America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 6 weeks ago by RobertHively. 62 replies replies.
2 Pages12>
Nikki Haley; the Globalist?
Abrignac Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
Other than being selected as Young Global Leader what exactly has she done that qualifies her as a Globalist?
RayR Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
Most was explained in 'Why Never Nikki'

https://nevernikki.net/#why-never-nikki
RayR Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
Newsom is a Nikki fan.
Gavin Newsom and Nikki Haley are both on that WEF globalist list of 'Young Global Leaders'.
https://humanevents.com/2022/11/10/world-economic-forum-young-global-leaders

She’s a Uniparty Plant: Governor Newsom Thanks Nikki Haley for Helping Democrats Make the Case Against Trump

by Jim Hoft Feb. 24, 2024 9:20 am

Quote:
This says it all. Governor Newsom is now thanking Nikki Haley for her outlandish attacks on President Trump.

It’s been widely reported that Nikki Haley is funded by RINOs and Democrats. This goes way back to 2022 when she was collecting donations for her non-profit Stand for America. She still is being funded by Trump-hating radicals.

Nikki Haley on Friday attacked President Trump for being the victim of 90+ lawfare indictments by Joe Biden and the Democrats.

Haley even blamed President Trump after New York state stole $455 million from him in the Democrats latest lawfare case. Trump’s crime was taking loans in New York state and then paying them back on time and with interest. New York state leaders have decided capitalism is no longer allowed in the Empire State.

It should be clear to everyone at this point that Nikki is only hanging around to hurt Trump and put Democrats back in office in 2024.

More...

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/02/shes-uniparty-plant-governor-newsome-thanks-nikki-haley/
DrMaddVibe Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,440
Abrignac wrote:
Other than being selected as Young Global Leader what exactly has she done that qualifies her as a Globalist?



Well, when you do your research on "Young Global Leader"...you see how she and the rest of them are gigantic POS!

https://www.younggloballeaders.org
Gene363 Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,819
South Carolina says, "No Thank you to Nikki."

44 South Carolina delegates won by Donald Trump.

Donald Trump 59.9% 397,524 votes

Nikki Haley 39.4% 261,731 votes
DrMaddVibe Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,440
GTFO heya...now...git!
Abrignac Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Well, when you do your research on "Young Global Leader"...you see how she and the rest of them are gigantic POS!

https://www.younggloballeaders.org


Been there done that. Why was she selected? Did she actually do something or was it a political statement like when Obama won the Pulitzer with a promise of Hope and Change?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,440
Abrignac wrote:
Been there done that. Why was she selected? Did she actually do something or was it a political statement like when Obama won the Pulitzer with a promise of Hope and Change?



If you'd had you'd see the problem.

Its literally right there on that website.

It cannot be more blatant and in your face as that.
Abrignac Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
DrMaddVibe wrote:
If you'd had you'd see the problem.

Its literally right there on that website.

It cannot be more blatant and in your face as that.


Whoosh - that’s the sound of something going right over your head.

Once again, she was selected. But, the question remains. What has she ACTUALLY done to warrant that selection? Remember that Obama was given a Nobel not for what he had done at the time, but because he represented HOPE and CHANGE.

The year she was selected a number of other Indian born persons were also selected. So was she selected because she actually did something or was she selected because she was an Indian-born female politician that may or may not have already promoted an agenda or that maybe she would someday in the future?

Or was she selected as a preemptive strike against her because this organization felt she could be a leader who would not conform to their agenda and thus they sought weaken her politically?
DrMaddVibe Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,440
Abrignac wrote:
Whoosh - that’s the sound of something going right over your head.

Once again, she was selected. But, the question remains. What has she ACTUALLY done to warrant that selection? Remember that Obama was given a Nobel not for what he had done at the time, but because he represented HOPE and CHANGE.

The year she was selected a number of other Indian born persons were also selected. So was she selected because she actually did something or was she selected because she was an Indian-born female politician that may or may not have already promoted an agenda or that maybe she would someday in the future?

