reply to post by JosephMatthew
Greatings JosephMatthew! My name is Timothy Daniel! Right next to me is Luke Mark. Thanks for registering at ATS in response to this thread. If only
we could get Peter Joseph in here...
Many ZM supporters responded to this thread, but eventually they seem to have mostly given up or even changed their opinion to some degree.
I love your absolutist rhetoric about my 'hit piece' being totally false. That sort of talk really makes you the voice of reason!
I get the feeling you havent read the entire thread.
In review:
The NWO is building almost exactly the system the ZM is calling for, except the parts where ZM pays lip service to it being good and 'nice'ie, not
spying on you, not tyrannical), the NWO is the ZM in practice as to implement the ZM requires tyranny.
Perhaps you can succeed where others have failed: How can you implement it without tyranny or human suffering? How can you maintain it without tyranny
or human suffering? How long will it take to transition this GLOBAL system? How much tyranny and suffering is it worth, assuming it could only be done
by unfriendly means?
Theres been no arguments against an argument raised about machines not being able to replace ALL of our jobs, meaning humans will still have to work,
which screws up the entire economic model of automation.
And YES it IS a GLOBAL GOVERNMENT. The way the system is presented globally, with machines smarter than humans rationing out resources, it could
probobly only work on a global scale, if it could at all. Global scale management of resources IS GLOBAL GOVERNMENT.
For a centralized system to "manage" (ration) resources, it WILL require tyranny to enforce it, as not everyone will play along. You'll never stomp
out libertarians and anarchists, NEVER!
Data (ie scholarly papers, etc) supporting the notion of there being abundance in all the resources the way Fresco claims has been requested on just
about every page in this thread. Nobody supporting ZM seems to be able to show us. If you cant show us data suggesting the abundance theory is
realistic, then that leads me and probably others to believe that it would require a population reduction agenda to thin out the population (make the
'data' 'fit') so that afterwards there WOULD be abundance.
[edit on 29-11-2009 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]