There is a conspiracy by a group a powerful people to establish a one world government on Earth.

Thank you for this post and I will gladly debate the topic with you. In order to address the majority of your points I want to start by first defining the term "conspiracy". According to www.dictionary.com the term "conspiracy" has 5 definitions. The first four of those definitions have a negative denotation that requires, or indicates, the use of unlawful action. The fifth, and last, definition simply means a concurrence. Considering that the majority of the definitions are negative and that the term "conspiracy" has a negative connotation, I can only assume that your post is based off of that type of definition. Point 1. Although you are correct that there are a number of organizations that are working toward a "one world government", there has been no unlawful activity in regards to accomplishing that goal. The UN is the closest, and only, entity to formalizing a "one world government". However, the UN is conducting meetings with world leaders to address that issue and would only form into a "one world government" at the agreement of representatives of each nation. Point 2. By your own admission groups such as Skull and Bones are secretive. Thus, any information obtained about those groups by former members is invalidated based on the fact that those members would have been sworn to secrecy. If a member, sworn to secrecy, gives information about the organization then they are of questionable character and cannot be trusted by their word. Point 3. Obama was an elected representative of this country and would not have the power to appoint people, even people associated with organizations desiring a "one world government", without it first being the will of the American people. Point 4. There are many writings about a globalist's agenda. Everyone is entitled to have an opinion and some people will have the opinion that a "one world government" is the most viable option for the world. Considering how tightly knit the world's economies are, it isn't surprising that people fell that way. However, believing in an idea and acting unlawfully to achieve it are two separate ideas. Point 5 & 6. Prior to the Civil War states in the United States were using different forms of currency, some of which weren't even accepted in neighboring states. The United States benefited by consolidating currency into 1 form as it allowed settlers living near state lines to purchase materials from the easiest place to get them. The Euro was essentially the same thing. With their being a "global economy" a single monetary unit could be debated as the preferred system. Assassination Point. Can you provide any evidence that all attempts on each of those presidents were for the sole purpose of stopping the Federal Reserve? If not, can you show the successful attempts were able to hinder the Federal Reserve in any remarkable way? Point 7. How does labeling a country a "terrorist" nation promote a "one world government"? By all logical means, labeling a country as a "terrorist" nation would cause a greater divide between those two countries. Point 8. "Free Trade" agreements are a natural part of having a global economy. Point 9. Iceland would not be in debt if it did not need to borrow money or if it did not ask for money from global financiers. Just because global financiers were willing to lend money doesn't mean that it was Iceland's intent to promote a "one world government". Point 10. G-20 called for a lawful meeting, the results of which, are still being debated and considered. Debate and considering negates the idea of "conspiracy".