A spider web is a work of art. If you doubt this, gaze upon the freshly made web of a garden spider covered with early morning dew. Each strand is placed purposefully, and its design is almost perfectly symmetrical.
Not so the webs of intrigue that infest government at all levels. Such a web more accurately resembles the roots of a plant that has spent far too long in the same pot. They crisscross, interlock and overlap. They must be followed deep inside the root ball to find their ends. That is where the rot hides.
So it is with the Bilderberg group that meets next week, June 9-12, in St. Moritz, Switzerland.
Members of this secretive organization — which includes the elites in world governance, the richest and highest-placed corporatists and the heads of the largest media conglomerates — would have you believe they meet to discuss old times, share coffee, hit the links and play pinochle. But the idea that such a group would gather to engage in such trivial pursuits is laughable.
What they do is shape policy for the world and chose who will be the next titular head of each country. Some have posited the charges of sexual misconduct charges against International Monetary Fund head Dominique Strauss Kahn could be a result of Bilderberg — or at least the international bankster cartel, which is a part of the whole — machinations. One such article can be read here. Others are out there to be found if one looks.
American Presidential politics is not immune from Bilderberg influence. In fact, most of the U.S. Presidents elected in the past 50 years have either been outright Bilderberg members or, as in the case of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama, were vetted at a Bilderberg conference prior to election.
The Bilderberg group covers all its bases and currently has one of its puppets in the Oval Office. It wants to make sure that continues following the next election cycle. But its Republican horse — Mitt Romney — is no sure bet. In fact, with Romney’s name recognition from his last run and the money he has in his coffers, it’s pretty safe to assume his current support — 17.4 percent, according to the Real Clear Politics average — is about as much as he is going to get.
That’s why you are starting to hear noise about a run by Texas Governor Rick Perry, writes James P. Tucker Jr., on AmericanFreePress.net. Tucker is one of the most diligent and tenacious reporters covering the Bilderberg group. He writes: “Like Clinton, Perry has attended a Bilderberg meeting. In June 2007, Perry attended the Bilderberg confab in Istanbul, Turkey, making the mandatory promise of secrecy and to follow orders. At the time, Perry was chastised in the newly aroused independent press.”
Tucker reminds readers that Perry is a longtime supporter of the NAFTA Superhighway and the North American Union and holds other globalist positions. He calls Perry the Bilderberg ace in the hole.
Perry is touted in the corporate media as a conservative who has been standing firm against an encroaching big government. But a closer look at his roots reveals something far different.
The same is true of other so-called “true conservatives” like Herman Cain and Sarah Palin.
We will analyze the GOP field in depth once it shakes out a bit. But a word of caution: Don’t be too quick to jump on a candidate’s bandwagon just because the corporate media call him or her conservative or point out links to the Tea Party.
The roots must be examined closely. Sometimes, the globalist rot is difficult to spot.
NOTE: Technology can be a wonderful thing. It can also cause headaches. For some of our regular commenters, the latter occurred over the holiday weekend. It’s true that I have asked our moderators to crack down on insulting comments. We have also blacklisted some of the more egregious offenders. In doing so, I’m hoping to foster intelligent debate and discourage ad hominem attacks. This forum is not meant to be an elementary school playground. After all, if you read the comment policy that falls at the end of each article, you will see that we specifically ask you to refrain from name-calling and using profanity and racial slurs. I believe we can disagree without being disagreeable, and I strive to take this tack whenever I respond to viewpoints opposite my own. I don’t think it’s too much to ask others to do the same. We have filters set to catch much of this and moderators to catch the rest. But I believe we became a little lax in policing what made it through the filters. That being said, for some reason the spam filters captured some comments beginning last Friday that were not offensive. So if you posted an innocuous comment and it went to spam, or if you were temporarily blocked from posting, please accept our apologies. Our system is not perfect, but we are working diligently to make it as close to perfect as possible.