[Jaime_Souviens]

ridenrain ridenrain:

So can I set all my digital appliances to past 1999 now?

[Hardy]

Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:

If you wanted to, you could follow up with this in Karl Popper, and his various writings on the 'Open Society'.

One of the most brilliant authors of the 20th century. Leftists and academics have been trying to destroy his reputation for 60 years.

Some rightists as well, he is anathema to the neoplatonists of the (neocon) Straussian school.

[Jaime_Souviens]

Hardy Hardy:

Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:

If you wanted to, you could follow up with this in Karl Popper, and his various writings on the 'Open Society'.

One of the most brilliant authors of the 20th century. Leftists and academics have been trying to destroy his reputation for 60 years.

Some rightists as well, he is anathema to the neoplatonists of the (neocon) Straussian school.

Fair enough.

Which is, as far as I'm concerned, the highest kind of endorsement. ---Anybody thinker reviled by the right and the left is my kind of thinker.

My point was that Ruxpercnd's post, (in addition to being well-written, with a nice touch at the end), seemed to shadow Popper's gereral ideas.

[Hardy]

Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:

Hardy Hardy:

Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:

If you wanted to, you could follow up with this in Karl Popper, and his various writings on the 'Open Society'.

One of the most brilliant authors of the 20th century. Leftists and academics have been trying to destroy his reputation for 60 years.

Some rightists as well, he is anathema to the neoplatonists of the (neocon) Straussian school.

Fair enough.

Which is, as far as I'm concerned, the highest kind of endorsement. ---Anybody thinker reviled by the right and the left is my kind of thinker.

My point was that Ruxpercnd's post, (in addition to being well-written, with a nice touch at the end), seemed to shadow Popper's gereral ideas.

The Open Society and Its Enemies was the first (only?) two volume work of nonfiction which I ever found interesting enough to finish. Whether or not you agree with his interpretation of Plato, it is one of those milestones of intellectual history which is guaranteed to make you a better person for having read it.

[Jaime_Souviens]

Hardy Hardy:

Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:

Hardy Hardy:

Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:

If you wanted to, you could follow up with this in Karl Popper, and his various writings on the 'Open Society'.

One of the most brilliant authors of the 20th century. Leftists and academics have been trying to destroy his reputation for 60 years.

Some rightists as well, he is anathema to the neoplatonists of the (neocon) Straussian school.

Fair enough.

Which is, as far as I'm concerned, the highest kind of endorsement. ---Any thinker reviled by the right and the left is my kind of thinker.

My point was that Ruxpercnd's post, (in addition to being well-written, with a nice touch at the end), seemed to shadow Popper's gereral ideas.

The Open Society and Its Enemies was the first (only?) two volume work of nonfiction which I ever found interesting enough to finish. Whether or not you agree with his interpretation of Plato, it is one of those milestones of intellectual history which is guaranteed to make you a better person for having read it.

I think Popper's spot on regarding Plato.

In fact, one of the side things I picked up from Popper was how to spot the false-democrat-aristocrat. His characterization of Plato also applies to the Ignatieffs, Kerrys, Liberals and Democrats of today as well.



As far as literary tastes go, I can bear to read no fiction, only non-fiction.

[Hardy]

Jaime_Souviens Jaime_Souviens:

I think Popper's spot on regarding Plato.

There are three current interpretations of Plato:
(1) The light one: that Plato's ruling elite were those who were most ethical and uncorruptable (traditional)
(2) The darker one: that Plato's ruling elite were in many ways superior, but that ethics was not the emphasis (Popper)
(3) The nihilistic, completely sinister one: that Plato's ruling elite were intelligent and amoral (Strauss)

The problem with (1) is that Plato never laid out his views on ethics in the clear, logical sort of way that Aristotle did. Once you have "the lovers of truth" (the elite) telling "the necessary lie," the ethical problems become messy, and Plato doesn't resolve these sufficiently to avoid criticism on the grounds given by Popper. Conventional wisdom is that Plato considered the rule of the wise to be ideal but impractical, and settled for the rule of law as the best feasible alternative, but this doesn't placate his harshest critics.

