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.

 

There will be no ONE WORLD GOVERNMENT, no NWO – Why would the Bilderbergs want any such thing?

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Anyone who thinks that the Bilberbergs, or any other group, would seek a one world government is mistaken in their beliefs.

There will be no one world government, no NWO. It does not make any practical sense. Why spend all your effort keeping down insurgents and calming the racial tensions created by a one world government? This is proof that there is no basis for a believe in the NWO in the traditional sense. Belief in a NWO as it has been stated in the past is just the fantasies or delusions of a group of people who do not undertand human nature.

It would be preferable to keep people separated by their ancestry as they are now in most nations. There are several reasons for this.
1. Less mini-war where the controlling group is the enemy than if you tried to force them under the same political system.
2. Less insurgency if you let people keep the illusion of being under their own form of government and separated by ancestry.
3. More competition and competition is good for any group of people in control.
4. More control when you keep some groups in fear of other groups.
5. Using war as a means of population control. You can simply drive war by pitting one group against another based on their differences.

If one group wanted to rule the world, they would be more successful in keeping people in a state of dividedness. They can put them in competition with one another, and drive it with fear of each other, in order to get more productivity and better ideas from each group of people. For proof, just look at the advances made during WW2, and the fear it instilled in pitting each group of people against one another. We developed nuclear bombs and nuclear power, improved aircrafts and shipping, and many other technological advances.

Even without war, pitting groups against one another fosters advancement. It is one of the key tenants in the free enterprise system. One could extrapolate from this and say that removing competition creates the laziest and most stagnant human conditions on Earth. Just look at the failure of Communist nations that removed the carrot and stick of competition.

Also, what better means do humans have of population control than war? Since we have no natural predators that we haven’t invented the means to slaughter, the only real population control we have is war.

So I say that any one or any group of people wanting to rule the world would see the impracticality of creating a one world government. Life for a group of controllers is much better under similar conditions we live in today, and it is still control if you can be in control of whatever governments are currently in existence. All you need to have is the means to control these groups for whatever purpose you want, whether it be war for population control or competition and/or war for technological advancement, etc…

A one world government would be more trouble than it is worth.

[edit on 22-6-2009 by grapesofraft]




posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 04:25 PM
link   
Control can still be made with a one world government, a lot easier then what we have today.

If a issue rises, they can introduce it with everyone, instead of taking many years for each country to fix it.

population control can still be made. MSM will still be alive they can control the masses and influence them.

You have to keep in mind that religion will still be alive, so religious wars will still happen.

And who know, they could come out with ET disclosure saying there is a threat up in space.

Problem Reaction Solution 3 easy words, and they work with any problems that arise, and MSN is one of the best tools for it.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 05:16 PM
link   

It does not make any practical sense. Why spend all your effort keeping down insurgents and calming the racial tensions created by a one world government?


1. This constitutes proof?

2. Just because you can't imagine the agenda, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

3. You think they're "spend"ing all their efforts?

4. Are the Bilderboogers (the richest, most powerful, most influential people on the planet) holding cake sales when they get together?

5. If there's one thing that's painfully apparent, it's that as long as there is a monetary system (at all), there will be war. Why? Because it's the most profitable BUSINESS on earth.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by lagnar
 


Oh cmon now. What would you do without money. What are you going to buy a new car with, a basket of fruit? Money does not cause wars, differences in ideology causes war.

Sometimes the things people say makes you think they just accuse the Bilderbergs of everything because they are jealous of their wealth and status.

[edit on 22-6-2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 06:09 PM
link   
money control a lot

you can't have war if you don't have money

cost money to deploy troops
cost money to make the weapons
cost money to train troops

trading would kinda work, more lower value items for higher value items.

but i would suggest a transparent monetary system



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
Anyone who thinks that the Bilberbergs, or any other group, would seek a one world government is mistaken in their beliefs.


Not to mention the aliens. If it wasn't for them keeping us divided into arbitrary countries and fighting with each other, they'd have a hard time infiltrating our societies and manipulating our minds.

[edit on 22-6-2009 by Nohup]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Blundo
 


You can have war if you do not have money. If you control a country and you have the military force you can sequester the resources needed for war and you can make a case for why they should want to fight or force people to fight.

How is someone going to bring enough goods to buy a 500k house? Where would everybody store all of the stuff they would have to keep around to pay for stuff? What would Bill Gates do, keep a few billion in sheep and nuts to acquire another tech company?

Can you just imagine how funny the financial news would be? Today GE bought Boeing. They paid with 10million cows, 3billion gallons of milk, 50k used cars, etc, etc, etc...

Give me an example of how you would create a transparent money system?

[edit on 22-6-2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by Nohup
 


Right, we can not forget the aliens. Even though we have no proof of their existence we better not leave them out as a possiblity.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 07:14 PM
link   
transparent monetary system not money system. everything is accounted for on where and what the money is used for, and open to the public to view it.

Something Ron Paul is trying to do with the HR 1207 bill being introduced, but on a small scale.




