Globalists

[fj1200]

Evil geniuses or incompetent technocrats? What does the evidence say?

[SassyLady]

Both.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

The usual, evil, greedy, POWERMAD, HUNGRY, do not give a damn about anybody else bastards.
The same kind as history has revealed so many times to be concerned about only Self and Wealth AND POWER.
In other words, sub human scum that truly do serve a hot piece of lead flying a super-sonic speeds -right between their ffkking eyes, imho.
And yes, they are not imaginary, fairies, unicorns- elves, or trolls.
They are people that are totally evil and so very deserving of a quick dispatching, imho....
since they do seriously champion eliminating at least 3 billion humans from this planet.
Sceptism of the very real threat, to me shows, a total and truly massive ignorance of truth, reality and the wherewithal to understand that one must open eyes to see a threat, in order to meet it and hopefully survive once in its path....
A little wisdom/insight that my brilliant, brave and honorable father made damn sure that his seven sons had in spades.
Sarcasm always being a damn poor very, very poor substitue for having intelligence, bravery and a conviction/willingness to take counteraction against a very real threat, n'est-ce pas ... --Tyr

[fj1200]

Both.

It's kind of hard to be a genius AND incompetent. At least in the context of the question. :shrug:


The usual, evil, greedy, POWERMAD, HUNGRY, do not give a damn about anybody else bastards.
...... --Tyr

All of that is not evidence.

[Gunny]

Evil geniuses or incompetent technocrats? What does the evidence say?What DOES the evidence say?

[fj1200]

What DOES the evidence say?

As laid out in my previous musings;

"I see societies advance that choose the environments that allow advancement... So based on the evidence presented I've determined that they are do-nothing technocrats who have largely zero impact on a free world. The other option is that they're not what I think they are at all and are in fact doing a great job (which I don't believe). As I've mentioned before I don't really see the logical outcome of granting freedoms, economic liberties, etc. for those that choose and then all of a sudden taking it all away. There is no logic to it.

...

My issue is that either these insitutions are so inept that they've failed, for close to 80 years now, to impose their governmental control on the world to the detriment of countries who choose liberalized economies; or that they've been controlling things so much that those countries that have liberalized their economies will have all their economic gains wiped out when the powers that be impose massive controls. The latter making no logical sense."

I'm going with incompetent technocrats... if there are any out there that identify as globalists.

But I await submittal of further evidence. :)

[fj1200]

Other previous musings:

"I just don't see what you see. We can both look at post WWII history and see the growth of international organizations, partnerships, global corporations, etc. and see completely different things. I see liberalization of global trade that will benefit everyone who chooses to take part and you see coalitions of organizations to take power away from the people. The thing is that I look at the benefits that have come to the world with increased freedoms for billions of people with increases in almost any measure of economic advancement... I don't know if you agree with that last sentence or not but it is not a logical conclusion to me that all of this liberalization has been granted until the rug gets pulled out from underneath the whole thing. All due respect I just don't see that."

[revelarts]

As laid out in my previous musings;

"I see societies advance that choose the environments that allow advancement... So based on the evidence presented I've determined that they are do-nothing technocrats who have largely zero impact on a free world. The other option is that they're not what I think they are at all and are in fact doing a great job (which I don't believe). As I've mentioned before I don't really see the logical outcome of granting freedoms, economic liberties, etc. for those that choose and then all of a sudden taking it all away. There is no logic to it.

...

My issue is that either these insitutions are so inept that they've failed, for close to 80 years now, to impose their governmental control on the world to the detriment of countries who choose liberalized economies; or that they've been controlling things so much that those countries that have liberalized their economies will have all their economic gains wiped out when the powers that be impose massive controls. The latter making no logical sense."

I'm going with incompetent technocrats... if there are any out there that identify as globalists.

But I await submittal of further evidence. :)

So says the Council for the Defense, FJ1200 esquire.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FXeFWhZXoAE20e7?format=png&name=small

[Gunny]

As laid out in my previous musings;

"I see societies advance that choose the environments that allow advancement... So based on the evidence presented I've determined that they are do-nothing technocrats who have largely zero impact on a free world. The other option is that they're not what I think they are at all and are in fact doing a great job (which I don't believe). As I've mentioned before I don't really see the logical outcome of granting freedoms, economic liberties, etc. for those that choose and then all of a sudden taking it all away. There is no logic to it.

...

My issue is that either these insitutions are so inept that they've failed, for close to 80 years now, to impose their governmental control on the world to the detriment of countries who choose liberalized economies; or that they've been controlling things so much that those countries that have liberalized their economies will have all their economic gains wiped out when the powers that be impose massive controls. The latter making no logical sense."

I'm going with incompetent technocrats... if there are any out there that identify as globalists.

But I await submittal of further evidence. :)I am going to ponder this a bit before responding. It's a complex topic. I don't necessarily disagree with your point(s). It narrows the topic down too far.

[fj1200]

So says the Council for the Defense, FJ1200 esquire.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FXeFWhZXoAE20e7?format=png&name=small

In for evidence that the devil exists while your at it. :)


I am going to ponder this a bit before responding. It's a complex topic. I don't necessarily disagree with your point(s). It narrows the topic down too far.

Just trying to get some discussion going. :)

[Gunny]

In for evidence that the devil exists while your at it. :)



Just trying to get some discussion going. :)I got that part.

In as far as "why?" goes ... the movie "The Matrix" provides the best answer. Humans with no reason to live make lousy batteries. They don't perform well nor last very long. Humans need hope. They need to believe that they will be rewarded for excelling. If you're just another sheep, what's the point of working harder than the next guy? Give humans hope and they strive to be more productive and innovative.

That would be the best reason I can think of to keep the pretext of "freedom" and "choice". If there's no hope, there's no point. When you blow off the smoke, the reality is, we all work to pay taxes to keep a bureaucracy (machine) moving.

Having been part of that "machine", I don't think there is a conscious, collective awareness by those that support and defend it. They believe what they are taught by the bureaucracy and it's satellite tentacles. At all level of our society, you comply or you get locked up.

I believe there are globalists as much as I believe there are Marxists fighting for control of our government. I just don't think they are this one, big group of global elites sitting at the Round Table deciding the fate of mankind. Their very nature says otherwise. Each individual/group calling itself globalist envisions global power with themselves, respectively, at the top of the food chain. I've not heard of one that doesn't have a person or group ruling others. Given that, any cooperation toward globalism is either advantageous at the moment, or coincidental. None are willing to nor are they going to share power.

The biggest threat of any real globalism is China because they are Hell bent on dominating and subjugating the entire planet. China IS the real, global enemy and should be treated as such at every turn. Hard to do when our President is empowering them while simultaneously weakening us at every turn.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

tech·no·crat
/ˈteknəˌkrat/

an exponent or advocate of technocracy.
a member of a technically skilled elite.

hmmmm, a fairly broad definition.
One that gives a great amount of leeway when using to describe a group and/or its supposed political positions/ambitions.
In fact, gives no hint at it being a group , just describes it as an individual.
As such, I see it as no basis for a counter to or refutation of the term-- "globalist"-- or the globalists, one world order/, one world government agenda.


To me seems like when discussing apples and oranges, somebody cites , mangoes or else coconuts!
And then walks away.. , n'est-ce pas?

Nothing imaginary about this below...---


https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/now-is-the-time-for-a-great-reset/

SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
Now is the time for a 'great reset'
Jun 3, 2020

In every crisis, there is an opportunity (note this--RJL), especially so when one manufactures the desired crisis in the first place, eh? RJL

Image: Space Uptopian/Unsplash

Klaus Schwab
Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum

Share:

OUR IMPACT
What's the World Economic Forum doing to accelerate action on Sustainable Development?

THE BIG PICTURE
Explore and monitor how Sustainable Development is affecting economies, industries and global issues

CROWDSOURCE INNOVATION
Get involved with our crowdsourced digital platform to deliver impact at scale
Stay up to date:

Sustainable Development
This article is part of:
COVID Action Platform
Visit the Great Reset microsite here.
Hear Klaus Schwab on these podcast episodes: the Great Reset launch and his book.
We can emerge from this crisis a better world, if we act quickly and jointly, writes Schwab.
The changes we have already seen in response to COVID-19 prove that a reset of our economic and social foundations is possible.
This is our best chance to instigate stakeholder capitalism - and here's how it can be achieved.
COVID-19 lockdowns may be gradually easing, but anxiety about the world’s social and economic prospects is only intensifying. There is good reason to worry: a sharp economic downturn has already begun, and we could be facing the worst depression since the 1930s. But, while this outcome is likely, it is not unavoidable.

To achieve a better outcome, the world must act jointly and swiftly to revamp all aspects of our societies and economies, from education to social contracts and working conditions. Every country, from the United States to China, must participate, and every industry, from oil and gas to tech, must be transformed. In short, we need a “Great Reset” of capitalism.

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/now-is-the-time-for-a-great-reset/

DISCOVER
What is the World Economic Forum doing about the coronavirus outbreak?


There are many reasons to pursue a Great Reset, but the most urgent is COVID-19. Having already led to hundreds of thousands of deaths, the pandemic represents one of the worst public-health crises in recent history. And, with casualties still mounting in many parts of the world, it is far from over.

This will have serious long-term consequences for economic growth, public debt, employment, and human wellbeing. According to the Financial Times, global government debt has already reached its highest level in peacetime. Moreover, unemployment is skyrocketing in many countries: in the US, for example, one in four workers have filed for unemployment since mid-March, with new weekly claims far above historic highs. The International Monetary Fund expects the world economy to shrink by 3% this year – a downgrade of 6.3 percentage points in just four months.

All of this will exacerbate the climate and social crises that were already underway. Some countries have already used the COVID-19 crisis as an excuse to weaken environmental protections and enforcement. And frustrations over social ills like rising inequality – US billionaires’ combined wealth has increased during the crisis – are intensifying.

Have you read?
What risks does COVID-19 pose to society in the long-term?
COVID-19 is a litmus test for stakeholder capitalism
Left unaddressed, these crises, together with COVID-19, will deepen and leave the world even less sustainable, less equal, and more fragile. Incremental measures and ad hoc fixes will not suffice to prevent this scenario. We must build entirely new foundations for our economic and social systems.

The level of cooperation and ambition this implies is unprecedented. But it is not some impossible dream. In fact, one silver lining of the pandemic is that it has shown how quickly we can make radical changes to our lifestyles. Almost instantly, the crisis forced businesses and individuals to abandon practices long claimed to be essential, from frequent air travel to working in an office.

Likewise, populations have overwhelmingly shown a willingness to make sacrifices for the sake of health-care and other essential workers and vulnerable populations, such as the elderly. And many companies have stepped up to support their workers, customers, and local communities, in a shift toward the kind of stakeholder capitalism to which they had previously paid lip service.

Clearly, the will to build a better society does exist. We must use it to secure the Great Reset that we so badly need. That will require stronger and more effective governments, though this does not imply an ideological push for bigger ones. And it will demand private-sector engagement every step of the way.


The Great Reset agenda would have three main components. The first would steer the market toward fairer outcomes. To this end, governments should improve coordination (for example, in tax, regulatory, and fiscal policy), upgrade trade arrangements, and create the conditions for a “stakeholder economy.” At a time of diminishing tax bases and soaring public debt, governments have a powerful incentive to pursue such action.

Moreover, governments should implement long-overdue reforms that promote more equitable outcomes. Depending on the country, these may include changes to wealth taxes, the withdrawal of fossil-fuel subsidies, and new rules governing intellectual property, trade, and competition.

The second component of a Great Reset agenda would ensure that investments advance shared goals, such as equality and sustainability. Here, the large-scale spending programs that many governments are implementing represent a major opportunity for progress. The European Commission, for one, has unveiled plans for a €750 billion ($826 billion) recovery fund. The US, China, and Japan also have ambitious economic-stimulus plans.

Rather than using these funds, as well as investments from private entities and pension funds, to fill cracks in the old system, we should use them to create a new one that is more resilient, equitable, and sustainable in the long run. This means, for example, building “green” urban infrastructure and creating incentives for industries to improve their track record on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) metrics.

The third and final priority of a Great Reset agenda is to harness the innovations of the Fourth Industrial Revolution to support the public good, especially by addressing health and social challenges. During the COVID-19 crisis, companies, universities, and others have joined forces to develop diagnostics, therapeutics, and possible vaccines; establish testing centers; create mechanisms for tracing infections; and deliver telemedicine. Imagine what could be possible if similar concerted efforts were made in every sector.


The COVID-19 crisis is affecting every facet of people’s lives in every corner of the world. But tragedy need not be its only legacy. On the contrary, the pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine, and reset our world to create a healthier, more equitable, and more prosperous future.


Explore The Great Reset Transformation Map Image: World Economic Forum

[fj1200]

tech·no·crat
/ˈteknəˌkrat/

an exponent or advocate of technocracy.
a member of a technically skilled elite.

hmmmm, a fairly broad definition.
One that gives a great amount of leeway when using to describe a group and/or its supposed political positions/ambitions.
In fact, gives no hint at it being a group , just describes it as an individual.
As such, I see it as no basis for a counter to or refutation of the term-- "globalist"-- or the globalists, one world order/, one world government agenda.


To me seems like when discussing apples and oranges, somebody cites , mangoes or else coconuts!
And then walks away.. , n'est-ce pas?

Nothing imaginary about this below...---

I don't think there was a claim made that globalists were imaginary; I've seen countless threads and references to actual people. My opening question was evil geniuses or incompetent technocrats (both plural)? Further I think incompetent technocrats is redundant especially as the technocrat usage was pejorative. Can you find references to whomever one wants to describe as a "globalist" and links to many egghead conferences and working papers? Without a doubt. My question gets to what the evidence says about their impact on the globe, so to speak. If I were a globalist I wouldn't publish a working paper.

[fj1200]

I got that part.

In as far as "why?" goes ... the movie "The Matrix" provides the best answer. Humans with no reason to live make lousy batteries. They don't perform well nor last very long. Humans need hope. They need to believe that they will be rewarded for excelling. If you're just another sheep, what's the point of working harder than the next guy? Give humans hope and they strive to be more productive and innovative.

That would be the best reason I can think of to keep the pretext of "freedom" and "choice". If there's no hope, there's no point. When you blow off the smoke, the reality is, we all work to pay taxes to keep a bureaucracy (machine) moving.

Having been part of that "machine", I don't think there is a conscious, collective awareness by those that support and defend it. They believe what they are taught by the bureaucracy and it's satellite tentacles. At all level of our society, you comply or you get locked up.

I believe there are globalists as much as I believe there are Marxists fighting for control of our government. I just don't think they are this one, big group of global elites sitting at the Round Table deciding the fate of mankind. Their very nature says otherwise. Each individual/group calling itself globalist envisions global power with themselves, respectively, at the top of the food chain. I've not heard of one that doesn't have a person or group ruling others. Given that, any cooperation toward globalism is either advantageous at the moment, or coincidental. None are willing to nor are they going to share power.

The biggest threat of any real globalism is China because they are Hell bent on dominating and subjugating the entire planet. China IS the real, global enemy and should be treated as such at every turn. Hard to do when our President is empowering them while simultaneously weakening us at every turn.

A Matrix reference. Nice. I understand where you're going with that. My counter is that life in liberalized countries is pretty good and we should either grant globalists all the credit in the world for advancing capitalism or understand that they had nothing to do with it at all and are actually a drag on the livelihoods of the poor in the world. I think the evidence suggests the second part.

To the latter part of your post I think that there are people in various countries and EU type entities that have ideas on how things should be but really are not in a position to impact things globally; only in their country and others that share their viewpoints.

[Gunny]

A Matrix reference. Nice. I understand where you're going with that. My counter is that life in liberalized countries is pretty good and we should either grant globalists all the credit in the world for advancing capitalism or understand that they had nothing to do with it at all and are actually a drag on the livelihoods of the poor in the world. I think the evidence suggests the second part.

To the latter part of your post I think that there are people in various countries and EU type entities that have ideas on how things should be but really are not in a position to impact things globally; only in their country and others that share their viewpoints.

That's a mouthful :)

In context, the problem with globalization as I assume you mean it is, every time some jackass country goes off the rails like Russia, China or even the US, it impacts everyone. In that regard, I am all for self-sufficiency. Yes, it would be nice if free trade made everything hunky-dory for everyone, but it does not. I'm not even including what Biden has done to our balance sheet in that.

If global free trade (I'm assuming since that's where you usually go) is done responsibly and everyone gets what they're after in the end; sure, it's a nice dream. When it is what it is, not so nice. The current administration is putting us upside down on everything.

Problem with free trade is corrupt government meddling, at time in collusion with other governments. I do believe that is the context in which the term "globalists" is used most on this board.

I'm wondering how all this free trade/global economy works once China replaces us at the top of the heap. Lest anyone mistake where I'm going with THAT ... WE are doing THAT to ourselves. Then maybe we won't have it so good here but it'll be too late for the crybabies starting all the shit to get a do-over.

[fj1200]

That's a mouthful :)

In context, the problem with globalization as I assume you mean it is, every time some jackass country goes off the rails like Russia, China or even the US, it impacts everyone. In that regard, I am all for self-sufficiency. Yes, it would be nice if free trade made everything hunky-dory for everyone, but it does not. I'm not even including what Biden has done to our balance sheet in that.

If global free trade (I'm assuming since that's where you usually go) is done responsibly and everyone gets what they're after in the end; sure, it's a nice dream. When it is what it is, not so nice. The current administration is putting us upside down on everything.

Problem with free trade is corrupt government meddling, at time in collusion with other governments. I do believe that is the context in which the term "globalists" is used most on this board.

I'm wondering how all this free trade/global economy works once China replaces us at the top of the heap. Lest anyone mistake where I'm going with THAT ... WE are doing THAT to ourselves. Then maybe we won't have it so good here but it'll be too late for the crybabies starting all the shit to get a do-over.

I'm not talking about globalization and free trade which I am generally for. I'm just trying to get to the bottom of the globalists and the evidence of what they've accomplished, or committed some might say. I guess the context used on this board would be helpful as well. Just who are these globalists who are the biden puppetmasters and what is the evidence against them that shows the detrimental actions that they've taken?

[SassyLady]

I'm not talking about globalization and free trade which I am generally for. I'm just trying to get to the bottom of the globalists and the evidence of what they've accomplished, or committed some might say. I guess the context used on this board would be helpful as well. Just who are these globalists who are the biden puppetmasters and what is the evidence against them that shows the detrimental actions that they've taken?
We can start with George Soros. Open border policies ... wants a world without borders and the UN in charge.
https://archive.humanevents.com/2011/04/02/top-10-reasons-george-soros-is-dangerous/

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

We can start with George Soros. Open border policies ... wants a world without borders and the UN in charge.
https://archive.humanevents.com/2011/04/02/top-10-reasons-george-soros-is-dangerous/

Soros was set up as a globalist puppet from the start, imho.
IMHO, a good research into his beginnings points out that he has no soul, lives for greed and does the biddings of the globalists with the money that they set him up with at the start.
And he owns the entire dem party leadership, has owned them for decades.
A totally evil POS, IMHO. -Tyr

[fj1200]

We can start with George Soros. Open border policies ... wants a world without borders and the UN in charge.
https://archive.humanevents.com/2011/04/02/top-10-reasons-george-soros-is-dangerous/

But not much in the way of accomplishments IMHO. The world has borders and the UN is not in charge.

[fj1200]

Soros was set up as a globalist puppet from the start, imho.
IMHO, a good research into his beginnings points out that he has no soul, lives for greed and does the biddings of the globalists with the money that they set him up with at the start.
And he owns the entire dem party leadership, has owned them for decades.
A totally evil POS, IMHO. -Tyr

I'd argue that the Koch brothers have been far more successful at moving an agenda forward.

[Gunny]

I'm not talking about globalization and free trade which I am generally for. I'm just trying to get to the bottom of the globalists and the evidence of what they've accomplished, or committed some might say. I guess the context used on this board would be helpful as well. Just who are these globalists who are the biden puppetmasters and what is the evidence against them that shows the detrimental actions that they've taken?That's better. "globalist(s)" has more than couple of definitions. I'll try again and maybe not run all over the place this time:)

"Biden's handlers". I don't consider them "globalists". Anyone defining them as such is using the wrong word(s), as it appears is per some plan. The fact there is no concrete evidence is the issue (with me). I suspect if there was, it would go the way of Hunter Biden's laptop anyway. What appears to be obvious to all can't be supported by any facts/hard evidence.

Quick aside: how nay times have we been burned by the nonexistent slippery slope simply because the left is good at hiding it, or nowadays, just denies it and refuses to address it? They keep everyone constantly chasing their "Russian collusion/abuse of power with Ukraine/Jan 6th" crap and refuse to address anything else.

Back to Biden: Ran as a moderate. I would never call him a moderate, but neither would I call him a far left extremist except where firearms are concerned. The agenda this WH is pursuing is not Biden (meaning unlike Biden historically). It's too extreme. Fossil fuels. The border. Schools. Who is and who is not a "domestic terrorist". He/in his name is pushing "let them eat cake". Doesn't matter what the Constitution states -- it's what the Biden admin/bureaucracy dictates. The Bureaucracy being a whole topic unto itself.

If one was to forget all the BS from the media we have been drowned in the past almost 2 years, wouldn't one think based on actual events that the Biden admin was actually pursuing the Green New Deal?

I don't recall its name, but there is an organization behind AOC and her ilk that are actively working to put progressive Marxists in office. It's been in the media about once or twice because it doesn't suit the MSM to keep it out front. Just my opinion, but logical conclusion leads me to believe this organizations is out to replace traditional political power brokers (big oil etc) with themselves, and not only Marxist philosophy but a Marxist government and society. Going further out on the limb, it wouldn't surprise me one bit to find China supplying this group's logistics.

The best way to achieve the latter is to destroy all our traditional institutions and a careful look shows them all under attack, right down to just common sense, fact and logic. When chaos is created, the organized group with a plan is going to come out the winner.

The gradual theft of our National identity has been gradual over several generations. Self-hatred has been gradually instilled in our your over generations. Young people actually believe they can stop a cyclical change in the climate of a planet hurtling around the Sun at umpteen gazillion MPH where inches matter. It's fraudulent, multi-billion dollar industry with one goal -- shut down big oil.

There's just too much all pointing at one conclusion for me to buy off on coincidence.

As far as this being some phantom, globalist ideology with what's best for Mankind as its goal, I'll stick with my above theory. Too much lefless cooperation would be required for anything even resembling such. The League of Nation's was Woodrow Wilson's brainchild and in the end, the US is the one that wouldn't sign off because it required surrendering too much sovereignty/adopting foreign political and societal ideology. We'll kill each other off before that even comes close to happening.

[SassyLady]

But not much in the way of accomplishments IMHO. The world has borders and the UN is not in charge.
Which is why I highlighted the word "detrimental". Those are just a couple of what he wants to accomplish. His main goal is to destroy America by advocating for open borders. Now the Mexico president wants to have no borders between the US, Canada and Mexico. Wants a European Union type of setup. Which is a goal of Soros. The open border policy of Biden's administration surely pleases Soros and his followers.

[fj1200]

Which is why I highlighted the word "detrimental". Those are just a couple of what he wants to accomplish. His main goal is to destroy America by advocating for open borders. Now the Mexico president wants to have no borders between the US, Canada and Mexico. Wants a European Union type of setup. Which is a goal of Soros. The open border policy of Biden's administration surely pleases Soros and his followers.

He can have lots of wants and goals but what is the evidence? Where is this global control? "Globalists" is very nebulous, it can be anything anyone wants it to be but as of yet it seems that there are no globalists in control. Sometimes bad border policy is bad border policy.

[revelarts]

But not much in the way of accomplishments IMHO. The world has borders and the UN is not in charge.

Globalist are long term actors. Usually incrementalist.
They've wanted One world Govt since at least the 40s.
So the real question is, What's changed in practical reality... As opposed to just lines on the maps?
A partial list
-European Union... Rules, regs and Parliament thats cross boarders.
-The Euro, true cross Broder currency.
-The beginnings of a North American, South American & African unions.
-Via/with trade agreements, softer broader & immigration rules and military alliances.
-the banking systems nearly homogenized over the whole world.
-UN rules about medicine & food incrementally implemented.
-WHO rules & "recommendations" about vaccines & other measures assumed to be picked up by nations. (Like federal "guidelines" by states)
-Trans Pacific partnership, "trade agreement" that cedes sovereignty of many nations laws to a globalist corporate arbitrators.
-recently the globalist WEFs admission that they seeded the worlds major National governments with people groomed by them. Aligned with their POV. Like Trudeau in Canada & Macron in France.

To name a few of the globalist successful moves over the years.

By the way, one of the names of the old organizations that promoted the idea is the
World Federalist Society.
So the goal isn't really to erase boarders exactly. The U.S.A still has city & state boarders. But we have a FEDERAL umbrella we all are under.
That's the goal.
Not erased borders but "state" borders under a world government.
Town, County, State, Nation, Region (EU), World govt.

They aren't there but they aren't complete failures.
Especially since folks like FJ defend various aspects of the moves because of the hoped for economic or other benefits.

The world government is being built in pieces all around us,
some won't see it until it's extremely obvious ..."seems reasonable" & difficult to reverse.

[fj1200]

Globalist are long term actors. Usually incrementalist.
They've wanted One world Govt since at least the 40s.
So the real question is, What's changed in practical reality... As opposed to just lines on the maps?
A partial list
-European Union... Rules, regs and Parliament thats cross boarders.
-The Euro, true cross Broder currency.
-The beginnings of a North American, South American & African unions.
-Via/with trade agreements, softer broader & immigration rules and military alliances.
-the banking systems nearly homogenized over the whole world.
-UN rules about medicine & food incrementally implemented.
-WHO rules & "recommendations" about vaccines & other measures assumed to picked up by nations. (Like federal "guidelines" by states)
-Trans Pacific partnership, "trade agreement" that cedes sovereignty of many nations laws to a globalist corporate arbitrators.
-recently the globalist WEFs admission that they seeded the worlds major National governments with people groomed by them. Aligned with their POV. Like Trudeau in Canada & Macron in France.

To name a few of the globalist successful moves over the years.

By the way, one of the names of the old organizations that promoted the idea is the
World Federalist Society.
So the goal isn't really to erase boarders exactly. The U.S.A still has city & state boarders. But we have a FEDERAL umbrella we all are under.
That's the goal.
Not erased borders but "state" borders under a world government.
Town, County, State, Nation, Region (EU), World govt.

They aren't there but they aren't complete failures.
Especially since folks like FJ defend various aspects of the moves because of the hoped for economic or other benefits.

The world government is being built in pieces all around us,
some won't see it until it's extremely obvious ..."seems reasonable" & difficult to reverse.

Which brings me back to my original question; they're either extremely successful or feckless failures. I'll argue that they had zero to do with where the world is today and the world today is largely successful for those who've chosen a economically liberalized path. You keep providing lists of things that "globalists" want as if that is the end of the argument but for me that begs the question of actual evidence. The IMF is appallingly, embarrassingly, a failure but they're not globlaists; they're incompetent. I like free trade and treaties require rules but it doesn't cede sovereignty to globalists.

Your list above... You see proof, I see a list of things. The US has model codes, UCC, Penal, UGMA, etc. that have been adopted at the state level but states make the choice to adopt or modify. Federal conspiracy or just a thing?

Your list; are those things bad because they're bad? Or are they bad because "globalist"?

