What's new

New World Order and Scientology

Royal Prince Xenu

Trust the Psi Corps.
Which Amazon.com deleted from all book readers worldwide, last week.

Downloadable copy of "1984"

Downloadable copy of "Animal Farm"

Now Amazon.com is part of the New World Order, huh? And all this time I thought they were money motivated.

The NWO is also money motivated. The dichotomy is that they have so much money, the don't need any more, but deep down they're insecure because they know their wealth is built on a lie, and they must keep us asleep lest we discover the lie and the banking system collapses.
 

abbot

Patron
Now we are in agreement.

The Anabaptist Jacques

____________________________

Actually, TAJ, whether you agree or not is irrelevant.

What I posted is only what I've been trying to say all along.

Instead of seeing the relationship - strike that, it's a bit much to ask -

Instead of taking what you say you've read about the NWO and comparing that to the history, policies and practices of the CoS and finding even remotely reasonable consistency, and allowing the thread to move in the direction of identification and elucidation of points of agreement between the two... strike that -

You choose to read only what you want to read then, finding points of disagreement, confuse the issue so much that it no longer even resembles an in-context reply.

Why don't you just post your handle from now on... we pretty much know what you're going to say.
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
I don't recall that Orwell ever recanted his socialist views. He did recant support for the Soviet Union due to its totalitarian regime. Different things altogether. :)


Mark A. Baker

You are correct. (although, I think, the distinction between the two is more of an academic exercise as to how power is wielded.)
 
At the outer edges of the co$, were the staff who handled the public. They were generally well-meaning individuals who believed in $cn and the services. They worked hard to give you for the services or handle the paperwork.

They were generally uninformed as what was being done at the inner core of $cn. They weren't privy to what the GO/OSA were doing/planning. They didn't know about where exactly the money all went or to whom or what corporation or how it was spent. They just did their scientology thing and tried to follow the rules. They were kept in the dark about the abuses of Sea org members. All was good and right with scn. (mind you, I am framing this as the past, since my experience is dated to the '80's)

Of course they experienced the constant indoctrination of who their enemies were (psychs, the media, etc.) And they are told that alll is good in scn.

The inner core of $cn made sure that the outer core didn't know what they were doing in terms of moving money to Swiss bank accounts, etc. or attacking their enemies in dirty ways through Fair Game or all the other questionable practices that have since been brought to light by the $cn critics and opponents. But the money was really always the thing.

The US govt. has its workers, too. There's nice people who work in govt bureaucratic offices. They do their job, they handle the public, the paperwork, or the money that runs things. They listen to the news and rally around the govt when it tells us the enemy is in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. etc.

But the US govt. has its dark side too--the dirty deeds done by CIA or FBI.
The workers in the office traditionally don't know about the CIA black ops, etc. What motivates the US govt to use black ops? Is it money and financially stability? The need to control and have power? What motivates any government leader to sanction evil things and human rights abuses?

What motivates the head of $cn to sanction evil things and human rights abuses? But does DM want the average newbie to scn to know what is going on within the RPF at Flag & Big Blue? Is he putting out policy that explains where the money is going and how much of it he spends on parties at the FreeWinds?

What motivates large corporations and their leaders to sanction or allow mis-handlings of people and money, or corporate espionage or behind-the-scenes operations that make money illegally, milk retirement funds, etc?

We're really not talking about who knows what history here, are we? History has always been written by those who are in charge/those who won/those who hold the power.....and then sold to the general public.

I am sure that DM's version of the history of $cn and how he took power differs from that of the outsider and the dissenter. And how is that he still to this day holds the power. What are the factors that keep him in power?

And do you think these factors that keep DM in power are not used in this world on the population as a whole?

Why would the owners of the world's largest corporations, largest banks, largest anything leave it to chance to let the world population decide the course of human events that could ultimately remove the power and money they hold?? What would have to happen for them to keep their power, money and financial stability?

Let's see: educate the population as a whole? Prevent war and create civilizations that value aesthetics and history and honesty? Create fair governments that protect and care about the welfare of every individual?

But is it not true that "Power corrupts.........................
 
____________________________

Actually, TAJ, whether you agree or not is irrelevant.

