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

I see that my opponent has forfeited the last round. I can only hope that he will continue the debate next round. In my last debate, my opponent forfeited a round and I did not seize the opportunity to introduce new material and gave my opponent the time and words to address all my previous points. In spite of that opponents lack of a round 4 he still won the debate. So in the interest of trying to not underestimate my opponent or the perceived benefit of having a free round I plan to continue to strongly establish the case for Pro. ---- Having plenty of words and nothing to refute, I would also like to interject a clarification for one of my links in rd. 3 - the link associated with the Noam Chomsky quote is from the documentary "Manufacturing Consent" and it talks in detail about how the people are "made" to consent. I list this only for the benefit of informational purposes to the readers and I am not making any other points from it at this time. ---- In many places during the debate it seems as if my opponent agrees with my point that there is a push for one-world government, but only seems concerned that this is being done openly and not in "secret" and argues that therefore it does not fall into the definition of a conspiracy. I would like to address that issue (7 points below), and I would like to point out that my opponent is not even seeming to disagree that a push for a one-world government is happening, which proves almost all of my original contention. 1 I would re-emphasize my round 3 points of the evidence of the Bilderberger group working in secret.(Bernake caught on film at Bilderberger and Bilderberger attendee list 2007) which was not rebutted by my opponent. 2 I will also argue that it is still secret (or a "conspiracy") because there are no (or not any significant) groups or people in the mainstream at this time proclaiming boldly that they are trying to submit all governments into a one world government. Yet at the same time there are people taking the very steps needed to do this. Therefore it is still being done in "secret". 3 Pro will also argue that what is started secretly (as a conspiracy) must at some point come to light in tangible, visible actions that can be seen. It is simply the interpretation of these events at that point as to whether they occurred due to normal, natural reasons or if they occurred because a conspiracy caused them to happen. So Pro would argue that just because certain actions can be seen, does not mean that they were not caused by a conspiracy to make them to make those very things happen. 4 David Rockefeller also thanked the newspapers for not exposing them early on (this shows it was done in "secret"). "We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years... "It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government." (1991) 5 There are also pictures of world leaders who are making strange hand gestures to each other (secret signs), this is probably done to let the other world leaders know that they are "in the loop" or part of the group. http://www.infowars.com... 6 "The Revolution will not be televised"(this video is an interesting documentary on the coup attempt in Venezuela)- it shows how what is shown on TV is not always reflective of what is happening (what really is happening is secret), bits and pieces of clips were taken for instance, that showed the Chavez supporters firing on people, and they inserted a clip of peaceful marchers below. But that is not who was actually there at the time the Chavez supporters were firing (as shown by the documentary, but not on their public TV - or in the USA probably either) at that time they were being fired upon! Also there is another part in the documentary where the public TV station has been seized (by the coup attempt) and they are saying that things are peaceful at the palace. Then the cameraman from the documentary swings his camera around (from his location at the palace) and shows many people marching on the palace (1 million people total, I think, but it has been a long time since I watched that). The points for pro are that: the media is "controlled" and if they don't want something sensitive that would hurt their plans to get out, then they will use the media to stop it, by either reporting on something, or not reporting on something, or even they will splice film to make things appear differently than they actually happened. This also is evidence of how things are happening in "secret" even though there is some reporting done on the topic, due to the bias in some reporting, it is as if what is "really" happening is done in secret. http://video.google.com... 7 There are also other evidences which are secret, but hidden in "plain sight", so to speak, for ex: It is ignored that half the world's population lives on less than $2/day. The fact that this is not widely known or made to seem important (through controlled media) is, in a way, making certain things "secret". A "It's not news unless we say it is news" kind of operation is in effect. "There is something morally repellent about one group of people seeking to gratify itself psychologically, pursuing novel and rarified pleasures, while the majority of mankind lives in wretchedness or starvation."- Dietrich Bonhoffer "The American government is not so concerned that the rest of the world knows what they are doing, but they are concerned that the US citizens not know what they are doing."-Noam Chomsky ---- Now to further the case of Pro, I would like to quote a bit from "Tragedy and Hope" by Professor Carroll Quigley. But I want to first point out the extensive research that went into this book. There are over 1,300 pages. The Book took over 20 years to write. The Jr. editor Michael L. Chadwick wanted to confirm the reality of this information, so he looked in over 25,000 books and over 50,000 documents, as well as conducted over 1,000 interviews, and he states in the Intro to the book that he found the information and conclusions to be true. This book is available to read online as well. "...[T]he powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. this system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations.... "It must not be felt that these heads of the world's chief central banks were themselves substantive powers in world finance. They were not. Rather, they were the technicians and agents of the dominant investment bankers of their own countries, who had raised them up and were perfectly capable of throwing them down. The substantive financial powers of the world were in the hands of these investment bankers (also called 'international' or 'merchant' bankers) who remained largely behind the scenes in their own unincorporated private banks. These formed a system of international cooperation and national dominance which was more private, more powerful, and more secret than that of their agents in the central banks..." ---- I thank the readers and my opponent and wish him good luck.