Gulags for U.S. citizens in final planning stages

I understand that avoiding the truth might be more comfortable than facing it Ed, but Jesus didn't didn't teach us to do that. Did he?

Avoiding the facts doesn't mean they are not facts. It only means one refuses to face reality. The reality is the Northwoods document, call it what you will lays out a plan called Operation Mongoose in plain English for all to see by the U.S. government to use fake terror as a pretext to engineer the citizen's consent to go to war with another country.

Avoid the facts if you want, that's fine by me. But imho opinion it is being less than honest to accuse someone of using "unsupported facts" and so on just because you refuse to look at those facts.

Throwing garbage in the groceries to spoil them all isn't being honest imho either.

 

He also told us to submit, and pray for our leaders, didn't he ?

 

Jesus never told us to submit to men that lie and conive to get their own way did he? If I remember rightly he spoke out against men that did such things.

 

Actually, I believe he did. Unless you can show me where he told us to "fight the power", I have to say we submit to our leaders, no matter how we feel about them.

Second, he tells us not to bear false witness. Since nobody has ever proved Bush lied to get us into war, I'd say you are on some dangerous ground.

 

Then show me where he said this. Chapter and verse.

I'm pretty sure you know this statement to be false. You may indeed have grown weary of my rants, but to say they are not supported by facts simply because you refuse to look at them is being less than honest imho.

I have linked to many supporting facts. Most of which were taken from the same sources you and others consider to be "credible" mainstream news agencies.

So, how is this not bearing false witness?

 

That statement is abslutely NOT false. I am VERY tired of your factless, unsupportable rants, to the point I rarely come in here, anymore. I am now afraid to agree with you, on anything, because you run away with the "globalist" ball. Those of us who read scripture know all about the one world government, so join us, in praising God Allmighty, that we see his word coming true.

Second, and I'm really sorry to say this, I will not read any more links from you, due to the holograph Allah thing, which you seem to still stand by, and your constant insistance that our own government egineered 9/11.

So I guess this means we won't bump into each other much, anymore. It's not just you, BTW, but these forums bring out the worst in me.

 

So, am I to gather from this last statement that you see the evil of a one world government happening all around you but because you consider yourself to be only a spectator to it that you have no responsiblity to your fellow man to speak out against it?

By not speaking out against evil are you not taking part in it?

All I have attempted to do is point out the ways and means the one world government that you yourself freely admit is coming to fruition according to God's word is being implemented.

This is very confusing. You admit to the formation of a one world government fortold by scripture yet you deny the very real and documentable means to which is being brought about.

How does one both believe and deny the same thing at the same time?

 

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20030331/greider

Who is to rule the world's future--global markets or national governments? The regime of globalization promotes an unfettered marketplace as the dynamic instrument organizing international relations. The other regime relies on the old-fashioned military power of the nation-state--the United States alone in this case--to impose its will on others in the name of global order.

 

The experience of a good friend of mine was different. His apartment was broken into by the FBI because he had been seen talking to some people they considered to be dangerous. In fact, he was talking to them about the gospel.

The FBI later admitted their mistake but refused to pay for the damage they had done and warned him not to say anything about the episode. That's what kept us from going to our Congressmen and Senators. I would gues that there are a lot of stories like his but everyone else is also afraid of the "Secret Police."

 

poncho: //I understand that avoiding the truth might be more comfortable
than facing it Ed, but Jesus didn't didn't teach us to do that. Did he?//

I think the followers of Jesus told us to be wise as serpents
and as inocent as doves.

I've been wanting to say this for awile:
Most Conspiracy Hounds are liars or fools.
First, they might be a fool and really not preceiving
that the very agencies they decry are taking note of every word
they say. The conspiracy Hounds are on the top of the list
to be taken to the concentration camps.
Second if they do understand the agencies they decry are keeping
track of them, and they still do it, then they are liars:
well, more like hypocrites

Caveat: I only describe a shoe, if the shoe seems to fit,
wear it. I don't put shoes on feet, that is judgmental

poncho: //Avoiding the facts doesn't mean they are not facts.
It only means one refuses to face reality.
The reality is the Northwoods document,
call it what you will lays out a plan called Operation Mongoose
in plain English for all to see by the U.S. government
to use fake terror as a pretext to engineer the citizen's
consent to go to war with another country.//

I do not dispute this 'fact'.
I do wonder if you have any concept (honest or dishonest) of
what these facts really mean?

Perchance you don't know what 'a plan' means.
A wise government has plans for things that may never happen.
It is necessary in complex socities such as in the world now to
have multiple plans for multiple circumstances. Not
all circumstances will ever happen. 'A plan' shows a route
that could be taken, not a route that is taken. As I said,
there is nothing gained by studying the roads our government did
NOT take.

BTW, non-goverenment agencies
also write 'plans'. Some support their plan making by 'selling'
copies of their plan.

Poncho: //So, am I to gather from this last statement that you
see the evil of a one world government happening all around
you but because you consider yourself to be only a spectator
to it that you have no responsiblity to your fellow man
to speak out against it?//

First, there is
a move toward a one world government. But some overlook counter
forces: those toward local un-government.
The computer is a very powerful force. Though it is largely
knowledge based, each computer user on the WWW is a force to
be dealt with seperately (i.e. a government of one).

 

There is only one response that is suitable to the nonsense that poncho, Galatian, Rocko9, and their ilk, post on this Forum: That is no response.

I think that after a short time they would get tired of scratching each others back; but if not at least it would keep them occupied with their own mischief.

