Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The End times...

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 2
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 2 template Next
  • #1

    The End times...

    The North American Union & the Vchip


    I believe this is only a matter of time before all this becomes reality, I hope not in my lifetime.
    Tags: None
  • #2
    Originally posted by GQchris View Post
    The North American Union & the Vchip



    I believe this is only a matter of time before all this becomes reality, I hope not in my lifetime.
    Hope in one hand and s*it in the other. See which one fills up first.

    Go find a documentary called End Game bro. It's long but covers alot.

    Comment

    • #3
      I usually hate "conspiracy theories" too Mike.. my only problem with this is when everything will actually come to fruition.

      Comment

      • #4
        Originally posted by Mike Brewer
        I'm sorry to say it, guys, but that's pure bunk. There are, of course, shreds of truth, but they are blown so completely out of proportion and framed so inaccurately as to be fairly laughable. You have to be objective when looking at stuff like this. That's not to say cynical or skeptical, because those start from conclusions, too. The real questions you have to ask are:
        If it contains components that are true, it can't be pure bunk.
        • Originally posted by Mike Brewer
        • Who really stands to gain?
        The rich.

        Originally posted by Mike Brewer
      • Who really stands to lose?
      Everyone who isn't rich

      Originally posted by Mike Brewer
    • What would it take for this to actually happen?
      • War, famine, economic problems/ rising food and fuel cost destroying peoples savings, out of control crime and a forced dependence on the Government for survival.

      Originally posted by Mike Brewer
    • Are those measures really the kinds of things that can stay hidden?
    • When information comes to light, what elements of credibility does it have?
    • When weighed against precedent and inductive reason, can the conclusions shown be considered likely or probable?
    • And more importantly, can all this be accomplished by a cohesive team that can keep secrets of great magnitude without leaking anything?
      • Originally posted by Mike Brewer

      Conspiracies rarely work, because people can't shut up. If you doubt this, we can do an experiment right here. I'll start a rumor via PM. I'll only send it to 10 people, and they'll be people I have historically been able to rely on. We'll talk about the rumor once or twice a week, and see how long it takes before someone gets wise. Now, we're already handicapping this, because people know about it and anyone I write to has an interest in proving they can keep a secret. But we're leveling the field by sparking some curiosity. So we'll be able to see how many incorrect assumptions are made by the curious. And if you're not into it here, do it in your own life. Get a rumor going. Tell one person something juicy, and swear them to secrecy. Then let a little "leak" happen to someone else. Don't tell them the whole story; just get them interested. Watch the radical assumptions they start to make. Then, the coup de grace. "Leak" another snippet, but this time, make it totally false. Make it detailed, believable, and incorporate the elements of the small leak from before, only lead people to a much different, more sinister conclusion. Lay it all out there, and just watch it take off. If you give it a couple weeks, people will believe the false story more readily than the truth. If you want to test that, tell them the truth. Tell them it was all an experiment and you made the whole thing up. Some of them won't even believe that.

      Propaganda 101.
      The chief argument against a government conspiracy of any kind is "how could they keep something like that secret?" If you've ever read Deep Politics and The Death of JFK by Peter Dale Scott he summed it up rather well.

      "To the stock objection that it would be virtually impossible to assemble a murder conspiracy without leakage, the response is that an existing conspiratorial network or system of networks, already in place and capable of murder, would have much less difficulty in maintaining the discipline of secrecy."



      The rest of this thread speaks directly to the problem addressed by Andrzej Lobaczewski in his book, Political Ponerology: The Science of Evil Adjusted for Political Purposes.

      In this seminal work on how evil rises to the top in any society and culture, and how it develops ramified networks of manipulation and control, the problem is addressed in terms of pathological deviance. In any society, there is a small percentage of deviant individuals who seek power over others. In a society, set up as the American society is, based on the previously described capitalistic ideology of John Calvin, what quickly develops is a "dog eat dog" world, and the fact is that deviant dogs always do better than normal ones. Lobaczewski writes:

      "The actions of this phenomenon affect an entire society, starting with the leaders and infiltrating every village, small town, factory, business, or farm. The pathological social structure gradually covers the entire country, creating a "new class" within that nation. This privileged class of deviants feels permanently threatened by the "others", i.e. by the majority of normal people. Neither do the pathocrats entertain any illusions about their personal fate should there be a return to the system of normal man.

