Originally posted by utherpendragon
I agree w/ you about the u.s. repression.

I say the u.s. would not be a good example of a nwo because its barely holding together. its emploding

I wasn't talking about "the U.S.", I was talking about the U.S. model of repression - decentralized, outsourced, managed through NWO proxies, domesticated media - plus chinless droves of little salaried "capitalist" commissars scuttling across the filthy Lino Of Surreality to extol the model's virtues, mentioning "freedom" three times in every lungful of duckspeak, and explaining how infrahuman wages are beacons of 'generosity' and choice. Far more effective than Stalinism.

Originally posted by utherpendragon
I agree w/ you about the u.s. repression.

I say the u.s. would not be a good example of a nwo because its barely holding together. its emploding

FMF already got you twisted around there. Just tell her\him that the book you read and could see a likeness in was about the USSR. Let it go at that. Who cares about what system lost out to whom. That wasn't the point anyway.

Originally posted by joe beyser
FMF already got you twisted around there. Just tell her\him that the book you read and could see a likeness in was about the USSR. Let it go at that. Who cares about what system lost out to whom. That wasn't the point anyway.

I've read the book utherpendragon cites. And everything else by its author. The point is that utherpendragon's point held no water. What is your point? You're fighting the corner of a point made by a book you haven't read? Talk about twisted around!

Originally posted by FMF
I've read the book utherpendragon cites. And everything else by its author. The point is that utherpendragon's point held no water. What is your point? You're fighting the corner of a point made by a book you haven't read? Talk about twisted around!

Nice try there FMF. He was just saying that is how he sees how the masses would be controlled,and what the conditions the NWO would be like. Go back and read his post again, for comprehension this time.

Originally posted by joe beyser
Nice try there FMF. He was just saying that is how he sees how the masses would be controlled,and what the conditions the NWO would be like. Go back and read his post again, for comprehension this time.

Yes. I get it. And my response is that utherpendragon has got it wrong. If there were to be a NWO in this world of ours, it wouldn't be like it was in "The Gulag Archipelago". That's my point. I even made a counter-proposal. No 'nice try' involved. No 'comprehension' problem. You haven't even read the book.

Originally posted by FMF
How strange to choose as your model for One World Government the system that LOST out to the U.S. system during the Cold War. Why not a network of murderous kleptomaniac dictators like Samosa, Soeharto, Pinochet, Mobutu, Marcos, Noriega, Hussein and others with their feudal-like corrupt bureaucracies, death squads, 'Dirty Wars', Operation Condors, and '98% vote Yes' electoral systems and their 'investment friendly' fiefdoms?

You are implying that the patriot has some other motive for choosing the USSR. By doing that you are deliberately derailing the point of conversation here.

Originally posted by joe beyser
You are implying that the patriot has some other motive for choosing the USSR. By doing that you are deliberately derailing the point of conversation here.

LOL. Saying something that you disagree with is "...deliberately derailing the point of conversation "?

🙄

Originally posted by FMF
LOL. Saying something that you disagree with is "...deliberately derailing the point of conversation "?

🙄

Nice try again. I didn't say I disagree with you. You are just twisting things about, thats all.

Originally posted by joe beyser
You are implying that the patriot has some other motive for choosing the USSR.

I personally attribute his choice of the U.S.S.R. as a model for the NWO to his lack of reading and his highly ideological take on what has been going on in this world since 1945. However he conceded the point about repression in the U.S. sphere of influence, so the 'conversation' has had one outcome, at least. As for me, he made me ponder the relevence and applicability of the U.S.S.R. model of control and repression, which is the sort of thing this Forum is good for.

Originally posted by joe beyser
Nice try again. I didn't say I disagree with you. You are just twisting things about, thats all.

I am just participating in this Thread. The topic is NOT "Is a U.S.S.R. style World Order a bad idea?"

You are on the verge of being generalissimoesque here. An on-topic post might salvage the situation.

Originally posted by FMF
I am just participating in this Thread. The topic is NOT "Is a U.S.S.R. style World Order a bad idea?"

You are on the verge of being generalissimoesque here. An on-topic post might salvage the situation.

I re assemble that remark! 🙂

Originally posted by utherpendragon
You must not read much. Arthurian Legend ring a bell?

No I read a lot, are you talking about King Arthur?

Originally posted by daniel58
No I read a lot, are you talking about King Arthur?

No he's not. He's talking about Arthur Slocombe, Member of Parliament for Aston Villa in the interwar years. He held the U.K. yard of ale record for 31 years until Bob Hawkes, future Prime Minister of Australia, bettered it when he was at Oxford University.

Originally posted by FMF
No he's not. He's talking about Arthur Slocombe, Member of Parliament for Aston Villa in the interwar years. He held the U.K. yard of ale record for 31 years until Bob Hawkes, future Prime Minister of Australia, bettered it when he was at Oxford University.

was that the geezer that was married to that bird what worked for old mr grace, you know the one, that liked to pamper her pussy?