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.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elsewhere who wrote (116629)	10/12/2003 2:32:20 PM
From: Sidney Reilly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

So you have a one sided discussion here and anything contrary is a conspiracy theory?? What I have said is no conspiracy theory. It's all well documented. The real goals of the CFR are well documented. I can see a moderated thread to stop name calling, heckling and such but not to prevent the polite introduction of contrary ideas. That's censorship. And that's something else the CFR would endorse too. As they do it themselves often through the control they have of the media and mainstream news.

To: Elsewhere who wrote (116629)	10/12/2003 2:43:46 PM
From: Sidney Reilly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Oh, I see the prohibition against conspiracy theories now that I read the header and followed that link. How can the history behind the founding of the CFR be considered a conspiracy theory? It's well documented that the CFR and like minded international organizations are working together to establish a one world global government. Some think it is a New World monopoly driven financial order so the rich men behind these organizations have permanent legal rights to their business empires. Now that could get into the "conspiracy theory" arena but the actual history which I posted I would think would not.

To: Elsewhere who wrote (116629)	10/13/2003 2:45:12 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

<Yes, some of us would like to see a "New UN", NUN.> Jochen, we have a quorum. We should set up a bilateral commission to draft a constitution. Another member and it could be trilateral. Quadrilateral or even multilateral would be fine too. We the Sheeple Rulz OK! It's a shame the USA isn't in favour of democracy, preferring totalitarian rule by force, shifting alliances [as before WWI - look at the carnage that led to], and multilevel human rights; Eminent Citizens [Americans], Allied Citizens[British], general aliens [also-rans], and non-persons who live in places like Guantanamo Bay or Dostum's shipping containers]. Mqurice