'The New World Order'

[Paul]

The reason for the preemptive stike on Iraq has to do with the establishment of 'The New World Order' - (control of the World Energy and The World Bank) and 'Christianity' being 'The World Religion'. Does anyone understand?


May the Spirit of Love and Truth be within you and your deeds accordingly

Peace be with you, Paul

[Inquisitor]

Any person armed with dogma of The Holy Orthodox Church understands that. Most people of course are unarmed in a spiritual sense and therefore easly decieved and manipulated.

The NWO has as its goal coming of the anti-christ.

What I don't understand in your post is the following:

'Christianity' being 'The World Religion'

Clearly I either misundersood you, or you don't understand that NWO's biggest enemy is Christianity. NWO needs obidient slaves there is no place in it for Christians who are " slaves of God and as such slaves to no man".

[Sonart]

I'm always a tad bemused by the rather arrogant presumptiousness of Christians like Inquisitor.

NWO needs obidient slaves there is no place in it for Christians who are "slaves of God and as such slaves to no man".

All evidence to the contrary. Religious leaders aren't called 'shepherds who tend their flocks' for nothing. Why is it, after all, that Christianity is not defined by one unified concept, but Greek Orthodox, Roman Catholic, Baptist, Lutheran, Methodist, Episcopalean, Pentacostal, Quaker, Jehovah's Witness, etc, etc. concepts of what God and Jesus would have us believe and do.

In the absence of God and Jesus having their own weekly radio show, it's left to a few strong minded 'Shepherds' who think they know 'thy will' to gather flocks of lambs around their particular message.

Any person armed with dogma of The Holy Orthodox Church understands that. Most people of course are unarmed in a spiritual sense and therefore easly decieved and manipulated.

Right. "We" know the truth! "They" have been fooled! Yaaawn!

As to Paul's statement...

The reason for the preemptive stike on Iraq has to do with the establishment of 'The New World Order'

...there's probably some truth to that. 'The New World Order' is simply the reality of trying to sort out the post-Cold War world. The mideast was once divided along cold-war lines, with Syra, Egypt and Iraq being Soviet clients while Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Shah's Iran were U.S. client states. Absent the Soviet Union, it's of little surprise that some over-reaching American regime would eventually decide it was time to use our status as the sole remaining superpower to remake the mideast. And the fact that this particular U.S. regime is in bed with the religious right adds legitimacy, whether actually true or not, to Paul's statement...

...and 'Christianity' being 'The World Religion'.

.

[Osborn F Enready]

1000 points of light, the New World Order.

It's the brainchild of secret society boys from way, way back. Anyone who can attach any type of "goodness" to the New World Order, is naive and waiting for the rest of their rights and freedoms to be taken. It isn't new, it's as old as tyranny.

[fedfem]

Quote by: Osborn F Enready 1000 points of light, the New World Order. It's the brainchild of secret society boys from way, way back. Anyone who can attach any type of "goodness" to the New World Order, is naive and waiting for the rest of their rights and freedoms to be taken. It isn't new, it's as old as tyranny.

A New World Order is not the same as THE New World Order some nutcases believe in.

[PatrickHenry]

Your take on the New World Order is ludicrously simplistic, Paul. There are volumes of literature, whole websites, and entire institutions devoted to exposing it. Yet you drop three lines on us as an explanation.

Here's some prophecy for you: as soon as the Administrator reads this title, this topic will be in the "Boiler Room." So why bother bringing it up? And Paul, do a little work on researching the topic before you present it for mass ridicule like you just did.

[Osborn F Enready]

FedFem said:
A New World Order is not the same as THE New World Order some nutcases believe in.

I say:
Ummmm, yes it is, if it consists of removing my rights, my constitution, and my ability to pursue happiness while retaining my liberty. If you can't understand that, take Patricks advice.

[Sonart]

Ummmm, yes it is, if it consists of removing my rights, my constitution, and my ability to pursue happiness while retaining my liberty. If you can't understand that, take Patricks advice.

Egad, talk about simplistic. Care to expand on that just a teeny bit?


.