Even though they know, often from personal experience, exactly what goes on there. I think it's so they can use their favorite tactic, mindless name-calling, whenever the subject comes up as a convenient substitute for anything resembling intelligent debate. This is one of those "antilibertarian bias" areas where specialty media bias groups like NB & MediaMatters (not sure about AIM, but they're probably not much better) do a consistently crappy job, IMO. "Organised" (HAH!) libertarian types are left entirely on our own to deal with the bias/blackout.
JMR
The tax & spend drugwar looks racist in the real world.
The more things---change the more they stay the same.
You old conspiro you--there is no such thing as Bilderburg, SPP or Nau or Nafta highway. Why do you persist in this belief??? Can't you give it up, (even though every week or so there is even more proof you are correct?) Your false gods are Corsi, Schlafly, Dobbs and an ever growing list of state officials. How silly of you!!!
Hang in there, after we are under the NA Constitution, a few may say you were right. (The few able to speak freely, that is!)
What do you have against Foreign Affairs magazine?
The Council on Foreign Relations has been around since 1920, IIRC. You would think that they would have LONG SINCE taken over the world if that was in fact their aim. But then, it is really too bad for you that this club of pencil-necked geeks and pointy-headed intellectuals couldn't take over a phone booth much less...anything.
But the magazine isn't what's causing increased big government globalism, as we all know. And for these socialists, the project of one world government is long term, as all of us but one infallible history genius seem to know.
JMR
The tax & spend drugwar looks racist in the real world.
As long as you keep posting stupid, paranoid posts ascribing overwheming power to the wimps that populate the CFR, I will keep asking that question. To quote a certain poster on NB: "Deal with it."
But the magazine isn't what's causing increased big government globalism, as we all know. And for these socialists, the project of one world government is long term, as all of us but one infallible history genius seem to know. If you bothered reading the mag, as I do - remember, reading is fundamental, as you so love to preach - you would know as I do that these pencil necked geeks and pointy headed intellectuals couldn't take over a phone booth, much less a city block, to say nothing about the world. AND they have had nearly 90 friggin' years to do so, yet NOTHING.
Virtually every single article in Foreign Affairs suggests diplomacy as the ONLY solution to the world's troubles: hardly a tactic of a hyper-evil cabal that is out to take over the world.
I know a teensy bit more about this club than you - I qualify to join, and have looked into joining. All I need is a sponsor - and that is easily gotten just by me calling one of three universities. But I won't, for it is a club of academic wimps. They would not tolerate my attitudes towards diplomacy.
All of this ascribing vast amounts of power to these wimps only demonstrates that you (or anyone else who is absurdly scared of the CFR) really don't have the slightest clue about foreign policy, or organizations like the CFR.
By the way, to twist the words of Dzugashvili: How many divisions has the CFR? Last I checked, THEY weren't the ones shooting at my fellow Airmen and I while I was in "the desert".
Hang in there, after we are under the NA Constitution, a few may say you were right. (The few able to speak freely, that is!)
Ah, it is SO GOOD to see NOTHING'S CHANGED!!! The same people who ascribe endless amounts of POWER to a stupid, powerless, weak bureaucratic talk-shop and photo-up absolutely, positively REFUSE to STUDY THEIR HISTORY or KNOW THEIR CULTURE.
To wit: while in Vancouver, in the Harbor Center, I saw a display which whined, in Canadian fashion, how much influence the United States had over Canada because 3 out of every 4 Canadians live within 200 km of the border with the United States.
Yep, the Canadians whine about this constantly. This doesn't sound like a people that are just going to magically politically join the United States.
But then, to listen to you Conspiros, the following will happen later this year perhaps:
President Bush: "You guys will join us in a North American Union."
President Calderon, PM Harper: "Oh, OK."
How many divisions does the HYPER-EVIL SPP have?(Hint: they weren't the ones shooting at me in the desert.) And WHy have we not made a pan-hemipsheric hyper-state yet? We have had the Pan-Am Highway FOR SIXTY YEARS!!!
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
This is now on the front
June 7, 2008 - 11:56 ET by ThoughtPoliceThis is now on the front page. I'll take credit for that one.
Go to www.prisonplanet.com to check on some updates. Bernanke, CondoSleeza Rice, obama, clinton, et al. Its really a "whos who" this year.
It's weird how the "mainstream" media *never* covers Bilderburg
June 7, 2008 - 12:02 ET by sarcasmoEven though they know, often from personal experience, exactly what goes on there. I think it's so they can use their favorite tactic, mindless name-calling, whenever the subject comes up as a convenient substitute for anything resembling intelligent debate. This is one of those "antilibertarian bias" areas where specialty media bias groups like NB & MediaMatters (not sure about AIM, but they're probably not much better) do a consistently crappy job, IMO. "Organised" (HAH!) libertarian types are left entirely on our own to deal with the bias/blackout.
