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.

 

Obama: I don't carry a Council on Foreign Relations card or know any 'special handshake'

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by thought
reply to post by battlestargalactica
 


So...exactly WHAT has the CFR done that is so dastardly?


I am not going to spoonfeed, you will have to find the time in your schedule to put forward some amount of due diligence and research and form your own conclusions.




posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 10:30 AM
link   
reply to post by CaptGizmo
 


These are just all people's opinions and G H.W. Bush was using NWO as a metaphor for international cooperation and an end to Cold War tensions.

Try again.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by thought
reply to post by CaptGizmo
 


These are just all people's opinions and G H.W. Bush was using NWO as a metaphor for international cooperation and an end to Cold War tensions.

Try again.


Do you just choose not to read what is written?
The term NWO and hidden government and elite are terms used by all of these people.That is not just peoples opinions...wake up man!!!Not to mention the fact that your going to have to do a lot better than that one line post with nothing to back your statement up with.

[edit on 2-4-2008 by CaptGizmo]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 10:57 AM
link   
Here's another good video for people who 'don't have the time':

Aaron Russo with insider information from Nick Rockefeller, [color=gold]great video...



www.youtube.com...



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by battlestargalactica
 


Why do you have to be so snarky? Just tell us what he said...some people don't have high bandwidth connections.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by thought
 


I agree. Apparently he 'doesn't have the time' to explain his position.

Don't post up links to make others do work. Explain your position and cite sources!



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Sublime620
reply to post by dgtempe
 


I don't worry about it. As the late, great Bob Marley said:

"You can fool some people sometimes, but you can't fool all the people all the time, and now you see the light. Stand up for your rights".

Even if the NWO conspiracy turns out to be true, the great plan will never work. The great mass of people always wins. Just ask Rome.


That's exactly right.
No worries.
Instead focus and determination.
Good will prevail.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:34 AM
link   
I would like to ask to be allowed to make an assertion regarding the CFR that, while on point, may offend some people here. If it does, forgive me. I take this liberty because I am offended by the very existence of the CFR, it's structure, it's membership, and it's truly evil manner of exercising power.

The CFR is only part of a larger organization, this is self-proclaimed so I am hoping I won't have to go into great detail. Suffice to say that the way the CFR is 'integrated' into a larger set of organizations is for some reason never brought to light by the media in it's reports and commentaries.

The CFR is an 'exclusive' organization, which is to say that no one can be privy to its proceedings, agendas, minutes of meetings, nor activities unless so 'decreed' by the senior 'core' of it's leadership. Again, this fact seems to elude the publics' attention. It is also unusual that even the 'casual' members of this 'club' decry ignorance when confronted with the fact that the CFR leadership are 'subordinate' to other organizations - equally, if not more so, restrictive and secret regarding membership and agenda.

The stream of 'revelations' by former members and critics alike regarding the actual 'efforts' made by the CFR and the eventual 'goal' remains oddly obscured by the lighthearted way she is presented by members (including media - now also members via 'corporate' channels).

People, please explain why an otherwise 'harmless' or even 'benevolent' organization would have to HIDE to conduct their 'good works?' What is it with people to fail to see that organizations like the CFR protect themselves from full disclosure the same way organized crime does?

At the very best the organization is a manifestation of the notion that an 'elite' group of people exist, and their self-proclaimed superiority motivates them to play puppeteer with the public interest.

At the very worst the CFR is the dreaded malevolent self-serving monstrosity that claimed control of as much of the nation as it could, to perpetuate it's own 'manifest destiny' to rule despite the self-determinism this nation was founded upon. It's parent and peer organizations are doing so to the remainder of the world, while we quibble about club-members and witty remarks about internet conspiracy theorists.

The illustrious Rhodes made it clear that he and those he served believed it was their place in the world to lead - others were lesser beings to be led - and his legacy runs through the CFR like it's very blood. The really pathetic members are the one's fro whom the prestige of belonging blinds them to their complicity in an agenda they won't even deign to inquire about. As Mr. Rockefeller said, 'why should we care about the people? They don't matter, They'll believe whatever we tell them to." - or something to that effect.


[edit on 2-4-2008 by Maxmars]

[edit on 2-4-2008 by Maxmars]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   
reply to post by Maxmars
 


Now, I will give you that the CFR has private meetings, but so do plenty of other people we do not talk about on here. I don't see what the big deal is. I'll say it again, it is no secret who is a member of the CFR and the CFR publishes the results of their deliberations.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:49 AM
link   
I have noticed that there are some members here who are too lazy to even watch an 18 second video, yet claim that conspiracy theorists are wacko's and nut jobs.

So ridiculous it isn't even funny anymore.

Barack Obama is being endorsed and advised by Zbigniew Brzezinski. Founder of the Trilateral Commission together with David Rockefeller (co-owner of the federal reserve), former national security advisor to former president Carter, and the man who has claimed to be responsible for arming the Muslim terrorists that the U.S. is fighting today.

