One World Religion

PLEASE NOTE I don’t get involved with what political system that we live under, and I am not decrying anyone’s system.

One world religion and One world Government.

The proposition that I offered (which was greeted like a fart in a lift) was that we are going to be led into a Chinese style one world Government. You would never be able to achieve this in one jump, as the masses wouldn’t stand for it; bottom line. To achieve this you therefore need incremental steps big enough to do the job but small enough to hopefully stop people from noticing.

Whatever you perceive might have just happened in the UK elections, we aren’t out yet, and there is being out of the EU, and being told that we are out of the EU but with lots of ties so we are out in name only.

Let’s define (for the purposes of this discussion) “Chinese Style”.

1) An authoritarian government run by a political elite. The population do not generally get a say in who their leaders are.

2) The population is heavily monitored and censored.

3) Christianity isn’t tolerated.

[Rationale: Christianity if it’s practiced according to the letter puts God first and demands that if there is a clash between the will of the state and God’s law that loyalty to God must come first. This clearly poses a problem if you are militaristic as you don’t want troops telling you that “it’s wrong to kill”.]

Back in the 60’s in the UK we had one man one vote. In the early 1970’s Heath took the UK into the EU which was a trading block.

In 1992 the Maastricht treaty provided for political integration and the beginning of surrender of national sovereignty. Maggie Thatcher was having none of it and ended up being deposed with John Major signing the treaty for the UK when he succeeded her.

In 2007 we had the Lisbon treaty which further integrated the EU members.

80% of the UK laws are now passed by the EU. So the UK can only vote on 20% of its own laws. This means that when the UK appoints government through a general election that in fact it isn’t so much as voting for government, but for governance; the act of a political party enacting the laws passed down by the European Union.

Although the EU claims to be democratic the officials are appointed through a restricted ballot. The general populace of the EU are not consulted when it come to the voting of the president of the EU or the appointing of the commissioners that make the laws.

In 40 years the UK has gone from one man one vote to one man 0.2 of a vote. This is why the majority wanted to leave the EU.

So how have we NOT moved towards the Chinese style in the last 40 years?

@medullah said
You didn't pick up my Hospital gauntlet, so it looks sir as if we are playing a games. What I can tell you is that I've written to your local secondary health care trust three times in the last 24 hours. I'll leave you to work out how I know that.

@medullah said
I will do this with you this weekend. The ball will be in your court as to whether we have a civilised discussion or more of the usual adversarial crap.

@divegeester said
It’s easy, you’re a returning user and one of the dozens of people here at RHP who know me elsewhere. What is also means is I will know you.

So what?

@medullah said
You dont know me, I promise you that.
Our paths have never crossed and are very unlikely to. I dont know where you live, though I was happy to give you my details.

I thought you were a bit more switched on. After observing the way that you wanted to pursue me in relation to pubs and you didn't evening know the licensing laws maybe I've overestimated you.

I did emphasise it you are correct. I was taught particularly when I presented to the NHS as I have been doing for 20 years now, "repetition for emphasis".

Only two conditions exist that could make my statement re writing to your local NHS possible.

1) that I somehow know you (I'm surprised you even considered that, given that it would have to be a random encounter, a 1/60,000,000 chance.)

2) That I must have communicated with all of the UK trusts, in which case I would have communicated with yours by default.

The latter is true. I've been running around trying to sort out (some of the) drug shortages within secondary (and tertiary) care within the NHS, and believe me, there are a lot.

@medullah said
I thought you were a bit more switched on. After observing the way that you wanted to pursue me in relation to pubs and you didn't evening know the licensing laws maybe I've overestimated you.

I did emphasise it you are correct. I was taught particularly when I presented to the NHS as I have been doing for 20 years now, "repetition for emphasis".

Only two conditions ex ...[text shortened]... drug shortages within secondary (and tertiary) care within the NHS, and believe me, there are a lot.

Whatever my faults, I truly hope that I'm not spiteful, and I would never try and prosecute a campaign against somebody on some whim of them being of a different nationality with a different political perspective.

@medullah said
Whatever my faults, I truly hope that I'm not spiteful, and I would never try and prosecute a campaign against somebody on some whim of them being of a different nationality with a different political perspective.

@divegeester

It's true. 😛

@divegeester said
You’re an oddball.

@divegeester said
Why are you bringing this up, are you looking for attention from me?

@divegeester said
Medullah?

@divegeester said
Then why are you claiming that you wrote to my local heathcare trust? So much so that you’ve mentioned it twice.

Here’s what you wrote:
“What I can tell you is that I've written to your local secondary health care trust three times in the last 24 hours. I'll leave you to work out how I know that.”

@caesar-salad said
Ah. Not a man of his word.