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.

 

The isn't a new world order at all

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 07:27 PM
link   
Now I am rebuilding my old thread that died (mainly because of my poor presentation).

We are in the Middle East for oil. Our president knows that our nation is too dependent on oil and that we will be finished if we do not control the world oil supply. Iran and Iraq both have the ME largest oil reserves, and that is why Bush wants them.

There is no terrorist conspiracy. Al Qaeda isn’t only against the US and her allies, but the mostly Christian Philippines because it borders Muslim nations. So if Bin Laden is really working for the so called “global elite”, then why would they want anything to do with that Far East nation? Muslims have always hated it when white Christians are on their holy land. Any one remember the crusades?

Those conspiracy nut leaders like Jones and Cooper would be dead now for treason. Those Global Elite are business leaders, and those men don’t let anyone push them around. If they did, then their companies wouldn’t be successful. So this thing that they aren’t dead yet because if they are killed, that proves that the NWO is real is all BS. If the GE is capable of tricking a whole nation of a terrorist attack, then they are certainly capable of making a murder look like an accident. Alex Jones always says he read the federal documents. What documents, and how did he get them. Cooper may be a former Naval Intelligence officer, but he would have been killed for treason instead of dying from a police shootout.

Now I met some anchors in the media, and you are a$$es to say that they lie and manipulate the public. Now I won’t say who, because they are on the local news, and you will find out the area where I live if I tell you. In this country there is left wing and right wing media. So some news corporations will try to make the governments actions justified, and others won’t. They lie to keep the public from freaking out. Humans are easily scared by certain threats so the media either will lie about them, or don’t give them any coverage.

If the US is controlled by the Illuminati, don’t you think Ron Paul will know about it? After all, he is a federal politician, and would know if something is wrong. He also doesn’t believe 911 was a conspiracy. He isn’t getting any coverage because he has no money. And he isn’t the only one; all lower candidates don’t get any coverage because they don’t have much money. And besides, the media isn’t a part of Paul’s campaign strategy. Rudy, Hillary, Barack, Edwards get the only coverage because they have the most money.

It’s silly to think that Americans would so easily give up their rights. We are too used to freedom, and would never change our capitalist lives, and absolutely never go with socialism. If the GE wants a socialist society, then why did they try so hard to keep it from spreading in the cold war? If microchip implants become mandatory, then there will no doubt be mass resistance.

And last but not least, NWO nuts, where is your hard evidence? I want real proof, and you have none of it.




posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 09:49 PM
link   
Well, how can one respond to such an emotionally charged argument? You have wholehearted faith in the institution and the cover story. This is proven by the fact that you claim that anyone who says that the media is used to manipulate the sheepish masses is an ass, even though the media has been used to spread propoganda during every war in which it has existed.

You're hopeless.

[edit on 11-8-2007 by SamuraiDrifter]



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 10:04 PM
link   
I know some media anchors from PBS and NBC and you would be an a$$ to say that they are lying manipulators.

Those conspiracy nut leaders should be dead if there is a new world order. They would be traitors and would be murdered looking like it was an accident. Even if there is a NWO, it would never work, the masses would never accept a one world tyrannical government. Look how our leaders are always talking about freedom and destroying tyranny. If our government changes into what they are against now, everyone will think that they have been decieved and rebel.

Now I would certainly rethink my position if I see hard evidence.



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 10:04 PM
link   
I know some media anchors from PBS and NBC and you would be an a$$ to say that they are lying manipulators.

Those conspiracy nut leaders should be dead if there is a new world order. They would be traitors and would be murdered looking like it was an accident. Even if there is a NWO, it would never work, the masses would never accept a one world tyrannical government. Look how our leaders are always talking about freedom and destroying tyranny. If our government changes into what they are against now, everyone will think that they have been decieved and rebel.

Now I would certainly rethink my position if I see hard evidence.



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 10:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by SamuraiDrifter
used to manipulate the sheepish masses is an ass

[edit on 11-8-2007 by SamuraiDrifter]


Have you even ever met an anchor? Now there are some propagandist, but they come from the right wing media.



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 10:12 PM
link   
So, by "met some anchors" you mean you've probably met two, one from each of the stations. That is certainly no representation of the media as a whole. What about Fox? CNN?

