Abolishment Of War Implies Elimination Of National Sovereingnty

[singular_me]

I support this author statement... which means that national sovereignty is a distorted concept caused by an economic fallacy.



EXCERPT
Shedding Blood For A New Age: The Art of Sacrificing Slaves
Saman Mohammadi
Infowars.com
May 26, 2012
“Without a long-established war economy, and without its frequent eruption into large-scale shooting war, most of the major industrial advances known to history, beginning with the development of iron, could never have taken place. Weapons technology structures the economy.”

“Since it is historically axiomatic that the existence of any form of weaponry insures its use, we have used the work “peace” as virtually synonymous with disarmament. By the same token, “war” is virtually synonymous with nationhood. The elimination of war implies the inevitable elimination of national sovereignty and the traditional nation-state.

The war system not only has been essential to the existence of nations as independent political entities, but has been equally indispensable to their stable internal political structure. Without it, no government has ever been able to obtain acquiescence in its “legitimacy,” or right to rule its society. The possibility of war provides the sense of external necessity without which nor government can long remain in power.

[MAGNES]

TOTAL MASONISTA !

ROFL !

NWO PROMOTER !

Fits everything else she stands for, no wonder she hates Western Man.

This is total Marxist Ideology and goals of Marxists, Masons, NWO,
anyone here that does not get that is retarded.

Nationalism is Freedom.

Here is Goldie, High Occult Priestess of GIM allied with Skyvike to the end,
she had a link to her own Occult forums.

She has many supporters here too.

http://i49.tinypic.com/30iym82.jpg


RON PAUL
Ron Paul " De-Recognize the United Nations " Excellent Analysis (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?54534-Ron-Paul-quot-De-Recognize-the-United-Nations-quot-Excellent-Analysis)

National Sovereignty is Freedom, not the Orwellian opposite,
Ron Paul gets it, which is why he is also constantly promoting
State Rights, decentralized power, etc , closer to home.
Sovereignty = Freedom .

[vacuum]

Not sure what conclusions the author was trying to draw from that piece, but the excerpt seems to be true, based on historical events.

edit: Ok, I see that the conclusion is in the title. If he's implying that a one world government is the only way to achieve peace, he's wrong. Just because nations imply war, doesn't mean war doesn't exist without nations. It's just different. It's an energy farm. We can either fight each other, or we can each be individually crushed under a boot. Same effect...in fact the latter is probably more efficient.

[singular_me]

TOTAL MASONISTA !

ROFL !

NWO PROMOTER !

Fits everything else she stands for, no wonder she hates Western Man.

This is total Marxist Ideology and goals of Marxists, Masons, NWO,
anyone here that does not get that is retarded.

Nationalism is Freedom.

Here is Goldie, High Occult Priestess of GIM allied with Skyvike to the end,
she had a link to her own Occult forums.

She has many supporters here too


RON PAUL
Ron Paul " De-Recognize the United Nations " Excellent Analysis (http://gold-silver.us/forum/showthread.php?54534-Ron-Paul-quot-De-Recognize-the-United-Nations-quot-Excellent-Analysis)

National Sovereignty is Freedom, not the Orwellian opposite,
Ron Paul gets it, which is why he is also constantly promoting
State Rights, decentralized power, etc , closer to home.
Sovereignty = Freedom .


HAHAHA... Too much for your head Magnes (aka Book) ... It was on Alex Jones....

Nationalism = freedom?
I say Nationalism = collectivism and war catalyst
and both are perfectly correct BUT a true free Man does NOT want war and WANTS to be able to travel freely. FULL decentralization will eventually lead to OPEN borders, if the NWO can ever be dismantled... so either it will be open borders with either a chip under the skin or not... see the difference Magnes?

However, now everybody can see that Magnes would rather shoot the messenger instead of stretching his mind a bit.

Thanks Alex, at least you provide food for the thoughts

Hey Magnes, I am a capitalo-anarchist with a great emphasis on bartering as much as possible.

