Michael Emrys Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 sorry - trying to build up a picture of a monolithic left with some kind of central control just shows how fragmented and disparate "the left" is... I once heard someone say that if the Democrats (US Democratic Party) ever had to form a firing squad, they'd form it in a circle, all pointing inwards. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted October 26, 2009 Author Share Posted October 26, 2009 I want to say that I don't believe that there is an international communist conspiracy in spite of what some may have interpreted from my initial post. What I do think is that there are many ... like minded 'collectivists' of various stripes in positions of power in the west who are all independently 'nudging' the international community towards some form of global government / collective society of some type. They are not picking up the phone and calling each other for strategy sessions. No, they all simply believe in the same thing and are independently moving the global community towards this end state. Some of you accept the premise of some of what I posted but you don't accept all of what I posted or how I link it together, and that's fine. I'm sure that what I posted turns a few people's world views totally upside down and that was part of why I decided to post what I did. I'm not going to try to convince anyone to change their views - people can read what I posted and decide for themselves what to make of it. My main objective was to start a conversation and get people to re evaluate some things that maybe they took for granted before. Now if you think I'm totally out in tin foil land, then why don't you take the links that I posted and take them apart like some do in here for John Kettler rather than just hyper ventilating. Let's take a few baby steps and start with this ten minute video here. What does this video mean to you? Keep in mind that the man in that video was in the Obama administration. You can either agree or disagree with what he is saying but you can't deny that he is saying it. So how do you interpret what he is saying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted October 26, 2009 Share Posted October 26, 2009 What you've just described, then, is a variant of Smith's "Invisible Hand." In other words; A Good Thing You can either agree or disagree with what he is saying but you can't deny that he is saying it Indeed, I cannot deny he said it. I suspect this profound statement of yours answers the age old question about whether a tree, falling in a forest with noone to hear it, still makes a sound. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 Okay, try this link from the 'socialist international' home page then http://www.socialistinternational.org/viewArticle.cfm?ArticleID=2032 The work of the Commission has focused on three priorities: a) to evaluate the threat of global warming and climate change and consider new global energy policies as fundamental to any response to that threat; to consider ways to redress social imbalances and economic inequality through new forms of governance; and c) to consider improvements in global governance as a foundation for building a sustainable world society overall. They are operating in the UN. Is that official enough for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I once heard someone say that if the Democrats (US Democratic Party) ever had to form a firing squad, they'd form it in a circle, all pointing inwards. But I thought that was par for the course for the US, get the result but with substantial collateral damage : ) ASL - I cannot say I have spent time looking at the videos but the tenor of your argument is based on them. It struck me that you talk of like minded people and revolution. Which made me think of other world revolutions with similarities. The Industrial Revolution seems to fit the bill. Change throughout the world as the UK [and others] supercharged by coal and minerals changed the world. It would seem that solar and other sources of power may again change the world and create vast industries based on new technologies. Conspiracy, or an alignment of thought and trade created the Industrial Rev? Fairly obvious that if many are going to benefit then it will get a consensus - and incidental to increased activity there should be a rise in the standard of living.* * Slightly complicated because now we have a crowded planet and looming problems with climatic change. Good green smarts http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/313642/Flyby+system+spots+power+plant+sites.htm?nl=TE_NL&dep=webops&dte=211009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Sheesh, these guys suck at conspiracies. Fancy placing the agenda of the Vast Left Wing Green Conspiracy on a webpage like that. What can they have been thinking? The need for secrecy is covered in Conspiracy 101, surely? (BTW; in a quick browse I see no evidence that "they are operating in the UN") (BTW2; the phrase Kettlerian refers to, among other things, drawing unsupportable conclusions from tenuous connections and flimsy or non-existant linkages.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 Sheesh, these guys suck at conspiracies. Fancy placing the agenda of the Vast Left Wing Green Conspiracy on a webpage like that. What can they have been thinking? The need for secrecy is covered in Conspiracy 101, surely? (BTW; in a quick browse I see no evidence that "they are operating in the UN") (BTW2; the phrase Kettlerian refers to, among other things, drawing unsupportable conclusions from tenuous connections and flimsy or non-existant linkages.) http://www.socialistinternational.org/about.cfm Consultative status with the United Nations As a non-governmental organisation, the Socialist International has consultative status (Category I) with the United Nations, and works internationally with a large number of other organisations. I never said there was a conspiracy. In fact I posted just a few minutes ago that I didn't think there was a conspiracy. Besides, why does it have to be a conspiracy - what difference does it make? They are telling you right in black and white what they are all about and they are carrying out their agenda in plain sight through global warming treaties. How does that invalidate what I was saying? It's almost like you are covering your eyes and saying "I'm not looking! I'm not looking!" Either that or you just don't care - which is fine. Just state that you are a socialist and you are in favor of a global government that is 'collectivist' in nature and in which you will doubtless have no vote or direct representation. If you are in favor of that then by all means let your views be known. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Sorry ASL, I did not see you latest addition before posting. The link you provide reads very well and seems to involve the best efforts of intelligent men and women. In the event that world weather could be situated permanently above the countries creating the problem then I am sure the desire for a global solution would be more muted. However as the climate is affected for all inhabitants on planet Earth then cooperation/polite coercion is required to face this very dangerous problem. I do fear that some people do not think it is a genuine problem and will seek to sabotage any attempts for joint world action on the grounds that it is a front for global government. I think some of these people are keen that the World does plunge into disaster to prove their Apocalyptic [?] world view correct. It seems to me that the correct analogy is that your country is threatened by invasion and you argue the toss that it is a scare only and therefore you will not be conscripted. The Govt is TRYING TO CONTROL YOU by telling you of threats. In the case of Iraq this was undoubtedly a 100% scare story but I am afraid that Climate Change is a genuine threat to all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 But I thought that was par for the course for the US, get the result but with substantial collateral damage : ) ASL - I cannot say I have spent time looking at the videos but the tenor of your argument is based on them. It struck me that you talk of like minded people and revolution. Which made me think of other world revolutions with similarities. The Industrial Revolution seems to fit the bill. Change throughout the world as the UK [and others] supercharged by coal and minerals changed the world. It would seem that solar and other sources of power may again change the world and create vast industries based on new technologies. Conspiracy, or an alignment of thought and trade created the Industrial Rev? Fairly obvious that if many are going to benefit then it will get a consensus - and incidental to increased activity there should be a rise in the standard of living.* * Slightly complicated because now we have a crowded planet and looming problems with climatic change. Good green smarts http://www.theengineer.co.uk/Articles/313642/Flyby+system+spots+power+plant+sites.htm?nl=TE_NL&dep=webops&dte=211009 It's admittedly a lot of material to go over and it takes a lot of time to look through. The Socialist international website is an interesting one and I hadn't located it prior to my initial post or I would have included it. If you have the time to look at the links and videos then I would be curious what you make of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Ok, so they specifically are NOT "operating in the UN". Glad we cleared that up, heh? It'd be awful if you were, you know, deliberately obfuscating or otherwise making the VLWGC look more eeevul than it really is. you are covering your eyes and saying "I'm not looking! I'm not looking!" Either that or you just don't care - which is fine. Just state that you are a socialist and you are in favor of a global government that is 'collectivist' in nature and in which you will doubtless have no vote or direct representation. ROFL - that is hilarious! I may have to change my sig to something along those lines While I'm doing that, you may want to associate yourself with the contents to be found here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 Sorry ASL, I did not see you latest addition before posting. The link you provide reads very well and seems to involve the best efforts of intelligent men and women. In the event that world weather could be situated permanently above the countries creating the problem then I am sure the desire for a global solution would be more muted. However as the climate is affected for all inhabitants on planet Earth then cooperation/polite coercion is required to face this very dangerous problem. I do fear that some people do not think it is a genuine problem and will seek to sabotage any attempts for joint world action on the grounds that it is a front for global government. I think some of these people are keen that the World does plunge into disaster to prove their Apocalyptic [?] world view correct. It seems to me that the correct analogy is that your country is threatened by invasion and you argue the toss that it is a scare only and therefore you will not be conscripted. The Govt is TRYING TO CONTROL YOU by telling you of threats. In the case of Iraq this was undoubtedly a 100% scare story but I am afraid that Climate Change is a genuine threat to all. The premise of those who see things the way I do is that the Global Warming "science" is propaganda by which those who want to pursue a collectivist global government get their agenda enacted and accepted by the common folk as summed up by this article here http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/un_climate_reports_they_lie.html# they get the folks to agree to a communistic 'global government' in order to save themselves from ficticious Global Warming - which of course leaves 'them' in charge. A court in the UK apparently did rule that Al Gore's movie had something like 9 errors of fact in it. Doesn't that make you pause and wonder just for a moment? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 The premise of those who see things the way I do is that the Global Warming "science" is propaganda by which those who want to pursue a collectivist global government get their agenda enacted and accepted by the common folk as summed up by this article here ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 A court in the UK apparently did rule that Al Gore's movie had something like 9 errors of fact in it. Doesn't that make you pause and wonder just for a moment? Yes, yes it does. It makes me wonder why anyone would take a docutainment as the literal truth, and why anyone would be terribly surpirsed to find inaccuracies. It also makes me wonder why anyone so emotionally bound up in a science-is-propaganda worldview would make such vague assertions, while leaving out such pertinent information as the judges summary: "I have no doubt that Dr Stott, the Defendant's expert, is right when he says that: 'Al Gore's presentation of the causes and likely effects of climate change in the film was broadly accurate.'" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/03/the-copenhagen-treaty-draft-wealth-transfer-defined-now-with-dignity-penalty/ I like your new sig Jon S. It fits. Sometimes you've got to call a spade a spade Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 (BTW2; the phrase Kettlerian refers to, among other things, drawing unsupportable conclusions from tenuous connections and flimsy or non-existant linkages.) Plus the Inverted Pyramid of Reason: taking something that is tiny and using it as a foundation for broader and broader layers of logic jumping and poor hypothesis. eg. Al Gore's film contains nine errors. This makes you wobder if there are more. If there are more it is proof that all global warming science is flawed. If it is flawed, then it is totally false and an obvious tool of the Reptiloids.