Furthermore, the personal character of the anchors has nothing to do with whether or not they're being used to manipulate the public. The news anchor's job is to read the prompt. They're just a mouthpiece. They take orders from someone else. Saying that a news anchor is a lying manipulator is like saying a gun is a murderer.

But they are no doubt being used to spread propoganda. They always have been and always will be.

And why would the NWO want to kill conspiracy theorists? That would only prove them right. They've come up with a much more intelligent tactic- make us look like nutjobs. Not that they really had to. The general public is full of stupid people who can't think very far ahead. Hence, since they are the majority, the majority belief is that anyone who looks beyond the given reason for an occurrence is thinking too deeply.

[edit on 11-8-2007 by SamuraiDrifter]

[edit on 11-8-2007 by SamuraiDrifter]



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 10:22 PM
link   
You appear to be trying to disprove my statements, if so, please back up it up with hard evidence. Because that is the only way you can change my mind.

Now I can back myself up

911myths.com...



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 10:36 PM
link   
First of all, whether or not the World Trade Center was demolished is completely irrelevent to the question of whether or not a conspiracy to create a New World Order exists.

Second of all, you yourself have provided no hard evidence, and no evidence at all that is relevant to your claim. All you've given me is emotionally charged hypothetical statements.

But, I can do you one better. I can give you transcripts of the conspirators themselves confessing to the conspiracy, and the stories of people manipulated by it (Thanks to freight thompson for collecting these in an earlier post):

"The real menace of our Republic is the invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls its slimy legs over our cities, states and nation. At the head is a small group of banking houses. This little coterie run our government for their own selfish ends. It operates under cover of a self-created screen, seizes our executive officers, legislative bodies, schools, courts, newspapers and every agency created for the public protection.”
-N.Y. Mayor, John Hylan, 1922

"Today the path to total dictatorship in the United States can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by the Congress, the President, or the people… outwardly we have a Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and political system, another body representing another form of government, a bureaucratic elite which believes our Constitution is outmoded and is sure that it is the winning side. All the strange developments in the foreign policy agreements may be traced to this group who are going to make us over to suit their pleasure. This political action group has its own local political support organizations, its own pressure groups, its own vested interests, its foothold within our government, and its own propaganda apparatus."
-Senator William Jenner, 1954

"The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States. The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate the four centers of power political, monetary, intellectual and ecclesiastical. What the Trilateral Commission intends is to create a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nationstates involved. As managers and creators of the system ,they will rule the future."
-U.S. Senator Barry Goldwater, l964

"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 work 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, 1991

"Some even believe we (Rockefeller family) 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's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
-David Rockefeller, in 2002 autobiography



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 10:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by SamuraiDrifter
But, I can do you one better. I can give you transcripts of the conspirators themselves confessing to the conspiracy, and the stories of people manipulated by it (Thanks to freight thompson for collecting these in an earlier post):


It is said the NWO started with 911. 911 is as much of a part of it as microchip implants.

No, I gave you a credible source with intense investigation into 911 which also had photo evidence and qoutes with sources. Where is your source for you qoutes?

[edit on 11-8-2007 by wildcat]
(Mod Edit: Please don't quote the entire preceding post without reason)

[edit on 13-8-2007 by WyrdeOne]



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 03:23 PM
link   
Who ever said the NWO started with 9/11? I certainly didn't, nor has anyone I've ever talked to on this site. It's been a plan generations in the making.

My sources are any of the dozens of historical books or websites that contain the above quotes from the leaders of this country. You have a single, heavily biased website to support one bit of irrelevant information. Now, please show me where you got your idea that the NWO conspiracy has only existed since 9-11-01.



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 05:13 PM
link   
911 was the ignition key of the NWO. How can there be a NWO if 911 wasn't a conspiracy? How could they ever pass the patriot act, or invade Iraq and Iran? And how could they ever get away with taking away liberties with no reason?

I'm afraid qoutes aren't hard evidence my friend. And do you even know what biased means? Have you even began to read that site, or the home page?

If you wish to comment any further, please review that site and come back with facts including photo evidence, links to valid sources, mathmatics, and models to disproove their claims.


It just amazed me how smart people can so easily believe a bunch of scripts that give no evidence to back itself up.

