The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the New World Order

Login or register to post comments Last Post 43582 reads   232 posts
Viewing 10 posts - 211 through 220 (of 232 total)
  • Fri, Apr 24, 2009 - 03:29am

    #211
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1616

    count placeholder

    Re: Move Thread to Controversial Topics?

[quote=SamLinder]As you’ve said to me in the past, c1oudfire, you don’t have to visit or read this thread. There are plenty of threads that I do not read and/or comment on as they are of minimal interest to me. There are others that I simply read without comment because the topic interests me but I have nothing to offer.

The very name of this thread speaks of its controversial nature – thus, those who don’t want to play in this sandbox shouldn’t visit (to paraphrase that which was told to me in another thread).

[/quote]

It’s time I clarified something with you, Sam.  After some thought, I think I know the post to which you are referring  . . . and it was not explicitly directed at you, nor was it intended to apply to you, individually.  It was a rhetorical question, as I recall, and was not meant to be taken personally.  Sometimes I want to make general observations, or pose rhetorical questions, without reference to any given individual or group of individuals.  Sometimes those rhetorical questions, are just that, and are not intended to be judgmental statements. . . .  If and when I want to say something to you personally, or direct an observation to a specific group of individuals, I will address it to you or them explicitly.  Unless I do so, you can rest assured that my comments are not about you, even if it happens that my post, by chance, follows yours, perhaps because that’s just when I had time to catch up on the thread, and post a comment. 

I think you will find that when I have a statement to make to a given individual, or group of individuals, especially when I feel there is cause to complain, I am pretty fearless about being direct, and to the point, within the bounds of civility.  If I do not address you directly, then you can safely assume that my "thinking aloud" or rhetorical question is not directed at you specifically, and is likely not directed at anyone specifically. 

I do not want to dissect, line by line, some passing conversation of a few days or weeks ago.  But I do want to let you know that this is my communication style, and that you can rest assured that if I have a bone to pick with you, my approach will be unequivocally clear.  Otherwise, you can assume that general statements that I make and rhetorical questions that I pose are just that, and that they do not have a hidden meaning. 

  • Fri, Apr 24, 2009 - 03:53am

    #212
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1616

    count placeholder

    Re: The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the New World Order

[quote=SamLinder]

Hey Worker Bee,

While researching your Emad A. Salem information, I came across the following site:

http://www.911blogger.com/node/6633  (10 False Flags That Changed the World)

Fascinating stuff and pretty much all true. Certainly lends some credence to some of the stuff that’s going on in recent times.

I don’t, by any means, discount that bad stuff happens – nor do I discount that conspiracies exist. I just have trouble with some of the more outlandish claims that are made in this thread and others. When tens of thousands of people are purportedly involved, it makes it difficult to believe. Good conspiracies are usually held close to the vest and very few people are involved.

As for Emad A. Salem, his involvement with the FBI appears to be factual. Some of the material I uncovered appears to implicate him in the bombing – others indicate he was fired by the FBI months prior to the bombing and not hired back until many months later. Is the FBI guilty of involvement in the 1993 WTC bombing? Possibly so. If true, it appears to be due more to stupidity and ineptness than maliciousness. Perhaps more time will have to pass before it gets added to the "False Flags" list.

[/quote]

Hey Sam,

     Thanks for looking up Emad Salem.  It seems contradictory to the directive of the FBI when they had the opportunity to supply inert explosives for the bomb and failed to do so.  If certain people had been doing their job the first bombing would have never happened.  I have a hard time buying that this was just ineptness on part of the agency.  

     You write "when tens of thousands of people are purportedly involved, it makes it difficult to believe."  I don’t think "tens of thousands" is the case.  You can have people in key positions who direct the operation by telling subordinates to leave it be (example: Operation Able Danger (US Military) or the Phoenix Memo (FBI)), or reassign people to different areas if they insist on being a problem by trying to do their job.  I don’t know if you’ve ever read anything on the London Bombing of 7/7, but it accidentally came out that  the authorities were running a "drill" of the exact scenario of what actually transpired.  A statistician did an analysis on the odds of this happening and it was "x" trillion to 1 of this being a coincident.  In the case of 9/11 they (NORAD) just happened to be doing "drills" of high jacked airliners.  This is one of the known reasons response time was so painfully slow with fighter jets responding to high jacked airliners.  The flight that hit the Pentagon flew for 80 minutes after it was known that it was high jacked.  This is the most guarded airspace in the world, yet a known threat penetrated the airspace and hit its target.  In the above examples 99% of the people in NORAD or the multitude of other agencies were doing their jobs, taking part in drills, distracted enough to react slowly or having resources diverted far enough away (jet fighters) to be rendered ineffective.  That is why I do not believe it would take "tens of thousands".