[revelarts]

Which brings me back to my original question; they're either extremely successful or feckless failures. I'll argue that they had zero to do with where the world is today and the world today is largely successful for those who've chosen a economically liberalized path. You keep providing lists of things that "globalists" want as if that is the end of the argument but for me that begs the question of actual evidence. The IMF is appallingly, embarrassingly, a failure but they're not globlaists; they're incompetent. I like free trade and treaties require rules but it doesn't cede sovereignty to globalists.

Your list above... You see proof, I see a list of things. The US has model codes, UCC, Penal, UGMA, etc. that have been adopted at the state level but states make the choice to adopt or modify. Federal conspiracy or just a thing?

Your list; are those things bad because they're bad? Or are they bad because "globalist"?

for your last question, well, I asked you similarly,... is "populism" bad by default.
your answer was ...i think... an unequivocal Yes.
while your defense of that POV wasn't very compelling.

So OK your question
"are those things bad because they're bad?
Or are they bad because 'globalist'?"

Many of those things are bad because they are globalist.
Some of those things are bad because they are bad.

BTW seems you keep using euphemisms like "economically liberalized" whenever i point out moves toward "Multinational Corporate Economic World Domination".
neat trick but I'm not buying it.
MAFIA & Cartels do bring some economic benefits but the price is a lost of freedoms and more.
the price is too high, especially when there are other ways to accomplish similar beneficial goals locally. WITHOUT the lion share of profits flowing offshore into the pockets of those entities that are already billionaires and the Financial entities that feed off of them on Wall st & London etc.

But the bottom line, the problems with globalism/one world governance are serious.
•but to begin with, large organizations of are full of people.
if there's no real check on their powers people have a tendency to be corrupt.
Globalism assumes there will be ONE ultimate source of world power.
With NO power/entity outside of it's control/authority to question or challenge it.
Power Corrupts

•If World Gov't goes bad, there's NO WHERE to run.
Just there is a recipe for a horror show.

•Add to that the fact the large orgs often fail over time simply because they become to static and unable to adjust to new information and challenges. As well as the problem of inefficiencies, problems that are not fixed down the line, and poor but entrenched management & policies. "bureaucracies".
As a capitalist you know this stuff.

Competition is not just good for Biz, it's good for NATIONS.
Having a diversity of national and local options allows for more innovation in dealing with problems ...& freedom.

And somehow, when promoting the NWO, some seem to forget (or don't believe) that Foundationally,
personal freedom is one of the highest ideals of mankind
(Gunny please notice that i said ideals not a full or complete reality)

Alternatively to ONE WORLD GOV't, the U.S Gov't was founded on the Idea the ALL Gov't rules, regs, laws AT BEST come from "the people" up through LOCAL representatives.
And stay base locally PRIMARILY. with representation at arms length. And an over arching set of basically laws & rights/constitution.

NOT rule by from a self selected corporate and/or gov't elite from above who think they know best. And can change or ignore "rights" willy nilly.

Those are core principals why world Gov't is a CRAP idea that we shouldn't even consider.
•The organizationally it's a nightmare & the competition vs monopoly principals have been reviewed in commerce for like hundreds of years now.
•AT base the understanding & problems of human nature & power are Biblically affirmed and historically obvious.
•PLUS on the Highest level, Biblically it's prophesied that a one world gov't will be a murderous Totalitarian Anti-Religious horror show.

Based on the above you can probably guess which items in my list of globalist accomplishments I think are -not as bad- ALONE, and which ones are terrible out of the gate.

[fj1200]

for your last question, well, I asked you similarly,... is "populism" bad by default.
your answer was ...i think... an unequivocal Yes.
while your defense of that POV wasn't very compelling.

So OK your question
"are those things bad because they're bad?
Or are they bad because 'globalist'?"

Many of those things are bad because they are globalist.
Some of those things are bad because they are bad.

BTW seems you keep using euphemisms like "economically liberalized" whenever i point out moves toward "Multinational Corporate Economic World Domination".
neat trick but I'm not buying it.
MAFIA & Cartels do bring some economic benefits but the price is a lost of freedoms and more.
the price is too high, especially when there are other ways to accomplish similar beneficial goals locally. WITHOUT the lion share of profits flowing offshore into the pockets of those entities that are already billionaires and the Financial entities that feed off of them on Wall st & London etc.

But the bottom line, the problems with globalism/one world governance are serious.
•but to begin with, large organizations of are full of people.
if there's no real check on their powers people have a tendency to be corrupt.
Globalism assumes there will be ONE ultimate source of world power.
With NO power/entity outside of it's control/authority to question or challenge it.
Power Corrupts

•If World Gov't goes bad, there's NO WHERE to run.
Just there is a recipe for a horror show.

•Add to that the fact the large orgs often fail over time simply because they become to static and unable to adjust to new information and challenges. As well as the problem of inefficiencies, problems that are not fixed down the line, and poor but entrenched management & policies. "bureaucracies".
As a capitalist you know this stuff.

Competition is not just good for Biz, it's good for NATIONS.
Having a diversity of national and local options allows for more innovation in dealing with problems ...& freedom.

And somehow, when promoting the NWO, some seem to forget (or don't believe) that Foundationally,
personal freedom is one of the highest ideals of mankind
(Gunny please notice that i said ideals not a full or complete reality)

Alternatively to ONE WORLD GOV't, the U.S Gov't was founded on the Idea the ALL Gov't rules, regs, laws AT BEST come from "the people" up through LOCAL representatives.
And stay base locally PRIMARILY. with representation at arms length. And an over arching set of basically laws & rights/constitution.

NOT rule by from a self selected corporate and/or gov't elite from above who think they know best. And can change or ignore "rights" willy nilly.

Those are core principals why world Gov't is a CRAP idea that we shouldn't even consider.
•The organizationally it's a nightmare & the competition vs monopoly principals have been reviewed in commerce for like hundreds of years now.
•AT base the understanding & problems of human nature & power are Biblically affirmed and historically obvious.
•PLUS on the Highest level, Biblically it's prophesied that a one world gov't will be a murderous Totalitarian Anti-Religious horror show.

Based on the above you can probably guess which items in my list of globalist accomplishments I think are -not as bad- ALONE, and which ones are terrible out of the gate.

Populism is bad. Unequivocally. Because populism is nothing and anything can be populism. There's right populists and left populists and in some cases they might be populist for the same reason. If that happens then they're probably both wrong. But I've got a thread going where you can challenge my "uncompelling" POV. I look forward to it. I did come up with my own definition for populism and based on that definition is why I call populism bad. I'm not sure quite the same applies to globalists.

I have never pointed "economically liberalized" whenever you point out "Multinational Corporate Economic World Domination." I use economically liberalized to call attention to the basis of free-market capitalist societies. Willi there be billionaires and more trading in NYC and London? Of course, nothing you can do about that; short of populist uprising and watch out for that if you think OWG is bad. Global trade is worth a lot of money and even a razor thin margin will start to mean real money.

I have also never been in favor of a one-world government. I specifically oppose one world government; it's a cosmically bad idea, unequivocally. But I am in favor of free trade and free trade pacts and it's often referred to as "globalization." But those two things are not the same.

My apologies if my missed any of your points.

[revelarts]

Which brings me back to my original question; they're either extremely successful or feckless failures. I'll argue that they had zero to do with where the world is today and the world today is largely successful for those who've chosen a economically liberalized path. You keep providing lists of things that "globalists" want as if that is the end of the argument but for me that begs the question of actual evidence. The IMF is appallingly, embarrassingly, a failure but they're not globlaists; they're incompetent. I like free trade and treaties require rules but it doesn't cede sovereignty to globalists.

Your list above... You see proof, I see a list of things. The US has model codes, UCC, Penal, UGMA, etc. that have been adopted at the state level but states make the choice to adopt or modify. Federal conspiracy or just a thing?

Your list; are those things bad because they're bad? Or are they bad because "globalist"?

Concerning your 1st assertion
---"I'll argue that they had zero to do with where the world is today and the world today is largely successful for those who've chosen a economically liberalized path."---

I'm not sure you can assume they had ZERO to do with what's happened when many are in fact at the seats of power at corportate tables and negotiation tables for the items you call "economic liberalization".

the Rockefellers, Rothchilds, Soros, and other mega rich.

they've met & planned for decades at Bilderberg and Bohemien Grove, worked out of the Council of Foreign Relations and the World Economic Forum, world banks helped choose/groom national leaders, pushed for the U.N. and it's policies & authority, the WHO it's policies & authority, the E.U. it's policies & authority, FUND/loan to Nations, the many international trade agreements you seem to like so much.
Opened up China, and South America to trade, all with the goal of global consolidation... not more personal freedom or spreading individual personal wealth indigenously.

You say the IMF & the World Banks are incompetent.
I say well MAYBE they've made a few small mistakes but bottom line is they serve their NWO function extremely well.
Which is Putting Nations in huge perpetual DEBT.
Therefore allowing a vehicle of political & financial control of the nation & it's leadership.
And feeding western corps with international contracts... "economically liberalizing":rolleyes: those debtor nations.
Globalist Created the Federal Reserve the World bank the IMF & WTO
they have all been very successful

....
Here are few of the other "crazier" things I believe the globalist have actively promoted successfully to various degrees,
Population Control -- acted out by Abortion laws, BS wars, and IMO Pharmaceuticals.
-The general Dissolution of the Family unit & Christian values by the cultural & legal promoting of the "sexual revolution", and promoting evolutionary BSery.
-The transformation of the education system, pre-k to university, from a Christian, national and freedom based POV into a globalist, socialist friendly & bizzaro POV.
-General manipulation of the media -- for western/corporate propaganda but also to keep certain information quiet.


A few Quotes
•REGIONALISM to Globalism
The developing coherence of Asian regional thinking is reflected in a disposition to consider problems and loyalties in regional terms, and to evolve regional approaches to development needs and to the evolution of a New World Order.
Richard M. Nixon

NAFTA is a major stepping stone to the New World Order.
Henry A. Kissinger

Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.
David Rockefeller

•Manipulation of the media
We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost 40 years......It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries.
David Rockefeller

The Technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more CONTROLLED society. Such a society would be dominated by ELITE, unrestrained by traditional values.
Zbigniew Brzezinski


•Role of the World Bank orgs
The one aim of these financiers is world control by the creation of inextinguishable debts.
Henry Ford

The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent meetings and conferences.
Carroll Quigley

The IMF and the World Bank, the most opaque and secretive entities, put millions into NGOs who fight against "corruption" and for "transparency." They want the Rule of Law - as long as they make the laws. They want transparency in order to standardise a situation, so that global capital can flow without any impediment.
Arundhati Roy

The United States has given frequent and enthusiastic support to the overthrow of democracy in favor of "investor friendly" regimes. The World Bank, IMF, and private banks have consistently lavished huge sums on terror regimes, following their displacement of democratic governments, and a number of quantitative studies have shown a systematic positive relationship between U.S. and IMF / World Bank aid to countries and their violations of human rights.
Edward S. Herman

The World Trade Organization, The World Bank, The International Monetary Fund and other financial institutions virtually write economic policy and parliamentary legislation. With a deadly combination of arrogance and ruthlessness, they take their sledgehammers to fragile, interdependent, historically complex societies and devastate them, all under the fluttering banner of 'reform'.
Arundhati Roy

[fj1200]

Concerning your 1st assertion
---"I'll argue that they had zero to do with where the world is today and the world today is largely successful for those who've chosen a economically liberalized path."---

I'm not sure you can assume they had ZERO to do with what's happened when many are in fact at the seats of power at corportate tables and negotiation tables for the items you call "economic liberalization".

the Rockefellers, Rothchilds, Soros, and other mega rich.

they've met & planned for decades at Bilderberg and Bohemien Grove, worked out of the Council of Foreign Relations and the World Economic Forum, world banks helped choose/groom national leaders, pushed for the U.N. and it's policies & authority, the WHO it's policies & authority, the E.U. it's policies & authority, FUND/loan to Nations, the many international trade agreements you seem to like so much.
Opened up China, and South America to trade, all with the goal of global consolidation... not more personal freedom or spreading individual personal wealth indigenously.

You say the IMF & the World Banks are incompetent.
I say well MAYBE they've made a few small mistakes but bottom line is they serve their NWO function extremely well.
Which is Putting Nations in huge perpetual DEBT.
Therefore allowing a vehicle of political & financial control of the nation & it's leadership.
And feeding western corps with international contracts... "economically liberalizing":rolleyes: those debtor nations.
Globalist Created the Federal Reserve the World bank the IMF & WTO
they have all been very successful

....
Here are few of the other "crazier" things I believe the globalist have actively promoted successfully to various degrees,
Population Control -- acted out by Abortion laws, BS wars, and IMO Pharmaceuticals.
-The general Dissolution of the Family unit & Christian values by the cultural & legal promoting of the "sexual revolution", and promoting evolutionary BSery.
-The transformation of the education system, pre-k to university, from a Christian, national and freedom based POV into a globalist, socialist friendly & bizzaro POV.
-General manipulation of the media -- for western/corporate propaganda but also to keep certain information quiet.

...

You see conspiracy, I see incompetence. Free trade and the spread of capitalism has raised far more out of poverty than any government program come up with by some globalist think tank could ever have hoped.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rainerzitelmann/2020/07/27/anyone-who-doesnt-know-the-following-facts-about-capitalism-should-learn-them/?sh=7d415e793dc1

If those seats of power lead to free trade and globalization then good on them. They may have stumbled into something. But you blame them for the lack of personal freedom in countries that care not a whit about their own populace. I'll repeat that there is no logic in the argument of globalists as evil who allow peole to be built up and then torn down at some point. You keep wrapping up the entirety of the argument under the "globalist" umbrella when I still just see a list of things. Some good, some bad, some innocuous, etc.

Also, I'm not sure how you get population control and pharmaceuticals in the same sentence.

[Gunny]

He can have lots of wants and goals but what is the evidence? Where is this global control? "Globalists" is very nebulous, it can be anything anyone wants it to be but as of yet it seems that there are no globalists in control. Sometimes bad border policy is bad border policy.True. Except you can't stop there.

Where does the bad border policy lead? What is its goal? What is the goal of breaking down law and order? The goal of making us economically unstable?

Could lead to whatever "globalization" and its many definitions is. My money's on attempted cultural revolution HERE. If using the globalization as a weapon to that end, then I see it as bad for the US.

But let's get some clarity/real here: when you use the term "globalization" on this board, it triggers those that think their is some global conspiracy toward one World order. I will point out that one of Biden's WH spokesmen did use the term "liberal World order"; which, I consider leads only to fascism in the US.

I would offer that if we focus on HERE, and worry about HERE, and fix things HERE, the US is in a much better position to tell any "World Order" to FOAD.

[fj1200]

True. Except you can't stop there.

Where does the bad border policy lead? What is its goal? What is the goal of breaking down law and order? The goal of making us economically unstable?

Could lead to whatever "globalization" and its many definitions is. My money's on attempted cultural revolution HERE. If using the globalization as a weapon to that end, then I see it as bad for the US.

But let's get some clarity/real here: when you use the term "globalization" on this board, it triggers those that think their is some global conspiracy toward one World order. I will point out that one of Biden's WH spokesmen did use the term "liberal World order"; which, I consider leads only to fascism in the US.

I would offer that if we focus on HERE, and worry about HERE, and fix things HERE, the US is in a much better position to tell any "World Order" to FOAD.

Right. Globalists and globalization are two different things. At least in my book.

And yes, why do seemingly smart people do and support exceedingly dumb things. To just scream "globalists" as though the end of an argument avoids dealing with issues directly.

[revelarts]

You see conspiracy, I see incompetence. Free trade and the spread of capitalism has raised far more out of poverty than any government program come up with by some globalist think tank could ever have hoped.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/rainerzitelmann/2020/07/27/anyone-who-doesnt-know-the-following-facts-about-capitalism-should-learn-them/?sh=7d415e793dc1

If those seats of power lead to free trade and globalization then good on them. They may have stumbled into something. But you blame them for the lack of personal freedom in countries that care not a whit about their own populace. I'll repeat that there is no logic in the argument of globalists as evil who allow peole to be built up and then torn down at some point. You keep wrapping up the entirety of the argument under the "globalist" umbrella when I still just see a list of things. Some good, some bad, some innocuous, etc.

Also, I'm not sure how you get population control and pharmaceuticals in the same sentence.

wha?
I'm not sure why you don't see the "conspiracy" when the they SAY it outright.
And do the things to try and make it happen.

your initial framing was better, where you say ---they aren't doing a great job of it---.
OK, that's debatable to a degree.
but to say it's not happening and it's all really just them bumbling into free trade and the benign spread of capitalism, sorry that's BS.

And Yes I blame them for overthrowing and pressuring democratically elected gov'ts and replacing them with leaders that give even less of a damn about them.
the history of south America, that the Rockafellars & Kissinger had no small part in, is a testament to NWO policies that really don't care about the people. Right wing Dictators, & IMF debts, with those countries the major resources controled by western corporations ...and not the locals... is what they wanted. "The school of the americas" trained death squads for some the "leaders" the US/western/Globalist supported.

Is everything under the control of globalist of course not, but many of the major moves & players in the world have been drawn along in a direction they preferred.

& I don't think are they some monolith. Seems like they're not. I get the impression that they fight among themselves over the best methods and how fast and what portion of the pie they want to control etc.

And they aren't all powerful or all knowing, but our collective ignorance and infighting over Red & Blue, Black & White, Christian, Muslim keeps us from really effectively dealing with the problem they really are.


But hey I'm glad youre against one world gov't
but I'm not sure you can promote all of the world gov't parts and still be against the world gov't.

kinda sounds like
Well I'm against baseball, but I like the nice mowed field, the hot dogs, the organ music, the seats in the stands are comfy too, And the fresh air, love the fresh air.
I think that's the only thing they REALLY were going to get when they planned to build the baseball stadium. Since they are so incompetent. it's not even a finished after all theses years! there's not even a parking lot!
And Just because there are a few players on the field "warming up" doesn't mean they are going to PLAY a game or anything. relax. enjoy the benefits.

[SassyLady]

Love your metaphor Rev.

[fj1200]

wha?
I'm not sure why you don't see the "conspiracy" when the they SAY it outright.
And do the things to try and make it happen.

your initial framing was better, where you say ---they aren't doing a great job of it---.
OK, that's debatable to a degree.
but to say it's not happening and it's all really just them bumbling into free trade and the benign spread of capitalism, sorry that's BS.

And Yes I blame them for overthrowing and pressuring democratically elected gov'ts and replacing them with leaders that give even less of a damn about them.
the history of south America, that the Rockafellars & Kissinger had no small part in, is a testament to NWO policies that really don't care about the people. Right wing Dictators, & IMF debts, with those countries the major resources controled by western corporations ...and not the locals... is what they wanted. "The school of the americas" trained death squads for some the "leaders" the US/western/Globalist supported.

Is everything under the control of globalist of course not, but many of the major moves & players in the world have been drawn along in a direction they preferred.

& I don't think are they some monolith. Seems like they're not. I get the impression that they fight among themselves over the best methods and how fast and what portion of the pie they want to control etc.

And they aren't all powerful or all knowing, but our collective ignorance and infighting over Red & Blue, Black & White, Christian, Muslim keeps us from really effectively dealing with the problem they really are.


But hey I'm glad youre against one world gov't
but I'm not sure you can promote all of the world gov't parts and still be against the world gov't.

kinda sounds like
Well I'm against baseball, but I like the nice mowed field, the hot dogs, the organ music, the seats in the stands are comfy too, And the fresh air, love the fresh air.
I think that's the only thing they REALLY were going to get when they planned to build the baseball stadium. Since they are so incompetent. it's not even a finished after all theses years! there's not even a parking lot!
And Just because there are a few players on the field "warming up" doesn't mean they are going to PLAY a game or anything. relax. enjoy the benefits.

The major points out of order.

C. That's a ridiculous metaphor. It makes no sense.
A. Technically that's not a conspiracy. They said it out loud. Pretty much makes them eggheads who desire to be incompetent technocrats.
B. Where did I promote all of the world government parts?

[fj1200]

kinda sounds like
Well I'm against baseball...

I think your analogies have been a little off lately, I'll try and tighten it up. I don't like baseball but a bunch of people have been talking about cricket being a pretty cool sport. And you say, "stop killing people in South America."

[revelarts]

BTW, can we add to the globalist wish list of things which ARE moving in their desired direction, a cashless economy?

In China of course it's nearly full blown with the final phase in place, the social credit system.
India in 2016 (http://Explained Cash is still king in India but how much are you a .. Read more at: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/90773235.cms?utm_source=contentofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst) they put severe limits on cash transitions. "to stop the 'black market'" "for the greater good"

Today Many banks and countries world wide are floating the idea of Digital currencies to replace cash.
In the US there are some businesses that simple do not take cash.
even My local UPS doesn't take cash anymore.

But hey, I'm Not sure what excuse is on the table to dismiss the idea that the globalist had ANYTHING to do with this, and/or claim that "it could never happen here". Or how it might be spun to claim it's a good thing.
But, some folks might.

[fj1200]

UPS. In the pocket of globalists?

[revelarts]

UPS. In the pocket of globalists?
mmm, maybe it's just following the trend blindly
or maybe
"UPS, World Economic Forum Partner"
"Our Partners
World Economic Forum Partners are leading global companies developing solutions to the world’s greatest challenges. They are the driving force behind the Forum’s programmes. Our Partners engage in Forum Platforms to shape the future, accessing networks and experts to ensure strategic decision-making on the most pressing world issues."
https://www.weforum.org/organizations/ups

I mean, OK maybe it's just the money for UPS right?
the Forums programs Smo-grams Psffft... it's that fat WEF account that they really want right am i right?
I mean that's all ANY company really wants. they all think like FJ would, so of course.
And Gotta go along to get along u-know-What-I'm Sayin' right? CACHING!!
Suuuure UPS is partners with the WEF "Agenda" wink wink... :rolleyes:
nothing to see here.


But to the MAIN POINT I'm assuming you agree that a cashless world is a goal and they are successfully pushing it.
with their bungling maneuvers.
Or would you rather just dodge the point.

[fj1200]

mmm, maybe it's just following the trend blindly
or maybe
"UPS, World Economic Forum Partner"
"Our Partners
World Economic Forum Partners are leading global companies developing solutions to the world’s greatest challenges. They are the driving force behind the Forum’s programmes. Our Partners engage in Forum Platforms to shape the future, accessing networks and experts to ensure strategic decision-making on the most pressing world issues."
https://www.weforum.org/organizations/ups

I mean, OK maybe it's just the money for UPS right?
the Forums programs Smo-grams Psffft... it's that fat WEF account that they really want right am i right?
I mean that's all ANY company really wants. they all think like FJ would, so of course.
And Gotta go along to get along u-know-What-I'm Sayin' right? CACHING!!
Suuuure UPS is partners with the WEF "Agenda" wink wink... :rolleyes:
nothing to see here.


But to the MAIN POINT I'm assuming you agree that a cashless world is a goal and they are successfully pushing it.
with their bungling maneuvers.
Or would you rather just dodge the point.

A cashless world; nefarious goal or natural extention of technological advancement?

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/benefits-cashless-society-mobile-payments/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/covid19-digital-cash-payments-government/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/04/is-cashless-leading-to-a-more-inclusive-society-in-east-asia/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/01/this-chart-shows-cash-cashless-finance-payment-methods-global-preference/
https://reports.weforum.org/future-of-financial-services-2015/perspectives-on-a-cashless-world/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/05/in-a-cashless-society-vulnerable-citizens-may-end-up-paying-the-highest-price/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/05/in-a-cashless-society-vulnerable-citizens-may-end-up-paying-the-highest-price/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/11/sweden-cashless-society-is-no-longer-a-utopia/

This kind of reminds me of someone bringing up the successes of BO, trump, <insert favorite POTUS here> and declaring these <insert list here> are proof of success where it's a list of things that have coincided with their being in that particular role. When in reality some things were because of, some things were in spite of, and some things only correlated on the space-time continuum. I'm pretty sure you're local UPS isn't taking cash because they hardly receive cash and don't want to deal with cash. Thus far FedEx is not affiliated with the WEF. Unknown if they still take cash.

[revelarts]

A cashless world; nefarious goal or natural extention of technological advancement?

https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/01/benefits-cashless-society-mobile-payments/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/06/covid19-digital-cash-payments-government/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/04/is-cashless-leading-to-a-more-inclusive-society-in-east-asia/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2021/01/this-chart-shows-cash-cashless-finance-payment-methods-global-preference/
https://reports.weforum.org/future-of-financial-services-2015/perspectives-on-a-cashless-world/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/05/in-a-cashless-society-vulnerable-citizens-may-end-up-paying-the-highest-price/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/05/in-a-cashless-society-vulnerable-citizens-may-end-up-paying-the-highest-price/
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2018/11/sweden-cashless-society-is-no-longer-a-utopia/

This kind of reminds me of someone bringing up the successes of BO, trump, <insert favorite POTUS here> and declaring these <insert list here> are proof of success where it's a list of things that have coincided with their being in that particular role. When in reality some things were because of, some things were in spite of, and some things only correlated on the space-time continuum. I'm pretty sure you're local UPS isn't taking cash because they hardly receive cash and don't want to deal with cash. Thus far FedEx is not affiliated with the WEF. Unknown if they still take cash.

the "natural extension of technological advancement".
suuure it is :rolleyes:

A system where you cannot buy or sell without the gov't or banks knowing everything ... allowing everything... (at least allowing decent folks to buy & sell what's allowed that is) is "NATURAL".
the next logical step.
now that you've explained I'm all onboard.
I mean,
It's worked so well for China, it's the NATURAL next step... Cough. I see it now.




FJ,
what i hear you saying is
...well since they've basically built the ball field ANYWAY... OF COURSE playing baseball games is the next natural step... not some GOAL.
BTW LOOK at all the benefits of baseball for the area.
I'm not a FAN of the game myself but the stands and the field they HAPPENED to have had a part in building... despite their bungling... it's very nice...

[fj1200]

the "natural extension of technological advancement".
suuure it is :rolleyes:

A system where you cannot buy or sell without the gov't or banks knowing everything ... allowing everything... (at least allowing decent folks to buy & sell what's allowed that is) is "NATURAL".
the next logical step.
now that you've explained I'm all onboard.
I mean,
It's worked so well for China, it's the NATURAL next step... Cough. I see it now.




FJ,
what i hear you saying is
...well since they've basically built the ball field ANYWAY... OF COURSE playing baseball games is the next natural step... not some GOAL.
BTW LOOK at all the benefits of baseball for the area.
I'm not a FAN of the game myself but the stands and the field they HAPPENED have a part in building... and despite their bungling it's very nice...

Globalists are not in charge of anything. Many people, depending on country, hardly ever touch cash. Many people made that decision because it's easier. Many companies would rather not receive cash. Globalists have not caused anything.

But I'm sorry... China is your example? They're not an example of anything related to free markets and free decisions; not sure why you bring them up.

[revelarts]

Globalists are not in charge of anything. Many people, depending on country, hardly ever touch cash. Many people made that decision because it's easier. Many companies would rather not receive cash. Globalists have not caused anything.

But I'm sorry... China is your example? They're not an example of anything related to free markets and free decisions; not sure why you bring them up.

"Globalists are not in charge of anything."
Except the things they bungle i guess.

look if they were outright dictators it all would have been done already. but they aren't... yet.
They are moving the pieces on the chess board using various amounts of influence and power and taking advantage of every crisis.