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
The more things---
June 7, 2008 - 12:17 ET by misterbillThe more things---change the more they stay the same.
You old conspiro you--there is no such thing as Bilderburg, SPP or Nau or Nafta highway. Why do you persist in this belief??? Can't you give it up, (even though every week or so there is even more proof you are correct?) Your false gods are Corsi, Schlafly, Dobbs and an ever growing list of state officials. How silly of you!!!
Hang in there, after we are under the NA Constitution, a few may say you were right. (The few able to speak freely, that is!)
We both know the first 4 words they'll ban...
June 7, 2008 - 12:53 ET by sarcasmo"I told you so." :)
JMR
PS Check out this video, has weird elements but interesting points about the CFR, IMO.
PPS I loved this quote: “Some people say that I advocate a conspiracy theory. That’s not true. I recognize a conspiracy fact...” -- James P. Tucker.
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
That silly mag
June 8, 2008 - 18:26 ET by UnsaneWhat do you have against Foreign Affairs magazine?
The Council on Foreign Relations has been around since 1920, IIRC. You would think that they would have LONG SINCE taken over the world if that was in fact their aim. But then, it is really too bad for you that this club of pencil-necked geeks and pointy-headed intellectuals couldn't take over a phone booth much less...anything.
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Same answer...Nothing.
June 10, 2008 - 05:51 ET by sarcasmoBut the magazine isn't what's causing increased big government globalism, as we all know. And for these socialists, the project of one world government is long term, as all of us but one infallible history genius seem to know.
JMR
The tax & spend drug war looks racist in the real world.
How many divisions have they?
June 11, 2008 - 21:55 ET by UnsaneAs long as you keep posting stupid, paranoid posts ascribing overwheming power to the wimps that populate the CFR, I will keep asking that question. To quote a certain poster on NB: "Deal with it."
But the magazine isn't what's causing increased big government globalism, as we all know. And for these socialists, the project of one world government is long term, as all of us but one infallible history genius seem to know. If you bothered reading the mag, as I do - remember, reading is fundamental, as you so love to preach - you would know as I do that these pencil necked geeks and pointy headed intellectuals couldn't take over a phone booth, much less a city block, to say nothing about the world. AND they have had nearly 90 friggin' years to do so, yet NOTHING.
Virtually every single article in Foreign Affairs suggests diplomacy as the ONLY solution to the world's troubles: hardly a tactic of a hyper-evil cabal that is out to take over the world.
I know a teensy bit more about this club than you - I qualify to join, and have looked into joining. All I need is a sponsor - and that is easily gotten just by me calling one of three universities. But I won't, for it is a club of academic wimps. They would not tolerate my attitudes towards diplomacy.
All of this ascribing vast amounts of power to these wimps only demonstrates that you (or anyone else who is absurdly scared of the CFR) really don't have the slightest clue about foreign policy, or organizations like the CFR.
By the way, to twist the words of Dzugashvili: How many divisions has the CFR? Last I checked, THEY weren't the ones shooting at my fellow Airmen and I while I was in "the desert".
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
Conspiro crap
June 8, 2008 - 18:24 ET by UnsaneHang in there, after we are under the NA Constitution, a few may say you were right. (The few able to speak freely, that is!)
Ah, it is SO GOOD to see NOTHING'S CHANGED!!! The same people who ascribe endless amounts of POWER to a stupid, powerless, weak bureaucratic talk-shop and photo-up absolutely, positively REFUSE to STUDY THEIR HISTORY or KNOW THEIR CULTURE.
To wit: while in Vancouver, in the Harbor Center, I saw a display which whined, in Canadian fashion, how much influence the United States had over Canada because 3 out of every 4 Canadians live within 200 km of the border with the United States.
Yep, the Canadians whine about this constantly. This doesn't sound like a people that are just going to magically politically join the United States.
But then, to listen to you Conspiros, the following will happen later this year perhaps:
President Bush: "You guys will join us in a North American Union."
President Calderon, PM Harper: "Oh, OK."
How many divisions does the HYPER-EVIL SPP have? (Hint: they weren't the ones shooting at me in the desert.) And WHy have we not made a pan-hemipsheric hyper-state yet? We have had the Pan-Am Highway FOR SIXTY YEARS!!!
Res tantum valet quantum vendi potest.
There is a Bilderberg
June 7, 2008 - 14:12 ET by TexasOptimistThere is a Bilderberg conference. http://www.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20080605006246&newsLang=en
Maybe even Hillary and Obama were there. Who cares?
I am a conservative who is willing to think for himself.