Yes. Nine-eleven was an inside job, and we are ruled by a ruthless cabal of global elite. You won't hear Obama or Biden say this, but we in the 'truth' community need to vote for them anyway. Many truthers will cry heresy. My purpose here is to make a case for voting for Obama, whom many consider to be merely in the progressive wing of the establishment.
Those who have struggled through the eerie labyrinthine terrain of the truth movement know that there are no simple answers. There is ample circumstantial evidence to indict 9-11 as an inside job, but we also realize that the smoking guns and hard material evidence are few at best, and each question answered only leads to another dozen questions. The more we pull back from the details to try to see the larger picture, the more convoluted, twisted and hazy the world becomes. We have learned that things are not always as they seem.
So please, bear with me when I say that, just because of Obama's and Biden's relationship with the Council on Foreign Relations, and Michelle Obama's position with CFR's chapter in Chicago, and the fact that both Obama and Biden continue to parrot the lies about the war on terror and talk tough about finding and killing bin Laden, and yes, Biden met with the 9-11 paymaster on September 13, 2001, and Obama voted for the Telecommunications Act giving eavesdropping amnesty to the telcoms, and both voted for the Wall Street bailout, but, just because of all that is no reason NOT to vote for the Obama-Biden ticket on November 4.
It is generally accepted within the truth community that 9-11 was much more than a manufactured excuse to take the US to war. It was an opportunity to reallocate vast sums of wealth, and an excuse to strip away our civil liberties, to intensify surveillance of the population, to militarize our police, and ultimately, it may well culminate in the declaration of martial law. And we're not just talking on the national level, because after 9-11 we saw further highly suspect bombings in Bali, London, and Madrid. The underlying objective cannot therefore be to simply bring fascism to the US, but by implication the objective must be something larger.
There are those who would argue that anyone willing to join the ranks of the New World Order and promote the ongoing illusion and agenda are thereby accomplices in the tyranny. Obama, they say is at worst a co-conspirator, and at best has sold-out.
There has been plenty of speculation in the alternative media about Obama's true political stripes, and whether he is simply being pragmatic and clever politically, or whether his politics are more progressive than his voting record, choice of advisors, and rhetoric suggest. And much of that speculation concludes that regardless of who Obama is, really, once in office, the power of the NWO will dominate his worldview and actions.
A BRIEF EXAMINATION OF WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH
What are some of the circumstances we are now in, and how and why did we get here? Professor Peter Dale Scott refers to our condition as the "deep state", with the preeminent governing body existing in the shadows, hidden behind the recognized political system. It may help to think of our political establishment as an outer veneer, covering an understructure that is unseen and not acknowledged, leading most to assume there is nothing beyond the visible veneer. Due to its hidden nature, this substructure is not easily defined. Many say the Free Masons, Illuminati, or some other formal or claimed entity is behind the deep state. I simply refer to the hidden force as the global elite – avoiding distractions over details and possible occult aspects such as Satan-worship, often associated with ancient secret societies.
In 1919 the global elite formed the Royal Institute of International Affairs in England, and two years later, the sister organization the Council on Foreign Relations in the U.S., charged with shaping American public opinion toward policies that would ultimately lead to the creation of a world government. Initially, CFR was composed primarily of international bankers, industrialists and politicians advised by leading academics and intellectuals. In 1954, the Bilderbergers held their first annual conference of global elite, with an emphasis on Europe, to discuss and plan global policies. In 1973, CFR Chairman David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski together founded the Trilateral Commission, which sought to include Asian governance among the American and European global planning efforts.
Every American president since Woodrow Wilson, Republicans and Democrats alike, has surrounded himself with influential members from these elite globalist groups. And over the years the influence has tended to expand, not lessen. CFR member John F. Kennedy had dozens of other CFR members in his administration, but, when the Kennedy brothers decided to pursue policies at odds with the "fifty men" who "run America" as Joseph Kennedy described the elite, they were made examples of – to illustrate where ultimate power resides.
Johnson also filled his administration with dozens from the CFR. Nixon appointed over 100 CFR members to serve in his administration; most notable was Henry Kissinger, probably one of the most influential if not one of most powerful members of the global elite. Carter had over 60 CFR and Trilateral Commission members serve under his presidency. There were 75 CFR and Trilateral Commission members under President Reagan, and when George Herbert Walker Bush became president, he appointed nearly 350 CFR and Trilateral Commission members to his administration. The trend continued under Trilateralist Bill Clinton, with Washington Post writer Richard Harwood declaring that the CFR membership in the Clinton administration was "the nearest thing we have to a ruling establishment in the United States." In 1992, Clinton's Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbot declared, "In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all."
The point is, that today there is no way for anyone to get elected president of the United States without the blessings of the global elite, namely, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the Bilderbergers. And in order that they trust your loyalty to them and their plans, a candidate must surround himself/herself with advisors tied to these groups, and say what they want. And once you get into office, you need to maintain their trust by filling appointments from among their ranks. Regrettably, at this time, there is no other way to become president.
The globalist agenda, purportedly seeks to bring about global governance by initially creating regional governing bodies: the European Union, the Asian Union, and the American Union. (I suppose Africa will be dealt with later?) But Henry Kissinger, a long-time member of the global elite has noted that Americans are not disposed to give up their sovereignty: "Today, America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow, they will be grateful! This would especially be true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated that threatened our very existence. It is then that all peoples of the world will plead to deliver them from this evil. The one thing man fears is the unknown. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by a World Government."
In his 1970 book, Between Two Ages, Brzezinski also talks of the sacrifices required on the path toward global governance. "The nation-state is gradually yielding its sovereignty... In the economic-technological field, some international cooperation has already been achieved, but further progress will require greater American sacrifices. More intensive efforts to shape a new world monetary structure will have to be undertaken, with some consequent risk to the present relatively favorable American position."