Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

I support the New World Order/Global Elite!

page: 5
5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ram

Originally posted by VladTheImpaler
Hahahaha, this post gave me a good laugh. Thanks!

To start, don't associate me with 'laiguana', I don't share his views.




I’ve read that the Global Elite plans to exterminate and kill 80% (4 out of 5) people in the world.

Now, after reading this, I must say, what a wonderful idea!

In my opinion there are too many undesirable groups in the world that I my self would be pleased to get rid of.





Are you trying to prove a point or are you just posting these pictures for your own enjoyment?



Ram

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 05:17 AM
link   
proof
or
enjoyment

......
neither of those two...



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 05:20 AM
link   


Ram

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 05:28 AM
link   


How many ways - do you think there is to exterminate human population?

KZ is one way of doing it...
But as organized as these Lucifer folks are - there might be more intelligent ways to do it...

So we wont recognize it for what it is.




secrets.


Ram

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 05:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Ram

Originally posted by laiguana
The NWO has already taken the first steps, it will only be a matter of time until the transformation is complete.


Well - one small step for mankind then?

Is one of the steps: to get out of the hiding place - like telling the truth?

Stop lying and stuff?


Can you still not awnser this question?



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by VladTheImpaler
Are you trying to prove a point or are you just posting these pictures for your own enjoyment?


You really don’t see the point?
Perhaps you ought to reread your OP. You are advocating killing 4.8 Billion people!!! In comparison Hitler killed 6 million. (according to race/religion just as you suggested in your OP).

Maybe we should look at more effective food distribution system… Are we positive we can’t feed everybody?


[edit on 20/12/06 by ConspiracyNut23]



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 07:43 AM
link   
It's not like humans haven't suffered severe declines of their population in the past. It's nothing new, except that this time it would be something concocted from humans themselves rather than epidemics/plagues and other natural -disasters-.. despite that it can still be viewed as a natural process in nature. The 'elite' remove the competition thus leaving more vital resources for themselves, giving mankind a fresh start so to speak. It's just the way of nature. They would be doing all of humanity a favor.
I think one simple way to accomplish this goal would be by the means of what is known as biological warfare, but that's just a possibility out of many.



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 12:39 PM
link   
There's a HUGE difference between natural selection, and the sort of selection you're espousing.

Natural selection is unbiased and doesn't have any greed or selfishness clouding its judgement. It leaves people alive based on their merits, not based on their bank balances.

:shk:

There is no overpopulation problem - it's an illusion put forward by people who want to consolidate their control by removing billions of unwanted peasants.



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
There's a HUGE difference between natural selection, and the sort of selection you're espousing.

Natural selection is unbiased and doesn't have any greed or selfishness clouding its judgement. It leaves people alive based on their merits, not based on their bank balances.

:shk:

There is no overpopulation problem - it's an illusion put forward by people who want to consolidate their control by removing billions of unwanted peasants.


Man, do you even read what you write?

You are wrong. Natural Selection is not an 'it', it does not decide anything. Natural Selection is merley a process. See? "It" does not leave people alive based on anything, people/living organisms struggle to achive the neccessary advantages over the rest of the pack in order to surive. So I'm afraid your very mistaken, if you are wealthy you most definitely have a larger chance for survival. The natural selection analogy used above is certainly valid.

There might not be a overpopulation problem right now, but at the current growth rate there will be within 50-150 years.



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by VladTheImpaler
, it does not decide anything. Natural Selection is merley a process. See?


Yea,I see. That is another reason why the planned elimination of the world's population cannot be compared to natural selection like Laiguana tried to do. You see, you are sufficiently making the case against the very people that you support.



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Congratulations.

You support the New World Order . Now stand up, turn off the P.C. and move slowly away from it or be kind enough to answer a few questions.

Which theory of the New World Order are we going by? How do you know for sure that this "theory" is the one that is right? Who told you? Is the person/source of information accurate?



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Odium
Congratulations.

You support the New World Order . Now stand up, turn off the P.C. and move slowly away from it or be kind enough to answer a few questions.

Which theory of the New World Order are we going by? How do you know for sure that this "theory" is the one that is right? Who told you? Is the person/source of information accurate?


My theory.

The one I just made up from thin air.

The likelyhood of my theory coming true is about as likely as Jesus' return to earth.


Ram

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 07:52 PM
link   


The alternative to a One World Government
- Is also a One world Government.




posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Thank you Ram.

I've been wondering where the serious One World advocates were hiding these days. Nice to meetcha. Care for a cup of joe and conversation?


Ram

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 08:28 PM
link   
yes - maybe it's time we start organize this mess we are in.
And become what we are meant to be.



Maybe a billion people would agree.

[edit on 20-12-2006 by Ram]



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 08:41 PM
link   
You know what? On the face of it, globalization is not a bad idea. However, when one examines the idea and realizes that it leaves the doors wide open for a dictatorship, the idea loses its appeal fairly quickly.



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 08:46 PM
link   
But who decides?
I'm sure you have an opinion on how the world ought to be managed, and probably with honourable intentions, but that doesn't mean others will agree with you.

Not everyone will have your weighting and priorities for moral, social, economic, and religious codes.

Small Is Beautiful.



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 09:02 PM
link   
I don't think it will run to dictatorship -

Oh sure, there might be the proverbial figurehead(s) - but only a truely enlightened and tolerant community could ever pull off such an effort.


Ram

posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 11:13 PM
link   
The hard part is to visualize - imagine the alternative human world.

It's so hard to visualize a world where people would give away and share this place with each other.

everything has a price these days - and always had an amount of value to it.

Now - we have reached a tech-level that could make harvesting food almost automatic. (greenhouses/fields/robotics) would be possible.

We have also reached a tech-level where we can talk to each other around the globe.

One media station could actually reach everyone on this planet by seconds.

What we are spending most time on - here in our life, is the worries about money - If you have none - you go die on the streets.

-Money Is our first problem.
-The value of money are bigger than our lives
-Bigger than the survival of animal speices.
-Money have bigger value than the entire planets future.
-The polar caps.
-The Rain forrest's

Money have bigger value than human lives.

Did you know that?


What would one week on earth mean without the value of money for everyone?

No Banks - No wallstreet - no income or outcome.


CAOS -

But what if our world was made to be like that - The pillars of our world was build to not be based on money - what would one week then mean to us?

It's so hard to imagine that i think we are actually doomed. But I still believe there are planets out there that live by those rules - Because it's simply the most natural way of existence.

All the violence today are created by the very system we live in.
Religions - Cannot be understood fully in the system we live in today.

The total transformation - Means total abbandon the idea of money and it's value.

We all know it - Even children can come to such a statement - and their mothers.



posted on Dec, 20 2006 @ 11:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana
You better watch out

You better not cry

Better not pout

I'm telling you why

NWO is coming to town



NWO will take care of all its opponents, the Patriot Act serves well, and it's only the beginning.


What if they makes an error?
Wanting does not equal "it is " all the time.
War in iraq not going so well, plus how do you deal with china, north corea and russia with out causing a nuclear holocaust where no one gets out alive not even the NWO.
Russia is already playing it's move, their not going to pus out.
Let's face it, the NWO only picks out on weak countrys, how pathetic is that?
Even if instauration of matial law is to take place it won't ensure a global NWO, because there are other powerful states that don't have to play like told, they got the big guns.
Do you think that russia is really a democratic state? I would say no, the old KGB is in control, china is comunist even if they have sky scrapers and computers connected to the internet, they run the show in their country100%
I belive maybe a partial NWO is possible, but not a total one.
Probaly this idea will destroy the world and will result in a nuclear holocaust because the NWO would try to impose their agenda to the end, it's easy to push a button and no one wins.
I don't see one world goverment, I don;t really think it's possible, it would of been possible before the nukes showed up as a weapon tehnology, but now that they are around I think they are like an insurance policy.








[edit on 20-12-2006 by pepsi78]






top topics



 
5
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join