PDA

View Full Version : Presidential candidates and some ammunition we have.




AlexAmore
05-25-2007, 02:33 PM
Educating Hillary Clinton, Fred Thompson, Tommy Thompson and John Edwards supporters.
(The stuff I just wrote is in the context of me writing to supporters of these presidential candidates, but i'm letting you guys read it. Let me know what you think)


Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is generally known for being a think tank, a VERY powerful think tank. I actually believe they are more than a think tank and I will go over why. Their members include the most powerful politicians, corporations, and special interests in the world; I will list some of them later. CFR’s mission is to create a global government, but first they must undermine America’s sovereignty to do so. Right now they are working on creating the North American Union which will make the U.S, Mexico, and Canada basically one entity who share military, police, education, economy, homeland security and more. Our tax money would be poured into those other countries to build them up and put them on the same page as America. CFR admits that in order to do this we must cede our American sovereignty, and of course that is true if we mesh with the other countries, we would have no other choice.

Here are some quotes from CFR members:

The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is the American Branch of a society which originated in England... (and) ...believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established." - Carroll Quigley, member of Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), mentor to Bill Clinton

"The main purpose of the Council on Foreign Relations is promoting the disarmament of U.S. sovereignty and national independence and submergence into an all powerful, one world government."
- Admiral Chester Ward, former CFR member and Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Navy

"Once the ruling members of the CFR shadow government have decided that the U.S. Government should adopt a particular policy, the very substantial research facilities of (the) CFR are put to work to develop arguments, intellectual and emotional, to support the new policy, and to confound and discredit, intellectually and politically, any opposition." - Admiral Chester Ward, former CFR member and Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Navy

"The powers of financial capitalism had (a) 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 meetings and conferences. The apex of the systems was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank...sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world." - Carroll Quigley, member of Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), mentor to Bill Clinton, quote from “Tragedy and Hope”, 1966

CFR President Richard Haass, on globalization and sovereignty:
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9903/sovereignty_and_globalisation.html?breadcrumb=%2Fi ssue%2F109%2Fsovereignty (http://www.cfr.org/publication/9903/sovereignty_and_globalisation.html?breadcrumb=%2Fi ssue%2F109%2Fsovereignty)
I suggest reading it all (it’s not long). There are many interesting and scary quotes; here are a couple of them:

”Globalization thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker. [UN] States would be wise to weaken sovereignty in order to protect themselves, because they cannot insulate themselves from what goes on elsewhere. Sovereignty is no longer a sanctuary.”

”Our notion of sovereignty must therefore be conditional, even contractual, rather than absolute.”

Here are some members of CFR:

Dick Cheney.
Al Gore
Jonothan S. Bush – GWB’s first cousin
Tommy Thompson
Fred Thompson
Robert M, Gates
Condoleeza Rice
Paul Wolfowitz
Richard Perle
Colin Powell
Madeleine Albright
Zbigniew Brzezinski
Henry Kissinger
Alan Greenspan
Jimmy Carter
David Rockefeller Jr.
John D. Rockefeller, IV
Bill Clinton
John Edwards
John Kerry
Nelson Rockefeller
John D. Rockefeller, 3rd
and many more…(I’ll give a link to see more)

Corporate members:

Boeing
Halliburton
ExxonMobile
Lockheed Martin
Shell Oil
Time Warner (owns a lot of big media)
and …many more including banks and other news..ect.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Foreign_Relations

The presidential candidates:

Hillary Clinton:

http://www.cfr.org/publication.html?id=6600 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Council_on_Foreign_Relations) – Hillary Clinton at a CFR meeting, she talks about moving towards a global government in parts of it. The fact that she is allowed to go to a CFR meeting and give a speech says more about her views on foreign policy than anything.

http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=265807 (http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=265807)And here she is again speaking at another CFR meeting on 10/31/06. This time on video. I know it’s long. You can watch it or not, but the point is she isn’t debating them. She supports them, just like her husband.

John Edwards:

http://stage.cfr.org/publication/13432/ (http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=265807) - Here John Edwards gives a speech at CFR. If you read it, you will notice his speech emphasizes hardcore nation building and hardcore policing of the world.

