PDA

View Full Version : World government


ravana2
Jul 14, 2008, 06:23 PM
Why is a concept of world government unacceptably to you ?

N0help4u
Jul 14, 2008, 06:25 PM
BIG Brother
YouTube - Broadcast Yourself. (http://youtube.com/results?search_query=one+world+government+&search=Search)

Fr_Chuck
Jul 14, 2008, 06:30 PM
Bush in charge of entire world ? Enough said

N0help4u
Jul 14, 2008, 06:35 PM
... actually it would be more like the U.N. in charge of the whole world and some people want Clinton (Bill) to head the U.N.

ravana2
Jul 14, 2008, 06:38 PM
I imagine democratic world organization not a dictatorship . World is to big to be under any state/person influence . There is a good step toward it a continental unions such as : european union , african union , association of south east asian nations...

I like the idea of w.g. witch will unite whole world . Idea of world language is also progressive .

Fr_Chuck
Jul 14, 2008, 08:08 PM
I don't know I would see someone taking control over the UN by some fraud or military force well of course that well could be Hillary.
Although I think I may make a good ruler of the world ( or universe)

ravana2
Jul 15, 2008, 01:36 AM
Maybe after this unification of the world the peace will finally come ?

Chery
Jul 15, 2008, 03:42 AM
That would depend entirely on who is at the very top of the leadership pyramid. And if you have informed yourself regarding the Bilderberg Group - I think it would scare the heck out of you, because it's all planned. Even before WWII, the plans for dividing Berlin (the whole of Germany for that matter) were already established and published.. I saw the maps and the dates they were printed. Talk about an eye-opener!

I for one, wish I could contact a spacecraft and get my family off this planet. I'm glad I won't be here much longer - there is far too much apathy and people wearing blinders in fear.

But don't stop hoping, and educate others to see the real deal. Maybe they will have the incentive to actively do something to establish a semblance of balance and change.

Thanks for starting this thread.
http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/15/15_11_2.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZSYYYYYYMXDE)

Chery
Jul 15, 2008, 03:56 AM
I'm going to make a prediction.

Those politicians throughout the world that go against the 'real rulers' will inevitably end up with the same fate as John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King, and others around the world that tried to make a difference. They will have their 15 minutes of fame and get voted for - just to placate the people, but it won't last.



http://smileys.smileycentral.com/cat/36/36_19_5.gif (http://www.smileycentral.com/?partner=ZSzeb001_ZSYYYYYYMXDE)

N0help4u
Jul 15, 2008, 04:58 AM
Basically, yeah I believe sometime within the next 5 to 15 years many American citizens are going to revolt and then it will be worse within a few years after that with a one world dictator system.

ravana2
Jul 16, 2008, 12:10 AM
We ( humans ) are all equal and its normal to me that one day we all will live in one state . This natinalism / racism things just divide .

Concept of world religion is not possible but world language and implementation of common law is .

To me it is also interestin possibility of fifth race ( white , black , yellow and red ) . This intermarriages create more and more people that don't belonge to any of that four races .

Chery
Jul 16, 2008, 04:37 AM
In my opinion religion now and in the past has done more damage through extremists than any other reason other than that of the money mongers.

There was a medical study done over twenty years ago stating that the more the races mix, the healthier people will get because the genes that inflict certain races will be weakened - i.e. sickle-cell anemia, diabetes, sarcoidosis and more. So races that mix strengthen the healthy genes and diminish the weaker sick genes and will eventually be gone. But, even though the medical field is aware, those that are still racist will never condone the thought.

So, sorry about your hopes of a unified world - those that rule will not allow it because there is no money in it and the poor will be healthier and have a longer survival rate - that would mean too many mouths to feed, more population growth, - and the planners and shakers of the world don't really want that.

Why do you think Africa is being used as a testing ground for all kinds of weapons? And, as long as the mid-east people 'hate' one group or the other and feed this hate in the mother's milk - forget about world peace... it will never happen.

And those that tried to make a change there get assassinated, as well as anywhere else in the world, to include the USA and England. Money is the real power, religious fanaticism next in line, not people anymore. Anytime the people gather to try to change things, something in the world happens to instill new fears and helplessness - guess who's pulling the stings there too. It's all a plan and we don't count in it.

NeedKarma
Jul 16, 2008, 04:41 AM
concept of world religion is not possible That's one of the biggest blocks right there. Islam wants a theocracy, that would be a show stopper for anyone who is not islamic.

ravana2
Jul 16, 2008, 05:02 PM
Christianity 2.1 billion
Islam 1.5 billion
Secularism/irreligious/agnostic/atheism 1.1 billion
Hinduism 900 million
Chinese traditional religion 394 million
Buddhism 376 million


List of religious populations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_religious_populations)

This is a top six . As you see on the 3th place are nonreligious people . There number are rising all over the world .

All religions have intention to create a theocracy not just islam . Islam is 622 years younger than christianity and he is still in his medieval period .

tomder55
Jul 17, 2008, 08:38 AM
When a representative world government is created by the consent of the governed ;rather than from gallery of rogue ,jackbooted thugs or nameless faceless unaccountable to the people bureaurocrats ,I will sign on.

WVHiflyer
Jul 17, 2008, 11:17 PM
Because I have enough pride in our Constitution to not want to live under another (esp since it's likely to not have a Second Amendment).



-