It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Angelina Jolie: Pretty Face in the Council on Foreign Relations?

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2007 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Jolie: the Pretty Face of the Global Slave Gulag

It’s official. The “UN Goodwill Ambassador” Angelina Jolie will front for the “prestigious” NWO “think tank,” the Council on Foreign Relations. “Angelina Jolie will now be joining former presidents Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter, current Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, Diane Sawyer and several other distinguished names as a member of the Council on Foreign Relations,” TransWorldNews reports. “The bombshell Oscar winner-turned globe-trotting activist is one of 94 new ‘term members’—a category reserved for up-and-coming young policy thinkers in their early 30s, most from the corporate world, government, academia or the media, who after their five-year terms can apply to join the ‘life membership’ ranks of Cheney, Soros, Greenspan, Kissinger, etc. What this means for Angelina: a chance to kibitz with top global policy experts. What this means for CFR: more paparazzi,” adds the CIA’s favorite newspaper, the Washington Post.

Of course, chances are slim to none Jolie will take up with the hoary and criminal likes of Cheney, Soros, Greenspan, or Kissinger, although she may as well, considering the fact she has in essence become a whore for the ruling elite, attaching her “paparazzi” celebrity glow to an organization determined to reduce the world to a one-world slave labor gulag based on the China model of medieval feudalism at the behest of transnational mercantile capitalism. Of course, most Americans remain clueless of this agenda, even as the CFR works diligently to erode their endangered sovereignty. “Most Americans who are even aware of the CFR consider its objectives as visionary rather than a pressing political certainty or reality. Senators, Congressmen, and others in some branch of government service, doubtless for the most part consider an invitation to CFR membership as an honor,” notes Noah W. Hutchings, “and after all, CFR membership enhances political career opportunities and potentiality.”

Oh my.

A big step for a pretty face like that.

So what is her role in this gentlemans N.W.O. club?

Probably for some propaganda and so that they can then use her, as a smoke screen, saying - "Hey we are not so bad, we have Angelina!". Yeah right guys - who are you kidding! Will the UN Goodwill Ambassador be the first one to bring certain "new cures for AIDS" to Africa?

Angelina sure is just another pretty face, who can not compete with corrupt politicians like Kissinger and others in the CFR - but I am more then sure, that the decision to accept her in this elite club, was more then carefully thought over and over and designed to portray this Global Mafia, as just another gentlemans club, which is so lovely and great, that also allows pretty actresess to join them.

Looks like the New World Order has a new pretty face.

Forget the dude from 1984.

PRETTY BIG SISTER IS WATCHING!



[edit on 13/6/07 by Souljah]




posted on Jun, 13 2007 @ 11:30 AM
link   
After having just researched Youth for Human Rights International, (see my post about it here), I stumbled upon this tidbit...


Celebrities Isaac Hayes, and Angelina Jolie voice their support in a TV special "Pepsi Everyday Freedom Heroes," which will air on WCPO-TV (Channel 9 in Cincinnati, OH) and in other cities before spring. A Pepsi Everyday Freedom Hero is an individual or group of people who exemplify courage, cooperation and perseverance.

The seven extraordinary people awarded included the founder of Youth for Human Rights International, Mary Shuttleworth and her young son, Taron Lexton.


So the founder of YHRI, (an organization promoting global government run by the UN), is being publicly praised by new CFR member Angelina Jolie in a series of ads Pepsi Co is releasing celebrating "everyday freedom heroes". Anyone notice anything suspicious about this? See article at www.prweb.com...



posted on Jun, 13 2007 @ 11:40 AM
link   
Why would they let her in?

Well, she has the prettiest damn mouth I've ever seen.

As I read this, the only thing I could think is that these doddering old elitist codgers have their hopes up to hit that.

All I can hope is that she'll be using that pretty little mouth of hers to weaken the CFR internally. Men are stupid and vulnerable around women of her ilk.

Here's hoping that she blows up the CFR from the inside, making the world a little safer from enslavement.



posted on Jun, 13 2007 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Well as long as they have Angelina...


Another Day in the Empire

But never mind. As we know, or rather as the corporate media would have us believe, “the merging of the governments of Canada, the United States and Mexico,” otherwise known as the North American Union, as sketched out by the CFR’s Robert Pastor, is an “urban legend,” part of the insanity of “the xenophobic or frightened right wing of America that is afraid of immigration and globalization,” as Pastor told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch. In other words, if you are suspicious of the so-called Security and Prosperity Partnership, i.e., the merging of Mexico, Canada, and the United States into a European style “union,” you are naturally a tinfoil hat nutter, never mind Benn Steil, writing for the CFR’s “influential” Foreign Affairs magazine, who tells us “the world needs to abandon unwanted currencies, replacing them with dollars, euros, and multinational currencies as yet unborn.”

