DailyKos Blocks Truth about Bilderberg candidates edwards gore clinton bush

BILDERBERG IS REAL however, at the dailykos they have censored me 2 times. This is because they are have members of Bilderberg they support. I hope you all read the truth.

see below that bilderberg is true and real and not a conspiracy theory. let us change the world. Let us vote in a non bilderberg candidate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_ Group

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bil derberg_attendees

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-1386 56385.html

http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G1-1386 56385.html

Full spectrum dominance.(America's Oil Wars)( Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order)(Book Review)
From: Arab Studies Quarterly (ASQ)  |  Date: 6/22/2005  |  Author: Bevan, Brock L.

Print
Digg
del.icio.us
Stephen C. Pelletiere. America's Oil Wars. (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2004). 208 pp. Hardcover, $34.95.

William Engdahl. A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order, (Ann Arbor: Pluto Press, [1992] 2004). 312 pp. Hardcover, $24.95.

IRAQ, ON THE SECOND ANNIVERSARY (March 2005) of the United States led invasion and subsequent occupation, endures perpetual violence and a lack of normalization of life. Though the United States argued that Iraq had possessed so-called "weapons of mass-destruction" and had colluded with "terrorists" in the run-up to the invasion (that was neither declared a war by the United States Congress nor sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council), both allegations have proven to be false. (1) Pretenses for the invasion have shifted in the wake of the original casus belli deteriorating: the real reason for the invasion -ex posto facto- was to bring enlightenment in the form of "democracy" to the Iraqi people (and the Arab world) through preemptive war. (2)

Stephen C. Pelletiere, former senior political analyst at the CIA on Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war and professor of National Security Affairs at the United States Army War College from 1998 to 2000, argues that the ultimate occupation of Iraq from 2003 up to the present was a result of Saddam Hussein's attempt in the late 1980s and early 1990s to solidify the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). For Pelletiere "... the individual who was able to marshal the resources of so great (and powerful) an institution, and keep its members in line, would have been someone with whom to reckon." (3)

The peculiar instability that was prevalent in the Persian Gulf region prior to 1988-1989 allowed the United States to execute its version of a global racket. It involved allowing instability to flourish in order to create a reason for the autocrats in the Persian Gulf to exchange their "petro-dollars" for United States-made armaments. That these armaments were often of no use to the states buying them made no difference. Pelletiere contends that the "historic juncture" that occurred in the late 1980s "imperiled America's position in the Gulf." The concurrence of events that was the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the Iraqi defeat of Iran in their near decade-long war, and the consolidation of OPEC with high-absorber states in control of policy posed a challenge to the hegemony of the United States in the region and (as a result of the geopolitical significance of petroleum) in the world.

Iraq, under Saddam Hussein, challenged the hegemony that the United States exercised in the region by invading Kuwait in 1990. The problem for the United States was manifold, starting with the threat that a strong Iraq would pose to the Washington's allies in the region; continuing onto the elevated position of power Baghdad would sustain with Kuwait integrated into the state; and ending with the additional prestige Iraq would have over petroleum resources on a global level. Iraq, once cornered by the shenanigans of the George H. W. Bush administration, attempted to accommodate Washington's dictates while saving face, but to no avail. (4) Iraq's mistake turned out to be the perfect opportunity to enact a modified version of plans developed under former Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger in the 1970s to seize oilfields in the Persian Gulf from weak sheikdoms such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates. (5)

As a result of the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the United States justified a military ground presence in Saudi Arabia. According to the story pushed by Washington, iraq posed a threat to the integrity of the Saudi Arabian kingdom, or at least the continued dynastic power of the al-Saud family. Thus, the al-Saud family gained "protection" from the United States but paid for it in terms of the cost of the war against Iraq in 1990-1991 as well as in terms of lost legitimacy. As Pelletiere says "... the decision to stay on [after the conclusion of the conflict in 1991] infuriated some elements of Saudi society, and instances of sabotage against the Americans began to proliferate." (6)

Whereas Pelletiere roots his analysis on the specificity of Iraq and its particular history in terms of leadership under Saddam Hussein, William Engdahl emphasizes the global dimension to the conflict. Engdahl is trained as an economist and writes for various financial publications on issues of energy, politics, and economics. In his A Century of War: Anglo-American Politics and the New Worm Order, the reader is exposed to the long history of petroleum and how the change from coal as the major fuel altered the world. (7) Engdahl states "War in Iraq was about the very basis of America's 'national security,' of future American power. America's role as the sole hegemon was the unspoken reason for the war ..." (8) In making that statement Engdahl highlights the international monetary system that has been in place since the end of Second World War.

