How do we join the NWO?

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

OK, theoretical and hypothetical situations aside. How do we join the New World Order?

 

F*ck it!

 

If you can't beat them then join them until you can deal with things all quite like.

 

Those who argue that there is no NWO.......stfu and dig up some research that isn't full of crazies on both sides. I don't even care that there is one....where the f*ck do I sign up?

 

 

The rest of the loose cannon idiots need something to focus on. Why not make something good out of all the trashed looming evils?

 

Surely, with all the chaos of the world today and the information age there is a means to a proper format to do this without a completely staunch tyranny in control of everything and if not then let's get on with it......nothing ventured, nothing gained.

 

I would like the hope of settling the stars at least on the horizon before a bitter end. Eventually, we have to find a way to change the whole shebang.

 

NWO? Why not? Do something or quite whining when others do what you dislike. Join something and keep it moving toward something you appreciate and admire.

 

Discuss.

Edited March 7, 2013 by HolyGrenadeFrenzy

[Raavi]

For the love of god. Get The f*ck out with these Alex Jones type wacko topics.

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

I don't care about any of that, really in all sincerity.

 

I'm curious about the possibility of people deciding to find a way to get along with each other on the planet well enough to bridge the stars.

 

All the rest of it just seems to get in the way.

 

Truly.

 

--------

 

I'm not down with conservatives or liberals because the division point seems overly fabricated and doctrinal. Conservation and Liberty can get along just fine together once you remove hidden agenda.

 

So, speaking of agenda, I have found one that is worth having.

 

This system needs order on this planet that is not controlled by the current "top end" yet the only way that anything will change is if "we" think global and act local the planet over.

 

I don't think that it is that much to ask......regardless of the petty excuses.

Edited March 7, 2013 by HolyGrenadeFrenzy

[Raavi]

I give up.

[A J]

Ask Hulk Hogan, he was in it once.

[TheGodDamnMaster]

Ask this guy. He's a former "Insider" when he was Governor. Now he has a show dedicated to exposing the NWO.

 

 

 

But, in all seriousness, it's best to just give up on all of this conspiracy crap. I used to be really into it a couple years back, but all I ended up doing was looking like a dumbass. I learned to let go of it once people helped me realize what was so f*cked-up about that stuff.

[Fireman]

Nowadays if they don't have a Sign Up here, facebook or internet page, it doesn't exist.

[lil weasel]

Simple answer is:

Join any Political Party.

Try to get into the Masons or the Knights of Columbus.

Believe anything the In Power Government says.

See if there is a United Nations organization that you can volunteer for.

 

Then just live your life.

Edited March 7, 2013 by lil weasel

[TheGodDamnMaster]

Simple answer is:

Join any Political Party.

Try to get into the Masons or the Knights of Columbus.

Believe anything the In Power Government says.

See if there is a United Nations organization that you can volunteer for.

 

Then just live your life.

My dad is part of the Knights of Columbus. I think he might be a Freemason also because I saw a sash with the emblem on it in his closet.

 

I don't see what the big deal is anyway.

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

I am not asking for direction with it.

 

I just would like the discussion about the world finding a possiblity so that we can move ahead with a mind set toward a future in the stars.

 

The New World Order makes sense if it topples the Old World Order, which is what has been going under the tittle of the NWO for some time.

 

It is quite interesting to me that people assume so much about themselves and others.

 

My introduction to what is currently referred to as The NWO had nothing to do with Alex Jones or any conspiracy theorists what so ever. It wasn't even a college class or a library book that brought it to my attention.

 

It was a friend of mine that happens to be a noble, but that is another matter altogether and is very old news in my life.....older than most of you here.

 

Many groups get caught up in this topic and they themselves are divided on it, The Masons for instance.

 

 

I tend to be passionate in conviction and my courage far surpasses my conviction to my own error.

 

Yet....the use of logical fallacy is commonplace on forums and social networking sites and it is tiresome to continually get bombarded with it.

