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 and the Bilderbergers -PROOF!

page: 17
133
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 10:44 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


They have a thread on it now..

fighting slurs




posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


Dang, maxmars answered that post....hum dee dum, nothing to see here, this post does not exist......


[edit on 10-6-2008 by Sheeper]

[edit on 10-6-2008 by Sheeper]



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Majal
Honestly, I'm shocked that people would believe any of this without a shred of evidence to support the conclusion. This is one of the most ridiculous fallacies I have ever seen.

X is linked to Y, and Y is linked to Z, so X must also be linked to Z

Because X is linked to Z (a false conclusion), X must also be linked to Z's plan A (an unproven plan)

The fact that some people buy into this stuff is extremely worrisome.


SHOCKED...SHOCKED!



However, Gov. Sebelius’ most telling sign that she is heading for bigger things might be her invitation and attendance at the 2007 meeting of the notorious Bilderberg Group in Istanbul, Turkey....

The Governor’s office released a statement saying she was there to speak about “cooperation and consensus-building in government”. Sebelius’ spokeswoman, Nicole Corcoran, was quoted as saying about the visit, “It is a rather prestigious group. She was pleased to be invited.”

The Bilderbergs paid for Gov. Sebelius’ travel expenses, however the Kansas taxpayers picked up the rest of the tab, totaling $1,274. The only other Governor invited to attend was Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, who apparently teamed with Gov. Sebelius on her presentation about “cooperation and consensus-building in government” at the conference.

www2.ljworld.com...



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Whether you vote for Obama or Mccain, it won't matter.

They are both part of the same.
Its all a show

If either one wins, the plan goes on as follows.
So voting means nothing anymore.

Have a good show!

Peace



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by jamie83
 


"Or, to put this in your terms:

a) George Soros and Perseus execs invest billions of dollars in industry X, or in currency Y, "

* Agreed. This is what they do and they have gotten extremely wealthy doing it.

"b) George Soros and Perseus execs help Obama get elected, "

* I believe that George Soros is in fact interested in getting Obama elected. He also vocally opposed the election of GWB in 2000 and 2004...odd how his sinister super power was unable to prevent GWB getting elected. He also vocally opposed the war in Iraq...geez this guy doesn't seem to have the power you think he has since he was unable to stop those two things from happening. Doesn't sound exactly like Dr. Evil from Austin Powers to me. As long as we are thinking about it...why would someone with such large and sinister business interests vocally and financially oppose GWB in 2000 and 2004 and ever since then when GWB has clearly been on the side of big business in words and actions, dismanteling environmental restrictions on industry to the detriment of our citizens (my favorite was allowing more mercury in our drinking water) and dramatically eliminating regulations on the finance industries, a huge proponent of tax breaks for the wealthy in the spirit of "trickle down economics" etc. etc. Why would George Soros oppose pres. Bush so vehemently when he seems like just the character that he would want in office? Long before Barak Obama was on the scene by the way. Is it possible he just has a ton of money, is a philantropist and has liberal leanings in keeping with Obama's platform...hmmm no that is just too far fetched. Why not create a conspiracy based on speculation, fallacious arguments, appeals to fear and even include visions of the future as "PROOF". (see below)

"c) Obama implements policy z that makes investments in X and Y skyrocket. "

* So much for logic here, now we have stepped into the future and Obama is crafting policy to serve his presumably corrupt master


d) Soros and Perseus execs make hundreds of millions while American interests are sold out.

Again we are assuming a lot of unknowns and some things that have much evidence to the contrary as well as predicting the future.

"Is this logic simple enough for you to follow? "

Thanks for the condescending remark, I responded above in kind. I think anyone with a reasonable head on their shoulders would have a hard time calling that logic.

[edit on 10-6-2008 by maybereal11]



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 


Originally posted by maybereal11

Thanks for the condescending remark, I responded above in kind. I think anyone with a reasonable head on their shoulders would have a hard time calling that logic.

[edit on 10-6-2008 by maybereal11]


So intelligent people would have a hard time finding logic in your post? Totally agreed!






[edit on 10-6-2008 by Sheeper]



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Hey, I don't know if this has been answered before, but does anyone have a definite news source that connects Obama and Frank Pearl? I have yet to find..



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by Sheeper
 


That's your contribution to the debate? Critical and reasoned thinking is just to much work for you? I welcome intelligent and well founded criticisms of any candidate, it's a neccessity for good government. But really sheeper that's your response?...



