Saw this recently:
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years...201081fat1.html
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/349469_force31.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Real_ID

Every day there's something new. We had updates on this stuff just in the last couple of days. When will it end?

I've been wondering about something lately (and I'm just gonna talk off the top O' me head):

The US is overextending its military in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's now trying to start a war with Iran. If Israel and Gaza go after each other, the US will send troops.

At home, people are being pushed to the limit with new laws, more restrictions on freedoms, and the final trashing of democracy and the constitution. At the same time, we're in danger of financial collapse because of corporate and banking mismanagement and scandals like the sub-prime loan thing (which is affecting economies around the world now). This coupled with the financial strain of a 9 trillion dollar debt, a 500 billion dollar deficit, and a billion-dollar-a-day war could be setting the stage for a major financial collapse. Government oppression and financial distress is good recipe for riots and social disorder.

My question: are we being prepared for international intervention and reorganization? Are we being 'set up' for an 'emergency' that would require international troops to come in a restore order and restructure the government? In other words, is the U.S. on the road to becoming an occupied country of the New World Order?

We get a bungling idiot who causes so much trouble that it can't possibly be fixed, and then the NWO rides in to the rescue and everybody praises the savior? It wouldn't matter how screwed up things were under the NWO, it would be better than the social and financial collapse we're headed for.

I'm really worried that the US is becoming a dangerously fascist police-state ... but sometimes I wonder if this is just a set up.

While religion may have a bad name, it is the only backbone that can support our civilization. Religions are on the defense allot and so too will you see our civilization suffer.

If you want to see us destroy ourselves, just attack our religious organizations and activities.

You have got to be kidding SM, are you blind and deaf? Religion has caused more strife on this planet than any other single thing. There have been more wars either in the name of some religion, or thinly disguised as something else but controlled by the church than any other source of conflict.
The churches have tried to control governments, people, industry, you name it.
How can you possibly make a statement like that!

Are you sure about that?

An impossible question to answer without first establishing that there is a NWO. Certainly there are many factions...some secretive and some not...operating within the sphere of politics. I would even be open to the possibility that some factions may even have key players strategically placed along a global network of politically influencing factors...that is to say...within organizations like major banking, industrial, military, science & technology, etc. But a true NWO would require a far-reaching, complex and concerted effort among one or more factions. So the question remains...is there one? Or is a there simply a mass of disorganized, competing factions vying for power in world politics?

If its worth the paper that the Constitution is printed on...

But would they be needed? Would they be able to get there in time before Israel had already won the war? Where would they station themselves? A multinational military force can be useful in some situtations, in others it just complicates things.

I knew I was going to get a reaction like that. But no, I am dead serious. Any effort to wipe out religion will result in the extinction of man kind. You must remember that religion's are not people. They are ideals. "Love thy neighborer"- 10 commandments, "Treat others as you would like them to treat you"- Buddhism, these are what a religion is. It is not the rabbi that hides guns. It is not a man that seeks to convince children to be suicide bombers.

Why? because in all the talk of religions being based on faith and ignorance, they were wrong. That they could be accused of this only shows that religions are still in the stone age with regard to development. Like a blackhole this undeveloped area of man's knowledge is sucking in everything around it. All the research into the brain, antidepressants and human disorders and so on is costing multi billions in an effort to resolve this blackhole that is ripping humanity apart. Every time someone has a psychological situation that deeply effects the person, every time a person has uncontrolled emotional situations, every time people dully try to figure out the difference between right and wrong, every time an insane man is let go undetected as he seeks to harm people..., humanity shrieks as the blackhole rips deeper and shreds us alive.

Technology gives us a tall pedestal to stand on. But religion keeps the pedestal steady and safe. Have you heard anyone ever express concern for how man could wipe himself out? That is because religion is lacking a sufficient presence to keep man on track.

I realize many of you are quite sore about the many abuses religions have gotten into. There was a reason they formed that has been lost. All the abusses have stacked and stacked until "death to religious institutions" seems the only way to go. But under it all is your life line. Barried in all the crimes is something you need more then any techincal advance we could ever have, because it means everything to you. Faith is an importaint word, because it represents a promise to fill in the missing gaps that man could never achieve without science. It was science that was missing when the word faith came into use because people could see religion was being held together by ducktake and hope. They tried to covel up this lack of understanding with lies that could only hurt man deeply.

It is a shame that by the time science began to catch up to what was needed to make the big descoveries into religion, it found only the lies religion had buried inself in with and so science denied religion.