Hillary Clinton is being endorsed and advised by her Husband, former president Clinton, who's mentor, Carroll Quigley wrote books about the NWO.

The Anglo American Establishment

Tragedy and Hope

He described how the wealthy elite are in charge and rule, and he was given access to their records. He agrees with the way things are, and has greatly influenced Clinton with that way of thinking.

Not to mention that Hillary Clinton is being endorsed by the Rothschilds.

John McCain is being endorsed and advised by accused war criminal Henry Kissinger, who, just as Brzezinski is also David Rockefeller's right hand man.

Voting for any of these three would be the same as voting for David Rockefeller and his friends and family.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by TheBandit795
 


So all you've got is guilt-by-association and ripping Mr. Quiggley's words out of context.

Guilt-by-association is a poor argument, I bet most, if not all, ATS members could be linked to individuals with shady pasts; This does not make ATS a scum-of-the-Earth forum.

Oh, and about the out-of-context quoting of Quiggley:

"Conspiracy theorists assailed Quigley for his approval of the goals (not the tactics) of the Anglo-American elite while selectively using his information and analysis as evidence for their views. Quigley himself thought that the influence of the Anglo-American elite had slowly waned after World War II and that, in American society after 1965, the problem was that no elite was in charge and acting responsibly."

www.scientiapress.com...



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 11:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheBandit795
I have noticed that there are some members here who are too lazy to even watch an 18 second video, yet claim that conspiracy theorists are wacko's and nut jobs.

So ridiculous it isn't even funny anymore.


You are ridiculous.


.....Now back to Mika Brzezinski and MSNBC's 'wake-me up all warm and fuzzy' programing @ Morning Joe.

(and my main man Joe Scarborough - who was Lori Klausutis?)
www.oldamericancentury.org...




[edit on 2-4-2008 by scrapple]

[edit on 2-4-2008 by scrapple]

[edit on 2-4-2008 by scrapple]



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:11 PM
link   
I guess the real point of this thread is to point out that we are being dealt an illusion that we will be getting someone that will fix things and save us when in the end it is nothing new and the game is still in play.When we the people say we want something new ....we don't mean a new face...We mean a new way of running things( policies, what have you) for the betterment of Americans and mankind.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by CaptGizmo
 


I make no secret of the fact that I don't like any of the candidates. Nevertheless, I don't think it's fair to say that there will be "no change" until we're on the other side of this thing.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by thought
 


I am clearly showing you the influence that these candidates are under. I didn't even mention that they themselves are involved the CFR &/or Bilderberg etc.. Do you think that these people advising and backing them up wont have the least bit of influence on their way of functioning?

And as for Quigley's quote being pulled out of context. I posted a direct link to his words. You posted merely a reference to his words.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:39 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBandit795
 


"Robert Eringer: I met Carroll Quigley in early autumn 1975. I phoned him to explain my interest in the power elite and he invited me to his Georgetown University office. Quigley was not a conspiracy theorist, but a professor and historian who taught a popular Georgetown course called Western Civilization, for which he used his own Tragedy and Hope as a textbook. I still have the copy I bought at the campus bookstore, which Quigley signed for me. I wasn’t a student at Georgetown: I attended American University a few miles away. But I think Quigley saw in me a yearning to learn, and this was irresistible to an educator. So over the next seven months I was a regular visitor to Quigley’s office. He directed me in my research and, as I mentioned earlier in this interview, I wrote a term paper on Bilderberg.

Quigley did not like conspiracy theorists. He felt they were motivated by politics, not history, and that they misconstrued things, including his book, for their own purposes. He felt that the attention conspiracy theorists gave to some twenty pages of his 1,300-plus page book somehow blackened his name in professorial circles; he was so sensitive about this he made me put the books he gave me into brown paper bags before I left his office. Quigley told me that I should go into journalism or intelligence. I ended up doing both, which are pretty much the same anyway: the business of information acquisition."

www.paranoiamagazine.com...



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:49 PM
link   
How many ways can you interpret his book except for one. That there is an establishment that is ruling politics and economics as we speak.

Did he regret that he wrote the book, or is it just that he didn't want to be guilty by association? That he didn't want to be associated with conspiracy theorists, even though he documented facts about a huge conspiracy?



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBandit795
 


No, no, no, no. It's obvious that he stood by everything in that book and probably still would were he alive today. Nevertheless, I think he really felt himself to be misrepresented...he didn't like conspiracy theories or conspiracy theorists. Furthermore, if he really believed the CFR was as obscene as you claim he did, he could have done a far, far better job of standing up against it.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:54 PM
link   
He didn't want to be associated with conspiracy theories because he wrote the following in his book?


the powers of financial capitalism had another 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 private meetings and conferences. The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations.



posted on Apr, 2 2008 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by TheBandit795
 


Notice he is writing in the past tense here. There's nothing in that writing to indicate that he believes this to be a current conspiracy.




top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join