CFR Stacks The Deck: Both Dem And Repub Candidates

2007-12-21

Richard Moore

Is there anyone who didn't already know this?

rkm

--------------------------------------------------------
Original source URL:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2007/150807CFR.htm

CFR Stacks The Deck With Both Democrat And Republican Presidential Candidates

MichaelVail
ThoughtCriminal.org
Wednesday Aug 15, 2007

Editor's Note: 2004 was the year of the Skull & Bones presidential candidates, 
and now 2008 seems to be the year of the CFR presidential candidates. Democrat 
or Republican, it matters not which rook they choose to elect. We lose either 
way. The 2004 elections were marred by the stench of a fixed fight. Bush and 
Kerry both Yale Bonesmen and related by blood running for the presidency. Now 
the Council on Foreign Relations has nearly every presidential candidate in 
their pocket. We need to elect Ron Paul. Let's redeem America and restore the 
Constitution. Ronald Reagan said, "It's Morning In America." Now we are mourning
America as she descends into tyranny.

The 2004 Democratic National Convention may be remembered most for a young and 
energetic senator that immediately drew comparison to the Kennedys. Obama's 
speech launched his name and image into the public spotlight, and his fresh 
style of rhetoric filled a growing anti-war political void - He voted against 
the Iraq war and wasn't afraid to criticize it's handling. Excitement and 
support for the senator eventually snowballed into his current presidential 
campaign. He enjoys a popular image as a liberal democrat, and his harsh 
criticism of the Iraq war has earned him support from a population united in 
it's discontent with the current government. To a select crowd of Americans, 
Obama preaches against the handling of the Iraq war. To other more private 
groups, Obama advocates military strikes on new middle eastern countries. Obama 
has aligned himself with several lobbying firms and nongovernmental 
organizations who seek further US militarization of the world. In several 
speeches and essays, Obama makes his foreign policy goals clear - and he is not 
anti-war. Is Obama intentionally sending a deceptive message to his 
constituency?

In a recent speech given to the American Israeli Political Action Committee, 
Obama outlines a plan for U.S. hegemony. He suggests polarizing political 
alignments that are already breeding anti-U.S. sentiment. Specifically, Obama 
pledges unfaltering military support to Israel. The U.S. has long supported 
Israel - this year they were given $30 billion for defense of the young state. 
To put this in perspective, less than $7 billion has been federally granted to 
rebuild homes destroyed after hurricane Katrina. Although the U.S. has always 
given billions in aid to Israel, his alliance backs preemptive strikes against 
countries deemed a threat. Israel is unpopular in the region, and is threatened 
by Iran's desire for modern nuclear energy in the future. Regarding Iran's 
nuclear program, Obama states "We should take no option, including military 
action, off the table". The US has already constructed massive permanent 
military bases in Iraq and Afghanistan to serve as hubs for such an operation. 
The fleet of aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf continues to grow, while 
politicians and media simultaneously hype a nonexistent enemy. This reckless 
policy leaves the U.S. on the brink of full scale war at all times.

Obama differed from many of his peers by admitting the Iraq war was heavily 
motivated by Iraq's oil reserves. Iran's oilfields, and the military buildup of 
the Persian Gulf creates and incentive for military action. It has been 
questioned if the U.S. military even has the capability of securing the 
strategic oil reserve. Iran has some of the most lucrative oilfields in the 
region, and provides energy to Asia and Europe. International economies would be
disenfranchised with the US military disruption of its energy supplies. Meddling
in other countries' foreign affairs has spurred backlash against the U.S. This 
phenomenon is referred to as "blowback", or, the consequences from provoking 
actions. Ignoring this cause and effect, Obama advocates troops in Iraq be 
redeployed to Pakistan and Afghanistan to fight amorphous groups of "terrorists"
. Regarding the war on terror, Obama differs from his colleagues in that he does
not believe nuclear weapons should be used - a small concession for an ambitious
military operation. This policy still backs preemptive strikes and the further 
militarization of the middle east, all at the expense of US resources.

