Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Boxing Ring Revived -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gao seng who wrote (2656)	2/20/2002 2:11:53 PM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 7720

I do not think that George Bush was referring to world government when he referred to a New World Order, I think he was referring to a time of peace and cooperation in the aftermath of the Cold War. Nor do I think we are anywhere near a world government, when the European Union has barely gotten off the ground, and NAFTA has not led to much closer relations with our neighbors, Mexico and Canada. I do not think there is a conspiracy, and I have no idea what a conspiracy would do. Talk up world unity? That may be goofy, but it is not nefarious. The reference in the Declaration of Independence is not to a "conspiracy", but to royal usurpation of colonial prerogatives, for example, disbanding colonial legislatures, allowing royal governor's to rule by fiat, and the like. To say that there are those who might erode the constitutional order or be cavalier with national sovereignty is true enough, but that does not depend on conspiracy in any meaningful sense. What I want to know is what is gained by sticking the label "conspiracy" on pro- internationlist sentiments?