 

I do respect Jesse Ventura's Work and a good portion of Alex Jones as well. Although I do have to admit that there are some approaches with Alex that I find difficult because he dances on a line and openly with holds information. Sometimes this is to protect a source and sometimes it is simply because that truth is often less accepted when it doesn't have enough knowledge to apply logic to and the rhetoric is way down the line and out of sight until much else has happened in the education of a populace.

 

----------

 

Don't mind this ^^ stuff.

 

----------------

 

I am just curious what the GTAF would find as a reasonable NWO system, be it a stand alone or an interplanetary panel or a planetary coop.

 

Largely, international business has done away with the real barriers long ago and now the boundaries between countries and most culture is superficial or visionary and that is especially true throughout most of the United States. That is not to say that there is no culture, just that it has grown thin in the USA and that the melting pot has done it's job while at the same time there is much work to do.

 

The rest of the world doesn't wait for such things and thus certain things need doing, including questions that need to be ask.

 

What is reasonable for any tenant of a New World Order to maintain a realistic structure for this planet?

 

What things on this same merit are intolerable?

 

These are important things to consider.

 

What say you?

Edited March 7, 2013 by HolyGrenadeFrenzy

[sivispacem]

May I point out how objectionable the term New World Order is? The very use of it is the height of stupidity, in my humble opinion. If you want to express sentiments related to the basic tenets of the conspiracy theory, I really do advise you do so without invoking that phrase, because the fact is that it is a naive corruption of a legitimate political term that existed decades before it's use as a conspiracy theory, and the very use of it in this emotive but illusive sense demeans the user in the eyes of anyone with reasonable political knowledge. To anyone with a modicum of political education, "new world order" is any period in history marked by a sizeable shift in the structure of international political systems or in the strategic balance of power. It isn't synonymous with anything else.

[na89340qv0n34b09q340]

Three crazies that I know of, and another one to add to the list. Fun.

 

Anyway, don't ask questions. They'll be the first ones to go is the ones that think they know what's going on, or look for an answer.

[Shenmue18]

I think you'd have had to join WCW, but they're out of business.

 

In all seriousness, there is no NWO and no Illuminati. Calm down, shut up and take off your tinfoil hat.

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

 

May I point out how objectionable the term New World Order is? The very use of it is the height of stupidity, in my humble opinion. If you want to express sentiments related to the basic tenets of the conspiracy theory, I really do advise you do so without invoking that phrase, because the fact is that it is a naive corruption of a legitimate political term that existed decades before it's use as a conspiracy theory, and the very use of it in this emotive but illusive sense demeans the user in the eyes of anyone with reasonable political knowledge. To anyone with a modicum of political education, "new world order" is any period in history marked by a sizeable shift in the structure of international political systems or in the strategic balance of power. It isn't synonymous with anything else.

Yes, that is a very good point!

 

The term New World Order has all kinds of baggage with it and has for over half a century.

 

The Illuminati, founded 1776, was intended to balance this sort issue out and prevent the current trend with the terminology. Yet after the "Old World Order" took over what is called "The New World Order", it has definately gone astray and so has the most recent arguments between Conspiracy Theorists and Coincidence Theorists.

 

 

Political responsiblity woud deem it necessary to bring it all under a different tittle, indeed.

 

Yet What?

 

Suggestions?

 

I mean, The Cooperative International Governmental Structure for Terra of Sol needs some sort of name that doesn't pound our heads and common sense into the ground.

Edited March 7, 2013 by HolyGrenadeFrenzy

[sivispacem]

How about you just use the definition to describe it, instead of applying any kind of handy little tag line. That way, we can also highlight people who piggyback on the theory without understanding it, and indeed examine whether it's proponents are actually vaguely singing from the same hymn sheet.

[lil weasel]

New World Order isn't a trade mark or registered to any specific organization that I know of.

Every political election has someone boasting of a New Direction, Turn Around, et cetera. So basically each one is claiming a NWO for themselves and their cult of followers.

What the people want to believe is for the person to believe. No high and mighty 'humble' person should be or have a right to insist on what others 'must' do/belive.