Unlike other countries that are constricted by issues such as balance of payments and debt, the United States developed a system whereby it issues a fiat currency that the rest of the world must use. At the end of the Second World War, America's unique position made sense in that it held the majority of global gold reserves and had an economy not shattered by war like in the United Kingdom, France, or Germany. Moreover, the United States dollar, at the time, was still exchangeable for gold. All this would change on 15 August 1971 when the United States "... announced formal suspension of dollar convertibility into gold, effectively putting the world fully onto a dollar standard with no gold backing, thereby ripping apart the central provision of the 1944 Bretton Woods system." (9)

Engdahl notes that "The American Century, stripped of the rhetoric of freedom, peace, and democracy, was based on clear US hegemony among nations." (10) He continues:

     It rested on two pillars. The one pillar was the
   uncontested role of US military power, a dominance which
   no combination of powers had been able to challenge since the
   end of the Second World War in 1945. The Soviet Union
   ultimately collapsed amid ruin in the effort to challenge that
   hegemony ... The second pillar of American power was the
   uncontested role of the dollar as world reserve currency. (11)

After gold no longer backed the dollar as a result of Nixon's action in 1971, another marker was to take its place: black gold. Thereafter, the denomination of petroleum sales in the international market place was to be exclusively in the dollar. The fact that the United States had a never-ending supply of greenbacks whereas every other country had to obtain dollars in order to purchase the petroleum required for economic growth put Washington in an extremely powerful position. (12) Engdahl refers to this series of events as the replacement of the gold standard with the "petrodollar standard."

Both Pelletiere and Engdahl see different cliques operating behind the scenes of nominal political channels in order to ensure their particular goals. Engdahl cites New York and London financial circles as well as the Seven Sisters (the major international petroleum companies) as designing American policy. Pelletiere often mentions the "complex," meaning the military-industrial complex that former President Dwight Eisenhower so famously warned about while allowing it to grow. The difference in the two lies in the breadth of analysis. Engdahl paints a larger, more in-depth, picture of United States action globally.

Pelletiere uses smaller brush-strokes and localizes the conflict to the Persian Gulf. They both agree on the nature of the United States occupation of Iraq as being imperialist. Again, the notion of American occupation of the Persian Gulf in order to exercise direct control over petroleum resources and indirect influence over the region was aired in 1970s. Engdahl notes that "In 1975, [James] Akins related, plans to find a pretext to send U.S. troops to occupy vital Mideastern oilfields had been encouraged by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger." (13)

The George W. Bush administration exploited the attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in 2001 in order to further United States interests that predated the end of the Cold War. As Engdahl states, "[t]error was to replace communism as the new global image of 'the enemy.' (14) The new terrorists could be anywhere and everywhere. Above all, as the was defined in Washington, they were mostly to be found in the Islamic regions which also happened to control most of the world's oil reserves." (15) Pelletiere focuses on the fact that the United States needed to relocate from its Saudi bases and:

  Rather than seeking to resolve this situation peacefully, the
   [George W.] Bush administration (egged on by the neo-cons)
   tried to force the issue by exploiting the horrific attacks on
   [the] Twin Towers and the Pentagon. (16)

Pelletiere continues by stating that any United States base(s) in Iraq that persist will be under "continual seige." But, he thinks that this state of continual siege will be a benefit to the military-industrial complex as it will allow for justification for "continued subsidization at higher and higher levels" and "will practically ensure underfunding of social programs in the United States."

Engdahl suggests a greater plot. Stating that the era of "cheap oil" was coming to an end, Engdahl argues that:

  ... the looming depletion of a major share of world oil and gas,
   due to take effect around the end of the first decade of the
   century, sometime around 2010 or 2015, perhaps even sooner,
   would explain the drive to unilateral military action in Iraq by
   the Bush administration, despite the enormous risks. (17)

By controlling Iraq, the United States would have a firm grip on the heart of the remaining "cheap oil" sources. Iraq--having been kept in a state of siege for the last 25 years--was ripe for development into the next Saudi Arabia. In a sense, Washington's support for the Iraq-Iran war, its active participation in the First Gulf War, and its active participation in the siege of Iraq from 1991 to 2003 were all indicative of the will to keep Iraq as primarily an exporter of petroleum and not a user of it. (18) With Iraq as a base of future operations, America projected its military might and showed its ability to control the financial resources of the world by using its fiat currency to sustain astronomical debts incurred from its massive spending on armaments. Engdahl states the United States "now commanded a near monopoly of future energy resources. The Pentagon had a term for it [control of the world reserve currency, military hegemony, and direct control of resources]--'full spectrum dominance.' It meant that the United States should control military, economic and political developments, everywhere."(19)

Pelletiere and Engdahl, challengers of the White House espoused reasons for war in Iraq, offer their readers insights into the operation of American imperial designs. Pelletiere concentrates his analysis on Iraq and its history. Engdahl provides a global approach to the vagaries of United States intervention in the Persian Gulf. They both agree that the invasion and occupation of Iraq was engineered and without any legitimate casus belli. Engdahl's detailed exposition on how the control of Iraqi oil--and derivative influence over the Persian Gulf region--produces United States power over economic competitors that are energy-dependent (e.g., China, Japan, Germany, and France) and reinforces the role of the dollar present a solid explanation of Washington's action. (20)

ENDNOTES

(1.) David Kay, transcript of Newshour with Jim Lehrer, 29 January 2004, . Kay states that his team launched to find Iraq's supposed "weapons of mass destruction" by the Bush administration found "program activities" related to missile development and atomic weaponization yet "the large stockpile of actual weapons, chemical and biological weapons simply have not yet been found." Regarding a "terrorist" connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda, no link has ever been proven. Pelletiere suggests that the attacks on the Twin Towers in 2001 were a result of the presence of United States troops in Saudi Arabia. He notes that "[t]o this day, Americans do not know what went on with those attacks [on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon], and there is every reason to believe that this is the case with their leaders as well." P. 135.

