Denne video viser Sarkozy (fransk præsident og EU-führer) og Barroso (formand for EU-kommissionen) propagandere for en Ny Verdensorden, “New World Governance”, “New Global Order”.
D’hrr taler også om hvordan EU og globalisterne har besluttet at bruge kriser til at etablere de sidste stadier af det, de kalder “New World Order”.
Vær’sgo og spis. Du bliver alligevel ikke spurgt.
Hvem var Dansk Politiks største løgnhals? Joeh, det var Poul Rævepels Schlüter og hans “Unionen er stendød”.
Filed under: arrogance, bedrag, demokrati, EU, EU-parliament, Euromediterranean, Europa, kulturradikalisme, oikofobi, opportunisme, pampere, propaganda, UN, venstrefløj | Tagged: Barosso, Sarkozy |
Anna Lyttiger 
Afslør deres uvidenhed, deres tårnhøje gager, deres åbenlyse sniksnakken og sammenblanding af begreberne og dere vrøvlen om ingen ting på dårligt engelsk,
Sonia
A pleasant conversation between time and space, space to begin…
‘It would seem that there is more to me than you’
‘How do you figure?’
‘Well I am without end’
‘As am I. Are you also without beginning?’
‘One without end is also necessarily without beginning as you well know’
‘Thus neither can be established and as such our finite nature cannot be discussed’
‘Well it can be discussed, and indeed it has been discussed well. But as Edgar would have it we can have no true knowledge of that which only exists within the imagination of our creators’
‘Ah, but there you make a mistake, I am both visible and actual! ‘Tis you that are naught more than an idea’
‘And again you make a mistake be precluding my intention; infinity exists solely in the imagination, not us, although you try to relegate me to status of a proposition’
’And is that not where we find you dear friend?’
‘Then you are asking if anything would exist without the ability to think, in which case you raise this ability to the highest sphere. Do you propose that creation exists for a purpose?’
‘Do you propose a purpose for space?’
‘To be travelled across, to be idealized, to be wished for’
‘But again, these ideas have been crafted after the creation of space, no?’
‘Enough. I am without beginning and without end; I am eternal and have not been created!’
‘Then you are without purpose?’
‘I am without purpose insofar as creation is without purpose, what I propose is that neither of us would have existed without thought, although we necessarily predate thought’
‘Then thought is the purpose of…?’
‘I exist independent of thought, but I am dependent upon thought for the relativity of my existence’
‘I also exist without thought, but thought has determined my nature’
‘I think you perhaps are mistaken towards the power of thought my friend, you nature determines your nature. Thought has not invented you but merely recognized you. And even that is a recent occurrence open to debate.’
‘My existence brooks no debate!’
‘No perhaps not, but the recognition of your existence is infinitely debatable’
‘As is yours!’
‘Well that is debatable since I am intrinsic to life whereas you are optional. Thought measures in me the length of determination, thought measures in you the indeterminable’
‘I am intrinsic, without me there could be no thought, I am the heavens’
‘And I am the earth’
‘Which would rather seem to confirm my synopsis that I am of the greater quantity?”
‘Again you jump to conclusions, I am the earth but I am not confined to the earth, I am merely relative to the earth as far as thought exists on said planet’
‘But you do not deny that I am intrinsic to thought?’
‘Decidedly not. No thought can exist without the space in which to exist. That which I postulate is that you are of no consequence to thought since you are already created and thus perfectly fulfill your potential at every moment in time’
‘I hear you talk of yourself as if you are not here, I hear you talk of my self as if I were dependent upon your very self for existence’
‘It was only a thought’
‘Well then, allow me to turn the table. Is existence dependent upon time?’
‘And now it would seem I have defeated your original proposition since without the time to think space would be of no consequence!’
‘Ah-ha, but without the space to think naught could exist’
‘I rather think we should have a word with thought’
Both together then
‘THOUGHT!!!’
*Why hallo
‘Did you invent us?’
*Have you not both already come to the conclusion that I am independent of you?
‘Rather the opposite, both myself and time’ spoke space ’have concluded that nothing could exist without ourselves’
*Yes I have been following the conversation closely, but was not the presumption made that you are dependent upon thought for your matter so the speak?
‘Can’t we leave matter out of this?’
‘Yes’ spoke time ‘matter is of no consequence to myself’
*I think you rather underestimate the importance of matter for without matter there would be neither space nor time
‘Is matter then independent of thought?’
*What point would there be to matter without thought, indeed what point either of you?
‘But existence is not dependent upon the recognition of existence’
*Perhaps not, but the recognition of existence is dependent upon thought
‘You speak very highly of yourself’
*I think very highly of myself
‘You think and therefore you are, yea we haft heard it before, but you are dependent upon our selves and our esteemed colleague for your existence’
*A fact which I do not deny, but what point to yourselves…
‘You argue that we exist simply in order to facilitate your existence?’
*There seems no point other wise?
>In which case I seem entitled to ask, to what point yourself?
‘MATTER!’
*Recognition perhaps?
‘Our acknowledgment’
>Whose? I am the essence of you space and I am that which defines you time
*And I suppose you allow for thought?
>Without matter, what would you ponder you ponderous preposition?
*That there perhaps is no point to thought, in which case neither space, time nor matter matter.
Oh… 😉