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.

 

United we stand, Divided We fall. Kudos to concept of One World Order!

page: 4
3
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by dalan.
reply to post by LiveEquation
 



We could have, 20% countries dedicated to agriculture, and 15% to industry. The rest for habitation etc etc


This is why I hate speculation of this kind.

People have the smug, superior attitudes, where, for whatever reason, they feel they are entitled to make decisions like this for people.

No one has the right to just clear out whole Countries for their flimsy environmental concerns.




You're right, "no ONE" has the right, but it is within the rights of a MAJORITY of us. If the majority of society finally uses their brain and say everyone will live in North and South America, Afrika will be strictly for wildlife, Europe and Asia for agriculture, etc, that would be smart.




posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by DZAG Wright
reply to post by 46ACE
 


Please provide us a dictionary provided definintion of "liberal" to kick things off...I get tired of faithful listeners of Rush throwing the term around and not even know where it originated from.

Look, it's really quite simple when you think about it. It only makes sense to centralize anything. Nothing is successful if it isn't centralized and sychronized on some level. Otherwise you get what's called a "charlie foxtrot".

No one is saying we will all be forced to wear the same grey suits and drive the same cars, I'm saying the PLANET should come together as one and then we can really get some things done.

Separation is always a tool of evil...it's really quite simple.


You can "come together now".Its just not possible.
You just want the power to force people you don't know to : "evacuate(i.e."abandon") whole countries"?
"Rush listeners" ha!
I'm sure
I've carried this definition since well before you were born; definition:"liberal"

Advocating: redistribution of wealth, An all encompassing perceived superiority hence the personal authority( no: "duty") to protect people from themselves. Concern over appearances or perceptions of others over substance.

"No one one is saying it" except:" U.n. Agenda21".:

Where humans are to be racked and stacked in designated "habitation zones".(.a.k. a.. "ghettos")( Some "mustache wearing Aryan guy in tall boots tried that once about 60 years ago!).



edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by DZAG Wright

Originally posted by dalan.
reply to post by LiveEquation
 



We could have, 20% countries dedicated to agriculture, and 15% to industry. The rest for habitation etc etc


This is why I hate speculation of this kind.

People have the smug, superior attitudes, where, for whatever reason, they feel they are entitled to make decisions like this for people.

No one has the right to just clear out whole Countries for their flimsy environmental concerns.




You're right, "no ONE" has the right, but it is within the rights of a MAJORITY of us. If the majority of society finally uses their brain and say everyone will live in North and South America, Afrika will be strictly for wildlife, Europe and Asia for agriculture, etc, that would be smart.


"disbelieving rant continues:"
Another advocate of "Mob" rule...I don't think it would be "smart" at all..and I "love" animals too.
How do you think the Greeks will react to being told to "pack your your chit and move to Bolivia"?What about the Bolivians who are being forced to give up valuable land to some world police"cocamamie scheme"?

Will they think it "smart" eliminating their way of life? Do you know any Greeks, or Italians or Slovenians? serbs?Turks? Of course not. Just numbers to be relocated and managed... one world Facists.!
You people are terribly misguided here; and Ican't convince anybody.So my time is better spent mounting the new laser to my tactical shotgun. See ya' around the playground
kiddies: "blue berets are "it!"
"BANG"
edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE

Originally posted by DZAG Wright
reply to post by 46ACE
 


Please provide us a dictionary provided definintion of "liberal" to kick things off...I get tired of faithful listeners of Rush throwing the term around and not even know where it originated from.

Look, it's really quite simple when you think about it. It only makes sense to centralize anything. Nothing is successful if it isn't centralized and sychronized on some level. Otherwise you get what's called a "charlie foxtrot".

No one is saying we will all be forced to wear the same grey suits and drive the same cars, I'm saying the PLANET should come together as one and then we can really get some things done.

Separation is always a tool of evil...it's really quite simple.