(2.) The term "preemptive" has seen much usage in order to describe the United States invasion of Iraq. However, Iraq posed little threat to its neighbors let alone the United States as it had neither the weapons to inflict damage on the United States nor the capacity to deliver the weapons. Thus, preemptive should be read as unilateral and without provocation from Baghdad.

(3.) Stephen C. Pelletiere, America's Oil Wars'. (Westport, CT: Praeger, 2004), p. ix. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was created during a conference in Baghdad that took place from 10-14 September 1960. The original members of the cartel included Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela.

(4.) Ibid., p. 105. "Once the United States had determined to oppose the invasion [of Kuwait], it seems to have resolved on making war, with the result that all of the Iraqis' maneuvers to initiate negotiations went unheeded."

(5.) Glenn Frankel, "U.S. Mulled Seizing Oil Fields in '73: British Memo Cites Notion of Sending Airborne to Mideast," The Washington Post, 1 January 2004, page A01.

(6.) Pelletiere, p. 150. The unrest caused by the United States basing troops in Saudi Arabia was a two-way street. It disturbed the sensibilities of Saudis keen on protecting Mecca and Medina from infidels and this anger was channeled against the monarchy as well as against Americans.

(7.) William Engdahl, A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics and the New World Order (Ann Arbor: Pluto Press, 2004).

(8.) Ibid., p. ix.

(9.) Ibid., p. 128. The United States was forced to decouple the dollar from the gold standard due to the low value set on the price of gold, $35 per fine ounce. For more on the Bretton Woods system, see Michael Hudson's Super Imperialism : The Origin and Fundamentals of U.S. Worm Dominance (Sterling, VA: Pluto Press, 2003).

(10.) Ibid., p. x.

(11.) Ibid.

(12.) Ibid., p. 154. Engdahl calls OPEC's decision in 1975 to accept only dollars for petroleum "curious" since the agreement remained in force "despite enormous losses to OPEC as the dollar gyrated up and down through the next decade and more."

(13.) Ibid., p. 218-219. James Akins was a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia.

(14). Ironically, the United States funded jihadi groups in the successful effort to keep the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan in the 1980s.

(15.) Ibid., p. 252.

(16.) Pelletiere, p. 150.

(17.) Engdahl, p. 262.

(18.) Ibid., pp. 268-269. Engdahl argues that the oil shock in 1973 was rigged at Saltsjobaden, Sweden during at meeting of the Bilderberg group. The jump in oil prices had the result of creating a huge pool of so-called 'petrodollars' that could not be invested in the countries that accrued them. Thus, they were invested in Europe and the United States instead of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. Besides strengthening the dollar in the wake of the decoupling from the gold standard, the price shock had the effect of placing developing countries in a perpetual debt cycle since their raw materials did not rise in price as the cost of dollar-denominated petroleum did. See pp. 130-141.

(19.) Ibid., p. 269.

(20.) At the end of 2000, Iraq began to price its petroleum in Euros. See Charles Recknagel, "Iraq: Baghdad Moves to the Euro," Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, 1 November 2000, < http://rferl.org/features/2000/11/011120 00160846.asp>. Although not devastating to Washington at the time, was a highly symbolic move on Iraq's part. Switching to dominated petroleum sales in Euros was an attack on the United States dollar as world reserve currency and as the United States as hegemon.

Brock L. Bevan holds a master's degree in Middle Eastern studies from the American University of Beirut. Formerly, he was grants administrator at the Washington, DC-based Jerusalem Fund.

I posted some of this information at the dailykos and have been blocked now.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/7/14/2055 43/426
action speak louder than words GORECLINTONEDWARDS (none / 0)

action speak louder than words

http://www.oilempire.us/map.html

The more damaging version of the official story is the admission that climate change is real and caused by our activities - but that technological shifts will be sufficient to solve the problem.

The best example of this approach is Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth," which has a good description of the basic science of global warming.

However, the film fails to address corporate or government responsibility in causing the problem or lifestyle shifts that would be needed in the wealthy parts of the world to address the crisis. Gore also neglects to mention in the film that he supported numerous policies that made the problem worse when he was in the White House such as the NAFTA treaty, World Trade Organization, energy deregulation and the largest expansion of the Interstate Highway System since President Eisenhower.

HOWEVER, maybe this time he will act? Then again maybe he won't

He did say in the Inconvinent truth that he was taught by a college professor about this problem many many yrs ago

hmmm why didn't he do anything then when he was billys VP ?

Is global warming used by Gore as a backup so another bilderberg will get elected

in case

Obama get the nod ??

http://www.oilempire.us/gore.html

Gore's Inconvenient Truth:
his sabotage of environmentalism while Vice-President

Al Gore, Read Your Book
-- chant at White House protest, November, 1993 by environmental groups opposed to the WTI toxic waste incinerator turned on in March, 1993

related pages:

Hillary Clinton worked for WTI's funder Jackson Stephens and was on the Board of Directors of LaFarge toxic waste incinerator
Waste Technologies Industries (WTI), East Liverpool, Ohio: the Clinton / Gore toxic waste incineration scandal
Climate Change and Peak Oil
The real issue is how and why the industrial system we are all a part of was unwilling and unable to make even modest shifts away toward efficiency (let alone toward sustainability).