But Who's just talking about "free markets and free decisions" we're talking about the globalist actions to get what they want.
You're the one that's ASSUMING/Insisting that everything has been done/motivated by "free markets and free decisions".
As far as China goes it has been helped along by many globalist players from Kissinger to Rockefeller and the many multinational companies that have done biz in and with the People's Republic of China over the years. And helped them perfect the social credit system and CONTROLLED economy that they have now.
and they admire & promote as "beneficial" "natural" aspects of it to west and western leaders Fj.
People like former UK PM Tony Blair And his "institute for global change (https://institute.global/sites/default/files/inline-files/Tony%20Blair%20Institute%2C%20The%20Case%20for%20D igital%20Health%20Passports%2C%20February%202021_0 .pdf)" which promotes vaccine passports. Blair said passports were "inevitable" (is that like "natural"?) and would be used for other things as well.

But hey you seem to have "free markets and free decisions" blinders on so I doubt you'll see the other agendas even though they have public websites & are having public conferences about creating world government.
it's all just talk.. and/or just happening "naturally"
:rolleyes:

[Gunny]

"Globalists are not in charge of anything."
Except the things they bungle i guess.

look if they were outright dictators it all would have been done already. but they aren't... yet.
They are moving the pieces on the chess board using various amounts of influence and power and taking advantage of every crisis.

But Who's just talking about "free markets and free decisions" we're talking about the globalist actions to get what they want.
You're the one that's ASSUMING/Insisting that everything has been done/motivated by "free markets and free decisions".
As far as China goes it has been helped along by many globalist players from Kissinger to Rockefeller and the many multinational companies that have done biz in and with the People's Republic of China over the years. And helped them perfect the social credit system and CONTROLLED economy that they have now.
and they admire & promote as "beneficial" "natural" aspects of it to west and western leaders Fj.
People like former UK PM Tony Blair And his "institute for global change (https://institute.global/sites/default/files/inline-files/Tony%20Blair%20Institute%2C%20The%20Case%20for%20D igital%20Health%20Passports%2C%20February%202021_0 .pdf)" which promotes vaccine passports. Blair said passports were "inevitable" (is that like "natural"?) and would be used for other things as well.

But hey you seem to have "free markets and free decisions" blinders on so I doubt you'll see the other agendas even though they have public websites & are having public conferences about creating world government.
it's all just talk.. and/or just happening "naturally"
:rolleyes:

Here's a question: Assume these "globalists" all get together and agree to cooperate to take over the entire planet. Minus China because it won't play. Minus Russia because it won't play. Minus Eastern Europe and the Middle East because they won't play either.

Suppose this great fear you are mongering comes about. Then what? How does this change life for you as you live it now? They take away your cookie cuter job and cookie cutter house and cookie cutter EV and put you on the street? Hardly meets their goal of controlling you and making you work, pay taxes and buy their products.

Isn't that what we're already doing? If anything, this administration should have opened your eyes to the fact that you have actually nothing to say that matters to government/bureaucracy.

So what does it really matter what the puppet calls itself?

[revelarts]

Here's a question: Assume these "globalists" all get together and agree to cooperate to take over the entire planet. Minus China because it won't play. Minus Russia because it won't play. Minus Eastern Europe and the Middle East because they won't play either.

Suppose this great fear you are mongering comes about. Then what? How does this change life for you as you live it now? They take away your cookie cuter job and cookie cutter house and cookie cutter EV and put you on the street? Hardly meets their goal of controlling you and making you work, pay taxes and buy their products.

Isn't that what we're already doing? If anything, this administration should have opened your eyes to the fact that you have actually nothing to say that matters to government/bureaucracy.

So what does it really matter what the puppet calls itself?
So in another thread you're talking about taking out Putin ....before it's to late...
So why don't you want to just lay down for Putin since we have no say anyway?
How does Putin taking over change your life?
Wouldn't he prefer to take the US without a shot... Like the globalist are?

[Black Diamond]

So in another thread you're talking about taking out Putin ....before it's to late...
So why don't you want to just lay down for Putin since we have no say anyway?
How does Putin taking over change your life?

Putin is against many of these new western ideals. Like the woke gay transgender crap. I have a feeling the people you are describing here are much in favor of those things.

[Black Diamond]

So in another thread you're talking about taking out Putin ....before it's to late...
So why don't you want to just lay down for Putin since we have no say anyway?
How does Putin taking over change your life?
Wouldn't he prefer to take the US without a shot... Like the globalist are?

You made an addendum. Putin may try to take Biden out. It's illegal for us to assassinate another country's president, dictator, etc. It became illegal under Ford I believe

[revelarts]

You made an addendum. Putin may try to take Biden out. It's illegal for us to assassinate another country's president, dictator, etc. It became illegal under Ford I believe
I hadn't heard that Putin wanted to take out Biden. If I were him I'd hope he stay alive.
But I don't know what you mean about it being "illegal" for us. "We've" done it many times with no consequence.
And people like Lindsey Graham have in fact publicly called for the assassination of Putin. Months ago.

But that's not the point of my question to gunny.
It seems like he wants to fight Putin...even though Putin hasn't attacked us or tried to control our laws.
While the globalist have been changing laws here for years, from the TSA to the surveillance to the vaccine mandates and much more. None of that was Putin. And if people would have recognized all of it and more for what's its been, it could have been bloodlessly stopped.
Leaving Us all with more of the freedoms we have a right to , and the government with less bogus control.

[fj1200]

"Globalists are not in charge of anything."
Except the things they bungle i guess.

look if they were outright dictators it all would have been done already. but they aren't... yet.
They are moving the pieces on the chess board using various amounts of influence and power and taking advantage of every crisis.

But Who's just talking about "free markets and free decisions" we're talking about the globalist actions to get what they want.
You're the one that's ASSUMING/Insisting that everything has been done/motivated by "free markets and free decisions".
As far as China goes it has been helped along by many globalist players from Kissinger to Rockefeller and the many multinational companies that have done biz in and with the People's Republic of China over the years. And helped them perfect the social credit system and CONTROLLED economy that they have now.
and they admire & promote as "beneficial" "natural" aspects of it to west and western leaders Fj.
People like former UK PM Tony Blair And his "institute for global change (https://institute.global/sites/default/files/inline-files/Tony%20Blair%20Institute%2C%20The%20Case%20for%20D igital%20Health%20Passports%2C%20February%202021_0 .pdf)" which promotes vaccine passports. Blair said passports were "inevitable" (is that like "natural"?) and would be used for other things as well.

But hey you seem to have "free markets and free decisions" blinders on so I doubt you'll see the other agendas even though they have public websites & are having public conferences about creating world government.
it's all just talk.. and/or just happening "naturally"
:rolleyes:

The problem all along is that you see things happening and ascribe those things to globalists. I do not. Your local UPS isn't not taking cash because of globalists and their ivory tower mentioning of cashless societies. You argue that I have blinders on; maybe so but I argue that you're seeing what isn't there. Besides, I said that they were incompetent technocrats not anyone who was in charge of something, let alone bungling.

[fj1200]

I hadn't heard that Putin wanted to take out Biden. If I were him I'd hope he stay alive.
But I don't know what you mean about it being "illegal" for us. "We've" done it many times with no consequence.
And people like Lindsey Graham have in fact publicly called for the assassination of Putin. Months ago.

But that's not the point of my question to gunny.
It seems like he wants to fight Putin...even though Putin hasn't attacked us or tried to control our laws.
While the globalist have been changing laws here for years, from the TSA to the surveillance to the vaccine mandates and much more. None of that was Putin. And if people would have recognized all of it and more for what's its been, it could have been bloodlessly stopped.
Leaving Us all with more of the freedoms we have a right to , and the government with less bogus control.

Those weren't globalists.

[BoogyMan]

There should be a third choice. Divisive and ignorant children who cannot understand there are more ways of looking at a problem than one that is fed to them from the hive mind of central government.


Evil geniuses or incompetent technocrats? What does the evidence say?

[Black Diamond]

I hadn't heard that Putin wanted to take out Biden. If I were him I'd hope he stay alive.
But I don't know what you mean about it being "illegal" for us. "We've" done it many times with no consequence.
And people like Lindsey Graham have in fact publicly called for the assassination of Putin. Months ago.

But that's not the point of my question to gunny.
It seems like he wants to fight Putin...even though Putin hasn't attacked us or tried to control our laws.
While the globalist have been changing laws here for years, from the TSA to the surveillance to the vaccine mandates and much more. None of that was Putin. And if people would have recognized all of it and more for what's its been, it could have been bloodlessly stopped.
Leaving Us all with more of the freedoms we have a right to , and the government with less bogus control.

Graham is an idiot. I can't remember the law that was passed
We are part of nato which is an org whose mission is to spread democracy throughout the world. Interesting we owe it to our allies but France didn't help us in Iraq.

[fj1200]

There should be a third choice. Divisive and ignorant children who cannot understand there are more ways of looking at a problem than one that is fed to them from the hive mind of central government.

No doubt. We've had think tanks, global consortiums, babbling former world "leaders", etc. yammering on for decades to little avail IMO.


Graham is an idiot. I can't remember the law that was passed
We are part of nato which is an org whose mission is to spread democracy throughout the world. Interesting we owe it to our allies but France didn't help us in Iraq.

If I'm not mistaken it was some sort of Executive Order. It came out of the Church Committee.

[Gunny]

So in another thread you're talking about taking out Putin ....before it's to late...
So why don't you want to just lay down for Putin since we have no say anyway?
How does Putin taking over change your life?
Wouldn't he prefer to take the US without a shot... Like the globalist are?That's not an answer. It's a deflection. We're talking YOUR "theory", not reality in Ukraine. Your theories contradict themselves. How I handle reality does not.

I'm pretty focused on a real enemy that can be touched. You're focused on defeating giants that are windmills.

[revelarts]

FJ, 2 simple questions?
How many politicians in 100 + years have self IDd as populist?
Have populist done anything In the US?

[fj1200]

FJ, 2 simple questions?
How many politicians in 100 + years have self IDd as populist?
Have populist done anything In the US?

1. There was a populist party but I'm not aware that they ever garnered any measurable power. There have been politicians who have been referred to as populists.
2. People who have been referred to as populist have done stuff in the US.

[SassyLady]

Does anyone here other than myself and Rev believe Soros, Gates and Blackwater control a lot of things here in America that affect our life? They are members of WEF. They are using climate change to implement their ideology.

I wouldn't be so ready to blow them off as not threatening to our way of life.

[fj1200]

Blackwater now? Blackrock and Vanguard still?

[revelarts]

FJ its clear that, outside of the short lived populist party, there are few to 0 politicians or political orgs or influential persons or biz that assume the title populist.

But somehow in your mind they have been & are a great danger to America. But you haven't named one person group policy or law that own the title.
Obviously you are ascribing power to groups / persons that have none.
Everything you say is "populist" is simply NATURAL. Just part of natural Republican or Democrat politics.... Nothing else, your labels are imaginary... There is zero danger from these unnamed unseen "populist" boogie men you are so concerned about.

If where going deny realities lets be consistent.

Fact is its far easier to point out the Communist, socialist, fascists, libertarians & globalist. People, groups, policies & Their progress in the 100 years than any kind of populism.

the Globalist agenda and people attached to it are not hard to see if folks care to see it.
Even though , like socialism, it doesn't like to call itself by it's name in its policy moves.
sometimes it flys under the label "free trade" as with the TPP that Obama & Hillary were promoting.
sometimes it flys under the UN treaties, etc.
The plutocrats are very real and are not hiding what they want much anymore.
And its not National sovereignty, or personal sovereignty under the U.S. constitution.
What the globalist openly want is a world Federal govt run by them. And we are moving in that direction ... "Naturally":rolleyes:

[fj1200]

FJ its clear that, outside of the short lived populist party, there are few to 0 politicians or political orgs or influential persons or biz that assume the title populist.

But somehow in your mind they have been & are a great danger to America. But you haven't named one person group policy or law that own the title.
Obviously you are ascribing power to groups / persons that have none.
Everything you say is "populist" is simply NATURAL. Just part of natural Republican or Democrat politics.... Nothing else, your labels are imaginary... There is zero danger from these unnamed unseen "populist" boogie men you are so concerned about.

If where going deny realities lets be consistent.

Fact is its far easier to point out the Communist, socialist, fascists, libertarians & globalist. People, groups, policies & Their progress in the 100 years than any kind of populism.

the Globalist agenda and people attached to it are not hard to see if folks care to see it.
Even though , like socialism, it doesn't like to call itself by it's name in its policy moves.
sometimes it flys under the label "free trade" as with the TPP that Obama & Hillary were promoting.
sometimes it flys under the UN treaties, etc.
The plutocrats are very real and are not hiding what they want much anymore.
And its not National sovereignty, or personal sovereignty under the U.S. constitution.
What the globalist openly want is a world Federal govt run by them. And we are moving in that direction ... "Naturally":rolleyes:

I've never suggested that there is a "populist cabal" that is attempting to subvert US sovereignty by nefarious means. I've never suggested that populists share an overarching agenda that they want to impose on the world. I've suggested that populism is bad for reasons detailed in my ever popular Populism (http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?72272-Populism-Good-or-Bad) thread. Generally populists are individuals, on either side of the spectrum, who are running for office on particular platforms that I would suggest are populist in nature. Thankfully populist politicians and ideas haven't really taken hold in this country like they have in other countries but that doesn't mean that there aren't populist movements that are detrimental and should be defeated as an idea. One might argue we have more populist laws in the US than we have globalist laws. Hmmmm... Nevertheless, there are examples in that other thread that I'd be happy to discuss further.

And I believe I've stipulated previously that there are "globalist" ideas that I am not in favor of and oppose. But there are things that you list as globalist which aren't nefarious as you keep trying to point out; looking at you free trade. And you are certainly more than likely to keep pointing out that I said "naturally" but I am just as likely to point out how ignorant that usage is because you keep ignoring context.

I certainly agree that globalists aren't hard to see, there are plenty of websites out there pointing them out. :rolleyes: But consistently speaking no globalist has been changing laws here just as no populist cabal put up trump and sanders to run for POTUS to oppose TPP.

[revelarts]

Here's just one place in the world
where the digital/cashless society is "naturally" happening.
Greeks set to face heavy fines if they don't spend 30 per cent of their income electronically

https://www.theage.com.au/business/markets/greeks-set-to-face-heavy-fines-if-they-don-t-spend-30-per-cent-of-their-income-electronically-20191209-p53i14.html
Greeks will be hit with a hefty fine if they do not spend almost a third of their income electronically in an unprecedented bid by the new government to stamp out rampant tax evasion.
The government expects to raise more than €500 million ($808 million) every year from the initiative that will force Greeks to spend 30 per cent of their income electronically, Alex Patelis, the prime minister's chief economic adviser, revealed....

...But many workers are paid their wages in cash, which they then use to pay their rent and bills. Greece also has one of the lowest internet usage rates in the EU at 72 per cent. ..."


But The government HAS to DO something right?
the fact that the excuse aligns with Globalist goals is just COINCIDENCE.
Not sure what the Greek prime minister's affiliation with the WEF or other gloabalist groups are but i guess i wouldn't have to scratch to deep to find another coincidence there.


But i do have a question for FJ.
Are you for or against a cashless society

If for it, should it be up for a PUBLIC vote?

[fj1200]

Here's just one place in the world
where the digital/cashless society is "naturally" happening.
Greeks set to face heavy fines if they don't spend 30 per cent of their income electronically

https://www.theage.com.au/business/markets/greeks-set-to-face-heavy-fines-if-they-don-t-spend-30-per-cent-of-their-income-electronically-20191209-p53i14.html
Greeks will be hit with a hefty fine if they do not spend almost a third of their income electronically in an unprecedented bid by the new government to stamp out rampant tax evasion.
The government expects to raise more than €500 million ($808 million) every year from the initiative that will force Greeks to spend 30 per cent of their income electronically, Alex Patelis, the prime minister's chief economic adviser, revealed....

...But many workers are paid their wages in cash, which they then use to pay their rent and bills. Greece also has one of the lowest internet usage rates in the EU at 72 per cent. ..."


But The government HAS to DO something right?
the fact that the excuse aligns with Globalist goals is just COINCIDENCE.
Not sure what the Greek prime minister's affiliation with the WEF or other gloabalist groups are but i guess i wouldn't have to scratch to deep to find another coincidence there.


But i do have a question for FJ.
Are you for or against a cashless society

If for it, should it be up for a PUBLIC vote?

I think your answer is here...



to stamp out rampant tax evasion.

The coincidence is that Greece is, and has been, and will continue to be, a complete cluster... which shouldn't be shocking to anyone.

I am neither for nor against it but I doubt it will be here any time soon.

[Gunny]

FJ, 2 simple questions?
How many politicians in 100 + years have self IDd as populist?
Have populist done anything In the US?Grasping at straws now :laugh:

Question, rev ... are populists globalists? :)

[fj1200]

Grasping at straws now :laugh:

Question, rev ... are populists globalists? :)

Now, now. It was a fair question but I knew where he was going. ;)

But I think anti-globalists are populists. It seems to be checking the boxes IMHO.

[Gunny]

Now, now. It was a fair question but I knew where he was going. ;)

But I think anti-globalists are populists. It seems to be checking the boxes IMHO.

I still haven't figured what either a populist or globalist is. Right about the time I get one or the other figured out, the goal posts get moved :)

[revelarts]

I think your answer is here...

So you believe the Greek officials have only one agenda.
taxes?
Like the U.S. said it attacked Iraq... for WMDs.
OK


The coincidence is that Greece is, and has been, and will continue to be, a complete cluster... which shouldn't be shocking to anyone.

ANd the best way to deal with it is by using globalist solutions.
unpopular with the people of that "democracy".
OK


I am neither for nor against it but I doubt it will be here any time soon.

Neither For or Against it?
I don't believe you but OK.

the 2nd part of the question was,
Do you think the people should have a say in whether or not it happens?
Or do you think it should just happen "naturally" ... that is by the will of certain plutocrats, bankers and politicians ... globalist... who lives it will make richer and make everyone else easier for them to control?

[fj1200]

So you believe the Greek officials have only one agenda.
taxes?
Like the U.S. said it attacked Iraq... for WMDs.
OK

ANd the best way to deal with it is by using globalist solutions.
unpopular with the people of that "democracy".
OK

Considering that Greece is the global poster child for governmental mismanagement and generally incompetent ideas of financial planning; I'd say that's an easier jump than the rollout of future globalist domination. If it is a globalist rollout then I'm glad that they started with Greece because surely it will bomb in spectacular fashion, being Greece and all, convincing the rest of the world that globalist are truly incompetent technocrats and not evil geniuses.

But you got an Iraq WMD dig in. Winning! :rolleyes:


Neither For or Against it?
I don't believe you but OK.

the 2nd part of the question was,
Do you think the people should have a say in whether or not it happens?
Or do you think it should just happen "naturally" ... that is by the will of certain plutocrats, bankers and politicians ... globalist... who lives it will make richer and make everyone else easier for them to control?

What's not to believe? But you know I was thinking a little more about your question and I feel I must expand a little. I would be against governmental mandates because small government and all. And I also think it would be a fairly spectacular failure especially for those least able to make the transition.

Secondly, in the unlikely event that it did happen then you're choice was made by our republican form of government or that UPS naturally decided that they no longer want to deal in cash. I have faith that our republican wouldn't go down that path but it also doesn't bother me that UPS won't take cash.

[Gunny]

Considering that Greece is the global poster child for governmental mismanagement and generally incompetent ideas of financial planning; I'd say that's an easier jump than the rollout of future globalist domination. If it is a globalist rollout then I'm glad that they started with Greece because surely it will bomb in spectacular fashion, being Greece and all, convincing the rest of the world that globalist are truly incompetent technocrats and not evil geniuses.

But you got an Iraq WMD dig in. Winning! :rolleyes:



What's not to believe? But you know I was thinking a little more about your question and I feel I must expand a little. I would be against governmental mandates because small government and all. And I also think it would be a fairly spectacular failure especially for those least able to make the transition.

Secondly, in the unlikely event that it did happen then you're choice was made by our republican form of government or that UPS naturally decided that they no longer want to deal in cash. I have faith that our republican wouldn't go down that path but it also doesn't bother me that UPS won't take cash.

Sure am glad I'm half-planning a one-way trip to Greece :laugh:

[revelarts]

Considering that Greece is the global poster child for governmental mismanagement and generally incompetent ideas of financial planning; I'd say that's an easier jump than the rollout of future globalist domination. If it is a globalist rollout then I'm glad that they started with Greece because surely it will bomb in spectacular fashion, being Greece and all, convincing the rest of the world that globalist are truly incompetent technocrats and not evil geniuses.

But you got an Iraq WMD dig in. Winning! :rolleyes:



What's not to believe? But you know I was thinking a little more about your question and I feel I must expand a little. I would be against governmental mandates because small government and all. And I also think it would be a fairly spectacular failure especially for those least able to make the transition.

Secondly, in the unlikely event that it did happen then you're choice was made by our republican form of government or that UPS naturally decided that they no longer want to deal in cash. I have faith that our republican wouldn't go down that path but it also doesn't bother me that UPS won't take cash.

uh huh.

again
Do you think the people should have a say in whether or not it happens?
Or
Do you think it should just happen "naturally"
... that is by the will of certain plutocrats, bankers and politicians ... globalist...
who lives it will make richer and make everyone else easier for them to control?

[fj1200]

uh huh.

again
Do you think the people should have a say in whether or not it happens?
Or
Do you think it should just happen "naturally"
... that is by the will of certain plutocrats, bankers and politicians ... globalist...
who lives it will make richer and make everyone else easier for them to control?

You ask dumb questions. We live in a Constitutional Republic. The people would have their say through their representatives. I'm OK with that; I'm not demading it be put to a vote.

And I know you don't like that the world is changing but the world is changing and habits are changing naturally :slap: with zero intervention by globalists. :slap: :slap:

https://www.frbsf.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/7/2019-Diary-of-Consumer-Payment-Choice-Figure1.jpg


(Source: Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco)Recent credit card and debit card transaction volume statistics show cashless payments are becoming the norm, and you may be wondering:
What percentage of transactions are in cash?
The 2021 Diary of Consumer Payment Choice has found that cash payments represented 19% of all transactions in the US in 2020. This was 7 percentage points down from 2019. So, there is a significant decline in the use of cash in the USA.

[revelarts]

You ask dumb questions.


That you can't even give honest answers too for some reason.
just dodge, deflect & dismiss items and assume you've made your point.

or u make BS Assertions without evidence.
like

...the world is changing and habits are changing naturally :slap: with zero intervention by globalists. :slap::slap:
that's a contentless assertion VOID of anything but the your belief.. & or ignorance.

Similar to saying,
"Trump was elected with ZERO intervention or influence by populism." :slap::slap:

Makes you feel better i suppose, but it's actually carries ZERO real info about any intervention or influence on events.

[fj1200]

That you can't even give honest answers too for some reason.
just dodge, deflect & dismiss items and assume you've made your point.

or u make BS Assertions without evidence.
like

that's a contentless assertion VOID of anything but the your belief.. & or ignorance.

Similar to saying,
"Trump was elected with ZERO intervention or influence by populism." :slap::slap:

Makes you feel better i suppose, but it's actually carries ZERO real info about any intervention or influence on events.

I try and give honest answers. Even to dumb questions. Should it be up for a vote? Should abortion be up for a vote? Should tax rates be up for a vote? Should <fill in the blank> be up for a vote? Most things at the Federal level are not up for a vote? Only people and only two of them in one vote casting effort.

I made an assertion. I gave evidence. From actual backed sources. I expect your apology. :) Or a rebuttal. Either way. And my BS assertions without evidence? :laugh:

trump is a populist. He was elected by the people who like his populist positions for some reason. You're entitled to your opinion whether it agrees with me or not. You don't even have to agree with my definition of populism. Doesn't mean that the issue can't be discussed like adults... assuming said adults present credible rationale for their viewpoint.

[revelarts]

"Globalists are not in charge of anything."
Except the things they bungle i guess.

look if they were outright dictators it all would have been done already. but they aren't... yet.
They are moving the pieces on the chess board using various amounts of influence and power and taking advantage of every crisis.

But Who's just talking about "free markets and free decisions" we're talking about the globalist actions to get what they want.
You're the one that's ASSUMING/Insisting that everything has been done/motivated by "free markets and free decisions".
As far as China goes it has been helped along by many globalist players from Kissinger to Rockefeller and the many multinational companies that have done biz in and with the People's Republic of China over the years. And helped them perfect the social credit system and CONTROLLED economy that they have now.
and they admire & promote as "beneficial" "natural" aspects of it to west and western leaders Fj.
People like former UK PM Tony Blair And his "institute for global change (https://institute.global/sites/default/files/inline-files/Tony%20Blair%20Institute%2C%20The%20Case%20for%20D igital%20Health%20Passports%2C%20February%202021_0 .pdf)" which promotes vaccine passports. Blair said passports were "inevitable" (is that like "natural"?) and would be used for other things as well.

But hey you seem to have "free markets and free decisions" blinders on so I doubt you'll see the other agendas even though they have public websites & are having public conferences about creating world government.
it's all just talk.. and/or just happening "naturally"
:rolleyes:
Just an addendum
Was trying to find find this clip when i 1st post the above.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FGyJZX0VEAMcCI4?format=jpg&name=900x900


"it's the natural evolution"
covid is just an "ADDITIONAL reason."

But not a long term goal or anything he'd have (or had) any influence in establishing.

[fj1200]

^A talking head said something you don't like that speaks to your outlook. Sadly, that's not exactly hard to find.

[revelarts]

Former Prime Minister claims ID card scheme is 'common sense'
2020
TONY Blair is excited his failed ID card scheme could be renewed as the government set out plans to enable the use of digital identity cards across the UK....
The former Prime Minister was a keen advocate of ID cards for all UK citizens following the events of 9/11 but was later billed as an “entitlement card” to fight against benefit fraud.
A scheme began its rollout in 2009 but was scrapped in 2010 by the Tory/Lib Der coalition government.
But now, under Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the government is planning new digital ID cards for British citizens....
This comes after Dominic Cummings bids to transform the government’s use of data despite privacy fears.
In the new scheme, people will get an online identity which can be used for daily activities such as proving age, registering with a GP and buying properties from a different location.
However, much like when Mr Blair tried to introduce his own scheme, it has been met with backlash from civil liberties groups saying they would lead to sensitive records being “at the fingertips” of authorities.
Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, said: “The idea of digital ID and vaccination checks could easily lead to health apartheid that few would expect of a democratic country...."
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1331223/Tony-Blair-digital-ids-news-bbc-boris-johnson-uk-government-coronavirus

So the talking head got "the scheme" started in the real world back in 2008, but people ...who thought that talking head's globalist ID system was a bad idea... kicked it back.
BUT it's back again. And he leant his Talking head to it help it along again.
It's almost like they have goals.
It's almost like the parts are NOT natural.

But watch out for them Populist! they'll ruin Everything.

[fj1200]

Former Prime Minister claims ID card scheme is 'common sense'
2020
TONY Blair is excited his failed ID card scheme could be renewed as the government set out plans to enable the use of digital identity cards across the UK....
The former Prime Minister was a keen advocate of ID cards for all UK citizens following the events of 9/11 but was later billed as an “entitlement card” to fight against benefit fraud.
A scheme began its rollout in 2009 but was scrapped in 2010 by the Tory/Lib Der coalition government.
But now, under Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the government is planning new digital ID cards for British citizens....
This comes after Dominic Cummings bids to transform the government’s use of data despite privacy fears.
In the new scheme, people will get an online identity which can be used for daily activities such as proving age, registering with a GP and buying properties from a different location.
However, much like when Mr Blair tried to introduce his own scheme, it has been met with backlash from civil liberties groups saying they would lead to sensitive records being “at the fingertips” of authorities.
Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, said: “The idea of digital ID and vaccination checks could easily lead to health apartheid that few would expect of a democratic country...."
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1331223/Tony-Blair-digital-ids-news-bbc-boris-johnson-uk-government-coronavirus

So the talking head got "the scheme" started in the real world back in 2008, but people ...who thought that talking head's globalist ID system was a bad idea... kicked it back.
BUT it's back again. And he leant his Talking head to it help it along again.
It's almost like they have goals.
It's almost like the parts are NOT natural.

But watch out for them Populist! they'll ruin Everything.

He could also declare Men in Black a documentary and it would still just be an entertaining movie. And populists, or populist movements, have caused far more damage here and globally than a globalist could ever hope to.

[SassyLady]

Who here would vote to move society to a digital ID?

Not I.

[fj1200]

^Will you be running for Congress on that platform?

[SassyLady]

^Will you be running for Congress on that platform?

Just one of many things in my platform. Free speech, medical freedom, election integrity, parental rights, no funding of foreign wars ...

What will your platform be fj?

[fj1200]

Just one of many things in my platform. Free speech, medical freedom, election integrity, parental rights, no funding of foreign wars ...

What will your platform be fj?

Small government stuff. Probably not to different than yours.

[SassyLady]

Small government stuff. Probably not to different than yours.
Maybe we should run together.

[fj1200]

^There's an idea.

[revelarts]

Just an addendum
Was trying to find find this clip when i 1st post the above.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FGyJZX0VEAMcCI4?format=jpg&name=900x900


"it's the natural evolution"
covid is just an "ADDITIONAL reason."

But not a long term goal or anything he'd have (or had) any influence in establishing.


Former Prime Minister claims ID card scheme is 'common sense'
2020
TONY Blair is excited his failed ID card scheme could be renewed as the government set out plans to enable the use of digital identity cards across the UK....
The former Prime Minister was a keen advocate of ID cards for all UK citizens following the events of 9/11 but was later billed as an “entitlement card” to fight against benefit fraud.
A scheme began its rollout in 2009 but was scrapped in 2010 by the Tory/Lib Der coalition government.
But now, under Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the government is planning new digital ID cards for British citizens....
This comes after Dominic Cummings bids to transform the government’s use of data despite privacy fears.
In the new scheme, people will get an online identity which can be used for daily activities such as proving age, registering with a GP and buying properties from a different location.
However, much like when Mr Blair tried to introduce his own scheme, it has been met with backlash from civil liberties groups saying they would lead to sensitive records being “at the fingertips” of authorities.
Silkie Carlo, director of Big Brother Watch, said: “The idea of digital ID and vaccination checks could easily lead to health apartheid that few would expect of a democratic country...."
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1331223/Tony-Blair-digital-ids-news-bbc-boris-johnson-uk-government-coronavirus

So the talking head got "the scheme" started in the real world back in 2008, but people ...who thought that talking head's globalist ID system was a bad idea... kicked it back.
BUT it's back again. And he leant his Talking head to it help it along again.
It's almost like they have goals.
It's almost like the parts are NOT natural.

But watch out for them Populist! they'll ruin Everything.


Who here would vote to move society to a digital ID?

Not I.


here's some "talking Head" Gov't paper going on about Digital ID... for all Canadians.


Canada’s Digital Ambition 2022

"...The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the need for government services to be accessible and flexible in the digital age. The next step in making services more convenient to access is a federal Digital Identity Program, integrated with pre-existing provincial platforms. Digital identity is the electronic equivalent of a recognized proof-of-identity document (for example, a driver’s licence or passport) and confirms that “you are who you say you are” in a digital context. The President of the Treasury Board’s mandate letter, issued in December 2021, committed the government to work “towards a common and secure approach for a trusted digital identity platform to support seamless service delivery to Canadians across the country.”"....
https://www.canada.ca/en/government/system/digital-government/government-canada-digital-operations-strategic-plans/canada-digital-ambition.html

so there's a VOTE on it across the country?
no?
there's discussion if it's what the people want across the country?
no?
So it must be naturally occurring across the country.
no?
it's By The President of the Treasury Board’s mandate letter.
So there it is.

And it just naturally HAPPENS to align with the bungling Globalist plans.
but that's just coincidence.

in one of the written objectives it says:
"To manage identity consistently and collaboratively within the Government of Canada and with other jurisdictions and industry sectors, where identity of employees, organizations, devices and individuals is required;...
https://www.tbs-sct.canada.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=16577
almost like the whole world or something.

But nothing to see here. i'm sure all the other text of the document explains it ALL away. all the benefits to be gained is the REAL reason.
nothing bad could happen, like when Canada blocked bank accounts of truckers protesting the Canadian gov't..
Digital ID would never be used to streamline that process.
like no buying or selling without the mark... i mean... ID.

So forgetaboit.
But those POPULIST are out there somewhere causing harm i'm sure.!!!

[fj1200]

But those POPULIST are out there somewhere causing harm i'm sure.!!!

You should thank me for keeping you in practice for running down your list every few days. You're welcome. :poke:

But as I said before populists have caused more harm than globalists could ever hope to.

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FZ9KsMcXwAEP2sd?format=jpg&name=small

[SassyLady]

You should thank me for keeping you in practice for running down your list every few days. You're welcome. :poke:

But as I said before populists have caused more harm than globalists could ever hope to.
Not true.

[fj1200]

Not true.

Based on...???

Have you been to the entire continent of South America where populists like Peron have destroyed economies? More specifically Venezuela where they rebel against the rich and Americanos? Have you seen the lack of development based on minimum wage laws? Have you seen what protectionism does to countries? The Great Depression? I think I could come up with scads more examples of populist movements destroying lives. We can argue whether they're populist in nature but I would argue that they are based on my definition. I've got a thread about it.

The anti-globalist mantra is mostly what they're going to do not what they've really done. Trade agreements with ultra[national enforcement agreements haven't destroyed lives. The EU hasn't destroyed any lives. NAFTA hasn't destroyed lives. The UN hasn't wholesale destroyed lives. The IMF hasn't wholesale destroyed lives long term. The UN sucks and the IMF suck but I mostly chalk that up to bureaucratic incompetence not because they've tried to end private property.

Pictures of someone hanging out with, or posts referencing, Klaus Schwab are not really evidence of destroyed lives.

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FayxjwfXkAAptlS?format=jpg&name=small



there are a lot of benefits to it. right?

[fj1200]

Not true.

Populists, IMO, about the screw over another country with nary a globalist around.


https://youtu.be/fl1Haw7w_j0

[revelarts]

Populists, IMO, about the screw over another country with nary a globalist around.


https://youtu.be/fl1Haw7w_j0

you sure about that?
globalist have been fomenting left wing & (but mostly) right wing coups for over 70 years.

[fj1200]

you sure about that?
globalist have been fomenting left wing & (but mostly) right wing coups for over 70 years.

I'm pretty sure. There hasn't been a coup in Chile for quite some time. The changes are gradual movements from right to left that the people have been voting for all along the way. The inevitable descension into chaos :cough: Venezuela :cough really doesn't benefit anyone.

[revelarts]

I'm pretty sure. There hasn't been a coup in Chile for quite some time. The changes are gradual movements from right to left that the people have been voting for all along the way. The inevitable descension into chaos :cough: Venezuela :cough really doesn't benefit anyone.

History of Chile includes USA, CIA DOD supported(assisted) coup and support of a right leaning dictatorship that kidnapped(disappeared) and tortured & killed people who were against the U.S. back gov't.
from the 1970's forward.

in the 1970's Chile peacefully elected a "marxist" Salvaodor Allende and the USA (pushed by globalist Kissinger & others) couldn't have that so...
Coup And Overthrow back by US and even Australia (probably UK too)

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/chile/2020-11-06/allende-inauguration-50th-anniversary

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/11/declassified-documents-show-australia-assisted-cia-in-coup-against-chiles-salvador-allende

the USA back coup installed Augusto Pinochet a Chilean general who ruled Chile as dictator from 1973 to 1990.
Chile's secret police were trained by the DOD's "School of the Americas" grads who committed atrocities of ever kind to suppress decent 20+ years.

Is it really hard to understand why some "populist":rolleyes: might form some animosity to the succeeding "elected" gov'ts friendly to the U.S. and those in power in Chile?

[fj1200]

Is it really hard to understand why some "populist":rolleyes: might form some animosity to the succeeding "elected" gov'ts friendly to the U.S. and those in power in Chile?

Thanks for the history lesson. :rolleyes: How does that dispute a populist movement today? Are they actively choosing a worse outcome (allegedly) of an undoubtedly left-wing constitution (subject to vote) to spite a 50-year old coup that resulted in a free-market based economy that improved the economic conditions of the vast majority of the country?

I'm sure the Chilean left of today remembers the myth of the martyr Allende rather than the actual history of his policies.


His economic policies were used by economists Rudi Dornbusch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudi_Dornbusch) and Sebastián Edwards (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebasti%C3%A1n_Edwards) to coin the term macroeconomic populism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroeconomic_populism).[88] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende#cite_note-91)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende#Presidency

[fj1200]

Populism: More damaging than Globalists.


Macroeconomic populism is a term coined by Rudi Dornbusch (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudi_Dornbusch) and Sebastian Edwards (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sebastian_Edwards) in a 1990 paper.[1] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroeconomic_populism#cite_note-paper-1) The term refers to the policies by many Latin American (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_American) administrations by which government spending (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_spending) and real wages (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_wages) increase in a non-sustainable way leading to inflation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation), then stagflation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stagflation) and ultimately an economic collapse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_collapse) that drops real wages to lower than they were before the populist (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populist) period began. The paper cites as examples Salvador Allende (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende) in Chile (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chile) (1970–1973), and Alan García (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Garc%C3%ADa) first term in Peru (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peru) (1985–1990). In 1991, Dornbusch and Edwards edited a book titled The Macroeconomics (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroeconomics) of Populism in Latin America which analyzed more cases like Argentina (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentina) between 1973 and 1976, Mexico (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexico) between 1970 and 1982, and Brazil (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil).[2] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroeconomic_populism#cite_note-2)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macroeconomic_populism

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FbXFnOQaQAA8ezk?format=jpg&name=small

When currency becomes completely digital, individuals can wave goodbye to any notion of privacy and meaningful freedom.
But as long as Biz does "freely" & it makes money, it's completely NATURAL and GOOD.
and not Globalist guided.
even though they've wanted this and pointed the world toward it for decades.

[fj1200]

:brokenrecord:

Populists making their citizens go cashless for decades by making the currency worthless.

[revelarts]

:brokenrecord:
.

it's called more evidence.

[revelarts]

A recent goal of the globalist is to get peple to eat bugs instead of meat.
they've been pushing this ... as is their style... upfront and behind the scence.




https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FbZuLpZXgAE04x1?format=jpg&name=small

But I'm guessing that FJ thinks it's JUST the FREE MARKET Demand for more bug filled meals that's driving all the talk.
and new bug food processing plants in the west.

[fj1200]

But I'm guessing that FJ thinks...

You spend way to much time guessing what I think.


it's called more evidence.

You spend way to much time putting stock into what eggheads say.

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FbZr2XQWAAA7XbM?format=jpg&name=small

[revelarts]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5g7VMJ4lHs

[Gunny]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/world-transgender-health-org-poised-give-hospitals-green-light-lower-age-youth-surgeries

Here's a global organization that needs a nuke dropped on it. This is just pure evil.

[fj1200]

Clarifying question:

If a Globalist wants "___fill in the blank___(you to eat bugs, you to give up cash, etc." is it automatically bad? Or is "___fill in the blank___(whatever a Globalist wants)" automatically bad because a Globalist says it?

[Gunny]

Clarifying question:

If a Globalist wants "___fill in the blank___(you to eat bugs, you to give up cash, etc." is it automatically bad? Or is "___fill in the blank___(whatever a Globalist wants)" automatically bad because a Globalist says it?IMO? Globalists are unnecessary to anything anyone actually needs to get along. They are one and the same as these climate crisis fucktards. They create and sell crises so people will fund them searching for a fix.

I would say considering their existence is based on fraudulence to begin with, they can't be anything good.

On the other hand, if the People here would take care of here, they wouldn't have to worry about what globalists want because there wiould be no fear of their retarded BS every affecting our lives.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Clarifying question:

If a Globalist wants "___fill in the blank___(you to eat bugs, you to give up cash, etc." is it automatically bad? Or is "___fill in the blank___(whatever a Globalist wants)" automatically bad because a Globalist says it?

It bad because they want 95% of earth's population to be slave to the top 5%..
They want one world government and earth to get rid of about 3 billion peoooooooooooooooooooooooooooople.
They want a nazi type dictatorship with them in charge-and they do not care if it kills billions getting it..
Read these words, totally EVIL....--Tyr

[fj1200]

IMO? Globalists are unnecessary to anything anyone actually needs to get along. They are one and the same as these climate crisis fucktards. They create and sell crises so people will fund them searching for a fix.

I would say considering their existence is based on fraudulence to begin with, they can't be anything good.

On the other hand, if the People here would take care of here, they wouldn't have to worry about what globalists want because there wiould be no fear of their retarded BS every affecting our lives.

Given my posit, and evidence compiled in support thereof, that they're incompetent technocrats who jumble together some documents and under the auspices of the blind squirrel theorem one is better served to just dismantle various policy proposals because they're just not very good. And on the off chance that they do find a nut there just isn't a blanket refusal.


It bad because they want 95% of earth's population to be slave to the top 5%..
They want one world government and earth to get rid of about 3 billion peoooooooooooooooooooooooooooople.
They want a nazi type dictatorship with them in charge-and they do not care if it kills billions getting it..
Read these words, totally EVIL....--Tyr

Is that in their founding documents? Their list of goals and milestones?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Given my posit, and evidence compiled in support thereof, that they're incompetent technocrats who jumble together some documents and under the auspices of the blind squirrel theorem one is better served to just dismantle various policy proposals because they're just not very good. And on the off chance that they do find a nut there just isn't a blanket refusal.



Is that in their founding documents? Their list of goals and milestones?


https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda

United Nations
Department of Economic and Social Affairs
Sustainable Development


Main navigation
Home
SDG Knowledge
Intergovernmental Processes
HLPF
SIDS
Partnerships
Engage
News
About
Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

Preamble
This Agenda is a plan of action for people, planet and prosperity. It also seeks to strengthen universal peace in larger freedom. We recognise that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development. All countries and all stakeholders, acting in collaborative partnership, will implement this plan. We are resolved to free the human race from the tyranny of poverty and want and to heal and secure our planet. We are determined to take the bold and transformative steps which are urgently needed to shift the world onto a sustainable and resilient path. As we embark on this collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind. The 17 Sustainable Development Goals and 169 targets which we are announcing today demonstrate the scale and ambition of this new universal Agenda. They seek to build on the Millennium Development Goals and complete what these did not achieve. They seek to realize the human rights of all and to achieve gender equality and the empowerment of all women and girls. They are integrated and indivisible and balance the three dimensions of sustainable development: the economic, social and environmental.

The Goals and targets will stimulate action over the next fifteen years in areas of critical importance for humanity and the planet:

People
We are determined to end poverty and hunger, in all their forms and dimensions, and to ensure that all human beings can fulfil their potential in dignity and equality and in a healthy environment.

Planet
We are determined to protect the planet from degradation, including through sustainable consumption and production, sustainably managing its natural resources and taking urgent action on climate change, so that it can support the needs of the present and future generations.

Prosperity
We are determined to ensure that all human beings can enjoy prosperous and fulfilling lives and that economic, social and technological progress occurs in harmony with nature.

Peace
We are determined to foster peaceful, just and inclusive societies which are free from fear and violence. There can be no sustainable development without peace and no peace without sustainable development.

Partnership
We are determined to mobilize the means required to implement this Agenda through a revitalised Global Partnership for Sustainable Development, based on a spirit of strengthened global solidarity, focussed in particular on the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable and with the participation of all countries, all stakeholders and all people.

The interlinkages and integrated nature of the Sustainable Development Goals are of crucial importance in ensuring that the purpose of the new Agenda is realised. If we realize our ambitions across the full extent of the Agenda, the lives of all will be profoundly improved and our world will be transformed for the better.

DECLARATION
Introduction
1. We, the Heads of State and Government and High Representatives, meeting at the United Nations Headquarters in New York from 25-27 September 2015 as the Organization celebrates its seventieth anniversary, have decided today on new global Sustainable Development Goals.

2. On behalf of the peoples we serve, we have adopted a historic decision on a comprehensive, far-reaching and people-centred set of universal and transformative Goals and targets. We commit ourselves to working tirelessly for the full implementation of this Agenda by 2030. We recognize that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including extreme poverty, is the greatest global challenge and an indispensable requirement for sustainable development. We are committed to achieving sustainable development in its three dimensions – economic, social and environmental – in a balanced and integrated manner. We will also build upon the achievements of the Millennium Development Goals and seek to address their unfinished business.

3. We resolve, between now and 2030, to end poverty and hunger everywhere; to combat inequalities within and among countries; to build peaceful, just and inclusive societies; to protect human rights and promote gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls; and to ensure the lasting protection of the planet and its natural resources. We resolve also to create conditions for sustainable, inclusive and sustained economic growth, shared prosperity and decent work for all, taking into account different levels of national development and capacities.

4. As we embark on this great collective journey, we pledge that no one will be left behind. Recognizing that the dignity of the human person is fundamental, we wish to see the Goals and targets met for all nations and peoples and for all segments of society. And we will endeavour to reach the furthest behind first.

5. This is an Agenda of unprecedented scope and significance. It is accepted by all countries and is applicable to all, taking into account different national realities, capacities and levels of development and respecting national policies and priorities. These are universal goals and targets which involve the entire world, developed and developing countries alike. They are integrated and indivisible and balance the three dimensions of sustainable development.

6. The Goals and targets are the result of over two years of intensive public consultation and engagement with civil society and other stakeholders around the world, which paid particular attention to the voices of the poorest and most vulnerable. This consultation included valuable work done by the General Assembly Open Working Group on Sustainable Development Goals and by the United Nations, whose Secretary-General provided a synthesis report in December 2014.

Our vision
7. In these Goals and targets, we are setting out a supremely ambitious and transformational vision. We envisage a world free of poverty, hunger, disease and want, where all life can thrive. We envisage a world free of fear and violence. A world with universal literacy. A world with equitable and universal access to quality education at all levels, to health care and social protection, where physical, mental and social well-being are assured. A world where we reaffirm our commitments regarding the human right to safe drinking water and sanitation and where there is improved hygiene; and where food is sufficient, safe, affordable and nutritious. A world where human habitats are safe, resilient and sustainable and where there is universal access to affordable, reliable and sustainable energy.

8. We envisage a world of universal respect for human rights and human dignity, the rule of law, justice, equality and non-discrimination; of respect for race, ethnicity and cultural diversity; and of equal opportunity permitting the full realization of human potential and contributing to shared prosperity. A world which invests in its children and in which every child grows up free from violence and exploitation. A world in which every woman and girl enjoys full gender equality and all legal, social and economic barriers to their empowerment have been removed. A just, equitable, tolerant, open and socially inclusive world in which the needs of the most vulnerable are met.

9. We envisage a world in which every country enjoys sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth and decent work for all. A world in which consumption and production patterns and use of all natural resources – from air to land, from rivers, lakes and aquifers to oceans and seas - are sustainable. One in which democracy, good governance and the rule of law as well as an enabling environment at national and international levels, are essential for sustainable development, including sustained and inclusive economic growth, social development, environmental protection and the eradication of poverty and hunger. One in which development and the application of technology are climate-sensitive, respect biodiversity and are resilient. One in which humanity lives in harmony with nature and in which wildlife and other living species are protected.

Our shared principles and commitments
10. The new Agenda is guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, including full respect for international law. It is grounded in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, international human rights treaties, the Millennium Declaration and the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document. It is informed by other instruments such as the Declaration on the Right to Development.

11. We reaffirm the outcomes of all major UN conferences and summits which have laid a solid foundation for sustainable development and have helped to shape the new Agenda. These include the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development; the World Summit on Sustainable Development; the World Summit for Social Development; the Programme of Action of the International Conference on Population and Development, the Beijing Platform for Action; and the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development ("Rio+ 20"). We also reaffirm the follow-up to these conferences, including the outcomes of the Fourth United Nations Conference on the Least Developed Countries, the Third International Conference on Small Island Developing States; the Second United Nations Conference on Landlocked Developing Countries; and the Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction.

12. We reaffirm all the principles of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, including, inter alia, the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, as set out in principle 7 thereof.

13. The challenges and commitments contained in these major conferences and summits are interrelated and call for integrated solutions. To address them effectively, a new approach is needed. Sustainable development recognizes that eradicating poverty in all its forms and dimensions, combatting inequality within and among countries, preserving the planet, creating sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth and fostering social inclusion are linked to each other and are interdependent.

Our world today
14. We are meeting at a time of immense challenges to sustainable development. Billions of our citizens continue to live in poverty and are denied a life of dignity. There are rising inequalities within and among countries. There are enormous disparities of opportunity, wealth and power. Gender inequality remains a key challenge. Unemployment, particularly youth unemployment, is a major concern. Global health threats, more frequent and intense natural disasters, spiralling conflict, violent extremism, terrorism and related humanitarian crises and forced displacement of people threaten to reverse much of the development progress made in recent decades. Natural resource depletion and adverse impacts of environmental degradation, including desertification, drought, land degradation, freshwater scarcity and loss of biodiversity, add to and exacerbate the list of challenges which humanity faces. Climate change is one of the greatest challenges of our time and its adverse impacts undermine the ability of all countries to achieve sustainable development. Increases in global temperature, sea level rise, ocean acidification and other climate change impacts are seriously affecting coastal areas and low-lying coastal countries, including many least developed countries and small island developing States. The survival of many societies, and of the biological support systems of the planet, is at risk.

15. It is also, however, a time of immense opportunity. Significant progress has been made in meeting many development challenges. Within the past generation, hundreds of millions of people have emerged from extreme poverty. Access to education has greatly increased for both boys and girls. The spread of information and communications technology and global interconnectedness has great potential to accelerate human progress, to bridge the digital divide and to develop knowledge societies, as does scientific and technological innovation across areas as diverse as medicine and energy.

16. Almost fifteen years ago, the Millennium Development Goals were agreed. These provided an important framework for development and significant progress has been made in a number of areas. But the progress has been uneven, particularly in Africa, least developed countries, landlocked developing countries, and small island developing States, and some of the MDGs remain off-track, in particular those related to maternal, newborn and child health and to reproductive health. We recommit ourselves to the full realization of all the MDGs, including the off-track MDGs, in particular by providing focussed and scaled-up assistance to least developed countries and other countries in special situations, in line with relevant support programmes. The new Agenda builds on the Millennium Development Goals and seeks to complete what these did not achieve, particularly in reaching the most vulnerable.

17. In its scope, however, the framework we are announcing today goes far beyond the MDGs. Alongside continuing development priorities such as poverty eradication, health, education and food security and nutrition, it sets out a wide range of economic, social and environmental objectives. It also promises more peaceful and inclusive societies. It also, crucially, defines means of implementation. Reflecting the integrated approach that we have decided on, there are deep interconnections and many cross-cutting elements across the new Goals and targets.

The new Agenda
18. We are announcing today 17 Sustainable Development Goals with 169 associated targets which are integrated and indivisible. Never before have world leaders pledged common action and endeavour across such a broad and universal policy agenda. We are setting out together on the path towards sustainable development, devoting ourselves collectively to the pursuit of global development and of "win-win" cooperation which can bring huge gains to all countries and all parts of the world. We reaffirm that every State has, and shall freely exercise, full permanent sovereignty over all its wealth, natural resources and economic activity. We will implement the Agenda for the full benefit of all, for today’s generation and for future generations. In doing so, we reaffirm our commitment to international law and emphasize that the Agenda is to be implemented in a manner that is consistent with the rights and obligations of states under international law.

19. We reaffirm the importance of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, as well as other international instruments relating to human rights and international law. We emphasize the responsibilities of all States, in conformity with the Charter of the United Nations, to respect, protect and promote human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, without distinction of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, disability or other status.

20. Realizing gender equality and the empowerment of women and girls will make a crucial contribution to progress across all the Goals and targets. The achievement of full human potential and of sustainable development is not possible if one half of humanity continues to be denied its full human rights and opportunities. Women and girls must enjoy equal access to quality education, economic resources and political participation as well as equal opportunities with men and boys for employment, leadership and decision-making at all levels. We will work for a significant increase in investments to close the gender gap and strengthen support for institutions in relation to gender equality and the empowerment of women at the global, regional and national levels. All forms of discrimination and violence against women and girls will be eliminated, including through the engagement of men and boys. The systematic mainstreaming of a gender perspective in the implementation of the Agenda is crucial.

21. The new Goals and targets will come into effect on 1 January 2016 and will guide the decisions we take over the next fifteen years. All of us will work to implement the Agenda within our own countries and at the regional and global levels, taking into account different national realities, capacities and levels of development and respecting national policies and priorities We will respect national policy space for sustained, inclusive and sustainable economic growth, in particular for developing states, while remaining consistent with relevant international rules and commitments. We acknowledge also the importance of the regional and sub-regional dimensions, regional economic integration and interconnectivity in sustainable development. Regional and sub-regional frameworks can facilitate the effective translation of sustainable development policies into concrete action at national level.

22. Each country faces specific challenges in its pursuit of sustainable development. The most vulnerable countries and, in particular, African countries, least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing states deserve special attention, as do countries in situations of conflict and post-conflict countries. There are also serious challenges within many middle-income countries.

23. People who are vulnerable must be empowered. Those whose needs are reflected in the Agenda include all children, youth, persons with disabilities (of whom more than 80% live in poverty), people living with HIV/AIDS, older persons, indigenous peoples, refugees and internally displaced persons and migrants. We resolve to take further effective measures and actions, in conformity with international law, to remove obstacles and constraints, strengthen support and meet the special needs of people living in areas affected by complex humanitarian emergencies and in areas affected by terrorism.

24. We are committed to ending poverty in all its forms and dimensions, including by eradicating extreme poverty by 2030. All people must enjoy a basic standard of living, including through social protection systems. We are also determined to end hunger and to achieve food security as a matter of priority and to end all forms of malnutrition. In this regard, we reaffirm the important role and inclusive nature of the Committee on World Food Security and welcome the Rome Declaration on Nutrition and Framework for Action. We will devote resources to developing rural areas and sustainable agriculture and fisheries, supporting smallholder farmers, especially women farmers, herders and fishers in developing countries, particularly least developed countries.

25. We commit to providing inclusive and equitable quality education at all levels – early childhood, primary, secondary, tertiary, technical and vocational training. All people, irrespective of sex, age, race, ethnicity, and persons with disabilities, migrants, indigenous peoples, children and youth, especially those in vulnerable situations, should have access to life-long learning opportunities that help them acquire the knowledge and skills needed to exploit opportunities and to participate fully in society. We will strive to provide children and youth with a nurturing environment for the full realization of their rights and capabilities, helping our countries to reap the demographic dividend including through ---.....................

