new world order!!

Torakx · 06-07-2010 2:03am

Ye that was probably a ct at one time alright.I had myself figured him to be first eu prez.But what are you skeptical of exactly?
I hadnt thought that the youtube vid would be a fake.I guess possible but i discounted that straight away because it would be a pointless post to do so imo.

drdeadlift · 06-07-2010 3:12pm

ok so you have all your world leaders/important people in there little holes,how does the population above die?

nyarlothothep · 06-07-2010 5:27pm

humanji wrote: »

Anyone who believes governments must murder billions of people is delusional.

its happened before, maybe not on the order of billions but even so

humanji · 06-07-2010 5:56pm

You missed the "must" part of my post. There's an assumption going around that mass genocide is going to happen and that there's no alternative.

mugs1 · 06-07-2010 7:45pm

humanji wrote: »

Anyone who believes governments must murder billions of people is delusional.

Carefull there humanji... sounds to me like you might be insulting their thought Process!

humanji · 06-07-2010 8:03pm

Stop trolling!

mugs1 · 06-07-2010 8:41pm

Am I alowed to responed to that post above??

tallus · 06-07-2010 8:58pm

if you have a problem with a mod decision you're supposed to message them.
As per the charter.

Yitzhak Rabin · 06-07-2010 9:06pm

There's also a fine feedback thread where you can put forward any issues you have.

Torakx · 07-07-2010 2:38am

mugs1 wrote: »

Carefull there humanji... sounds to me like you might be insulting their thought Process!

Just a note.This is not a response to a mod decision,unless mods decide on governments too hehe..but maybe a bit cheeky lol
I think that its true we should not assume they need or definetly will kill off billions.
It only appears to be a plan.Considering the stuff going around on eugenics and all the cover orgs for that i migth think its reasonable to consider it a possibility for the NWO at some stage.
I saw an on youtube a vid saying they wish to kill off 3 billion by 2050..But then thought wouldnt we gain 3 billion by that time anyway if not more?
Ah but then i wasnt considering eugenics and "planned parenting" etc...so its kind of complicated to see exactly how things could pan out.

me_right_one · 08-07-2010 5:30pm

Does anybody else think a NWO would be a good thing? I do! Look up the Georgia guidestones people, it makes sense to control the way the world is run, instead of letting the population, resources, etc cause the demise of ALL of us!

espinolman · 11-07-2010 12:23am

Google : CIA Denver .

vampire of kilmainham · 11-07-2010 3:05am

TA SIAD A TEACHT. SO WATCH YE ALL FOR YOU KNOW NOT THE DAY NOR THE HOUR:eek::eek::eek:

GerardKeating · 11-07-2010 10:48am

davemc180 wrote: »

there no need to have huge storage rooms with strange sprinklers in the roof ( gas chambers )

Or just fire sprinklers...

davemc180 · 27-07-2010 6:53pm

GerardKeating wrote: »

Or just fire sprinklers...

but why would you need fire sprinklers in a bare concrete room?

theres nothin there to burn

Audiomad · 28-07-2010 8:11pm

The new world order are real just different names Bilderberg is another.

here are some Video's

Russia Today :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmM61kSMTR0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4UJRF0YM_M
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wxIPccqWzU

The symbols in films and where the Saying new world order came from " World leaders saying it" :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvnNAzCgd5E

The independent :
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/what-are-the-bilderberg-group-really-doing-in-spain-1991021.html

Bilderbergs in Dublin :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2D5imvMAuLM

K-9 · 28-07-2010 11:28pm

Would Russia Today be a reliable source on this type of stuff? I've watched it a few times and they seem to have their own agenda, though make some good points.

Audiomad · 28-07-2010 11:46pm

K-9 wrote: »

Would Russia Today be a reliable source on this type of stuff? I've watched it a few times and they seem to have their own agenda, though make some good points.

They question a lot of stuff like the Bilderbergs, even global warming and wars. I trust them a lot more than the RTE. Max Keiser is also good he criticizes the banks in America and other countries.

K-9 · 29-07-2010 1:02am

Audiomad wrote: »

They question a lot of stuff like the Bilderbergs, even global warming and wars. I trust them a lot more than the RTE. Max Keiser is also good he criticizes the banks in America and other countries.

He seemed good, but biased again. Seem no different to Fox, CNN, Sky etc, they all have their own agenda. RT just appeals to another type of agenda, but it interesting, al the same.

Audiomad · 29-07-2010 11:34am

Fox & Sky are sister companies they never talk out against their own Governments, Russia Today, Press TV & Al Jazeera all do and openly question other Governments too.

CNN I watch too they are good but some topics they do hold back.

