11-30-2011, 06:00 AM
This thread has been created here so that we can have a closer look at the nonsense that is published continuously on the expansions.com website. I hope everybody will participate in this thread, and contribute with their own research made. Note that it illustrates just how these stories published are completely unfounded and that the association fallacies become evident.
The first post relates to Stewart's article dd. 28 November 2011 "If I ruled the world".
Now we have all seen in Stewart's books, their seminars, and expansions.com, the constant reference and theme of the 4th Reich. Stewart himself told me at some point that he was protected by Fourth Reich agents, and that the Kuiper's Belt Aliens were secretly co-operating with the Fourth Reich. The Fourth Reich is the theoretical succession of the Third Reich (aka Nazi Germany 1931-45), where members of the Third Reich continued the policies of the Führer after World War Two, and who secretly control parts of world politics today. The aim of the Fourth Reich is to establish a one world government.
What we should not forget though is that the Illuminati is seeking to create a fascist one world government as well. And 'fascists' seek to rejuvenate their nation based on commitment to the national community as an organic entity, in which individuals are bound together in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood (Wikipedia). Remember "True Blood, Blue Blood"?
Now let's have a look about what Stewart has to say about what he would do if he ruled the world:
The "nonsense would end! Yes, it may take tough measures, but I would be fair."
Stewart would want to apply a technique used by the Nazis in the 1920's and 1930's: fight terror through terror. The Nazis used former criminals and extreme right-wingers to generate social instability, by having people beat up, or impose random violent sanction. If anyone has ever read Sir Thomas Hobbes "Leviathan" you will know that the first duty of government is to guarantee social peace within it's borders so that the country can prosper, independently of what type of government is in power. During the 1920's and 30's, the people creating social unrest were not affiliated to the Nazi Party, yet latter fought them (and later integrated those trouble-makers into its various organizations such as the SA), which gave to the Nazi Party the required support to get Hitler into power, first as Chancellor, and subsequently as President, thus establishing himself as dictator. An excellent read is Alan Bullock's biography on Hitler. Michael Moor argued the same tactics were applied by the Republican Party following the 9/11 attacks.
In the article, Stewart has given a number of examples of what is wrong with the world we live in today. And his reply to that "the nonsense would end" and that "yes, it may take tough measures". Why would there be a requirement to use such tactics to impose a new world order, Stewart? Seems to me that you are on the Illuminati's side after all, as no matter whether you support the Fourth Reich or the Illuminati directly, the end result is the same, after all.
Finally, all dictators claim to be 'fair'. As a dictator, who decides what fair is and based on which standards? The problem with government and government policy is that 'fair' is not a constant, alas.
"No one would be allowed to bully anyone for any
reason."
I get a feeling Janet will have a difficult time with this one.
"People would have to respect each other, or go to “Respect
School” until they understood how to treat others."
"Fascists seek to rejuvinate their nation based on
commitment to the national community as an organic entity, in which
individuals are bound together in national identity". So what was that about being forced to join a "Respect School"? Somehow this reminds me of the Hitler Youth. On what basis would you even begin to teach what respect is? If you require a dictatorship in the first place, then on the basis of your status-quo, you do not respect The People at all!
"War would be abolished for any reason and no one, no nation, no group would be allowed to have weapons."
That of course is a noble thing. It is also to be expected in a fascist one world government, after all, one world government also stands for no borders. Without borders, who are you gonna have a war with? If there are no boards, and thus no war, why do you need weapons? The other argument of course is that in order to maintain the status quo, as the sole ruler of the world, presumably you'd be the only one to have guns? Makes sense, doesn't it?
"The news would have to tell the truth ALL the time."
Again, very noble, but who decides what the truth is? If the news become of the same quality as the news on expansions.com, you'd get more information reading toilet paper. Jokes aside, if only one person decides what the truth ought to be and what not, and considering that this particular decision maker is making a terrible job already, we can expect the world to illiterate morons. Even easier to control, isn't it?
"Politicians would be REALLY elected, not placed in office."
Elected? Really? If you alone ruled the world? Why bother with politicians when you rule the world?
"All food would be organic. Medicines would be natural, not chemical."
Probably a good thing as well. Though after all, antibiotics have helped in curing a number of diseases in the past. Treat cholera or syphilis with green tea? That might be a little too positive an approach... The advantage of course with only natural medicine is that your population will decrease dramatically in a very short period of time. Not sure that one is well thought-through, Stewart. After all, with a smaller population you have less people available to rule... The advantage on the other hand is that property prices crash, and you can not only rule the world, but also own the world! Tic Tac... I can hear the Illuminati ticking...
"No one would be allowed to abuse anyone else."
No more Wilhelm Reich techniques? No more rituals? Sounds good to me!