      A normal person deprived of privilege or high position will go about finding and performing some work which will earn him a living; but pathocrats never possessed any solid practical talent, and the time frame of their rule eliminates any residual possibilities of adapting to the demands of normal work. If the laws of normal man were to be reinstated, they and theirs could be subjected to judgment, including a moralizing interpretation of their psychological deviations; they would be threatened by a loss of freedom and life, not merely a loss of position and privilege. Since they are incapable of this kind of sacrifice, the survival of a system which is the best for them becomes a moral imperative. Such a threat must be battled by means of any and all psychological and political cunning implemented with a lack of scruples with regard to those other "inferior-quality" people that can be shocking in its depravity.

      In general, this new class is in the position to purge its leaders should their behavior jeopardize the existence of such a system. This could occur particularly if the leadership wished to go too far in compromising with the society of normal people, since their qualifications make them essential for production. The latter is more a direct threat to the lower echelons of the pathocratic elite than to the leaders.

      Pathocracy survives thanks to the feeling of being threatened by the society of normal people, as well as by other countries wherein various forms of the system of normal man persist. For the rulers, staying on the top is therefore the classic problem of "to be or not to be".

      We can thus formulate a more cautious question: can such a system ever waive territorial and political expansion abroad and settle for its present possessions? What would happen if such a state of affairs ensured internal peace, corresponding order, and relative prosperity within the nation? The overwhelming majority of the country's population would then make skillful use of all the emerging possibilities, taking advantage of their superior qualifications in order to fight for an ever-increasing scope of activities; thanks to their higher birth rate, their power will increase. This majority will be joined by some sons from the privileged class who did not inherit the pathological genes. The pathocracy's dominance will weaken imperceptibly but steadily, finally leading to a situation wherein the society of normal people reaches for power. This is a nightmare vision to the psychopaths.

      Thus, the biological, psychological, moral, and economic destruction of the majority of normal people becomes, for the pathocrats, a "biological" necessity. Many means serve this end, starting with concentration camps and including warfare with an obstinate, well-armed foe who will devastate and debilitate the human power thrown at him, namely the very power jeopardizing pathocrats rule: the sons of normal man sent out to fight for an illusionary "noble cause." Once safely dead, the soldiers will then be decreed heroes to be revered in paeans, useful for raising a new generation faithful to the pathocracy and ever willing to go to their deaths to protect it. [...]

      The ideology must, of course, furnish a corresponding justification for this alleged right to conquer the world and must therefore be properly elaborated. Expansionism is derived from the very nature of pathocracy, not from ideology, but this fact must be masked by ideology. Whenever this phenomenon has been witnessed in history, imperialism was always its most demonstrative quality. "

      Reading is FUNdamental. Anyone who hasn't read The Creature from Jekyll Island by G.Edward Griffin or the essay by Martha Rose Crow, M.S. The Nine Stages of American Autogenocide is really missing out, most private forums and debate groups won't let you post if you don't have working knowledge of the info contained in these text.

      Comment

      • #5
        Originally posted by Mike Brewer
        If the true elements are misconstrued, then yes it can.

        The rich gain through monopolies. A one world government would mean most of the rich and powerful would be forced into sharing their corners of the market. It's counter-productive. In that sense, many of the world's richest people stand to lose more than anyone. What happens if good and commodities are regulated the world over by one source? There's far less room for competitive advantage, that's what. The rich lose as much as anyone.