................. ........................

John Edwards is pro nuclear + bilderberg candidate like Clinton Bush

Citizens Rally at NC Senator John Edwards' Raleigh Office
by Nora Wilson * Monday July 08, 2002 at 03:02 PM
nora@ ncwarn.org 919-490-0747
NC Citizens Rally for Responsible Nuclear Waste Policy

In 2000, the North Carolina Democrat changed his stance from opposition to support of the Yucca Mountain project after receiving a letter from CP&L executive William Orser.

Sen. John Edwards: The only major candidate to come down squarely for building the Yucca dump, Edwards voted for the project despite pleas from 21 environmental and social-justice group leaders in his home state of North Carolina--who posed questions about waste transportation to a life-size Edwards cutout outside his office in Raleigh. And further rumblings about his relationship with the nuclear-power industry are ominous.
However, Edwards is under pressure from his state's nuke-industry power brokers. North Carolina has five active nuclear reactors that produce about 32 percent of the state's electricity. The North Carolina Independent Media Center claims that in 2000, Edwards reversed his stance from opposition to support of the Yucca project after getting a letter from William Orser, an executive with CP&L (Carolina Power and Light).

John Edwards:The Bilderberg Candidate/SKULL BONES (Revised)

by URI DOWBENKO

When you own all the ponies, you don't really care who
wins the race. So it is with the US presidential
elections in 2004.

After his triumphant appearance at the Bilderberg
Conference in Italy even the New York Times was
gushing at the performance of John Edwards. The
selection of John "Bilderberger" Edwards by John
"Skull and Bones" Kerry was inevitable, as the secret
societies own all the candidates in this "election."

This time around George "Skull and Bones" Bush is not
favored by the elite as his father George H. W. Bush
was replaced by Bill Clinton in 1992.

The New York Times wrote -- "Several people pointed to
the secretive and exclusive Bilderberg conference of
some 120 people that this year drew the likes of Henry
A. Kissinger, Melinda Gates and Richard A. Perle to
Stresa, Italy, in early June, as helping win Mr.
Kerry's heart. Mr. Edwards spoke so well in a debate
on American politics with the Republican Ralph Reed
that participants broke Bilderberg rules to clap
before the end of the session.

Hillary Heralds 30 Year Plus Control Of America By Interlocking Crime Family
Pro-war Clinton candidacy success would mean same mob bosses have ruled U.S. since 1980

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet
Monday, January 22, 2007

Another Clinton in office would mean America being under the thiefdom of either a Bush or a Clinton for a total of at least 32 years, 36 if Hillary is re-elected (many now acknowledge that H.W. Bush pulled the strings as VP during the Reagan era), and they still say anyone can become President! What a pathetic joke!

Hillary Clinton surprised few when she announced her intention to run for the 2008 presidency in New York on Sunday.

Forecasters are already predicting a success for the Senator, meaning Americans will probably be living under the same hierarchical oligarchy that brought them rampant illegal immigration, the devaluation of the dollar, the gigantic deficit, 9/11, and hatred of the U.S. around the world. The electorate got bored of drinking Coke so now the establishment is going to provide Pepsi.

Clinton voted for the Patriot Act and she voted for the war in Iraq, but so many Democrats are blinded by the cult of personality that they will overwhelmingly vote to put this crime family back in office. While we have made some progress in educating liberals as to the phony staged consensus of the left-right paradigm, the fact remains that a majority still see the White House as some kind of political super bowl, where the success of their 'team' is the be all and end all - to the expense of America as a whole.

"I felt that it was appropriate under the circumstances, which really went back to 1998 under the Clinton administration's conclusion that the regime had to change, that the President (Bush) had authority to pursue that goal," said Hillary after giving her personal approval for the mess in Iraq.

The punch and judy show theatre of the troop surge debate characterizes Hillary's role in hoodwinking Americans perfectly. The debate is framed as not whether the U.S. should get out of Iraq altogether, but the relative minutia of whether to feed 20,000 more troops into the meat grinder or not. The Democrats play along with this farce and make empty threats of "non-binding resolutions" that have no teeth and mean absolutely nothing.

Clinton's campaign manager has already compared Hillary to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and has outlined her style as "Strong on foreign policy. People have got to know you are going to keep them safe." This translates as more war, more dead Americans, and a further desecration of the tattered shreds of what's left of the U.S. Constitution.

Clinton is the ultimate elitist and represents the Democrats supposed base, the poor and downtrodden, about as much as Lindsay Lohan represents grace and dignity. She was sure to inform the likes of David Rockefeller and Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands as to her presidential aspirations during her visit to last year's Bilderberg conference in Ottawa Canada. Bilderberg has a proven history of acting in a kingmaker capacity. Both Bill Clinton and Tony Blair attended before becoming President and Prime Minister and the media reported that Bilderberg selected John Edwards as Kerry's running mate in 2004.

Hillary Heralds 30 Year Plus Control Of America By Interlocking Crime Family
Pro-war Clinton candidacy success would mean same mob bosses have ruled U.S. since 1980

Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones
Prison Planet
Monday, January 22, 2007

Another Clinton in office would mean America being under the thiefdom of either a Bush or a Clinton for a total of at least 32 years, 36 if Hillary is re-elected (many now acknowledge that H.W. Bush pulled the strings as VP during the Reagan era), and they still say anyone can become President! What a pathetic joke!

Hillary Clinton surprised few when she announced her intention to run for the 2008 presidency in New York on Sunday.

Forecasters are already predicting a success for the Senator, meaning Americans will probably be living under the same hierarchical oligarchy that brought them rampant illegal immigration, the devaluation of the dollar, the gigantic deficit, 9/11, and hatred of the U.S. around the world. The electorate got bored of drinking Coke so now the establishment is going to provide Pepsi.

Clinton voted for the Patriot Act and she voted for the war in Iraq, but so many Democrats are blinded by the cult of personality that they will overwhelmingly vote to put this crime family back in office. While we have made some progress in educating liberals as to the phony staged consensus of the left-right paradigm, the fact remains that a majority still see the White House as some kind of political super bowl, where the success of their 'team' is the be all and end all - to the expense of America as a whole.

"I felt that it was appropriate under the circumstances, which really went back to 1998 under the Clinton administration's conclusion that the regime had to change, that the President (Bush) had authority to pursue that goal," said Hillary after giving her personal approval for the mess in Iraq.

The punch and judy show theatre of the troop surge debate characterizes Hillary's role in hoodwinking Americans perfectly. The debate is framed as not whether the U.S. should get out of Iraq altogether, but the relative minutia of whether to feed 20,000 more troops into the meat grinder or not. The Democrats play along with this farce and make empty threats of "non-binding resolutions" that have no teeth and mean absolutely nothing.

Clinton's campaign manager has already compared Hillary to former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and has outlined her style as "Strong on foreign policy. People have got to know you are going to keep them safe." This translates as more war, more dead Americans, and a further desecration of the tattered shreds of what's left of the U.S. Constitution.

Clinton is the ultimate elitist and represents the Democrats supposed base, the poor and downtrodden, about as much as Lindsay Lohan represents grace and dignity. She was sure to inform the likes of David Rockefeller and Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands as to her presidential aspirations during her visit to last year's Bilderberg conference in Ottawa Canada. Bilderberg has a proven history of acting in a kingmaker capacity. Both Bill Clinton and Tony Blair attended before becoming President and Prime Minister and the media reported that Bilderberg selected John Edwards as Kerry's running mate in 2004.

Hillary's presidential financiers include Neo-Con kingpin and Fox News owner Rupert Murdoch, with whom she often meets and parties with along with Roger Ailes and other Republican big wigs. While Bill has been hanging around with the Bushes, Hillary has also been living it up with the likes of Newt Gingrich, Bill Frist, John McCain and Rick Santorum.

We have continually exposed how Clinton and the Bushes personally profited from massive drug smuggling operations through Mena, while Clinton was Governor of Arkansas. Alex Jones has interviewed multiple former CIA officers who were unloading the cocaine. Bush Snr, met eleven times with the Clintons in the year before Clinton announced his run for President. Teenagers Don Henry and Kevin Ives were murdered for accidentally witnessing a CIA cocaine smuggling operation in Mena. Bill Clinton aided in the cover up, as well as the money laundering. The Clinton-Bush relationship is a long and fruitful one.

The Clintons and the Bushes have been known to vacation together in more recent times. Last year on CBS, Clinton revealed that he looks upon the Bushes as a surrogate family, and how Barbara Bush refers to him as "her son". Is this really a picture of two distinct and opposed political ideologies pitted against one another?

In 2005, George W invited both Clintons as guests of honor and praised them to the hilt as he unveiled portraits of the two to be hung in the White House. Bush described him as having "...a great compassion for people in need... a man of enthusiasm and warmth". This after Bush's 2000 campaign was built around Clinton having no honor or dignity whilst in the White House.

A national poll carried in the Washington Post Sunday has Clinton leading closest Democrat contender Sen. Barack Obama by 24% and projects her to beat anyone the Republicans can offer, with the possible exception of former New York Mayor and 9/11 shill Rudolph Giuliani.

A massive grassroots campaign needs to be activated immediately to challenge liberals who profess anti-war sentiments to vote for a real anti-war candidate, Congressman Ron Paul, a man who voted against the illegal invasion of Iraq unlike Hillary Clinton and who also unlike Hillary is firmly opposed to embroiling America in any further foreign entanglements such as Iran.

We need to support the stance of Cindy Sheehan, who has vowed to oppose Hillary, and utilize Sheehan's considerable influence to sink Clinton's candidacy.

At the very least we can take as many votes away from Hillary as possible, so we can get someone like Obama in office, and wrestle America free from the ownership of the same gaggle of crooks that have ruthlessly sat on their autocratic power monopoly for the past 30 years.