Or was she selected as a preemptive strike against her because this organization felt she could be a leader who would not conform to their agenda and thus they sought weaken her politically?



That "whoosh" sound is the toilet. My god, how do you not see that the World Economic Forum selects and promotes "leaders" according to how well they'll spew their garbage??? You have to be willing to do their bidding and often times it means tossing sovereignty to the wind. All the garbage "science" and weird counter productive to Common Sense topics get rammed down from their meetings out to the public. You get swell campaign funds and assistance too!

Just read. Damn, its not that freaking hard. Especially when you're given a link!
rfenst Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
I already mailed in my primary ballot for Haley!
DrMaddVibe Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,440
rfenst wrote:
I already mailed in my primary ballot for Haley!


She needs donations Robert, not votes!
Abrignac Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
DrMaddVibe wrote:
That "whoosh" sound is the toilet. My god, how do you not see that the World Economic Forum selects and promotes "leaders" according to how well they'll spew their garbage??? You have to be willing to do their bidding and often times it means tossing sovereignty to the wind. All the garbage "science" and weird counter productive to Common Sense topics get rammed down from their meetings out to the public. You get swell campaign funds and assistance too!

Just read. Damn, its not that freaking hard. Especially when you're given a link!


So do you have an example of something she has actually said or done, or is your hatred based simply on the fact she was selected? Can you provide an answer, or will you continue to deflect?
Gene363 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,819
Abrignac wrote:
So do you have an example of something she has actually said or done, or is your hatred based simply on the fact she was selected? Can you provide an answer, or will you continue to deflect?



One perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwWQj4n6A8M

She wasn't a terrible governor, but IMO she has lost her path.
Abrignac Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
Gene363 wrote:
One perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwWQj4n6A8M

She wasn't a terrible governor, but IMO she has lost her path.


Is it because she accepted campaign contributions from defense contractors?
rfenst Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
Gene363 wrote:
One perspective: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwWQj4n6A8M

She wasn't a terrible governor, but IMO she has lost her path.

Exactly what path has she lost?
Gene363 Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,819
Abrignac wrote:
Is it because she accepted campaign contributions from defense contractors?



Yes


rfenst wrote:
Exactly what path has she lost?


She stoped representing interests of the voters and started representing the military industrial complex.
Abrignac Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
Gene363 wrote:
…. started representing the military industrial complex.


I’m pretty sure that’s unavoidable at this point.
Gene363 Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,819
Abrignac wrote:
I’m pretty sure that’s unavoidable at this point.


They are doing their best to make it that way.
rfenst Offline
#20 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
Gene363 wrote:
... She stopped representing interests of the voters and started representing the military industrial complex.

You mean you think she'd lead us into a war based on that.
Load of crap.
Gene363 Offline
#21 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,819
rfenst wrote:
You mean you think she'd lead us into a war based on that.
Load of crap.


Not sure what you're saying.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqCh9_0pd38
DrMaddVibe Offline
#22 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,440
Abrignac wrote:
So do you have an example of something she has actually said or done, or is your hatred based simply on the fact she was selected? Can you provide an answer, or will you continue to deflect?


Hatred? Please stop projecting.


Nomination Criteria

Every year, we select a remarkable group of exceptional leaders under the age of 40 who have the tenacity, foresight, and track record to better the world. We seek individuals who reflect global diversity, innovate to advance the public interest, and place a premium on genuine public-private cooperation exchanges. These individuals will be invited to join the community and embark on a three-year transformational journey.
Nominations

Nominations for the class of 2024 are now closed.

Selection Criteria


Every year 100 Young Global Leaders with exceptional experience are carefully selected and handpicked out of thousands of applications.

The selected YGLs are drawn from a range of sectors and are recognized established leaders who are strategic and inspiring with a deep commitment to creating lasting positive change within their societies and globally.