     I do not know if you ever watched the low budget, but very well done movie titled "Who Killed John O’Neil?" it’s available on Google Video.  I’ve posted this here before, but in case you don’t know the story, John O’Neil quit the FBI out of frustration of being hamstrung while trying to pursue Bin Laden.  He was consistently blocked by the White House and superiors at the FBI in his pursuit of Bin Laden.  He went to work as head of security for the Trade Center and was killed on 9/11.  It is but another example of the US having chances to get at the terrorist, but someone, somewhere won’t allow it to happen. 

     A recent post asked what does this have to do with the 3 E’s?  I think it has a lot to do with them.  The economy is melting down before out eyes, the recent MIAC and DHS memos label anyone as extremist or potential terrorist who attended a Tea Party, voted for Ron Paul, buys guns and/or ammo, knows the Constitution and The Bill of Rights, or wears white underwear.  The tools are now in place to deal with these potential threats to the federal government.  9/11 brought about the rush to pass the PATRIOT Act without review.  I remember arguing with someone several years ago about the PATRIOT Act, and they said "you don’t have anything to worry about if you haven’t done anything wrong".  Now look at all the afore mentioned people that are "doing something wrong". 

  • Fri, Apr 24, 2009 - 07:21am

    #213
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1616

    count placeholder

    Re: The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the New World Order

[quote=redpoe]Is the government which manufactured 9/11 also the one which created the fiasco in Iraq?[/quote]

it’s not the official govt, though.  the NWO types don’t claim that it was an official act of the US govt to do 9/11…that would indeed be impossible because there are plenty of govt types that are honest.  rather they claim it was what has come to be called the shadow govt…the well-entrenched network that operates behind the scenes which involves a few hi-level govt infiltrators, intell orgs, financiers, etc.  they know how to manipulate govt to do certain things.  for example, if you can pulloff a domestic terror attack, what is the US govt going to do?  a guy like Bush is going to rally americans to start overthrowing countries, wiretap citizens, establish a massive homeland security dept, etc, all of which happened.  so the shadow types just need to stage the problem and then the official government automatically handles the rest.

Iraq is a fiasco in terms of the supposed official mission, Bush is a total failure as a result, but it’s a success if the CIA’s goal was to establish a massive US presence in the middle east to secure our oil future and keep China/Russia from gaining permanent strategic advantage as we move into the 21st century (it’s insane and paranoid, but from their perspective it would be a success).

[quote]I agree that this thread is irrelevant because of the 3 E’s.  What difference does it make who is on top of the financial rubble years from now?[/quote]

my view is that if enough people wakeup to what’s really happening, then we will fight for the end of the empire and a society based on local community will rise again…that’s the way I want to deal with the 3 E’s.  if people just sit back and let the feds do what they’re currently doing we will move further toward global currency/control/oppression…not the way I want to deal with the 3 E’s.  

  • Sat, Apr 25, 2009 - 03:12am

    #214
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1616

    count placeholder

    Re: Move Thread to Controversial Topics?

[quote=c1oudfire]

[quote=SamLinder]As you’ve said to me in the past, c1oudfire, you don’t have to visit or read this thread. There are plenty of threads that I do not read and/or comment on as they are of minimal interest to me. There are others that I simply read without comment because the topic interests me but I have nothing to offer.

The very name of this thread speaks of its controversial nature – thus, those who don’t want to play in this sandbox shouldn’t visit (to paraphrase that which was told to me in another thread).

[/quote]

It’s time I clarified something with you, Sam.  After some thought, I think I know the post to which you are referring  . . . and it was not explicitly directed at you, nor was it intended to apply to you, individually.  It was a rhetorical question, as I recall, and was not meant to be taken personally.  Sometimes I want to make general observations, or pose rhetorical questions, without reference to any given individual or group of individuals.  Sometimes those rhetorical questions, are just that, and are not intended to be judgmental statements. . . .  If and when I want to say something to you personally, or direct an observation to a specific group of individuals, I will address it to you or them explicitly.  Unless I do so, you can rest assured that my comments are not about you, even if it happens that my post, by chance, follows yours, perhaps because that’s just when I had time to catch up on the thread, and post a comment. 

I think you will find that when I have a statement to make to a given individual, or group of individuals, especially when I feel there is cause to complain, I am pretty fearless about being direct, and to the point, within the bounds of civility.  If I do not address you directly, then you can safely assume that my "thinking aloud" or rhetorical question is not directed at you specifically, and is likely not directed at anyone specifically. 

