It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


I have heard Pat Buchanan and Pat Robertson/Jerry Falwell talk about the New World Order ?

page: 1

log in


posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 09:28 AM
I have heard Pat Buchanan talk about the New World Order my question is does he mean it the sameway that Alex Jones does ? Maybe I don't understand but Pat Buchanan did work for Presidents Nixon Ford and Reagan why does he admire and respect these Pesidents if Alex Jones says the Presidents are Puppets of the New World Order ? Well how does Pat Buchanan believe that there will be a New World Order yet still work for Presidents ? Pat Robertson wrote a Book about the New World Order and Jerry Falwell has talked about the New World Order.

2000 - Pat Buchanan's definition of the New World Order

Christopher Hitchens vs. Pat Buchanan Part 4: Rush Limbaugh (1993)

Start at 2:30

Pat Buchanan-Alex Jones interview

Falwell: "[C]ashless society," "one-world government" will happen near Rapture
August 28, 2006 6:46 pm ET
Rev. Jerry Falwell stated that the United Nations is "the infrastructure, the stage on which the Antichrist will build his one-world government." Falwell also asserted that the prevalence of online bill-paying is a sign that "God is setting the stage for ... a cashless society," and that "the day will come" when "the only way you can get cash and trade and to do business is to have the mark of the beast."

posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 10:04 AM
reply to post by mikejohnson2006

You ask a very good question. IMO, here is where the trick lies- there will be a NWO, there is no question about that. But the game that these evil people are playing is who gets blamed for it.

Because Alex Jones denies the concept of Peak Oil (in a depression, companies consolidate, in the ultimate depression of resource scarcity, countries consolidate), he seems to place most of the blame on the Federal Reserve. This sidesteps the fact that under a Peak Oil scenario, the Federal Reserve is useless anyway (banks make money by expanding credit that is not possible in resource scarcity). In other words, it will be disposed of, with certainty either way.

So why blame an entity for the NWO that is not the true culprit? The Federal Reserve is just a scapegoat to the real criminals who will walk away scott free. And everyone will love their libertarian NWO ruled by a "god"/ the New Age "Christ".

The same thing with Pat Robertson. For "Christians", the NWO is blamed on "Muslim terror attacks" (watch out for the London Olympics false flag/ Seal 5 "Cry of the Martyrs hated for God's namesake" Zion logo ritual "Muslims" get blamed for the destruction of our modern way of life.

posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 10:29 AM
I've been following Falwell and Robertson for many years. I used to record Falwell's sermons every Sunday just to keep track of his agenda. I think both basically believed that the UN was the foundation for a New World Order but that only liberals and Democrats for the most part were behind it.
I don't know if Robertson has changed his tune of late but both used to be strong supporters of the Republican party and the Moral Majority and Christian Coalition were both factors in the elections of both Reagan and Bush 41. It always annoyed me to no end how they blindly defended the actions of Republican Presidents even when it went against Christian values, particularly our intervention in Panama, Nicaragua and El Salvador. Falwell even went so far as to have Oliver North as the key speaker at graduation for his LIberty University back in '87.
You might remember that Robertson even ran for President back in '88 and actually won the Iowa straw poll. If you ever have any questions about Falwell PM me, I grew up in Lynchburg and can show where he grew up, where his wive grew up, where his first church and school were etc.

posted on Oct, 9 2011 @ 02:24 PM
Yes I would like to pm you how do I pm on this forum ?

posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 06:49 AM
Is it possible that Pat Buchanan both agrees and disagrees with Republican President's Policies ?

Answering 20 Frequently Asked Questions About Conservatism

Written By : John Hawkins

How 'bout Paleocons?: Paleocons for the most part hold the same beliefs as other conservatives except they tend to be isolationists, anti-free trade, and are debatably even more anti-illegal alien than the average conservative. The best known paleoconservative is Pat Buchanan whose magazine, The American Conservative, is so shrilly anti-Bush and anti-war that large portions of it could have been written by left-wingers like Michael Moore or Ted Rall.

George W. Bush, Globalist

by Patrick J. Buchanan

Have the Bush Republicans ceased to be reliable custodians of American sovereignty? So it would seem. ... balist-867
Is Pat Buchanan a Shill for the Neocon Iran Attack?

Kurt Nimmo
Saturday, January 27, 2007

After watching the video below, it is difficult not to believe Pat Buchanan is working for the neocons, or at least shilling for them.

Of course, he wants us to believe he is adamantly opposed to an attack against Iran, and yet he argues from the neocon standpoint—the mullahs and Ahmadinejad are the problem—and essentially embraces, in circuitous fashion, their endgame, making plentiful reference to Iran’s nukes, a fanciful fiction at best.

Buchanan knows full well Iran, under the NPT, has a right to enrich uranium, and yet he comes off in this video sounding like a neocon, telling us Iran “has to step back and suspend uranium enrichment,” thus enhancing the neocon line that an Iran enriching uranium for domestic energy is an Iran than will nuke Israel.

I never trusted Pat Buchanan, a former Nixon speechwriter and White House Communications Director for the Reagan administration (recall Pat’s assertion, “I’m a contra too,” that is to say he supported killing 30,000 Nicaraguans).

In 2004, Pat voted for Bush, although he claimed to be an adversary of the neocons.

On the one hand, Buchanan refers to Capitol Hill as “Israeli-occupied territory,” while on the other he declares the United States has a “moral commitment” to recognize Israel’s right to “defend itself,” in other words continue its policies against the Palestinians and Arabs and Muslims in the neighborhood.

Come on, Pat. You can’t have it both ways.

Indeed, as Buchanan tells us, the neocons carry “with them the viruses of statism and globalism,” but then Pat worked for Reagan, a statist and globalist parading as a conservative. In other words, Pat Buchanan, who is nothing if not a consummate insider (and a member of the Masonic and monarchial Knights of Malta), cannot be trusted to oppose the neocons.

In the following video, taped on January 26, it sure sounds as if Pat Buchanan accepts an Iran attack as an inevitability, as do a lot of neolibs and neocons, who are now flooding the corporate media with the same sort of nonsense they unleashed in the lead-up to the March, 2003, invasion of Iraq. Pat appears to be playing the foil, that is to say he is enhancing by way of contrast. ... chanan.htm

posted on Oct, 18 2011 @ 04:13 PM
Is the New World Order Unraveling?
by Patrick J. Buchanan

The NWO dates back as far as Woodrow Wilson's League of Nations, which a Republican Senate refused to enter. FDR, seeking to succeed where his mentor had failed, oversaw the creation of a United Nations, an International Monetary Fund and a World Bank.

top topics

log in