Obama outlines his ambitious geopolitical plans in a recent essay for Foreign 
Affairs magazine. Foreign Affairs is published by the Council on Foreign 
Relations, which describes itself as a non-partisan group of which he is a 
member. Established in the 1920's and headquartered in New York, its membership 
includes prominent politicians and business elite, including heads of academia 
and media. The organization seeks to centralize both political power and market 
power to craft legislation outside the checks and balances of democracy. The CFR
is rarely mentioned by the mainstream media, making it difficult to fully gauge 
its influence. When it is mentioned in the press, it is likely whitewashed as 
trivial or irrelevant. Notable members of the CFR include:

Dick Cheney
John Kerry
Bill Clinton
Al Gore
Ronald Reagan
George H. W. Bush
Gerald Ford
Richard Nixon

John, David & Nelson Rockefeller
Condolezza Rice
Paul Wolfowitz
Alan Greenspan
Colon Powell
Henry Kissinger

Angelina Jolie (Yes, the actress has a five year term membership as an 
ambassador)

Its membership list is a who's who of Washington and Wall St. elite going back 
nearly a century. It should not be surprising that most presidential candidates 
in the 2008 election are CFR members. Candidates do not advertise their CFR 
membership to the public. They pose as "liberals" and "conservatives" to control
all aspects of the debate. The CFR has stacked the deck for the 2008 election 
with several members in the race from both sides of the aisle:

Democrat CFR Candidates:
Barack Obama
Hillary Clinton
John Edwards
Chris Dodd
Bill Richardson
Republican CFR Candidates:
Mitt Romney
Rudy Giuliani
John McCain
Fred Thompson
Newt Gingrich

The mainstream media's self-proclaimed "top tier" candidates are united in their
CFR membership, while an unwitting public perceives political diversity. The 
unwitting public has been conditioned to instinctively deny such a mass 
deception could ever be hidden in plain view. Presidential Candidate & 
Congressman Ron Paul is the only "top tier" candidate who is not a member of the
CFR.

Although many politicians hold membership, It must be noted that the Council on 
Foreign Relations is a non-governmental organization. The CFR's membership is a 
union of politicians, bankers, and scholars, with several large businesses 
holding additional corporate memberships. Corporate members include:

Halliburton of Dubai
British Petroleum
Dutch Royal Shell
Exxon Mobile
General Electric (NBC)
Chevron
Lockheed Martin
Merck Pharmaceuticals
News Corp (FOX)
Bloomberg
IBM
Time Warner
JP Morgan/ Chase Manhattan
& several other major financial institutions

Members are united in their interventionist intentions with the goal of a 
consolidated global governance. The CFR's mission is to influence policy through
the reach of its members and publications. Those who study the CFR ideology are 
recruited and cultured for membership. The best and brightest university 
students are taught to propagate the CFR model. Individuals who both subscribe 
to the CFR ideology and can bring an element of capital (political status, 
business influence, money) to the group will be given membership. Members meet 
at the CFR headquarters in Manhattan and Washington DC, and round-table style 
discussions are held for its membership to discuss foreign affairs and make 
recommendations on policy. The CFR often creates "task forces" to report " 
findings and policy prescriptions" (cfr.org) for specific current world events, 
and also publishes the periodical Foreign Affairs magazine. CFR authors are 
often found in mainstream media publications. In a recent issue of TIME 
magazine, one CFR member writes: "The US should make (Pakistani President & US 
intelligence asset) Musharraf the best dictator he can be". Another author, this
time in Newsweek magazine objectively argues to the readers that the world 
really isn't all that bad in an article titled "Don't Worry, Be Happy". 
Currently, the front page of CFR.org features essays on European anti-terrorism 
measures, radical Iranians, and the reemergence of the nuclear threat (CFR 
members in government control the nuclear football). Many prominent publications
are influenced and controlled by the CFR:

Time
Newsweek
US News & World Report
Atlantic Monthly
Forbes
& several major publishing houses

Members of the CFR in the media intend to inject it's pro-globalist arguments 
into the mainstream consciousness. Although the CFR is self-described as a 
non-partisan association, it unabashedly promotes a one-world-government agenda 
without regard for US sovereignty or the desires of the American people.

