It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Next President: Member of Shadowy Elite Group.

page: 1

log in


posted on May, 4 2007 @ 09:52 PM
Ok so I postulate that:

The next president voted in by the people will be someone that is a member, or affiliated with, either in the past, or at present of one of the following groups:

  • The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)
  • The Trilateral group
  • The Bilderberg Group (past or continual attendance)
  • The Davos Group

    Also to be mentioned is the Masons or Masonry. Members that are a part of the above group(s) will most likely be a member of Masonry or be a mason, so it therefore is left off the list. The list is meant to be the extreme elite groups whereas Masonry perhaps even some people on ATS are members of...albeit not high members.

    The Davos group is more of an international group, but is mentioned for completeness.

    I do not have information on which candidates, if any, are members of the above groups, some research needs to be performed on this. Its possible taht all of the candidates, or perhaps none at all (unlikely) are members of the above groups.

    Also need to look at affiliations, such as parents of, grandparents of and school affiliations. For instance, Yale is affiliated with Skull & Bones, other schools have other groups. Also George Bush of course we know his father and grandfathers were affiliated with the above groups...

    Here are the candidates (let me know if I left any off)...

    * Senator Joe Biden of Delaware
    * Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York
    * Senator Christopher Dodd of Connecticut
    * Former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina
    * Former Senator Mike Gravel of Alaska
    * Representative Dennis Kucinich of Ohio
    * Senator Barack Obama of Illinois
    * Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico

    * Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas
    * John H. Cox of Illinois
    * Former Governor Jim Gilmore of Virginia
    * Former Mayor Rudy Giuliani of New York City, New York
    * Representative Duncan Hunter of California
    * Senator John McCain of Arizona
    * Raymond L. McKinney of Georgia
    * Representative Ron Paul of Texas
    * Former Governor Mitt Romney of Massachusetts
    * Representative Tom Tancredo of Colorado
    * Former Governor Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin

    So thats my prediction. Why would this be the case? These groups are far reaching, powerful and with an 'alumnus' if you will that include politicians, mega-wealthy, judges, CEO's, law-enforcement, the media and any other leadership positions we may think of.

    Do WE THE PEOPLE really pick our president? Or is it manipulated from the start and led to believe that WE vote our president into office?

    [edit on 4-5-2007 by greatlakes]

    [edit on 27-5-2007 by UM_Gazz]

  • posted on May, 5 2007 @ 08:50 PM
    The obvious one is Mrs Clinton, affiliation of course to Bill Clinton,

    William (Bill) Jefferson Clinton BB/CFR/RS/TC

    BB=Bilderberger CFR=Council on Foreign Relations RS=Rhodes Scholar S&B=Skull and Bones (Yale) TC=Trilateral Commission

    From here:

    [edit on 5-5-2007 by greatlakes]


    posted on May, 5 2007 @ 09:00 PM

    Originally posted by greatlakes
    * Senator Sam Brownback of Kansas

    Research him.

    When I posted about the group he belonged to it really never got a much of a responce.

    Originally posted by me
    The founder mentioned a New World Order in 1944.
    There are members in the United States Government.
    They have influence with the "movers and shakers" in Washington and companies like Raytheon
    The have extended their influence to other governments.
    Their goal seems to be controlling the worlds governments starting with the U.S.
    Their current leader has shown up in most powerfull lists in magazines like Time.

    posted on May, 5 2007 @ 09:04 PM
    Thanks Cug, I'll try to find some information on him.

    Here's some info on who the Trilateral Commission may be backing.


    Major Trilateral Commission Support for McCain
    International Politics

    by Patrick Wood
    The August Review
    April 13, 2007

    Since 1976, the members of the Trilateral Commission have carefully backed presidential candidates in both political parties, to insure their continued Hegemony over the Executive Branch of the U.S. government.

    [edit on 27-5-2007 by UM_Gazz]

    posted on May, 5 2007 @ 09:11 PM
    I would suppose, are there quasi-controlled People in the highest authority within one of the most financial and militarily powered countries on the planet?

