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 China against the NWO?

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
The Anti-Christ! Where did that come into it? I'm no more going to start believing in that then I am in Goldilocks and the 3 bears.


"No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a LUCIFERIAN Initiation." David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations


What can I say ?




posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 03:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by joyouslyhumored
"No one will enter the New World Order unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a LUCIFERIAN Initiation." David Spangler, Director of Planetary Initiative, United Nations

What can I say ?


I'm sure you're just kidding with me but.....

I would be interesting to know the original source of that quote..? I did a search on it and could only find it on loads NWO, Illuminati, chemtrail and general paranoia sites. None of which gave a source for the quote.

I presume we talking about David Spangler Kaufman, the first Jewish United States Congressman from Texas (and a Mason!)? If we are then it would be interesting to know how he was a member of the a United Nations body as he died in 1851, which is a full 94 years before the UN was actually formed.

If we aren't talking about that David Spangler, then who the hell is it these sites keep quoting??? My guess is that one site made the whole thing up completely and the rest just endlessly recycle it. If anyone can prove me wrong and show it to be a genuine quote I would be interested.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 05:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by joyouslyhumored



new [ noo ] adjective
1. recently made: recently made, created, or invented

Well if you compare the age of the earth to the age of the human race you could say reglion is a new ideal.



or·der [ áwrdər ] noun
1. social grouping: the arrangement of society into groups or classes and the relationships between them
2. social group: a group or class that is a division of society
3. an institution: institution in charge of maintaining the order


Sounds like reglion to me.







Which divisions are those ? Are you saying that the freedom loving chinese people are working against the evil NWO at all costs ? You're joking! Right?


Havnt you noticed that thou out history that reglion has been the source of conflict?
I said the government of china was fighting the NWO as for freedom loving chinese well they probaly dont live in China.

Dosnt the NWO other wise known as reglion have a globe presnce ?


No, you're talking about Congress. Every country has got one. So unless you're a major anarchist I've failed to grasp your point yet again.


Im no anarchist just a econmic consertive who bevlies in small government but thats another story.




So if the chinese are taught to worship money/sex/rocknroll how does that leave them out of the New World Order ?


I would say the chinese are brainwashed to worship a strange mixture of capitslim and government. Anybody who takes part in active reglion or promote the concept of god is a member of the NWO.
Is money or sex a reglion?
Sex might be but I dont think money is.




*If I may ask, Is there anything in life you worship ? If so, how does that make you an athiest ?


I dont worship anything hence Im an athiest not to mention the whole concept of god is at best alien to me at worse I cant figuer out why anybody in the western world would still bevlie in a higher power.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 06:21 AM
link   



Originally posted by xpert11
new [ noo ] adjective
1. recently made: recently made, created, or invented

Well if you compare the age of the earth to the age of the human race you could say reglion is a new ideal.


Why would you want to compare how long religion has been around with the age of the earth? Why not make it the age of the universe? Then this planet and everything on it would be "new".

When we say something is "new" we mean it, at it's very outer limits, in terms of human existence. In that respect religion has been around since the dawn of civilisation and would be considered an "old" idea by any sensible person.

Anyway your definition that the NWO=all religions is just plain daft in every respect and makes no sense.





[edit on 27/7/05 by FatherLukeDuke]



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 09:17 AM
link   
father luke duke, i disagree that everyone here has a different definition. it seems to me all us whackjobs are saying mostly the same thing. it is you're inability to see the similiarities that is a common weakness of naysayers.
you're ranting and spittle have no effect on those of us who are only trying to flow with the inevitable, and perhaps influence the great change, so that in the global village, there are no cats that are too fat, and justice is still something EVERYONE has access to.
you're not only an atheist, you don't believe in anything. you just don't believe anything is EVER below the board.
isn't that naive, your unholiness?



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
father luke duke, i disagree that everyone here has a different definition. it seems to me all us whackjobs are saying mostly the same thing. it is you're inability to see the similiarities that is a common weakness of naysayers.

Alright then - what is your definition of the NWO? The only thing that seems to be running through all the definitions of the NWO is paranoia.



you're ranting and spittle have no effect on those of us who are only trying to flow with the inevitable, and perhaps influence the great change, so that in the global village, there are no cats that are too fat, and justice is still something EVERYONE has access to.

Me ranting?? That's a bit rich coming from you, especially in the middle of a rant.



you're not only an atheist, you don't believe in anything. you just don't believe anything is EVER below the board.
isn't that naive, your unholiness?

And how exactly can I not believe in anything? My beliefs are grounded in evidence, that's all. Corporations, governments and individuals get up to all sorts of nefarious and secretive crap all the time. The lies that were propogated by the US and UK governments in the build up the last 2 gulf wars were an example of a grand conspiricy which I definitely believe in.

