http://dmiessler.com/blog/a-logical-approach-to-the-council-on-foreign-relations-cfr-and-one-world-government-nwo-conspiracy

—————————–

What, you’ve got an infallible crystal ball with which you can foresee future events? Then tell me whose going to win the 2nd race at Santa Anita during any day in the first week of Sept. this year.

Myself, I voted for Paul in my state’s primary. Now I wait to see what happens next. Anything and everything, or nothing at all, can happen between now (Mar. 08) and the Republican convention 1-4 Sept. 08.

I don’t make ‘excuses’ for Paul’s performance to date, as reported in the media. I do think it’s a valid point to state delegates are not necessarily committed to McAmnesty. To many, perception is reality.

What happens next, happens next. Who will be President in ’09 will be President.

Remember, the democrat socialists see the state as this “friend who is always there, looking out for ya”. To my knowledge, this concept of a parentalist-state being invisible and somehow not connected with the oppression of liberty has hardly even worked out in fiction, as Star Trek would attest(DS9 comes to mind, primarily).

Honestly, I see very little reason for disillusionment due to Cronkite’s stance. I really wouldn’t even give him the satisfaction of importance due to the traitorous nature of his remarks are to the concept of our sovereignty Constitution.

Of course, in the “new world order”, Constitution writes you! They’ll probably just poo-poo such worries with “Well there’s nothing to worry about if we make a *new* constitution!”

With such, I can only end with a face-palm.

The man known as “The Most Trusted Man In America” said in his acceptance speech:

“It seems to many of us that if we are to avoid the eventual catastrophic world conflict we must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government patterned after our own government with a legislature, executive and judiciary, and police to enforce its international laws and keep the peace,”

he continued:
“To do that, of course, we Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty. That would be a bitter pill. It would take a lot of courage, a lot of faith in the new order.”

Hillary Clinton came on CCTV to congratulate Mr.Cronkite on accepting the award.

Well if you can’t trust Walter Cronkite that there is a move towards world government and to destroy ALL nations sovereignty, who can you trust?

Nuff said…

Thanks for a pretty objective conversation.

“…This regionalization is in keeping with the Tri-Lateral Plan which calls for a gradual convergence of East and West, ultimately leading toward the goal of “one world government’….National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept…” Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor to President Jimmy Carter, cofounder of Trilateral Commission, Foreign Policy Advisor to Barack Obama

The term Internationalism has been popularized in recent years to cover an interlocking financial, political, and economic world force for the purpose of establishing a World Government. Today Internationalism is heralded from pulpit and platform as a ‘League of Nations’ or a ‘Federated Union’ to which the United States must surrender a definite part of its National Sovereignty. The World Government plan is being advocated under such alluring names as the ‘New International Order,’ ‘The New World Order,’ ‘World Union Now,’ ‘World Commonwealth of Nations,’ ‘World Community,’ etc. All the terms have the same objective; however, the line of approach may be religious or political according to the taste or training of the individual.” Excerpt from A Memorial to be Addressed to the House of Bishops and the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in General Convention (October 1940)”The New World Order will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down…but in the end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much more than the old fashioned frontal assault.” CFR member Richard Gardner, writing in the April l974 issue of the CFR’s journal, Foreign Affairs.

“But this present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for long. Already there are powerful forces at work that threaten to destroy all of our hopes and efforts to erect an enduring structure of global interdependence.” David Rockefeller, speaking at the Business Council for the United Nations, September 14, 1994.

“The Persian Gulf crisis is a rare opportunity to forge new bonds with old enemies (the Soviet Union)…Out of these troubled times a New World Order can emerge under a United Nations that performs as envisioned by its founders.” President George Bush, September 11, 1990.

“NAFTA is a major stepping stone to the New World Order.” Henry Kissinger when campaigning for the passage of NAFTA.

“In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.” Strobe Talbot, President Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State, as quoted in Time, July 20th, l992.

http://www.svpvril.com/nwo.html

Amazing how an article about Ron Paul turned into this! Ha!

*[for those interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memetics. ]

Memetics, at this point, is an interesting neo-darwinian proto-science which aims to be an analoge to genetics; only it deals with information (& information transmission), not genes.

There is still much work to be done to get it to the point where Biology is, so you’ll hear no argument from me that it has a while’s way to go to being an empirical science.

Interesting you mention the zeitgeist, as a certain animation series called Ghost In The Shell deals with the possibility of machines having a “ghost” or “spirit”, which somehow allows them consciousness. Of course, if you have a bit of an Objectivist-streak, you might want to stay clear of such nonsense :p.