Strauss' interpretation is strangest of all -- that the blackest possible reading of Plato is appropriate, and that the sinister interpretation of Plato is, in all meaningful ways, an accurate reflection of life and society. For him, the "necessary lies" are primarily religion and nationalism, and these are foisted off on the people in order to ensure the triumph of the culture of the deluded "gentlemen" (Plato's silver class) over that of the worthless "vulgar" (Plato's iron class), who are considered to be little more than animals. Why anyone should care which triumphs, in a universe which is supposed to have no deity and no possibility of any natural system of ethics, is unclear.

I think that we are mostly in agreement in our interpretations of Plato, but realize that our view is not the only one around.

[conjuredcrisis]

A New World Order? - Newsweek Article 2003
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3068688/site/newsweek/

Russia's New World Order - Time Magazine Jul. 2006
http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazin ... 26,00.html

New world order of polluters - New Scientist July 2006
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/ear ... uters.html

[Ruxpercnd]

Wow! I am learning so much here... I didn't realize that Canadians could be so intellectual.

I always thought Plato anticipated Quantum Theory with his world of ideas which he was more consumed with than Socratic Ethics.

Perhaps Karl Popper was disturbed by the 'ism's ideogies being supported with some sort of social science theory. So he wanted to clarify the concept of science.

Any philosopher contributes to a new order of reason by providing alternatives to absolute theocratic dogma.

If we are looking for world conspiracies, then I wonder if anyone could point to any past world wide conspiracies the surprised us. Seems to me that most World Problems and Wars are the result of folly and simple despotism.

I don't think that policy should be confused with conspiracy. For example, George F. Kennan helped define the Cold War with his policy statement of "Containment". This became policy, not conspiracy. Hence, we currently form new "Containment" type policies, not to clandestinely conspire, but to provide a rational direction for the world.

Well, perhaps if someone implements a policy without telling anyone, then that may appear to be some type of conspiracy.

[Mustang1]

conjuredcrisis conjuredcrisis:

A New World Order? - Newsweek Article 2003
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3068688/site/newsweek/

Nope.

$1:

“Russia's New World Order - Time Magazine Jul. 2006
http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazine/article/0,13005,901060710-1209926,00.html”

But, not a New World Order. NO global conspiracy here either.

$1:

“New world order of polluters - New Scientist July 2006
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/ear ... uters.html”

Are you just googling “New World Order” and then posting whatever turns up? Laaaaaaazy.

Cue the next round of “researchin’ via web surfin’”!

[Dayseed]

conjuredcrisis conjuredcrisis:

A New World Order? - Newsweek Article 2003
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3068688/site/newsweek/

Russia's New World Order - Time Magazine Jul. 2006
http://www.time.com/time/europe/magazin ... 26,00.html

New world order of polluters - New Scientist July 2006
http://www.newscientist.com/channel/ear ... uters.html

Conjuredcrisis,

I read your articles. I'm not sure where they mention the imminent installation of a global government nor where they decry a unified world. Perhaps instead of just posting links, you could provide the link, a summary of the link and the rationale you used in deciding it supported your argument.

As it is, it seems to me you've just gone websurfin' for "New world order" and pasted links from credible newssources without any further thought.

Surely to God you're trying to make a point, right?

[conjuredcrisis]

LIPSTICK IMPERIALISM AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER: http://www.un.org/documents/ecosoc/cn6/ ... allagh.htm

Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Marrack Goulding said that conventional weapons -- easy to produce and difficult to control -- "made a mockery of the new world order". He also said that if the First Committee was looking for a theme for its work it should be the urgent need to rid the world of land-mines, which the Secretary-General had called "a slow-motion weapon of mass destruction". -http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/1995/19951027.gadis30.31.html

Global Day of Mobilisation For a New World Order Against Poverty, War and Unilateralism - http://www.un-ngls.org/cso/cso6/appeal.htm

The CFR, funded by Wall Street and the Rockefellers after WW II, is an organization openly sworn to destroying American national sovereignty in favor of world government. They have acted as the de-facto “secret team” in managing U.S. domestic and foreign policy, orchestrating wars like Vietnam and the first Gulf War.. Almost all executives in the CIA and State Department have been members of the CFR, whether it was Dean Rusk, Allen Dulles and Robert McNamara during Vietnam or Richard Armitage and George Tenet during the crimes of 9-11.

The CFR has acted as the dominant roundtable group pushing for a Panamerican Union by 2010 which would dissolve national borders and unite Mexico, Canada, and America under a single currency, with biometric ID cards and GPS-tracked vehicles on camera-strewn superhighways.

