Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; , Add Tags  (less...)
Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

Permalink
View Article Stats      (7 comments)

CELEBRATING UN-PRESIDENTS DAY: WHY I WILL NOT VOTE FOR A PRESIDENT IN 2008

Add this Page to Facebook!
Submit to Twitter
Submit to Reddit
Submit to Stumble Upon

Tell A Friend
Become a Fan
Get Embed HTML Code
By (about the author)

Become a Fan Become a Fan   -- Page 2 of 4 page(s)

opednews.com

I love it when people say, "But we need leadership." Yes we do-our own. What we don't need is a feel-good celebrity candidate, owned by corporations, whored by handlers, clueless about the magnitude of the issues (if even aware of what the issues are), narrowly focused on the federal system, whose only mission in life is to get and stay elected. Alternatively, we need to focus on our local bioregions, work in concert and consensus with others who see and feel as passionately about the transformation of our communities as we do, and become our own leaders and team players.

Who Really Owns These Candidates?

In 2007 I reviewed Daniel Estulin's True Story of the Bildergerg Group, an expose of that group and two related monster organizations of the ruling elite, the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission. With control of central banks, discount rates, interest rates and gold prices, the core members of these organizations, Estulin demonstrates, have set out to loot the planet-and they are doing just that. The current mortgage crisis and ensuing global economic meltdown, as I stated in my review, is due to the stupendous success of the Big Three's strategy for planetary economic hegemony as the cacophony of their carefully engineered global economic cataclysm reverberates across America and around the world. It was never about home buyers who didn't read the fine print when taking out liar loans. It was always about silver-tongued, ruling elite politicians and financial systems which ultimately and skillfully stole and continue to steal governments from people and replace them with transnational corporations. No, I'm not making that up. One of the explicit goals of the Bilderberg Group, the Council on Foreign Relations, and the Trilateral Commision is the ultimate dissolution of nation-states to be replaced by global corporate hegemony.

In addition to Estulin's excellent expose of the Bilderberg Group, I highly recommend Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management, edited by Holly Sklar (1980) An overview of the book may be read at the Third World Traveler website.

The Trilateral Task Force Report of 1977, "Toward A Renovated International System" states:

The public and leaders of most countries continue to live in a mental universe which no longer exists-a world of separate nations-and have great difficulties thinking in terms of global perspectives and interdependence.

Holly Sklar summarizes: "In other words: "(1) the people, governments, and economies of all nations must serve the needs of multinational banks and corporations; (2) control over economic resources spells power in modern politics (and of course, good citizens are supposed to believe as they are taught; namely, that political equality exists in Western democracies whatever the degree of economic inequality); and (3) the leaders of capitalist democracies-systems where economic control and profit, and thus political power, rest with the few-must resist movement toward a truly popular democracy. In short, trilateralism is the current attempt by ruling elites to manage both dependence and democracy-at home and abroad." (4)

What is more, every American president since the inception of the Big Three has been a member of one or more them. Both Bill and Hillary Clinton are Bilderberg members, and Barack Obama and his wife are members of the Council on Foreign Relations, Michelle Obama currently serving on the board of the Chicago Council of Global Affairs.

Specifically, in regard to Obama's foreign policy, Los Angeles writer, Juan Santos, notes:

With respect to Black interests, Obama would be a silenced Black ruler: A muzzled Black emperor. A Black man at the head of the White Amerikkkan State - one who's unwilling to speak truth to power, but more than willing, like a Condi Rice or a Colin Powell, to become that power and to launch wars of aggression against other people of color.

In Obama's case the targets will be Iran (which he has threatened with "surgical" missile strikes) and Pakistan, rather than Iraq. That's the only difference between Obama and Rice and Powell, or Bush, for that matter.

Even ABC News notes that "Obama, one of the more liberal candidates in the race, is proposing a geopolitical posture that is more aggressive than that of President Bush." Washington Post columnist Robert Kagan, in a column entitled "Obama, the Intervensionist," cites Obama's claim that "he wants the American military to ‘stay on the offense, from Djibouti to Kandahar.'" To help the empire stay on the offensive, and despite the fact that US military spending is breaking the bank at over $1 trillion a year, and far outstrips the spending of any potential imperial rival, Obama wants to beef up military spending, adding 65,000 troops to the Army and 27,000 more Marines beyond the obscene levels already under arms in the so-called "War on Terror."

For further insight into the candidate who is a "master of pretending to be progressive", see Carolyn Kay's "He Ain't A Saint: A Citizen's Guide To Barack Obama".

The Life And Death Issues Eclipsed By Election Hysteria

Specifically, here is what I would need from a candidate to even consider the possibility of voting for her/him:

•1)    Is that candidate aware of and astutely informed regarding the reality and scope of climate change? Will he in the first month in office convene a worldwide summit on the issue and enact emergency measures in the United States to address it?

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4

 

Carolyn Baker, Ph.D. is author of U.S. HISTORY UNCENSORED: What Your High School Textbook Didn't Tell You. Her forthcoming book is SACRED DEMISE: Walking The Spiritual Path of Industrial Civilization's Collapse. She also (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Add this Page to Facebook!      Submit to Stumble Upon      Submit to Reddit      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      My Web      Blink List     (More...)

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
7 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

meanwhile, back at reality by Jim Stinson on Thursday, Feb 14, 2008 at 10:08:56 PM
Sorry, but YOU'RE WRONG by SpiritBlooms on Friday, Feb 15, 2008 at 12:48:38 PM
I also do not believe that not voting makes any statement by Watching on Friday, Feb 15, 2008 at 2:53:20 PM
Fine by Maxwell on Friday, Feb 15, 2008 at 3:14:17 PM
Deja Vu by Carolyn Baker on Friday, Feb 15, 2008 at 3:23:38 PM
Nearsighted deja vu by Jim Stinson on Saturday, Feb 16, 2008 at 1:32:06 PM
Not Voting Either by Kitty Antonik Wakfer on Friday, Feb 15, 2008 at 11:13:17 PM