To be eligible to join the Class of 2024, candidates will need to fulfil the criteria below:

- Candidates from the corporate sector must be responsible for the full operation of a corporation or division and hold one of the following titles (or equivalent): president, board chair, chief executive officer, managing director, or managing partners. Candidates should have demonstrable commitment to serving society, beyond their day-to-day responsibilities (e.g., volunteering, corporate social responsibility activities, charity, boards of institutions).

- At the startup level, candidates must be founders, chief executive officers or chairs of boards. Series C start-ups and unicorns are strongly preferred.

- For the public sector, government leaders should be ministers, parliament members, mayors of capital cities or highly populated cities, governors, or heads of political parties. Leaders of international organisations should be at least P-5 level or equivalent.

- For civil society leaders and social entrepreneurs, candidates should be founders and chief executive officers of consequential civil society organizations or social enterprises, or hold a senior leadership role in a large global NGO.

- From academia, candidates should be deans or professors from top tier regional or national universities.

- Artists, athletes, and cultural leaders must have leveraged their arts or notoriety to address a systemic issue and serve society at large (e.g., tangible initiatives, social media campaigns, etc).

- From media, candidates should be editor-in-chiefs, publishers, journalists or social media influencers with a clear focus on public good topics.

All applicants must be born between 1 January 1985 and 31 December 1995.

Timeline

30 April 2023 – Official nomination period for the class of 2024 ends. Nominated candidates may be invited to submit a brief application.

May - November 2023 – The World Economic Forum shortlists candidates for further review. As part of the due diligence process, shortlisted candidates may be asked to meet with a member of the YGL Community between July 2023 and September 2023.

December 2023 – An independent selection committee evaluates the nominees for finalist status.

January 2024 – Candidates will be informed of their selection.

March 2024 – The announcement of the new class of Young Global Leaders.


DUH! It was there the whole time. For a guy that doesn't like it when I post links...you don't even read them!


PLEASE block me too! You've lost your little mind.

Abrignac Offline
#23 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
DrMaddVibe wrote:
Hatred? Please stop projecting.


Nomination Criteria

Every year, we select a remarkable group of exceptional leaders under the age of 40 who have the tenacity, foresight, and track record to better the world. We seek individuals who reflect global diversity, innovate to advance the public interest, and place a premium on genuine public-private cooperation exchanges. These individuals will be invited to join the community and embark on a three-year transformational journey.
Nominations

Nominations for the class of 2024 are now closed.

Selection Criteria


Every year 100 Young Global Leaders with exceptional experience are carefully selected and handpicked out of thousands of applications.

The selected YGLs are drawn from a range of sectors and are recognized established leaders who are strategic and inspiring with a deep commitment to creating lasting positive change within their societies and globally.

To be eligible to join the Class of 2024, candidates will need to fulfil the criteria below:

- Candidates from the corporate sector must be responsible for the full operation of a corporation or division and hold one of the following titles (or equivalent): president, board chair, chief executive officer, managing director, or managing partners. Candidates should have demonstrable commitment to serving society, beyond their day-to-day responsibilities (e.g., volunteering, corporate social responsibility activities, charity, boards of institutions).

- At the startup level, candidates must be founders, chief executive officers or chairs of boards. Series C start-ups and unicorns are strongly preferred.

- For the public sector, government leaders should be ministers, parliament members, mayors of capital cities or highly populated cities, governors, or heads of political parties. Leaders of international organisations should be at least P-5 level or equivalent.

- For civil society leaders and social entrepreneurs, candidates should be founders and chief executive officers of consequential civil society organizations or social enterprises, or hold a senior leadership role in a large global NGO.

- From academia, candidates should be deans or professors from top tier regional or national universities.

- Artists, athletes, and cultural leaders must have leveraged their arts or notoriety to address a systemic issue and serve society at large (e.g., tangible initiatives, social media campaigns, etc).

- From media, candidates should be editor-in-chiefs, publishers, journalists or social media influencers with a clear focus on public good topics.

All applicants must be born between 1 January 1985 and 31 December 1995.

Timeline

30 April 2023 – Official nomination period for the class of 2024 ends. Nominated candidates may be invited to submit a brief application.

May - November 2023 – The World Economic Forum shortlists candidates for further review. As part of the due diligence process, shortlisted candidates may be asked to meet with a member of the YGL Community between July 2023 and September 2023.

December 2023 – An independent selection committee evaluates the nominees for finalist status.

January 2024 – Candidates will be informed of their selection.

March 2024 – The announcement of the new class of Young Global Leaders.


DUH! It was there the whole time. For a guy that doesn't like it when I post links...you don't even read them!


PLEASE block me too! You've lost your little mind.



Why block you. You’re too easy a mark.

I’ve read the selection criteria. So what?

All you’ve done is pointed to selection criteria. Yet, you can’t seem to find anything that shows she actually deserved the award based on the criteria stated.

She’s a public figure. Every speech she’s given is online somewhere. Every action she’s taken as governor is archived. Can’t your little pea sized brain find one article to link to that shows she actually did something to warrant the award? I mean you seem to find all sorts of other articles.

On one hand you obviously hate the organization yet, on the other you trust their judgement that she’s actually done something to qualify for the award. Hint: Think Obama winning a Nobel having done nothing to deserve it.

Block you? Hell no! You’re like a dog constantly chasing his tail but just can’t seem to catch it. I wouldn’t miss your shit show for all the marbles in the world.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#24 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,440
Abrignac wrote:
Why block you. You’re too easy a mark.

I’ve read the selection criteria. So what?

All you’ve done is pointed to selection criteria. Yet, you can’t seem to find anything that shows she actually deserved the award based on the criteria stated.

She’s a public figure. Every speech she’s given is online somewhere. Every action she’s taken as governor is archived. Can’t your little pea sized brain find one article to link to that shows she actually did something to warrant the award? I mean you seem to find all sorts of other articles.

On one hand you obviously hate the organization yet, on the other you trust their judgement that she’s actually done something to qualify for the award. Hint: Think Obama winning a Nobel having done nothing to deserve it.

Block you? Hell no! You’re like a dog constantly chasing his tail but just can’t seem to catch it. I wouldn’t miss your shit show for all the marbles in the world.



I thought that was a bit more than what you show people here. There's not.

You asked a question. I answered it. Multiple times.

One has to be "selected". You're "vetted". You don't "do" andything, but you will when the time comes. Say, to push gun control, EV's, clot shots, eating crickets, darkening the skies, I DGAF what craziness but there it is. I've never said I hated them. I recognize the inherent evil they espouse. You?
Abrignac Offline
#25 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
DrMaddVibe wrote:
I thought that was a bit more than what you show people here. There's not.

You asked a question. I answered it. Multiple times.

One has to be "selected". You're "vetted". You don't "do" andything, but you will when the time comes. Say, to push gun control, EV's, clot shots, eating crickets, darkening the skies, I DGAF what craziness but there it is. I've never said I hated them. I recognize the inherent evil they espouse. You?


Actually you’ve yet to answer my question. I’ve asked you numerous times to show what she has done or said to warrant selection. Every time I do you simply post that she was selected.
RayR Offline
#26 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
rfenst wrote:
I already mailed in my primary ballot for Haley!


Never mind your ballot, you better step up and donate, Kochtopus pulled its support for Nikki.

Koch network stops spending on Nikki Haley’s presidential campaign

Americans for Prosperity Action said it had to “take stock” after Haley’s loss in South Carolina.

By Natalie Allison
02/25/2024 05:06 PM EST

Quote:
Americans For Prosperity Action, the powerful conservative group supporting Nikki Haley in the Republican presidential primary, will no longer spend money on behalf of her campaign.

In an email to staff obtained by POLITICO, Americans For Prosperity CEO Emily Seidel said Sunday that the group’s political arm, AFP Action, had to “take stock” of its spending priorities after Haley’s loss in the South Carolina primary. The Koch-aligned group, Seidel said, will now focus its efforts on competitive Senate and House races.