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I like your new sig Jon S. It fits. Sometimes you've got to call a spade a spade Yeah, it's the gift that keeps on giving. Just now I noticed yet another idiocy embedded in it. Well done, bro - you hit the fallactic jackpot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave H Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 Yeah, it's the gift that keeps on giving. Just now I noticed yet another idiocy embedded in it. Well done, bro - you hit the fallactic jackpot. Hi, my name is Dave and I'm a socialist in favor of a global government. I'm also sorry you beat me to the sig. Good catch on the "collectivist" with no direct vote or representation hilarity, comrade. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 They are operating in the UN. Is that official enough for you? where do you get that from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 where do you get that from? Asked and answered. The short version is: pure imagination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 By dieseltaylor * Slightly complicated because now we have a crowded planet and looming problems with climatic change. Luckily all that is being solved by transfering production to densly populated areas where environmental concers (along with workers human rights) take the backseat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 ASL Vet:Okay, try this link from the 'socialist international' home page then http://www.socialistinternational.or...ArticleID=2032 Quote: The work of the Commission has focused on three priorities: a) to evaluate the threat of global warming and climate change and consider new global energy policies as fundamental to any response to that threat; to consider ways to redress social imbalances and economic inequality through new forms of governance; and c) to consider improvements in global governance as a foundation for building a sustainable world society overall. They are operating in the UN. Is that official enough for you? Seriously, why isn't every political movement doing exactly this? Since when has continuing to do the thing that doesn't work been the best thing to do? JonS, the hereditary union memberships I'm talking about are willable or otherwise transferable assets held in families. Such instruments do exist - they're just not legal in NZ or Oz. As for global warming and the message - it could be the only threat likely to appeal to every population and force some sort of globally cohesive action. The politics of fear is still being practiced... The fact that the reasoning behind the message is somewhat inaccurate (so far) in its predictions (I'm thinking specifically about the energy loss due to phase change of water and the lack of inclusion of this in the modelling) leads me to class the acceptance of the message as an act of faith. As such, I can't see that giving my allegiance to the high priests of the Green movement makes any more sense than doing the same for the Pope. Gore, frankly, scares the **** out of me. Elmar, my error, thankyou. But if I were to have a look at the make up of the leadership of the Danish governments, or the German, French, Swedish... (by Party) since WWII, I wonder how many different Parties would actually turn up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 ASL Vet: JonS, the hereditary union memberships I'm talking about are willable or otherwise transferable assets held in families. Such instruments do exist - they're just not legal in NZ or Oz. I dunno if they are legal or not here, but they do exist, particularly on the docks. It's not so long ago that you would never get a job on the docks unless you were related to someone who already worked there. And you can't join the union if you don't have the job.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted October 27, 2009 Author Share Posted October 27, 2009 where do you get that from? Am I just typing to watch my own fingers moving? What part of this is hard to understand? Consultative status with the United Nations As a non-governmental organisation, the Socialist International has consultative status (Category I) with the United Nations, and works internationally with a large number of other organisations. http://www.socialistinternational.org/about.cfm I don't know how you can have consultative status with the United Nations (aka UN) and not be operating in the UN. It's in the quoted section in my response to Jon S below the link I posted where this quote can be found. Apparently Jon S believes that a consultant doesn't operate within the organization that it consults with. Nothing personal Stalinist Organist Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tero Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 By ASL Veteran I don't know how you can have consultative status with the United Nations (aka UN) and not be operating in the UN. Wikipedia to the rescue. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consultative_Status Consultative Status has its foundation in Article 71 of Chapter 10 of the United Nations Charter: "The Economic and Social Council may make suitable arrangements for consultation with non-governmental organizations which are concerned with matters within its competence. Such arrangements may be made with international organizations and, where appropriate, with national organizations after consultation with the Member of the United Nations concerned." In 1948, shortly after the founding of the United Nations, there were 45 NGOs in Consultative Status, mostly large international organizations. Currently there are 2719 NGOs in consultative status with the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), and some 400 NGOs accredited to the Commission on Sustainable Development (CSD).Sounds to me these group are there for lobbying. It's in the quoted section in my response to Jon S below the link I posted where this quote can be found. Apparently Jon S believes that a consultant doesn't operate within the organization that it consults with. How do you define "operate within the organization" ? Sinister or benevolent operation ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted October 27, 2009 Share Posted October 27, 2009 I love the way ASL goes from "consultative status" to being a consultant. but even consultants do not have to work within an organisation - they can be doing all their work outside and all the organisation gets is a report at the end...which it may then choose to do something with or not. Certainly some consultants come into organisations and work "inside them" - but not all by any means. and yes, that definition looks like "lobby group" to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts