It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
But hey, if none of that concerns you, it should still be interesting to see how some of these people connect.
This however was supposed to be the "swamp draining" remember? Don't worry, #DrainTheSwamp was something invented by Cambridge Analytica.
Trump supporters have made "globalist" one of the most used words in the English language currently
Proponents of this line of thought refer to the process as polarization and argue that current neo-liberal economic policies have given wealthier states an advantage over developing nations, enabling their exploitation and leading to a widening of the global wealth gap
The term "globalization" has been appropriated by the powerful to refer to a specific form of international economic integration, one based on investor rights, with the interests of people incidental. That is why the business press, in its more honest moments, refers to the "free trade agreements" as "free investment agreements" (Wall St. Journal). Accordingly, advocates of other forms of globalization are described as "anti-globalization"; and some, unfortunately, even accept this term, though it is a term of propaganda that should be dismissed with ridicule. No sane person is opposed to globalization, that is, international integration. Surely not the left and the workers movements, which were founded on the principle of international solidarity—that is, globalization in a form that attends to the rights of people, not private power systems.
The term suggests that its followers support protectionism and/or nationalism, which is not always the case - in fact, some supporters of anti-globalization are strong opponents of both nationalism and protectionism: for example, the No Border network argues for unrestricted migration and the abolition of all national border controls.
Cambridge Analytica worries me quite a bit. It's bad enough if they're next level microtargeting everyone but how do we know they won't be running operations that are far more nefarious still? Now we find out the same billionaires are putting together an organization to sell the Trump platform.
As for Bannon, he's been a member of the CNP since at least 2014 which hardly qualifies him as anti-establishment. IMO, it's not Trump vs "The Establishment" it's a hostile takeover of the right-wing establishment by a new family of oligarchs and frankly, Mercer scares me because he's not just rich, he's brilliant and his professional experience runs the gamut from linguistics processing to trading algorithms — and he funded an offshoot of a no-s# psyops contractor.
If they are doing something to micro target people to make them buy into trumps platform, they aren't very good at it. There is still a whole lot of opposition to Trump.
It's looking like they have a solid plan & the cooperation in place to make America great again
originally posted by: Outlier13
Appreciate the effort OP but you basically showed how people who know people are connected.
Jeremy Scahill at The Intercept has a very interesting article about what Erik Prince really wants. Beyond an appointment for his sister — for which she's completely unqualified — the notorious founder of Blackwater (or founder of the notorious Blackwater?) has his sights set beyond running mercenaries to heading a private firm of assassins contracted for operations al a CIA's Project Phoenix.
originally posted by: NobodiesNormal
originally posted by: theantediluvian
I'm sure this won't be as viewed as a thread showing how Soros gave $5k to some group and therefore supposedly controls them,
wow its pretty outrageous how delusional your hypocrisy has gotten, you criticize someone pointing out a link of 5k in the same post that you've made yourself an entire map of similar donations, many of the data points within your map exist for nothing but less then $100 in donations, so to you, its irrelevant that soros gave 5k to a senator, but to you it is utter conspiracy that a republican would donate less then 100$ to the republican presidential candidate during his campaign,
that is going full retard.