World Government: NOT Conspiracy - Walter Cronkite & Hillary Agrees! VIDEO HERE!
DriftingByTheStorm
Posts: 8,684
Anyone feel like discussing this video clip?
Hillary Clinton at the end congratulating Walter Cronkite for receiving his "GLOBAL GOVERNANCE" award.
Introductory speaker praising him for his lifetime commitment to "WORLD GOVERNMENT".
A SINGLE GLOBAL AUTHORITY!
Hmm.
:(
Hillary Clinton at the end congratulating Walter Cronkite for receiving his "GLOBAL GOVERNANCE" award.
Introductory speaker praising him for his lifetime commitment to "WORLD GOVERNMENT".
A SINGLE GLOBAL AUTHORITY!
Hmm.
:(
If I was to smile and I held out my hand
If I opened it now would you not understand?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Edit-Forgot to give congrats to to Hillary on her HUGE comeback tonight. Now the super delegates will be able to make her the winner of the nomination. Go Hillary.
...and McCain shall be our new Emperor
http://inthepresenttense.blogspot.com/
i am going to bump this 4 times a day until 12.12.2012
so get used to it.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Hey look.
Hillary Clinton wants to subvert the constitution and put you under the control of WOLRD Government.
No conspiracy needed.
She just said it.
:rolleyes:
If I opened it now would you not understand?
for those that are still in denial that not only is the pursuit of global government a reality, but the achievement of it is looking more probable by the decade.
THE PEOPLE TALKING ABOUT THIS ARE THE PEOPLE VYING FOR CONTROL OF YOUR GOVERNMENT.
And still,
no comments.
Huh?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
11 am bump.
bringing you a repetitive blend of conspiracy and more conspiracy, here in the Pit, every hour on the hour.
VOTE HILLARY CLINTON FOR WORLD GOVERNMENT!
Hey, i hear not everyone thinks its a bad idea, right?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
Any bets it's Hillary 08?
insane...
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
At a dinner for an association that promotes international cooperation and international law, they honour this Cronkite (famous journalist am I right?) for his staunch support of human right law and support for international peace through negotiation and cooperation. You dont like the idea of human rights or international law associated to that, I guess that's your call.
For the specific "points" in the OP, my responses are as follows:
Establishing world law as a way to peace. Scary indeed
He's basically on about war crimes and crimes against humanity, and that there should be a system through which they can be processed effectively.
And he also highlights how all nations must give up a little sovereignty in order to establish the institutions needed for world peace, of which international courts is a way of achieving.
Go nationalism. That has brought so much peace to the world.... :rolleyes:
As if having an international court for violations of human rights and "crimes against humanity" is any different than having laws to abide to within the countries. And this court can only be entered voluntarily by the countries in question.
In response to the Robertson qupte that anyone trying to achieve justice and order to the world before the messiah is to be regarded as pawns of satan... Dry wit there.
...or "You are a nice guy, and congratulations on this award" which IS what she said.
You seem to be totally over-reacting (now that's a shock) to an association that wants world peace through world law. Whether "world law" will achieve that or not is certainly up for debate. Whether "world law" CAN arguably mean and be interpreted as something sinister, that might be. But nothing of what Cronkite said here strikes me as "conspiratorial" or "sinister" unless you take the soundbyte where he talks about "world government" and add in your specific brand of how that must automatically mean your world police-state scenario.
Not impressed.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
So HOW THE FUCK CAN I WIN THEN?
THIS IS FUCKING STUPID.
I say over and over, the people in power want world government and they are working in a very quiet manner to achieve that with out you knowing it.
It all seems true. Hell this video would prove that Hillary supports it. You seem to want to make it out that she is just congratulating him on being a lover of peace. Bull fucking shit! He is getting an award from an organization that is DIRECTLY responsible for promoting WORLD GOVERNMENT. And she is speaking to that audience.
And yet, every time the argument is made by me or others that THEY ARE PUSHING WORLD GOVERNMENT
i get 1 of 2 basic lines of logic:
1. No they are not. You are a fucking idiot. Quit your conspiracy theory wet dream, they aren't trying for it, and it won't happen.
or
2. Yeah so what. Its just world government.
SO WHICH IS IT?
Some days it is flat denial.
Other days you try to explain it away as something that isn't really a problem.
World government will not bring about DICK for peace.
It will actualy institutionalize oppression. It won't be country vs. country, it will be Government Vs. The People.
