TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Is U.S. in Slow Motion to Socialism?
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby It says a lot of negative things about your personality and unhealthy world view that would point out those 8 cents and not the obvious 42 cents... Good luck man...

World view? Those eight cents go to help our nations poorest or actually laziest. I don't want that. We should actually put those eight cents in areas that could be useful like in saving our environment or putting more of that money into medical research/treatment that could save millions of lifes that die unneccasarily. Or how about putting some more money into education?
Also, I think you have forgotten that if you wanted to help the world's poorest than you could always volunteer and do it for free. Or have you ever seen those beggers in the cities walking down the street asking for money? Have you ever given any money to any of those? Probably not. Why? Because you don't care yet you are willing for the government to give away our money to them for free. And you consider yourself a model citizen for that? You are being silly.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Don't worry, they're still working on it. The need to finish molding public opinion first.

I believe it is a process of doing it just like the way the Russians kicked out the mongols of Russia. It didn't just happen in one battle. It was a very long process but eventually they succeeded. So yeah the elite are having no difficulty with their plan. Remember it is a series of slow processes, and not a single battle for the win.

quote:

Originally posted by ams.rld World view? Those eight cents go to help our nations poorest or actually laziest. I don't want that. We should actually put those eight cents in areas that could be useful like in saving our environment or putting more of that money into medical research/treatment that could save millions of lifes that die unneccasarily. Or how about putting some more money into education? Also, I think you have forgotten that if you wanted to help the world's poorest than you could always volunteer and do it for free. Or have you ever seen those beggers in the cities walking down the street asking for money? Have you ever given any money to any of those? Probably not. Why? Because you don't care yet you are willing for the government to give away our money to them for free. And you consider yourself a model citizen for that? You are being silly.

I wasn't insinuating any of this wasn't true.

I was saying it's messed up that you would pick up on the 8 cents when the glaring pile of money towards the war would probably warrant your disgust far more than helping the poor.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby I wasn't insinuating any of this wasn't true. I was saying it's messed up that you would pick up on the 8 cents when the glaring pile of money towards the war would probably warrant your disgust far more than helping the poor.

He was obviously looking for some kind of an emotional response. Noone in their right mind could really take pleasure in depriving anyone of anything, let alone from the poor.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is U.S. in Slow Motion to Socialism?

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I know Especially Tony Blair, who doesn't make it any kind of real secret http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4944100.stm

Heh, just because it has the word "society" in its name doesn't mean its a secret society! The Fabians are simply a left (ish) wing think tank, nothing more, nothing less, and certainly not secretive!!

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Is U.S. in Slow Motion to Socialism?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Heh, just because it has the word "society" in its name doesn't mean its a secret society! The Fabians are simply a left (ish) wing think tank, nothing more, nothing less, and certainly not secretive!!

You don't need to restate the obvious regarding "society" but in regards to the Fabians, I'm sure it's safe to assume that you know that from what you've read and heard rather than from the personal experience of being in their inner circle.

What you said is exactly what they'd want you to think.

Famous author H. G. Wells called them "the new Machiavellians" upon is quitting their society

Erm no I am not a member (altho I am eligable for membership) but trust me, it really is simply a think tank (a left leaning one)

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley but trust me, it really is simply a think tank (a left leaning one)

That's also what they say about the CFR and the Trilateral Commission (and I'm sure also the RIIA)

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X That's also what they say about the CFR and the Trilateral Commission (and I'm sure also the RIIA)

If that's what "they" ( ) say about them, what do you say about these organisations?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley If that's what "they" ( ) say about them, what do you say about these organisations?

I'm rather suspect of them. I believe that they were created in order to destroy my country's sovereignty.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X I'm rather suspect of them. I believe that they were created in order to destroy my country's sovereignty.

Riiiiiiight...

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X That's also what they say about the CFR

Lol, I thought we hashed this one out? Is every association of policy-makers and intellectuals necessarily conspiratorial?

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Lol, I thought we hashed this one out? Is every association of policy-makers and intellectuals necessarily conspiratorial?

No, just the ones which belong to the Rockefeller-Rothschild and other such globalist/banking networks, IMO.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Riiiiiiight...

Thanks for agreeing with me

That's based upon the greedy and well documented motivations of the people who created those groups as well as what several notable individuals in history have publically spoken out about.

quote:

"The most powerful cliques in these elitist groups (Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, and others) have ONE objective--to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and independence of the United States of America. A second clique of international members in the CFR comprises the Wall Street international bankers and their key agents. Primarily, they want the world banking monopoly from whatever power ends up in the control of global government. They would probably prefer that this be an all powerful United Nations organization; but they are also prepared to deal with and for a ONE-WORLD GOVERNMENT controlled by the Soviet Communists if U.S. sovereignty is ever surrendered to them." - Rear Admiral Chester Ward USN, former CFR member, Review of the News Apr. 9, 1980 pg. 37

quote:

"I made it quite clear that Socialism means equality of income or nothing, and that under Socialism you would not be allowed to be poor. You would be forcibly fed, clothed, lodged, taught, and employed whether you liked it or not. If it were discovered that you had not character and industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a kindly manner; but whilst you were permitted to live you would have to live well." ― George Bernard Shaw, Intelligent Woman�s Guide to Socialism and Capitalism

I'd much rather stay FREE!

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Thanks for agreeing with me That's based upon the greedy and well documented motivations of the people who created those groups as well as what several notable individuals in history have publically spoken out about.