“She has made it clear that she will continue to fight and we wholeheartedly support her in this effort,” Seidel wrote of Haley. “But given the challenges in the primary states ahead, we don’t believe any outside group can make a material difference to widen her path to victory.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/02/25/koch-afp-nikki-haley-00143212
HockeyDad Offline
#27 Posted:
Joined: 09-20-2000
Posts: 46,134
First one has to decide if being a globalist is a bad thing. It is definitely the opposite of an America First mindset. It could at times be America First but in some cases could be America Last as entire American industries have been eliminated through outsourcing. I consider myself a globalist and have benefited from it. Heck, I can’t even remember when I first started outsourcing US jobs to India. Maybe 1994.

The globe is interconnected through business and is only becoming more interconnected which leads to financial opportunities. Those financial opportunities won’t necessarily be equitable between classes or across countries. There are winners and losers.

Where does the World Economic Forum fit in? They are the global one world government but yet are not a government. They influence all governments and businesses by be comprised of global government leaders and corporate leaders which they recruit while they are emerging in their careers.
Gene363 Offline
#28 Posted:
Joined: 01-24-2003
Posts: 30,819
HockeyDad wrote:
First one has to decide if being a globalist is a bad thing. It is definitely the opposite of an America First mindset. It could at times be America First but in some cases could be America Last as entire American industries have been eliminated through outsourcing. I consider myself a globalist and have benefited from it. Heck, I can’t even remember when I first started outsourcing US jobs to India. Maybe 1994.

The globe is interconnected through business and is only becoming more interconnected which leads to financial opportunities. Those financial opportunities won’t necessarily be equitable between classes or across countries. There are winners and losers.

Where does the World Economic Forum fit in? They are the global one world government but yet are not a government. They influence all governments and businesses by be comprised of global government leaders and corporate leaders which they recruit while they are emerging in their careers.


When I drive past the many closed derelict textile and textile related mills I DO NOT want them to re-open, our children deserve a better future than the life of a linthead.

Conversely, there are many third world countries that need jobs and have workers that welcome an opportunity to improve their status by working in a mill.

Before anyone overreacts and accuses me of being an oppressor and taking advantage of those third world workers... eventually all these mill jobs will be eliminated by automation. By then the prosperity that wages earned by those mill workers will bring many improvements in those third world countries.
RayR Offline
#29 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
I heard the WEF is all about public-private partnerships, which is the same as government control of the means of production and limiting the liberties of stubborn humans who get in the way.
Abrignac Offline
#30 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
HockeyDad wrote:
First one has to decide if being a globalist is a bad thing.



There needs to be a balance for sure. Anyone who thinks we can be 100 percent America 1st simply don’t see the big picture. We are all interconnected and every day that connectivity becomes tighter. On the other hand, the USA shouldn’t be obliged to consider any other nation’s ideals when determining our own policies. Nor should be subjected to another nation’s laws.

Likewise failing to see the US Constitution as a living document is flawed. Certainly, the system of government set forth in the Constitution should not change. But, failing to account for the natural progression of change within our nation is short sided. I see no reason that Federal oversight should not expand to encompass issues that pertain to the nation simply because those issues were not evident at the time the Constitution was written.

On the other hand, the Constitution should not in my opinion be used to make laws. It was written as a framework and needs to remain as such. Individual laws should go through the proper legislative process. For example, I think the Roe v Wade opinion was flawed. Instead of making abortion legal, the SCOTUS should have deferred to Congress to pass legislation either granting or restricting access.
RayR Offline
#31 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
Statist! Living CONSTITUTION BS!

The Constitution can only be amended which is hard because it requires at least three-quarters of the states to ratify an amendment.
The powers delegated in the Constitution to Congress are few and defined.
Not that that has ever stopped Congress from ignoring the said delegated powers and exceeding its powers like a gang of thieving power-hungry criminals. Cursing

Mark Twain wrote, "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself."

