Put Up Or Shut Up

[Hackjames Profile]

@Middleman

Technically, I agree with you, except for the part about claiming to know what anyone means when they say NWO. He didn't offer much in the way of evidence, though I don't think that was his specific goal.

That said, do you actually feel there is a lack of evidence showing that powerful interests collude and have done so for all of recorded history? That's what I mean when I say NWO (not that I actually have the occasion to say it often).

[Middleman Profile]

do you actually feel there is a lack of evidence showing that powerful interests collude and have done so for all of recorded history?

Not at all, and I agree it's been happening throughout history.

I fully accept that rich and influential people coordinate their efforts to grab ever larger slices of power and money, but that is not the same thing as the fear based meme Alex Jones pushes about commies in blue helmets coming to get your guns and lock your grandma in a FEMA death camp.

As far as what NWO means in specific speeches or headlines, the context of the rest of the speeches provide the meaning. It's the NWO believers who are drawing secret messages and meanings from those speeches, but all they ever seem to have is 3 words, and not much else.

[Newdawnrising Profile]

That guy is pretty smug for someone who doesn't comprehend that when politicians and bureaucrats say "New World Order", what they really mean is "we should do things differently tomorrow than how we do them today".

Just because you can dig up headlines which repeat the provocative phrase, that doesn't mean the organization actually exists in the sense conspiracy people usually mean. It certainly doesn't prove it.

He appeals for logic, then presents evidence that requires an illogical leap of faith.

Put up or shut up, indeed.

Any politician or bureaucrat, who uses the term NWO knows how controversial the term has become. What they really mean is " lets keep doing the same things differently, so the peasents don't notice ". Wake the f*ck up, or shut the f*ck up!

[Middleman Profile]

Any politician or bureaucrat, who uses the term NWO knows how controversial the term has become.

...and anyone serious about this shit should do some reading about it, so that they don't look like fools.

For starters, some of our words or sayings have multiple meanings. As we've already seen in this thread, there are even multiple meanings for NWO within the conspiracy community itself.

The cited headlines and speeches go back to the 1920s, but the term was only popularised in right wing groups like the Birch society in the 60s and 70s. Did Woodrow Wilson or FDR mean what Alex Jones means when he says NWO? Did they know it was incendiary?

There is a long established definition to the phrase New World Order that has only a tangential connection to the secret society dog whistle definition. Even if you believe the politicians are sending secret messages when they say this phrase, that means they are pretending to mean NWO in this other way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_world_ ... olitics%29

So I'll cop any argument on this anyone cares to present, but if you think it's as straight forward as 3 words being a smoking gun, you'd better have some evidence, and you'd better know the basic definitions and history of the term, or I will cast abominable filth upon thee, and make thee vile, and will set thee as a gazing-stock.

[The57ironman Profile]

.



.......words have meanings....

Upload to Disclose.tv

[mediasorcery Profile]

That guy is pretty smug for someone who doesn't comprehend that when politicians and bureaucrats say "New World Order", what they really mean is "we should do things differently tomorrow than how we do them today".

Just because you can dig up headlines which repeat the provocative phrase, that doesn't mean the organization actually exists in the sense conspiracy people usually mean. It certainly doesn't prove it.

He appeals for logic, then presents evidence that requires an illogical leap of faith.

Put up or shut up, indeed.

yes, your right, no such thing as bilderberg or committee of 300, skull and bones, etc etc etc.

[Middleman Profile]

Did I say any of that? No, I didn't.

Proof of secret societies, or even secret agendas among the rich and influential is not proof of the NWO by the popular, Alex Jones definition. That most common definition is the one I object to.

Is it too much to ask that we occasionally treat this (or any) subject seriously?

[mediasorcery Profile]

the letters and words-new world order- have no meaning other than to identify a way of thinking, but when you translate the idea of a nwo into actions, then it becomes obvious, if proof is what you need, look at agenda 21. essentially i agree with u, theres no actual group going around calling themselves the "nwo" even tho they are, we r already living in a new world order.

[The57ironman Profile]

That most common definition is the one I object to.

.

.....where can i find that definition..?

.