New World Order - Discussion - Page 8

Ronster · 06-25-2008, 10:49 PM

Eventually a one world goverment will exist. And it should. But it should be under our value system, or most of it anyhow. I mean, like our rights. Americans should not be forced to give up our value system and our culture in the interest of a global society. I think the freedoms I have should be more, not less. And there is a standard of living that I want to keep as well. I don't want to be poor because its "fair"....

Alas, I fear that Americans will be left behind because of our educational system. We are producing stupid kids. And this will be the catalyst that destroys the U.S as we know her today. These are good times folks, I really believe that the worst is yet to come.....

The next 8 years are gonna suck, imo...

God I hope I am wrong, but I have bad feeling about shit....

The American model in her true form is the best model of government that Man has ever seen. If we can duplicate that worldwide, then I say go for it. Otherwise, forget about it...

johnflesh · 06-25-2008, 10:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelr

Why would you say that it would be hard JF? Hell they have the pieces in place, people like me protest it, I was at the Battle of Seattle protesting the WTO. They had infiltrators cause problems in the protest areas, all hell broke out, we were the bad guys and protesters have been demonized ever since. The resistance level in this country is nil, hell trying to get the fluoride poisoned masses to even believe in the NWO is work. Then when parts rear it's ugly head they have learned from their favorite talking head that it's a good thing. This is a direct result from the NWO conditioning, Huxley said that it is better to have the plebes want and ask for servitude, the other method as he puts it is "terror", meaning prison camps(FEMA Camps) and full blown Martial Law. Messy stuff.

Anyway I digress, for proof of the NWO start at the UN, WTO, WHO, NAFTA, CAFTA, and other nongovernmental orgs that damage the sovereignty of this nation, while your at it, look into the world and central banks and the IMF, and others.

Well I never said it would be hard. I said it was an enormous undertaking, which is true. I've seen evidence that the NWO is real but my whole interest is just how are we going to actually stop it?

I'll be honest, I don't have a lot of faith in humanity concerning this particular subject. Seems to me certain folks would rather be controlled than in control themselves and that control can come from anyone with a good enough idea, willing to take it on.

So to me protesting and fighting is a great idea but will fail if the opposition is bigger than the resistance.

I feel like the NWO is real or will be a reality of sorts from recent history into the near future. I also feel like it won't be stopped by any resistance because people either need to be force fed signs of this, won't believe it anyway, or agree with a NWO.

Djinn · 06-26-2008, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mjdsr

So what do you think of the rest of the article? Do you agree with this?

Hard to say. The bill is an enormous one, and I was unable to find the provision mentioned in the second sentence. Was anyone else able to find it in the text of the bill?

michaelr · 06-28-2008, 10:26 AM

EU Constitution Kingpin: We Will Ignore Referendums

Well now we know how the NWO will deal with the votes, ignore them. Me smells a fight a brewen.

Invayne · 06-28-2008, 04:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Djinn

Hard to say. The bill is an enormous one, and I was unable to find the provision mentioned in the second sentence. Was anyone else able to find it in the text of the bill?

Yes, it starts at the bottom of page 11.

Invayne · 06-28-2008, 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by michaelr

EU Constitution Kingpin: We Will Ignore Referendums

Well now we know how the NWO will deal with the votes, ignore them. Me smells a fight a brewen.

Almost sounds like our "elections".

Djinn · 06-30-2008, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Invayne

Yes, it starts at the bottom of page 11.

I'm looking, but I don't seem to have page numbers. Can you give me a section number? Or a unique string of words that I can use in a search to guide me to the right section?

GovTrack: H.R. 3221: Text of Legislation

mjdsr · 06-30-2008, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Djinn

I'm looking, but I don't seem to have page numbers. Can you give me a section number? Or a unique string of words that I can use in a search to guide me to the right section?

GovTrack: H.R. 3221: Text of Legislation

Go to the text of the Senate bill summary. The link was in the article but here it is again.

rpc.senate.gov/public/_files/L62HR3221Houseamendments0618SN.pdf

Djinn · 06-30-2008, 10:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mjdsr

Go to the text of the Senate bill summary. The link was in the article but here it is again.

rpc.senate.gov/public/_files/L62HR3221Houseamendments0618SN.pdf

Excellent, thank you... +rep pending.

I believe this is the text in question, which I've broken into paragraphs for easier reading:

Quote:

Payment Card and Third Party Network Information Reporting. The proposal requires information reporting on payment card and third party network transactions. Payment settlement entities, including merchant acquiring banks and third party settlement organizations, or third party payment facilitators acting on their behalf, will be required to report the annual gross amount of reportable transactions to the IRS and to the participating payee.

Reportable transactions include any payment card transaction and any third party network transaction. Participating payees include persons who accept a payment card as payment and third party networks who accept payment from a third party settlement organization in settlement of transactions. A payment card means any card issued pursuant to an agreement or arrangement which provides for standards and mechanisms for settling the transactions.

Use of an account number or other indicia associated with a payment card will be treated in the same manner as a payment card. A de minimis exception for transactions of $10,000 or less and 200 transactions or less applies to payments by third party settlement organizations. The proposal applies to returns for calendar years beginning after December 31, 2010. Back-up withholding provisions apply to amounts paid after December 31, 2011. This proposal is estimated to raise $9.802 billion over ten years.

Now, unless someone thinks I've quoted the wrong section of the bill, let's move on to the claim made by the article. I've boldfaced what I believe to be the crux of it. Let's see how they match up:

Quote:

The terrorists in the federal government are continuing their push to implement a cashless economic enslavement system. According to a legislative notice from the U.S. Senate, a new Housing Bill (HR 3221) contains a provision that will require nearly every online credit card transaction to be reported directly to the Internal Revenue Service. The insanity of this is obvious and it is nothing more than a way to give the government a means to track and trace as many private transactions as humanly possible.

With regard to the bill, I think that the article is addressing the first pargraph; the one that begins and ends with "Payment Card and Third Party . . . to the participating payee."... agreed?

Now, the article says that "nearly every online credit card transaction will be reported directly to the IRS." The wording suggests that each individual transaction, presumably traceable to the purchaser, is reported to the IRS.

Meanwhile the actual bill suggests that the only thing being reported is an annual gross of all credit card transactions throughout the year - not the individual details of each transaction.

Based on the above info, how are others reading this? Do others see a conflict in message here?

michaelr · 06-30-2008, 11:52 AM

The Plan That Never Was Has Now Been Canceled

Quote:

On July 31, 2007, the New York Times published a small article claiming that fears about construction of a massive new highway system connecting Mexico to Canada were "urban legend." The article even included a photo of the planned route that would, in effect, bisect Texas. The photo was a conceptual drawing of where the road would be created, an artist's rendition put forth by the North American Super Corridor Coalition (NASCO). But even that wasn't enough for the Times as its article pointed out that candidates for the GOP nomination were being peppered with questions about it while campaigning in faraway New Hampshire and Iowa. The GOP stalwarts claimed no knowledge of such a plan.

Well this will deal a blow to the NWO, any delay in the NAU could only be seen as a good thing. However for every step forward they deal a blow of their own.

U.S. and EU seen near private data deal

Quote:

NEW YORK (Reuters) - The United States and the European Union are near a deal on letting law enforcement and security agencies obtain private information like credit card transactions and travel histories about people on the other side of the Atlantic, The New York Times reported on Saturday.

This is a world wide police grid. A Prison Planet if you will.