[Book]

...national sovereignty is a distorted concept...



http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_45VkWqlaR2Y/TU2VCrUmHBI/AAAAAAAAExE/VHVFeOOK3XA/s1600/%25D7%2597%25D7%2593%25D7%25A9_ta_MG_0215.jpg

[Glass]

Wars only occur because some people want other peoples stuff. They want it and the other people don't want to "share" (give it to them) so they up and take it.

In all my travels I have never encountered anyone who wanted to war with me. People mostly are friendly and welcome strangers to their part of the world. Perhaps us 1st worlders forgot this behaviour somehow.

I don't think we need war or a one world government as part of our existence. All we need to do is stop coveting our neighbours ass. Problem solved.

[singular_me]

Not sure what conclusions the author was trying to draw from that piece, but the excerpt seems to be true, based on historical events.

edit: Ok, I see that the conclusion is in the title. If he's implying that a one world government is the only way to achieve peace, he's wrong. Just because nations imply war, doesn't mean war doesn't exist without nations. It's just different. It's an energy farm. We can either fight each other, or we can each be individually crushed under a boot. Same effect...in fact the latter is probably more efficient.

abolishing wars would simply open the borders and nationalism would vanish eventually, one step at the time of course. Cannot. wont happen over night.

If you think that Man is destined to remain an animal, then sorry yes state sovereignty is an illusion that must be enforced.

In fact I was thinking of adding this post in my "I want anarchism in my life time" thread but then changed my mind.

The rock bottom line is that if man refused to think for himself or wants leaders because he is too fearful, he doesnt deserve liberty at all... let alone live whereever he feels like to

Only a man can be a sovereign being... not a state

[singular_me]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_45VkWqlaR2Y/TU2VCrUmHBI/AAAAAAAAExE/VHVFeOOK3XA/s1600/%25D7%2597%25D7%2593%25D7%25A9_ta_MG_0215.jpg

book, your anti-jews agenda is really boring... have fun with yourself

[singular_me]

I don't think we need war or a one world government as part of our existence. All we need to do is stop coveting our neighbours ass. Problem solved.

makes absolutely sense, Glass... the dilemma of mankind will always be "A state OR no State"....

[Horn]

Even those within a singular U.S. state tend to split it into to 2 states when speaking of their sovereignty.

Its part of human nature to be territorial, and also to transcend boundaries when the rules, or activity don't suit in a particular territory.

Molyneaux on the animal farm, in the 1800's you were basically free to go where you were wanted, or needed.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WK6SS4ETHWQ

[palani]

Sovereignty is the active form of citizen. Subject is the passive form.
http://books.google.com/books?id=zXIaAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA75&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U1MyoZ0ibmZK8Fm8OJDbQM3EECByg&ci=73%2C259%2C713%2C595&edge=0

[Book]

...abolishing wars would simply open the borders and nationalism would vanish eventually, one step at the time of course. Cannot. wont happen over night.



https://fasttimesinpalestine.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/four-panel-map.jpg

Let's ask the Palestinians about Goldissima's theory.

:)

[horseshoe3]

In all my travels I have never encountered anyone who wanted to war with me. People mostly are friendly and welcome strangers to their part of the world. Perhaps us 1st worlders forgot this behaviour somehow.

"When two people meet, the natural reaction is immediate friendship until someone called a polititian comes along and tells them to kill each other."

Source unknown.

[singular_me]

Even those within a singular U.S. state tend to split it into to 2 states when speaking of their sovereignty.

Its part of human nature to be territorial, and also to transcend boundaries when the rules, or activity don't suit in a particular territory.

Molyneaux on the animal farm, in the 1800's you were basically free to go where you were wanted, or needed.


yes Horn, I too believe that man is territorial but only regarding his own property/land. Not a whole nation, that is just impossible and a catalyst for wars. However if we had sound economics, there would be much less immigration, and those who'd decide to migrate would be the adventurers and pioneers only. But when the grass look better in the garden nearby, the buzz is spreading like wildfire and then causes havoc to the systems, that is what we have now worldwide, so advocating for sovereignty under those circumstances is misleading or even worse, deceptive.