More at link given..

As in more bullshit fantasy composed to feed the gullible masses, etc,, --Tyr

[fj1200]

More at link given..

As in more bullshit fantasy composed to feed the gullible masses, etc,, --Tyr

It seemed like the answer was no. It's not.

I could have missed something through all the yelling though but a quick perusal didn't show anything about slaves, dictatorships, or billions of deaths.

[Gunny]

Given my posit, and evidence compiled in support thereof, that they're incompetent technocrats who jumble together some documents and under the auspices of the blind squirrel theorem one is better served to just dismantle various policy proposals because they're just not very good. And on the off chance that they do find a nut there just isn't a blanket refusal.



Is that in their founding documents? Their list of goals and milestones?I see impasse. Some of these global institutions are hardly harmless buffoons. Especially when the current person occupying the WH supports their BS. THAT give them teeth, and is in line with my preceding comment.

They can be whatever it is you call them right up to the point where our Idiot in Chief signs us on to their BS and lets them in the door.

As previously stated, allegedly, the People of the US can keep them and their stupidity out. I have about as much faith in that as I do Biden doing what's right for the country.

Just to clarify: I am referring to real organizations such as the one I posted a a link two a couple of posts up. Not imaginary ones.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

It seemed like the answer was no. It's not.

I could have missed something through all the yelling though but a quick perusal didn't show anything about slaves, dictatorships, or billions of deaths.
As if they would broadcast their true agenda!
I know you are not that dense. Other sites/links and 25 years of study points to me version. I simply gave you a sample of their liying , open agenda sent to deceive the gullible masses. -Tyr

[fj1200]

I see impasse. Some of these global institutions are hardly harmless buffoons. Especially when the current person occupying the WH supports their BS. THAT give them teeth, and is in line with my preceding comment.

They can be whatever it is you call them right up to the point where our Idiot in Chief signs us on to their BS and lets them in the door.

As previously stated, allegedly, the People of the US can keep them and their stupidity out. I have about as much faith in that as I do Biden doing what's right for the country.

Just to clarify: I am referring to real organizations such as the one I posted a a link two a couple of posts up. Not imaginary ones.

Fair point but we have moronically destructive organizations right here at home that makes fighting the imaginary ones like charging at windmills. To the former which makes it necessary to win elections and I'm pretty sure we're on that same page.

[fj1200]

As if they would broadcast their true agenda!
I know you are not that dense. Other sites/links and 25 years of study points to me version. I simply gave you a sample of their liying , open agenda sent to deceive the gullible masses. -Tyr

Then you really didn't supply me with anything. This thread is on the 8th page of me asking for evidence and I haven't seen the silver bullet yet.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Then you really didn't supply me with anything. This thread is on the 8th page of me asking for evidence and I haven't seen the silver bullet yet.

One cannot see that which they have already made up in their mind, does not exist. To see , one must invistigate with an open mind.
Investigate to find truth-- not to try to ignore to support ones already made uo decision on the subject.
Sure, you are intelligent , but being willfully blind so greatly hampers that and its fruitful harvests, imho.-Tyr

[fj1200]

One cannot see that which they have already made up in their mind, does not exist. To see , one must invistigate with an open mind.
Investigate to find truth-- not to try to ignore to support ones already made uo decision on the subject.
Sure, you are intelligent , but being willfully blind so greatly hampers that and its fruitful harvests, imho.-Tyr

So what you're saying is these...


What does the evidence say?


But I await submittal of further evidence. :)

are evidence that I've already made up my mind. That's one way to look at it I guess.

[revelarts]

As if they would broadcast their true agenda!
I know you are not that dense. Other sites/links and 25 years of study points to me version. I simply gave you a sample of their liying , open agenda sent to deceive the gullible masses. -Tyr
Tyr, yep, we can post their true agenda, they do say the things you mentioned earlier outright but in documents, books and speeches that are less public... but they are public.

the problem is that some folks just don't believe they actually mean what they say,
or they complain about "the source"
or ..as FJ keeps repeating... he implies we should simply not worry about them because, according to him, they aren't good at getting anything done.
despite the evidence and continued roll out of many items on their agenda. And their continued invasive presence at seats of influence.



thing is, If someone keeps whispering they are going to steal your land and kill your kids cause you have to many (and will make you like it),
but publicly loudly says they are going to "help you".
Sorry I'm not buying the "help you" BS.
And I'm not dismissing them just because the bullets that 'happened to' come over the fence the last 3 times MISSED!

[fj1200]

Tyr, yep, ...

So you're on board with the claim of mass slavery, dictatorship, and killing of billions? Because that's the sort of thing that needs some bearing out. You post a lot of claims regarding free trade, cashless society, bug diets, etc. and those seem to be very different than the first set of claims. I don't tend to just take for truth "years of reading and studying and..." It should take a little more correct?

I was talking to a friend of mine about a bunch of political stuff and since we were in the car I didn't provide corroborated sources and links but I referenced specifics about why I have certain opinions and beliefs; which I certainly could have provided. To do the same here when one can relatively easily find and post reference material is what should be necessary to lend credibility to arguments. Provided sources can then be vetted for credibility thus my quest for evidence.

[revelarts]

So you're on board with the claim of mass slavery, dictatorship, and killing of billions? Because that's the sort of thing that needs some bearing out. You post a lot of claims regarding free trade, cashless society, bug diets, etc. and those seem to be very different than the first set of claims. I don't tend to just take for truth "years of reading and studying and..." It should take a little more correct?

I was talking to a friend of mine about a bunch of political stuff and since we were in the car I didn't provide corroborated sources and links but I referenced specifics about why I have certain opinions and beliefs; which I certainly could have provided. To do the same here when one can relatively easily find and post reference material is what should be necessary to lend credibility to arguments. Provided sources can then be vetted for credibility thus my quest for evidence.

"mass slavery, dictatorship,"
Cashless Society, Id Chips (recommended for children no less), 24/7 surveillance of populous EQUALS mass slavery & dictatorship FJ.
By those than run the sytem & their suragates the polticians.
Anyone not falling in line with gov't "recommendations" loose access to money, jobs food water or simply access to certain parts of public life.
See what happened to the Canadian Truckers. Gov't locked their bank accounts, and even digital donations were blocked.
All that happened After they were told by gov't NOT to cross the boarder or not to drive at all if they didn't follow gov't mandates.
That's just a taste of the "FREE TRADE" the globalist are bringing in.
Not able to BUY OR SELL without the permission of the state.
Or as the Bible said, not able to BUY OR SELL without the mark of the Beast.

sounds like mass slavery & dictatorship to me.

[fj1200]

"mass slavery, dictatorship,"
Cashless Society, Id Chips (recommended for children no less), 24/7 surveillance of populous EQUALS mass slavery & dictatorship FJ.
By those than run the sytem & their suragates the polticians.
Anyone not falling in line with gov't "recommendations" loose access to money, jobs food water or simply access to certain parts of public life.
See what happened to the Canadian Truckers. Gov't locked their bank accounts, and even digital donations were blocked.
All that happened After they were told by gov't NOT to cross the boarder or not to drive at all if they didn't follow gov't mandates.
That's just a taste of the "FREE TRADE" the globalist are bringing in.
Not able to BUY OR SELL without the permission of the state.
Or as the Bible said, not able to BUY OR SELL without the mark of the Beast.

sounds like mass slavery & dictatorship to me.

See that sounds nothing like mass slavery or dictatorship, let alone nazi-style, or even a plan for billions dead. Your example also sounds like massive government overreach by Trudeau which is having harmful effects on his poll numbers.

https://morningconsult.com/global-leader-approval/#section-2

The trend for Trudea isn't looking good and neither for Canada being in the right direction. Don't get me wrong, it's nothing that I'm in favor of and a picture of Trudeau hanging out with the young globalists when he was at summer camp isn't going to sway me; it takes a little more but you already knew that.

I would like a line from globalists to billions dead though. I'm sure that would be entertaining.

[Gunny]

Fair point but we have moronically destructive organizations right here at home that makes fighting the imaginary ones like charging at windmills. To the former which makes it necessary to win elections and I'm pretty sure we're on that same page.

That would be the point to my comment.

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

See that sounds nothing like mass slavery or dictatorship, let alone nazi-style, or even a plan for billions dead. Your example also sounds like massive government overreach by Trudeau which is having harmful effects on his poll numbers.

https://morningconsult.com/global-leader-approval/#section-2

The trend for Trudea isn't looking good and neither for Canada being in the right direction. Don't get me wrong, it's nothing that I'm in favor of and a picture of Trudeau hanging out with the young globalists when he was at summer camp isn't going to sway me; it takes a little more but you already knew that.

I would like a line from globalists to billions dead though. I'm sure that would be entertaining.


Seems to me that you want an open confession by the globalists. As if they are that stupid or insanely crazy.
As if any group egaging in a conspiracy, one that seeks to gain ultimate power over all peoples /nations would happily leave out in the open to be readily seen. When one knows such would ultimately expose them and bring easy discovery and defeat.
Such folly by such evil doers are as rare as hens's teeth.
Always demanding that the other guy must give you absolute proof, or research when you yourself rarely gives it to support your own stand, imho.
Must nbe a preset to gain advantage and paint the opponent as devious, lazy or else foolhardy/stupid. -Tyr

[revelarts]

See that sounds nothing like mass slavery or dictatorship, let alone nazi-style, or even a plan for billions dead. Your example also sounds like massive government overreach by Trudeau which is having harmful effects on his poll numbers.

https://morningconsult.com/global-leader-approval/#section-2

The trend for Trudeau isn't looking good and neither for Canada being in the right direction. Don't get me wrong, it's nothing that I'm in favor of and a picture of Trudeau hanging out with the young globalists when he was at summer camp isn't going to sway me; it takes a little more but you already knew that.

I would like a line from globalists to billions dead though. I'm sure that would be entertaining.

I just gave you part 1.
I hadn't gotten to the "billions dead" yet part.
Had to go to work.

But just to be clear
Trudeau is just 1 western example.
(And yes I know evidence of Trudeau and other officials world wide working with globalist in gloablist private groups and implementing globalist agendas doesn't count as evidence somehow in your mind.)

But it is strange that you don't think the globalist plan to implement the Chinese social credit system all over the world is really slavery or dictatorship?
It's just a little "government overreach".
Since it's not exactly like the NAZIs. it's not a problem?
So Chinese style gov't & "Free Trade" is NOT really nazi like enough or dictatorship or mass slavery in your mind.
it's just a bit of "overreach":rolleyes: that's "unpopular" so it's should not be taken seriously?

oookkk
you do that but please some of us do see it as a real an growing problem
as said before, they are incrementalist a little less freedom here, a little less there, some off the top, soon there's nothing left but mass slavery and dictatorship.
Even if we don't have to say Heil Hitler.
I mean the Chinese all still vote right?


-next post billions killed-

[revelarts]

globalist want billions killed
(have had millions killed already?)
often called "population control"

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FcOTIT5WYAIXL5n?format=jpg&name=360x360

Food as a weapon: Bucharest, Rome and the politics of starvation
B Segal
PMID: 12307033
Abstract
PIP: At the convention of the World Food Conference, leaders of the underdeveloped nations hoped to press for changes in international trade relations while U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger hoped to use the conference as a forum to link food shortages to overpopulation. Kissinger tried to put the blame for the food crisis on the oil producing nations and the "energy crisis" they brought about and made it clear that the U.S. no longer plans to provide most of the world's food aid. The underdeveloped nations did not accept this. They still blame the crisis on the U.S., which they say controls more food than the fuel the oil producing nations control. The U.S. has historically used food as a tool of foreign policy, and with the increasing dependency of the U.S. on the raw supplies of the underdeveloped world, there is growing talk of using food to blackmail nations into adopting population control programs. One such proposal came in Rome by former U.S. government official Richard Gardner, who suggested a "global survival pact" under which rich nations would conserve food, energy, and raw materials in return for commitments by Third World nations to change their suicidal demographic, agricultural and environmental practices. Another proposal was made by Congressman Jerry Litton who said he would introduce legislation banning food aid to any country with above average population growth and which was not doing anything to reduce it.....
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12307033/


Control by the plutocrats/glabalist over energy, & food & money to control us all.

But it's just about free trade right? not control?

Here are few quotes about "population control" that is killing of billions
But How many quotes do you want from the globalist environmentalist types that say thing like the global population should be less than 1 billion?
for sustainability?
the Rockafellers, Kissinger and other globalist have been on this track for decades.

#1) The March 2009 U.N. Population Division policy brief (http://thetruthwins.com/archives/the-population-control-agenda-behind-the-global-warming-movement-for-the-environmental-extremists-at-copenhagen-population-reduction-is-the-cheapest-way-to-reduce-carbon-emissions)....
"What would it take to accelerate fertility decline in the least developed countries?"

#2) Microsoft's Bill Gates (http://thetruthwins.com/archives/to-the-global-elite-the-math-is-simple-human-overpopulation-is-causing-climate-change-so-the-solution-to-climate-change-is-population-control)....
"The world today has 6.8 billion people. That's heading up to about nine billion. Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent."

#3) Barack Obama's top science advisor, John P. Holdren (http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/the-dangerous-myth-of-overpopulation)....
"A program of sterilizing women after their second or third child, despite the relatively greater difficulty of the operation than vasectomy, might be easier to implement than trying to sterilize men.
The development of a long-term sterilizing capsule that could be implanted under the skin and removed when pregnancy is desired opens additional possibilities for coercive fertility control. The capsule could be implanted at puberty and might be removable, with official permission, for a limited number of births."

#4) George W. Bush's science advisor Paul Ehrlich....
]"Each person we add now disproportionately impacts on the environment and life-support systems of the planet."

#5) U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg (http://signsofthelastdays.com/archives/the-radical-population-control-and-eugenics-agenda-of-the-global-elite)....
"Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of."[/FONT][/COLOR]

#6) A United Nations Population Fund report entitled "Facing a Changing World: Women, Population and Climate" (http://www.unfpa.org/swp/2009/)....
"No human is genuinely 'carbon neutral,' especially when all greenhouse gases are figured into the equation."

#7) David Rockefeller (http://thetruthwins.com/archives/to-the-global-elite-the-math-is-simple-human-overpopulation-is-causing-climate-change-so-the-solution-to-climate-change-is-population-control)....
"The negative impact of population growth on all of our planetary ecosystems is becoming appallingly evident."

#8) Jacques Cousteau....
"In order to stabilize world population, we must eliminate 350,000 people per day."

#9) CNN Founder Ted Turner....
"A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal."

#10) Dave Foreman, Earth First Co-Founder....
"My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world."

#11) Prince Phillip, the Duke of Edinburgh....
"If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels."

#12) David Brower, first Executive Director of the Sierra Club....
"Childbearing [should be] a punishable crime against society, unless the parents hold a government license ... All potential parents [should be] required to use contraceptive chemicals, the government issuing antidotes to citizens chosen for childbearing."

#13) Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger....
"The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

#14) Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger. Woman, Morality, and Birth Control. New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922. Page 12....
"Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race."

#15) Princeton philosopher Peter Singer....
"So why don’t we make ourselves the last generation on earth? If we would all agree to have ourselves sterilized then no sacrifices would be required — we could party our way into extinction!"

#16) Thomas Ferguson, former official in the U.S. State Department Office of Population Affairs....
"There is a single theme behind all our work–we must reduce population levels. Either governments do it our way, through nice clean methods, or they will get the kinds of mess that we have in El Salvador, or in Iran or in Beirut. Population is a political problem. Once population is out of control, it requires authoritarian government, even fascism, to reduce it…."

#17) Mikhail Gorbachev....
"We must speak more clearly about sexuality, contraception, about abortion, about values that control population, because the ecological crisis, in short, is the population crisis. Cut the population by 90% and there aren't enough people left to do a great deal of ecological damage."

#18) John Guillebaud, professor of family planning at University College London....
"The effect on the planet of having one child less is an order of magnitude greater than all these other things we might do, such as switching off lights. An extra child is the equivalent of a lot of flights across the planet."

#19) Professor of Biology at the University of Texas at Austin Eric R. Pianka (http://signsofthelastdays.com/archives/the-radical-population-control-and-eugenics-agenda-of-the-global-elite)....
"This planet might be able to support perhaps as many as half a billion people who could live a sustainable life in relative comfort. Human populations must be greatly diminished, and as quickly as possible to limit further environmental damage."

#20) U.S. Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton (http://howtohelpsavetheenvironment.com/archives/hillary-clinton-population-control-will-now-become-the-centerpiece-of-u-s-foreign-policy)....
"This year, the United States renewed funding of reproductive healthcare through the United Nations Population Fund, and more funding is on the way. The U.S. Congress recently appropriated more than $648 million in foreign assistance to family planning and reproductive health programs worldwide. That’s the largest allocation in more than a decade – since we last had a Democratic president, I might add."

#21) Clinton adviser Nina Fedoroff (http://thisistheendoftheworldasweknowit.com/archives/one-less-child-environmental-extremists-warn-that-overpopulation-is-causing-climate-change-and-will-ultimately-destroy-the-earth)....
"We need to continue to decrease the growth rate of the global population; the planet can't support many more people."

#22) The first of the "new 10 commandments" on the Georgia Guidestones (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones)....
"Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature."





Killing billions means by multiple methods.
and takes many forms,
Abortion has been a useful tool for them for a long time now they promoted/promote it and help get it legalized,
Euthanasia is up & coming in the west over the past 40 years. they promoted/promote it and have helped get it legalized.
killing the young and the old have been easier sells than mass starvations and a few other methods

Just a little background info on eugenics ... (posted this elsewhere, got no comments though)


...research into the history of bioethics leads one to the doorstep of the Hastings Center, a nonprofit research center that, according to its website (https://www.thehastingscenter.org/who-we-are/), "was important in establishing the field of bioethics." The founding director of the Hastings Center, Theodosius Dobzhansky, was a chairman (http://www.all.org/abac/aes.txt) of the American Eugenics Society from 1964 to 1973, while Hastings cofounder Daniel Callahan—who has admitted (https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-220561055/ethics-and-population) to relying on Rockefeller Population Council and UN Population Fund money in the early days of the center's work—served as a director (https://www.thehastingscenter.org/pdf/cv/cv_daniel_callahan.pdf) of the American Eugenics Society (rebranded as The Society for the Study of Social Biology (https://www.thehastingscenter.org/pdf/cv/cv_daniel_callahan.pdf)) from 1987 to 1992.
As previous Corbett Report guest (https://www.questia.com/library/journal/1G1-220561055/ethics-and-population) Anton Chaitkin has extensively documented (https://www.thehastingscenter.org/pdf/cv/cv_daniel_callahan.pdf), there is a line of historical continuity connecting the promotion of eugenics in America by the Rockefeller family in the early 20th century to the creation of the Hastings Center in the late 20th century. As Chaitkin points out, Callahan and his center was fostered by the Rockefeller-founded Population Council as a front for pushing the eugenics agenda—including abortion, euthanasia and the creation of death panels—under the guise of "bioethics."
As a result, many of the most prominent bioethicists working today come from the Hastings Center stable.
Take Peter Singer. If there is any bioethicist working today whose name is known to the general public, it's Hastings Center fellow (https://www.thehastingscenter.org/who-we-are/our-team/hastings-center-fellows/) Peter Singer, famed for his animal liberation advocacy. Less well known to the public are his arguments not only in favor of abortion but infanticide (https://www.thehastingscenter.org/pdf/cv/cv_daniel_callahan.pdf), including the belief that there is no relevant difference between abortion and the killing of “severely disabled infants."
Or take Ezekiel Emanuel. Another Hastings Center fellow, Emanuel is also a senior fellow at the shady (https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/secret-donors-behind-center-american-progress-and-other-think-tanks-updated-524/) Center for American Progress and a bioethicist who has argued (https://archive.is/F6dbb) that the Hippocratic Oath is obsolete and that people should choose to die at age 75 (https://www.thehastingscenter.org/pdf/cv/cv_daniel_callahan.pdf) to spare society the burden of looking after them in old age. He is also the lead author of that New England Journal of Medicine article advocating for rationing COVID-19 care that was adopted by the CMA.

What few would realize is that Emanuel's death panel proposal did not emerge in response to the current COVID-19 "crisis" at all, but has been a key part of his advocacy for decades. In his 2008 book, Healthcare, Guaranteed (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/3343792-healthcare-guaranteed), Emanuel argued for the creation of a National Health Board to approve all healthcare payments and procedures in the United States, one whose life-and-death decisions would be final, with no possibility for objection from patients, healthcare providers, government officials or the taxpayers who funded the system....

.....

U Penn Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel To Serve On President-Elect Biden’s Coronavirus Task Force
...He has argued (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/10/why-i-hope-to-die-at-75/379329/) that the Hippocratic Oath is obsolete and that it leads to doctors believing that they should do everything they can for their patients rather than letting them die to focus on higher priorities. He has argued that people should choose to die at age 75 (https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/10/why-i-hope-to-die-at-75/379329/) to spare society the burden of looking after them in old age. As a health policy advisor to the Obama administration he helped craft the Affordable Care Act (https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/01/obamacare-architect-on-bringing-down-soaring-health-insurance-costs.html), which fellow Obamacare architect Jonathan Gruber admitted was only passed thanks to the stupidity of the American public...


https://www.liveaction.org/news/population-council-founded-eugenicists-promoting-abortion-turns-65/



BTW The use of war as a depopulation tool isn't out of bounds since it's to save the planet.
But it's not necessary if diseases (& vaccines :tinfoil:) Abortion, Euthanasia etc can do the trick.

there's more I could add by way of corroboration but I'm wondering if maybe since the killing of billions is not by mass shootings and gas chambers like the nazis did, then is it really killing?
or just maybe some unpopular gov't overreach?

[revelarts]

Just for fun a few more of these crazy Non-influential (?) globalist environmentalist


https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-childbearing-should-be-a-punishable-crime-against-society-unless-the-parents-hold-a-david-r-brower-60-49-21.jpg

"David Ross Brower was a prominent environmentalist and the founder of many environmental organizations,
including the John Muir Institute for Environmental Studies (1997),
Friends of the Earth (1969),
Earth Island Institute (1982),
North Cascades Conservation Council,
and Fate of the Earth Conferences.
From 1952 to 1969, he served as the first Executive Director of the Sierra Club,
and served on its board three times: from 1941–1953; 1983–1988; and 1995–2000
as a petition candidate enlisted by reform-activists known as the John Muir Sierrans."

Obviously no one's paid attention to that crackpot egghead thoughts on anything right? so not to worry.
PLUS IT DIDN"T HAPPEN... & no ones trying it so so just fogitaboutIT!
MIT professor Penny Chisholm (http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/biology/7-014-introductory-biology-spring-2005/video-lectures/30-population-growth-ii/)[COLOR=#3A3A3A][FONT=&quot]:
“The real trick is, in terms of trying to level off at someplace lower than that 9 billion, i
s to get the birthrates in the developing countries to drop as fast as we can.
And that will determine the level at which humans will level off on earth.”


Bill Gates:
“The problem is that the population is growing the fastest where people are less able to deal with it.
So it’s in the very poorest places that you’re going to have a tripling in population by 2050. (…)
And we’ve got to make sure that we help out with the tools now so that they don’t have an impossible situation later.”

Dave Foreman,
the co-founder of Earth First: “We humans have become a disease, the Humanpox.”

Japan’s Deputy Prime Minister Taro Aso about medical patients with serious illnesses: (http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/22/hurry-up-and-die-japans-finance-minister-apologizes-for-saying-old-people-should-die-to-save-the-state-money/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NP_Top_Stories+%28National+Po st+-+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=Google+Reader)
“You cannot sleep well when you think it’s all paid by the government.
This won’t be solved unless you let them hurry up and die.”

Colorado State University Professor Philip Cafaro in a paper entitled “Climate Ethics and Population Policy” (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wcc.153/pdf):
“Ending human population growth is almost certainly a necessary (but not sufficient) condition for preventing
catastrophic global climate change. Indeed, significantly reducing current human numbers may be necessary in order to do so.“

Planned Parenthood Founder Margaret Sanger:
“All of our problems are the result of overbreeding among the working class”
(http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger)




https://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-one-fourth-of-humanity-must-be-eliminated-from-the-social-body-we-are-in-charge-of-god-barbara-marx-hubbard-71-81-65.jpg

another rockefeller funded, WEF connected New Age Guru &
the godmother of transhumansim
Barbara Marx Hubbard: Godmother of Transhumanism and ... (https://unlimitedhangout.com/2022/05/investigative-reports/barbara-marx-hubbard-godmother-of-transhumanism-and-synthetic-spirituality/)


It's Not like they don't say what they really want out loud. But it's often not front page news, or on CNN ... at least not negatively.
But I think the main problem is that too many of us are like the people before WW2. We don't really BELIEVE that they mean it, that the Jews etc are "rats" that need to be killed "literally" right?
Interesting thing is that many/most people didn't even know what Hitler was doing , how far he had gone ... until AFTER the war.
The camps, the killing of the handicapped, as Darwinism clearly suggest since only the strong should survive, was the logic next step & unknown & unthinkable to most.

Are these environmentalist globalist really not as sincere as Hitler?
Are you sure?

[fj1200]

Seems to me that you want an open confession by the globalists. As if they are that stupid or insanely crazy.
As if any group egaging in a conspiracy, one that seeks to gain ultimate power over all peoples /nations would happily leave out in the open to be readily seen. When one knows such would ultimately expose them and bring easy discovery and defeat.
Such folly by such evil doers are as rare as hens's teeth.
Always demanding that the other guy must give you absolute proof, or research when you yourself rarely gives it to support your own stand, imho.
Must nbe a preset to gain advantage and paint the opponent as devious, lazy or else foolhardy/stupid. -Tyr

What I'm suggesting is an attempt to connect the dots. I don't believe you've even attempted to do that but I might have missed it in all of your anti-globalist screeds. I'm also dubious to such a conspiracy as alleged could even be kept a secret. Besides I don't demand proof, just think it's a good idea if you want to get somebody on board.

[revelarts]

... I'm also dubious to such a conspiracy as alleged could even be kept a secret. ....


"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in past centuries."

David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, in an address to a meeting of The Trilateral Commission, in June, 1991.

http://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/a0/42/13/a04213b925f81c4c623efed2a571e670.jpg

[fj1200]

I just gave you part 1.
I hadn't gotten to the "billions dead" yet part.
Had to go to work.

But just to be clear
Trudeau is just 1 western example.
(And yes I know evidence of Trudeau and other officials world wide working with globalist in gloablist private groups and implementing globalist agendas doesn't count as evidence somehow in your mind.)

But it is strange that you don't think the globalist plan to implement the Chinese social credit system all over the world is really slavery or dictatorship?
It's just a little "government overreach".
Since it's not exactly like the NAZIs. it's not a problem?
So Chinese style gov't & "Free Trade" is NOT really nazi like enough or dictatorship or mass slavery in your mind.
it's just a bit of "overreach":rolleyes: that's "unpopular" so it's should not be taken seriously?

oookkk
you do that but please some of us do see it as a real an growing problem
as said before, they are incrementalist a little less freedom here, a little less there, some off the top, soon there's nothing left but mass slavery and dictatorship.
Even if we don't have to say Heil Hitler.
I mean the Chinese all still vote right?


-next post billions killed-

Well I do tend to consider slavery as having zero choice on what I want to do and mandates on backbreaking labor that I must do. And dictatorship as every decision being made by an unelected leader or leaders. And Nazis of course being much worse. But I am a strict constructionist on definitions in general.