Now here is Dick Cheney (I know he isn’t running). I wanted to leave this for last. Watch Cheney at a CFR meeting, getting a question from Rockefeller…and WATCH Cheney’s response. This will get you angry, especially after all you know about CFR.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdxLYuvvbgs (http://clinton.senate.gov/news/statements/details.cfm?id=265807)

So should we hope Fred Thompson won’t be like all of his other CFR peers? Is he really a conservative and not a globalist? Based on his voting patterns and his CFR membership it doesn’t look good.

Craig_R
05-25-2007, 09:02 PM
good one

mrapathy
05-25-2007, 10:32 PM
good post but wheres the link to the CFR document Building a North American Community?

http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/NorthAmerica_TF_final.pdf

good word is special interest. I dont know about one rule but a dominant empire for sure. Tyrannical policy as well.

lets not forget the SPP Security Prosperity Partnership http://www.spp.gov/
have you read the immigration bill? 326 pages and plays into nasco corridor and texas corridor. special interest has big plans going.

http://www2.nationalreview.com/dest/2007/05/19/immigrationdraft051807.pdf
DHS and other Federal Agency checkpoints not solely for immigration.
wording on Gangs that causes fear for some 2A supporters that think it could close Gunshops down though Patriot Act could do that.
Commissioner and Commission with all expenses paid by Tax Payers.
language on commission member party affiliation nice attempt at balance but scary at the same time.

Nation building in Mexico and corrupting them to be less corrupt?
some stuff is Authoritarian good in it but overwhelming majority of the immigration bill is trash.

the Immigration bill even mentions SPP pages 210 on down.

http://www.nascocorridor.com
http://www.keeptexasmoving.org

dont fall for the cushy oh we are innocent we arent doing nothing sinister public relations propaganda spin. questionable business practices using corruption to have there way.

excellent public relations propaganda campaign by special interest btw media is a special interest they are corporation owned they are far from neutral or balanced.
heard the corporations just blindly repeat state department information.

this country has been taken to the watershed and its not over yet.
http://www.canadians.org/water/documents/NA_Future_2025.pdf

I check wikipedia and CFR on Fred Thompson and saw that. Thompson has also been a lobbyist and works for abc or nbc group.
expecting a good pr campaign coming with loads of special interest money.

simply put its special interest. Rockefeller's had the original oil monopoly standard oil. Rockefeller donated the land the UN building sits on.
Iraq war. Preemptive strike supporting UN resolutions regarding WMD's. also got links to banks.

Special interest is reaping the pork spent on the Iraq war. Millions and Billions of dollars that will add up to 1-2 Trillion dollars spent. massive amount of debt to foreign nations that lent money for the war will want that paid off. printing presses pumping out billions of dollars a day flooding the market. more printed paper as money from thin air means its worth less you get inflation. China has 1 trillion they want to dump. also money has been created electronicly. bubbles that could burst. bank failures are still happening today dont hear much about it. thought I heard of one in Pennsylvania last month either Philadelphia or Pittsburgh

Kregener
05-26-2007, 08:06 AM
Excellent stuff Alex!

You too Mr. Apathy!

AlexAmore
05-26-2007, 08:07 AM
That's some good stuff there Mrapathy. Thanks!

edit: There's so much ammunition, that's it's overwhelming...seriously.

austinphish
05-29-2007, 06:25 PM
That is good stuff, but everyone I know likes OBAMA.

I have been meaning to post on here if anyone has seen or written specifically on why Ron Paul is better than Obama, I would really appreciate it.

Keep up the good work!

AlexAmore
05-29-2007, 07:09 PM
Hmm. Time to dig up some dirt on Obama! ;)

1. Obama rhymes with Osama...Do we really need that in a time of WAR?
2. His middle name is Hussein which rhymes with HUSSEIN!
3. His first Name is Barack which sounds like IRAQ!

This man's name is bad for troop moral!

Just kidding around with the Fox propaganda :p .

Seriously though, I really should to start looking into Obama. :cool:

Kuldebar
05-30-2007, 03:12 AM
Let's remember: it's less about dirt and more about differences. Really, try to find any daylight between the mainstream, big money candidates from both parties...you won't.

Outside of issues like abortion, you aren't going to see any revolutionary differences between Hillary, Obama or McCain. etc.

None of them want to change DC and the way of empire, they only wish to lead it.