The goals of the CFR is best described by its very own members. Bill Clinton's 
Georgetown mentor and CFR member Carroll Quigley states: "The Council on Foreign
Relations is the American branch of a society which originated in England... 
(and) ...believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one world rule 
established.". Quigley differs from many of his CFR colleagues in that he 
believes their plan for a new world order should be more publicly disclosed. In 
his book Tragedy and Hope, Quigley concedes he is unique among his peers in that
he believes the new world order plan of global government's "role in history is 
significant enough to be known". Quigley also admits that the two-party system 
allows for both groups to be controlled at the highest level but operate like 
bitter rivals. As Quigley says, this gives the voters the chance to "throw the 
rascals out at any election without leading to any profound of extreme shifts in
policy.". Controlling Washington elite allowed private central banks to " 
dominate the political system... ...and economy of world as a whole" and 
implement a new system of "feudalist fashion" through "secret agreements". 
Although he believes the CFR's intentions should be more public, Quigley 
understands the average person doesn't understand feudalism or serfdom and will 
never read his book.

Surprisingly, many of its own members admit the CFR goal is to subvert the 
democratic process. CFR member and Judge Advocate General of the US Navy Admiral
Chester Ward writes "The main purpose of the (CFR) is promoting the disarmament 
of US sovereignty and national dependence and submergence into and all powerful,
one world government.". This high ranking military officer went on to explain 
their procedures for influencing policy, claiming: "Once the ruling members of 
the CFR shadow government have decided that the US government should adopt a 
particular policy, the very substantial research facilities of the CFR are put 
to work to develop arguments, intellectual and emotional, to support the new 
policy and to confound and discredit, intellectually and politically, any 
opposition.".

The CFR's strategy is also being used to promote world government as well as the
new environmental agenda. Obama and most candidates have made the environment a 
major issue in the policy. The CFR has long suggested a global tax, specifically
identifying the environmental movement as a means for its advancement. All CFR 
candidates align themselves with the position that the government has both the 
ability and responsibility to maintain the world's environment. Good intentioned
individuals may genuinely seek environmental protection, but nongovernmental 
organizations are quickly capitalizing on land acquisitions and taxes in the 
name of global warming. While most scientist agree the planet earth is 
undergoing a degree of climactic change, the CFR admits the environmental 
argument will be used to erode national sovereignty and build up their global 
authority. Proposed "Carbon Taxes" place carbon expenditure ratings on mundane 
human activities. Contrary to popular misconceptions, CO2 is by no means a 
pollutant. As an essential gas for life, plants thrive on increased levels of 
CO2 which in turn they produce higher levels of oxygen. Furthermore, carbon 
based life forms emit carbon to the atmosphere, hence a "Carbon Tax" is a tariff
for doing nothing but maintaining life. A popular movement lead by the CFR's own
Al Gore would have you believe CO2 is the root cause of environmental woes while
ignoring real industrial pollution in developing countries. There are serious 
environmental problems that are ignored in favor of issues that can be used to 
tax the broad population.

Environmental protection has already lead countries to willingly surrender 
control of natural resources. The US has ceded control of natural resources to 
the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) 
in a land grab under the guise of environmental protection. UNESCO is part of 
the United Nations, an organization controlled by many CFR members like 
permanent US ambassador John Bolton. The CFR's President Richard N. Haass boldly
admits "Some governments are prepared to give up elements of sovereignty to 
address the threat of global climate change.". He adds that this "Globalisation 
thus implies that sovereignty... ...needs to become weaker.". While it is 
important to be conscious of humans' effects on the earth, nongovernmental 
organizations like the CFR see an opportunity to redistribute wealth through 
selective enforcement targeting the US. The CFR openly states its intentions of 
using the environmental movement and other emotional arguments to build up 
global authority and undermine US sovereignty.

