Sandalfon, I assume you are referring to Domhoff, see my post above.
If you really read Domhoff's arguments they are full of logical fallacies that, the way he presents them, can only be called intellectual dishonesty.
Such as he will argue there are no such things as secretive conspiracies agreed upon by the elite power brokers in dark smoky rooms..... but of course
there are agreements that are not publicly divulged by them made during their conferences and that's all perfectly normal.
About Bohemian Grove he argues that big deals aren't made there... because they could be made anywhere else. That's not a denial it's dodging the
point.
He also staunchly defends the concept that Council on Foreign Relations is an innocent little group of policy advisors, with silly logic like "they
could have no secret plans because they have over 3,000 members, far too many to keep a secret- and their reports are made public in their
archives"
Which is BS to the point of being an insult.
Laurence Shoup wrote a book on CFR called "imperial brain trust" which is given legitimacy by acknowledgement from the CFR itself.
Some excerpts are here:
CFR by Shoup
The acknowledgement by CFR, which I will provide here:
CFR further reading page
The most important critical analysis of the Council is: Laurence H. Shoup and William Minter, Imperial Brain Trust: The Council on Foreign Relations
and United States Foreign Policy (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1977)
Is as good as factual proof that what Domhoff bizarrely pushes about the CFR is complete bull****. As what his agenda does is allow these people to
continue to consolodate their powers and march toward a goal of capitalistic benefit for them by socialist enslavement of the masses, I am not ashamed
to allude to what I'd do if I could get my hands around the neck of that guy.
Read what Shoup reveals about the CFR's role in our "democracy":
Bush, Kerry and the CFR
A lot of truth in there, when you see that all of a sudden so many of the contradictions about the Iraq war (which I staunchly defend, believe it or
not) between the parties in 2004 now make complete sense.