Id like to visit africa for several months and earn some bucks while traveling... with the currently immigration laws, it is just impossible to do this. But talking of africa, many tribes were nomadic before its colonization and the end result of designing borders and debt money have caused famines all across the continent. 6 years ago or so, 85% of african countries were deeply impoverished. No wonder that many want to flee misery.

earth belongs to ALL humans, Molyneux is a great guy, thanks to him for helping shred light on that fundamental issue.

The NWO has done a great job, no even people who seek and dream of absolute freedom are seen as masonic supporters. Laughable, really.

best to you pal

[Book]

...I too believe that man is territorial but only regarding his own property/land. Not a whole nation, that is just impossible and a catalyst for wars.



http://thewe.cc/thewe_/images_5/-/global_elite_strategy/israel-settlers-attack-palestine-woman.jpe

http://www.idfblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/IDF-soldier-palestinian-girl-fake3-640x448.png

http://www.dullesnow.org/Palestine_Gaza_IDF_Girl.jpg

Let's ask the Palestinians about your "Open Borders" policy Goldissima.

(:;)

[singular_me]

https://fasttimesinpalestine.files.wordpress.com/2009/10/four-panel-map.jpg

Let's ask the Palestinians about Goldissima's theory.

:)

I am sorry for them, but like the other world populations they have been deluded. Thats a mind boggling state of affairs that will lead the whole planet toward WW3 and possibly worse...

who wants national sovereignty wants wars, we have millennia of history that proves it. Insanity is doing the same mistake over and over and expecting different results.

[Book]

Thats a mind boggling state of affairs that will lead the whole planet toward WW3 and possibly worse...



http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_n7RltmTdk-g/TM67w2obihI/AAAAAAAAXW0/TATY069RM2A/s1600/NETANYAHU+-+BLEEDING+HEARTS.jpg

[singular_me]

Sovereignty is the active form of citizen. Subject is the passive form.
http://books.google.com/books?id=zXIaAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA75&img=1&zoom=3&hl=en&sig=ACfU3U1MyoZ0ibmZK8Fm8OJDbQM3EECByg&ci=73%2C259%2C713%2C595&edge=0

I never implied that countries's laws have to be the same everywhere... but freedom of traveling as one does see fit demands open borders. If the laws of whatever country doesnt appeal one, there is no reason to migrate to that particular country. I am sure that if we had a world open border policy (not dictated by the NWO), many countries however would try to make look themselves more appealing though. Free market economy would cause this adjustment spontaneously.

[Book]

... but freedom of traveling as one does see fit demands open borders. If the laws of whatever country doesnt appeal one, there is no reason to migrate to that particular country...



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BvjJ6CY4wso

You agree with this Open Border guy Goldissima.

:)

[singular_me]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_n7RltmTdk-g/TM67w2obihI/AAAAAAAAXW0/TATY069RM2A/s1600/NETANYAHU+-+BLEEDING+HEARTS.jpg

but with a mindset such as yours, Book, I guess you will have to bear some responsibility for what it is/will be at some point... NWO has worked wonders... how about standing up for yourself instead of a group for a change???

Group psychology (aka herd mentality) is really the dead end of society.

[Book]

Id like to visit africa for several months and earn some bucks while traveling... with the currently immigration laws, it is just impossible to do this.



http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/48800000/gif/_48800170_gaza_strip3_map466.gif

Instead of Africa why don't you visit Gaza and help them with their "Open Border" plan?

:D

[Horn]

I am sure that if we had a world open border policy (not dictated by the NWO), many countries however would try to make look themselves more appealing though. Free market economy would cause this adjustment spontaneously.

Might try to look attractive, or not.

That could lead to true sovereignty, not a clinging onto some piece of history that was created hundreds of years ago. (when most borders were open).

It is interesting to think of what it was like for the traveler back then. I imagine without the clearly enforced borders, the peoples natural borders (territorial) and acceptance of outsiders was heightened to a different state of sovereignty we might never know.

You would definitely be inclined to come bearing gifts of some nature.

What we have now is the nation who is most capable of waging war is treated as the golden child as far as traveling rights, so in reference to the thread title, completely flipped.

[singular_me]

http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/48800000/gif/_48800170_gaza_strip3_map466.gif

Instead of Africa why don't you visit Gaza and help them with their "Open Border" plan?