        Likewise, if a one world government did actually work (which it can't), the poor would gain more than the rich. Standards of living have historically always gone up rather than down under strong centralized governments. Self fulfillment issues suffer in many ways, as does cultural identity, but the basic standard of living and wealth almost universally increase for the poor. Look at the histories of Empires from Rome onward, and I think you'll find that's true.

        I don't mean to dismiss the things you wrote out of hand, and I'll read more of the original source material when I get time. But the boogeyman idea behind concepts like "Pathocrats" is indicative of conspiracy theories all over the place. First, the offenders have to be a group of people that aren't "like us." One of the very first rules of propaganda is that you have to objectify and demonize the intended target. Labelling everyone in politics a "pathocrat" (a made up term to describe a made-up condition that is neither proven nor diagnosable by any scientific means whatsoever) is just one way of doing that. It distracts, and for me such tactics reduce credibility rather than enhance it.

        I've got a heavy study load right now, so forgive me if I'm not as well read on your sources as I could be. But I would submit to you that not one person here is more qualified, more experienced, or better trained to spot and assess the means and methods of propaganda than I am. It was a full time job for me, and one in which I excelled. I'm not discounting other opinions, and I'm not claiming to be the world's authority on the matter. Far from it. I'm simply suggesting that as you are obviously far and away more qualified to speak with authority on some topics because of your experience and training, my opinions on this are not just opinions. They are the products of trained analytical processes and many years of hands-on, real-world experience.

        As such, I'll grant that you may have some really knowledgable sources and some very credible information that's worth looking into. But I also maintain that in my distanced and objective view, the production posted in the opening of the thread has all the marks of pure propaganda. Each and every category used to analyze such products is present, and each of them detracts from credibility. When you get enough of those boxes checked, the product can be reliably called - in industry terms - bullshit.
        You'll get no argument from me that you're an expert on dispensing BS which means you're also an expert on sniffing it out. Thats why I enjoy our debates, you make me think, thank you.

        Comment

        • #6
          well in all fairness, there has been quite a lot of talk of a one world governmet for quite some time. for example, henry kissinger has been talking about his NWO idea for decades now, there are people like him who have claimed its going to happen or would benefit the world if it were to happen etc....

          [YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bKwH3kJew4[/YOUTUBE]

          Comment

          • #7
            Originally posted by Mike Brewer
            Dick, your timing on that video could not have been better. I spent the day yesterday face to face with Henry Kissinger (among others) talking about actions in Iran, Chile, Nicaragua, Cuba as well as talking about the role of a "New World Order" in times to come. His position wasn't that this New World Order would fall under the command and guidance of a single One World government as the conspiracy theorists like to claim, but that the face of international relations and alliances would change drastically in the future. Included in such drastic changes are the talks between previously warring cross sections of Iraqi Muslims, talks between Palestinians and Israel, and new alliances built between Major influencers like China, Russia, Iran, etc. His suggestion bears out when considered against such emerging organizations as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization - a cooperative effort between Russia and China to gain control and influence over the oil and gas producers in the 'Stans (and presumably later, Africa). The SCO has become a major force of influence, rivaling NATO in many sectors - but the organization and the function of the alliance does not threaten either China's or Russia's statehood any more than NATO has threatened the Statehood of its members.

            Again, the New World Order you hear Kissinger talking about describes a new order of alliances, agreements, treaties, and geopolitics - not the dissolution of sovereign powers to bow universally to a single one-world government.
            wow you talked to henry kissinger in person?? that guys is like, the michael jordan of conspiracy theories, he is an icon. for me talking to henry kissinger would have been like you guys getting to talk to larry bird or mark mcguire.

            Comment

            • #8
              Originally posted by Mike Brewer
              Yeah, I talked to him, to Brent Scowcroft, William Hood, David Robarge, Albert "Bud" Wheelon, Jennifer Sims, and to the current Director of Central Intelligence Agency, GEN Michael Hayden. Google some of those names an see what you come up with. Dick, you'd have been in UFO heaven.

              The face time wasn't extensive, but they also gave speeches and sat on panels to take questions and discuss issues raised by the audience. Then we went to a social mixer/reception for an hour and a half afterward.