What I posted is only what I've been trying to say all along.

Instead of seeing the relationship - strike that, it's a bit much to ask -

Instead of taking what you say you've read about the NWO and comparing that to the history, policies and practices of the CoS and finding even remotely reasonable consistency, and allowing the thread to move in the direction of identification and elucidation of points of agreement between the two... strike that -

You choose to read only what you want to read then, finding points of disagreement, confuse the issue so much that it no longer even resembles an in-context reply.

Why don't you just post your handle from now on... we pretty much know what you're going to say.

I've read about 90% of the books to which you make reference. I doubt you've read any books that you don't agree with.

I make it a habit to read what I don't agree with. It is a point that comes from the writings of John Stuart Mill.

This way either I learn more, and/or I have to reevaluate and my ideas.

You should try it sometimes. If you did you wouldn't come across as silly as you do.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 
snip

History has always been written by those who are in charge/those who won/those who hold the power.....and then sold to the general public.


That is a statement made by people who do not read, write, or research history.

Unitl recently, almost all we knew about the Eastern Front in World War I and II were from the Germans--the losers.

Most of what we know about how slaves were treated in the South in the antebellum days are from stories and diaries of slaves--hardly the winners.

Remember the Alamo? The stories come from the losers.

Ever heard of the Armenia Massacre? You didn't hear about that from the winners.

Do the diaries of Anne Frank and Tanya Savicheva ring a bell? they are hardly the boasting of the victorious.

The list goes on and on.

History is written by those who can write, whether they win or lose.

Don't confuse the limited amount of history that we come in contact with as all the history there is. There is an almost unlimited amount of history that is there for anyone to read.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
The Anabaptist Jacques,

Just because there are kooks and nutcases that read a conspiracy behind every world event does not necessarily negate the general notion that world leaders want a world gov't.
 
The Anabaptist Jacques,

Just because there are kooks and nutcases that read a conspiracy behind every world event does not necessarily negate the general notion that world leaders want a world gov't.

True. But there is not even the slightest evidence that they do.

They usually can't agree on anything.

And let's keep in mind that most of them are elected, temporary officials.

They have national constituentcies.

If you think the temporary leader of Germany wants his people ruled by a Turkish leader, or any Russian wanting his country ruled by a Pole or a Ukrainian or vice versa, or an American wanting America ruled by a Korean, or vice versa, then I think you are misreading these leaders.

People have been crying about the creeping one world government since the end of World War II.

Compare how many contires there are now compared to then.

There are at least 100 more sovereign countries now then there were then.

Hardly an indication that temporary world leaders want just one country.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

programmer_guy

True Ex-Scientologist
True. But there is not even the slightest evidence that they do.

They usually can't agree on anything.

And let's keep in mind that most of them are elected, temporary officials.

They have national constituentcies.

If you think the temporary leader of Germany wants his people ruled by a Turkish leader, or any Russian wanting his country ruled by a Pole or a Ukrainian or vice versa, or an American wanting America ruled by a Korean, or vice versa, then I think you are misreading these leaders.

People have been crying about the creeping one world government since the end of World War II.

Compare how many contires there are now compared to then.

There are at least 100 more sovereign countries now then there were then.

Hardly an indication that temporary world leaders want just one country.

The Anabaptist Jacques

I wasn't talking about elected heads of gov't. They have a bit of influence BUT they don't really rule the world anyway.
For your entertainment, do I need to post a clip from "Network" again?
 
I wasn't talking about elected heads of gov't. They have a bit of influence BUT they don't really rule the world anyway.
For your entertainment, do I need to post a clip from "Network" again?

They make the decisions. But they are not dictators and they make decisions that are in agreement with the majority of those that influence them.

Romantic notions about who rules the world are really just that: romantic notions.

The modern world economy generally operates on the desire to maximize profits, and political decisions are made by consensus. I

nternational decisions may be made by a select few but they never come to fruition without consensus.

The world is not so easily controlled. The President of the United States can't control the Taliban, nor can big business, not can the Taliban's neighbors.

Public opinion in the Western World is fickle, but once it gains a large consensus it is impossible to ignore. Leaders can try to co-opt public opinion to further their own agendas, but they can't control it.

The world is not coming under the control of one government.