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 02:33 PM
link   
reply to post by maybereal11
 


Your right I don't have anything else to add, I think everything has been covered perfectly, I was just pointing out your mistake and that is was a funny mistake because it contradicts what you meant.
I think it actually sets a nice picture for people that are here to defend Obama. BTW I thought my remark was actually pretty witty and intelligent but apparantely it went right over your head.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 


They have a thread on it now..

fighting slurs


Thanks Max,

Here's another,

Why is Obama refusing to release his birth certificate?

campaignspot.nationalreview.com...




Barack Obama is not legally a U.S. Natural-born citizen according to the law on the books at the time of his birth, which falls between “December 24, 1952 to November 13, 1986? . Presidential office requires a natural-born citizen if the child was not born to two U.S. Citizen parents, which of course is what exempts John McCain though he was born in the Panama Canal. US Law very clearly stipulates: “…If only one parent was a U.S. Citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least ten years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16.” Barack Obama’s father was not a U.S. Citizen


michellemalkin.com...

I don't know what the reason is, but I guess we will find out sooner or later.

Some are saying it is because his legal name is Barry Dunham.

Wouldn't that be a hoot?

This is the first I heard of this,

Wouldn't you think it would be a prerequisite to show proof of citizenship, if you are running for president?


[edit on 043030p://bTuesday2008 by Stormdancer777]



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by MemoryShock
 


> The interent is fabulous because for the first time we have an outlet to
> communicate these things in real time and not be suckered by the elitest
> bastards who think they are the biggest brains on this planet....

Yes, but they are doing everything they can to take that away from us as well. Doesn't matter if it's to silence dissent and coordination or simply to make more money on the available resource, the end result is the same. And it's gotten so bad that they can hide the "silencing" incentive by claiming simply that it's in the interest of making money, because screwing people for that motive is now acceptable



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 05:09 PM
link   


In a news conference at a St. Louis hospital, Mr. Obama said that Mr. Johnson and the other leaders of his vice-presidential search time, Eric Holder and Caroline Kennedy, are “not folks who are working for me, not folks I have assigned a job in a future administration.” He said they had the discrete task of reviewing or “vetting” possible vice-presidential candidates.

New York Times

What do you think?



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by crontab
 


To me, his response is even more reason to be suspicious. He claims the man is not being paid, so their is no big deal. But thats not the point. How many lobbyists, get paid. No, the get kickback once the person is elected, or they get to influence his decision making.

Another disturbing development to me is that McCain only accused Johnson of being shady because he too countrywide loans, and failed to mention his connection with Perseus (I think that some of the news stories mentioned this but to my knowledge was not mentioned by McCain). And obviously, there was no mention what so ever of the Bilderberg Group. Don't you think that ththis would have been something McCain would have wanted to mention to show just how decieptful Obama is being about change?

It really frightens me how politicians and the media collude to just pretend that Bilderberg doesn't exist. I honestly wouldn't even think that the BG was sinister if this wasn't the case. But what is a rational person to think? We have people like Dan Rathers who we know has attended even denying the existence of the group. Everyone admits that the media is incredibly powerful and can shape what the world thinks, so how are we not to think something is going on when they refuse to cover stories like this, or for that matter certain political candidates and things like the impeachment proceeding?



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Grambler


To me, his response is even more reason to be suspicious. He claims the man is not being paid, so their is no big deal. But thats not the point. How many lobbyists, get paid. No, the get kickback once the person is elected, or they get to influence his decision making.



This is indeed the most disturbing development of all. The Perseus-Soros partnership is jumping up and down screaming, "LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME!" and not only does the MSM ignore it, but McCain and his camp choose to focus on the lame Countrywide controversy. This is 100% pure and intentional misdirection.

Makes me wonder if the whole thing wasn't a setup just to make sure McCain becomes the next POTUS. The symbolism of Perseus is to take out Medusa/Clinton, maybe to pave the way for McCain. Let's not forget that Johnson was the guy who picked Edwards to be Kerry's VP. Didn't do much good, did it?

Johnson was also the guy in charge of picking Mondale's VP. Didn't do much good, did it?

Maybe Soros and Perseus already made billions being short the dollar and long oil and want to make sure McCain gets in to continue the same policies that made them hundreds of millions since 2000.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthIsNeverTooHorrible

This is nothing but an act to sell better Clinton, using the mind control technique of acceptance by association.