You can "come together now".Its just not possible.
You just want the power to force people you don't know to : "evacuate(i.e."abandon") whole countries"?
"Rush listeners" ha!
I'm sure
I've carried this definition since well before you were born; definition:"liberal"

Advocating: redistribution of wealth, An all encompassing perceived superiority hence the personal authority( no: "duty") to protect people from themselves. Concern over appearances or perceptions of others over substance.

"No one one is saying it" except:" U.n. Agenda21".:

Where humans are to be racked and stacked in designated "habitation zones".(.a.k. a.. "ghettos")( Some "mustache wearing Aryan guy in tall boots tried that once about 60 years ago!).



edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)




I really don't know where to begin with this post...

1. Where...LOL...did that definition of liberal come from..link please.

2. You sound paranoid and not well. (Not said in humor but seriousness)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 03:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE

Originally posted by DZAG Wright

Originally posted by dalan.
reply to post by LiveEquation
 



We could have, 20% countries dedicated to agriculture, and 15% to industry. The rest for habitation etc etc


This is why I hate speculation of this kind.

People have the smug, superior attitudes, where, for whatever reason, they feel they are entitled to make decisions like this for people.

No one has the right to just clear out whole Countries for their flimsy environmental concerns.




You're right, "no ONE" has the right, but it is within the rights of a MAJORITY of us. If the majority of society finally uses their brain and say everyone will live in North and South America, Afrika will be strictly for wildlife, Europe and Asia for agriculture, etc, that would be smart.


"disbelieving rant continues:"
Another advocate of "Mob" rule...I don't think it would be "smart" at all..and I "love" animals too.
How do you think the Greeks will react to being told to "pack your your chit and move to Bolivia"?What about the Bolivians who are being forced to give up valuable land to some world police"cocamamie scheme"?

Will they think it "smart" eliminating their way of life? Do you know any Greeks, or Italians or Slovenians? serbs?Turks? Of course not. Just numbers to be relocated and managed... one world Facists.!
You people are terribly misguided here; and Ican't convince anybody.So my time is better spent mounting the new laser to my tactical shotgun. See ya' around the playground
kiddies: "blue berets are "it!"
"BANG"
edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)




I'll kill your argument with this simple thing. I'll take the relocation agenda from my perspective.

We are now a One World and the decision is made that Florida (where) is now restricted for agriculture. So I have to move....well no big deal, I'll move. Long as my expenses are taken care of, I'm not a vampire and has to sleep in the soil of my native land, I guess I'll be living in Japan now.

See how easy that is, and how I don't need my laser to shoot soldiers?



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 03:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by DZAG Wright

Originally posted by 46ACE

Originally posted by DZAG Wright

Originally posted by dalan.
reply to post by LiveEquation
 



We could have, 20% countries dedicated to agriculture, and 15% to industry. The rest for habitation etc etc


This is why I hate speculation of this kind.

People have the smug, superior attitudes, where, for whatever reason, they feel they are entitled to make decisions like this for people.

No one has the right to just clear out whole Countries for their flimsy environmental concerns.




You're right, "no ONE" has the right, but it is within the rights of a MAJORITY of us. If the majority of society finally uses their brain and say everyone will live in North and South America, Afrika will be strictly for wildlife, Europe and Asia for agriculture, etc, that would be smart.


"disbelieving rant continues:"
Another advocate of "Mob" rule...I don't think it would be "smart" at all..and I "love" animals too.
How do you think the Greeks will react to being told to "pack your your chit and move to Bolivia"?What about the Bolivians who are being forced to give up valuable land to some world police"cocamamie scheme"?

Will they think it "smart" eliminating their way of life? Do you know any Greeks, or Italians or Slovenians? serbs?Turks? Of course not. Just numbers to be relocated and managed... one world Facists.!
You people are terribly misguided here; and Ican't convince anybody.So my time is better spent mounting the new laser to my tactical shotgun. See ya' around the playground
kiddies: "blue berets are "it!"
"BANG"
edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by 46ACE because: (no reason given)




I'll kill your argument with this simple thing. I'll take the relocation agenda from my perspective.

