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.


Bill Maher Interview With Richard Haas President of CFR

page: 1

log in


posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 08:27 PM
Wow this was a great interview. If we only had REAL reporters to grill this guy although even Maher pulled back a few times. Great interview give me thoughts...

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 08:52 PM
Definitely an interesting conversation. I do not think the Bill or the general public puts into full context exactly what this guy is saying...

None the less I sure would like to know what that guys knows...

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 10:01 PM
The self-appointed thread archaeologist has some old Haass comments-

(2/14/08) The North American Union Myth (thread by Memory Shock)

Straight from the Haass's mouth: Sovereignty and Globalisation
Author: Richard N. Haass, President, Council on Foreign Relations-

The world’s 190-plus states now co-exist with a larger number of powerful non-sovereign and at least partly (and often largely) independent actors, ranging from corporations to non-government organisations (NGOs), from terrorist groups to drug cartels, from regional and global institutions to banks and private equity funds. The sovereign state is influenced by them (for better and for worse) as much as it is able to influence them. The near monopoly of power once enjoyed by sovereign entities is being eroded. [con't]

As a result, new mechanisms are needed for regional and global governance that include actors other than states. This is not to argue that Microsoft, Amnesty International, or Goldman Sachs be given seats in the United Nations General Assembly, but it does mean including representatives of such organisations in regional and global deliberations when they have the capacity to affect whether and how regional and global challenges are met. [con't]

Moreover, states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies if the international system is to function.
Some governments are prepared to give up elements of sovereignty to address the threat of global climate change
All of this suggests that sovereignty must be redefined if states are to cope with globalisation.

Globalisation thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker. States would be wise to weaken sovereignty in order to protect themselves, because they cannot insulate themselves from what goes on elsewhere. Sovereignty is no longer a sanctuary.

Necessity may also lead to reducing or even eliminating sovereignty when a government, whether from a lack of capacity or conscious policy, is unable to provide for the basic needs of its citizens. This reflects not simply scruples, but a view that state failure and genocide can lead to destabilising refugee flows and create openings for terrorists to take root.

Thank the Ghost of Tom Jefferson for bringing this back up.

Some other NAU threads which tie into some of Haass's comments-
(8/13/07) NAU (what you NEED TO KNOW) and how it is not SPP.GOV (thread by cpdaman)
(8/19/07) North American Union Exposed (thread by xstealth)

posted on Jun, 7 2009 @ 10:43 PM
lol the education system is about memorization and wrote and not about questioning! lmao...what is our education system about???????????????

why did all of my teachers, save for a precious and valuable few, encourage me not to question? If people in this country did question their education for the last 30 plus years we would not be in the situation we are in now..

the hypocrisy of the leaders of this country and its ''spokesmen'' give me a bad case of cognitive dissonance and it will continue.

posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 12:41 AM
He willing admits that several of these wars are wars of choice, but what I fail to recognize in his responses is a feeling that war is a bad thing. =

posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 12:30 PM
This thread might garner additional attention if you asked a mod to move it to
forum that has more traffic, such as "Current Events" or "New World Order".

I'd like to see some other member's thoughts on Haass's comments.

posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 12:40 PM
reply to post by aecreate

aecreate, good idea!

Maher's name is a lightning-rod to people of certain political persuasions, and Haass is not as common 'household' name (At least, not to me).

posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 01:22 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 01:29 PM
reply to post by weedwhacker

Indeed, it was early last year when I was researching issues surrounding the
North American Union that I first stumbled across Haass, and his worldviews.
For a person of Haass's power and influence, his comments require scrutiny.

reply to post by tjeffersonsghost

Ah, so the mods moved it here... I suppose they will point out that its getting
plenty of attention in here, although I feel it would get more in another forum.

posted on Jun, 8 2009 @ 01:33 PM

off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


top topics


log in