IF IT WAS SO FUCKING GREAT, WHY AREN'T THEY ON TV AND OPENLY OUT IN THE PRESS JUST DISCUSSING IT, BRINGING DIALOGUE TO THE PEOPLE?
WHY WOULD THEY HIDE IT?
and by the way, this was not a public ceremony, and there was no internet video in 1999, so don't think they intended for YOU to see this!
So what is it?
Either you agree Global Government is a great thing, or you disagree.
But you can't sit here and tell me "its not a conspiracy" because you know what? IT PRETTY MUCH IS.
They are talking to EACHOTHER about it, but they sure as fuck aren't bringing the American public in to the dialogue.
And i could give two shits if Cronkite thinks it is some great idea becaues it will bring about peace and end suffering. Of COURSE a lot of them think they are doing the right thing. Hell Che Guevara and the Trotskyites thought THEY were doing the right thing too.
THere are always SOME people in a movement that genuinely believe in the cause as a good one ... but look how far they got ... DEAD.
The evil assholes ALWAYS take it over, it seems ... so why would you want to give them a GLOBAL platform to do so.
Sheesh.
That is why the founding fathers made a system that tried to give the people as much control as possible through representation and REPEATEDLY warned them about losing their vigilance or accepting encroachment on their liberty and soverign rights. They KNEW the tendency was for inertia to work in favor of expanding government and eroding personal rights, so they made a system which was by no means perfect but gave the people the best chance at maintaining control possible, provided they didn't get fat, lazy and stupid.
But look at us, fat lazy and stupid, and turning over our rights and liberties over to government at every chance we get.
Hell half of you are practicaly screaming for global government.
The other half still have their head up their ass that anyone would even consider trying such a "conspiracy theory".
Well, WAKE UP!
If I opened it now would you not understand?
but most importantly....
Ignorance is strength.
Everything is just face value...spend all your money...work harder... pay more taxes...
wake up repeat...
I should try digging a pit and putting my head in the sand...maybe I'll see something down there that would explain it...
Edit: I should add The federal reserve is real. The SPP/NAU is real.
Hand over your life and liberty to the government are you do just that...hand over your entire life's ownership.
People really do need to turn the damn TV off. it's pulping their brains into slop...
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
As here, Cronkite gets an award, talks about peace and how international law would help that, and gets a "happy birthday" greeting from Hillary.
You cant possibly draw the conclusions you do wihtout a tremendous bias from the get-go. And as for the "secrecy" of it. :rolleyes: . It wasn't a public adress, no. Private gatherings should apparently be banned. But if this is what they say "in private" then I am truly not at all worried for the global nazi police-state. Seriously.
You may still make the argument for conspiracy or not, but this video, unlessed viewed with maximum ill will and heavy bias, does not say what you say it does. Simple as that.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
http://video.google.ca/videoplay?docid=-70668650671711857&q=Phenomenon%3A+The+Secret+of+the+Federal+Reserve&total=4&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
"GLOBAL GOVERNANCE AWARD"
Introductory Speech:
"WORLD GOVERNMENT IS THE STRUCTURE NECESSARY FOR GLOBAL JUSTICE, YOU SIR HAVE BEEN A LIFE LONG ADVOCATE OF THIS PRINCIPLE"
I don't need to extrapolate bumpkiss.
Cronkite got the GLOBAL GOVERNANCE AWARD from the fucking WORLD FEDERALIST Association.
CLINTON then comes on to say, not happy birthday as you say but, "TONIGHT WE HONOR YOU FOR YOUR LIFE LONG COMMITMENT TO FIGHTING FOR THE WAY IT COULD BE."
So what if they dress it up under the guise of it being for the global good of "equity and justice" ... they ALWAYS dress it up. REMEMBER THE IRAQ WAR FOR FUCKS SAKE? Man, did they dress up the shit out of that. How about the FIRST Iraq war? What were we fighting for again? Babies thrown out of incubators and left to die? IT WAS ALL LIES! LIES LIES LIES!
I have no doubt that SOME of the people involved in the push for world government legitimately think they are doing the right thing.
I equally have no doubt that there are a bunch of em that have NO delusions about what they are doing, and simply use the subterfuge of "world peace" or "human rights" to justify their diabolic plans for global conquest.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
They make up names of projects that is 180 degree the opposite to what the intention is in order to camouflage it. There are examples of this over and over again.
Seriously, it's insane.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
THE ANSWER TO 1984 IS 1776!
If I opened it now would you not understand?