That's the way I feel about most members of Congress.


frankj1 Offline
#32 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
Even Jefferson would say you are too rigid
RayR Offline
#33 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
frankj1 wrote:
Even Jefferson would say you are too rigid


I didn't know you knew Jefferson. Eh?
Not well enough I say. if you ever read what he said, his criticisms of the corrupt members of Congress in his day were pretty plain.


"That this corrupt squadron, deciding the voice of the legislature, have manifested their dispositions to get rid of the limitations imposed by the constitution on the general legislature, limitations, on the faith of which, the states acceded to that instrument:" - Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, May 23, 1792
rfenst Offline
#34 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
HockeyDad wrote:
First one has to decide if being a globalist is a bad thing. It is definitely the opposite of an America First mindset. It could at times be America First but in some cases could be America Last as entire American industries have been eliminated through outsourcing. I consider myself a globalist and have benefited from it. Heck, I can’t even remember when I first started outsourcing US jobs to India. Maybe 1994.

The globe is interconnected through business and is only becoming more interconnected which leads to financial opportunities. Those financial opportunities won’t necessarily be equitable between classes or across countries. There are winners and losers.



Definitions from Oxford Languages:

glob·al·ist
/ˈɡlōbəlist/

noun

a person who advocates the interpretation or planning of economic and foreign policy in relation to events and developments throughout the world.

adjective
relating to or advocating the operation or planning of economic and foreign policy on a global bas
frankj1 Offline
#35 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
RayR wrote:
I didn't know you knew Jefferson. Eh?
Not well enough I say. if you ever read what he said, his criticisms of the corrupt members of Congress in his day were pretty plain.


"That this corrupt squadron, deciding the voice of the legislature, have manifested their dispositions to get rid of the limitations imposed by the constitution on the general legislature, limitations, on the faith of which, the states acceded to that instrument:" - Thomas Jefferson to George Washington, May 23, 1792

yet not related to my point...

that being his looser interpretation than yours of an evolving/changing/living Constitution...you know, for the generations actually living in the future with circumstances he could not foresee.
RayR Offline
#36 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
frankj1 wrote:
yet not related to my point...

that being his looser interpretation than yours of an evolving/changing/living Constitution...you know, for the generations actually living in the future with circumstances he could not foresee.


OK Smarty pants. I don't care about your fact-free original thoughts. Show me his looser interpretation where he said the general government should legislate violating the Constitution if they feel like it because of circumstances old dead guys with wigs could not foresee. If you knew anything about Jefferson, he warned about the growth of government, but he couldn't foresee then the monstrosity it has become today.

The funny thing about that "living Constitution" of yours. It didn't evolve that much but I can think of a couple of amendments where it devolved during the Progressive Era.
RayR Offline
#37 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
rfenst wrote:
Definitions from Oxford Languages:

glob·al·ist
/ˈɡlōbəlist/

noun

a person who advocates the interpretation or planning of economic and foreign policy in relation to events and developments throughout the world.

adjective
relating to or advocating the operation or planning of economic and foreign policy on a global bas


Tsk Tsk...Silly short dictionary definitions with no substance open to interpretation.

This is better and substantive...psychopathic cultists who think they are smarter than everyone else and want to rule over puny individuals.

To Understand The Globalists We Must Understand Their Psychopathic Religion

BY TYLER DURDEN
THURSDAY, FEB 22, 2024 - 11:40 PM

Authored by Brandon Smith via Alt-Market.us,

Quote:
In the late 1800s and early 1900s the western world experienced a sudden burst of open occultism among the ultra-rich elites. The rise of “Theosophy” was underway, becoming a kind of fashion trend that would ultimately set the stage for what would later be called “new age” spiritualism. The primary driver of the theosophical movement was a small group of obscure academics led in part by a woman named H.P. Blavatsky. The group was obsessed with esoteric belief, Gnosticism and even Satanism.

