You have no point. There is no Big Lie here. All you have is a Loony Rant.
Thanks again for proving another point.
Kozmik Why is Queen Elizabeth informed of the Anarch’s identity and intentions? Why not another monarch?
Because Elizabeth II, unlike other monarchs, is monarch of more than one country.
They laughed at Copernicus! They laughed at Galileo! They laughed at Bozo the Clown!
Well one flaw is that the Queen is only in power because the various parliaments allow her to. If the conspiracy is seen as bad by the PM then we can just ignore her. She is our monarch only by invitation.
There’s a good one?
Even if all the representatives who are PMs see the conspiracy as bad, those representatives would have to convince other representatives such as the King of Belgium, the Queen of Denmark, the Queen of the Netherlands, the King of Norway, the King of Spain, the King of Sweden, all of whom are related to Elizabeth II, not to mention the President of the United States who has a special relationship with the United Kingdom, also all the representatives who belong to NATO, and the Emperor of Japan who is a member of the Order of the Garter.
You are also assuming that the conspiracy could (or would) be seen as bad by the representatives, or even that the conspiracy could be seen as a conspiracy. What would be discussed and debated during the summit will be the New World Order. The New World Order can be thought of as something like the Cold War and something like the War on Terror, yet, in a way, nothing like them at all. The Cold War, of course, involved the Space Race, NASA, DARPA, fundamental questions of societial organization, how to do things, the “Kitchen Debate”, who we are and where we are going. The War on Terror, on the surface, involved the Iraq War and the Afghanistan War. Obviously, the Afghanistan War has not ended yet and neither has the War on Terror, though, it is a question whether the War on Terror will end with the Afghanistan War or whether the War on Terror will continue after the Afghanistan War ends. We’ll see.
Keep in mind that speculating on the New World Order during the War on Terror is like speculating on the War on Terror during the Cold War.
Feudalism! That’s what I’ve been trying to think of!
A political system wherein power is directly conditional on personally pledged fealty to the person above you. Study some history; that is NOT how international politics has worked for a few hundred years.
(I also notice that any conspiracy theory which involves the British royal family is inevitably Eurocentric and racist; as if the promulgators of these theories actually do not believe in the rest of the populations of the world.)
Ok, I get it. It’s not Queen Elizabeth who introduces the Anarch, though- it’s the Rothschild family.
Horse dog fiddle.
Wrong! I’m glad you are thinking though.
Actually, the conspirators do not believe in population as the rest of the world does. See: Georgia Guidestones
No, you don’t get it. As I wrote, Elizabeth II introduces the Anarch. And, no, the Anarch is not a member of the Rothschild family.
How can you say he doesn’t get it? You are making up a scenerio that hasn’t happened. Or did you forget that already?
That’s the beauty of it… they haven’t done anything!
Why would the Chinese (who have been enjoying the prosperity of the Communist dynasty for over sixty years now) or the Japanese (whose emperor is a direct descendent of the sun goddess herself) give a wet slap about whether the Queen of a bunch of big-nosed barbarians introduces someone?
You’ve made some references to the Pope. While the Pope isn’t exactly a leader of more than one state, he does have a certain supra-national role that is fairly unique. To a much lesser extend, the Dalai Lama does, too. The Red Cross is probably the most widely accepted and esteemed international organization there is, and is present in probably every country on earth, and afforded unusual access in many places (e.g., the Red Cross makes visits to prisoners in Guantanamo). Might those, and similar, entities fo special international character also have knowledge of the Illuminati?
And when you compare the New World Order to the Cold War and the War on Terrorism, you’re comparing it to two things that I think most people would not say were good things. How do we know that the New World Order isn’t a good thing? You know, like more Age of Aquarius or the Enlightenment?
Or have they?
Because he was thinking that the Rothschild family has something to do with the Illuminati. It doesn’t.
Because, for one thing, the Emperor of Japan is on good terms with Elizabeth II. He is a member of the Order of the Garter.
Yes. All these are comparatively recent. They may all have direct or indirect knowledge of the Illuminati. Think more ancient. Think Egypt.
We don’t. Any entity that is above the world’s governments would likewise be above such concepts as good and evil. Their vantage point, their perspective would be fundamentally different. Think of how the perspective of the lowly worker - their paycheck - is different than the perspective of the CEO - the profit. Now think of how the perspective of the common CEO - the profit - is different than the perspective of the elite Illuminati - beyond national goals.
It’s like the assumption that ETs would be benevolent.
How do you know? It fits the facts just as well as your hypothesis.
My hypothesis is that the Illuminati are ancient, elite, and unknown. The Rothschild family is obviously well-known.
Like Queen Elizabeth II.
Unlike Queen Elizabeth II.
The CIA operates in secret, and it has a history of nearly-illegal operations. Plus, it covers (or tries to) its tracks well. So why isn’t the CIA more represented in these conspiracy theories?