Since 1954 the Bilderberg has served as the central brain of the New World Order, the major secret gathering for Globalist agents from across the globe. Bilderberg chairmen like Prince Bernhard and David Rockefeller have pushed for total global government, eugenics population control, engineering wars, and controlling the worldwide economy. Top politicians from America and Europe also undergo a grooming process at the Bilderberg. Bill Clinton went in 1991 as Rockefeller’s personal guest, and Tony Blair attended in 1993 before becoming Prime Minister. John Kerry attended in 2000, and John Edwards did two weeks before becoming the VP nominee in 2004.

Major members of the media, such as editors from the Economist, NY Times, Newsweek, Washington Post, US News and World Report are regular attendees. Yet they rarely, if ever, mention the proceedings.

Major media outlets like the BBC admit the Bilderberg is planning for a one-world currency, bank, and army. Articles in Reuters and the Financial Times of London have admitted the existence of the Bilderberg,
their grooming of politicians, and their secret plans for world governance. If these mainstream media reporters can admit the major role of the Bilderberg in shaping world affairs, why do average Joes have such a tough time accepting it even as a possibility?

How can people seriously ignore the role of the Trilateral Commission, the brainchild of Globalist masters David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski? This is the same Brzezinski who helped direct the first CIA funds to bin Laden, and in his book Between Two Ages called for a technotronic society with a microchipped population.
The Trilateral Commission openly admits they are trying to control the economy through closer European-Japanese-American cooperation.

They operate much like the CFR, counting the worlds top elites, politicians, corporate executives, and media barons as members. They have been instrumental in creating the destructive “free trade” agreements that are destroying Canada and America’s economy (as well as others), and national sovereignty in order to usher in world governance.

Other fronts like the World Wildlife Fund, managed by the aforementioned Prince Philip, vocally push for population control while seizing large swaths of land for “Mother Earth.” Other pet projects such as the Kyoto Protocol, which would give the UN total control of energy resources, have floundered.

Past WWF board members have included Bilderberg founder Prince Bernhard, Hollinger media gopher and Bilderberg member Conrad Black, Shell chairman John Loudon, King Juan Carlos of Spain, Prince Henrik of Denmark, and accused drug dealer Henry Keswick.

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a neocon group that published radical statements calling for world war, population control, and a worldwide police state back in 2000. The signatures on the documents included Dick Cheney and cabinet members like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, Dov Zakheim, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, and Eliot Abrams.

Their infamous “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” document, produced in 2000 before 9-11, reads like prophecy, calling for theater wars against Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. They also admitted that "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor." September 11, anyone?

They also openly called for killer viruses to wipe out large sectors of the human population. The document states: "[A]dvanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool."


Long a pet project of the Malthusian-obsessed Rockefeller clan, U.N.E.S.C.O projects include filtering pro-UN propaganda into American schools and with the goal of eventually merging the curriculum with Mexico and Canada in the proposed Panamerican Union; and seizing control of huge swaths of American federal lands through "UN World Heritage" sites. The first U.N.E.S.C.O chief Julian Huxley said during his tenure in 1948:

"The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent... It can stress… the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world political organization… Political unification in some sort of world government will be required…to help the emergence of a single world culture."

[Mustang1]

conjuredcrisis conjuredcrisis:

LIPSTICK IMPERIALISM AND THE NEW WORLD ORDER: http://www.un.org/documents/ecosoc/cn6/ ... allagh.htm

Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs Marrack Goulding said that conventional weapons -- easy to produce and difficult to control -- "made a mockery of the new world order". He also said that if the First Committee was looking for a theme for its work it should be the urgent need to rid the world of land-mines, which the Secretary-General had called "a slow-motion weapon of mass destruction". -http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/1995/19951027.gadis30.31.html

Global Day of Mobilisation For a New World Order Against Poverty, War and Unilateralism - http://www.un-ngls.org/cso/cso6/appeal.htm

The CFR, funded by Wall Street and the Rockefellers after WW II, is an organization openly sworn to destroying American national sovereignty in favor of world government. They have acted as the de-facto “secret team” in managing U.S. domestic and foreign policy, orchestrating wars like Vietnam and the first Gulf War.. Almost all executives in the CIA and State Department have been members of the CFR, whether it was Dean Rusk, Allen Dulles and Robert McNamara during Vietnam or Richard Armitage and George Tenet during the crimes of 9-11.