Blavatsky co-founded the Theosophical Society in New York in 1875, claiming that she had a psychic connection to beings called “the Mahatmas” or “the masters.” These creatures, she asserted, helped her write the foundational books of Theosophy, including ‘The Secret Doctrine.’

I bring up Theosophy and Blavatsky because the movement she helped launch was primarily an elitist one – The spread of occultism in the early 1900s specifically targeted the upper classes and this resulted in many political leaders and financial leaders being involved in obscure organizations with secretive mandates. Such groups have existed in the past, from the Rosicrucians and Freemasons to the alchemists of the Middle Ages who hid their occult beliefs in coded texts. However, never before had they been so public in their efforts.

To their credit, the early theosophists were mostly apolitical (at least outwardly) and they argued against political intrusion into people’s lives. I suspect, however, that this was because at the time western governments revolved around Christian and conservative values. As politicians became more separate from Christianity, the theosophist interest in controlling government grew and the movement became increasingly socialist in practice.

More...

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/understand-globalists-we-must-understand-their-psychopathic-religion
rfenst Offline
#38 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
RayR wrote:
Tsk Tsk...Silly short dictionary definitions with no substance open to interpretation.

What interpretation(s) are you referring to?
RayR Offline
#39 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
rfenst wrote:
What interpretation(s) are you referring to?


Your dictionary definitions boy! How does one interpret them? Meaningless fluff, how do they explain the agenda of those authoritarian WEF globalists?
Abrignac Offline
#40 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
frankj1 wrote:
yet not related to my point...

that being his looser interpretation than yours of an evolving/changing/living Constitution...you know, for the generations actually living in the future with circumstances he could not foresee.



Don't know why you bother. RayRay sits on an island all by himself, oblivious to the happenings around him.
RayR Offline
#41 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
Abrignac wrote:
Don't know why you bother. RayRay sits on an island all by himself, oblivious to the happenings around him.


Hey! You're not supposed to read my posts. You blocked me...remember?
RayR Offline
#42 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
AlLeGeDlY Frankie and and his defender Anthony both believe in that "LIving Constitution" theory, a loose interpretation thing that evolves, changes over time, and adapts to new circumstances, without being formally amended. So why have a constitution at all if the words have no teeth, no meaning as to what the framers originally argued over and finally agreed on as to what the branches of general government shall and shall not be allowed to do and what powers were reserved to the individual states who comprised the compact?

So back to the globalist Nikki Haley, the notorious flip-flopper, back peddler, and kow·tower to the left. What does she believe about anything? What day is it? Which way is the wind blowing? Who does she have to pander to for votes and cash? That's pretty much it.








frankj1 Offline
#43 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221

Monticello July 12. 16.
Some men look at Constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, & deem them, like the ark of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. they ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. I knew that age well: I belonged to it, and labored with it. it deserved well of it’s country. it was very like the present, but without the experience of the present: and 40. years of experience in government is worth a century of book-reading: and this they would say themselves, were they to rise from the dead. I am certainly not an advocate for frequent & untried changes in laws and constitutions ... but I know also that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind ... we might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

Thomas Jefferson
RayR Offline
#44 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
frankj1 wrote:
Monticello July 12. 16.
Some men look at Constitutions with sanctimonious reverence, & deem them, like the ark of the covenant, too sacred to be touched. they ascribe to the men of the preceding age a wisdom more than human, and suppose what they did to be beyond amendment. I knew that age well: I belonged to it, and labored with it. it deserved well of it’s country. it was very like the present, but without the experience of the present: and 40. years of experience in government is worth a century of book-reading: and this they would say themselves, were they to rise from the dead. I am certainly not an advocate for frequent & untried changes in laws and constitutions ... but I know also that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind ... we might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors.