Di0genes · 04-08-2010 4:31pm

Audiomad wrote: »

Fox & Sky are sister companies they never talk out against their own Governments,

Yes Fox news that bastion of support for the Obama administration....

Russia Today, Press TV & Al Jazeera all do and openly question other Governments too.

Russia Today is a state run media. Its insanely biased.

CNN I watch too they are good but some topics they do hold back.

So lets be clear. Murdoch bad? Turner good?

Audiomad · 04-08-2010 5:52pm

Di0genes wrote: »

Yes Fox news that bastion of support for the Obama administration....

They don't like Obama!

Russia Today is a state run media. Its insanely biased

.

And other news agencies are not?

So lets be clear. Murdoch bad? Turner good?

What? who said CNN where bad?

Di0genes · 04-08-2010 6:11pm

Audiomad wrote: »

They don't like Obama!

So you've flat out contradicted yourself within two posts. Bravo.
.

And other news agencies are not?

Other news agencies aren't run with the express intention of spreading their government line.

What? who said CNN where bad?

Oh Christ. You said you liked CNN, I pointed out that CNN is run by a media tycoon Ted Turner, while you don't like Fox which is run by a media tycoon Murdoch.

Simiplies.

Audiomad · 04-08-2010 6:20pm

Di0genes wrote: »

So you've flat out contradicted yourself within two posts. Bravo.
.

???

Other news agencies aren't run with the express intention of spreading their government line.

Yes they do, all governments own or have a major say in media!

Oh Christ. You said you liked CNN, I pointed out that CNN is run by a media tycoon Ted Turner, while you don't like Fox which is run by a media tycoon Murdoch.

Simiplies.

And? I know who owns them so what?

you might want to go back and read what I actually said!!

Di0genes · 04-08-2010 10:39pm

Audiomad wrote: »

???

Yes they do, all governments own or have a major say in media!

Facts source links?

And? I know who owns them so what?

Because the level of control different. For example I worked in sy news for 4 years and never saw Murdoch once.

you might want to go back and read what I actually said!!

Yeah I did.

My name is URL · 04-08-2010 10:43pm

Di0genes wrote: »

Facts source links?

Because the level of control different. For example I worked in sy news for 4 years and never saw Murdoch once.

Yeah I did.

You can't discredit claims by spouting your own.. Want proof-linksers.. lol?

Guessing you meant Sky, btw... So where's your Linkedin page.. etc?

Di0genes · 05-08-2010 10:41am

My name is URL wrote: »

You can't discredit claims by spouting your own.. Want proof-linksers.. lol?

Oh dear see now I make you look silly

“The pressure of the state on the Russian mass media is still mounting,” Ms. Bonnamour goes on. She calls the setting up of the round-the-clock English-language Russia Today TV channel “another step of the state to control information”. The denial to extend the accreditation for ABC and “an enormous fine” that the Court of Arbitration charged from Kommersant Daily to satisfy Alfa Bank’s suit are measures of the same kind, according to experts of Reporters Without Borders.

That'd be reporters with out borders who rate russia 138 out 167 in countries with a free media

http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?idr=530&id=619775

Guessing you meant Sky, btw... So where's your Linkedin page.. etc?

Yes because a linken page is proof of a career. :rolleyes: I've also worked for Al Jazeera and CNN

My name is URL · 05-08-2010 11:46am

Di0genes wrote: »

Oh dear see now I make you look silly

That'd be reporters with out borders who rate russia 138 out 167 in countries with a free media

http://www.kommersant.com/page.asp?idr=530&id=619775

Yes because a linken page is proof of a career. :rolleyes: I've also worked for Al Jazeera and CNN

The point I was making, albeit somewhat drunkenly.. was that if you're going to shoot down a claim which suggests that governments have a say in the media, by claiming to work for said media, then it's only fair if you can back up your own claim when asking others to back up theirs.

Have you heard of the CNN Effect?.. and how Psyops are sometimes incorporated into the reporting of the news?

Di0genes · 05-08-2010 11:48am

My name is URL wrote: »

The point I was making, albeit somewhat drunkenly.. was that if you're going to shoot down a claim which suggests that governments have a say in the media, by claiming to work for said media, then it's only fair if you can back up your own claim when asking others to back up theirs.

No really I think you were making more sense while drunk.

Have you heard of the CNN Effect?.. and how Psyops are sometimes incorporated into the reporting of the news?

I have heard the one about the bishop and the actress. Does it go anything like that?

My name is URL · 05-08-2010 11:49am

Di0genes wrote: »

No really I think you were making more sense while drunk.

I have heard the one about the bishop and the actress. Does it go anything like that?

lol.. you're a poor troll really

new world order!!

Comments