[edit on 12-8-2007 by wildcat]

[edit on 12-8-2007 by wildcat]



posted on Aug, 12 2007 @ 11:40 PM
link   
NWO was used by George Bush ... that is, GWB's daddy in the 80's. It is real. It is arguable whether it is the idealistic way he states, or that was the honey used to cover the poison of the truth.

9/11 ... not all people who believe in the NWO believe they did it, not all people who believe 9/11 was a false flag, believe in the NWO.

You made assumptions.

You also make assumptions as to what the NWO is. I would find it has more than one definition. It depends on who you are talking to and how they are referencing it.

Just give it another 10 years or so, maybe less, then compare life to how it is now ... see, the conspiracy is suppose to be a slow take over of freedoms, rights, and the enstatement of slowing combining governments into bigger ones until one group can control and manipulate the laws and people of the world.

Look at 10 years ago. No European Union. Less laws that restrict freedom. It is a baby step process, not evident in day to day, but visible from decade to decade.

Whether you see it or believe it or not ... that is up to you and each person. The same with 9/11. The fact of 9/11, the NIST and 9/11 Commission have contradicting data ... and neither one explains the SIMPLE MATH facts.

Something dropped from 1365 feet takes nearly 10 seconds to fall in a vacuum with no resistance. Both buildings fell at 9 and 11 seconds respectively. Proof of a lie. What is the lie? You have to find that on your own. We don't know yet.

It wasn't a pancake collapse. It wasn't weakened steel. Why would the steel 10's of stories below and above the fire be so weak? Something we don't understand yet happened. Unless of course, you say the laws of physics do not apply to NYC. I would say explain it, but you might blow my mind, man ... with those '___' induced explanations.

I could debate with you, but you have made your mind up already. I have recently read something that altered my view. I am still open to new ideas and concepts ... but I also studied some in school and know what is impossible.

Not all the broadcasters are in on it, some are reading a script. Some just do what the money tells them. Some do think for themselves. Most, operate like a business. NO one implies that your 'friends' in broadcasting are corrupt, but, like the samurai said, propaganda has always been used, in every war ... this one ... is not any different. Where are the WMDs? Why Saddam but Osama didn't matter any more? They are pulling the public by the leash, but it isn't a collar, it is a choker.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by wildcat
You appear to be trying to disprove my statements, if so, please back up it up with hard evidence. Because that is the only way you can change my mind.

Now I can back myself up

911myths.com...



See, the problem with sites like that is that it convinces people who haven't done their homework and are easily deceived. No offense, but that's just how it is.

Let me give you an example of how they operate and "debunk" or lets just say spin facts to give you the illusion that they have proven anything.



Now we have a basis for comparison. If the towers really did fall completely in 8.4 seconds, then that would actually be faster than gravity, requiring some major additional force to push from above (or pull from below). We’ve seen it suggested that explosives created a “powerful vacuum”, for instance, but that’s not apparent from the collapse videos and images. Like this one, for instance.




Large chunks of rubble, which are in free fall, are clearly falling faster than the rest of the building. The base of the massive chunk lower left is, what, 20 storeys lower than the top of the right-hand corner of the building? (And there may be rubble below that, and the building may be intact higher higher still). This suggests we should be looking at a collapse time greater than our 9.22 second freefall figure, not less.

How much greater? If the video evidence gives such a great ranges of guesses, then maybe another approach is required, at least as a crosscheck. We tried looking at the audio of each collapse, and came up with a minimum of 14 seconds in each case...


See?
Now if you stop thinking right there you will think "ofcourse! they are right and I was wrong to think that they were falling at freefall speed."
Completely missing the point.

It doesn't matter if the building fell with no resistance or _almost_ no resistance. THAT is what matters. 9 seconds, 10 seconds or 15 seconds are all TOO fast for a normal collapse.
Conservative guesses estimate around 45 seconds for the collapse.


That site is filled with garbage like that that only stop those whose tactic relies on debunking anything that goes against the official story rather than trying to figure out what is right about the story we've been sold.

Furthermore, your opening post is so bad that it is hardly worth the effort to reply to. Throwing around bs, *ss and 'conspiracy nut leaders' more often than facts is not a good way to convince anyone. And then you have the audacity to ask for facts yourself when someone shows you quotes that basically prove you wrong.