              The spread was fantastic too, by the way. Georgetown University hosted an amazing, amazing event.
              i would have stood up and asked every single one of those people the exact same question about the suppression of free energy and the technologies the united states military-industrial complex was able to create by analyzing pieces of machinery recovered from crashed interplanetary crafts/probes that are visiting our planet.

              Comment

              • #9
                Originally posted by Mike Brewer
                I don't think it will, Chris. The idea that the world will ever function under a single government is just plain nuts.

                All evidence says otherwise, the Economy is more intertwined Globally than in years past, and we have the technology we need to have a One World Government. It does sound nuts I agree, but I believe in the infallibility of the Bible, don't want to make this a religious debate but that's what I believe. Bible prophecies have never been wrong.

                Comment

                • #10
                  Just some thoughts

                  Originally posted by Mike Brewer
                  The rich gain through monopolies. A one world government would mean most of the rich and powerful would be forced into sharing their corners of the market. It's counter-productive. In that sense, many of the world's richest people stand to lose more than anyone. What happens if good and commodities are regulated the world over by one source? There's far less room for competitive advantage, that's what. The rich lose as much as anyone.
                  This is assuming that the rich only see money as a measure of power.

                  Who is it that came up with money anyway? Was money always the measure of power?

                  The Native Americans and nomadic natives of most parts of the world had no set borders no centralized government and no real money system. Yet they lived quite a long time doing just fine and thriving without jobs, health care or public transportation.

                  It's about who gets to control what. And lets not forget the first step in control is dependence on the government. Isn't that the basis for communism?
                  Everybody relies on the government. And I don't me the crap on paper I mean the way it plays out in the "real" world.

                  Comment

                  • #11
                    But why did people need to control the Native Americans. So they could congeal North America?

                    Isn't that moving toward a central government? And doesn't this suggest a domino effect?

                    There is always someone stronger who wants more, so who's to say that personality wouldn't coerce other leaders to join under them?

                    The roman empire covered most of the known world at one time. Wasn't that a single government?

                    The only reason they feel was because of poor communications. Now with instant communications and cameras or eyes everywhere, plus the ability to track all your citizens and listen to everything they say, what's to stop this from happening again?

                    You need other countries to conglomerate with you because your own military won't take out it's own people. But somebody else's will if you keep them thinking that the other people are a threat.

                    Hiltler got lots of leaders to join him in an attempt at world domination. He was close to succeeding in European domination. Hell he even got Japan to join and for a period of time Russia. Maybe somebody just figured out how to sweeten the pot to get enough people to join.

                    World leaders seem to be very easy to buy these days. The ones who don't join up get assassinated and you get the guy who's willing to work for you in. It's not unheard of and not that far fetched unless you want to wear blinders to the past 200 years or so of history.

                    Those who can't be bought can and will be replaced.

                    Comment

                    • #12
                      Originally posted by Garland
                      Ok..I seriously just found an alien growing in my nalgene bottle.

                      I went to take a drink out of it...and the water tasted fucking gross, so I opened the lid...

                      And staring back at me was this white and yellow mucus-like squid thing...

                      Oh my GOD!

                      If something pops out of my chest and kills me...you guys will know why I'm missing. Call in an airstrike.
                      Dont worry Garland, an intervention team is underway. Please stay calm. Leaving your residence during an investigation is a felony under US law: Reference #1053-12


                      If you would like to fill in a complaint, please call 606-262-7606. Your reference code is #90637895.

                      Thank you for your cooperation.

                      Comment

                      • #13
                        Originally posted by Mr. Arieson
                        Really?

                        I can't let this one go.

                        Bible prophecies have never been wrong? Says who? The bible? Oh, I bet you are going to say that this represents that, and that represents this...perhaps point to the book of revelation and say that the 6 headed beast rising from the sea represents modern day Israel, Russia and the whore of babylon represents the Catholic church. Oh sure, you will say this with a straight face. But then when it comes to the book of Genesis, you will absolutely say it is literally true, every single word. And you will use that to justify your voting on certain issues, and try your best to make sure that the rest of the country has to live under your un-patriotic and irreligious rules. For people that suscribe to your mind-set, the first part of the bible is always to be taken literally. So much so, that school boards in Kansas basically no longer allow Science in the classroom. But the book of revalation and perhaps a few other places that contain so called "prophecy" is to be taken as allegory. Is that what you are saying? Becuase if you are not, then show me the proof. Show me the events you are saying the bible predicted. And I don't mean general type prophecies, like "one day the there will be an earthquake", but something specific.....

                        You can't. I already know.
                        I have nothing against you personally, but your right-wing type of religious beliefs drive me nuts. On one hand you mention "liberal la-la land" (meaning that anyone with Liberal beliefs is crazy and irrational) in your tag, yet you also post pictures of scantily clad models. I think you need to study the bible more. Be less concerned with Dick Hardman's end-of-the-world and UFO conspiracies, and more with helping the poor and loving God with all your heart. There should be enough on your plate just handling those two things.
                        "When Jesus comes back, these crazy, greedy, capitalistic men are gonna kill him again. " -Mike Tyson

                        Comment

                        • #14
                          Originally posted by Mr. Arieson
                          Really?

                          I can't let this one go.

                          Bible prophecies have never been wrong? Says who? The bible? Oh, I bet you are going to say that this represents that, and that represents this...perhaps point to the book of revelation and say that the 6 headed beast rising from the sea represents modern day Israel, Russia and the whore of babylon represents the Catholic church. Oh sure, you will say this with a straight face. But then when it comes to the book of Genesis, you will absolutely say it is literally true, every single word. And you will use that to justify your voting on certain issues, and try your best to make sure that the rest of the country has to live under your un-patriotic and irreligious rules. For people that suscribe to your mind-set, the first part of the bible is always to be taken literally. So much so, that school boards in Kansas basically no longer allow Science in the classroom. But the book of revalation and perhaps a few other places that contain so called "prophecy" is to be taken as allegory. Is that what you are saying? Becuase if you are not, then show me the proof. Show me the events you are saying the bible predicted. And I don't mean general type prophecies, like "one day the there will be an earthquake", but something specific.....

                          You can't. I already know.
                          I have nothing against you personally, but your right-wing type of religious beliefs drive me nuts. On one hand you mention "liberal la-la land" (meaning that anyone with Liberal beliefs is crazy and irrational) in your tag, yet you also post pictures of scantily clad models. I think you need to study the bible more. Be less concerned with Dick Hardman's end-of-the-world and UFO conspiracies, and more with helping the poor and loving God with all your heart. There should be enough on your plate just handling those two things.
                          First off, I am a Conservative, not a "right wing Neocon"... and I am not against Science, I am all for Science, as far as all the evidence, Secular Historians have verified and acknowledge the existence of Jesus Christ, and the Bible is not only God's infallible Word, but a Historical book that can be backed up by Science, History, testimony from Non-Christian sources, and on and on... I am pretty much done with the two sided endless liberal vs conservative rants, but I just am not a fan of liberal politics or policies, no offense to libs though.

                          Down from History, God's Word has been perfectly preserved, people who say otherwise either don't know what they're talking about or would always say anything against Christianity anyway.

                          And as far as the models, who doesn't like beautiful women... don't be so uptight. I quit posting them though because people like you seem to like to point out and cry about it... as if Christian Men should act like they don't notice women.

                          Comment

                          • #15
                            Originally posted by Mike Brewer
                            I want you to know I hung my head and observed a moment of silence when I saw you were no longer posting the hotties. It was a dark time.
                            Yeah the Pharisees ruined it man... they will take everything over the top... just like when they called Jesus a Winebibber and Glutton the moment they saw the wine and if he took a second helping of food..

                            Comment

                              • Previous 1 2 template Next
                              Working...
                              X