If you control a country and you have the military force you can sequester the resources needed for war and you can make a case for why they should want to fight or force people to fight.


how did they get the military forces to begin with, and how can you force someone when u dont have a force to do it.
why not just say religious leader making his followers do stuff, which you would still have during a new world order, along with militias.

and did u ever think thats they could lie of a ET threat, o wait the government doesn't lie, what was i thinking



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 07:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Blundo
 


When war started people were on a barter system or no system at all. They simply got together and agreed that it was good for the community to attack their perceived enemy



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 07:38 PM
link   
reply to post by grapesofraft
 




When war started people were on a barter system or no system at all


When war started people were on a religious system



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 07:47 PM
link   
i call trolling! can i call, yes, ok i call trolling on this thread.this drapesofdraft person has his hook in the water again!

oh wait i think i wanna through tailwagging on there too.
[edit on 22-6-2009 by randyvs]

[edit on 22-6-2009 by randyvs]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 08:08 PM
link   
Again with obviously needed explanations:


It does not make any practical sense. Why spend all your effort keeping down insurgents and calming the racial tensions created by a one world government?



1. This constitutes proof? - Waving the word 'proof' around provides necessity of responsibility to back up that proof with something other than opinion. Proof, at the very least, requires objectivity, with no subjectivity whatsoever.

2. Just because you can't imagine the agenda, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. - If you had more money than you could ever spend, what would you do with it if you cared for nothing more than having more of it (also applies to power...redundantly). Ignorance of their alleged agenda, and all of the intertwined intricacies and connection therein, certainly is not fuel for speculation of such being referred to as "proof".

3. You think they're "spend"ing all their efforts? - The beauty of their concern is that they get slaves to enslave themselves. How much money (motivation) do you think the richest 1% of the world's population have?

4. Are the Bilderboogers (the richest, most powerful, most influential people on the planet) holding cake sales when they get together? - One of the only reasons one would start a group as such would be to become connected with them so as to further their influence upon world policy, agenda and future.

5. If there's one thing that's painfully apparent, it's that as long as there is a monetary system (at all), there will be war. Why? Because it's the most profitable BUSINESS on earth. - I don't exactly know where you got the idea that I didn't like the monetary system, or had some alternative in mind. I expect the monetary system to last forever...and thus war, famine, death, pollution, lies, control, crying and despair as well.

I've done everything I could do to discount my own findings (still trying every single day), but once you recognize an inkling of the truth, it continues to snowball out of control until you don't recognize the majority of the past at all, but you do see the unfortunate and horrific sense of it.

[edit on 22-6-2009 by lagnar]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 08:20 PM
link   
The only world order the elite want is their contracts honored and their banks to be spread throughout the world. That is one of the reasons that Islam is such an existential threat to them. In Islam usury is a crime. In the West we call it progressive. This entire NWO thing is about making laws uniform so that the desires of the money masters are realized. They do not require a one world government as much as they desire to have a one world fiat currency.

I think they have nearly accomplished that goal. Already the Russians are selling off US treasury bonds and buying World Bank Bonds. These are the initial financial instruments that will spawn global currency which is the end game goal in my opinion.

If they make the money of the land they care not rules the land. The rulers will end up being their puppets and they know it.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by UFOTECH
 


You are correct about everything, except the need for a one world fiat currency. Do you really think it would matter if there was one currency or several to them? Actually, several may be better, because you can get more money by manipulating the differences in multiple currencies.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Look at it this way.

You have an idea. An ideal. An opinion on the way things should be run. Maybe your opinion is based on religion. It is not hard to see why such a thing would come about.

In fact it already has once. The Catholic Crusades marched upon many lands killing everyone who did not turn to christ. The Church wanted everyone to be Catholic and those who resisted were put to death as Heretics.

The NWO is simply the same principle and the same Ideal. A few people with more power and money than brains have an idea about how everyone should live their life and how the world should be run and they intend to see it come about. They believe that a desirable outcome can only be wrought by doing away with the elements that oppose such ideals - just like The Church did.

You're probably right on the single currency thing. It doesn't matter that there is 1 or 20 currencies. But there's two ideals behind it. One, simply showing off that they control the globe. It's egotistical but I'm sure we're all guilty of egotistical showmanship at some point - particularly when we think we're right. And Two, the format. There could be a hundred currencies but if the currency is all the same - electronic - then is it really different currencies anymore? At the fundamental level we already HAVE a single currency. Metal and notes. It's all the same. The only thing that changes is the value and the name but at that fundamental level it's all the same stuff: metal and paper.



[edit on 22-6-2009 by James Random]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by James Random
 


Interesting post. So you are saying that the Bilderbergs are a group of people who are working to structure the world in what there view is the best way for everyone and that they do not really have bad intentions?

[edit on 22-6-2009 by grapesofraft]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by James Random
 


Interesting post. So you are saying that the Bilderbergs are a group of people who are working to structure the world in what there view is the best way for everyone?


Exactly. They see the world should be run in a certain way. But people who they think they know better because they went to university and have these high paid jobs because they have the qualifications to get there, etc.

