Fall of the republic

Discussion in 'Soap Box' started by OutCaste, Nov 7, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. OutCaste

    OutCaste Well-Known Member

  2. lonercarrot

    lonercarrot Well-Known Member

    Do not listen to anything Alex Jones has to say.
  3. Tobes

    Tobes Well-Known Member

    Agreed. He's a nutbag.
  4. Ordep

    Ordep Well-Known Member

    I just love conspiracy theories...

    Seriously, where would the gain for Obama be in ruining the world or the United States? He would be ruining himself in the process.

    That said, I just read the movie description as I don't have 2 and a half hours to waste by watching that thing, so for all I know, the absolute truth that'll open my eyes could be there, but I don't think so, so I wont watch it.
  5. Tobes

    Tobes Well-Known Member

    I love conspiracy theories as well, and have seen a fair few on the NWO. From what I understand, Obama is a puppet and world bankers pull the strings, and he holds barely any power at all (this is what the theorists believe, not me) and as they want a One World Government they don't want America to be the dominant country anymore. I am a big fan of the 9/11 conspiracy, and have seen enough evidence pointing toward an inside job that I'm convinced that the official story is a steaming pile of shit. For example, there was a man called Aaron Russo who was told by one of the Rockefeller clan before 9/11 that 'there is going to be an event, then we're going to go into Iraq and afghanistan (and another country, i forget which)" Another interesting tidbit is how on the event everyone kept on mentioning several explosions, including a few directly before the planes hit, in the basement. Watch Zeitgeist Part 2 (A documentary) to get the full picture, if you are so inclined.

    Now you guys can laugh at me for thinking it was an inside job, but know that I'm laughing harder at you for believing it wasn't. You most likely haven't researched the facts, you only go by what you were told on the news.
  6. lonercarrot

    lonercarrot Well-Known Member

    I'm the kind of person who finds conspiracy theories really interesting... And I kind of have to struggle to come to the conclusion that most are bullshit. I stopped taking Alex Jones seriously when he said the hidden objective for building highways was so that the army could easily travel across countries when a police state is created when the bankers take over the world...

    I used to believe the 9/11 thing, but a lot of the conspiracy theorists claims have been destroyed.. So now I'm not sure. The only reason I’m on the fence is because there have been (documented) false flag reports in the past which were carried out by the US.
  7. Zurkhardo

    Zurkhardo Well-Known Member

    I find conspiracy theories make for a convenient oversimplification of certain traumatic events. That, and inflate the egos of the theorists themselves, who always posture themselves as being exceptionally well-informed and self-righteous.

    Believe what you want to, but don't try to paint everyone else as foolish or sheep-like just because they don't agree. Besides, it's impossible to ever prove a theorist wrong because they just end up presuming that anyone that disagrees with them, regardless of whom, is just misguided or in on it.

    Sorry, went on a bit of a rant there. As for Alex Jones, he's represents that historical tendency for right-wing Americans to prescribe to dangerously paranoid conspiracy theories that are basically extrapolations of isolationism and their own hatred of government. But that's just my opinion.
  8. Ordep

    Ordep Well-Known Member

    Right, I love conspiracy theories, but obviously not for the same reason as you. The thing about these theories is that when you apply common logic and strategy to them, they crumble like sand castles.

    Take for example the "One World Government" theory you mentioned and that I know as the "New World Order" theory. The premise is that there's a few men behind the throne who are plotting to take over the world and that alone is proof enough that whoever came up with this theory really didn't thought it through. Simply put, if there's a 1st rule of world politics, is that no one can rule the whole world and hope to keep it that way for long. Just take a look at the past empires of the world:

    ->Macedonia, under Alexander the Great: crumbled as soon as the man died.

    ->Seleucid Empire: crumbled under its own weight as the cost of defending its borders against the eastern people was gigantic

    ->Rome: Had to be split in two because its size became impossible to manage. Both halfs crumbled under corruption, power struggles and barbarian influences.

    ->Mongol Empire: was split into multiple khanates by internal struggles and effectively dissolved.

    -> Napoleonic France: Crumbled as every other nation in Europe rose against them.

    ->Nazi Germany: Same as Napoleonic France

    Considering this and that history repeats itself, why in the name of heck would someone so wise to plot such complex secret kabbahlas not see how futile it is to try to take over the world? It impossible! Once a nation achieves a certain size, internal struggles and unrest lead to civil war and splits. The closest we have these days to an empire is of course, the USA who keeps itself united by a fine web of economic inter-dependence between states. But the moment one state shows interest of annexing another, don't think that there won't be another civil war. And that said, roughly 250 years isn't alot in empire years, who knows what's gonna happen?

    But hey, let's not go so far ahead. Even if say, the bankers of the United States suddenly took over the country, what's keeping the military from rebelling and ending the take-over before it even begun? Hell, if Barack Obama has no "real decision power" he certainly still has power to control the military, as I'm sure these wisemen wouldn't tell every general in the army they're the ones in charge. Thus, what's keeping the president from ordering the military to aprehend these people and expose their plans? Like they said in Rome, "who controls the legions controls Rome."

    But even if somehow the bankers managed to take over the USA and subdue the military, what would they achive? The unrest would be gigantic, productivity would fall like a rock in the ocean as people don't like to be tricked and fooled, companies and investment would leave the States to go to countries with more stability, the nation would be ruined and they would become kings of nothing, and this would happen to the rest of the world too if they (SOMEHOW) managed to expand to the rest of the world. The best they would achive is global chaos and a global civil war.

    About the 9/11 theory, that one also amusses me. Basically the one question NO ONE seems to be able to answer is "What's the gain?" Who, internally benefitted with the 9/11? The stock market was closed for days and the Dow Jones fell drastically, the stock values fell over a trillion dollars, almost 2 trillions by today's standards, and the cost of repairing and restoring the WTC area rose to dozens of billions of dollars. NYC economy and exports was damaged in billions of dollars and the air travel industry suffered extremely. Oh but you may say they got an excuse to invade Afganistan and Iraq. But then again, Afganistan had nothing of use to the USA appart from a pipeline project that actually benefitted everyone, not just them, and Iraq, while they did in fact get some good old oil deals out of the war, the gigantic cost of the said war allied to the unrest that triggered oil prices to rise and was one of the causes for the current economic depression that is hurting the United States so bad, expecially the, wait for it, *banking industry* makes me wonder what the heck those "Men behind the throne" were thinking. I'm just a lousy economics and managment student and I can see that plan has more holes than swiss cheese. I'd expect those masterminds to plot something better.

    Ah but I'm rambling as usual... Anyway, economic-political conspiracy theories, as far as I can see, are always flawed as the web of economic inter-dependence that mantains world (relative) peace and technological evolution is extremely delicate, and any man capable of plotting such ellaborate plans is most likely to be aware of this. That said, the only theories I actually consider are the ones dealing with companies and how they ruthlessly break every civil and moral law for bigger profit.

    But then again, whatever you believe in, it's your choice. Just don't go thinking yourself "enlightened" or something because in the end, conspiracy theorist are the ones publish books after books to exploit the people's naivity.
  9. Xaos

    Xaos Well-Known Member

    Yeah, I'm agree with that last paragraph. Plus I can't stand listening to Alex Jones, he's such a fear monger. Banging on about a police state, sure we have a lot of surveillance, like the patriot act in the US, and cameras pretty much everywhere here in the UK, but to me, a police state implies no freedom, like a dictatorship, last time I checked I could do pretty much whatever I wanted, and I can't see it changing much in my lifetime.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.