The CFR backs other programs that promote regional governments. Another 
ambitious goal of the CFR is the implementation of regional unions under the 
control of a central world government. World leaders are moving towards a 
regional partnership of North America consisting of Canada, the US, and Mexico. 
In 2005, the CFR released a report titled "Building an American Community" which
sought to eliminate borders between the three North American countries. One part
of the plan called for decreasing government control of cross-border traffic in 
an effort to dissolve national borders. Robert Pastor, a vice chairman of the 
task force that released "Building a North American Community", names the " 
Amero" as a hypothetical unified North American currency similar to the Euro. 
Carried out with precision, the private, run-for-profit federal reserve bank has
massively devalued the US dollar, allowing foreign corporations to buy up US 
resources for literal pennies on the dollar.

The European Union is a similar model to the North American partnership. The EU 
was hugely opposed by Europeans, and took a half century for the complicit 
European power elites to fully implement the union. During his time as Prime 
Minister, Tony Blair tried several times for the United Kingdom's adoption of 
the unpopular EU constitution that was also staunchly rejected by French and 
Dutch voters. The current Prime Minister Gordon Brown continues to advance a 
similar constitution under a new name. Like the EU, American countries would 
keep their governmental infrastructure but all policy would be superseded by a 
regional constitution.

Already in place in North America is the Security and Prosperity Partnership 
(spp.gov) established in a meeting between Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, 
and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin. The SPP consolidates protection of the 
North American Union by establishing a security perimeter extending north of 
Canada to the Mexican/ Guatemalan border. This measure was authorized under 
Bush's ambiguous executive authority, thus avoiding any congressional input or 
oversight. It is a precursor to a trilateral authority between the three North 
American economies.

A similar measure to the SPP in the establishment of a unified North American 
region is the NAFTA "Superhighway" which eliminates border restrictions on 
shipping, allowing imported goods destined for the US to arrive in North America
at ports in Mexico. Rather than arriving at the port of Long Beach, imported 
goods would enter the US via a "port" in the mid-west that lies along the 
shipping lane. This measure has been unanimously opposed by US cities in 
proximity of the highway, but the democratic voice is ignored as the government 
covertly advances. Congress has largely looked away from the issue. Members who 
are aware of this plan avoid this issue and prefer that it stay secret, and the 
CFR presidential candidates will not address it. The presidential candidates' 
association with the the self-described "shadow government" compromises the the 
voting process and defrauds the constituency.

Barack Obama has captivated voters from all parties with his refreshing new 
style of rhetoric. He has the voting record to back his criticism of the Iraq 
war. But like his CFR colleagues, he vows to continue the pursuit of a shadowy 
enemy under the vague threat of "terrorism" - a policy that has cost citizens 
their personal liberties, trillions in debt and untold lives. The war on terror 
has been crafted to spend the US into bankruptcy and setup a domestic police 
state. Money continues to be being printed out of thin air by the private 
run-for-profit Federal Reserve, while China remains leveraged with over $1 
trillion in US dollar holdings. In the middle east, the CFR's blank check for 
U.S. military operations will deplete U.S. resources while inciting sectarian 
strife and anti-U.S. sentiment, ignoring the history of blowback as documented 
by the CIA. Obama and other CFR candidates affiliation with the organization is 
not promoted on their websites or in any press releases because the organization
has centralized political power and financial capital to set policy the public 
would otherwise oppose. The career politicians in the CFR know corporate 
sponsorship is frowned upon by voters. The Council is one of the major conduits 
between government and business leaders in the US. The CFR is guaranteeing power
by owning all the horses in the race that is the 2008 election. Obama is 
captivating unlike most of his competition, undoubtedly intelligent enough to 
understand his political niche. Another CFR US president guarantees more of the 
same costly foreign policy that protects corporate interests and isolates the 
US. Like his colleagues, Barack Obama's stated foreign policy intentions foment 
the long term militarization and balkanization of the middle east while 
resources will continue to be spent in deficit to finance an illegal foreign 
policy. Only when the control of the CFR is fully exposed will the voters have a
real democratic choice.
-- 

--------------------------------------------------------
Posting archives: 
http://cyberjournal.org/show_archives/?lists=newslog

Escaping the Matrix website: http://escapingthematrix.org/
cyberjournal website: http://cyberjournal.org

How We the People can change the world:
http://governourselves.blogspot.com/

Community Democracy Framework: 
http://cyberjournal.org/DemocracyFramework.html

Moderator: •••@••.•••  (comments welcome)

Share this: