View Full Version : Anti-CFR/Pro-Ron Paul Video
wwycher
06-11-2007, 11:22 PM
http://infowars.com/articles/nwo/cfr_nau_2008_presidential_candidates.htm
Cool Video listing all candidates supporting North American Union.
Bryan
06-11-2007, 11:40 PM
This was created by one of our distinguished members, LibertyOrDie. :)
wwycher
06-11-2007, 11:52 PM
It rocks and I am going to send it to all my friends that say this will never happen.
OK...forgive me...
Conspiracy THEORIES aside....
Is this REALLY IN THE WORKS? I need some hard evidence.
Because if this is real.....I'm off to the fierarhms store.
aravoth
06-12-2007, 12:17 AM
Yes, it's not a conspiracy, it's factual, go to the cfr website, research, research, research, the rabbit hole does go quite a ways down.
Craig_R
06-12-2007, 12:40 AM
OK...forgive me...
Conspiracy THEORIES aside....
Is this REALLY IN THE WORKS? I need some hard evidence.
Because if this is real.....I'm off to the fierarhms store.
If thats anything like a firearms store I suggest you go go go
angrydragon
06-12-2007, 12:55 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIWoPHfHaJs this is pretty good too, NAU 101.
aravoth
06-12-2007, 01:00 AM
indeed, and if you ever wondered if the president could force a police state in a heartbeat, http://youtube.com/watch?v=Jl1VIhdpl4c Kinda shows the power of the executive branch these days.
Bryan
06-12-2007, 08:52 AM
Is this REALLY IN THE WORKS? I need some hard evidence.
Here's the link to the CRF doc that is causing all the attention:
http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/attachments/NorthAmerica_TF_final.pdf
Read it for yourself and come to your own conclusions, it's a bit long though, below are some links and quote based on others research on this topic.
Be sure to also visit www.spp.gov
Take a look, tell us what you think.
Bush Administration Fast-Tracks Formation of North American Union
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15954
North American Union: Fact or fiction?
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=54639
Among other goals, Pastor wants the three countries to:
* Adopt a common external tariff.
* Adopt a North American Approach to Regulation
* Establish a common security perimeter by 2010.
* Establish a North American investment fund
* Establish a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution.
* Hold an annual North American Summit meeting
* Establish minister-led working groups
* Create a North American Advisory Council
* Create a North American Inter-Parliamentary Group.
http://www.newswithviews.com/Wood/patrick20.htm
Some of the recommendations of the task force are:
* "Adopt a common external tariff."
* "Adopt a North American Approach to Regulation"
* "Establish a common security perimeter by 2010."
* "Establish a North American investment fund for infrastructure and human capital."
* "Establish a permanent tribunal for North American dispute resolution."
* "An annual North American Summit meeting" that would bring the heads-of-state together for the sake of public display of confidence.
* "Establish minister-led working groups that will be required to report back within 90 days, and to meet regularly."
* Create a "North American Advisory Council"
* Create a "North American Inter-Parliamentary Group.
The problem with all of this: No One is calling it what it is! These ongoing efforts by the CFR and the President of the United States have a descriptive name you know.
They are actively engaged in activities with the direct intent to
OVERTHROW OUR CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIWoPHfHaJs this is pretty good too, NAU 101.
What the F*CK?? :mad:
So, most of these videos are over a year old I've noticed.
Why haven't we heard more about this? You would think it would be all over the news, etc.
Is GWB that deep into the pockets of big companies??
I'm flabbergasted. I feel like going out and getting as many guns as I can.
This ain't gonna happen on my watch fellas. :mad:
GreenApples
06-12-2007, 10:43 AM
Every American should use their 2nd amendment rights and arm themselves while they still can.
wwycher
06-12-2007, 10:51 AM
Every American should use their 2nd amendment rights and arm themselves while they still can.
I'm thinking about repairing antiques like old shotgus and such. So I don't have to register them. Cause once they lock down they will have a list of all registered gun owners, just like they did in New Orleans after Katrina. I think they even went to door to door asking about possible gun owners.
burnice
06-12-2007, 11:03 AM
What the F*CK?? :mad:
So, most of these videos are over a year old I've noticed.
Why haven't we heard more about this? You would think it would be all over the news, etc.
Is GWB that deep into the pockets of big companies??
I'm flabbergasted. I feel like going out and getting as many guns as I can.
This ain't gonna happen on my watch fellas. :mad:
I believe that Lou Dobbs of CNN has covered this pretty extensively, but as far as I know he's just about the only host on MSM to even touch on it. Apparently Dobbs has a contract that allows him to say just about anything he wants.
Even with all the evidence that's been posted, apologists are still in pretty serious denial about all this. They'll bitch all day long about our borders being wide open and the border agents having the necessary tools taken away from them, but when it comes time to put 2 and 2 together, they just can't make the leap. Sadly, a lot of people still seem to be in denial about this globalist activity.
burnice
06-12-2007, 11:05 AM
I'm thinking about repairing antiques like old shotgus and such. So I don't have to register them. Cause once they lock down they will have a list of all registered gun owners, just like they did in New Orleans after Katrina. I think they even went to door to door asking about possible gun owners.
Pretty good idea you have there. In my state, it's perfectly legal for private persons to sell guns to another private individual and not register the weapon. I've been to a number of estate sales which have LOTS of guns and ammo for sale - no background check, no registration. :cool:
Spatch67
06-12-2007, 11:22 AM
A few more legitimate links, including the White house press releases. Its looking pretty ugly from where I sit:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/03/20050323-4.html
http://www.spp.gov/
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/03/20050323-1.html
http://www.cfr.org/publication/8102/
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20040101faessay83112/robert-a-pastor/north-america-s-second-decade.html
remaxjon
06-12-2007, 11:24 AM
You all can do whatever you want to do but the fact is that talk like this does not help Dr Paul. The HUGE majority of people will think you are nuts. I don't care if your right or not they will still think your nuts. We should be pushing the message of Iraq and taxes. Thats how he is going to get elected. He can deal with all this other stuff after he is in office. I hope you all remember that when you telling people about Dr Paul.
Spatch67
06-12-2007, 11:29 AM
I just posted mainstream stuff on here, you should see my whole library on NAU research. This isn't a "nutso" issue. It's happening right in front of us. We are literally selling out. Do you not think this issue hasn't been in the news the past couple of weeks in the form of the Immigration Reform bill??
:confused:
angrydragon
06-12-2007, 11:32 AM
You all can do whatever you want to do but the fact is that talk like this does not help Dr Paul. The HUGE majority of people will think you are nuts. I don't care if your right or not they will still think your nuts. We should be pushing the message of Iraq and taxes. Thats how he is going to get elected. He can deal with all this other stuff after he is in office. I hope you all remember that when you telling people about Dr Paul.
Once it happens, they'll be saying "oh f***."
remaxjon
06-12-2007, 11:36 AM
I just posted mainstream stuff on here, you should see my whole library on NAU research. This isn't a "nutso" issue. It's happening right in front of us. We are literally selling out. Do you not think this issue hasn't been in the news the past couple of weeks in the form of the Immigration Reform bill??
:confused:
I'm not saying its not an important issue or something that shouldn't be discussed. I am saying it doesn't help Dr Paul and people will think you are nuts. Post mainstream stuff, you tube stuff, published articles, it doesn't matter they will still think your nuts. Iraq and taxes Iraq and taxes Iraq and taxes. Thats the message!
Bryan
06-12-2007, 11:37 AM
You all can do whatever you want to do but the fact is that talk like this does not help Dr Paul. The HUGE majority of people will think you are nuts. I don't care if your right or not they will still think your nuts. We should be pushing the message of Iraq and taxes. Thats how he is going to get elected. He can deal with all this other stuff after he is in office. I hope you all remember that when you telling people about Dr Paul.
Dr. Paul specifically calls this out on his issues pages for the campaign:
NAFTA”s superhighway is just one part of a plan to erase the borders between the U.S. and Mexico, called the North American Union.
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/issues/american-independence-and-sovereignty/
Some past writing by Dr. Paul on the subject:
A North American United Nations?
August 28, 2006
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst082806.htm
The NAFTA Superhighway
October 30, 2006
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst103006.htm
Edit- but I agree, this isn't the bread and butter issues to talk about first.
burnice
06-12-2007, 11:37 AM
You all can do whatever you want to do but the fact is that talk like this does not help Dr Paul. The HUGE majority of people will think you are nuts. I don't care if your right or not they will still think your nuts. We should be pushing the message of Iraq and taxes. Thats how he is going to get elected. He can deal with all this other stuff after he is in office. I hope you all remember that when you telling people about Dr Paul.
LOL - you do realize that Dr. Paul himself introduced a bill specifically stating that the US is under no circumstances entering into a North American Union, right?
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst082806.htm
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:1:./temp/~c110L5uV47::
remaxjon
06-12-2007, 11:42 AM
LOL - you do realize that Dr. Paul himself introduced a bill specifically stating that the US is under no circumstances entering into a North American Union, right?
http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2006/tst082806.htm
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c110:1:./temp/~c110L5uV47::
I'm saying that it doesn't matter. If you want the guy to get elected talk about Iraq and taxes. He can deal with this other stuff when he gets in office. You asking people to do some research. Its not going to happen. Iraq and taxes are something every American knows about and that is what the message should be.
Spatch67
06-12-2007, 11:45 AM
OK....I can push Iraq and taxes...thats easy.
Can I at least throw a little side note in every once in a while about national sovereignty? It is sort of important you know...being a nation and all.
remaxjon
06-12-2007, 11:51 AM
OK....I can push Iraq and taxes...thats easy.
Can I at least throw a little side note in every once in a while about national sovereignty? It is sort of important you know...being a nation and all.
Look I'm not saying its not an important issue. I just want the guy to get elected. His current momentum is based on his view of the war and taxes. When we start adding things the message gets mixed up. Look at Rudy's message. 911 911 911 911 911. Yes he sucks but he is also currently leading ing the polls. One or two big ideas is what's going to get the ball rolling. If someone hears one thing they don't agree with the mainstream meadia idea that Paul's a nut job will be cemented in stone to them. Lets get him up in the mainstream polls before bringing any new messages. They will be taken much more seriously then.
wwycher
06-12-2007, 11:59 AM
I'm saying that it doesn't matter. If you want the guy to get elected talk about Iraq and taxes. He can deal with this other stuff when he gets in office. You asking people to do some research. Its not going to happen. Iraq and taxes are something every American knows about and that is what the message should be.
If our government in unison with the CFR selling our nation to global intrests is not important to the American people then we deserve it. Dr. Paul has never backed away from tough issues to get elected and I hope he never does. The way we will win this election is by emulating Dr. Paul and to stop pussy footin' around the real issues just get along.
I agree that Iraq and taxes are major issues that we should hammer home. Where do go from there? Why does he want to pull us out of Iraq? Why does he want us to pull out of the UN? The questions lead to other questions. Dr. Paul is running for president because he has seen first hand that our republic is being destroyed.
I'm sorry I'm goin' on a tyrate but this issue really pisses me off. The fact that people will not believe it pisses me off more. If we dance around the true issues, we are no better than MSM.
Henry
06-12-2007, 12:03 PM
I'm saying that it doesn't matter. If you want the guy to get elected talk about Iraq and taxes. He can deal with this other stuff when he gets in office. You asking people to do some research. Its not going to happen. Iraq and taxes are something every American knows about and that is what the message should be.
I couldn't agree more. I have been quiet about what RP is or is not saying. Believing in him being a savvy politician, I think what he is not saying is deafening!!:;;)
Thanks,
Henry
4Horsemen
06-12-2007, 01:01 PM
OK...forgive me...
Conspiracy THEORIES aside....
Is this REALLY IN THE WORKS? I need some hard evidence.
Because if this is real.....I'm off to the fierarhms store.
Watch the video again. It instructs you to look up the CFR's website for further info. Amazing that more people don't know about this! How about the Trilateral Commission or the Asian society? There's many more committees and organizations that are founded by the Rockefeller family. Look up a book written by David Rockefeller III ,here's a quote from his book in 2002.
If you think that the allegation of a world conspiracy is hysterical hyperbole, read the confession of David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, permanent member of the Bilderberg Club, who is one of the principal conspirators:
"For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." David Rockefeller: Memoirs, pg. 405 (2002).
http://www.seekgod.ca/rockefeller.htm
http://www.nexusmagazine.com/articles/rockefeller.1.html
LibertyOrDie
06-12-2007, 01:03 PM
Hello All,
It is my video that has caused this controversy, which I must admit, I don't fully understand. Our national sovereignty and individual liberties are at stake. These things are being perpetrated by a non-government "club" with no authority, who happens to have members in our government.