In the Crusades most people couldn't read the bible - this is one of the many reasons so many mistranslations are in it - only the clergy could read the bible to masses. So those with more knowledge believed that the world should be run in a certain way and that that certain would should be as Catholics. It didn't matter to them about freedom of choice it only mattered that they were right.

This is exactly the same thing again. It's another crusade. Only this time its politicians and commercial bumpkins whose knowledge and power and money have gone to their heads.

It all boils down to an inequality of knowledge and that is why the Elite will seek to control, or exterminate, those with a good knowledge who might oppose. It's not so much ABOUT the knowledge itself. Anyone can read that 1 + 1 makes 2. But it's what you DO with that knowledge that makes the difference. Someone stood up one day and said 1 + 1 makes 3 and this is why. And a new kind of math was born.

You look at someone taking a crap and you are repulsed. Some people only see some dude taking a crap. But the guy who invented the Aluminium Extruding machine saw a kid taking a crap one day and though 'You could do that with aluminium.' You see?

We're entering a time where information is more freely available to those who want it. The Digital Age brought the internet and the internet brought Google and Google brought endless information at the fingertips of the user.

Now, leaders require that they are more intelligent than those below them because that is how the structure of power works for these people. If suddenly everyone was becoming as intelligent as they are there would BE no leaders anymore because EVERYONE would be a leader. And that is the fundamental fear behind all of this, that these people will lose their power. And that they'll just become normal and have no money despite the fact money means nothing anymore. So they seek to keep the masses stupid - like the church did with making the bible only available to its clergy and burning any material that contradicted the bible (and the Nazi's are guilty of the same thing, burning books of knowledge that Hitler didn't agree with).

It's about a few dustly old men who can't face the 21st century and wish to cling on to power. It's another Crusade same as Hitler's or The Churche's. Only this one is more cleverly thought out and on a much wider scale.



[edit on 22-6-2009 by James Random]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by James Random
 


I tend to agree with you, but I see it slightly different. They are people of power and status and education, but they are not working to keep things the same or to rule over us.

They are working to create policies that they believe are good for humanity as a whole. I dont think they want a one world government at all. They want a little more commonality in government to prevent wars as much as possilbe and also to make trade less cumbersome, etc..

They view these things as good for society and they have the best of intentions, and just like all of us sometimes they make mistakes or they are misunderstood.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 09:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by grapesofraft
reply to post by James Random
 


I tend to agree with you, but I see it slightly different. They are people of power and status and education, but they are not working to keep things the same or to rule over us.

They are working to create policies that they believe are good for humanity as a whole. I dont think they want a one world government at all. They want a little more commonality in government to prevent wars as much as possilbe and also to make trade less cumbersome, etc..

They view these things as good for society and they have the best of intentions, and just like all of us sometimes they make mistakes or they are misunderstood.


But you fail to see that they are coerced by their own religion. Their religion is leadership, total domination. They want to BE the best and they can't do that while there are people walking around who are probably much better but less recognized.

There are many theories on why the NWO want to depopulate the world. One of the foremost theories is that some kooky satanic belief requires them to lower the population - which, really - is on a par with the same kooky belief that if you don't do what God says, you go to Hell.

The most believable is that they simply can't control the masses. People are steadily educating themselves to much higher levels and a day will come - soon - when a billion people will stand up and say. 'Well shucks. We know what they know already, why do we need them to point the way?' And that is where the end of power for them begins. hey don't want that. They've been brought up to be Elitist in families that have always believed that. It's not that they are evil because there's no such thing as a good or bad person, it's the environment

Lemme explain what I mean. and if anyone is black, pay attention.

In america. If you're brought up in the deep south as a white man and it's a generally uneducated region you will speak with a Southern accent. And you will say things like "I'm go get me a 'n-word' and I'm kick his ass in'.
Where do you think that comes from? It comes from an environment. It's not that the person is mentally ill. There's nothing wrong with a Southerner or a member of the Ku Klux Klan. That's the environment he was brought up in.
And the psychologists of today and the psychiatrists are so stupid that they deal with the individual. It's really the environment that makes them that way.

Now, if you don't understand me if you were brought up as a little baby by the head-hunters of the Amazon and I said to you. 'Doesn't it bother you that you have ten shrunken heads?' You might say, 'Yes! My brother has twenty!' So you would be perfectly well adjusted from where you're coming from. There are no good for bad people. There are people brought up in different environments which they believe in.
If you're brought up in Nazi Germany, all you hear is 'heil hitler' and 'Germany above all!'.
You're a nazi, if you've never seen anything else.
If you still don't understand me, if you take a nice jewish boy and bring him up in a nazi family while he's very young, he'll become a nazi. If you take a nazi boy while he's very young and bring him up in a jewish family, he'll become a nice Jewish boy.

So really, there's no such thing as good or bad people, just the nature of being brought up with a fundamental belief created by the society they were brought up in. And that is what we're seeing here. People brought up by an ancient offshoot religion who believed that they should rule the world because THEY are the best. THEY are the Illuminati or what have you and NOBODY else is as good as they. And when someone stands up with a valid theory that they cannot refute there is only one thing religious fanatics can do - just what the Church did - do away with that person.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join