Thomas Jefferson


That's nice Frank but it's an excerpt taken out of context from a letter concerning the Proposals to Revise the Virginia Constitution: I. Thomas Jefferson to “Henry Tompkinson” (Samuel Kercheval), 12 July 1816

Read the whole thing. https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Jefferson/03-10-02-0128-0002
It's interesting and he hits on a number of issues including "we must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. we must make our election between economy & liberty, or profusion and servitude."

Jefferson was a de-centralizer and was for further decentralization so as to keep the principles of republicanism alive and was "certainly not an advocate for frequent & untried changes in laws and constitutions", especially those "rash & ruinous innovations" in the name of progress. If the movement to centralize power further from the people as has happened (not without some pushback from some states and some people who refused to acquiesce to the demands of the overlords) "if this avenue be shut to the call of sufferance it will make itself heard thro’ that of force, and we shall go on, as other nations are doing, in the endless circle of oppression, rebellion, reformation; & oppression, rebellion, reformation again, and so on forever."



frankj1 Offline
#45 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,221
I am well aware of the context of the quote. However you choose to ignore the inarguable...such as his pluralizing the word Constitutions. That "s" on the end means he was referencing more than just the Constitution of Virginia but rather all Constitutions and the small minded short sighted future generations that would be dogmatic about refusing to acknowledge that times and minds change in ways unforeseen by the revered generations that came before and created the document(s).

He admits he was in the wrong as a young passionate man, true wisdom came over several decades.

Your misdirection attempts by singling out specific individual preferences are not germane to the discussion of the Constitution as a whole and how he felt about it being absolutely beyond amending.
And nowhere has it been suggested by me or Anthony or anyone I can think of that the process of change should be anything but gruelingly difficult.

He might also ask "how is that boys coat of yours fitting today?".
rfenst Offline
#46 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 39,330
RayR wrote:
Your dictionary definitions boy! How does one interpret them? Meaningless fluff, how do they explain the agenda of those authoritarian WEF globalists?

Word salad reply.
RayR Offline
#47 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
"Times and minds change in ways unforeseen" and not always for the better, Jefferson probably was too hopeful sometimes about the "progress of the human mind" but he realized that there were always people who would take the republic backward into corruption and tyranny if they gained power if the people forgot the basic principles of republican government. He had plenty of battles with members of the Federalist Party, who who plotted to centralize government. They were more nationalists than a party that adhered to the system of federalism.
Well, they are still around under different names doing mischief against the Constitution(s). Most commonly they ignore the Constitution or try to reinterpret the words away from their original meaning, and hope nobody notices.

Justice Scalia once described the difference between living constitution evolutionists versus originalists like himself.

Quote:
“If you’re asking about fundamental method of interpretation, I think you’re asking about the major division, not just between the justices on the Court but in American jurisprudence generally. That is, there are those who think the Constitution is to be interpreted in such a way as to keep it up to date. That is to say, it does not mean today what it meant when it was adopted. Some of its provisions change in order to keep up with the times. My friend Justice Breyer has that view. The other view, which is held by people called originalists, and I’m one of them, is that the Constitution doesn’t change. If you want to change it, there is an amendment provision. Amend it. It’s not up to the Supreme Court to write a new Constitution by deciding that things that never were there all of a sudden are there.”


You can listen to the whole conversation between Scalia and Breyer here.
https://www.annenbergclassroom.org/resource/conversation-constitution-judicial-interpretation/

RobertHively Offline
#48 Posted:
Joined: 01-14-2015
Posts: 1,844

If everybody here, both alive and dead, agree that the Constitution should be followed or go through the tedious process of amendment to change it, then what is the debate?
Abrignac Offline
#49 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,278
RobertHively wrote:
If everybody here, both alive and dead, agree that the Constitution should be followed or go through the tedious process of amendment to change it, then what is the debate?


Let me know what you find out. As I haven’t seen anyone on the thread suggest otherwise.
RayR Offline
#50 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 8,892
But some people think the Constitution is ALIVE..IT"S ALIVE...IT''S ALIVE! Bwahahaha!
Users browsing this topic
Guest (2)
2 Pages12>