Ok well I can't really comment on the other organisations you referred to (altho Chatham House I used quite a bit while at uni and would say that is just a journal/think tank as well) but I was specifically referring to our conversation regarding the Fabians. I don't see how a left wing/socialist policy think tank can fall into the category of "greedy" individuals or even elitists (as you mentioned earlier). Fair enough for right-wing think tanks, but surely not for left wing socialist think tanks as that would run counter to their very ideology

Every think tank with an ideology has as an aim 'changing the world' but please don't confuse that with conspiracies or plans to rule the world...

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Every think tank with an ideology has as an aim 'changing the world' but please don't confuse that with conspiracies or plans to rule the world...

+1

In regards to CFR, it is a bi-partisan group of individuals, which makes it all the more difficult to envision any kind of global governance consensus - particulalry since some of the things they produce are so critical of global governance in the first place.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov +1 In regards to CFR, it is a bi-partisan group of individuals, which makes it all the more difficult to envision any kind of global governance consensus - particulalry since some of the things they produce are so critical of global governance in the first place.

Of course that's how it's made to appear superficially but in order to truly understand it for what it is you need to look much deeper than it's surface.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X Of course that's how it's made to appear superficially but in order to truly understand it for what it is you need to look much deeper than it's surface.

True, and I can only do that by going to youtube or wikipedia.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov True, and I can only do that by going to youtube or wikipedia.

No, you really have to research the history and the background through books, lectures, quotes, news clippings and other accounts but that's something that most people (yourself included) seem unwilling to do.

YouTube and Wikipedia are for the most part (there are always exceptions) just good sources of easily manifested infotainment posted for the sake of mere convenience.

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X No, you really have to research the history and the background through books, lectures, quotes, new clippings and other accounts but that's something that most people (yourself included) seem unwilling to do.

Insult aside, I am fairly confident that I have done a great deal more academic research on global governance and international institutions than you will ever do. And all of that leads me to conclude that your theory on the CFR is completely unsubstantiated bollocks. The opinions of four or five lesser known members of CFR conveyed through Youtube videos can offer nothing more than anecdotal evidence that there are indeed members of CFR that want a greater role for institutions like the EU, UN, or ASEAN. However, that says nothing about the organization as a whole (which represents a tremendously wide range of political perspectives), nor does it prove that there's a vast conspiracy within the organization to take America's sovereignty. Does David Rockefeller forfeit his own personal political beliefs when he becomes associated with an organization?

A video of him saying he likes free trade areas doesn't really do a whole lot of justice to your argument - add to that the fact that it was a youtube video produced by who knows and you can imagine why I don't trust it. Unless you can bring to me academic (and I stress that word) arguments about this conspiracy, I will remain skeptical. Quote out of context and post all the videos that you want, but I am starting to think this is a smoke and mirrors show.

quote:

YouTube and Wikipedia are for the most pasrt just a good source of easily manifested infotainment brought up for the sake of convenience.

And yet that's 90% of what you back your arguments up with. If you get things from books, let's see it. And be sure to include the name of the publisher please. In an academic setting, these arguments would never fly because they are not cross-referenced with anything reliable. And I'm sorry, maybe I'm stuck in my academic ways, but it takes more than a quote and a youtube video to convince me of anything contrary to every piece of academic evidence I have ever observed firsthand.

quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov Insult aside, I am fairly confident that I have done a great deal more academic research on global governance and international institutions than you will ever do. And all of that leads me to conclude that your theory on the CFR is completely unsubstantiated bollocks. The opinions of four or five lesser known members of CFR conveyed through Youtube videos can offer nothing more than anecdotal evidence that there are indeed members of CFR that want a greater role for institutions like the EU, UN, or ASEAN. However, that says nothing about the organization as a whole (which represents a tremendously wide range of political perspectives), nor does it prove that there's a vast conspiracy within the organization to take America's sovereignty. Does David Rockefeller forfeit his own personal political beliefs when he becomes associated with an organization? A video of him saying he likes free trade areas doesn't really do a whole lot of justice to your argument - add to that the fact that it was a youtube video produced by who knows and you can imagine why I don't trust it. Unless you can bring to me academic (and I stress that word) arguments about this conspiracy, I will remain skeptical. Quote out of context and post all the videos that you want, but I am starting to think this is a smoke and mirrors show. And yet that's 90% of what you back your arguments up with. If you get things from books, let's see it. And be sure to include the name of the publisher please. In an academic setting, these arguments would never fly because they are not cross-referenced with anything reliable. And I'm sorry, maybe I'm stuck in my academic ways, but it takes more than a quote and a youtube video to convince me of anything contrary to every piece of academic evidence I have ever observed firsthand.

You obviously don't get it so I'm just going to put you on ignore and will continue to post for others that might.

Michael Tsarion understands...



[[ LINK REMOVED ]]

quote:

Originally posted by Trancer-X You obviously don't get it so I'm just going to put you on ignore and will continue to post for others that might.

Did I miss something here? You post an undocumented youtube video as evidence of a vast conspiracy that goes well against conventional wisdom. I ask for something more substantial. You type some vagaries about how I should do more research. I respond that I have done research and have found nothing to validate any of your claims. You don't produce any of said research to back up your own claims. And I'm the one who "doesn't get it"?

That's ok, you can ignore your critics all you want. You are entitled to do whatever you want. But you should know that by censoring the voices that disagree, you are only proving your hypocrisy, since that is exactly what you claim people are trying to do to you.

I feel like I'm back in high school.

I stopped listening when he said Hannibal was hauling elephants across Asia Minor. Historically inaccurate from the get-go, so I can only imagine where it goes from there. And since you posted a 2 hour video with absolutely no direction as to what I should be listening for (the Fabians have nothing to do with this argument...), I'm really not going to waste my time.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.