Let us forget about North American Union, about Amero and about Globalization, which shall slowly turn this world into a REAL New World Order with One Government, One Currency, One Army. The ultimate wet dream of Council on Foreign Relations. And as it looks like, now a wet dream of Angelina too.



posted on Jun, 13 2007 @ 03:44 PM
link   
I have to say Jolie is a genuine humanitarian. Ofcourse the CFR would like such a popular frontperson, but that in itself means nothing. I really do not get why you are blowing this out of proprortion, Souljah. I enjoy most of your threads but the logic on this one eludes me.



posted on Jun, 14 2007 @ 02:37 AM
link   
Regarding the campaign that Jolie is involved with along with Hayes. Hayes is a bit fishy:


On March 13, 2006, a statement was issued in Hayes' name, indicating that he was asking to be released from his contract with Comedy Central, citing recent episodes which satirized religious beliefs as being intolerant. "There is a place in this world for satire, but there is a time when satire ends and intolerance and bigotry towards religious beliefs of others begins," he was quoted in a press statement. The statement, however, did not directly mention Scientology. A response from Stone said that Hayes' complaints stemmed from the show's criticism of Scientology and that he "has no problem –– and he's cashed plenty of checks –– with our show making fun of Christians, Muslims, Mormons or Jews."[7] Stone adds, "[We] never heard a peep out of Isaac in any way until we did Scientology. He wants a different standard for religions other than his own, and to me, that is where intolerance and bigotry begin." Stone and Parker agreed to release Hayes from his contract per his request.





She had a tattoo on her back of the Chinese character for death, as well as the Latin proverb "quod me nutrit me destruit" (what nourishes me also destroys me)

There is alot of NWO symbology in 'Tomb Raider'.

There is also a strange connection between Jolie and Rosie O'Donnell. Jolie's godmother, Jacqueline Bisset had a scene in which her t-shirt was wet, this led Rosie to discover she was a lesbian.

Also her mother is part Iroquois, which may interest some here.



posted on Jun, 14 2007 @ 07:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by SteveR
I have to say Jolie is a genuine humanitarian. Ofcourse the CFR would like such a popular frontperson, but that in itself means nothing. I really do not get why you are blowing this out of proprortion, Souljah. I enjoy most of your threads but the logic on this one eludes me.

Now why would CFR want to have a popular person like that?

Maybe because none of current members are very popular.

They did not accept her for her good deeds for Humanity or for her being the UN ambassador of Good Will - they want ther, to make them look just a little bit better, because maybe, just maybe, they are getting a feeling that they are not very popular among the general crowd. And that we, as open minded people, can read so much stuff about them, that it is kind of making them nervous.



posted on Jun, 14 2007 @ 07:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah
So what is her role in this gentlemans N.W.O. club?

I could make a guess - but this is a family site and X rated comments wouldn't be welcome.


Oh - side note - She's a hypocrite when it comes to freedom of the press - freedom of the press hypocrite


Originally posted by SteveR
I have to say Jolie is a genuine humanitarian.


She's just a homewrecker who has a high profile hobby of collecting children from around the world ... and making her nanny (Brad Pitt) carry them around for her.

A 'genuine humanitarian' wouldn't break up families, and that's what she (and Brad Pitt) did.



posted on Jun, 14 2007 @ 09:31 AM
link   


Oh - side note - She's a hypocrite when it comes to freedom of the press - freedom of the press hypocrite


Why because she wanted to talk about the movie instead of them asking questions about Brad Pitt or her children?



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 05:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
A 'genuine humanitarian' wouldn't break up families, and that's what she (and Brad Pitt) did.


Not to stray off topic but I don't agree with this...well not completely. Breaking up a family can be the humane thing to do.

I lived in a care home for 24 years. I have dealt with social services, child protective services and other related agencies my entire life thus far. I have had 14 additional brothers and sisters, both adopted and small-term placements, coming from all sorts of disfunctional families; some physical abuse, some emotional abuse, some drugs. I speak from experience when I say kids living in a broken up home, or a care home, can be much more ideal then living in a disfunctional family.

Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston ended their marriage because it wasn't working, it was disfunctional. Maybe they tried hard to work things out but realized it just wasn't going to work. That disfunctional marriage would have created a disfunctional living environment for the developing child.


[edit on 16-6-2007 by Cloak and Dagger]



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 05:24 AM
link   
I find it funny that people rant about how the rich do nothing to help. When there are rich who wish to help, they rant about not helping a specific group or how they are just doing it for themselves. It kinda shows how pathetic some people can be.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cloak and Dagger
Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston ended their marriage because it wasn't working, it was disfunctional.


You just want to argue with me, don't you?


You can't say they ended their marriage because it was 'dysfunctional'. It ended because Brad Pitt committed ADULTRY with Angelina Jolie. Adultry. That isn't a positive thing. It's not a good thing. There was no indication of 'disfunction' prior to that.

FACT - Angelina Jolie is a homewrecker. Brad Pitt is an adulterer who severely emotionally injured (and lied to) his wife - a person he was supposed to be honest and caring with. These behaviors are NOT humanitarian in nature.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 07:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

Originally posted by Cloak and Dagger
Brad Pitt and Jennifer Aniston ended their marriage because it wasn't working, it was disfunctional.


You just want to argue with me, don't you?


I think it has more to do with the attention your extreme claims grab.