We are now a One World and the decision is made that Florida (where) is now restricted for agriculture. So I have to move....well no big deal, I'll move. Long as my expenses are taken care of, I'm not a vampire and has to sleep in the soil of my native land, I guess I'll be living in Japan now.

See how easy that is, and how I don't need my laser to shoot soldiers?


Some of us (and not only Americans) would ask:" Who the hell are you to be making decisions like that for me?"
Don't be so quick to assume you hold the "majority" position.

You still haven't addressed my point:

You can "bring people together and unite the world" now; without global taxation, military,and a global dictatorship.you simply want the power to direct your fellow humans because "you know better".

Silly "Liberal":I don't require a "link" to my own opinion.Formed through observation and experience.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE
Some of us (and not only Americans) would ask:" Who the hell are you to be making decisions like that for me?"


Like all those people who chose to stay put during Katrina and then needed to be rescued?

Sadly sometimes people need to be proded like cattle to do what is in their best interest.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by daskakik

Originally posted by 46ACE
Some of us (and not only Americans) would ask:" Who the hell are you to be making decisions like that for me?"


Like all those people who chose to stay put during Katrina and then needed to be rescued?

Sadly sometimes people need to be proded like cattle to do what is in their best interest.



"POP"!

There its out: don't you feel bettter now? You don't love your fellowman:
you think he's too stupid for his own good.

But You on the other hand are blessed with that infallible insight to know whats best!.

We continue to disagree there.

The end.

I personally am going to resist returning to this squabble so here is my final thought on this matter:

If you want to live in a collective.... "Move",. once the world falls for global collectivism where is there for Americans who value their gift of freedom to run too? When Every redistributed country is tepidly the same as every other country?

In reference to the proposed "north American union": Many "Canadians have said publicly and proudly "I don' t want to be an American!" We are two different cultures!.
And I don't blame them.

You advocate Global power as long as "your guy" (your environmental agenda) is in charge!

What if:
"We" all conceded to" your" global govt
with one stipulation) we have to bring Chimpy Bush and Darth Cheney out of retirement to run it?

Granting Absolute power doesn't sound so appealing now does it?


d.c.al fine'
So long and thanks for all the insults...



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE
There its out: don't you feel bettter now? You don't love your fellowman:
you think he's too stupid for his own good.

But You on the other hand are blessed with that infallible insight to know whats best!


Nope, I include myself in the herd. Nobody has a clear head all of the time.

On the topic of the NAU. Canadians will not be American any more than the French have become German or the Spanish have become Polish or any of the 27 members have become anything other than what they were before they joined European Union.

No one guy should be in charge ever. Not yours, mine or theirs.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by 46ACE
So long and thanks for all the insults...


I don't believe you have been insulted here. I don't see why it is difficult for you to accept that sometimes it is necessary to set aside deontological ideals. Would you rather have corporations use GM corn(research sponsored by DARPA) to control population growth while the rest of human males have no consent? Hell no!

It is for these reasons that we need a one world order (OWO). Where did all that corn go I wonder? Oh yeah, experiment with it in South America, Middle East (to reduce aggression), and Africa. As long as you are fine here, you could care less about what happens to the rest of the world.

People hate and despise the Somali Pirates...but what was their motivation? well read this article to find out 'Toxic waste' behind Somali piracy and this one too: Untold Stories about Somalia Pirates - European ships dump Nuclear Waste into Somalia Ocean.

This is exactly why we need a One World Order.

Just to show how good my suggestions are, we could place all religious fanatics and extremists and all major religions in Australia. people could always go there for worship. ( I am hoping that the religious would either learn to live in peace or just annihilate each other)





edit on 27-6-2011 by LiveEquation because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 06:56 PM
link   
reply to post by DZAG Wright
 



Everyone pay attention to the statement below his username and recall what I proclaim.

Separation is a tool of the evil...


Logical fallacy.

Nice way to deflect what I said, but if you are going to insist on grasping at straws, then allow me to explain. An Apprentice of Satan is an affectation that I picked up from one of my favorite songs.

Furthermore, pointing out to people to pay attention to my headline does not validate your argument. In fact, that sort of tactic is an extremely weak form of argumentation.

Calling for a one world government in today's day and age is like asking for a global train wreck. Take the United States for instance. We can all barely agree with each other in our own Union...now extend that to a global civilization and you have amplified that problem by 6 billion.

There is a reason why certain philosophers claimed that local control is key to happiness during the enlightenment. Its much easier for a town to make a decision than it is for a County, than it is for a State, than it is for a Country..etc...etc.


edit on 6/27/2011 by dalan. because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/27/2011 by dalan. because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   
reply to post by dalan.
 


s&f for you very well done. i would also like to add it is why the U.S. was setup for the states to control themselves. problem is the fed keeps over riding the states and we are getting into more of a mess with the stripping of the states rights for the feds rights.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by DZAG Wright
 



You're right, "no ONE" has the right, but it is within the rights of a MAJORITY of us. If the majority of society finally uses their brain and say everyone will live in North and South America, Afrika will be strictly for wildlife, Europe and Asia for agriculture, etc, that would be smart.


No, see, this is how we know that educational systems are failing. The fallacy here is the fact that you don't seem to understand that the United States is a REPUBLIC....we are not a democracy. Do we use democracy as a tool? Certainly. But a democracy is not the form of government that we have.

Let me break it down for you.

I have natural rights. I was endowed with those natural rights. Our forefathers understood this basic principle and built a government around it. One of the things that our forefathers wanted to protect us from was the concept of mob rule...or as some of them put it the tyranny of the majority. Or, in other words, this democracy that you think can strip a man of his property.

Nope.

You see, our forefathers left us with a republic. In a republic all men are equal under the law. The law of our Union was established to defend and protect the rights that we were endowed with. Guess what that means? That means that a majority cannot whimsically vote away my property to turn it into a nature reserve. PERIOD. In a republic, one man can be protected by the votes of one million, if that one man is on the right side of the law. There are just some things that you CANNOT take to vote.


A democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner, in a republic, the sheep has a gun.-Benjamin Franklin



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by letscit
reply to post by dalan.
 


s&f for you very well done. i would also like to add it is why the U.S. was setup for the states to control themselves. problem is the fed keeps over riding the states and we are getting into more of a mess with the stripping of the states rights for the feds rights.


Precisely, that is exactly why the States were set up to control themselves, but, as you have stated, the fed has overreached their authority by a long shot.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by dalan.
There is a reason why certain philosophers claimed that local control is key to happiness during the enlightenment. Its much easier for a town to make a decision than it is for a County, than it is for a State, than it is for a Country..etc...etc.


Those philosophers are wrong. The idea of local control seems wise until you start observation things in the lab or in the hospital. Lets start with this analogy: say anatomy,

If each of your muscles and organs were independently controlled locally...errr, that would be a recipe for disaster. We call that disease. You have a brain, a nervous system for a reason. Without this control system, you have a system wide malfunction leading to death since one cannot breath without the ANS ( a type of Nervous System)

From a living cell to a full organism, there is a main control system. The same should apply in our society if we are to have harmony. Local control systems need to be kept in check by a more "sophisticated system-wide" control system.

Here is an example below of a system-wide control system,



A one world order is even evident in our bodies...

The reason why even local control systems do not work in our societies is due to differences in beliefs



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by LiveEquation
 


You wont be doing anything if we have a one world government.

Its too big. Even big nations like the US do not adequately represent the will of the people because there are so many regional differences in opinion, needs, etc., that those needs all get mashed into an unsatisfactory mush of crap no one likes.

Nations and governments should be small enough that they cannot escape the voice of the people. A One World Government would be hell for us. They would be so distant from the people we would cease to matter at all.

Mark my words.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by LiveEquation
 


Yeah and most of your organs dont get a vote, either. There may be one world control, but they have no say, and often times, the "controller" destroys whole nations (organs) with its crappy and selfish decision making.