"You are a good guy, fighting the good fight". Sounds pretty run-of-the-mill congratulatory speech for life-long achievement to me. And the focus is on him being a great humanitarian and a good journalist bringing attention to the issues. Relevance? This wasn't even public as you yourself stated. Why do they lie to themselves in private? The war propaganda machine is something else entirely.
That is your opinion. Not fact. You are entitled to your opinion. You dont have to dress it up to look like fact when it isnt.
Whcih is my point here. Unless you have bias and agenda beforehand, there is nothing sinister or scary in that entire clip. They use the word "world government", but from what they say in connection to it and about it, it has nothing to do with your "world government" as outlined before.
As for your previous question of how you can "win", you'll win me over when you focus more on the facts, and less on sensationalist interpretations. Stop cutting all the "if", "might", and "perhaps" in order to add 5 exclamation marks. You did a good job on the rockefeller link to propaganda research. More of that, and less ramblings with 16 exclamation points, where you have to apply about half a ton of ill will and arguable premises to see the same way.
It's kinda like this norwegian tabloid, that was found to have like 14500 references in their database with the word "shock" in it. Use it for everything, and it loses it's potency. If they call everything a shock, I wouldn't know when there really WAS something to be shocked about, since they're always maxing out the scale for whatever trivialty.
Point is, that even if you ARE right in your assertions, that clip is nowhere near making that case for you. It's a hint at best.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
So bottom line we can at least agree that the elite ARE in FACT pushing for GLOBAL GOVERNMENT?
I like how you have repeatedly sidestepped the truth here by saying it is a "life time achievement" award.
It is the GLOBAL GOVERNANCE AWARD.
It isn't about peace, it isn't about equity.
Sure that is one of the reasons they seem to think it is a good idea.
But the award was not for peace or equity.
It was for GLOBAL GOVERNANCE.
So now the cat is out of the bag, right?
I don't have to come on here and bludgeon everyone over the head with all this "conspiracy theory" crap about global government, right?
You AT LEAST ACKNOWLEDGE that there IS a push on for it.
Now we just disagree over
1. Whether this is "good" or "bad"
2. If\How\When they will achieve it
3. The motives
Correct?
So i win a battle, but not the war?
???
If I opened it now would you not understand?
FUCK McCain
FUCK BILL-ARY
FUCK THE CFR
FUCK THE TRILATERAL COMMISSION
FUCK SKULL & BONES
FUCK THE MASONS
FUCK THE BUSH CRIME FAMILY
FUCK R.F.I.D.
FUCK NAFTA
FUCK CAFTA
FUCK THE NSA
FUCK THE DoD
FUCK THE AMERICAN UNION
FUCK THE NWO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ETC. ETC. ETC.
hmm...seems strange that the US so rigorously trades with this communist type of regime to the point that thew US is now held underneath it financially....
I'm a bit confused, can someone explain this to me?
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
that's easy,we have been sold out by the very people who were entrusted to make sure that didn't happen.
We have to have our fangs pulled so we willingly whimper into global government.
You have yet to show that this "global governance" ties at all to the stuff you have linked before. The word is not incriminating in itself.
However your use of the word "elite" indicates a unity I dont at all see. "Some of the elite" are pushing for global government, sure. Some people want more power to the EU, the UN and whathaveyou, certainly. The motives vary a lot, and the push is not universal nor unopposed within even the elite itself.
An award was given, a speech made, both of which are severely over-interpreted in my view, based on what was actually said.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
And i certainly don't deny that there is debate with in the circles of power about this either.
However, what is really getting to me is that i am first brushed off with staunch opposition to the notion that there is even some sort of group of elite pushing for world government.
Then i show you a video (and thank god this exists, or who knows where i'd be in my argument) that clearly shows that the same fucking shit bag politician who gets her ass driven to Bilderberg meetings and dropped off at the lower parking deck so as not to be seen, because it is illegal under US law for her to be meeting with foreigners discussing US policy anyhow ... i show you this video with her CLEARLY discussing her belief that -- and yes under the guise of the greater good for the downtrodden -- global government is something we urgently need and that Cronkite is a superduper fellow for pushing for it himself ...
i show you this video,
and all i get back, in so many words, is "SO?"
So again, my question is,
you do not see where a soverignty minded true blooded American should be getting up in arms over this !?!
We have SOMEONE WHO IS RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT OF AMERICA OPENLY (to a select group of shmucks) DISCUSSING WORLD GOVERNMENT!