The CFR has acted as the dominant roundtable group pushing for a Panamerican Union by 2010 which would dissolve national borders and unite Mexico, Canada, and America under a single currency, with biometric ID cards and GPS-tracked vehicles on camera-strewn superhighways.

Since 1954 the Bilderberg has served as the central brain of the New World Order, the major secret gathering for Globalist agents from across the globe. Bilderberg chairmen like Prince Bernhard and David Rockefeller have pushed for total global government, eugenics population control, engineering wars, and controlling the worldwide economy. Top politicians from America and Europe also undergo a grooming process at the Bilderberg. Bill Clinton went in 1991 as Rockefeller’s personal guest, and Tony Blair attended in 1993 before becoming Prime Minister. John Kerry attended in 2000, and John Edwards did two weeks before becoming the VP nominee in 2004.

Major members of the media, such as editors from the Economist, NY Times, Newsweek, Washington Post, US News and World Report are regular attendees. Yet they rarely, if ever, mention the proceedings.

Major media outlets like the BBC admit the Bilderberg is planning for a one-world currency, bank, and army. Articles in Reuters and the Financial Times of London have admitted the existence of the Bilderberg,
their grooming of politicians, and their secret plans for world governance. If these mainstream media reporters can admit the major role of the Bilderberg in shaping world affairs, why do average Joes have such a tough time accepting it even as a possibility?

How can people seriously ignore the role of the Trilateral Commission, the brainchild of Globalist masters David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski? This is the same Brzezinski who helped direct the first CIA funds to bin Laden, and in his book Between Two Ages called for a technotronic society with a microchipped population.
The Trilateral Commission openly admits they are trying to control the economy through closer European-Japanese-American cooperation.

They operate much like the CFR, counting the worlds top elites, politicians, corporate executives, and media barons as members. They have been instrumental in creating the destructive “free trade” agreements that are destroying Canada and America’s economy (as well as others), and national sovereignty in order to usher in world governance.

Other fronts like the World Wildlife Fund, managed by the aforementioned Prince Philip, vocally push for population control while seizing large swaths of land for “Mother Earth.” Other pet projects such as the Kyoto Protocol, which would give the UN total control of energy resources, have floundered.

Past WWF board members have included Bilderberg founder Prince Bernhard, Hollinger media gopher and Bilderberg member Conrad Black, Shell chairman John Loudon, King Juan Carlos of Spain, Prince Henrik of Denmark, and accused drug dealer Henry Keswick.

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC), a neocon group that published radical statements calling for world war, population control, and a worldwide police state back in 2000. The signatures on the documents included Dick Cheney and cabinet members like Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Armitage, Dov Zakheim, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard Perle, and Eliot Abrams.

Their infamous “Rebuilding America’s Defenses” document, produced in 2000 before 9-11, reads like prophecy, calling for theater wars against Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. They also admitted that "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor." September 11, anyone?

They also openly called for killer viruses to wipe out large sectors of the human population. The document states: "[A]dvanced forms of biological warfare that can 'target' specific genotypes may transform biological warfare from the realm of terror to a politically useful tool."


Long a pet project of the Malthusian-obsessed Rockefeller clan, U.N.E.S.C.O projects include filtering pro-UN propaganda into American schools and with the goal of eventually merging the curriculum with Mexico and Canada in the proposed Panamerican Union; and seizing control of huge swaths of American federal lands through "UN World Heritage" sites. The first U.N.E.S.C.O chief Julian Huxley said during his tenure in 1948:

"The general philosophy of UNESCO should be a scientific world humanism, global in extent... It can stress… the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world political organization… Political unification in some sort of world government will be required…to help the emergence of a single world culture."

[conjuredcrisis]

The point is that the term New World Order is becoming common place in the household, and is being used by mainstream sources when confronting "global issues". It implies that we are currently living and experiencing the New World Order. Their explinations to not range into topics which insinuate it is coming, they use it in the title to imply it is already in place, and therefore needs no debate or explination.

The term is common place, and mainstream sources are talking as if its over. It has become a term to imply loosly the end of the cold war, agreements between countries which tie in economies, military, global issues attempting to show that countries are all moving at their own pace towards what we in the west are already living under, the New Order.