Please read this document written by their (CFR) president. Printed, it is only about a page and a half:
Sovereignty and globalisation -> http://www.cfr.org/publication/9903/sovereignty_and_globalisation.html
This is document is very frightening and shows the clear purpose of this organization, which, if you notice, every "Top-Tier" candidate is a part of, even the ones considered "Top-Tier" that have yet to fully announce their candidacy. This information is not hidden, they are very open about it. Many of the candidates even have numerous articles that they have written representing the CFR that are posted on the CFR's website. These Democrats and Republicans have a global agenda that they are willing to purchase, using your liberty as their currency for it.
So to you that suggest that we be quiet about the truth, I say to you, that you are a promoter of apathy. There is nothing you could possible explain that would have me believe that this information would hinder people from supporting Ron Paul, because he is not a member of CFR and is against it.
That is absurd, I have yet to meet one person I didn't hand the document "Sovereignty and globalisation" and ask them to read it and tell them that out of all the candidates there is one main voice that is not a member of the CFR , and not only disagrees with the CFR, but speaks against it: Ron Paul, and they are instantly a supporter.
The American people may not be aware of a lot of things that are passed what is spoon fed them by the media, but they do like their liberty. Hell, that is what disconnects most of them from what is going on; they just want to get up everyday and do what they want to do and not be bothered with all the crap around them. All you have to do is show them what is really at stake, and I believe a page and a half document is not too much to be able to show them that.
So, please, pass this information around. An educated public is the only way we are going to keep our freedoms, otherwise the consequences are our own doing!
AgentSmith
06-12-2007, 01:39 PM
OK...forgive me...
Conspiracy THEORIES aside....
Is this REALLY IN THE WORKS? I need some hard evidence.
Because if this is real.....I'm off to the fierarhms store.
Its very real. We have been trying to tell you about it for several years now, but of course its a 'conspiracy theory' because everyone is too lazy to look for themselves.
Thank you, thank you, thank you, LibertyorDie, a true voice of reason! I am so sick of hearing what people should and should not say. The truth may not be popular but if you want popular just go watch the mainstream media. I'm sure Paris has done something that will titillate your ears.
Bryan
06-12-2007, 02:34 PM
Hello All,
It is my video that has caused this controversy, which I must admit, I don't fully understand. Our national sovereignty and individual liberties are at stake. These things are being perpetrated by a non-government "club" with no authority, who happens to have members in our government.
Please read this document written by their (CFR) president. Printed, it is only about a page and a half:
Sovereignty and globalisation -> http://www.cfr.org/publication/9903/sovereignty_and_globalisation.html
You trouble maker!! I hadn't seen that CFR link before, thanks, here are some brief thoughts on it:
As a result, new mechanisms are needed for regional and global governance that include actors other than states. This is not to argue that Microsoft, Amnesty International, or Goldman Sachs be given seats in the United Nations General Assembly, but it does mean including representatives of such organisations in regional and global deliberations when they have the capacity to affect whether and how regional and global challenges are met.
So we should grant corporate special interests the power to influence policy for how the people will be ruled? Isn't this one of the bases of fascism?
This is already taking place in the trade realm. Governments agree to accept the rulings of the World Trade Organisation because on balance they benefit from an international trading order, even if a particular decision requires that they alter a practice that is their sovereign right to carry out.
Why would citizens want to give up being able to buy basic vitamins and mineral without a prescription as the WTO wants? Why should we give up freedoms to not upset the "balance" of this "international trading order"?
Moreover, states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies if the international system is to function.
Says who? Why should we care about this "international system"? Maybe we should focus on personal liberty?
At its core, globalisation entails the increasing volume, velocity and importance of flows within and across borders of people, ideas, greenhouse gases, goods, dollars, drugs, viruses, emails, weapons, and a good deal else, challenging one of sovereignty’s fundamental principles: the ability to control what crosses borders in either direction.
So the control of ideas and e-mails across borders is fundamental to sovereignty?
Sovereign states increasingly measure their vulnerability not to one another, but to forces beyond their control.
This is a very confusion statement, is the author suggesting that controling things like all e-mail is necessary for a state to control their sovereignty? (See context from above)
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.
How is this not doublethink, weakness = strength? Still, even without sovereignty we can not insulate ourselves from what goes on elsewhere, so what is the point here? Is the author suggesting that we give up freedom for safety?
Similarly, America’s preventive war against an Iraq that ignored the UN and was thought to possess weapons of mass destruction showed that sovereignty no longer provides absolute protection.