I don't give one flying fuck what her motive is, or who she thinks she is helping by doing this, the fact that someone who is a US Senator and RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT is candidly discussing a belief in a supranational government entity that would supercede United States soverignty is HIGHLY OFFENSIVE to me.
:(
And as to your claim regarding how it is just a World Court.
Oh yeah sure. You think there is a reason Cronkite said that was PRIORTY #1 for the NWO Shills? HELL YES!
You don't even need the other parts of world government if you have a bloody freaking world court!
NOTHING ELSE MATTERS, really ... because you have just created a Court that can overule and overturn the freaking constitution!
Who cares if we have a constitution or any other US laws for that matter, if there is some Global Judge who can just say, "Nope. Under international law, you're a criminal!"
Hmm.
I'm calling a spade a spade.
Can you explain to me your position on World Government at least?
It sounds like you are for it.
I couldn't think of a more ridiculous notion.
Its even more intolerably stupid to me than communism.
It sounds great in theory, but practical application is beyond the pale.
:(
If I opened it now would you not understand?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
This is precisely what I mean by over-interpretation. In order to arrive at the same I have to acknowledge and agree to a host of other (in my view questionable) information and premises. No way can this speech be "scary" or revealing of anything like you indicate. That doesnt say that you are wrong by default, I do say that this clip here isn't any evidence either way.
I dont think anything said here is something to get up in arms over, no. Politicians can and should be opinionated and participating in organizations concerning themselves with politics and policy-questions. Comes with the territory. You can also detest and totally disagree with said politician, of course. And you are entitled to not be a fan of multilateralism, just as other people are entitled to be fans of it.
A president believing in international negotiations and mediation between the nations would be something new and scary wouldn't it?
And it seems you dont really know what the deal about the world court is. The proposed court is to adress crimes against humanity and war crimes. How is that bad? Nowhere has it been remotely proposed that it is a court that will generally outrank laws of the signing countries. The point is to have a permanent court that are already set up, so that when the next Rwanda happens, it doesnt take 5 years of bullshitting back and forth to get a process started. Not to mention that you then have a specialized court that can start dealing with it right away. Such a court, as all international organizations, will only function if the nations cooperate and agree to them.
As for the US constitution, according to yourself, they havent exactly needed a world court to ignore it, have they? So why would that be different?
As for "world government", that is a silly "for or against" question really. It is not a black and white issue. It's not something we have or not. It's many seperate issues, which do not at all fall neatly into two camps, or 3 or even 4. Being in favour of a world court, does not equal being in favour of general "world government". Being in favour of international negotiations on issues does not equal giving up sovereignty. And so on.
I am generally in favour of democracy, and preferably in smaller units. I am undecided how small the units need to be, but the main point is that people can influence their lives and surroundings. Beyond that however, there is need for some international coordination and cooperation for select global concerns. So an organization like the UN, or similar to it, is necessary as a forum where issues can be adressed. At least as long as the world is divided into militaristic, mutually hostile nation-states. Nationalism is a big killer, that is a point I agree with these federalists on. However, making an international level to correspond to the nations like the federal level corresponds to the US states sounds like a bad idea to me. Even well-intentioned, it's bad for democracy, which always is my major concern. But an international level, with a human rights court acknowledged by all signatory states doesn't sound that bad to me.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
The above statement is a pretty big perversion of what the clip presented suggests.
Hillary Clinton is speaking in praise of a man who just received an award for GLOBAL GOVERNANCE, presented by an introductory speaker who explicitly says the words "WORLD GOVERNMENT"
That has NOTHING ... NOTHING NOTHING NOTHING to do with "multilateralism" or "international negotiations"...
Why the hell are you so unwilling to concede that what is being directly discussed in NO uncertain terms here is the attempt to get the ball rolling on WORLD GOVERNMENT!
Cronkite's entire fucking speech is about this.
He is talking about the HUGE undertaking of convincing the world and the hard sell to Americans specificaly of getting them to concede soverign rights in order to build a WORLD GOVERNMENT.
This isn't some stupid fucking policy negotiation at a round table.
They want to set up WORLD GOVERNMENT, Dan.
But in 10 responses, you have only half admitted this a whopping one time.
What gives?
If I opened it now would you not understand?
we are a god-less nation now too,the bible talks about world government and the beast system they are/have been erecting for some time now.but so many can't read the writing on the wall.
If I opened it now would you not understand?
If I opened it now would you not understand?