What's at question really is the interpretation of those facts, individually they mean one thing, maybe nothing, pulled together a bigger picture starts to emerge that's not quite what you were expecting to see, it's certainly not one of a friendly benevolent Government looking after the citizenry that's for sure - the fact that politicians can even be lobbied is indicative of that.
Cherry picking facts and ignoring anything contradictory doesn't form the basis of an argument. Starting out with something to prove then picking evidence that supports it is not scientific. Ignoring occam's razor is usually a bad idea.
Cherry picking facts and ignoring anything contradictory doesn't form the basis of an argument. Starting out with something to prove then picking evidence that supports it is not scientific. Ignoring occam's razor is usually a bad idea.
You're quite right, centralisation of power; increases in unnecessary security measures; guns bans; central banks having extra-governmental powers; talks about 'world government' at the 'G' meetings (G7, G20 et-al); Climate summits talking about the centralisation of authority to manage 'climate change'; carbon tax - carbon credits being a trade-able commodity.
I can quite see how using Occam's Razor in that instance could lead to only one conclusion
I would have thought it was quite obvious that a film with a limit run-time has to "cherry picked" information as you put it, in order to make its case within that window of opportunity, so I'm not sure why you would even bother using that as a counter argument.
As for the claim against the evidence... there's actually a surprising amount of evidence to support what's being claimed in this particular movie.. As I said above... the interpretation is up for question, as it is with Global Warming - now 'climate change'; the effectiveness of airport security; the effectiveness of pedestrian surveillance; telecoms lobbying against net neutrality, Pharmaceutical companies being now immune from prosecution over vaccines, etc.. etc.. the list is endless and all of it equally 'subjective' in interpretation.
As for the claim against the evidence... there's actually a surprising amount of evidence to support what's being claimed in this particular movie..
There is a surprising amount of evidence to support anything.
Since we're all spouting insane anti government bullshit in here let me bring up some Discordianism to support my point; it's a made up religion from the 50s. The interesting, relevant part is a fundamental tenet of their beliefs, the law of fives:
The Law of Fives is summarized in the Principia Discordia:
The Law of Fives states simply that: All things happen in fives, or are divisible by or are multiples of five, or are somehow directly or indirectly appropriate to 5
The Law of Fives is never wrong.
now, it was made up to be complietely silly and ridiculous. It's also true. There's an extraordinary amount of evidence to support everything ever going back to the number 5.
If i look hard enough i can connect everything in this thread to the number five.
It's probably integral to how the world banks launder money, too, considering there are six continents as taught in greece, spain, and italy (likely locations for the headquarters) and nobody is running any money through antarctica so...
35:35 "Not because the bill of rights was given to us by government, but because our bill of rights our constitution enshrines these are inalienable rights given to us by God"
SEE those crazy Oligarchist left God out of the painting! Cut him right out! Stuffed the whole canvas with their newly formed government. But they didn't get Jesus, you can clearly see him exiting the room after delivering the documents!
That's enough right wing conspiracy for one day...
I don't know what you guys are talking about but it's pretty clear to me that any president the US has is going to be subordinate to the La-Li-Lu-Le-Lo and their mad use of the SOP System of nanomachines to influence the War Economy.
There is a surprising amount of evidence to support anything...
That's exactly the point... so using that as an position to refute something isn't a counter argument, it's simply being glib and disingenuous for the sake of it, because as you point out, one could argue any point about anything if one was so inclined.
Alex Jones highly anticipated documentary Fall of Pepe Silvia: The Presidency of Barack Obama boldly lifts the lid and unveils the fraud behind the mail and how Carol and HR are using their newest, and slickest ever puppet to destroy the last vestiges of Americas freedom, Constitution and economy, all while helping the bankers loot the country clean.
The film exposes the agenda that Obama was put in place to accomplish, a world government allied with a bank of the world run by globalist eugenicists hell-bent on destroying Americas first world status and replacing it with a hollow shell of tyranny.
The mind control, the television programming, and all the media talking points that serve to reinforce the image of Brand Obama are laid bare, unveiling the naked truth, as legendary author and documentary film maker John Pilger recently discussed, that Obama is nothing more than a corporate marketing creation, a skilled hypnotist using seductive tools of propaganda race, gender and class to hoodwink the masses into accepting his rhetoric while ignoring the contradiction of his actions.