The term is used by many leaders in various quotes, some of them fully in context, some in context and some the meaning is given by the person reading, or open ended implications.

One world government is the goal, and it is obvious that the term is now normal when discussing global issues.

When one looks at the charters an ambitions of the UN, the groups involved in the creation of the UN and those current and recent world leaders and their position toward global government, the answers are self-evident. National Sovereignty has become something of the Old World Order, a good idea in theory that didnt really work to well in the real world.

They have openly said, there will be a world court, it already exists, and its rule can supercede sovereign rule of any country.

[Ruxpercnd]

In the epic novel, War and Peace, Leo Tolstoy presented a frustration at the lack of freedom of choice, that history just brushes aside personal aspirations. In today's parlance "Shit Happens".

Certainly it is folly to believe that anyone can control history with a New World Order plan.

Perhaps you could add Plato's Utopia to your list of New World Order plans. Plato like those who follow just like to mentally construct the perfect society. This is a useful exercise unless it includes some fascists notion of culling the population.

[conjuredcrisis]

Would a microchip keep your child safe?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3307471.stm

US issues first RFID passports

http://www.engadget.com/2006/03/13/us-i ... passports/




British Columbia and Washington State could become the testing ground for any new border-crossing alternative to passports, says John van Dongen, B.C. Minister of State for Intergovernmental Relations.

He says U.S. Homeland Security secretary Mike Chertoff “seemed receptive to the idea” Tuesday at the annual meeting of the Pacific NorthWest Economic Region (PNWER) in Edmonton. Chertoff and Canada’s Public Safety Minister Stockwell Day discussed the border issue during a roundtable meeting chaired by van Dongen at the PNWER conference.

Officials in B.C. and Washington State fear requiring a passport to enter the U.S. will have serious impacts on the $10-billionUS that’s injected annually by cross-border traffic into communities on both sides of the border.

B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell and Washington Governor Chris Gregoire have asked President George Bush and Prime Minister Stephen Harper to delay a proposed Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative that would require a passport to enter the U.S.

Van Dongen says an identity card built on documents required for a driver’s licence is one alternative to passports, but it would have to meet security standards set by the U.S.

“Through this roundtable, I feel we got a pretty good reception to the concept generally and we may well be invited the next few months ... to build an ID card that meets those standards,” he says. Documentation that can’t be duplicated and that identifies both the individual and their nationality would be part of the new standards.

The minister says Chertoff “emphasized they’re working on options to passports,” but at present the U.S. security czar is charged with carrying out the passport requirement approved by the U.S. Congress.

However, van Dongen says Chertoff also told PNWER officials “he’s going to do that with a view to seeking the maximum flexibility and simplicity, and he re-iterated those two words, to accomplish the goals of security.”

Currently, passports will be required starting Jan. 1, 2007 by people flying into the U.S. or arriving by ship. In 2008, those crossing the border by land will require at least a “smart card” alternative that identifies the traveller and their nationality.

Chertoff also announced that people arriving in the U.S. in small boats or by ferries will be treated like those crossing land borders, which would hit B.C. and Washington. Draft regulations for air and sea travellers are expected next month, and the draft land regulations by the end of the year.

Minister van Dongen represents B.C. at PNWER, a public-private organization with members from B.C., Alberta, Yukon, Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Idaho and Montana.


http://www.theprogress.com/portals-code ... 4493&more=


EU: Commission to resurrect biometric ID cards?

http://www.statewatch.org/news/2006/feb ... -cards.htm

ID cards
ID cards will provide legal UK residents, including foreign nationals, with an easy and secure way of proving who they are.

ID cards will be linked to their owners by unique biometric identifiers (for example, fingerprints), which mean we will have a much stronger way of protecting people's identities. Background checks will ensure that claimed identities are real and not stolen, and will prevent criminals using multiple identities.

The exact format of an ID card isn’t yet decided but it’s likely that it will be a credit card-sized plastic card featuring the holder’s photograph and a computer chip storing basic personal information.

Who’ll be eligible for an ID card?
You will be eligible for an ID card if you are:

UK resident for three months or more
over the age of 16
When will ID cards be introduced?
Our decision to introduce a National Identity Scheme was announced in the Queen's Speech on 17 May 2005. The Identity Cards Act received royal assent, becoming law, on 30 March 2006.

We expect to issue the first ID cards from 2008/9.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/passports- ... /id-cards/