:D

Book, the planned killing of billions of people is my concern and less I participate in world events, the better I feel... if more were doing what I do, the NWO would collapse under its own weight. Thats the only option, I am afraid. Fueling the "us vs them" will only comfort one in the end of time prophecy. So you want a blood sacrifice in the end to prove your point? Sorry dear, but such a mindset is simply bankrupt.

Didnt Christ advocate to leave everything behind? He was an anarchist, thats for sure.

[Horn]

So you want a blood sacrifice in the end to prove your point?

I would suggest not visiting with Idahoan sovereignty, it was born in the basement next to some old potato bin?

[singular_me]

Might try to look attractive, or not.

That could lead to true sovereignty, not a clinging onto some piece of history that was created hundreds of years ago. (when most borders were open).

It is interesting to think of what it was like for the traveler back then. I imagine without the clearly enforced borders, the peoples natural borders (territorial) and acceptance of outsiders was heightened to a different state of sovereignty we might never know.

You would definitely be inclined to come bearing gifts of some nature.

What we have now is the nation who is most capable of waging war is treated as the golden child as far as traveling rights, so in reference to the thread title, completely flipped.

when a state uses "fear" as a trojan horse, dictatorship eventually comes true... its only a matter of time. And since man evolves according its environment (as he was born naked and ignorant), this fear can be found in deep fabric of societies in many various forms.

There is no way to dismantle standing armies as long as people FEAR their nation could be attacked, and collectivism will rule.

Horn when you get a chance, read the whole thing.

[Book]

Didn't Christ advocate to leave everything behind?



http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-U3DaJVxI5vI/T0_IclQSpyI/AAAAAAAAMy8/3UDK73RTj8E/s1600/CW%2BCover%2BFinal.jpg

Share more with us your favorite lessons from Jesus.

:)

[singular_me]

Book, I am not sure as to whether you follow much of the Christ's teachings... since you wish all fledged war and fuel it restlessly.

and fear is an illusion becoming reality when one doesnt understand its consequences. The whole world is being taken for a ride, jews and non jews alike.


Usury in Hinduism and Buddhism

Wayne A.M. Visser and Alastair McIntosh
Centre for Human Ecology
Among the oldest known references to usury are to be found in ancient Indian religious manuscripts and Jain (1929) provides an excellent summary of these in his work on Indigenous Banking in India. The earliest such record derives from the Vedic texts of Ancient India (2,000-1,400 BC) in which the “usurer” (kusidin) is mentioned several times and interpreted as any lender at interest. More frequent and detailed references to interest payment are to be found in the later Sutra texts (700-100 BC), as well as the Buddhist Jatakas (600-400 BC). It is during this latter period that the first sentiments of contempt for usury are exressed. For example, Vasishtha, a well known Hindu law-maker of that time, made a special law which forbade the higher castes of Brahmanas (priests) and Kshatriyas (warriors) from being usurers or lenders at interest. Also, in the Jatakas, usury is referred to in a demeaning manner: “hypocritical ascetics are accused of practising it”.

usury, not only a judeo-christian problem

[Horn]

Horn when you get a chance, read the whole thing.

This one?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/shedding-blood-for-a-new-age-the-art-of-sacrificing-slaves.html

Question: can civilization exist without war as that's what created it.

There's much glorifying the click-clack of synapse going on over there, but the meat is off the bone somewhere?

Maybe lacking "organized procurement evolution"



The historical record reveals one instance after another where the failure of a regime to maintain the credibility of a war threat led to its dissolution, by the forces of private interest, or reactions to social injustice, or of other disintegrative elements.The organization of a society for the possibility of war is its principal political stabilizer.“

The definition of war could just be an old one. National sovereignty can be supported thru cyber/drone wars.

Or something as simple as a soccer ball. The article makes me reminisce on GoD's video offering.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2Ljv0fZKEs

[palani]

I never implied that countries's laws have to be the same everywhere... but freedom of traveling as one does see fit demands open borders.

Passports are an instrument of war. Try going into other countries of the world without first declaring that you are on the side attacking their sovereignty. Using the umbrella of protection of the United States is a cop-out and comes at a cost that is rather large.