And what I consider those things is not what you present as current examples.

It would be nice to have a discussion without all of your ridiculous rhetorical questions you insist on digging in there. But I got myself into your ridiculous tactics didn't I?

[fj1200]

globalist want billions killed
(have had millions killed already?)
often called "population control"


I must say I severely underestimated your ability to find so many quotes that were said by dead people, really old people, inconsequential people, and people who were taken out of context to reinforce the point you keep trying to make. And I mentioned before something about connecting the dots and what you've shown are a bunch of dots that do not lead to the outcome that you keep bringing up.

1. "fertility decline" is far different than billions dead. I can't find the source of the quote to fully know the context of the quote but this link (https://www.prb.org/resources/family-planning-is-a-crucial-investment-for-kenyas-health-and-development/) references family planning.

2. Bill Gates was declining about a reduction in child mortality (https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/oct/11/blog-posting/bill-gates-didnt-say-he-wanted-use-vaccines-reduce/).

3. RBG was apparently making a comment about another SCOTUS (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ruth-bader-ginsburg-and-roe-v-wade/) case in reference to Medicare and made a quote that was taken out of context. Do you really think she's in favor of eugenics?

Now I'm sure that more of your links are taken out of context I'm also sure that some of your links were made by morons, aka eggheads that should be ignored. And you'll do your level best to keep pointing them out but the garbage quotes hurt your overall point.

[revelarts]

Well I do tend to consider slavery as having zero choice on what I want to do and mandates on backbreaking labor that I must do. And dictatorship as every decision being made by an unelected leader or leaders. And Nazis of course being much worse. But I am a strict constructionist on definitions in general.

And what I consider those things is not what you present as current examples.

It would be nice to have a discussion without all of your ridiculous rhetorical questions you insist on digging in there. But I got myself into your ridiculous tactics didn't I?

A soft dictatorship... like China's is not really a dictatorship in your opinion. got it.
And having the state choose only some of your options in life, or narrow your options, or tell you what meds you have to take, or thing you can say about things publicaly, is not slavery in the full sense of the word... so it shouldn't have been used.
ok.
You should have a talk with Patrick Henry,
He made that speech saying "Give me Liberty" etc and referenced "slavery" several times for just unrepresented taxation and a few foreign troops in the house now & then.
hyperbolic much that guy? sheesh.



I must say I severely underestimated your ability to find so many quotes that were said by dead people, really old people, inconsequential people, and people who were taken out of context to reinforce the point you keep trying to make. And I mentioned before something about connecting the dots and what you've shown are a bunch of dots that do not lead to the outcome that you keep bringing up.
1. "fertility decline" is far different than billions dead. I can't find the source of the quote to fully know the context of the quote but this link (https://www.prb.org/resources/family-planning-is-a-crucial-investment-for-kenyas-health-and-development/) references family planning.
2. Bill Gates was declining about a reduction in child mortality (https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2021/oct/11/blog-posting/bill-gates-didnt-say-he-wanted-use-vaccines-reduce/).
3. RBG was apparently making a comment about another SCOTUS (https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ruth-bader-ginsburg-and-roe-v-wade/) case in reference to Medicare and made a quote that was taken out of context. Do you really think she's in favor of eugenics?
Now I'm sure that more of your links are taken out of context I'm also sure that some of your links were made by morons, aka eggheads that should be ignored. And you'll do your level best to keep pointing them out but the garbage quotes hurt your overall point.

FYI
Seems that pre WW2 German doctor's associations joined the NAZI party more than ANY OTHER profession (about 50% most of the leading doctors). They Joined voluntarily and enthusiastically. For the HEALTH of the German people, and influenced by the cutting edge "science" of the day, eugenics, racial theories and ideas about "health" etc..
Race laws, Health cards/passports, forced sterilizations, experimentation, mass killings of the infirm/unfit/etc.. all in the name of science & the health of the REAL German volk..
After WW2 the Nuremberg trails put a few doctors on trial but the bulk of the doctors and nurses that went along were given a pass.
It wasn't until 2012 that the German Medical Association made formal apology for it's involvement and influence in the NAZI crimes and movement.

I hate to even address your sad deflective statements which, as usual, ignore the clear points made by statements & actions of the globalist politicians, officials, scientist & activist over the past 60+ years.

But I'll mention a bit
concerning RGB, i simply quoted her. I didnt take her out of context, or assume her motives.
As her statement says. SHE UNDERSTOOD that "...there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of."
In her mind that was A reason Roe V Wade was decided the way it was.
At the least she's simply confirming the eugenics thinking she was aware of... and made no negative comment about.
There's a similar quote from Nixon, who said that one big reason the people in Michigan voted for abortion in the 1970's was that the voters wanted too
"control the little black bastards"
https://youtu.be/ZXap-OtDvVc

"family planning" has always been a euphemism for abortion, population control and yes eugenics.
Fredrick Osborn, Founding member the American Eugenics Society
"the AES was reorganized and renamed "The Society for the Study of Social Biology." “The name was changed because it became evident that changes of a eugenic nature would be made for reasons other than eugenics, and that tying a eugenic label on them would more often hinder than help their adoption. Birth control and abortion are turning out to be great eugenic advances of our time." 1973
American Eugenics Society : p.3
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Eugenics_Society


Former PP of NYC board member, Dr. LaVern Tolbert reports that
"...many Planned Parenthood board meetings talked about over population, passed out info on it... but i thought.. what population are they trying to control?"
https://youtu.be/RDR7QMnHBNs

Look some folks don't like seeing this but they didn't like seeing things like this in Germany either.
Many like yourself seem to go into denial.
That didn't mean it wasn't really happening.
Most prominent doctors and scientist in Germany embraced the "science" of eugenics.
today how many doctors and scientist in the west embrace the environmental "science" and over population "science".
Hitler read the science of his day and implemented the darwinist eugenics policies that logically aligned with it.
Some policies he copied from the U.S.. like the force sterilization policies that were in too many states. & some of those policies didn't even end here until the 1970s.

Here's someone else publicly promoting depopulation
Bill Nye the Consensus Science Guy chatting with Travis Rieder, PhD, the Assistant Director for Education Initiatives at the Berman Institute, and the Program Director for the Master of Bio"ethics" degree program.
•Nye: So, should we have policies that penalize people for having extra kids in the developed world?
•Travis Rieder: I do think that we should at least consider it.
•Nye: Well, ‘at least consider it’ is like ‘Do it.’
•Rieder: One of the things that we could do that’s kind of least policy-ish is we could encourage our culture and our norms to change, right?

We don't need to pretend that these people are not trying to suppress the population and yes even kill people.
They say it.
the price of a few bodies under the foundation of the brave new world is worth it in many of their minds.

"Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history."
– David Rockefeller

[fj1200]

A soft dictatorship... like China's is not really a dictatorship in your opinion. got it

Well I guess if you're just going to put words in my mouth there's no point in going further. I'm more than happy to discuss particular topics but you vomiting words and videos up on the screen is counterproductive. And if you want to make good arguments you should leave the junk out of it; A little advice for you to ignore.

[revelarts]

Well I guess if you're just going to put words in my mouth there's no point in going further. I'm more than happy to discuss particular topics but you vomiting words and videos up on the screen is counterproductive. And if you want to make good arguments you should leave the junk out of it; A little advice for you to ignore.

You said you wanted to see some evidence,
You complained that Tyr didn't post any.
But now you're complaining that I'm posting too much.
And unspecifically label some of it "junk".
Seems like to me you're not really that interested in seeing what globalist are up to.
Seems you've already made up your mind.
And just want to dismiss all the contrary data outright.

Look, it's fine to disagree on the issue, but don't pretend that there's objectively nothing to see here but "dead people" & "bunglers".
it's disingenuous on your part.
What an honest person could say is something like,
Even though these globalist seem determined to do some VERY negative things and have made some progress over the years.
i'm not AS concerned about them as some might be.
or
I wasn't as aware of some of this info before, I might need to look into this a bit more. But I'm not yet convinced of any serious danger.

Rather than trying to gaslight us with the idea that there's nothing really to be concerned about, just a few "talking head" "eggheads" who can safety be ignored.
EVERYTHING happening is always and only about "free trade", $$$, a bit of govt overreach and evil populism.

But hey if you can read all that gone before in this thread and honestly think that there's NOTHING to be concerned about from globalist,
That its 99.9% smoke. No fire to worry about.
Well OK, all the best to ya FJ.

we disagree.

[fj1200]

You said you wanted to see some evidence,
You complained that Tyr didn't post any.
But now you're complaining that I'm posting too much.
And unspecifically label some of it "junk".
Seems like to me you're not really that interested in seeing what globalist are up to.
Seems you've already made up your mind.
And just want to dismiss all the contrary data outright.

Evidence? Yes, I'd like to see some. Not an endless array of quotes by various people. Connect some dots how people said something and here's the specifics of how it leads to "billions dead." Besides I specifically labeled some of it junk and I'm sure there's more that is unspecifically junk. It seems you won't even acknowledge the specific junk I pointed out. Does Bill Gates want "billions dead?" No. Does he want "family planning" to alleviate future issues that he thinks are coming? Sure. Not every time does someone say "family planning" mean that they want mass abortions that you can tally up as "billions dead."


Look, it's fine to disagree on the issue, but don't pretend that there's objectively nothing to see here but "dead people" & "bunglers".
it's disingenuous on your part.
What an honest person could say is something like,
Even though these globalist seem determined to do some VERY negative things and have made some progress over the years.
i'm not AS concerned about them as some might be.
or
I wasn't as aware of some of this info before, I might need to look into this a bit more. But I'm not yet convinced of any serious danger.

Rather than trying to gaslight us with the idea that there's nothing really to be concerned about, just a few "talking head" "eggheads" who can safety be ignored.
EVERYTHING happening is always and only about "free trade", $$$, a bit of govt overreach and evil populism.
To the first bold, I've pretty much said that. Do I want "fill in the blank" globalist idea? No. Do I think they have a chance of causing real global pain? No.

To the second bold, that's why I started a thread. I'm trying to see what the evidence says but so much of what you post turns out to be garbage and what might not be garbage is tainted by the actual garbage. Eugenicists are reprehensible people but that doesn't mean that they have sway over the WEF and UN.

Maybe I do tend to think most of that can be safely ignored because they do mostly talk and they haven't really caused any pain. I'm just looking at Venezuela now, most of Africa for generations, Argentina soon, etc. that are complete crap or ready to go to complete crap with zero help from any globalist.
But hey if you can read all that gone before in this thread and honestly think that there's NOTHING to be concerned about from globalist,
That its 99.9% smoke. No fire to worry about.
Well OK, all the best to ya FJ.

we disagree.

The problem is all I see when looking back in this thread are walls of words that are impossible to look through to see things that might be of actual concern. And even if I don't make any agreement in your direction it's not like you're making any agreement in my direction.

[revelarts]

the problem here FJ is that you call quotes and the completed or working policy actions from prime ministers, scientist, gov't officials, activist, activist orgs and self declared globalist leaders "garbage".
then renew your request for "evidence".
You're being disingenuous.

If a president says they want to go to war with country X, & they work on that action in and out of office and later we are in fact at war with X.
With a paper trail of how they maneuvered various aspects of the event happening by Supporting those who agree with him with funding and even training some getting them INTO poltics.
It's frankly kinda ridiculous to say "i can't connect the dots".
counter claiming that it's ALL JUST caused by the recent threats of country x is disingenuous and or naive.

seems you don't want to connect the dots.

And since you don't want to read.
I'll post memes from now on so it's not so hard to get the point.

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fb7gjHhXEAErCQh?format=jpg&name=900x900
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fb7gjHqX0AA2jxD?format=jpg&name=900x900


U.K.s New Prime minster (a member of the WEF) says directly she likes and is going to try and implement WEF (Globalist) trade policies.
that's not "natural" or based on demands of "free trade" but on the plans of the globalist at the WEF.

[fj1200]

the problem here FJ is that you call quotes and the completed or working policy actions from prime ministers, scientist, gov't officials, activist, activist orgs and self declared globalist leaders "garbage".
then renew your request for "evidence".
You're being disingenuous.

If a president says they want to go to war with country X, & they work on that action in and out of office and later we are in fact at war with X.
With a paper trail of how they maneuvered various aspects of the event happening by Supporting those who agree with him with funding and even training some getting them INTO poltics.
It's frankly kinda ridiculous to say "i can't connect the dots".
counter claiming that it's ALL JUST caused by the recent threats of country x is disingenuous and or naive.

seems you don't want to connect the dots.

And since you don't want to read.
I'll post memes from now on so it's not so hard to get the point.

I call garbage quotes garbage. And then I call quotes that might not be garbage completely tainted by garbage quotes. Show me a quote that's not garbage and not tainted by garbage and it will be easier to discuss. Your problem is that I don't want to read garbage. :)

And memes are even worse. They're not even a link to anything and typically disingenuous from the start.

[fj1200]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fb7gjHhXEAErCQh?format=jpg&name=900x900
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fb7gjHqX0AA2jxD?format=jpg&name=900x900


U.K.s New Prime minster (a member of the WEF) says directly she likes and is going to try and implement WEF (Globalist) trade policies.
that's not "natural" or based on demands of "free trade" but on the plans of the globalist at the WEF.

I like free trade. Am I a globalist?

[revelarts]

Fj 1st of all, the main point is that you asked for evidence of globalist influence in the world.

So your new question assumes that you DO see it at this point .
With the election of and intent of the new U.K. prime minister to implement Globalist policies.
And as a member of the globalist group, and long time govt official she's gained even more real power to help make other parts of the globalist agenda come to pass..

Globalist are real and in seats of power and pushing their agenda.
They are not simply eggheads & bunglers having meetings we can ignore.

Can agree on that much?


https://twitter.com/Avery4peace/status/1569074417023741952/photo/1(wait for dodgy evasive answer that tries to move the goal post or set a red herring)

[SassyLady]

Evidence? Yes, I'd like to see some. Not an endless array of quotes by various people. Connect some dots how people said something and here's the specifics of how it leads to "billions dead." Besides I specifically labeled some of it junk and I'm sure there's more that is unspecifically junk. It seems you won't even acknowledge the specific junk I pointed out. Does Bill Gates want "billions dead?" No. Does he want "family planning" to alleviate future issues that he thinks are coming? Sure. Not every time does someone say "family planning" mean that they want mass abortions that you can tally up as "billions dead."


To the first bold, I've pretty much said that. Do I want "fill in the blank" globalist idea? No. Do I think they have a chance of causing real global pain? No.

To the second bold, that's why I started a thread. I'm trying to see what the evidence says but so much of what you post turns out to be garbage and what might not be garbage is tainted by the actual garbage. Eugenicists are reprehensible people but that doesn't mean that they have sway over the WEF and UN.

Maybe I do tend to think most of that can be safely ignored because they do mostly talk and they haven't really caused any pain. I'm just looking at Venezuela now, most of Africa for generations, Argentina soon, etc. that are complete crap or ready to go to complete crap with zero help from any globalist.

The problem is all I see when looking back in this thread are walls of words that are impossible to look through to see things that might be of actual concern. And even if I don't make any agreement in your direction it's not like you're making any agreement in my direction.

Just what would constitute evidence to you?

Millions died from covid virus that was generated in a lab. That's evidence. Just one. But I'm sure you'll find an article that says "no it wasn't!"

Fj ... do you recognize the WHO as globalist organization? Do you know anything about The Pandemic Treaty that is planned to be in effect by 2024.


Contrary to popular opinion, the WHO is not an independent, unbiased, and ethical organization that aims to achieve the common good. In reality, its goals and agendas are set by its donors, including some of the world’s richest countries and most influential philanthropists. For decades, “philanthropists and their foundations have [gained] increasing influence (https://archive.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/GPFEurope/Philanthropic_Power_online.pdf)” when it comes to shaping the global health agenda (https://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/GPFEurope/Philanthropic_Power_online.pdf) by “placing people in international organisations, and gaining privileged access to scientific, business and political elites (https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/jan/15/bill-gates-rockefeller-influence-agenda-poor-nations-big-pharma-gm-hunger).”
For example, as Jens Martens and Karolin Seitz explain in Philanthropic Power and Development: Who Shapes the Agenda? (https://archive.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/GPFEurope/Philanthropic_Power_online.pdf),“ the Gates Foundation and earlier the Rockefeller Foundation, have been shaping global health policies not only through their direct grant-making but also through the provision of matching funds, the support of selected research programmes, the creation of global health partnerships with Foundation’s staff in their decision-making bodies, and by direct advocacy at the highest political level.” In fact, back in 2006, The Guardian reported (https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2016/jan/15/bill-gates-rockefeller-influence-agenda-poor-nations-big-pharma-gm-hunger) that “the Gates foundation is now the second largest donor to the World Health Organisation after the US, as well as one of the world’s largest single investors in biotechnology for farming and pharmaceuticals.” Unfortunately, when philanthropists and their foundations advance their own interests, they do so at the expense of the common interests of society. There is no reason to believe that this dynamic will be any different in the case of the Pandemic Treaty.


https://mises.org/wire/whos-pandemic-treaty-end-national-sovereignty-and-freedom

[fj1200]

Fj 1st of all, the main point is that you asked for evidence of globalist influence in the world.

So your new question assumes that you DO see it at this point .
With the election of and intent of the new U.K. prime minister to implement Globalist policies.
And as a member of the globalist group, and long time govt official she's gained even more real power to help make other parts of the globalist agenda come to pass..

Globalist are real and in seats of power and pushing their agenda.
They are not simply eggheads & bunglers having meetings we can ignore.

Can agree on that much?


https://twitter.com/Avery4peace/status/1569074417023741952/photo/1(wait for dodgy evasive answer that tries to move the goal post or set a red herring)

Point of order 1; my OP stipulated to the existence of globalists.


Evil geniuses or incompetent technocrats? ...

Point of order 2; you posted something about the new PM and her thoughts on "free and fair trade." It's a leap on your part to go from "free and fair trade" to murdering billions.

Can we agree on that much?

Point of order 3; that depends on the evidence doesn't it?


... What does the evidence say?

In my opinion you think your case is stronger than it actually is. I'll stipulate again that I'm sure you can find a million quotes that "prove" your point but that's not evidence in my book.

[fj1200]

Just what would constitute evidence to you?

Millions died from covid virus that was generated in a lab. That's evidence. Just one. But I'm sure you'll find an article that says "no it wasn't!"

Fj ... do you recognize the WHO as globalist organization? Do you know anything about The Pandemic Treaty that is planned to be in effect by 2024.



https://mises.org/wire/whos-pandemic-treaty-end-national-sovereignty-and-freedom

So you have evidence that covid was specifically designed to "murder billions" or at least a good start? Do tell.

The WHO... do they want to "murder billions"? The Pandemic Treaty... do you expect it will make it past the Senate for ratification in the next two years?

[SassyLady]

So you have evidence that covid was specifically designed to "murder billions" or at least a good start? Do tell.

Do you have evidence that it wasn't?


The WHO... do they want to "murder billions"? The Pandemic Treaty... do you expect it will make it past the Senate for ratification in the next two years?

Yes

[revelarts]

Point of order 1; my OP stipulated to the existence of globalists.
agreed.



Point of order 2; you posted something about the new PM and her thoughts on "free and fair trade." It's a leap on your part to go from "free and fair trade" to murdering billions.

Can we agree on that much?...

1st of all it's not "her" ideas on free trade it's her regurgitating the WEF Globalist ideas.

And it's the Globalist WEF version of "free trade" FJ.

the head of the WEF says that we'll all "own nothing and be happy".
That's not the goal or version of "free trade" that comes to my mind ... or your's I'd assume.

I think we're all wise enough nowadays so we that we don't simply BUY the labels politicians & activist put on their agendas.
When 4 blue haired people with beards and nuts say they are "women" I don't believe it.


concerning making a leap to millions dead, FJ, you've made the leap here.
I just asked if we can agree that She's a Globalist politician using her power to promote one specific aspect of the globalist agenda.
Globalist "Free Trade" which equals/end goal is everyone (except the uber rich) "owning nothing and being happy".

[fj1200]

Do you have evidence that it wasn't?

That's a cop out.


Yes

No chance.

[fj1200]

agreed.

1st of all it's not "her" ideas on free trade it's her regurgitating the WEF Globalist ideas.

And it's the Globalist WEF version of "free trade" FJ.

the head of the WEF says that we'll all "own nothing and be happy".
That's not the goal or version of "free trade" that comes to my mind ... or your's I'd assume.

I think we're all wise enough nowadays so we that we don't simply BUY the labels politicians & activist put on their agendas.
When 4 blue haired people with beards and nuts say they are "women" I don't believe it.


concerning making a leap to millions dead, FJ, you've made the leap here.
I just asked if we can agree that She's a Globalist politician using her power to promote one specific aspect of the globalist agenda.
Globalist "Free Trade" which equals/end goal is everyone (except the uber rich) "owning nothing and being happy".

Here's the problem again. You keep jumbling all of these things together with zero ability to keep it to one thing. In one post you go from "free trade" to "owning nothing" to "billions dead" as if anyone who has any particular opinion on free trade, and has WEF ties, :rolleyes: automatically accepts every part of the agenda as you define it.

[revelarts]

Here's the problem again. You keep jumbling all of these things together with zero ability to keep it to one thing. In one post you go from "free trade" to "owning nothing" to "billions dead" as if anyone who has any particular opinion on free trade, and has WEF ties, :rolleyes: automatically accepts every art of the agenda as you define it.
FJ seems you're intentionally conflating the various issues and then separating items for your convenience.
And then somehow taking accusations personally.

"In one post you go from "free trade" to "owning nothing""

FJ the globalist said "owning nothing" is their goal for the WORLD... that's what they ultimately mean by "Free Trade".
It makes no sense to assume they mean anything else.

I'm not sure why you think there's no connection.
Unless you just want to assume that the globalist plans are really "free trade" in the form that you'd like.
And deny what they've clearly stated.

[SassyLady]

That's a cop out. You didn't answer the question. Deflecting.




No chance.
Where's the evidence?

[fj1200]

You didn't answer the question. Deflecting.

You're asking me to prove a negative? It doesn't really work that way since you made the accusation.


Where's the evidence?

I need evidence of a prediction I've made that won't occur until a minimum of next year? :rolleyes: Here goes... The scads of unsigned treaties laying around and the knowledge that the Republicans will control the Senate, or at minimum have at least 35 seats, which is plenty of votes to not vote for this.

Shall I now prove that the planets will continue to circle the sun for the next billion years?

[fj1200]

FJ seems you're intentionally conflating the various issues and then separating items for your convenience.
And then somehow taking accusations personally.

"In one post you go from "free trade" to "owning nothing""

FJ the globalist said "owning nothing" is their goal for the WORLD... that's what they ultimately mean by "Free Trade".
It makes no sense to assume they mean anything else.

I'm not sure why you think there's no connection.
Unless you just want to assume that the globalist plans are really "free trade" in the form that you'd like.
And deny what they've clearly stated.

Because it all sounds so ridiculous when you're intent on ascribing the entirety of a globalist agenda, dun dun dunnnnn, to anyone who has ever mentioned that, "hey, I like free trade (even the "globalist" kind)."

[revelarts]

Because it all sounds so ridiculous when you're intent on ascribing the entirety of a globalist agenda, dun dun dunnnnn, to anyone who has ever mentioned that, "hey, I like free trade (even the "globalist" kind)."
you're exaggerating my comments and making unduly negatives assumptions.

And it Seems you're intent on NOT ascribing much of ANY of the globalist agenda to anyone.
Even self declared globalist.
And you're intent on dismissing & minimizing the anti-national sovereignty, un-constitutional, totalitarian, negative aspects of the agenda.


But hey, could you please just explain to me how the path to "you will own nothing " aligns with the "Free Trade" that you like?

[SassyLady]

You're asking me to prove a negative? It doesn't really work that way since you made the accusation. And I gave you my opinion based on evidence I find to be credible. You don't agree which is fine.


I need evidence of a prediction I've made that won't occur until a minimum of next year? :rolleyes: Here goes... The scads of unsigned treaties laying around and the knowledge that the Republicans will control the Senate, or at minimum have at least 35 seats, which is plenty of votes to not vote for this.

You're assuming the MAGA candidates are going to win? Isn't that going against your previous predictions? Bet you didn't think the Inflation Reduction Act would go through either.


Shall I now prove that the planets will continue to circle the sun for the next billion years?
Well, yeah. :cool:

[fj1200]

And I gave you my opinion based on evidence I find to be credible. You don't agree which is fine.

You didn't really post any evidence, I think the legal term is conjecture.


You're assuming the MAGA candidates are going to win? Isn't that going against your previous predictions? Bet you didn't think the Inflation Reduction Act would go through either.

Some will, some won't, the number of maga candidates does not equal all of the races. Please point out where I said that none of them would win. I more think it's probable that the Republicans won't do as well as they should have. Do you mean the Inflation Reduction Act that does not require the same level of votes that a treaty does? They needed to swing one guy, not 17. Math!!! Bam!!!


Well, yeah. :cool:

Just wait and see. I'll be correct yet again. ;)

[fj1200]

you're exaggerating my comments and making unduly negatives assumptions.

And it Seems you're intent on NOT ascribing much of ANY of the globalist agenda to anyone.
Even self declared globalist.
And you're intent on dismissing & minimizing the anti-national sovereignty, un-constitutional, totalitarian, negative aspects of the agenda.


But hey, could you please just explain to me how the path to "you will own nothing " aligns with the "Free Trade" that you like?

Hey, you've found quotes so apparently someone has an agenda. I call them incompetent eggheads. And I don't dismiss anything because, you know, quotes, but I do minimize because, you know, incompetent... and the lack of evidence.

But honestly, that last sentence isn't anything I really recognize as remotely possible. Free trade; good. You will own nothing; bad. My argument is just because someone is on board with the former doesn't mean that they are on board with the latter. Have you found a picture of a quote from Madam Truss espousing her agreement with the WEF in re: owning nothing?

[Evmetro]

Evil geniuses or incompetent technocrats? What does the evidence say?

I recently read Alex Jones "The Great Reset". I've never really been much of an Alex Jones fan, but his book really was an eye opener. He did a great job of explaining the history of globalist and technocrats, and he explained how Carter, Bush, and a whole bunch of other globalists are connected via the trilateral commission. He discussed current globalist and their goals, he discussed covid and globalism, and he discussed how globalist want to use technology. Alex is much better educated and well spoken than I had previously understood.

[fj1200]

I recently read Alex Jones "The Great Reset". I've never really been much of an Alex Jones fan, but his book really was an eye opener. He did a great job of explaining the history of globalist and technocrats, and he explained how Carter, Bush, and a whole bunch of other globalists are connected via the trilateral commission. He discussed current globalist and their goals, he discussed covid and globalism, and he discussed how globalist want to use technology. Alex is much better educated and well spoken than I had previously understood.

I'm sure it was a wonderful book with many dubious connections.

[revelarts]

I'm sure it was a wonderful book with many dubious connections.
"i'm sure"
Says the guy who didn't read any of it.

[revelarts]

Hey, you've found quotes so apparently someone has an agenda.
revelarts free translation
I see the evidence so i can't outright deny it so I'll say "apparently" to still make it seems questionable.
and I'll not be specific by making reference the specific people making those horrifying quotes I'll say "someone", so it all seems somewhat random and vague.