Edit to add,

Not to mention that often the "controller" ends up destroying the whole "world" (kills the entire body) for various reasons. Accident, stupidity, suicide, etc. That system of control might work well in a natural selection type scenario when you have a virtually endless supply of "worlds" (bodies) with which to experiment, but lets not forget we get ONE chance at this. We have ONE world. One.

There is no way in hell the morons who are crashing national economies, and destroying local environments should be entrusted with the entire planet. Maybe someday, when humanity has evolved a bit, and actually IS a rational animal. But right now there are only a handful of people on the planet who would have the character and the intellect to actually lead the world and those people are NOT in power, nor could they be in the current situation.

The people running the world are seriously emotionally disturbed, only slightly more intelligent than average, and have characters more nasty than the crap you scoop out grease traps. Only the similarly insane would even contemplate letting the people wrecking things on a lower level of order run things at a higher level of complexity.


edit on 27-6-2011 by Illusionsaregrander because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 09:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


History disagrees with you. So i have "umarked your words"

I don't see how you can think it is impossible to have one world government. Your body does it, why is it impossible? a single cell in your body probably thinks the same way like you because it doesn't see the big picture.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 09:54 PM
link   
Originally posted by LiveEquation

Originally posted by dalan.
There is a reason why certain philosophers claimed that local control is key to happiness during the enlightenment. Its much easier for a town to make a decision than it is for a County, than it is for a State, than it is for a Country..etc...etc.



Those philosophers are wrong. The idea of local control seems wise until you start observation things in the lab or in the hospital. Lets start with this analogy: say anatomy


The behavior of human anatomy can be related to systems of government?

This should be interdasting.



If each of your muscles and organs were independently controlled locally...errr, that would be a recipe for disaster. We call that disease. You have a brain, a nervous system for a reason. Without this control system, you have a system wide malfunction leading to death since one cannot breath without the ANS ( a type of Nervous System)


So we are discussing politics, and you explain to me how anatomy works?

Anatomy = The perfect political system??


From a living cell to a full organism, there is a main control system. The same should apply in our society if we are to have harmony. Local control systems need to be kept in check by a more "sophisticated system-wide" control system.


Interesting. I think that's what the point of the United Nations is, for all those Countries over there in Europe...and that "control system" has obviously failed.

Or even the Federal government of the United States for that matter.


Here is an example below of a system-wide control system


That was simply an example of why anatomy has nothing to do with governing people.

They are two separate systems, and it is foolish to use anatomy as a framework for governments. You really are grasping at straws. Funny though...I remember hearing an idea similar to yours from Jacque Fresco.


A one world order is even evident in our bodies


Ummm...no. Anatomy is evident in our bodies...governments are not. Biology is not political science.


The reason why even local control systems do not work in our societies is due to differences in beliefs


That's what republics are for.

If "differences in beliefs" put a damper on local control systems, then they are certainly going to put a hurtin' on one world governments.

The United States was a strong Country...back when "local control systems" were left unhampered. The moment the Federal government started overstepping its authority is the moment the American Union began to fall. If, by your logic, when the Federal government took more control from the States, then the Union should have flourished...but it has not. There is nothing even remotely resembling a brain on Capital hill.

And maybe that's why you should not grasp at straws and compare two completely different systems to one another as if they are related.

Anatomy, and governments, have nothing in common.

edit on 6/27/2011 by dalan. because: (no reason given)

edit on 6/27/2011 by dalan. because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 10:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by LiveEquation
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander
 


History disagrees with you. So i have "umarked your words"

I don't see how you can think it is impossible to have one world government. Your body does it, why is it impossible? a single cell in your body probably thinks the same way like you because it doesn't see the big picture.


Provide proof of one overarching, ruling body that has not failed.

Entire Empires have fallen, because the needs of people are vastly different region to region. I could bet that our goals here in Ohio would differ from that of Kentucky's.







 
3
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join