How is this case any different from countless other preventive wars throughout history? Of course, sovereignty never provided absolute protection, yet, nothing will ever provide "absolute protection" so what's the point of this?
Necessity may also lead to reducing or even eliminating sovereignty when a government, whether from a lack of capacity or conscious policy, is unable to provide for the basic needs of its citizens.
Since when is a government responsible for proving the "basic needs" of its citizens? The citizens ARE the government, they provide for themselves or not, no? What is the source of these resources that enable the government to provide these "basic needs"? Where are they coming from? The people?
The goal should be to redefine sovereignty for the era of globalisation, to find a balance between a world of fully sovereign states and an international system of either world government or anarchy.
So that is our choice? Some form of world government or anarchy? What definition of word "anarchy" is being referred to here? Either 1-3 or 4:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/anarchy
1. a state of society without government or law.
2. political and social disorder due to the absence of governmental control: The death of the king was followed by a year of anarchy.
3. a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.
4. confusion; chaos; disorder: Intellectual and moral anarchy followed his loss of faith.
Is the author trying to imply here that if we don't support his policy and agenda of some form of world government than we're going to have chaos and disorder or is he stating the obvious that we'll either have "rule" or "no rule"?
lucius
06-12-2007, 02:37 PM
So to you that suggest that we be quiet about the truth, I say to you, that you are a promoter of apathy. There is nothing you could possible explain that would have me believe that this information would hinder people from supporting Ron Paul, because he is not a member of CFR and is against it.
So, please, pass this information around. An educated public is the only way we are going to keep our freedoms, otherwise the consequences are our own doing!
Agreed! Isn’t amazing that after years of Fabian indoctrination, Treason is now NOT PC—small wonders? I got it from youtube and will start burning it. It’s a great message, since I have already incorporated NAU 101 in previous disks. Thanks!
Look I'm not saying its not an important issue. I just want the guy to get elected. His current momentum is based on his view of the war and taxes. When we start adding things the message gets mixed up. Look at Rudy's message. 911 911 911 911 911. Yes he sucks but he is also currently leading ing the polls. One or two big ideas is what's going to get the ball rolling. If someone hears one thing they don't agree with the mainstream meadia idea that Paul's a nut job will be cemented in stone to them. Lets get him up in the mainstream polls before bringing any new messages. They will be taken much more seriously then.
I would have to disagree with that assessment. While the War and Taxes my stir some interest in Ron Paul, it is what he's saying about the Constitution, liberty and taking our country back that's exciting people.
It's not just about the war or taxes, it's about saving our Constitutional Republic.
.
wwycher
06-12-2007, 03:14 PM
This is great stuff guys. All this reminds me I need to call my local GOP office and attend some local functions. See if I can't get us some delegates.
LibertyOrDie
06-12-2007, 03:36 PM
All this reminds me I need to call my local GOP office and attend some local functions. See if I can't get us some delegates.
That is exactly what I have been working on too, here is a thread I posted about it:
http://ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=1051
LibertyOrDie
06-12-2007, 03:41 PM
Very nice Q&A breakdown Bryan! These are the type of questions that I perceive. But most of all,
Who the Hell gave this private elite "club" any authority to take over any aspect of our lives?
Bryan
06-12-2007, 04:42 PM
Very nice Q&A breakdown Bryan! These are the type of questions that I perceive. But most of all,
Who the Hell gave this private elite "club" any authority to take over any aspect of our lives?
Thanks. Well, of course they aren't granted specific power but the question is, how much do they influence policy? I think this picture helps answer that, it was taken Janurary 6, 2006 with Bush and some policy advisors on the direction of Iraq.
http://www.stopthenorthamericanunion.com/secretaries-of-state-ap-smaller.jpg
Of the 17 pictured, 14 belong to the Council on Foreign Relations. Two others (Rumsfeld and Laird) are formers members of the CFR. Of the 17, George W. Bush himself is the only one who has not belonged to the organization.
Starting on the left: Former Secretary of Defense Harold Brown, former Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger, former Secretary of State James Baker, former Secretary of State Colin Powell, former Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Vice President Dick Cheney, President George W. Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, former Secretary of State George Shultz, former Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird, former Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State Alexander Haig, former Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci, former Secretary of Defense William Perry, and former Secretary of Defense William Cohen.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.