"Anyone could live anywhere they chose."
Preferably in St. Joseph, Michigan, though, the new capital of Stewtopia! This also implies that if everybody decided to live in St. Joseph, you'd have a serious problem with space. So you need central planning to administer the common choices of The People and to plan the economy. Suddenly I don't wanna live on earth any more...
"Prejudice and hate would be eliminated via education and mind-pattern releases."
And you'd be teaching this? To whom? To yourself? What was that about the Swiss? Or the Bulgarians? Or the Singaporeans? Or Germans? Or any of the other nations and cultures for which you have your deranged prejudices for? What about hate? You have met Janet, right?
I do wonder: If you haven't managed in all your life to eliminate hate and prejudice for yourself (and Janet), how can you possibly teach this to others? Or perhaps asked differently, if your one world government is viewing the world Stewart does, don't you think you'd end up with a civil war in no time? Oh, but of course! Divide and rule! Very clever indeed...
"I would make the “Language of Hyperspace” mandatory in all schools. (...) Religion would be gone."
Yes, to make way for the Language of Hyperspace. Expansions would evolve into an official and mandatory religion.
"All borders would be open."
Yeah, that is sort of given under a one world government.
"High technology that has been hidden by the Illuminati would be given to the people for use in a proper manner."
Again, who decides on what 'high technology' is deemed as formerly "hidden by the Illuminati"? How can The People request to be given technology they don't know about? That's a contradiction in terms!
"I would have to either run for office on the “Emperor of the Universe” ticket, or just take over in another way."
Yeah, we get it, you want to rule the world! Establish the fascist one world government. Do the Illuminati's job yourself. One way or another. So if we read you correctly, you'd either request to get elected by The People, or else? History books are filled with rulers who operated in the exact same ways.
Despite the cynical comments made here, when you look at the writings of both Swerdlows, but in particular Stewart's writings and analysis of the world, the recurring theme of the Fourth Reich, and now this post dd. 28/11, one does wonder if Stewart might not be on the Illuminati's side after all? The direction and destination both Stewart and the Illuminati have taken is exactly the same. Or is his programming revealing his true agenda unknowingly?
Granted, the world is not doing well. No one can deny that. But as John F. Kennedy famously and correctly said: "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings." It is thus for humanity to jointly evolve into a more compassionate and balanced society, which grants equal rights to everybody naturally, rather than having some evil and nasty cult leader from St. Joseph, Michigan, do the job instead.
I feel very sad for you, Stewart!
The first post relates to Stewart's article dd. 28 November 2011 "If I ruled the world".
Now we have all seen in Stewart's books, their seminars, and expansions.com, the constant reference and theme of the 4th Reich. Stewart himself told me at some point that he was protected by Fourth Reich agents, and that the Kuiper's Belt Aliens were secretly co-operating with the Fourth Reich. The Fourth Reich is the theoretical succession of the Third Reich (aka Nazi Germany 1931-45), where members of the Third Reich continued the policies of the Führer after World War Two, and who secretly control parts of world politics today. The aim of the Fourth Reich is to establish a one world government.
What we should not forget though is that the Illuminati is seeking to create a fascist one world government as well. And 'fascists' seek to rejuvenate their nation based on commitment to the national community as an organic entity, in which individuals are bound together in national identity by suprapersonal connections of ancestry, culture, and blood (Wikipedia). Remember "True Blood, Blue Blood"?
Now let's have a look about what Stewart has to say about what he would do if he ruled the world:
The "nonsense would end! Yes, it may take tough measures, but I would be fair."
Stewart would want to apply a technique used by the Nazis in the 1920's and 1930's: fight terror through terror. The Nazis used former criminals and extreme right-wingers to generate social instability, by having people beat up, or impose random violent sanction. If anyone has ever read Sir Thomas Hobbes "Leviathan" you will know that the first duty of government is to guarantee social peace within it's borders so that the country can prosper, independently of what type of government is in power. During the 1920's and 30's, the people creating social unrest were not affiliated to the Nazi Party, yet latter fought them (and later integrated those trouble-makers into its various organizations such as the SA), which gave to the Nazi Party the required support to get Hitler into power, first as Chancellor, and subsequently as President, thus establishing himself as dictator. An excellent read is Alan Bullock's biography on Hitler. Michael Moor argued the same tactics were applied by the Republican Party following the 9/11 attacks.
In the article, Stewart has given a number of examples of what is wrong with the world we live in today. And his reply to that "the nonsense would end" and that "yes, it may take tough measures". Why would there be a requirement to use such tactics to impose a new world order, Stewart? Seems to me that you are on the Illuminati's side after all, as no matter whether you support the Fourth Reich or the Illuminati directly, the end result is the same, after all.
Finally, all dictators claim to be 'fair'. As a dictator, who decides what fair is and based on which standards? The problem with government and government policy is that 'fair' is not a constant, alas.
"No one would be allowed to bully anyone for any
reason."
I get a feeling Janet will have a difficult time with this one.
"People would have to respect each other, or go to “Respect
School” until they understood how to treat others."
"Fascists seek to rejuvinate their nation based on
commitment to the national community as an organic entity, in which
individuals are bound together in national identity". So what was that about being forced to join a "Respect School"? Somehow this reminds me of the Hitler Youth. On what basis would you even begin to teach what respect is? If you require a dictatorship in the first place, then on the basis of your status-quo, you do not respect The People at all!
"War would be abolished for any reason and no one, no nation, no group would be allowed to have weapons."
That of course is a noble thing. It is also to be expected in a fascist one world government, after all, one world government also stands for no borders. Without borders, who are you gonna have a war with? If there are no boards, and thus no war, why do you need weapons? The other argument of course is that in order to maintain the status quo, as the sole ruler of the world, presumably you'd be the only one to have guns? Makes sense, doesn't it?
"The news would have to tell the truth ALL the time."
Again, very noble, but who decides what the truth is? If the news become of the same quality as the news on expansions.com, you'd get more information reading toilet paper. Jokes aside, if only one person decides what the truth ought to be and what not, and considering that this particular decision maker is making a terrible job already, we can expect the world to illiterate morons. Even easier to control, isn't it?
"Politicians would be REALLY elected, not placed in office."
Elected? Really? If you alone ruled the world? Why bother with politicians when you rule the world?
"All food would be organic. Medicines would be natural, not chemical."
Probably a good thing as well. Though after all, antibiotics have helped in curing a number of diseases in the past. Treat cholera or syphilis with green tea? That might be a little too positive an approach... The advantage of course with only natural medicine is that your population will decrease dramatically in a very short period of time. Not sure that one is well thought-through, Stewart. After all, with a smaller population you have less people available to rule... The advantage on the other hand is that property prices crash, and you can not only rule the world, but also own the world! Tic Tac... I can hear the Illuminati ticking...
"No one would be allowed to abuse anyone else."
No more Wilhelm Reich techniques? No more rituals? Sounds good to me!
"Anyone could live anywhere they chose."
Preferably in St. Joseph, Michigan, though, the new capital of Stewtopia! This also implies that if everybody decided to live in St. Joseph, you'd have a serious problem with space. So you need central planning to administer the common choices of The People and to plan the economy. Suddenly I don't wanna live on earth any more...
"Prejudice and hate would be eliminated via education and mind-pattern releases."
And you'd be teaching this? To whom? To yourself? What was that about the Swiss? Or the Bulgarians? Or the Singaporeans? Or Germans? Or any of the other nations and cultures for which you have your deranged prejudices for? What about hate? You have met Janet, right?
I do wonder: If you haven't managed in all your life to eliminate hate and prejudice for yourself (and Janet), how can you possibly teach this to others? Or perhaps asked differently, if your one world government is viewing the world Stewart does, don't you think you'd end up with a civil war in no time? Oh, but of course! Divide and rule! Very clever indeed...
"I would make the “Language of Hyperspace” mandatory in all schools. (...) Religion would be gone."
Yes, to make way for the Language of Hyperspace. Expansions would evolve into an official and mandatory religion.
"All borders would be open."
Yeah, that is sort of given under a one world government.
"High technology that has been hidden by the Illuminati would be given to the people for use in a proper manner."
Again, who decides on what 'high technology' is deemed as formerly "hidden by the Illuminati"? How can The People request to be given technology they don't know about? That's a contradiction in terms!
"I would have to either run for office on the “Emperor of the Universe” ticket, or just take over in another way."
Yeah, we get it, you want to rule the world! Establish the fascist one world government. Do the Illuminati's job yourself. One way or another. So if we read you correctly, you'd either request to get elected by The People, or else? History books are filled with rulers who operated in the exact same ways.
Despite the cynical comments made here, when you look at the writings of both Swerdlows, but in particular Stewart's writings and analysis of the world, the recurring theme of the Fourth Reich, and now this post dd. 28/11, one does wonder if Stewart might not be on the Illuminati's side after all? The direction and destination both Stewart and the Illuminati have taken is exactly the same. Or is his programming revealing his true agenda unknowingly?
Granted, the world is not doing well. No one can deny that. But as John F. Kennedy famously and correctly said: "Our problems are man-made, therefore they may be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings." It is thus for humanity to jointly evolve into a more compassionate and balanced society, which grants equal rights to everybody naturally, rather than having some evil and nasty cult leader from St. Joseph, Michigan, do the job instead.
I feel very sad for you, Stewart!