    If so, are there others in other so-called democratic countries? Why and to what purpose?



    posted on May, 5 2007 @ 09:16 PM
    of course it is manipulated from the start. both candidates will be two different sides of the same coin. we're damned if we do and damned if we don't. that's why we the people doesn't exist anymore.

    posted on May, 27 2007 @ 08:00 AM
    I looked up all the candidates and some undeclared ones. If I forgot 1, let me know.

    BB - Bilderberger
    TC - Trilateralist
    CFR - Council on Foreign Relations
    M - Mason
    RS - Rhodes Scholar
    S&B - Skull & Bones


    Joe Biden - CFR

    Hillary Clinton - BB (Bill - CFR/TC/BB/RS)

    Chriss Dodd - CFR/TC

    John Edwards - BG

    Al Gore - CFR/M

    Mike Gravel - None, but is for international carbon tax :/

    Dennis Kucinich - None, but is against 2nd Amendment :/

    John Kerry - S&B

    Barack Obama - CFR

    Bill Richardson - CFR/BB


    Sam Brownback - OPUS DEI

    Jim Gilmore - Unknown, "USA national terrorism policy writer, head of the Gilmore Commission. Very bad guy w/ tight Bush connections."

    Newt Gingrich - CFR

    Rudy Giuliani - CFR

    Charles Hagel - CFR, TC, BB

    Mike Huckabee - None, anti free trade, pro fair trade, pro Iraq war.

    Duncan Hunter - None, Anti-illegal immigration, pro fence, but involved in Iraq reconstruction corruption:

    "According to The New York Times, the provision closing the Office of the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction as of Oct. 1, 2007, was tacked on at the last minute to a complex military authorization bill by staffers of Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee."

    In fairness though, Duncan Hunter voted against both NAFTA and CAFTA, and has said that "both trade agreements were “bad deals” that he would “junk” if elected president."

    John McCain - CFR

    George Pataki - BB, possibly S&B, as he went to Yale.

    Ron Paul - None, against NAFTA, CAFTA, NAU, SPPI, Tyranny, pro freedom, liberty, eliminating the Federal Reserve System and IRS, and is dedicated to restoring the Constitution. Voted against Patriot Act and Iraq War. Anti-illegal immigration. Abolish dept. of Homeland Security.

    Mitt Romney - Mormon church linked to Freemasons, and owns Pepsico - TC

    Tom Tancredo - None, Anti internationalists, Anti WTO free trade and CAFTA, but very pro-Iraq war. Sounded very bigoted against Muslims in the Rudy Giuliani vs. Ron Paul exchange. Crony for AIPAC (Israel).

    "People have to understand what we're talking about here. The president of the United States is an internationalist," said Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo. "He is going to do what he can to create a place where the idea of America is just that – it's an idea. It's not an actual place defined by borders. I mean this is where this guy is really going."

    Fred Thompson - CFR

    Tommy Thompson - None. Health and Human Services secretary for Bush jr. Pushed for mandatory vaccines, and an amendment in a Homeland Security Bill, that would give him sweeping powers to declare martial law and do forced inoculations.

    "Even more sinister, however, is that this provision reintroduces proposals which were previously rejected by most states in last years' Model State Emergency Health Powers Act (MEHPA). Calling for mandatory vaccination, MEHPA allows for confiscation of real estate, food, medicine and other property; and outlines plans to herd afflicted citizens into stadiums.

    Bemoaning that the provision was "snuck into the bill at the last minute," Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) said, "It is hard to think of a more blatant violation of liberty than allowing government officials to force peopleto receive potentially dangerous vaccines based on hypothetical risks."

    The upcoming election is the most important one in our nations history. In this election, you must choose between authoritarian tyranny under the North American Union/New World Order, or choose freedom, liberty, and the full restoration of the Constitution. NOTHING is more important! Not Iraq, health care, or education. If you do not choose to "support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic", then the USA will cease to exist. Our nations sovereignty and Constitution are under attack by these globalist groups that wish to merge us with Canada and Mexico, and force the "Amero" upon us.

    Ron Paul is clearly our best choice.

    posted on May, 27 2007 @ 10:01 AM

    I was too lazy to look up the data, I tried to find some of the information, but found it to be quite diffficult finding the right stuff.

    Great job! If there was a WATS award still I'd give you the vote!

    How do you do the research searching mostly if you don't mind...

    I know alot of google search 'techniques' (hacks) but am not pro at it yet..

    posted on May, 27 2007 @ 07:50 PM
    Thanks GL
    It took hours, ugh! I type the candidates name in and then a phrase like either just "council on foreign relations", or "council trilateral skull bilderberg". Invariable you start to see the same sites coming up time and again. I found 2 sites on the CFR's page where they rated every candidate on Iraq and on free trade, or rather, their banker driven WTO spewin managed trade that they try to tell us is "free" but isn't. The biggest obstacle is only getting 4000 characters. I might come back and do another write up on just those 2 issues for every candidate. Many more sources came up, like these:

    I can't stress it enough. If you currently hold pre-concieved ideas regarding your candidate of choice, and you appear to be locked in to supporting that candidate and are otherwise obstinate to looking at the policies of other candidates, please step outside of yourself for a moment, and objectively look at them again through the lens of whether or not they are an internationalist, globalist, WTO managed free trade (very important that you understand that NAFTA/CAFTA/FTAA/GATT/SPPI is NOT "free trade"), or pro-UN/NAU/NWO.

    Do not take "party" into consideration. Just because someone is a Republican doesn't mean they are a pro-Bush, pro-war neo-con. Note: Clinton's and Bush's are on the "same team". Literally, throw out the old paradigm of red state vs blue state, liberal vs. conservative, rep vs. dem, pro life vs. pro choice (this issue could be solved by letting the states decide), but do take "Constitutional" issues into consideration, things that end our sovereignty, or give authority over our domain to the UN, or things that remove the ability of the people to retake their government should it resort to authoritarian rule (the true reason behind the 2nd amendment).

    All that "Left vs. Right" garbage is known as "Marxist Hegelian Dialectic Techniques". These are techniques the elitists use against us to 1) keep our attention fixated on American Idol and against each other and away from the global elitists plans to subvert our Constitution and merge us into the NAU, and 2) it divides us, keeping us fighting each other over stupid crap until it's too late. The old "Divide and Conquer."

    If your candidate falls into any of the above categories, then you should not support that candidate, because that candidate does not "support, protect, and defend the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic" as the oath of office implies. The continued sovereignty of the United States of America is what is at stake in this next election. I am going to join the Republican Party and vote for Ron Paul in the Primary. This is critical if your goal is to see that he wins the nomination. If he doesn't win the Republican nomination, then I will leave the party and probably join the Constitution Party and hope he runs as an Independent, Constitutionalist, or Libertarian.

    Lastly, I highly recommend that whatever candidate you choose, that you actively work to make electronic voting illegal in your state, or at least work to have it backed up by a paper record. All 50 states must do this to secure the integrity of our electoral process.

    Whatever you choose, I hope you found this information informative and helpful folks. I love this country very much, and I am fighting hard to spread the freedom message while respecting others views. Just know that we are in the top of the 9th inning and if we do not act soon and make this coming vote count, we will all lose, and America will fall just like Rome did. That's what empires do.

    God Bless and Good Luck

    [edit on 5/27/07 by Kelldor]

    posted on Jun, 6 2007 @ 01:10 AM
    I watched the debate tonight. It's no big secret that I'm a Ron Paul fan. I thought he did well tonight, although I wished he woulda been given the chance to smoke the other candidates on monetary policy. He was strong tonight on foreign policy, stuck to his guns, and got some cheers, so that's good news.

    The main reason I wanted to post here again is because of Tom Tancredo's performance tonight. I would say his was the most surprising. Early on he talked about whether or not we would continue as a nation. His argument was very thought provoking with regards to becoming a bilingual or multilingual state threatening the continued sovereignty of our nation. He used language that questioned whether or not we would survive as a nation, apparently alluding to the North American Union, although not directly by name.

    I wish he wasn't so pro-Iraq war and pro-AIPAC because I would love to be more supportive of him based upon his views of the seriousness of our illegal immigration problem and the threat to our sovereignty by the WTO managed trade agreements (NAFTA, CAFTA, FTAA, SPPI, etc.). I still can not pin him to any of the above secretive NWO affiliated organizations. AIPAC might be in that category depending upon your view though. In my view, too much of our foreign policy is dictated by Tel Aviv via AIPAC, and this is unacceptable. It is not in our nations self interest. Only Israels, and if we stopped paying for half of their defense budget every year, then maybe they would be less beligerant and more willing to talk with their neighbors.

    posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 10:39 PM

    I found this video today, pretty cool, it calls out who is CFR in the presidential election.

    CFR / NAU & 2008 Presidential Candidates

    It won't let me edit the above post :/ how bunk!

    Mitt Romney - CFR, Mormon church owns Pepsi Co. which is a member of TC, and is linked to Freemasons.

    Jim Gilmore - CFR, USA national terrorism policy writer, head of the Gilmore Commission. Very bad guy w/ tight Bush connections.

    Hillary Clinton - CFR, BB (Bill - CFR/TC/BB/RS)

    John Edwards - CFR, BB

    Sovereignty and globalisation

    Roundtable: Old Rules, New Threats

    [edit on 6/7/07 by Kelldor]

    posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 10:48 PM

    Originally posted by Kelldor
    CFR / NAU & 2008 Presidential Candidates

    I'm going to edit my above post to reflect the new information.

    Nice find
    on the video posting. Alas, you cannot edit your posts past a certain amount of time past, you can always u2u a mod and ask them to change for you though.

    That was a good video, glas to see others are thinking about this too.

    I wonder, on another topic, has anyone done a AIRTIME totals of the past republican and democratic debates. Particularly concerning Ron Paul, it did seem that he did not get much airtime, and others got disproportionate amounts....

    posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 10:48 PM

    Originally posted by Kelldor
    CFR / NAU & 2008 Presidential Candidates

    I'm going to edit my above post to reflect the new information.

    Nice find
    on the video posting. Alas, you cannot edit your posts past a certain amount of time past, you can always u2u a mod and ask them to change for you though.

    That was a good video, glad to see others are thinking about this too.

    I wonder, on another topic, has anyone done a AIRTIME totals of the past republican and democratic debates. Particularly concerning Ron Paul, it did seem that he did not get much airtime, and others got disproportionate amounts....

    posted on Jun, 7 2007 @ 11:09 PM
    Thx Greatlakes!

    Ron Paul only got roughly 6 min in the CNN debate. I was PISSED! The only "doctor" on stage yet he was the only guy they skipped during the Health Care round.

    BTW, The "Shamnesty" Bill was defeated today

    U.S. Sovereignty 1: CFR/NAU: 0


    [edit on 6/7/07 by Kelldor]

    posted on Jul, 5 2007 @ 08:21 PM
    Great thread guys,that material will keep me busy for a night or two.Looking down the list it sure looks like "meet the new boss,same as the old boss"
    Go Ron Paul!

    posted on Jul, 19 2007 @ 12:36 PM
    are we seeing a theme here?

    seems to me there are few candidates left – one of which is on my sig.

    [edit on 19-7-2007 by tyranny22]

    posted on Jul, 19 2007 @ 12:37 PM
    dbl post. sorry.

    [edit on 19-7-2007 by tyranny22]

    posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 09:50 AM
    double post...

    [edit on 2-4-2008 by battlestargalactica]

    new topics

    top topics


    log in