I do not want to dissect, line by line, some passing conversation of a few days or weeks ago.  But I do want to let you know that this is my communication style, and that you can rest assured that if I have a bone to pick with you, my approach will be unequivocally clear.  Otherwise, you can assume that general statements that I make and rhetorical questions that I pose are just that, and that they do not have a hidden meaning. 

[/quote]

c1oudfire,

Haven’t been ignoring you – just busy.

I appreciate your taking the time to clarify your position. I shall try to be more aware of your penchant for generalizing when a comment is not specifically directed at any one individual.

BTW, your use of explanatory bracketed comments or use of "smiley" faces certainly helps show your "tongue in cheek" side and removes any potential sting.

  • Sat, Apr 25, 2009 - 03:25am

    #215
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1616

    count placeholder

    Re: The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the New World Order

[quote=strabes]

[quote=redpoe]Is the government which manufactured 9/11 also the one which created the fiasco in Iraq?[/quote]

it’s not the official govt, though.  the NWO types don’t claim that it was an official act of the US govt to do 9/11…that would indeed be impossible because there are plenty of govt types that are honest.  rather they claim it was what has come to be called the shadow govt…the well-entrenched network that operates behind the scenes which involves a few hi-level govt infiltrators, intell orgs, financiers, etc.  they know how to manipulate govt to do certain things.  for example, if you can pulloff a domestic terror attack, what is the US govt going to do?  a guy like Bush is going to rally americans to start overthrowing countries, wiretap citizens, establish a massive homeland security dept, etc, all of which happened.  so the shadow types just need to stage the problem and then the official government automatically handles the rest.

Iraq is a fiasco in terms of the supposed official mission, Bush is a total failure as a result, but it’s a success if the CIA’s goal was to establish a massive US presence in the middle east to secure our oil future and keep China/Russia from gaining permanent strategic advantage as we move into the 21st century (it’s insane and paranoid, but from their perspective it would be a success).

[quote]I agree that this thread is irrelevant because of the 3 E’s.  What difference does it make who is on top of the financial rubble years from now?[/quote]

my view is that if enough people wakeup to what’s really happening, then we will fight for the end of the empire and a society based on local community will rise again…that’s the way I want to deal with the 3 E’s.  if people just sit back and let the feds do what they’re currently doing we will move further toward global currency/control/oppression…not the way I want to deal with the 3 E’s.  

[/quote]

strabes,

Re your post on 4/23 at 1851 (post #204) and this one.

You make some very valid points that there are some nefarious goings on within certain segments of our government. However, while I agree with many of your perspectives, I have to wonder if organizations like the CFR are simply not red herrings.

I find it hard to swallow that everybody nominated/accepted into the CFR becomes a willing accomplice to the evil goings-on in the "shadow government". You’re suggesting that hundreds, if not thousands, of people are being co-opted into "the dark side" without a single one saying "wait a minute – this is wrong and I’m not going to do this".

Even if almost everything you say is true, do you sincerely believe that the leaders of our military (most of them outstanding, honest, patriotic men and women) would not only stand by, but even go along with the dissolution of our constitution and pledge itself to an unelected government? That would fly in the face of everything they and I hold dear about this country.

I don’t know about you but, even at my age, I would have to become part of a new American revolution and I know I’m not alone in that feeling.

  • Sat, Apr 25, 2009 - 04:15am

    #216
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1616

    count placeholder

    Re: The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the New World Order

germany 1933 sam

  • Sat, Apr 25, 2009 - 04:16am

    #217
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1616

    count placeholder

    Re: The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the New World Order

linda blair in the exorcist made my head spin

  • Sat, Apr 25, 2009 - 04:21am

    #218
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1616

    count placeholder

    Re: The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the New World Order

this is great greg.

the average caveman had a higher iq than the average american today……………reason he didnt watch tv

  • Sat, Apr 25, 2009 - 04:23am

    #219
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1616

    count placeholder

    Re: The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the New World Order

in the stages of awareness i place this in denial

  • Sat, Apr 25, 2009 - 04:26am

    #220
    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Peak Prosperity Admin

    Status Bronze Member (Offline)

    Joined: Oct 31 2017

    Posts: 1616

    count placeholder

    Re: The Complete Idiot’s Guide to the New World Order

for anyone doubting the fact that there is an elite in this country which wishes to rule it without the mess of democracy i suggest reading some walter lippman…………..very interesting indeed

Viewing 10 posts - 211 through 220 (of 232 total)

Login or Register to post comments