err.... Global Government anyone??


dorave
 Share

Recommended Posts

Has anyone read the original security paper? The one quote on that page doesn't seem to suggest a one world government. Instead, you read the following:

- Relative Certainty: A global multipolar system is emerging with the rise of China, India, and others. The relative power of nonstate actors-businesses, tribes, religious organizations, and even criminal networks-also will increase.

That doesn't suggest a one world government. It suggests a loss of local power due to globalization: Specifically, companies that can simply laterally move to avoid laws and/or taxes they don't like mean that local governments have less power. Less power for local government naturally increases the power of nonstate conglomerates like businesses, religious organizations, criminal networks and the like.

That's pretty much word-for-word what the single quote on this says from that. Maybe I'm missing something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone read the original security paper? The one quote on that page doesn't seem to suggest a one world government. Instead, you read the following:

That doesn't suggest a one world government. It suggests a loss of local power due to globalization: Specifically, companies that can simply laterally move to avoid laws and/or taxes they don't like mean that local governments have less power. Less power for local government naturally increases the power of nonstate conglomerates like businesses, religious organizations, criminal networks and the like.

That's pretty much word-for-word what the single quote on this says from that. Maybe I'm missing something?

What does that have to do with anything??? I think I'm missing something!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does that have to do with anything??? I think I'm missing something!!!!

I think you might be. Do you know what the actual discussion we're having on is about?

We're talking about a one world government. This paper is being quoted as proof we're moving towards one, but the paper itself didn't seem to say that at all. It said almost the exact opposite.

Or maybe I misunderstood where your confusion was. You recognize we're talking about Glenn Beck stating we're moving towards a one world government and then he goes on to state that the government recognizes this with this paper?

I'm just not seeing your confusion. I'm sorry. If you could be a bit more specific about what part you aren't sure on, I could be more helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anyone read the original security paper? The one quote on that page doesn't seem to suggest a one world government. Instead, you read the following:

That doesn't suggest a one world government. It suggests a loss of local power due to globalization: Specifically, companies that can simply laterally move to avoid laws and/or taxes they don't like mean that local governments have less power. Less power for local government naturally increases the power of nonstate conglomerates like businesses, religious organizations, criminal networks and the like.

That's pretty much word-for-word what the single quote on this says from that. Maybe I'm missing something?

Depends on what you are open minded to.. which I doubt you are in regards to the report.

Coz It states quite clearly that a strategic shift is in place n has been for sometime, however it does not openly, say a one world government is a group of individuals plotting to take over the world to plunder the masses and take control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. You recognize we're talking about Glenn Beck stating we're moving towards a one world government and then he goes on to state that the government recognizes this with this paper?

Do you even read it??

Or you did you just see Glenn's comments then go thru the report looking for proof to prove or dispell his remarks??

Sheesh, this isnt about Glenn Beck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you even read it??

Or you did you just see Glenn's comments then go thru the report looking for proof to prove or dispell his remarks??

Sheesh, this isnt about Glenn Beck.

It's not about Glenn Beck. It's about someone taking a report, not reading it and drawing conclusions that aren't supported by the text.

Did you read the paper this whole thing was based on? I'm more than willing to be proven wrong here. Just show me where in the paper it supports the conclusions he's talking about. I don't mind someone saying there's a movement to one world government. I do take issue with someone making up conclusions to papers that don't support that at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Has anybody watched the full version of 'Fall of The Republic' on YouTube? If not it's worth a watch to anybody wanting to watch something on 'The New World Order'

About 25 years ago I was reading a lot on the subject -- finally got burned out on it with my rants at the time -- got away from it all for years -- and then checked this video out a couple of weeks ago, which I thought was really well done -- kind of an updated version for me.

Like FDR said once many years ago about the Presidency -- 'A President is not Elected, he is Selected'

I think people that get into this stuff will love it -- I was going to provide a link, but I'm at work and can't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not about Glenn Beck. It's about someone taking a report, not reading it and drawing conclusions that aren't supported by the text.

Did you read the paper this whole thing was based on? I'm more than willing to be proven wrong here. Just show me where in the paper it supports the conclusions he's talking about. I don't mind someone saying there's a movement to one world government. I do take issue with someone making up conclusions to papers that don't support that at all.

What the heck are you claiming again, specifically? You are coming off like a big rant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't we have any Trekkers here, who would support the notion of a planetary government a la United Earth? Trek takes it even further and establishes an interplanetary government in the form of the Federation!

Personally, I'm all for a global government, as long as it's a representative republic that protects individual rights.

Shalom. :)

HEP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What the heck are you claiming again, specifically? You are coming off like a big rant.

All right. Maybe I'm talking about the wrong link, then. Here's the beginning of said link that I'm reading:

Global Government by 2025?

September 23, 2010 - 14:51 ET

Wait, that isn't your goal? You need to get on board. The National Intelligence Council has put together a report titled: "Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World". The NIC is a center of strategic thinking within the US Government, reporting to the Director of National Intelligence... they provide the President and senior policymakers with analysis of foreign policy issues that have been reviewed and coordinated throughout the Intelligence Community. So, what are some of their estimates? Take a look...

Now, I'm going to go step by step rather than jump to the end of my conclusions because, clearly, I'm being confusing: Would you agree that this whole title leads us to believe that the paper is supporting the idea that there will be a global government by 2025?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't we have any Trekkers here, who would support the notion of a planetary government a la United Earth? Trek takes it even further and establishes an interplanetary government in the form of the Federation!

ST : Deep Space 9 did a great service to the whole thing, by having the Ferrengi Quark [unrestrained capitalism] and the Cardassian Garek [socialism to the point of fascism] sitting at the bar griping about the Federation.

QUARK: Here, I want you to try something for me. Take a sip of this.

GARAK: What is it?

QUARK: A human drink. It's called "root-beer".

GARAK: I don't know...

QUARK: Go ahead. Aren't you just a little bit curious?

[Garak hesitates a beat, but then takes a sip. He immediately makes a face.]

QUARK: What do you think?

GARAK: It's vile.

QUARK: I know. It's so bubbly and cloying and ... happy.

GARAK: Just like the Federation.

QUARK: But you know what's really frightening? If you drink enough of it, you start to like it.

GARAK: It's insidious.

QUARK: Just like the Federation.

LM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ST : Deep Space 9 did a great service to the whole thing, by having the Ferrengi Quark [unrestrained capitalism] and the Cardassian Garek [socialism to the point of fascism] sitting at the bar griping about the Federation.

QUARK: Here, I want you to try something for me. Take a sip of this.

GARAK: What is it?

QUARK: A human drink. It's called "root-beer".

GARAK: I don't know...

QUARK: Go ahead. Aren't you just a little bit curious?

[Garak hesitates a beat, but then takes a sip. He immediately makes a face.]

QUARK: What do you think?

GARAK: It's vile.

QUARK: I know. It's so bubbly and cloying and ... happy.

GARAK: Just like the Federation.

QUARK: But you know what's really frightening? If you drink enough of it, you start to like it.

GARAK: It's insidious.

QUARK: Just like the Federation.

LM

I loved that episode.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share