There is a way to spot any person of ill will long before he can harm people. There is a way to cure any and all insanities. Increase IQ by leaps and bounds. Cure any and all undesirable traits you have. Understand why you have those dreams and why they can effect you. People can live in peace, free of terror and evil and evil impules. The answer is religion. More correctly the answer is you. For that is the definition of religion, it is not the study of god or gods, it is the study of you and how you interacte with the world around you. People have been waiting allong time for religion to come though with the promise. I know how you feel. But don't do it, don't crush religions. Just demand that they stay honest and back up what they say with proof. Some day that act of kindlness will be repaid many times over. And when it does, it will give you the answer you are looking for, even the answers to the questions at the top of this thread.

Religion is a 'not-so-subtle' attempt at control…
Whether that be in making sense of the World around us or an attempt to get people to think the same.

Religion attempts to control what the masses see as reality… Kind of like Human Science, except that Human Science explains the World around us in better detail than a any religion does imho

Religion also has the tendency to polarize groups of people, thus creating fertile ground for Conflict… WAR… ~rore

No, I'm not. Israel has demonstrated repeatedly that they can handle the problems as long as they have the weapons. However, it HAS been discussed ...

http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=18791

http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/troops-cr...8995408880.html


and



This has historically been a precursor to the use of US troops.

http://www.rense.com/general63/sdu.htm
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/810986/posts
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0620/p02s02-uspo.html

Certainly the idea has been discussed.

IW2B2: When I say New World Order, I'm using the term very, very loosely. I'm not talking about the alleged conspiracy over the last thousand years to control the planet. I'm actually thinking of something a bit more mundane, a bit more practical, and a bit more realistic.

In my opinion, there seems to be a movement to coalesce, to bring people under more unified rules: to unite people under a single government. The League of Nations, NATO, The United Nations, the EU, and so on seem to be efforts to end the wars between nations by uniting them. However, the superpowers will be the nations who are least likely to want to subjugate their authority because they have the most to lose and the least to gain. The question then is: How do we get the most powerful nations to agree to be PART of a union of nations without allowing those superpowers to run over the rest?

This is all I'm thinking of.

Ya, I know. We can see the evil, we can see the lies, we can see the corruption, we can see conflict in the name of religion... but you can't see what I am talking about.

I tried... :cry:

Scottman, with all due respect, I have to agree with Rore and Dundee on this one ... and I'm not so sure what you're talking about either.

It is quite all right. No offense has been taken. I am simply not a religious preacher. And, I am talking to a crowd that has rightly been offended by the acts of people in the name of religion.

I posted a comment on religion because I believe it is related to the topic. How I came to that conclusion is my own. My views are not in favor of what passes as religion here on Earth at this time anyway.

It is fruitless to talk about something using works and and names that have double meanings. What I mean and what you mean. They are not the same.

Truth is that for what I am talking about there is no need to put up a defense. It is good enough to say that we will learn more about ourselves. It is simply my opinion that in the process the word religion will be redefined. If you think that the current concept of religion has been around sense it's origin then you are mistaken. It has been altered. In it's current form it is meaningless.

You could also be correct, Andrew. The issue is far too complex to address from any one point of view. It could only be answered, I suppose, by examining the situation in reality rather than hypothetically.



I understand, Kirin...which is why I conceded the existence of present day factions vying for power along a global network.



Would unity necessarily be a bad thing?

Well Scottman,
I guess we will just have to agree to disagree then, I have not seen much that redeems the church. And I can see much to accuse it of evil. But if you are blind to that, of perhaps choose to ignore it in the name of some greater ideal, well then thats exactly the kind of thinking that has justified the evils of the church in the past, and prevented it from being accountable for its evil. Some evil is done, but hey thats OK, just seek forgiveness from God and its OK now, you don't have to be accountable.

I have said it before, I have no problem with a persons individual belief, faith, of spirituality. But organized religion is the root of most evil, get rid of it, and we would be better off.

It sounds corny, but John Lennon nailed it in my opinion when he wrote Imagine. The world he sings about is my idea of heaven...

Not at all. I hope it would be a good thing ... but then I'm probably more imagining Star Trek's Federation more than some kind of global fascist state.

I'm not even sure that the current problems are even related to any kind of attempt to bring the US under control of a global government.

If I had to put a name to it: I'd say I'm just feeling some anxiety. I'm looking at forces that are almost entirely out of control.