The world is out-of-control even by its own institutions.

Parents can't control their kids, Churches can't control their parishoners, Governments can't control their own populations.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

michaelangelo

Gold Meritorious Patron
Which Amazon.com deleted from all book readers worldwide, last week.
About a month ago I purchased a copy of 1984 from Sussex University bookshop. They may have one in your local Uni bookshop. Also oneheartbooks.com may have a copy. It's in America somewhere and on the internet.
 

michaelangelo

Gold Meritorious Patron
About a month ago I purchased a copy of 1984 from Sussex University bookshop. They may have one in your local Uni bookshop. Also oneheartbooks.com may have a copy. It's in America somewhere and on the internet.

"History is written by men who hung heroes"-Braveheart.
 
About a month ago I purchased a copy of 1984 from Sussex University bookshop. They may have one in your local Uni bookshop. Also oneheartbooks.com may have a copy. It's in America somewhere and on the internet.

That's right. I found 819 used copies on Amazon, not to mention new ones.

Also every Barnes and Noble store has them in the classics and back to school sections.

It is on the reading list for the county public schools where I live.

I guess they didn't get the memo from the New World Order in-charge.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 
You mean it wasn't written in the 50 books you read during your indoctrination.
Yes it was from a movie, of course it was. Who are you going to bully now?.

Why is it that you think I am bullying anyone? A person can make a comment or disagree with you without it being bullying.

I made a point that history is a vast subject that is not written only by the victors. You reply with an apparent quote from a historical figure. I pointed out that it was not from a historical figure but from a movie.

If you find that someone disagreeing with your data or opinion is bullying then you have a problem.

Most of the people that I argue with on this conspiracy theorists point do not read and/or are dismissive of any other information which disagrees with them.

I point out that there is mush more information on history, which they seem to know so little about, and I am the one who is accused of being arrogant.

My accusation against them is that they do not know what they are talking about; that they do not know everything.

Their claim is that they know more than others and others who do not see it their way are brainwashed or naive.

They dismiss the data that contradicts them. Yet I am called the arrogant one.

Maybe we should all bow down to the all-knowing conspiracy theorists who know so much more than us mere mortals.

The problem I have is that there are some of these conspiracy theorists that have an excited glee about the world being controlled by a few.

They seem happy and excited that their doom and gloom visions is real, and they insist that others believe it. They are a bore, a drag, liars and fools.

It is they who bully others to believe what they believe.

I suggest that people read more. they decry this and insist that people read only what they recommend.

The Anabaptist Jacques
 

Dulloldfart

Squirrel Extraordinaire
I just counted 819 used copies of 1984 on Amazon.com. they run between 6.95 and 14.99 a copy. Plus they sell new editions.

This is why believers in the New World Order need to forget about their links to conspiracy theory sites and start linking up to the real world. You guys make things up as you go along.

The Anabaptist Jacques

Google News shows 536 articles under the heading "Amazon pulls 1984 from Kindle ebooks." Here is an excerpt from one. From http://www.thestar.com/sciencetech/article/672156:

Earlier this month, another Kindle "feature" garnered negative attention. Without any warning or consent, Amazon remotely deleted copies of two books from thousands of Kindle devices. Few customers were aware that Amazon retained the technical capability to erase ebooks from their devices. Yet, when the company learned that two books had been distributed without proper authorization, it simply deleted the books and promised a refund.

The case proved that fact is often stranger than fiction since the books were George Orwell's 1984 and Animal Farm, conjuring up new images of the Orwellian vision of information control.​

My opinion, for what it's worth, is that the fact that it was Orwell's books is most likely pure coincidence. Or maybe it was deliberately done by someone with a wicked sense of humour.

Second opinion. I don't know if I said this earlier on this thread or not, and I'm not going to check, but I have never seen any evidence at all of any direct connection between the CofS and any NWO-type non-Scn actions and think the idea is silly.

Paul
 

michaelangelo

Gold Meritorious Patron
There is no NWO, there are no chemtrails and 9/11 was organised by a man in a turban from a cave in Afghanistan! So get your swine flue vaccines and keep drinking your beer cos evereything is just dandy and tickety boo!
 
Last edited:
Top