I call them incompetent eggheads.
revelarts free Translation:
I see they are prominent, influential, well educated and include heads of state and leading business people past & present,
so I'll lump them all together and give them a funny name in an attempt to minimize the collective impact of the facts.
And I'll call them incompetent even though I probably couldn't get a job working next to any of them. And deny the fact that it's blindingly obvious they've have gotten a lot done over the years, personally, professionally and politically.



And I don't dismiss anything because, you know, quotes, but I do minimize because, you know, incompetent... and the lack of evidence.
revelarts free Translation::
Next I'll pretend not to be doing what i'm doing.
Then double down on the name calling and assertions of incompetence.
And then claim "I SEE NOTHING" just like Sargent Shultz from Hogan's Heroes.



But honestly, that last sentence isn't anything I really recognize as remotely possible. Free trade; good. You will own nothing; bad. My argument is just because someone is on board with the former doesn't mean that they are on board with the latter. Have you found a picture of a quote from Madam Truss espousing her agreement with the WEF in re: owning nothing?
revelarts free Translation:
And Finally i'll pretend to address his damning question.
1st I'll make MY distinction of Free trade and "you'll own nothing" clear.
and then simply not address the contradiction of the globalist use of the 2 ideas.
and I'll act like that when the UK official (who is member of the globalist WEF) promotes the "free trade" idea FROM the globalist WEF, she doesn't mean the same as the "you'll own nothing" Agenda 2030/Great Reset "free trade" FROM the the globalist WEF.
And then I'll shift the burden back to him and require that he show me the head of the UK publicly stating "you'll own nothing and be happy".
And pretend that until that happens, then it's not even CLOSE to ever happening or even meant to go in that direction.

[fj1200]

"i'm sure"
Says the guy who didn't read any of it.

I thought that was implicit in my comment. But what new information was presented in the book that hasn't been presented anywhere else here?


revelarts free translation

Your translations are generally wrong. If you have a specific, legible, question or comment I'll do my best to respond.

[SassyLady]

Hey fj ... the sun is predicted to come up tomorrow .. again!

Just wanted to see if you could agree on one thing posted here.

[Black Diamond]

Hey fj ... the sun is predicted to come up tomorrow .. again!

Just wanted to see if you could agree on one thing posted here.

It probably will.

[fj1200]

Hey fj ... the sun is predicted to come up tomorrow .. again!

Just wanted to see if you could agree on one thing posted here.

It is predicted but only He knows the time and place.

I'm wondering if you can agree that one of your links just doesn't look quite right.


It probably will.

You're such a wishy-washy hedger. :slap:

[Evmetro]

I'm sure it was a wonderful book with many dubious connections.

No need to read the book, just wait for CNN to give you an honest and objective review.of what's in it.

[fj1200]

No need to read the book, just wait for CNN to give you an honest and objective review.of what's in it.

That's not why I don't plan to read the book. I think most of the major high points have been touched on over the course of this thread. If any have been missed please fill us in. :)

[SassyLady]

It is predicted but only He knows the time and place.

I'm wondering if you can agree that one of your links just doesn't look quite right.

Only when you agree that that most of your links are just regurgitated MSM talking points. Perusing what you call "fringe" links might expand your narrow viewpoint.

[revelarts]

FORBES

https://www.forbes.com/sites/worldeconomicforum/2016/11/10/shopping-i-cant-really-remember-what-that-is-or-how-differently-well-live-in-2030/?sh=ceda86a17350
Nov 10, 2016

Welcome To 2030: I Own Nothing, Have No Privacy And Life Has Never Been Better
World Economic Forum - Contributor

Welcome to the year 2030. Welcome to my city - or should I say, "our city." I don't own anything. I don't own a car. I don't own a house. I don't own any appliances or any clothes.
It might seem odd to you, but it makes perfect sense for us in this city. Everything you considered a product, has now become a service. We have access to transportation, accommodation, food and all the things we need in our daily lives. One by one all these things became free, so it ended up not making sense for us to own much.
First communication became digitized and free to everyone. Then, when clean energy became free, things started to move quickly. Transportation dropped dramatically in price. It made no sense for us to own cars anymore, because we could call a driverless vehicle or a flying car for longer journeys within minutes. We started transporting ourselves in a much more organized and coordinated way when public transport became easier, quicker and more convenient than the car. Now I can hardly believe that we accepted congestion and traffic jams, not to mention the air pollution from combustion engines. What were we thinking?
....

the hopeful article goes on in the same vein and also mentions those poor souls that don't live in "our city".

just because they are planning it and have the money and will to try and make it happen doesn't mean that anyone should try to point it out or work against it politically.
It's those loose cannon populous that are the problem, or the muslims, or those immigrants, or minorities or the democrats or republicans or the Chinese or Putin.

If we step back, it seems we all have common enemy pretending to be our friend trying to Shepard us all into a controlled technocracy.

[fj1200]

Only when you agree that that most of your links are just regurgitated MSM talking points. Perusing what you call "fringe" links might expand your narrow viewpoint.

Such as? Be specific please.

[Evmetro]

That's not why I don't plan to read the book. I think most of the major high points have been touched on over the course of this thread. If any have been missed please fill us in. :)

I was already well versed in the high points before I read the book as well, but I got that way because I've been seeking the truth for a long time. My naturally occurring interest in finding the truth is what drove me to read the book. My search is never over.

[fj1200]

I was already well versed in the high points before I read the book as well, but I got that way because I've been seeking the truth for a long time. My naturally occurring interest in finding the truth is what drove me to read the book. My search is never over.

Should be pretty easy to run them down then. :)

I do wonder when Alex Jones starts to lose credibility though. Who's to say his psychosis is truly over?


“almost had like a form of psychosis back in the past where I basically thought everything was staged, even though I’m now learning a lot of times things aren’t staged.”

“the trauma of the media and the corporations lying so much, then everything begins — you don’t trust anything anymore, kind of like a child whose parents lie to them over and over again, well, pretty soon they don’t know what reality is.”


"neither Mr. Alefantis, nor his restaurant Comet Ping Pong, were involved in any human trafficking as was part of the theories about Pizzagate that were being written about in many media outlets and which we commented upon."

[Black Diamond]

Should be pretty easy to run them down then. :)

I do wonder when Alex Jones starts to lose credibility though. Who's to say his psychosis is truly over?
Didn't He used to peddle 9/11 conspiracy theories back in the day.

[fj1200]

Didn't He used to peddle 9/11 conspiracy theories back in the day.

I believe so. I was looking for specific apology quotes.

[Black Diamond]

I believe so. I was looking for specific apology quotes.

It doesn't mean he's wrong about globalism. It's just not a source I would be going to.

[Black Diamond]

Should be pretty easy to run them down then. :)

I do wonder when Alex Jones starts to lose credibility though. Who's to say his psychosis is truly over?

Well that's interesting. I never thought he was psychotic. I thought he was capitalizing on and cornering the market of a multi million dollar industry.

[fj1200]

It doesn't mean he's wrong about globalism. It's just not a source I would be going to.

No disagreement here. But this book came out in August 2022 I think which means he's not exactly on the leading edge. More of capitalizing on a trend when there's a $44.9 million judgement to pay off... is something that a cynic would say.


Well that's interesting. I never thought he was psychotic. I thought he was capitalizing on and cornering the market of a multi million dollar industry.

His words. And capitalzing on a trend is not exactly an unbiased source.

[Black Diamond]

No disagreement here. But this book came out in August 2022 I think which means he's not exactly on the leading edge. More of capitalizing on a trend when there's a $44.9 million judgement to pay off... is something that a cynic would say.



His words. And capitalzing on a trend is not exactly an unbiased source.

Oh. I was referring to the conspiracy theory industry. He seems to be admitting his "mistake" . And yeah this book may help him pay his judgment.

[Evmetro]

Should be pretty easy to run them down then. :)

I do wonder when Alex Jones starts to lose credibility though. Who's to say his psychosis is truly ...

Some of us search to find what the truth is, and some search for things to prove what they want the truth to be. Questions about the author's credibility suggest subjective agenda, and a subjective reason to never indulge in the book. There is no need to read the book though, since the MSM can tell you everything you want to hear about it.

[fj1200]

Some of us search to find what the truth is, and some search for things to prove what they want the truth to be. Questions about the author's credibility suggest subjective agenda, and a subjective reason to never indulge in the book. There is no need to read the book though, since the MSM can tell you everything you want to hear about it.

Do false assumptions get you very far in life? So far you've told us that you read a book but haven't been able to actually tell us what is in the book. You've told us you're on this great quest for knowledge but haven't been able to relay any of that knowledge. You've implied that the MSM has massive credibility questions but you pretty much ignore the credibility questions of an individual who has admitted, at least twice, that they were wrong and/or suffered from some sort of psychosis because the media and corporations "lying so much."

Based on what I've been asked to swallow and believe in this thread, where I've engaged in a quest for truth by the way, I've seen website after website and quote after quote of things that just do not pass any sort of credibility check when the whole of the evidence is piled together.

FWIW I don't think the MSM has been anywhere near this book. For reasons that are just beyond imagining. :rolleyes:

[fj1200]

Only when you agree that that most of your links are just regurgitated MSM talking points. Perusing what you call "fringe" links might expand your narrow viewpoint.

Have an example? And I do wonder... If I'm only following MSM links, which I of course dispute, and you're only following "fringe" links don't we both have a narrow viewpoint?

[Evmetro]

Do false assumptions get you very far in life? So far you've told us that you read a book but haven't been able to actually tell us what is in the book. You've told us you're on this great quest for knowledge but haven't been able to relay any of that knowledge. You've implied that the MSM has massive credibility questions but you pretty much ignore the credibility questions of an individual who has admitted, at least twice, that they were wrong and/or suffered from some sort of psychosis because the media and corporations "lying so much."

Based on what I've been asked to swallow and believe in this thread, where I've engaged in a quest for truth by the way, I've seen website after website and quote after quote of things that just do not pass any sort of credibility check when the whole of the evidence is piled together.

FWIW I don't think the MSM has been anywhere near this book. For reasons that are just beyond imagining. :rolleyes:

Sounds like you have a good idea of what you want the truth to be. You will not have any problems finding plenty to support it. Good luck.

[fj1200]

Sounds like you have a good idea of what you want the truth to be. You will not have any problems finding plenty to support it. Good luck.

My post went so far over your head it's amazing. Almost like a world record over your head.

[fj1200]

Nov 10, 2016


....

the hopeful article goes on in the same vein and also mentions those poor souls that don't live in "our city".

just because they are planning it and have the money and will to try and make it happen doesn't mean that anyone should try to point it out or work against it politically.
It's those loose cannon populous that are the problem, or the muslims, or those immigrants, or minorities or the democrats or republicans or the Chinese or Putin.

If we step back, it seems we all have common enemy pretending to be our friend trying to Shepard us all into a controlled technocracy.

A couple of questions. Have they made any progress in the past 6 years? And am I to understand that the globalists are worse than the others or are the particular enemy that we need to focus on?

[Gunny]

A couple of questions. Have they made any progress in the past 6 years? And am I to understand that the globalists are worse than the others or are the particular enemy that we need to focus on?This thread is really interesting.

In this corner .... we have a conspiracy around every corner.

And in the blue corner, we have "there's no slippery slope" and if you don't have concrete evidence it never happened and isn't going to.

Addressing the latter first, the first time I heard the "there's no slippery slope" theory was when the left was conning society into accepting fags and not beating them up. Seems to me we've taken a long, deep dive down that nonexistent slope. We now have child mutilation, brainwashing, Peds have Rights, and loser males competing in Women's sports. This is "a", not "the" example. There are more than a few (hundred). Lest we not forget, blacks established this Nation and if the 1619 Project isn't lies compounded upon lies to create an alternate, fantasy reality to suit an agenda, I don't know what is.

As to the former ... the boy who kept crying wolf got eaten by the wolf because people stopped listening and/or reacting.

I also STILL can't understand why whatever "globalists" are trying to do is more important an issue than what our own damned government is doing right here, in our country, to us. Addressing individual symptoms does not cure the disease. If We, the People were in control of our government as we are supposed to be, the issue of what these global bureaucrats creating crises so they can sell us the cure is moot.

A government of the people does business with anyone only if the People let it. Maybe we should be more worried about getting our own house in order rather than trying to control things beyond our reach.

[Black Diamond]

This thread is really interesting.

In this corner .... we have a conspiracy around every corner.

And in the blue corner, we have "there's no slippery slope" and if you don't have concrete evidence it never happened and isn't going to.

Addressing the latter first, the first time I heard the "there's no slippery slope" theory was when the left was conning society into accepting fags and not beating them up. Seems to me we've taken a long, deep dive down that nonexistent slope. We now have child mutilation, brainwashing, Peds have Rights, and loser males competing in Women's sports. This is "a", not "the" example. There are more than a few (hundred). Lest we not forget, blacks established this Nation and if the 1619 Project is a lies compounded upon lies to create an alternate, fantasy reality to suit an agenda, I don't know what is.

As to the former ... the boy who kept crying wolf got eaten by the wolf because people stopped listening and/or reacting.

I also STILL can't understand why whatever "globalists" are trying to do is more important an issue than what our own damned government is doing right here, in our country, to us. Addressing individual symptoms does not cure the disease. If We, the People were in control of our government as we are supposed to be, the issue of what these global bureaucrats creating crises so they can sell us the cure is moot.

A government of the people does business with anyone only if the People let it. Maybe we should be more worried about getting our own house in order rather than trying to control things beyond our reach.

Not sure we have that.

[Black Diamond]

Predicting the future is quite difficult when you set dates. Or say "within x number of years"

[Gunny]

Not sure we have that.Anyone besides me remember Ron Popeil (sp)? The inventor of just about every useless gadget/gimmick in existence in the 1970s. My favorite was the "Pocket Fisherman". What a useless piece of crap. You couldn't catch goldfish from a bowl with that thing :laugh: I digress.

He was rich because there were people that bought all his crap right of channel 6 in Miami.

"Globalists" just sell their crap to a larger audience full of marks.

The way to stop them from being here is our government, representing the People. Not itself, nor its interest in adding more layers to the bureaucracy we already have.

[fj1200]

This thread is really interesting.

In this corner .... we have a conspiracy around every corner.

And in the blue corner, we have "there's no slippery slope" and if you don't have concrete evidence it never happened and isn't going to.

Addressing the latter first, the first time I heard the "there's no slippery slope" theory was when the left was conning society into accepting fags and not beating them up. Seems to me we've taken a long, deep dive down that nonexistent slope. We now have child mutilation, brainwashing, Peds have Rights, and loser males competing in Women's sports. This is "a", not "the" example. There are more than a few (hundred). Lest we not forget, blacks established this Nation and if the 1619 Project isn't lies compounded upon lies to create an alternate, fantasy reality to suit an agenda, I don't know what is.

As to the former ... the boy who kept crying wolf got eaten by the wolf because people stopped listening and/or reacting.

I also STILL can't understand why whatever "globalists" are trying to do is more important an issue than what our own damned government is doing right here, in our country, to us. Addressing individual symptoms does not cure the disease. If We, the People were in control of our government as we are supposed to be, the issue of what these global bureaucrats creating crises so they can sell us the cure is moot.

A government of the people does business with anyone only if the People let it. Maybe we should be more worried about getting our own house in order rather than trying to control things beyond our reach.

We do it to ourselves. Nevertheless there are busybody big government people out there at all levels that say a lot of things the problem being when the outlandish claims start and the tying together of all the crazy.


Not sure we have that.

Of course we do. Just not enough people to consistently vote the conservative end of the spectrum and not enough elected officials to actually govern from the conservative end of the spectrum. There are "conservatives" in this country who are not conservative. Don't mean to shock you.

[revelarts]

This thread is really interesting.

In this corner .... we have a conspiracy around every corner.

And in the blue corner, we have "there's no slippery slope" and if you don't have concrete evidence it never happened and isn't going to.

Addressing the latter first, the first time I heard the "there's no slippery slope" theory was when the left was conning society into accepting fags and not beating them up. Seems to me we've taken a long, deep dive down that nonexistent slope. We now have child mutilation, brainwashing, Peds have Rights, and loser males competing in Women's sports. This is "a", not "the" example. There are more than a few (hundred). Lest we not forget, blacks established this Nation and if the 1619 Project isn't lies compounded upon lies to create an alternate, fantasy reality to suit an agenda, I don't know what is.
...oookkk...
I'm on board with most of that


As to the former ... the boy who kept crying wolf got eaten by the wolf because people stopped listening and/or reacting.


Um Gunny, In the story the boy was outright lying.
I'm not lying. people are just ignoring... or claiming blindness.
Please note. I'm not saying the Wolf is complete control i'm just saying LOOK there IS a wolf.. a in fact a pack.


Here's a bit of alteration to the story to make it more the way i see it.
AND what you've suggested.
1st everyone is supposed to be watching out for wolves.
But Many don't even want to BELIEVES there are many wolves in the area. BUT if there are, "they are just keeping the deer population down" so don't worry.
Couple of Boys see wolves dressed as sheep and scream but no one wants to even look and say... "that's crazy talk".
Finally after years of wolves dressed as sheep coming and going and taking out a few sheep, perfecting their routes in and out of the herds and changing the way people handle sheep.
a few more people notice "HEY there ARE a few wolves dressed as sheep out here. But they haven't DONE anything. SO, Until they start really ACTING like wolves no one should worry. There are still mostly sheep out there. AND as long as we add MORE sheep and then we don't have to worry or even really check if there are wolves dressed as sheep."
The Boys slap their heads in frustration, but still try to point out the problem, while being laughed at and ignored.
And few more folks are seeing the wolves as well, but they don't want to say anything because they don't want to be lumped into the group with the "crazy Boys".



I also STILL can't understand why whatever "globalists" are trying to do is more important an issue than what our own damned government is doing right here, in our country, to us. Addressing individual symptoms does not cure the disease. If We, the People were in control of our government as we are supposed to be, the issue of what these global bureaucrats creating crises so they can sell us the cure is moot.

A government of the people does business with anyone only if the People let it. Maybe we should be more worried about getting our own house in order rather than trying to control things beyond our reach.

Gunny here's the thing,
they are IN our gov't, have been for years. we've been voting them in HERE, not over seas far far away.
"The developing coherence of Asian regional thinking is reflected in a disposition to consider problems and loyalties in regional terms, and to evolve regional approaches to development needs and to the evolution of a New World Order."
Richard M. Nixon

"NAFTA is a major stepping stone to the New World Order."
Henry A. Kissinger

"The Technetronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more CONTROLLED society. Such a society would be dominated by ELITE, unrestrained by traditional values."
Zbigniew Brzezinski

"A new partnership of nations has begun, and we stand today at a unique and extraordinary moment. The crisis in the Persian Gulf, as grave as it is, also offers a rare opportunity to move toward an historic period of cooperation. Out of these troubled times, our fifth objective -- a new world order -- can emerge: A new era -- freer from the threat of terror, stronger in the pursuit of justice and more secure in the quest for peace. An era in which the nations of the world, east and west, north and south, can prosper and live in harmony..."
President Bush I

U.S. Corporate heads and the media adding their vast influence.
"Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."
David Rockefeller


It's been here.
being honest about what it is and who they are has been the missing piece.
until recently most people have assumed it's JUST Ds or Rs or Communist or Conservatives or Populist.
While the globalist have been quietly doing SOME work (not EVERYTHING) with some folks (not EVERYONE) that supposedly represent Ds, Rs, so-called communist and so-called conservatives/patriots.
And sometimes some proposals of from folks in those groups happen to align with globalist views. so they BACK IT.


But it's good that we're at point we're not in as much denial as before.

[revelarts]

Just for fun, here's another quote


Walter Cronkite
acceptance speech for the world governance award.
With a congrats and 'atta boys' from then 1st lady Hilary Clinton



"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.

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.
But the American colonies did it once and brought forth one of the most nearly perfect unions the world has ever seen. The circumstances were vastly different, obviously. While the colonies differed on many questions, at least the people of the colonies were of the same Anglo-Saxon stock. Yet just because the task appears forbiddingly hard, we should not shirk it.
We cannot defer this responsibility to posterity. Time will not wait. Democracy, civilization itself, is at stake. Within the next few years we must change the basic structure of our global community from the present anarchic system of war and ever more destructive weaponry to a new system governed by a democratic UN federation.

I suppose I'm preaching to the choir here. So let's not talk generalities but focus tonight on a few specifics of what the leadership of the World Federalist Movement believe must be done now to advance the rule of world law....
Today we must develop federal structures on a global level. We need a system of enforceable world law-- a democratic federal world government--to deal with world problems....
Today the notion of unlimited national sovereignty means international anarchy. We must replace the anarchic law of force with a civilized force of law....



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZTgBrlS3M0

[fj1200]

Richard M. Nixon - Dead

Henry A. Kissinger - Surprisingly not dead. But he's 99.

Zbigniew Brzezinski - Dead

President Bush I - Dead

David Rockefeller - Dead

Walter Cronkite - Also Dead

[revelarts]

Richard M. Nixon - Dead
Henry A. Kissinger - Surprisingly not dead. But he's 99.
Zbigniew Brzezinski - Dead
President Bush I - Dead
David Rockefeller - Dead
Walter Cronkite - Also Dead

:rolleyes:

[fj1200]

:rolleyes:

So much effort spent on things dead, or almost dead, people said. Quotes possibly taken out of context.

Here's the entirety of the Kissinger piece for example.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1993/07/20/nafta-clintons-defining-task/0e985ef7-94f1-4470-a85f-67d260daadb6/

Nixon. From 1967 I think.

https://qoshe.com/foreign-affairs/richard-m-nixon/asia-after-viet-nam/142215756

[revelarts]

So much effort spent on things dead, or almost dead, people said. Quotes possibly taken out of context.

Here's the entirety of the Kissinger piece for example.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/opinions/1993/07/20/nafta-clintons-defining-task/0e985ef7-94f1-4470-a85f-67d260daadb6/

Nixon. From 1967 I think.

https://qoshe.com/foreign-affairs/richard-m-nixon/asia-after-viet-nam/142215756
Thanks,
I think these help make the case.
Kissinger and Nixon pushing towards globalism.
In the way mentioned earlier, piece by piece "regionalism" ..to finally a global "word order".

[fj1200]

Thanks,
I think these help make the case.
Kissinger and Nixon pushing towards globalism.
I the way mentioned earlier, piece by piece "regionalism" ..to finally a global "word order".

No. Kissinger. Globalism. Free trade. Not "globalist." Popular governments and market economies contrasted against the state-run horror of Cuba then and Venezuela now.


In this light, developments in the Western Hemisphere become crucial to global order. Here, a group of democratic nations has pledged itself to the Enterprise for the Americas initiative based on popular governments and market economies. The sole dictatorship remaining in the Western Hemisphere is Cuba; state-run enterprises are being privatized; nationalistic, protectionist methods of economic management are being replaced by export-oriented economies hospitable to foreign investment and supportive of open international trading systems. The revolution sweeping the Western Hemisphere can point the way to an international order based on cooperation.

No. Nixon. A pre-campaign ('67 I think but doesn't matter really) policy speech that is decidedly anti-China and pro-western friendly Asian states.


Along with the rising complex of national, subregional and regional identification and pride, there is also an acute sense of common danger—a factor which serves as catalyst to the others. The common danger from Communist China is now in the process of shifting the Asian governments' center of concern. During the colonial and immediately post-colonial eras, Asians stood opposed primarily to the West, which represented the intruding alien power. But now the West has abandoned its colonial role, and it no longer threatens the independence of the Asian nations. Red China, however, does, and its threat is clear, present and repeatedly and insistently expressed. The message has not been lost on Asia's leaders. They recognize that the West, and particularly the United States, now represents not an oppressor but a protector. And they recognize their need for protection.

The overall point being is that cherry-picked quotes out of larger contexts do not a simplistic anti-globalist position make. I'm pretty sure someone just googled "new world order" and whereever anyone said it... "Aack, globalist."

[revelarts]

No. Kissinger. Globalism. Free trade. Not "globalist." Popular governments and market economies contrasted against the state-run horror of Cuba then and Venezuela now.
No. Nixon. A pre-campaign ('67 I think but doesn't matter really) policy speech that is decidedly anti-China and pro-western friendly Asian states.
The overall point being is that cherry-picked quotes out of larger contexts do not a simplistic anti-globalist position make. I'm pretty sure someone just googled "new world order" and whereever anyone said it... "Aack, globalist."

I'm pretty sure that If people read the whole things for themselves, that many can see what's being said fairly clearly.
not cherry-picked, just highlight.
Especially in the larger context of the reality of globalist stated agenda and methods.

but, of course, some won't see anything.
And anytime they see quotes that say "new world order" or "global governance", or "international agreements" or "regionalism as a 1st step", "build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world" or "new system governed by a democratic UN federation" or "Yes, there will be a New World Order, and it will force the United States to change it's perceptions." or "The world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government." or "When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government"...

they see those quotes and say stuff like "oh, ,in context, that simply means they're 'Free Traders'!".

[fj1200]

I'm pretty sure that If people read the whole things for themselves, that many can see what's being said fairly clearly.
not cherry-picked, just highlight.
Especially in the larger context of the reality of globalist stated agenda and methods.

but, of course, some won't anything.
And anytime they see quotes that say "new world order" or "global governance", or "international agreements" or "regionalism as a 1st step", "build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world" or "new system governed by a democratic UN federation" or "Yes, there will be a New World Order, and it will force the United States to change it's perceptions." or "The world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government." or "When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government"...

they see quotes they say "oh, ,in context, that simply means they're 'Free Traders'!".

And if they did they might come to their own conclusion. But that's not the bread and butter of what is presented by you and the countless links over and over. It is a sentence here, a quote there, countlessly repeated as the only possible conclusion based on your preconceived outcome. You've decided that you get to assign motives to some people that are in no way possible.

Frankly 99.5% of people putting information out on youtube and various links are not really deep thinkers that they so want to be. They're parrots. It goes along with my general outlook that 99.5% of "creatives" trying to eek out a following on youtube and social media are not really creative, they are parrots that echo something an actual creative person came up with.

[Evmetro]

I haven't been around the site much over the last year or so, but I had it in my mind that the community was dominated by rino type "conservatives", vs the freedom loving patriot conservatives, which also means that I made an indirect connection between these rino types and soldiers of globalism. After reading this thread, I see that I was off, at least for the ones on this thread who are "awake", regarding globalism and the WEF. Understanding the bigger picture of globalism, including its history and current reach, is one of the things for me that differentiates the rino variety of conservatives from freedom loving patriots. It is like a special lens that I see the rest of politics through, a lens that shows me the implications of a lot of day to day politics.

[fj1200]

^You should get your prescription checked.

[Evmetro]

^You should get your prescription checked.

Thank you for your valuable contribution. If it were not for lefties, we would not have any use for political discussion sites.

In the earlier part of my life, I saw the world through a lefty lens like yours, so I understand what you see. I was a full blown lefty who loved the sound of my evening news fading out of Aaron Copland music on NPR's All Things Considered, I hung out in Yoga communes, and drove a Subaru with a bike rack. I totally understand how lefties perceive righties, since I was born a lefty, screaming for that tit or bottle for my survival.

I've learned to love lefties. My dogs and kitties are all little lefties who don't love me, but I still love them. Lefties on political boards are a great asset to the community, even if they are wrong about everything, lie, cheat, and vote wrong. Thanks for being a lefty, thanks for giving me a reason to vote!

[fj1200]

Thank you for your valuable contribution.

You're not particularly smart. First, you haven't really contributed anything here. Second, you have no clue who the lefties are around here. I was going to say that we have no lefties around here but in reality the lefties don't really know who they are. I've come to learn something; in the years of 2015 and earlier I would have guessed that most here were small government, constitutional conservatives. 2016 and later I know that is just not true. There are plenty on the "right" that truly have a desire for more government action; they just prefer that the government action is one that they control and works for their benefit. They would describe themselves along the lines of freedom loving patriots but unfortunately "freedom loving" turns out to be an oxymoron when used alongside conservative.

[Evmetro]

You're not particularly smart. First, you haven't really contributed anything here. Second, you have no clue who the lefties are around here. I was going to say that we have no lefties around here but in reality the lefties don't really know who they are. I've come to learn something; in the years of 2015 and earlier I would have guessed that most here were small government, constitutional conservatives. 2016 and later I know that is just not true. There are plenty on the "right" that truly have a desire for more government action; they just prefer that the government action is one that they control and works for their benefit. They would describe themselves along the lines of freedom loving patriots but unfortunately "freedom loving" turns out to be an oxymoron when used alongside conservative.

It is common for people anywhere on the political line to claim something further to the right than what they really are, which should validate your perception of freedom loving patriots, as well as my sense of how far left you are. Do you know why people claim to be further right than what they really are?

[fj1200]

It is common for people anywhere on the political line to claim something further to the right than what they really are, which should validate your perception of freedom loving patriots, as well as my sense of how far left you are. Do you know why people claim to be further right than what they really are?

Soooooo, you're also further right than you really are? But please; point out my left positions.

[Evmetro]

Soooooo, you're also further right than you really are? But please; point out my left positions.

In my case, the left end of the political line says "lefty", and the right end says "EvMetro". EVERYONE is to my left.

I don't look for positions, I look for instinct. Do you objectively seek the truth, or do you subjectively seek what you want the truth to be?

[fj1200]

In my case, the left end of the political line says "lefty", and the right end says "EvMetro". EVERYONE is to my left.

I don't look for positions, I look for instinct. Do you objectively seek the truth, or do you subjectively seek what you want the truth to be?

Interesting method of avoiding being provably wrong. I guess you've chosen what you want the truth to be. ;)

[Evmetro]

Interesting method of avoiding being provably wrong. I guess you've chosen what you want the truth to be. ;)

Weak. From what I've read of your posts so far, you are more witty and clever than this. This looks more like a low level juvenile post on a big forum full of lefty trolls. I may see you to my left, but I expect more out of you than this. This community may be small, but the bar is set a little higher than most other forums.

I'm open to the notion that you are further right than I give you credit for. Can you tell me why people like to identify as further right than they really are?

[fj1200]

Weak. From what I've read of your posts so far, you are more witty and clever than this. This looks more like a low level juvenile post on a big forum full of lefty trolls. I may see you to my left, but I expect more out of you than this. This community may be small, but the bar is set a little higher than most other forums.

I'm open to the notion that you are further right than I give you credit for. Can you tell me why people like to identify as further right than they really are?

No idea. I guess you won't admit to being wrong though.

[Evmetro]

No idea. I guess you won't admit to being wrong though.

Righties know why people claim to be further right than they are. We have more credibility, we are right all the time, and the foundation of our values is what our country was founded upon.

[fj1200]

Righties know why people claim to be further right than they are. We have more credibility, we are right all the time, and the foundation of our values is what our country was founded upon.

:laugh: Unsurprisingly an incredibly self serving bit of rationale there.

[Evmetro]

:laugh: Unsurprisingly an incredibly self serving bit of rationale there.

And just like that, you're fighting for the left. Glad we got that cleared up. It's OK that you are a lefty, the community needs a couple to survive. I've learned to really appreciate lefties. Thank you for your valuable lefty contributions in this community.

[fj1200]

And just like that, you're fighting for the left. Glad we got that cleared up. It's OK that you are a lefty, the community needs a couple to survive. I've learned to really appreciate lefties. Thank you for your valuable lefty contributions in this community.

I thought you were a red-pill swallowing truth seeker? Now it appears that you just make up your own truth when it serves your self interest. And so far you haven't said anything that indicates your "right" views other than your proclamations and linking to what other people think and say.

[revelarts]

Firehose of info making connections of eugenics and transhumanism from U.S. & Germany the 1920s to todays rebranding and tech advances on the same projects in the in UK govt, foundations ,tech corps, the WHO &WEF.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/E89BNqxMzy0U/

Nothing to see here ....

[revelarts]

Intersting

BTW I trust Putin a little less than I trust Dick Cheney.


Address by the President of the Russian Federation
full transcript
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/transcripts/69390

https://bioclandestine.substack.com/p/putins-address-approaching-the-precipice

"... throughout the speech, Putin carefully articulates that these actions were not carried out by any Nation(s) or the People, but by “the aggressive policy of some Western elites”.

Putin and Russia have made a conscious effort since the beginning, to direct their allegations and displeasure with the “Western elites”, not the US as a whole. Russia have repeatedly alleged that the “US Democratic Party”, along with the help of George Soros and non-government entities, have been laundering US DoD funds into Ukraine to build an unofficial Deep State proxy, outside the scope of US Congressional Oversight.3...

[fj1200]

A. Cheney hasn't invaded anyone lately.
B. That guy seems a little nuts.

[revelarts]

A. Cheney hasn't invaded anyone lately.
lol, not that we know of anyway.
https://media.giphy.com/media/24y2gUQ3vZsg8/giphy.gif

[revelarts]

Visa offers restaurants $10,000...if they stop accepting cash



They're calling it the "The Visa Cashless Challenge."
The plan is to convince small business restaurants, cafés and food trucks to stop accepting cash, forcing customers to pay with credit cards or digital payments.

"Visa will be awarding up to $500,000 to 50 eligible US-based small business food service owners who commit to joining the 100% cashless quest," the credit card company wrote in a press release.

If a restaurant opts in, it'll get a $10,000 gift from Visa (V) to help pay for technology upgrades, the company said. Those tech upgrades could mean installing platforms that that accept payments from phones, smart watches or other devices.

Visa has a clear incentive: Credit card companies charge processing fees and tack on other charges to businesses that accept their cards as payment.

But those fees can cut painfully into the margins any small business, and it could even mean life or death for a small mom and pop shop.

Marco Carabjo, a credit expert, wrote in a 2013 U.S. Small Business Administration blog post that fees for credit card transaction can cost businesses up to 5% of their revenue.

Visa claims it has proof that cutting out cash can help small businesses. The company said it conducted a study that found if businesses in cities across the United States stop accepting cash, they could bring in billions more each year....


story not so current
https://money.cnn.com/2017/07/14/news/companies/visa-no-cash-restaurant-initiative/index.html
First published July 14, 2017


relentless nudges, prompts & bribes towards a CASHLESS society.

[fj1200]

Very timely. :rolleyes:

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FrR3dQNWYAAn_dA?format=jpg&name=small

[fj1200]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FrR3dQNWYAAn_dA?format=jpg&name=small

Don't let the apparent issue of him not having actually said that dissuade you from your cause. Also not sure about his "spokesperson" title.

Not that he doesn't have provable egghead street cred.


https://www.theguardian.com/books/2018/sep/14/yuval-noah-harari-the-new-threat-to-liberal-democracy

[fj1200]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FrR3dQNWYAAn_dA?format=jpg&name=small

Unfortunately based on personal experience, the above meme, and his actual point I could be persuaded to agree that humans are indeed "hackable animals." :(

[SassyLady]

Unfortunately based on personal experience, the above meme, and his actual point I could be persuaded to agree that humans are indeed "hackable animals." :(
And will be even more so once a micro chip is inserted.

[fj1200]

Who needs a microchip when people stupefy themselves?

[revelarts]

Don't let the apparent issue of him not having actually said that dissuade you from your cause. Also not sure about his "spokesperson" title.

Not that he doesn't have provable egghead street cred.

Odd that you come out on cue to blow smokescreens for this crap FJ. e.v.e.r.y.t.i.m.e.

AND you're just wrong.
yes, he did basically say it. ... in one form in the 1st 10 minutes here. And in other interviews.
http://www.youtube.com/shorts/oMxTYt43_xU
But you don't watch videos so you'd never know.
Even though you pretended like you knew everything he's said. so you confidently "refuted" my post. Falsely.
Why are you acting like you're aware of everything Harari's said FJ?
Why the knee jerk denials and defense of this guy?
It's not honest.
look, you don't have to disagree with everything I post in this thread.
Take a breath before you reply next time.

Not a "spokesperson"
So He only gave 4 talks and a Q&A at the WEF in 2018.
https://www.ynharari.com/wef2018/
in 2020 he "set the tone'.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/authors/yuval-harari
Yuval Noah Harari, is the lead advisor of Klaus Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum.
Which is a group/org/network of unelected rich scumbags & politicians who want to control the wor...--COUGH-- I mean... want to have one world government = globalist


Unfortunately based on personal experience, the above meme, and his actual point I could be persuaded to agree that humans are indeed "hackable animals." :(

Ok, So now you DO agree with the eggheads?
And he did say free will is over.
But hey isn't that the way it goes, with anti-conspiracy denials

no, no, no, no it's not happening they didn't say it! they are not doing that! you're paranoid! tut tut it's never happen & never going to happen. not need to raise false alarms or fight.
-SOME TIME LATER-
Ah well ,
yes that,
Actually what they are doing was just inevitable... and the way thing should be... no news here...
(insert excuse for the new system/law/rule --ie blame stupid people, economics, technology, "progress" "experts" etc--.)
And add resignation to fate and give no hope or options for change.
...
the Virus came from a wet market you bigoted fools!
-SOME TIME LATER-
The virus looks man made and may have come from the Wuhan lab via North Carolina and Faucii.
...
Mask Do work you fools!
-SOME TIME LATER-
cough Well of course we always knew they didn't work.
...
everyone needs Vxines and everyone needs to LOCKDOWN for 15day... no for months!
-SOME TIME LATER-
cough well of course we should have really focused on the elderly...& lockdowns didn't work. (have never)
...
the the civil rights movement & MLK were making up wild stories about the the FBI & State officials.
-SOME looong TIME LATER-
well Records show that the FBI was infiltrating & subverting the the civil rights movement/MLK and Governors and state lawmakers were working with the KKK against the civil rights movement & MLK.

etc etc etc

[fj1200]

Odd that you come out on cue to blow smokescreens for this crap FJ. e.v.e.r.y.t.i.m.e.

AND you're just wrong.
yes, he did basically say it. ... in one form in the 1st 10 minutes here. And in other interviews.
http://www.youtube.com/shorts/oMxTYt43_xU
But you don't watch videos so you'd never know.
Even though you pretended like you knew everything he's said. so you confidently "refuted" my post. Falsely.
Why are you acting like you're aware of everything Harari's said FJ?
Why the knee jerk denials and defense of this guy?
It's not honest.
look, you don't have to disagree with everything I post in this thread.
Take a breath before you reply next time.

Not a "spokesperson"
So He only gave 4 talks and a Q&A at the WEF in 2018.
https://www.ynharari.com/wef2018/
in 2020 he "set the tone'.
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/authors/yuval-harari
Yuval Noah Harari, is the lead advisor of Klaus Schwab, the founder of the World Economic Forum.
Which is a group/org/network of unelected rich scumbags & politicians who want to control the wor...--COUGH-- I mean... want to have one world government = globalist

Don't tell me what he basically said, tell me what he actually said; give me timestamps. And not a paraphrase in some meme completely lacking context with other questionable information that is usually easily checkable. He either said it or he did not. And your complaints about the media being disingenuous, you don't seem to require the same of things you post.

I read most of his ridiculous little screed published in the guardian and he did not say, in that piece, that the era of free will was over. He basically said that free will never really existed anyway and was a construct created by theologians. Two different things. Also I'm in for the evidence of his being lead advisor and a spokesperson. It takes a little more in the real world than just saying it.


Ok, So now you DO agree with the eggheads?
And he did say free will is over.
But hey isn't that the way it goes, with anti-conspiracy denials

no, no, no, no it's not happening they didn't say it! they are not doing that! you're paranoid! tut tut it's never happen & never going to happen. not need to raise false alarms or fight.
-SOME TIME LATER-
Ah well ,
yes that,
Actually what they are doing was just inevitable... and the way thing should be... no news here...
(insert excuse for the new system/law/rule --ie blame stupid people, economics, technology, "progress" "experts" etc--.)
And add resignation to fate and give no hope or options for change.
...
the Virus came from a wet market you bigoted fools!
-SOME TIME LATER-
The virus looks man made and may have come from the Wuhan lab via North Carolina and Faucii.
...
Mask Do work you fools!
-SOME TIME LATER-
cough Well of course we always knew they didn't work.
...
everyone needs Vxines and everyone needs to LOCKDOWN for 15day... no for months!
-SOME TIME LATER-
cough well of course we should have really focused on the elderly...& lockdowns didn't work. (have never)
...
the the civil rights movement & MLK were making up wild stories about the the FBI & State officials.
-SOME looong TIME LATER-
well Records show that the FBI was infiltrating & subverting the the civil rights movement/MLK and Governors and state lawmakers were working with the KKK against the civil rights movement & MLK.

etc etc etc


I don't agree with the eggheads. He didn't say it. He doesn't even think it ever existed. I do think that people are being led around like sheep... out of their own free will unfortunately.

And FWIW, pointing out that your evidence doesn't measure up isn't blowing smokescreens, it's attempting to force a better argument.

[Black Diamond]

Don't tell me what he basically said, tell me what he actually said; give me timestamps. And not a paraphrase in some meme completely lacking context with other questionable information that is usually easily checkable. He either said it or he did not. And your complaints about the media being disingenuous, you don't seem to require the same of things you post.

I read most of his ridiculous little screed published in the guardian and he did not say, in that piece, that the era of free will was over. He basically said that free will never really existed anyway and was a construct created by theologians. Two different things. Also I'm in for the evidence of his being lead advisor and a spokesperson. It takes a little more in the real world than just saying it.



I don't agree with the eggheads. He didn't say it. He doesn't even think it ever existed. I do think that people are being led around like sheep... out of their own free will unfortunately.

And FWIW, pointing out that your evidence doesn't measure up isn't blowing smokescreens, it's attempting to force a better argument.
LMAO!! You made me laugh again.

[SassyLady]

LMAO!! You made me laugh again.
Basically said vs actually said?

Weird argument.

[fj1200]

Basically said vs actually said?

Weird argument.

I agree. Rev is making it. It's not hard to quote what someone actually said. It gets harder to paraphrase, with accuracy, what someone "basically" said. But when you need to sum up an argument with 7 words, a picture of an egghead, and overstated credentials...

[revelarts]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FrR3dQNWYAAn_dA?format=jpg&name=small


Yuval Noah Harari, tells us in his book, Homo Deus (https://www.amazon.com/Homo-Deus-Brief-History-Tomorrow/dp/0062464345/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=homo+deus&qid=1658521740&sr=8-1) (man god),
“The era of free will is over.”


I agree. Rev is making it. It's not hard to quote what someone actually said. It gets harder to paraphrase, with accuracy, what someone "basically" said. But when you need to sum up an argument with 7 words, a picture of an egghead, and overstated credentials...

No, It's not hard to quote what someone actually said.
And it's what I did.

FJ you just assumed that since you personally never heard of the quote that it be must be false? WHY?
Why did you ASSUME it must be false until proven otherwise?
Why were you so sure of your opinion of it being "made up"?
Why did you feel compelled to refute it and mock it without looking it up for yourself?

Why do you jump to the defense of these people?

The guy has said this many times and in many ways. And promoted the GENERAL concepts over and over again. he's not shy.
Why are you splitting hairs?

If someone tells you that a thug said he "wants to chop you're arms off" are you going reply
"HE didn't say THAT. that's a false quote. the only thing I SEE is that he said he only wanted
"to cut the whole torso."
that's not "the arms!". ...chortle snort... get your facts strait. It's not true.... And BTW he might have a fair reason."

What the H3ll FJ?
I'm just not getting where this kind of reaction is coming from.

[revelarts]

Another fun quote from Yual Noah Harari.

“History began when humans invented gods, and will end when humans become gods”


BTW nearly every time i see this guys name it's "Yual Noah Harari" .. it's odd.
for me at least because it makes me think of names of assassins and serial killers.
Jared Lee Loughner, John Wayne Gacy, John Wilkes Booth...

[fj1200]

Yuval Noah Harari, tells us in his book, Homo Deus (https://www.amazon.com/Homo-Deus-Brief-History-Tomorrow/dp/0062464345/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=homo+deus&qid=1658521740&sr=8-1) (man god),
“The era of free will is over.”

No, It's not hard to quote what someone actually said.
And it's what I did.

FJ you just assumed that since you personally never heard of the quote that it be must be false? WHY?
Why did you ASSUME it must be false until proven otherwise?
Why were you so sure of your opinion of it being "made up"?
Why did you feel compelled to refute it and mock it without looking it up for yourself?

Why do you jump to the defense of these people?

The guy has said this many times and in many ways. And promoted the GENERAL concepts over and over again. he's not shy.
Why are you splitting hairs?

If someone tells you that a thug said he "wants to chop you're arms off" are you going reply
"HE didn't say THAT. that's a false quote. the only thing I SEE is that he said he only wanted
"to cut the whole torso."
that's not "the arms!". ...chortle snort... get your facts strait. It's not true.... And BTW he might have a fair reason."

What the H3ll FJ?
I'm just not getting where this kind of reaction is coming from.

You didn't quote him; you posted a meme. I didn't defend him; I pointed out the ridiculous nature of what he did say. Why would you say I didn't look it up when I found an op-ed that he put out and not a third-party meme about something he might have put out? At least I went to the source.

But this thread is about the evidence that they're evil geniuses or incompetent technocrats. I grant you that he's a blabbering egghead but this is not the guy I'm worrying about.

[AHZ]

Evil geniuses or incompetent technocrats? What does the evidence say?
both.

[fj1200]

both.

I'm pretty sure those options are mutually exclusive.

[AHZ]

I'm pretty sure those options are mutually exclusive.
they're definitely not.

incompetent and evil can definitely come together in one hellish package of traits.

[fj1200]

they're definitely not.

incompetent and evil can definitely come together in one hellish package of traits.

Evil genius or incompetent technocrat is mutually exclusive. Either way, I don't see the evidence that they're effective that some do.

[AHZ]

Evil genius or incompetent technocrat is mutually exclusive. Either way, I don't see the evidence that they're effective that some do.
they're not mutually exclusive.

there are plenty of ineffective geniuses.

many times it's due to poor people skills, or laziness. or both.:cool:

[fj1200]

they're not mutually exclusive.

there are plenty of ineffective geniuses.

many times it's due to poor people skills, or laziness. or both.:cool:

I'm certainly one to quibble minor points. I agree that there are ineffective geniuses and I'll argue that incompetent technocrat is redundant. I was asking though about evil geniuses vs. incompetent technocrats, not ineffective geniuses with competent bureaucrats. If a globalist is an ineffective genius then I'll worry even less about them. I'm also sure 1mm+ threads/posts/tweets/blogs/vlogs/etc. wouldn't be tracking every moronic uttereance. Moronic utterances which your average "globalist" supplies in excess abundance unfortunately.

[AHZ]

I'm certainly one to quibble minor points. I agree that there are ineffective geniuses and I'll argue that incompetent technocrat is redundant. I was asking though about evil geniuses vs. incompetent technocrats, not ineffective geniuses with competent bureaucrats. If a globalist is an ineffective genius then I'll worry even less about them. I'm also sure 1mm+ threads/posts/tweets/blogs/vlogs/etc. wouldn't be tracking every moronic uttereance. Moronic utterances which your average "globalist" supplies in excess abundance unfortunately.


ah yes. i see your mutliaxis analysis. but really traits can be graphed in orthogonal blob patterns.

one can be an evil, incompetent, technocratic genius. with dedication of course.

[Gunny]

Where things do go when context is removed :laugh:

[AHZ]

Where things do go when context is removed :laugh:


evil incompetent technocratic geniuses have taken over!:salute:

[jimnyc]

evil incompetent technocratic geniuses have taken over!:salute:

Not from what I have seen in the white house! Incompetent is about the only word that fits that braindead nitwit.

[AHZ]

Not from what I have seen in the white house! Incompetent is about the only word that fits that braindead nitwit.


im talking about the hidden hand.

p2
the bilderbergs
the banks of internationals settlements.
the jesuit 4th vow
mossad
cia
cfr
trilateral commission.

[revelarts]

TONY BLAIR INSTITUTE CALLS FOR A DIGITAL ID FOR ALL BRITISH CITIZENS, CALLS IT THE “GREAT ENABLER”

Published: June 17, 2023
https://www.institute.global/insights/tech-and-digitalisation/great-enabler-transforming-future-of-britains-public-services-digital-identity


OBAMA PROPOSES "DIGITAL FINGERPRINTS" ON CONTENT TO COMBAT "MISINFORMATION"
https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/84886/obama-proposes-digital-fingerprints-on-content-to-combat.html


WEF Calls for 75% Reduction in Private Car Ownership
https://slaynews.com/news/wef-calls-75-reduction-private-car-ownership/

Again.... they won't quit. They like China's model to much.
Ignoring them doesn't seem to be a good option.


http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-3ngzsu50CQw/UpdOrC7yl2I/AAAAAAABvPo/mVWzla56xfM/s1600/funny_picdump_540_640_50.jpg

[revelarts]

He's at it again
“In a few years, there might be religions that are actually correct. Just think about a religion whose holy book is written by an A.I.”

https://caldronpool.com/a-i-could-rewrite-the-bible-and-correct-religion-says-professor-and-wef-member/




Yuval Noah Harari, tells us in his book, Homo Deus (https://www.amazon.com/Homo-Deus-Brief-History-Tomorrow/dp/0062464345/ref=sr_1_1?keywords=homo+deus&qid=1658521740&sr=8-1) (man god),
“The era of free will is over.”



No, It's not hard to quote what someone actually said.
And it's what I did.

FJ you just assumed that since you personally never heard of the quote that it be must be false? WHY?
Why did you ASSUME it must be false until proven otherwise?
Why were you so sure of your opinion of it being "made up"?
Why did you feel compelled to refute it and mock it without looking it up for yourself?

Why do you jump to the defense of these people?

The guy has said this many times and in many ways. And promoted the GENERAL concepts over and over again. he's not shy.
Why are you splitting hairs?

If someone tells you that a thug said he "wants to chop you're arms off" are you going reply
"HE didn't say THAT. that's a false quote. the only thing I SEE is that he said he only wanted
"to cut the whole torso."
that's not "the arms!". ...chortle snort... get your facts strait. It's not true.... And BTW he might have a fair reason."

What the H3ll FJ?
I'm just not getting where this kind of reaction is coming from.

[fj1200]

TONY BLAIR INSTITUTE CALLS FOR A DIGITAL ID FOR ALL BRITISH CITIZENS, CALLS IT THE “GREAT ENABLER”

Published: June 17, 2023
https://www.institute.global/insights/tech-and-digitalisation/great-enabler-transforming-future-of-britains-public-services-digital-identity


OBAMA PROPOSES "DIGITAL FINGERPRINTS" ON CONTENT TO COMBAT "MISINFORMATION"
https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/84886/obama-proposes-digital-fingerprints-on-content-to-combat.html


WEF Calls for 75% Reduction in Private Car Ownership
https://slaynews.com/news/wef-calls-75-reduction-private-car-ownership/

Again.... they won't quit. They like China's model to much.
Ignoring them doesn't seem to be a good option.

Thank goodness they're incompetent technocrats.


He's at it again
“In a few years, there might be religions that are actually correct. Just think about a religion whose holy book is written by an A.I.”

https://caldronpool.com/a-i-could-rewrite-the-bible-and-correct-religion-says-professor-and-wef-member/

I believe I already replied to that post. But I see the egghead has updated his ramblings with the boogeyman of the day; he's not a deep thinker.

[AHZ]

Thank goodness they're incompetent technocrats.



I believe I already replied to that post. But I see the egghead has updated his ramblings with the boogeyman of the day; he's not a deep thinker.
they're not competent enought to actually pull their schemes.

they've wildly undercalculated people's intelligence and resistance to their totalitarian scheming.

[revelarts]

"the Great Reset"...
At links a 40 second video of world leaders, celebrities, media, and "the King" all calling for, hoping for, working for "the Great reset".

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1676686595498426368/pu/vid/854x480/gIwfATUe9cI2Yftn.mp4?tag=12

https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1676686595498426368/pu/vid/854x480/gIwfATUe9cI2Yftn.mp4?tag=12


below 14 minute video giving outlines
https://youtu.be/JWRScUZPrWY

[AHZ]

It's kind of hard to be a genius AND incompetent. At least in the context of the question. :shrug:



All of that is not evidence.


genius and incompetence often go hand in hand.

spergy geniuses often don't get how the world works and start invent mad scientist things to kill everybody.

they're prone to a eugenics ideology, being semi human spergs.

[fj1200]

genius and incompetence often go hand in hand.

spergy geniuses often don't get how the world works and start invent mad scientist things to kill everybody.

they're prone to a eugenics ideology, being semi human spergs.


It's kind of hard to be a genius AND incompetent. At least in the context of the question.

:)

[Kathianne]

:)
:laugh2:

[AHZ]

:laugh2:


https://i.ytimg.com/vi/53MHfgK9sa4/hqdefault.jpg

[AHZ]

As laid out in my previous musings;

"I see societies advance that choose the environments that allow advancement... So based on the evidence presented I've determined that they are do-nothing technocrats who have largely zero impact on a free world. The other option is that they're not what I think they are at all and are in fact doing a great job (which I don't believe). As I've mentioned before I don't really see the logical outcome of granting freedoms, economic liberties, etc. for those that choose and then all of a sudden taking it all away. There is no logic to it.

...

My issue is that either these insitutions are so inept that they've failed, for close to 80 years now, to impose their governmental control on the world to the detriment of countries who choose liberalized economies; or that they've been controlling things so much that those countries that have liberalized their economies will have all their economic gains wiped out when the powers that be impose massive controls. The latter making no logical sense."

I'm going with incompetent technocrats... if there are any out there that identify as globalists.

But I await submittal of further evidence. :)

the logic is "make people think you value freedom, gain authority, then go totalitarian".

it's called deception, 'sperg.

[fj1200]

the logic is "make people think you value freedom, gain authority, then go totalitarian".

it's called deception, 'sperg.

Again, no logic and no evidence. You keep making the same faulty predictions that others have for decades.

[AHZ]

Again, no logic and no evidence. You keep making the same faulty predictions that others have for decades.


I just explained to you what deception is.

you were saying you didn't understand.



the country has massive jobs loss and loss of production capacity due to globalization fanaticism.

do you even approve of reciprocal tariffs?

probably not, you hate america and freedom.

Now sit down and take your medicine.

[fj1200]

I just explained to you what deception is.

you were saying you didn't understand.



the country has massive jobs loss and loss of production capacity due to globalization fanaticism.

do you even approve of reciprocal tariffs?

probably not, you hate america and freedom.

Now sit down and take your medicine.

Pretty sure I didn't say I didn't understand. But I know what deception is, I witness it in all of your posts.

[AHZ]

Pretty sure I didn't say I didn't understand. But I know what deception is, I witness it in all of your posts.


you just find it illogical that the power hungry would use deception.


is that your point?

[fj1200]

you just find it illogical that the power hungry would use deception.


is that your point?

You should review the thread if you're unaware of my point.