I am going back to TruthIsNeverTooHorrible's earlier angle. America loves a comeback.

Hillary (the headless Balboan) will arise as Obama's VP for the Perseus Prophecy play.

Prior to November Obama will stumble from the #1 slot - involuntarily killing his estranged maternal grandfather in what seems to be an errant horse shoe, discus, or bowling ball throw - Wikioracle is unclear.
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 10:22 PM
link   
I was beginning to lose faith in this site (all the unnecessary debunking in the strange science links) when I found this thread. I am relieved that people of all political stripes are aware of the Bilderburger connections of all three candidates.
The only place for the truth to be found is in these quiet after hours places.



posted on Jun, 10 2008 @ 10:51 PM
link   
I didn't know about Obama's ties to the Builderbergers untill I saw this thread.
I'm glad to see that people of all political stripes are aware of the Bilderburger connection of all three candidates. I will vote for Obama as the lesser of three evils. There is no need for Obama supporters to defend him on this issue. I think it is obvious to most that even if the candidates are not directly involved in the Builderbergers that they must deal with the real world power.
That leaves the question of how do we citizens deal with it? A thread on how to deal with it would be nice. Or would the media B. G. rats take it down and kick out the members? The only place this news gets out is in the quiet after hours places like this, (the reason the British forbade gathering at taverns by the colonists and freedom of association became part of the U. S. constitution).
Should we move all of our investments to Obama-centric programs?
Should we build survival shelters and put in a supply of food and water? A two week supply according to FEMA, a years supply according to the Amish, a ten year supply according to the Native Americans?



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 05:33 AM
link   
There is even more to it than you think. I remembered hearing about Obama way back in 2004. wondering why I went through CNN's website looking at all the Obama stories since 2004.

Obama was being called the "Democratic Rockstar" the "Democratic Sensation" the "Democrats newest rising star", etc. He was being mentioned in articles that had nothing to do with him, sometimes, nothing to do with politics, etc. When they were talking about Rice getting the confirmation as Secretary of State they mention the new rockstar Obama.

This was in 2004 when Kerry was running against Bush. He had not even been elected and they were talking him up. Then he had just gotten elected and they are asking democrats who they want for president 4 years from now and he was supposedly in the list candidates. Why would you list Obama as a presidential candidate after he just got elected to his first term as Senator?

Then when you opened up the complete Poll and searched Obama's name in the poll he was never even mentioned. Several months later that polling company was bought by the Clinton's biggest contributor.

Then I started noticing the name on 90% of these Obama the Rockstar stories.

He is William Schnieder. Also called the "Nation's Electionmeister"

He is also a former Resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Guess who is not only responsible for the policies of the second Bush term, but who has a senior fellow by the name of......Lynne Chaney? You got it the American Enterprise Institute.

You may remeber when Lynn Cheney (Dick Cheney's wife) was promotting her book she stated that Barack Obama is Dick Cheney's cousin. I was wondering how Barack Obama went from working at a charity and going to community college one minute to going to Harvard law school and getting president of the Harvard Law Reveiw the next.

In addition the man who threw George W Bush his biggest fund raiser also held one for Obama. He also bought land next door to Obama and then sold it back to him. Payoff? Obama's response was "I made a mistake".

And the Candidtae from CNN is................



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 05:57 AM
link   
I wanted to add this since I read the lesser of the evils line on a post.

If you want to make sure a bill has little chance of passing you assign it to the brand new freshman Senetor that has no experience in such things.

That is what they did with Obama, he just gets elected and the first major thing they give him is to put him in charge of the Lobbying and Ethics reform. Nice job. He hasn't even learned how to steal in Washington yet, he can't fix it if does not know how it works.

John McCain has not placed an earmark on a bill in his entire career. Now that's an honest man.

That is why he sent Obama a letter blasting him for polictical posturing and being disingenuine.

Link Below:

www.cnn.com...

You want 4 more years of Bush / Cheney......McCain ain't it ObamaBush is. He's Cheney's cousin and has been created to continue their policies. Crazy huh?



posted on Jun, 11 2008 @ 06:39 AM
link   
Barack O'Bildeberger

Interesting article. When Obama's campaign was asked about a meeting with the Bilderbergers .. they refused to answer yes or no.

Mr. Change, eh??


[edit on 6/11/2008 by FlyersFan]




top topics



 
133
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join