To go back to my original post:
There are laws being passed now that seem to regulate every part of our lives ... but it seems like there's nothing I can do about that.

Cops are beating people up in the street ... but it seems like there's nothing I can do about that either.

Real ID: to be 100% totally completely honest ... I don't have a problem with a national ID. I think we SHOULD have one. I think we should have a standardized driver's license system and a standardized education system too. I personally honestly think we should have ONE police force. You're either a cop or you're not, and if you're a cop, it doesn't matter where you go: you're still a cop. Japan is like that, and I think it's pretty good. A standardized ID would make it easier for Americans to get Japanese driver's licenses. A national police system would make it easier to track interstate criminals. We need a unified police system and an end to BS jurisdiction disputes.

Still ... I dunno ... I think there are things that have to change.

I don't think it would be bad if the US were no longer a superpower: if the world were one big country. No more wars for land or oil. And terrorists could be prosecuted as criminals. Might not be all bad ... depending on the type of government.

I just kinda thinking out loud about things. I'd hate to see us as a society with body-armored machine-gun toting police officers on every corner.

That is a very poor interpretation. You see no group is made up of one person. Look in the bible and find me a crime that you can take them to court on. You can't. There is a difference between the acts of a person and a group. You can take people to court for a crime, but you can not take the religion to court.

You can not blame every person with faith for what a handful or perhaps even one person did. It should not be hard to see that no major religion can be taken to trial for their beliefs, nor do their beliefs warrant "an act of Evil". So if someone commits "an act of evil", is it the religion or the person that did it?

There is something about religions you may not have noticed. No major religion believes in destructive conduct. Every religion that did so has vanished quickly. So where do these acts come from if they are not in the religion beliefs?

This is something I feel is being overlooked. It is easy for a member of a religion to defy their won religious beliefs and act on his/her own or in a small group of people with other interests.

If a person can, all on his won, decide to be destructive, do the other people that do not share his ideas, but do share his religion deserve to be forced to believe something else?

Please have another look at religions and the beliefs of the religions. The independent (and destructive) acts of people are not just attached to religions. This kind of independent act is found in all groups of large size. I am not saying religions have always been kind, but they get attacked like any destructive group the moment they do.

If you did remove the religion, I have a surprise for you. The people that didn't listen to the religious code will also not listen to any other code of good conduct. The theme of the act will change, but the acts will continue. Removal of the religion will not change the person because they were already in conflict with the religion to begin with.

"People have accused me and my family of conspiracy to set up a one world government. Well there is no conspiracy. Nor can there be any, as the definition of conspiracy implies a secretive effort. And am telling you now, it can not be a conspiracy because I admit that it is true that I am working to bring the world under a one world government. So it can't be a conspiracy, because I admit to it." -David Rockefeller Memoirs 2005

"Revolts all have one thing in common. If you ever see a riot or revolt you can know this with out even looking. You can know that people will revolt when they no longer feel they can get fair justice.

When a black man gets unfairly beaten by police on a corner and is not able to get fair and fast judicial recourse, you will know what to expect.

When a society begins to believe that it's justice system will not provide fair protection to it's lawful criticizes, you can know that it is a ticking time bomb just waiting for a little spark to set it off.

This is a law of people and is true of any society." circa 1969.

SM posts: Look in the bible and find me a crime that you can take them to court on.

Rore posts: Stoning a woman to death for being declared a witch maybe?
==============================
SM posts: No major religion believes in destructive conduct.

Rore posts: I suggest you start actually reading the Bible SM.
The Bible is filled with advocating destructive conduct when the religious are face to face with The Enemy’.
Even the New Testament promotes the death of the Evil Ones, whatever shape they may take, which is usually the shape antithesis to that of the religion's belief system…
=================================
SM posts: It is easy for a member of a religion to defy their won [own] religious beliefs

Rore posts: And just as easy for the religion acting as one to do the same SM, as has been evidenced throughout modern history…
==========================================
SM posts: Please have another look at religions and the beliefs of the religions

Rore posts: Hmmm yes… The 3 ‘Western’ religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) believe in the same ancestral God yet have been at war with each other for over 1300 hundred years. Yep, that makes the case for the benevolence of these Great and Humane institutions…
==============================================

SM posts: If you did remove the religion, I have a surprise for you.

Rore posts: Pure speculation on your part SM…

You are no more in the possession of a higher wisdom than I or anyone else I’ve met on this forum…imho