 

You would think that some folks on this forum would want to pull thier head out of the sand every now and then and face the stark reality of the failure of the present administration to properly govern. Instead those like OldRegular and those who think just like him want to repress others for their opposing views and that kind of thinking, folks , is just plain un-American.

 

Let me talk about a past 'conspiracy' that is a hollow strawman:

Here is what a fairly balanced site says:
http://www.silverbearcafe.com/private/lewin.html

//In 1967 the war in Vietnam was escalating and race riots were breaking out in many major U.S. cities. Popular distrust of the federal government was growing. It was in this context that on October 16 a book appeared titled [/b] Report from Iron Mountain on the Possibility and Desirability of Peace.[/b] It was published by Dial Press, a division of Simon & Schuster. Leonard C. Lewin, a New York freelance writer, wrote the introduction to the book. He explained that the report had been compiled by 15 experts known as the Special Study Group (SSG) who had been brought together by the U.S. government. The SSG had first met in 1963 at a secret "underground nuclear hideout" called Iron Mountain. They had then held periodic meetings during the next two and a half years to discuss the problems that would confront the United States if it entered into a period of permanent peace. According to Lewin, one of the experts ("John Doe") who was identified as a professor of social science at a 'large Middle Western University,' had decided to release the report to the public.

//The report, in language full of think-tank jargon, documented the conclusions of the Special Study Group concerning whether peace was possible given the economic condition of the world. The SSG decided that peace "would almost certainly not be in the best interest of stable society." War, they argued, was simply too important a part of the world economy, and therefore it was necessary to continue a state of war indefinitely: //

This report was distained by the US Government starting the day it came out.
I suspect also the Northwoods Document was likewise condemned.
So I'm not going to standby quitely and be damned for 'avoiding the truth'.
Get real, we should be concurned about the bad paths the current government
of the USofA is taking NOT the half-baked paths they did not take.

Last night on the SF (Science Fiction) channel I was watching
the 1983 Movie THE DAY AFTER. It is about all-out nuclear war between
Russia and the USofA. Thank you, in prefernce to that I like living in the
Terrorist Age. Maybe a city or two will be nuked in this 'modern age' instead
of the whole planetary surface being purged of all life forms.

 

You look like the leader type,
Brother OldRegular. You lead the walkout
(ah, er, well the 'typing slow-down') and
I'm sure the rest of us 'balanced and objective
souls' will follow.

 

A proposal that was rejected by the Kennedy admistration. In 1962 no less! The people who knew, or cared anything about it are long gone.

I don't think anyone would say that conspiricies never happen. They do. But to tie every illegal proposal and 'questionable' event for the last few centuries into one giant conspiricy is not reasonable. It's also not reasonable to expect everyone to see it the way you do.

 

You would think that some folks on this forum would want to pull thier head out of the sand every now and then and face the stark reality of the failure of the present administration to properly govern. Instead those like OldRegular and those who think just like him want to repress others for their opposing views and that kind of thinking, folks , is just plain un-American. </font>[/QUOTE]You don't read very well Rocko9. I didn't say anything about repressing your views. I said that if others did not respond [in an attempt to correct your twisted views]:

 

You look like the leader type,
Brother OldRegular. You lead the walkout
(ah, er, well the 'typing slow-down') and
I'm sure the rest of us 'balanced and objective
souls' will follow. </font>[/QUOTE]Ed

I just posted a response to socko Rocko9's mischaracterization of my suggestion. However, I will do as I said, not respond to these foolish conspiracy theories and internet lies that are posted on this Christian Forum. One can expect such nonsense on the various leftwing blogs but they have no place on a Chistian Forum.

 

O'REILLY: Orlando, Florida, Mike, go.

CALLER: Hey Bill, I appreciate you taking my call.

O'REILLY: Sure.

CALLER: I like to listen to you during the day, I think Keith Olbermann's show --

O'REILLY: There ya go, Mike is -- he's a gone guy. You know, we have his -- we have your phone numbers, by the way. So, if you're listening, Mike, we have your phone number, and we're going to turn it over to Fox security, and you'll be getting a little visit.

HILL: Maybe Mike is from the mothership.

O'REILLY: No, Maybe Mike is going to get into big trouble, because we're not going to play around. When you call us, ladies and gentleman, just so you know, we do have your phone number, and if you say anything untoward, obscene, or anything like that, Fox security then will contact your local authorities, and you will be held accountable. Fair?

HILL: That's fair.

O'REILLY: So, just -- all you guys who do this kind of a thing, you know, I know some shock jocks. Whatever. You will be held accountable. Believe it.

We'll be right back.

SOURCE

Obey or else. Get in line, conform act like us talk like us be like us or else you'll be getting a little visit, you don't want that do you?

 

Private organizations aren't a problem; they can't take anyone's rights if government won't allow it. And to tell you the truth, I don't care if someone gets nailed for an obscene phone call(assuming that's what really happened).

When your government goes bad, there's no escape.

 

Ponch & Galation,
It will not do us any good to post on the BB anymore. Haven't you heard that OldRegular has led a walkout and no one will read our posts anymore.
To tell the truth, I feel as though we have been thouroughly blessed by God and it will be different not seeing OR post his tired old rhetoric.
Meanwhile back to the topic at hand. Bill O'Reilly is a real crybaby it doesn't put him in a very good light when he handles callers in the manner that he handled this one. The world is full of O'Reilly's that espouse our way of life in the good Ol' U.S. of A. Yet they have their own perspective on what the truth should be and are only concerned about their message. If one was the read between the lines of O'Reilly's rants the message for those who oppose his views would be "SHUT UP AND LISTEN TNLY ME". Lets use our God given rights to speak out while we can before some loon who claims that God talks through him takes them away.