I'm off the Big Shell this weekend Kaskad, me and Pliskin have a date with some computer viruses and the computer that is training super baby soldiers to be the new army of the world!
a world government allied with a bank of the world run by globalist eugenicists hell-bent on destroying Americas first world status and replacing it with a hollow shell of tyranny.
I know this is BS since I'm not in office yet.
Oh, but it wouldn't be destroying America's first world status, but bringing the status quo to first world levels all over. to-may-to to-mah-to I know.
We do so love starvation and lack of clean water elsewhere so we can say how good we have it, all the while feigning guilt over the case.
Hollow shell of tyranny, hollow shell of democracy, pick a label, so long as you can buy what you want, and spend your time off basically how you want how many people would really notice?
semi-sarcasm aside:
What is the big fear of global governance, or at least some more direct mutual cooperation between nations world wide?
I'd like to see an intersection between those who would "support world peace" and those who would "oppose globalization".
Is the root fear that those who might Run such a hypotehtical government wouldn't be like you? Does the idea of thousands of scattered nation states warring at their borders sound like a good idea?
I'm not exactly FOR a single governing body for the whole earth, as just maintaining countries seems to be difficult enough for people, but I also recognize that there are few places who can be wholly self sufficient.
Its been said that ALL wars are fought/started due to population density, leading to resource scarcity.
You have two distinct options when where you live doesn't have what your people need: Trade for it, or take it.
If your neighbors don't feel like trading, your options are do without, or take it. Things like food, water, and space tend to get taken.
We're at a point where many countries depend on others for one product or another. Admittedly many of these are technically luxuries, but having a consistent form of trade, and a method for inter-country grievance redress could be useful. Maybe we'd actually care what was happening "across the pond" so to speak
The fear over globalization is generated by knowing that humans will never be infallible. And it also doesn't help when people see first hand how they lost their manufacturing jobs because of crap like NAFTA.
I bet a lot of people here would probably love what that Zeitgeist Addendum proposes up above there with the Venus Project stuff. I don't know how that could ever work out, but anyway...
The problem is humans will always like to be better than other humans. You can't trust an Oligarchy type of system where a select few run the rest of our lives for us. Someone always wants more power than someone else. Socialism sounds fine and dandy until you realize being equal sounds kinda boring. That Venus Project thing in zeitgeist doesn't answer this. Someone will always want to own their own car for example.
Sure a Star Trek future would be nice...but the odds are greatly against this as evidenced by the sheer number of greedy corporations on the planet. These greedy corporations are what will run your new singular globalized government. Instead of Star Trek you'll most likely get 1984.
Will I be able to still draw znd model in the new world order? Because if I can't . I am joining up with the rebels.
In the new world order, Bobby Kotick will be the president of the world videgames company, which will be a subsidiary of the world government and the only games you will be making will be the yearly sports titles, Football 69, Soccer 66 and Torture Political Prisoners for Fun 6. You can quote me on that in a few years.
Also, indie game development will be punished by imprisonment and torture.
Replies
Cherry picking facts and ignoring anything contradictory doesn't form the basis of an argument. Starting out with something to prove then picking evidence that supports it is not scientific. Ignoring occam's razor is usually a bad idea.
I can quite see how using Occam's Razor in that instance could lead to only one conclusion
I would have thought it was quite obvious that a film with a limit run-time has to "cherry picked" information as you put it, in order to make its case within that window of opportunity, so I'm not sure why you would even bother using that as a counter argument.
As for the claim against the evidence... there's actually a surprising amount of evidence to support what's being claimed in this particular movie.. As I said above... the interpretation is up for question, as it is with Global Warming - now 'climate change'; the effectiveness of airport security; the effectiveness of pedestrian surveillance; telecoms lobbying against net neutrality, Pharmaceutical companies being now immune from prosecution over vaccines, etc.. etc.. the list is endless and all of it equally 'subjective' in interpretation.
There is a surprising amount of evidence to support anything.
Since we're all spouting insane anti government bullshit in here let me bring up some Discordianism to support my point; it's a made up religion from the 50s. The interesting, relevant part is a fundamental tenet of their beliefs, the law of fives:
now, it was made up to be complietely silly and ridiculous. It's also true. There's an extraordinary amount of evidence to support everything ever going back to the number 5.