Go back to your TV and keep believing those anchors you know so well, but please don't try to sell us any of your remarkable revalations in the future.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 12:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by wildcat
911 was the ignition key of the NWO. How can there be a NWO if 911 wasn't a conspiracy? How could they ever pass the patriot act, or invade Iraq and Iran? And how could they ever get away with taking away liberties with no reason?

Obviously you don't even understand the theories you are trying to debate. If you think NWO conspiracy theories are only 6 years old, you haven't even begun to research them. I mean, hell, Mel Gibson talks about the NWO in the movie Conspiracy Theory, which was released years before 9/11.

I think it's highly possible that the 9/11 attacks were a conspiracy perpetrated by either our government or an organization exerting control over our government with the goal of gaining control over the American people. But I also think that conspiracies of world rulers to gain control of world events are much older than that.


I'm afraid qoutes aren't hard evidence my friend.

That's like saying a confession isn't grounds for conviction in a court of law.


If you wish to comment any further, please review that site and come back with facts including photo evidence, links to valid sources, mathmatics, and models to disproove their claims.

You play at being scientific, but you're overlooking some serious logical flaws in your own arguments, that I've pointed out to you over the course of this thread.


It just amazed me how smart people can so easily believe a bunch of scripts that give no evidence to back itself up.

Believe? I wouldn't use such a strong word. But it makes sense to assume that people with the power to do so would attempt to shape the world in their favor.

Not only that, some of those being accused of conspiring to create the NWO have actually admitted to it.

[edit on 13-8-2007 by SamuraiDrifter]

[edit on 13-8-2007 by SamuraiDrifter]



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 02:50 PM
link   
It has already started with the European union and the North American Union.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 06:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeThinkerIdealist
Something dropped from 1365 feet takes nearly 10 seconds to fall in a vacuum with no resistance. Both buildings fell at 9 and 11 seconds respectively. Proof of a lie. What is the lie? You have to find that on your own. We don't know yet.


Thank you, that exactly the kind of thing I was looking for.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by SamuraiDrifter

If you think NWO conspiracy theories are only 6 years old, you haven't even begun to research themI



I'm afraid qoutes aren't hard evidence my friend.


No, I know that they have been there since the early 90s. What doesn't make sense to me, is that these global elite who are corporate leaders want socialism. Their companies exist because of capitolism and laissez faire economics. And they are successful because of it.

Yes I caught that mistake this morning. As you can see, I have made many errors in this thread including the title.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by FreeThinkerIdealist

Just give it another 10 years or so, maybe less, then compare life to how it is now



That's the same exact stuff the nut leaders were saying 17 years ago. And they meant just a few years, like less than 10.

So what has happened? Nothing.

The European Union to my knowledge was created mostly for economic reasons. Now I admit that I do not know much about the EU. The North American Union is for economic reasons. That is what we are being told now. If it turns out to be a different thing, then the people will realize they have been lied to.

It's not worth it IMO

[edit on 13-8-2007 by wildcat]



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 10:10 PM
link   
The world business leaders don't want true socialism. They want a bastardized form of it where they control all of the world's wealth. In capitalism, their wealth is always ultimately subject to the decisions of the consumer. Remove that choice and they have nothing to worry about. Not only that, with the creation of a government under their direction, they never have to worry about prosecution.

Basically, for them, things are good but they could be better. They see ultimate power within reach and are attempting to take it.



posted on Aug, 13 2007 @ 11:18 PM
link   
wildcat


We are in the Middle East for oil. Our president knows that our nation is too dependent on oil and that we will be finished if we do not control the world oil supply.


I think that's an unsubstantiated statement. First, it rests on the assumption that business leaders care one bit about the fate of the country - it's profit before national allegiance every time. Second, it rests on the assumption that we have reaped some great oil windfall since the invasion of Iraq - we haven't, we subsidize their fuel costs as a matter of fact.

Know how much Iraqis pay per gallon of gas? About 40 cents - the average in the region is under a dollar.

Personally, I think the invasion was driven by a need to open the Iraqi market to US investment, primarily in the oil services and security sectors (two BIG lobbies here at home). Not oil, but oil services...



There is no terrorist conspiracy. Al Qaeda isn’t only against the US and her allies, but the mostly Christian Philippines because it borders Muslim nations.


You're kind of bouncing all over here. Just let me say that the Philippines is relatively wealthy in terms of natural gas/petroleum, and it just so happens to exist between Taiwan and Indonesia.




new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join