Our Sheldon seems to be overly upset regarding the use of NWO. Shouldn't splitting hairs be the sole job of a stylist?

 

[theNGclan]

Post Edited: Spam

[Ryda King]

May I point out how objectionable the term New World Order is? The very use of it is the height of stupidity, in my humble opinion. If you want to express sentiments related to the basic tenets of the conspiracy theory, I really do advise you do so without invoking that phrase, because the fact is that it is a naive corruption of a legitimate political term that existed decades before it's use as a conspiracy theory, and the very use of it in this emotive but illusive sense demeans the user in the eyes of anyone with reasonable political knowledge. To anyone with a modicum of political education, "new world order" is any period in history marked by a sizeable shift in the structure of international political systems or in the strategic balance of power. It isn't synonymous with anything else.

Now we shouldn't say New World Order? Really, sivi?

[TheGodDamnMaster]

To add on to my earlier statement about Freemasonry; they are a very open organization and are in no way "secret society" or part of the "New World Order".

 

Hell, my local lodge even has a website.

 

http://www.mwphglmd.org/

 

 

[sivispacem]

Now we shouldn't say New World Order? Really, sivi?

If you actually understood what the term meant, you wouldn't use it.

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

@sivispacem ^^Points taken.

 

 

Yet, responsibility is often choosing one set of chain reactions over a different set of chain reactions.

 

I tire of the disaster chain reaction very much.

 

There IS a better way and that starts with open and honest communication and hashing out the dos and don'ts

 

Agreement CAN find place with us earthlings if we first imagine it can.

 

-----------

 

Can we at least discuss what areas that such an organization out to be involved in and those that it is to not be allowed involvement in?

 

This seems to be the edge of concern regarding such things does it not?

Edited March 7, 2013 by HolyGrenadeFrenzy

[Ryda King]

Now we shouldn't say New World Order? Really, sivi? 

If you actually understood what the term meant, you wouldn't use it.

You do realize people started using it in "conspiracy theories" because George Bush Sr said in '91, right? After that, people just associated it with government corruption and world domination. Hence, New WORLD ORDER.

 

 

 

"We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a NEW WORLD ORDER, a world where the rule of law, not the rule of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations. When we are successful, and we will be, we have a real chance at this new world order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the U.N.'s founders."

 

New World Order = world government. It makes sense, so people stuck with it. End of story.

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

^^The trouble with that particular definition with George is that the "founders" are not the nations themselves but "The League of Nations" people that are the root of so many other disasters. All quite documented, and their baggage follows them and litters up the political landscape.

 

 

Yet, if the definition was left alone without all the baggage that follows it then it could be hashed out or even redefined as something suitable.

[EscoLehGo]

The government stands a lot to gain from you thinking their an all powerful reptilian alien organization and not the bureaucratic, frighteningly inefficient clusterf*ck it actually is.

[Ryda King]

 

The government stands a lot to gain from you thinking their an all powerful reptilian alien organization and not the bureaucratic, frighteningly inefficient clusterf*ck it actually is.

Why do you keep saying reptilian or alien? They're a bunch of sadistic cowardly old bastards who want power and money, nothing more.

[Korpi]

 

Ask Hulk Hogan, he was in it once.

When you're in the nWo, you're in it 4 life.

[DEALUX]

How is one (totalitarian) government going to control the whole world?

[Ryda King]

How is one (totalitarian) government going to control the whole world?

By killing off 90% of the population.

[HolyGrenadeFrenzy]

How is one (totalitarian) government going to control the whole world?

By killing off 90% of the population.

I don't think that is going to work out.

 

And it is 93% of the population according so some sources.

 

------------

 

That asside

 

--------

 

 

What would be more applicable and acceptable instead?

 

Consider this a Global version of Would You Rather, or something.

[DEALUX]

How is one (totalitarian) government going to control the whole world?

By killing off 90% of the population.

Last time I checked the government depended on the majority. After all, they are the ones making the money. I don't see how this is going to work well for the 10 percent after that, at least not for long.