If i look hard enough i can connect everything in this thread to the number five.
It's probably integral to how the world banks launder money, too, considering there are six continents as taught in greece, spain, and italy (likely locations for the headquarters) and nobody is running any money through antarctica so...
SEE those crazy Oligarchist left God out of the painting! Cut him right out! Stuffed the whole canvas with their newly formed government. But they didn't get Jesus, you can clearly see him exiting the room after delivering the documents!
That's enough right wing conspiracy for one day...
[ame]
Alex Jones highly anticipated documentary Fall of Pepe Silvia: The Presidency of Barack Obama boldly lifts the lid and unveils the fraud behind the mail and how Carol and HR are using their newest, and slickest ever puppet to destroy the last vestiges of Americas freedom, Constitution and economy, all while helping the bankers loot the country clean.
The film exposes the agenda that Obama was put in place to accomplish, a world government allied with a bank of the world run by globalist eugenicists hell-bent on destroying Americas first world status and replacing it with a hollow shell of tyranny.
The mind control, the television programming, and all the media talking points that serve to reinforce the image of Brand Obama are laid bare, unveiling the naked truth, as legendary author and documentary film maker John Pilger recently discussed, that Obama is nothing more than a corporate marketing creation, a skilled hypnotist using seductive tools of propaganda race, gender and class to hoodwink the masses into accepting his rhetoric while ignoring the contradiction of his actions.
so much irony.
I'm off the Big Shell this weekend Kaskad, me and Pliskin have a date with some computer viruses and the computer that is training super baby soldiers to be the new army of the world!
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]ZEITGEIST: ADDENDUM[/FONT]
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=7065205277695921912#
Zeitgeist, The Movie
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-594683847743189197#
http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/
I know this is BS since I'm not in office yet.
Oh, but it wouldn't be destroying America's first world status, but bringing the status quo to first world levels all over.
We do so love starvation and lack of clean water elsewhere so we can say how good we have it, all the while feigning guilt over the case.
Hollow shell of tyranny, hollow shell of democracy, pick a label, so long as you can buy what you want, and spend your time off basically how you want how many people would really notice?
semi-sarcasm aside:
What is the big fear of global governance, or at least some more direct mutual cooperation between nations world wide?
I'd like to see an intersection between those who would "support world peace" and those who would "oppose globalization".
Is the root fear that those who might Run such a hypotehtical government wouldn't be like you? Does the idea of thousands of scattered nation states warring at their borders sound like a good idea?
I'm not exactly FOR a single governing body for the whole earth, as just maintaining countries seems to be difficult enough for people, but I also recognize that there are few places who can be wholly self sufficient.
Its been said that ALL wars are fought/started due to population density, leading to resource scarcity.
You have two distinct options when where you live doesn't have what your people need: Trade for it, or take it.
If your neighbors don't feel like trading, your options are do without, or take it. Things like food, water, and space tend to get taken.
We're at a point where many countries depend on others for one product or another. Admittedly many of these are technically luxuries, but having a consistent form of trade, and a method for inter-country grievance redress could be useful. Maybe we'd actually care what was happening "across the pond" so to speak
I bet a lot of people here would probably love what that Zeitgeist Addendum proposes up above there with the Venus Project stuff. I don't know how that could ever work out, but anyway...
The problem is humans will always like to be better than other humans. You can't trust an Oligarchy type of system where a select few run the rest of our lives for us. Someone always wants more power than someone else. Socialism sounds fine and dandy until you realize being equal sounds kinda boring. That Venus Project thing in zeitgeist doesn't answer this. Someone will always want to own their own car for example.
Sure a Star Trek future would be nice...but the odds are greatly against this as evidenced by the sheer number of greedy corporations on the planet. These greedy corporations are what will run your new singular globalized government. Instead of Star Trek you'll most likely get 1984.
Ahahaha Zeitgeist.
Not when the cyborgs take over, no.
They're jealous of our feelings.
In the new world order, Bobby Kotick will be the president of the world videgames company, which will be a subsidiary of the world government and the only games you will be making will be the yearly sports titles, Football 69, Soccer 66 and Torture Political Prisoners for Fun 6. You can quote me on that in a few years.
Also, indie game development will be punished by imprisonment and torture.
I aint no la-li-lu-le....
thought this one was better. Way more indi.