But I do think it (memetics) will show it’s importance more and more as we delve further into the Information Age / a more Information-based economy/society. If nothing more, it is infact interesting stuff that’s great for a read if your trying to get brain working in the morning.

Then again, I’m terrible at sudoku, so to each their own, I guess.

@Nitroadict,
Memetics, huh. Isn’t that the same as mass psychology (sort of)? Well, that is a fine “theory” but more needs to be studied about that. It is almost a dogma within it’s self when you think about it. I think it is often angled to the “masses” to help label or group people together so propaganda can be used easier, but can also relate to those “at the top” if it is held to a true scientific standard. But that can be a whole other debate. Good food for thought though. I guess it can relate to the zeitgeist theory as well, in a way.

I had to revise that sentence, as I meant as far as the motivations for these bankers are concerned;?I was not generalizing the desire for profit as a desire for ‘ultimate power’. Dare I say it almost read like anti-capitalist drivel; I suppose the coffee was getting to me.

The label itself I suppose is useful in a debate, similar to the label “Libertarianism”, but with the label comes views assorted from serious skeptics to alarmist theorists who run amok in circular arguments concerning validity.

The correlation between secrecy and conspiracy is also quite true. This is one of the lessons I think we are learning, in spades I might add, with the advent of a much more inter-connected world, open-source vs. closed source, calls for transparency, globalism, etc.

However, while we are on the precipe of such a world taking a permanent residence in our foreseeable history, (because whether or not we like, some version of this increasingly inter-connected, interdependent world is coming towards us), we can also see the dangers that this changing word is presenting.

One prime danger, I think, is what whacko mentioned concerning bankers severing ties with their nationality, more openly creating their own class of self-declared and self-financed rule, and essentially trying to keep things the “same” in terms of the countries of the world’s own population not having true power or control over their country due to the “man behind the curtain”.

Again, though, I think the motivation is not under some grand scheme for a NWO, rather the tried and true “for profit” motive. I think the NWO concept is incidental to the more believable motive of “for-profit”.

Of course, desiring profit also yields a desire for more power. I also tend to think of the NWO concept as simple smoke & mirrors in some cases, to re-direct people’s rightful suspicion & concern upon themselves, in a possible tactic to prevent people from educating themselves, debating and discussing with others, in an effort to change things.

Of course, I also study memetics, so think of that what you will, I suppose.

I appreciate the debate that has taken place on this page, honestly. With the influx of Digg users migrating to Reddit, I had thought serious debate and/or conversation of such matters were unlikely 8D.

Paul has made many mistakes in this round of running for POTUS. He had raised so much money but hadn’t spent nearly enough to “get the word out” himself. Many of his supporters have been upset because of that. Not to mention he virtually said nothing when he was getting 0 votes in areas in NH where whole families voted for him. Not a word other than we have to move on. That , I believe, was the beginning of the end of his national campaign. Many felt betrayed for not making a bigger “to-do” about it. Besides that, his TV ads were awful!! I am a supporter of liberty and Ron Paul is my guy this year because I can not stomach the other choices, but damn, he needed to put a little more effort into it instead of JUST relying on the “grassroots”. Which, you have to admit (regardless of effectiveness) was quite impressive with imagination and energy. Ron Paul isn’t going to win but I do love our great nation and hope one day we do get a true defender of the constitution into office, instead sell outs.

@Nitroadict
Well put. Although I can understand the frustration that some have that often spills over to aggressiveness and often leads to their ridicule and the whole cycle begins again. It becomes an endeavor of circular arguments. I do agree that some of the most ardent “theorists” are often filled with more zeal than a Pope on Sunday, but I admire the conviction. Now once we figure out what went wrong with the education system, the family, and corruption in our government we could calm these “fears” down. It’s amazing that most of the people that decry “the politics of fear” use it as well to make a point. The whole NWO idea is not a “group” but a mindset. Can you deny we are in a “globalized world”? Of course not, we hear and see about it every day. I think the biggest problem about this is there is virtually no debate on the effects of globalizm on our nation, the family, and the individual. Not to mention sovereignty. I think a lot of people feel globalizm is being shoved down our throats and we “just have to except that”. Then we get into these ridiculous shouting matches that involve all sorts of semantical arguments that miss the real point. Yes globalizm is real, and no there has not be a real debate about it’s effects on us and the world. What is the endgame of it all? Once we make this whole thing more transparent most of these “conspiracies” will go away. Secracy breeds conspiracy, no secrets = no conspiracies. If you want to get rid of “conspiracy theorists” you have to get rid of the secracy that breeds it. Now I’m not talking about opening out weapon secrets up for the world to see, but if our nation has been up to no good we need to come to terms with that and reclaim our former good name. Thanks for the reply. May the light of truth shine on you all always!