It doesn't surprise me that was your first assumption. Projection perhaps? I'm into debate not arguing. Difference is i'm not angry when I type.


FACT - Angelina Jolie is a homewrecker. Brad Pitt is an adulterer who severely emotionally injured (and lied to) his wife - a person he was supposed to be honest and caring with. These behaviors are NOT humanitarian in nature.



Cleary you know these people personally and so have intimiate knowledge about how their relationship went. I can't debate with FACTS now can I.

If Brad Pitt is this super inhumane emotionally crippling adulterer then why is it you think he should have stayed married to Jennifer and eventually raised a family? Or do you completely disagree with my previous post on dysfunctional homes? Brad Pitt cheated on his wife. That makes him a bad husband. Bad husband = good chance of bad family. Also, unless you know them personally then you really don't know anything about their relationship...nor do you know about any potential non-humanitarian things she might have done to her husband Brad.

You word things in such a way that it leaves no room for debate. I'm sure the result of that makes you feel like you won the 'argument', perhaps that's why you do it.

Anyways, I think couples should do everything they can to stay together. But if they feel they need to divorce then they should.

[edit on 16-6-2007 by Cloak and Dagger]



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
FACT - Angelina Jolie is a homewrecker. Brad Pitt is an adulterer who severely emotionally injured (and lied to) his wife - a person he was supposed to be honest and caring with. These behaviors are NOT humanitarian in nature.

I like how you consider personal facts as being part of a person's career choices.
Angelina Jolie wishes to help the world and that is what she is doing. It doesn't matter if she is acting like every other celebrity does when it comes to marriage issues.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 08:06 AM
link   
Please post on topic.

The issue of ex-marital relationships has nothing to do with the OP.

Thank you.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 09:32 AM
link   
This is ridiculous, first of all i dont think the UN as a hole has very little to do with the NWO(influenced by the NWO yes maybe), and secondly why would the UN ambassador be a so called think tank?? Its only some one that is well known who cares about people, nothing more nothing less.

Souljah i seriously hope that you were drunk when you started this topic, because then i could forgive u for this slip up.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 09:49 AM
link   
It is also possible that she, like maybe others involved in these kinds of organizations, believes that she is genuinely helping people. There was once a time that I thought that the United Nations etc were the 'good guys'.

Just a thought.



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Boockelbee
This is ridiculous, first of all i dont think the UN as a hole has very little to do with the NWO(influenced by the NWO yes maybe), and secondly why would the UN ambassador be a so called think tank?? Its only some one that is well known who cares about people, nothing more nothing less.

Well my friend, United Nations, Council on Foreign Relations and the New World Order have more in common then you think. Less than 20 years after the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) was founded, World War II had arrived and once that war was over, America was ready to join "the League of Nations." The United Nations' 18 acres of prime Manhattan land was donated by the Rockefeller family (the CFR's chairman is David Rockefeller).

The corporate portion of the NWO is dominated by international bankers, oil barons and pharmaceutical cartels, as well as other major multinational corporations. The decision making nerve centers of this effort are in London (especially the City of London), Basel Switzerland, and Brussels (NATO headquarters). The United Nations, along with all the agencies working under the UN umbrella, such as the World Health Organization (WHO), are full time players in this scheme. Similarly, NATO is a military tool of the NWO.

Meaning, that an ambassador of good will in United Nations and now a member of Council on Foreign Relations is already a front man for the New World Order. And you know what CFR is right?

If one group is effectively in control of national governments and multinational corporations; promotes world government through control of media, foundation grants, and education; and controls and guides the issues of the day; then they control most options available. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and the financial powers behind it, have done all these things, and promote the "New World Order", as they have for over seventy years.

The CFR is the promotional arm of the Ruling Elite in the United States of America. Most influential politicians, academics and media personalities are members, and it uses its influence to infiltrate the New World Order into American life. Its' "experts" write scholarly pieces to be used in decision making, the academics expound on the wisdom of a united world, and the media members disseminate the message.



Souljah i seriously hope that you were drunk when you started this topic, because then i could forgive u for this slip up.

Still think I am drunk? If you are a member of this forum board, which is by the way called ABOVETopSecret, you should know a little bit about N.W.O. and CFR and the ruling Global Elite, which is shaping this world of OURS as we are typing right now. Reading posts like yours, I wonder what certain people are actually doing and reading here...



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 10:17 AM
link   
Shes so nice and you write so much bad stuff about her. Try to think and see something positive for a change. She adopted few kids, she is a humanitarian and i think she deserves to be a member of CFR.


Besides, NWO is not that bad as Christians would like you to believe. They will say it's ultimate evil because they fear New Age and similar awareness will destroy Christianity. Let God decide, eh?



posted on Jun, 16 2007 @ 10:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by sb2012
Besides, NWO is not that bad as Christians would like you to believe. They will say it's ultimate evil because they fear New Age and similar awareness will destroy Christianity. Let God decide, eh?
I'm Christian and I support the NWO so far as I know of it. Anyway, aren't the Christians supposed to be taken off of the Earth before the Revelation?



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join