Senator John Edwards:
voted for War on Iraq, pro-nuclear, pro-Patriot Act

in 2004, Edwards was vetted by elite "Bilderberg" society for the job of Vice President

"I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country."
-- John Edwards, CNN Late Edition, Feb. 24, 2002

John Edwards and Bilderberg

New York Times

A Secret Conference Thought to Rule the World
By ALAN COWELL and DAVID M. HALBFINGER
Published: July 11, 2004

SINCE its first meeting 50 years ago, the Bilderberg conference, a secretive gathering of global power brokers, has inspired layer upon layer of conspiracy theories, which it has done little to dispute. Over the years, the deeds laid at the conference's devious door have included the creation of the European Union, the invasion of Iraq and the bombing of Serbia - all to service its most cherished goal: the creation of a world government.The conspiracy theories bubbled to the surface anew last week, after it was reported that a well-received speech by Senator John Edwards at the conference last month in Stresa, Italy, was one reason for his selection as John Kerry's vice-presidential running mate.
Is the Bilderberg confab now molding domestic American policy?
Roughly 130 delegates attend the invitation-only annual gatherings, named for the Dutch hotel where the first Bilderberg conference was held in May 1954, to debate issues surrounding the cold war.
The meetings are hardly a monument to transparency. The hotels involved are usually closed off to other guests.
Unlike the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, journalists are not invited to cover it - although a few attend as participants - and all delegates promise to keep quiet about what they hear and say.
"They do not have to sign anything, but they understand that they do not talk," said Maja Banck-Polderman, the organization's executive secretary. In a telephone interview, she said she was the only employee at the Bilderberg administrative office in Leiden, the Netherlands.
Secrecy understandings aside, prying details loose about Mr. Edwards's appearance was not difficult so long as the chattering chieftains were not identified.
Mr. Edwards, several said, joined Ralph Reed, the Republican strategist, in giving a presentation on the American election. After Mr. Reed spoke about how Mr. Kerry was vulnerable on "values," Mr. Edwards presented a characteristically positive case for Mr. Kerry's election, focusing on the insecurity of American workers that persists even when economic statistics turn north.
Two Democrats in the room said Mr. Edwards sparked a rule-breaking round of applause when he finished, though a nonpartisan witness did not recall such an ovation.
"He spoke with great passion, in a meeting that is usually rather dry," said the nonpartisan veteran attendee. "He was able to make it a cross between his stump speech and an intimate conversation in a small room."
The group's meetings, Ms. Banck-Polderman said, are financed by corporate sponsors in the host countries and are regularly attended by tycoons, politicians and diplomats in Europe and the United States, including Henry A. Kissinger, the former secretary of state, and Richard N. Perle, the former head of the Defense Policy Board. This year's list also included Richard C. Holbrooke, the former United States ambassador to the United Nations, and, of course, Senator Edwards.
The guest list and membership would more or less overlap with the "Wanted" posters of anti-globalization protesters. Indeed, one former participant, Will Hutton, a British journalist and economist, has been widely quoted calling the Bilderberg set the "high priests of globalization."
Former participants have generally played down the conspiracy theories, saying the secrecy is merely designed to foster a climate of open debate, allowing participants to speak their minds freely.
But critics of the Bilderberg conference argue that while it may not make formal decisions, it sets a consensus that spreads among business and political elites, molding the global agenda.
Some argue, for instance, that the first intimations of American determination to wage war in Iraq came from a Bilderberg gathering in 2002.
"What I call for is more openness in what they do," said Tony Gosling, a British researcher and former journalist who has followed the Bilderberg meetings and believes they are designed to unite opinion around major, global ideas.
"I don't think the participants should be sworn to secrecy," he said in a telephone interview from Bristol, England. "I think that a forum where so many rich and powerful people meet should be open to public scrutiny."
Whatever else, the selection of Mr. Edwards as Mr. Kerry's running mate seems to show that the Bilderberg delegates have an eye for a contender.
But Democrats please note: they do not always back the winner. This year's delegates list showed that Giulio Tremonti attended as Italy's minister of economy and finance: four weeks later, he resigned in a political dispute - perhaps not the best of omens for Senator Edwards.

Edwards is now anti-war (but the damage has been done)

It is a good thing that Edwards is now anti-war, but that does not undo the damage that he caused in supporting the War on Iraq. A "peace president" would be one who can make the right decision when it is needed - and not merely change his mind in favor of peace years after the fact.

Edwards Echoes King's Anti-War Message
The Associated Press
Monday 15 January 2006

New York - Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards called on Americans to resist President Bush's planned troop escalation in Iraq, echoing a plea by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. 40 years ago to end the Vietnam War.
Edwards addressed about 1,200 parishioners Sunday at Riverside Church, a multiracial, politically active Manhattan congregation where King delivered his famous "Beyond Vietnam" speech on April 4, 1967. King was assassinated exactly one year later.
Edwards spoke from the same wooden pulpit King used and was introduced by King's son, Martin Luther King III. The younger King said his father would have admired Edwards' commitment to fighting poverty.
The former North Carolina senator and 2004 Democratic vice presidential nominee touched on poverty issues in his speech, as well as AIDS in Africa, energy independence and a proposed boost in the minimum wage.
But he saved his strongest words for the troop increase in Iraq, invoking King's condemnation of the Vietnam War as a betrayal of American values.
"Silence is betrayal, and I believe it is a betrayal not to speak out against the escalation of the war in Iraq," Edwards said to a sustained standing ovation.
It was a high-profile appearance for Edwards on the home turf of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, the Democratic presidential front-runner who has been decidedly more cautious in speaking out against the war and the proposed troop escalation.
Several of Clinton's allies attended the Edwards speech, including fellow New York Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, who has already endorsed Clinton's likely presidential bid.
Clinton spent the Martin Luther King holiday weekend traveling to Iraq and Afghanistan.
Two other Democratic presidential hopefuls, Delaware Sen. Joe Biden and Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, attended King remembrances in South Carolina. Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, who could join the presidential field as early as this week, was observing the holiday weekend with low-key appearances in Chicago.
Underscoring his previous calls for a troop rollback in Iraq, Dodd said Sunday at a memorial service in Greenville, S.C., "It is time now that we say we have done enough."
Edwards, who declared his candidacy in late December, said Americans must not wait for a change in presidential leadership to demand that American forces be drawn down in Iraq. Bush announced last week he would send an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq in an effort to stabilize the war-torn country; Edwards has called for 40,000-50,000 to be removed.
"We need to show we are serious about leaving, and the best way to do that is to start leaving," he said to applause.
Edwards voted in 2002 to authorize military action in Iraq, as did Clinton, Biden, and Dodd. All but Clinton have forcefully recanted their votes.
Edwards also called on Congress to withhold funding for the troop increase, echoing a proposal announced last week by Massachusetts Sen. Edward Kennedy. Kennedy's plan has been embraced by some other Democrats, including Dodd, but viewed warily by others who see it as unworkable and potentially harmful to troops already serving in Iraq. Clinton and Obama are among those who have not yet indicated they would support Kennedy's approach.

Edwards is pro-nuclear

http://nc.indymedia.org/...

Citizens Rally at NC Senator John Edwards' Raleigh Office
by Nora Wilson * Monday July 08, 2002 at 03:02 PM
nora@ ncwarn.org 919-490-0747
NC Citizens Rally for Responsible Nuclear Waste Policy

In 2000, the North Carolina Democrat changed his stance from opposition to support of the Yucca Mountain project after receiving a letter from CP&L executive William Orser.

lasvegasweekly.com/2004/02/05/upfront.ht ml
Flip Flops, Unchanged Stances and Whatever Will Get Me Your Four Electoral Votes
Where the candidates stand on Yucca Mountain
By Steve Bornfeld

Sen. John Edwards: The only major candidate to come down squarely for building the Yucca dump, Edwards voted for the project despite pleas from 21 environmental and social-justice group leaders in his home state of North Carolina--who posed questions about waste transportation to a life-size Edwards cutout outside his office in Raleigh. And further rumblings about his relationship with the nuclear-power industry are ominous.
However, Edwards is under pressure from his state's nuke-industry power brokers. North Carolina has five active nuclear reactors that produce about 32 percent of the state's electricity. The North Carolina Independent Media Center claims that in 2000, Edwards reversed his stance from opposition to support of the Yucca project after getting a letter from William Orser, an executive with CP&L (Carolina Power and Light).

............. .................. .....................

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bilderberg_ Group

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bil derberg_attendees

Hillary Clinton (1997), current US Senator

Rupert Murdoch

Guests at the 2004 Bilderberg Meeting included John Edwards, James Wolfensohn, Melinda Gates, and Mario Draghi;

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:Dur 2cYwj0GwJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_w arming_conspiracy_theory+wikipedia+bilde rberg+gore&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd= 3&gl=us

Former Vice President Al Gore;

The suggestion of a conspiracy to promote the theory of global warming was put forward in a 1990 documentary The Greenhouse Conspiracy broadcast by Channel Four in the United Kingdom on 12 August 1990, as part of the Equinox series,[1] which asserted that scientists critical of global warming theory were denied funding.[6] Although the program title referred to a conspiracy, Patrick Michaels downplayed the idea, saying[7] "It may not quite add up to a conspiracy, but certainly a coalition of interests has promoted the greenhouse theory; scientists have needed funds, the media a story, and governments a worthy cause".

.............. .......................

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:V9P l__wQwAoJ:www.bilderberg.org/2007.htm+wi kipedia+bilderberg+bush&hl=en&ct =clnk&cd=2&gl=us

George W Bush
The Bilderberg Conference 2007, 31st May to 3rd June 2007, Istanbul

18Jun07 - BILDERBERG 2007 REPORT
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bi lderberg_2007.html

But in Washington on May 31, even as Bilderberg luminaries were arriving at the posh Ritz-Carlton for their annual secret meeting, Bush called for 15 major nations to agree on a goal for global emissions limits by the end of next year.

"The United States takes this seriously," Bush said.

But while gloating over this "surrender," Bilderberg members denounced his efforts as "too little and too late" because the Kyoto Treaty expires in 2012. The Europeans agreed that more must be demanded at the Group of 8 summit now taking place, but Bush must not be "embarrassed." The new environmental buzzword is to be "sustainable growth."

Among new climate related demands by Bilderberg is for the United State to increase gasoline taxes so the price will rise "significantly" to more than $6 a gallon. The argument is that this will reduce driving and thus emissions. They argued, with little or no dissent from Americans, that Europeans already pay that much or more. Unsaid was the fact that many more Americans have to drive long distances to work. Many Europeans live so close to their jobs they walk or ride bikes.

http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cache:PT0 7fNCzNxMJ:www.oilempire.us/obama.html+wi kipedia+bilderberg+obama&hl=en&c t=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

Just doing a simple google search on obama you can only find the above site with these references below as to some who worry about Barack Obama as a president.

