that Sweden in particular had a strong sterilization program, sterilizing around 62,000 individuals over a period of 40 years. Other countries that had notably active sterilization programs include Canada, Australia, Norway, Finland, Estonia, Slovakia, Switzerland, Iceland, and some countries in Latin America (including Panama). In the United Kingdom, Home Secretary Winston Churchill introduced a bill that included forced sterilization. Writer G.K. Chesterton led a successful effort to defeat that clause of the 1913 Mental Deficiency Act.(www.secondspring.co.uk...)

Overview

Why is it not hard to realise that sterilization be-it forced or compulsory does exist and has existed for the last several hundred years? At the present moment it is going on in India:
"A 1993 study, India’s National Family Health Survey, revealed that of all contraceptive use at the time, 67% was by female sterilization (compared to 9% male sterilization)."
www.census.gov...
The list of places go on if you would check; so it is clear that there is a problem and that people are being sterilized so they can get jobs, family aid, etc, and in some cases this has been against their will.

[edit on 9-6-2005 by Odium]