But does this mean I have to also believe that the Illuminati control the world, or that Tony Blair is a reptile who orders the bombing of his own citizens, or that chemtrails exist? Of course not.

Naivety is believing anything people tell you without questioning or asking for evidence. I would suggest you are the naive one for believing everything you read on every conspiricy website without asking for evidence, or applying any common sense.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Well Father Luke, you could say that religion has been around since the dawn of mankind but that is a rather loose statement. There has been many beliefs, or should I say ways of life that seem religious but do not have the controling factors.

The "New religions" took over during the Aryan expansion of 2100 B.C.E. It was with the need for rulers and followers in a warlike culture, and created a need for dieties to enforce a ruling class and a warrior class, with a priesthood to stand between the masses and the elite.

This is why mankind is in and has been in such a mess.

The New World Order is but the super rich (We are talking about families that have more money than most countries) dictating what they want to Governments. They want to create enough fear so that all people wil want a one world government.

A one world government is not a bad thing if it is done right, but that is not how this one will be set up. This one will lock mankind into a permament facsisim that we will never get out of. Freedom the little bit we enjoy today will be gone in the future they want for us.

Father Luke I suggest you read some history and stop using google so much.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 10:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke

If we aren't talking about that David Spangler, then who the hell is it these sites keep quoting??? My guess is that one site made the whole thing up completely and the rest just endlessly recycle it. If anyone can prove me wrong and show it to be a genuine quote I would be interested.



I doubt everyone's talking about Mr. Kaufman. I originally read the quote in Road to Tyranny by Alex Jones but have yet to find the original. If it exists I'll post it up.



posted on Jul, 27 2005 @ 11:55 PM
link   
xpert,
What can I say ?

posted by xpert11 I am saying that all reglions are the NWO it dosnt matter if people worship a melon or jesus.


I would say the chinese are brainwashed to worship a strange mixture of capitslim and government.




posted by xpert11
or·der [ áwrdər ] noun
1. social grouping: the arrangement of society into groups or classes and the relationships between them
2. social group: a group or class that is a division of society
3. an institution: institution in charge of maintaining the order

Sounds like reglion to me.

Couldn't that sounds like Mao's goventment as well ?


Is money or sex a reglion?
Sex might be but I dont think money is.

Money is a religion. And the one with most adherents as well.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 03:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
Well Father Luke, you could say that religion has been around since the dawn of mankind but that is a rather loose statement. There has been many beliefs, or should I say ways of life that seem religious but do not have the controling factors.

I was just making a point that religion was an old idea, that's all.



The "New religions" took over during the Aryan expansion of 2100 B.C.E. It was with the need for rulers and followers in a warlike culture, and created a need for dieties to enforce a ruling class and a warrior class, with a priesthood to stand between the masses and the elite.

This is why mankind is in and has been in such a mess.

That seems to be a very simplistic view of the world. Perhaps you should read some more history and stop using Google so much.



The New World Order is but the super rich (We are talking about families that have more money than most countries) dictating what they want to Governments. They want to create enough fear so that all people wil want a one world government.

So your definition of the NWO is "super rich families creating fear"? That's another one to add to my list.



A one world government is not a bad thing if it is done right, but that is not how this one will be set up. This one will lock mankind into a permament facsisim that we will never get out of. Freedom the little bit we enjoy today will be gone in the future they want for us.

And why do the super rich want to do this? I would have thought they would want to retain the status quo, what with all the money and power they have.



Father Luke I suggest you read some history and stop using google so much.

I'm not sure what overuse of Google you are referring to. I understand that "history" is quite a big subject, are there any particular books you woud recommend? Which bits should I concentrate on? Perhaps: "The development of modern weaving in Northern Europe?" Or "The history of industrial relations in 19th century Britain"? Oh, the choices.

Poor old un-read me just doesn't know where to start.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 12:05 PM
link   


And why do the super rich want to do this? I would have thought they would want to retain the status quo, what with all the money and power they have.


It is not how much they can gain, it is how little they leave for the rest the creates the power they really want. The people that pull the strings can never get enough.

You stated that you are well read, so why do you think we fight wars?

Edit for Post Script

P.S. The thread is titled "Is China against the NWO?" My opinion is how could they not be? China has been taking its time in building its nation (after the old world got them hooked on opium) and is the next target for the NWO. They will make American consumerism look quite insignificant once they get to a certain point. People wonder in America, why would they let our economy go to crap, we buy most of the goods? Well when China ripens to its full fruitation, with 1.7 billion consumers America will be small change compared to the super-consumerism of China's 1.7 billion.

[edit on 28-7-2005 by LoneGunMan]



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
You stated that you are well read, so why do you think we fight wars?

Well, I didn't exactly, though I was a tad sarcastic. There are a lot better read people than me out there, some on these boards. However I certainly don't think "research" is just tapping stuff into Google, as some people do (not to say it isn't a fantastic tool). Oh, most, if not all wars are land disputes. Though this is often obscured by ideology.

Anyway, I don't think China are for or against the NWO, as I don't think there is such a thing as the NWO, at least not in the sense of a conspiricy.

China are looking increasingly like they are the New World Order, their size and dynamism are changing all the rules. This is especially true of their "capatalism with Chinese characteristics" as they refer to their economy.



posted on Jul, 28 2005 @ 09:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke


Anyway, I don't think China are for or against the NWO, as I don't think there is such a thing as the NWO, at least not in the sense of a conspiricy.

China are looking increasingly like they are the New World Order, their size and dynamism are changing all the rules. This is especially true of their "capatalism with Chinese characteristics" as they refer to their economy.


That is a good point, but why would you not believe in a New World Order as a conspiracy? You dont think that the ones pulling the strings do not communicate with each other as to how to become more profitable? I think they have a LOT better communication with each other than does the masses, and our communication isnt to shabby. You dont think that they discuss things like the fact that they cannot get away with things like manufacturing emissions, land grabs like the stuff that is going on on the USA? You dont think they are aware that things for them will be better by a thousand fold if our basic freedoms are taken away? I have to ask you are you not seeing what is going on in this nation and in your beloved UK?

As to war it is ALWAYS about profit and power. Not land diputes or a leader being assignated, or 911, or the London bombings. Those all are excuses to get the masses to except the agenda.

I dont want to sound condensending but Luke you seem to have a very imature and closed minded point of view. You remind me of my teenage son. If you are just a teen, thats ok. You havnt gained the wisdom that living for more than 20 years can give. You see subtle things that make you understand the complexities of the world and that all is not how it seems.

Good luck in your quest for wisdom and knowledge my friend, and remember to keep an open mind.


[edit on 28-7-2005 by LoneGunMan]



posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 10:29 AM
link   
it is simple, really, FLD. it is the age old struggle of the individual against the state. the ones who run the state wish to hold onto their ill gotten power. it is true in china, and it is true in britain, america, russia, and the world over. anywhere you see armed conflict, you can consider it to be a reshuffling of the heirarchies.
war is just a gladiator ring for the elite.
the elite are frightened of people communicating with one another. government has always been used to control the flow of information, democracy or dictatorship. the new media enviroments demand a total lockdown on freedom. this is the restructuring we are experiencing currently.
anytime people actually get a grassroots movement going, 'the man' comes and busts it up using a single proven formula. divide and conquer.
this can be facilitated through many different venues. religion is only one. fear is the main tool 'they' use.
some of us are no longer afraid.

hegellian dailectic is the key to using fear. you cause a problem(say knock down some towers with planes), wait for the public reaction(fear, anger), and then offer the 'solution'(the patriot act, WOT).

the reason falun gong is persecuted so heavily in china, is because all that good will is a threat to a fear driven state.

we talk about america going to war with china, while a HUUUUUGE percentage of products purchased in america, now, are all manufactured there. do you not see the disconnect, here?



posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by LoneGunMan
That is a good point, but why would you not believe in a New World Order as a conspiracy? You dont think that the ones pulling the strings do not communicate with each other as to how to become more profitable?

But is there some overarching world-wide, long term organisation that runs this so called "New World Order"? Can you give me some concrete examples of them communicating to become "more profitable"?



I think they have a LOT better communication with each other than does the masses,

What even better than the electric telephone?!? Wow! Again, have you any examples?



You dont think that they discuss things like the fact that they cannot get away with things like manufacturing emissions, land grabs like the stuff that is going on on the USA?

I do believe that the current neo-liberal "tooth and nail" capatilism that the US and certain allies (yes, including the UK) is trying to get the world to accept will be considered an extremist ideology by future generations. There are certainly individuals and groups that promote this ideology and attempt to make it the norm. But is there a "NWO" in charge of it all? No, or at least there is no evidence of it.

I would strongly recommend you read "The Corporation" by Joel Backan:

www.amazon.com...=1122657196/sr=8-2/ref=pd_bbs_2/104-5185377-5739142?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

It might give you a more sophisticated outlook on the situation than just "they" are out to get us.



You dont think they are aware that things for them will be better by a thousand fold if our basic freedoms are taken away? I have to ask you are you not seeing what is going on in this nation and in your beloved UK?

My government (which I didn't actually vote for) seems to be pretty 2 faced on the situation. In some ways it seems to want a free reign for corporations, and on the other hand expands the public sector enormously. It's what Tony Blair refers to as a "third way", I believe.

I myself work for the public sector and strongly believe that coporations have far to much power, in my country and worldwide. I think the current model will eventually destroy us all if it carries on unchecked.



As to war it is ALWAYS about profit and power. Not land diputes or a leader being assignated, or 911, or the London bombings. Those all are excuses to get the masses to except the agenda.

They're aren't many disputes in the world that aren't about land. Even Islamic terrorists claim that they just want US troops of what they consider their land. I would agree that power and profit are invariably entangled with land though.



I dont want to sound condensending [sic] but Luke you seem to have a very imature and closed minded [sic] point of view.

LOL. You remind me of those people who say "I don't want to sound sexist, but a womens place is in the home", or "I don't want sound racist, but those blacks are all criminals".

If you don't want to sound condescending, then don't condescend. A little tip for the future: if you want to make yourself sound like someone wise talking to a child then get your spelling and grammer sorted out first.



You remind me of my teenage son. If you are just a teen, thats ok. You havnt gained the wisdom that living for more than 20 years can give. You see subtle things that make you understand the complexities of the world and that all is not how it seems.

Hmm, I suspect you are saying this just to wind me up, at least I hope you are. If understanding the complexities of the world amounts to "the NWO are out to get us, run for the hills!" then we are all in trouble.



Good luck in your quest for wisdom and knowledge my friend, and remember to keep an open mind.



Why bless you my son. Is your mind at least open to the possibility that there might not be an "NWO"?



posted on Jul, 29 2005 @ 09:14 PM
link   
wonders never cease, father. you DO believe in the new world order. you just don't want to call it that.

'the corporation' is exactly it.
as far as meetings go, they're called bildeberger, for one. council on foreign relations for another. the international monetary fund. the committee of three hundred. bohemian grove. walmart. etc.



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by FatherLukeDuke
Is your mind at least open to the possibility that there might not be an "NWO"?


There isn't! You got that right. What we do have is a world order that has been able to disguise itself and its actions through our governments. And it is this group which now seeks new ways to continue enforcing their will on goverments.

Their struggle has been and will be, to control the governments, groups and societies that control the people. And the perfect way to achive it is a New World Order. This system will control the goverments, who will then control society, who will then control the masses. In my definition I'd say the NWO is the government of governments. Although it doesn't exist yet. There is a group that rules the world as of today. But it is not the NWO.



posted on Jul, 30 2005 @ 03:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by billybob
wonders never cease, father. you DO believe in the new world order. you just don't want to call it that.

My problem is that the term "new world order" is too vague a definition, and means different things to everyone.



posted on Jul, 31 2005 @ 12:54 AM
link   


My problem is that the term "new world order" is too vague a definition, and means different things to everyone.


It is a phrase that the first president Bush made popular in our lexicon on
9/11 of the year 1990. Exactly 11 years before the BIG 9/11. It is a way of
describing something that most people understand that have been
listening and being vigilent about our governments. Without having to explain
it all everytime. Some people need there hand held every step of the way
because the ole frontal lobes never developed properly from being raised on
television. So original thought is absent. I am not saying that you Luke are
one of those poor folks that just remember things and dont think with
originality, or cannot put together abstact thought or anything, just that there
are a lot like that out there and that is why the NWO are getting away with
such obviously blatent plans that just 15-20 years ago just could not have
been done.

Of yeah and I want to thank you for taking the time in cutting and pasting
everything I said in that last post you made. It is a sure sign that you were
angry and a sure sign you took so much time in making sure I got your point!
Well it makes me feel kind of important considering I dont even take the time
to proof my own post for errors!

I did have to edit this one though, I coudnt stand thinking people are gonna
have to scroll back and forth to read my post. Maybe its just my browser
but this page of this thread is really screwed up!




[edit on 31-7-2005 by LoneGunMan]



posted on Aug, 6 2005 @ 11:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by RebelSaint
The people who tend to view the New World Order I believe do so in one of the following circumstances.
A) As a secret American-Illuminati project
B) A trans-Atlantic conspiracy involving Britain and America
C) A Western Conspiracy with much of Europe (France, Germany, Poland, Italy) and Australia incorporated with choice B.
D) An emerging or already established Global movement that takes choice B and C and adds Eurasian powers such as India, Russia and China as international partners.
E) It's too late. They have already finished or are finishing up negoiations and have moved towards rapid implementation of agreed upon protocols to make the venture a success.

I truly believe that much of the academic world including professors of Political Science and those of similary affected scholary genre that will in the very least submit that a NWO agenda is perhaps being talked of or implemented will simply say that the process is too daunting and immense for it to have progressed even up to the infantile choice A which amounts to full conviction that a single western nation has been overthrown by those who wish to further a global agenda. The sad truth is that we are further down the choice of letters than we like to imagine.



One could say that no countries people actually have true freedom and control of their government when voting...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join