NOTE: The worse thing oilempire can find on Obama is that he supported Lieberman which was a terrible mistake but he does have to reach out to the jewish community to win the election. Then again  he was mentored by lieberman which is the rule. However, he is against the war in iraq and against a war with Iran.

The other thing is his coal to oil vote in january but Obama changed since then to make sure coal is only produced to oil if it is 20% below oil in carbon output.

Tags: 1954, bilderberg, Bush, Candidates, clinton, conspiracy, Edwards, Elections, encyclopedia, Gore, Kerry, not, truth, wikipedia (all tags)

Comments

22 Comments

Re: DailyKos Blocks Truth about Bilderberg candida

by enarjay 2007-07-16 10:06AM | 0 recs
Re: DailyKos Blocks Truth about Bilderberg candida

stop the spam...  Copying entire texts is against the rules.

by enarjay 2007-07-16 10:07AM | 0 recs
why is using the full text wrong

without the full text you can't have the truth

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 10:26AM | 0 recs
Re: why is using the full text wrong

you could post a link...

by enarjay 2007-07-16 10:29AM | 0 recs
Re: why is using the full text wrong

I was trying to save everyone from having to travel to the link by offering the actual text.. besides many won't go to links and miss the truth

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 10:31AM | 0 recs
Re: why is using the full text wrong

yes but this is NOT truth; it is outdated BULLSHIT

by jjgtrs 2007-07-16 10:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Bilderberg

You should redo the diary to make it more concise and less radical conspiracy theorist because Bilderberg is actually very interesting.

by Doug This Week 2007-07-16 10:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Bilderberg

well i am open to help if you want to make a new diary i will delete this one

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 10:28AM | 0 recs
Now you know why saudi's are being terrorist in ir

Now you know why saudi's are being terrorist in iraq

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 10:25AM | 0 recs
Re: DailyKos Blocks Truth about Bilderberg

all i do is offer the truth.. if i thought obama was a bilderberg i would dump him quick

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 10:27AM | 0 recs
Re: DailyKos Blocks Truth about Bilderberg

well i do know jimmy carter went to a bilderberg meeting but rejected them so they got rid of him.

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 10:33AM | 0 recs
DKos banning

I think you were auto-banned at DKos for posting the same comment over and over again.

And I dont think this diary is going to be recieved well here either.

Posting entire text is usually a copyright infringement - and is damn annoying and makes people want to read it less.

I think you need to show the readers here that you: read the linked articles, digested it, analyzed it, and then summarized it for the readership here to promote discussion of the issue.

And then we can have a discussion... which will most likely lead to dismissal, given the CT talk of "Bilderberg candidates" (whatever that is) being only Edwards and Clinton, where Obama is somehow pure of this non-issue.

by BWasikIUgrad 2007-07-16 10:49AM | 0 recs
Re: DKos banning

well how can people believe me if they can't read it for themselves.

no i didn't post copies there i did that here but they were all deleted i saw but at least they didn't kick me out.

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 10:54AM | 0 recs
Re: DKos banning

well people need to read more and not just have opinons because we all know opinions are like _ _ _ _ _ _ _ and everyone has one.

i am into facts not opinions

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 10:56AM | 0 recs
Re: DKos banning

YOU ARE INTO BULLSHIT; NOT FACTS; PLEASE, GET A CLUE(and by the way, your attempt at smearing clinton AND edwards to benefit YOUR candidate obama is only going to piss those of us who have brain(unlike you) off)); PLEASE STOP

by jjgtrs 2007-07-16 11:02AM | 0 recs
Re: DKos banning

well i see you haven't read the truth and all you have is an opinion

i will go i see this is another place where freedom to share the truth isn't allowed

bye

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 11:07AM | 0 recs
Re: DKos banning

YOU IDIOT; I HAVE STUDIED THE SO-CALLED BILDERBERG CONSPIRACY LONGER THAN YOU HAVE BEEN ALIVE; YOUR PIECE IS NOTHING BUT AN OBAMA HIT PIECE TO SMEAR CLINTON AND EDWARDS; PEOPLE HERE AND DAILYKOS ARE SMARTER THAN THAT; YOU SHOULD TRY RED STATE OR LITTLE GREEN FOOTBALLS TO DISSEMINATE YOUR DRIVEL

by jjgtrs 2007-07-16 11:11AM | 0 recs
Re: DKos banning

>>>>"Bilderberg candidates" (whatever that is)<<<<<

so read my diary and learn what a bilderberg candidate is.. i have read tons on bilderberg..

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 10:59AM | 0 recs
Re: DailyKos Blocks Truth about Bilderberg

this blog will be deleted in 5 minutes since freedom to share the truth isn't important here but only opinions mean anything and we all know about opinions

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 11:09AM | 0 recs
Re: DailyKos Blocks Truth about Bilderberg

GOOD; 2 MINUTES TO GO

by jjgtrs 2007-07-16 11:12AM | 0 recs
Re: DailyKos Blocks Truth about Bilderberg

don't worry it will get reposted all over the web with your comments

by DANIELLECLARKE 2007-07-16 11:14AM | 0 recs
Re: DailyKos Blocks Truth about Bilderberg

She's pissing this Obama supporter off... WHAT THE FUCK????  Is the Smoking Man running the next meeting?

by yitbos96bb 2007-07-16 11:31AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads