Henry Lamb
Playing President
By Henry Lamb
Obama's performance as POTUS is pretty convincing, if not Oscar-worthy. From the moment CNN called the election, Obama's rehearsed swagger emerged. He won; he is entitled to gloat. What's pitiful is that he really thinks he is in charge.
Well before Obama seriously considered a run for President, others evaluated his potential. Khalid Al-Mansour, associate of Saudi prince Alwaleed bin Talal, one of the world's richest men, helped get Obama into and through Harvard.
After Harvard, Chicago's notorious political machine saw Obama's potential to become the nation's first black president. This view was shared by rich liberal power brokers, black liberation preachers, and the un-scrubbed street gangs in desperate need of a new hero. This unlikely collection of political forces delivered a well-scrubbed performer to the national stage.
The Obama campaign promised "Hope" and "Change," but delivered neither. Instead, the same, old socialist-democrat agenda put on a new costume and a face. Eleven of the 12 members of Obama's advisory board came from the Clinton administration, as did 31 of the 47 members of his transition team. Obama's administration is almost a repeat of the Clinton team. And there's a good reason.
A thorough analysis of Obama's administration reveals that those recalled from the Clinton years have much in common: they share membership in the same organizations that have guided public policy since Roosevelt. The Council on Foreign Relations and, since 1973, the Trilateral Commission, have produced the people who have shaped public policy. These are the people who tell Obama's teleprompter what to say.
Members of these organizations assemble at least annually with members of England's Royal Institute of Foreign Affairs, and affiliated organizations from around the world. It is not accurate to say that these organizations "run" the world's governments. It is absolutely accurate to say that the people who do run the world's governments are members of these organizations.
Attention is too often diverted from this reality by members of the media, who incidentally, are also members of these same organizations. They quickly open the "conspiracy theory" bucket and paint with lavish strokes all who dare to focus the spotlight of truth on the real source of public policy initiatives.
There is nothing conspiratorial about it. These organizations have a common agenda — global governance. A solid history of the development of this agenda is available here. What is important now is the next step toward realization of this goal.
The next step is the April 2 meeting of the G20 in London. No one will be allowed to ask, but were it possible to identify the people in this meeting who are members of the Council on foreign Relations; the Royal Institute of International Affairs; the Trilateral Commission, or one of their international affiliated organizations, we'd find that the meeting is dominated by members of these groups. Perhaps after the meeting, a participants list can be secured to see exactly to what extent they dominated the meetings.
Another way to test this allegation is to compare the recommendations that come out of the meetings to the proposals that have been advanced by the various organizations whose members participate in the meetings.
The most important goal of the global governance advocates is an independent income stream for the United Nations. Another very important goal is to gain international control of the global economy through the regulation of capital flows, currency, and trade. If the recommendations that come out of the G20 meetings move toward these goals, it will be a pretty good indication of who dominated the meetings.
By surrounding himself with advocates of global governance, his campaign speech in Berlin, and with his public pronouncements, Obama has sent a strong signal to the world that he is ready to lead the United States into the United Nations' slaughter house. The gateway will be the mechanism to control the global economy produced by the G20 meeting.
The recommendation to come out of this meeting will most likely call for a new mechanism to control the global economy, and a mechanism for collecting taxes on fossil fuel energy. It will not be a full-blown proposal. That's not how the United Nations works. There will be a policy document agreed by all that sets forth the goals to be achieved over a period of time. The document will also define the working group(s) that will be charged with producing the proposal for the final structure.
The people who populate the working groups will be work-horses of the organizations which designed the agenda in the first place. The news media will report a successful meeting. All parties will go home encouraged, and the members of the behind-the-scenes policy-making groups will continue to shape public policy, now with the approval of the G20.
And Obama will think he did something, while all along he is simply playing the role of President while others use him to advance their own agenda.
© Henry Lamb
March 29, 2009
Obama's performance as POTUS is pretty convincing, if not Oscar-worthy. From the moment CNN called the election, Obama's rehearsed swagger emerged. He won; he is entitled to gloat. What's pitiful is that he really thinks he is in charge.
Well before Obama seriously considered a run for President, others evaluated his potential. Khalid Al-Mansour, associate of Saudi prince Alwaleed bin Talal, one of the world's richest men, helped get Obama into and through Harvard.
After Harvard, Chicago's notorious political machine saw Obama's potential to become the nation's first black president. This view was shared by rich liberal power brokers, black liberation preachers, and the un-scrubbed street gangs in desperate need of a new hero. This unlikely collection of political forces delivered a well-scrubbed performer to the national stage.
The Obama campaign promised "Hope" and "Change," but delivered neither. Instead, the same, old socialist-democrat agenda put on a new costume and a face. Eleven of the 12 members of Obama's advisory board came from the Clinton administration, as did 31 of the 47 members of his transition team. Obama's administration is almost a repeat of the Clinton team. And there's a good reason.
A thorough analysis of Obama's administration reveals that those recalled from the Clinton years have much in common: they share membership in the same organizations that have guided public policy since Roosevelt. The Council on Foreign Relations and, since 1973, the Trilateral Commission, have produced the people who have shaped public policy. These are the people who tell Obama's teleprompter what to say.
Members of these organizations assemble at least annually with members of England's Royal Institute of Foreign Affairs, and affiliated organizations from around the world. It is not accurate to say that these organizations "run" the world's governments. It is absolutely accurate to say that the people who do run the world's governments are members of these organizations.
Attention is too often diverted from this reality by members of the media, who incidentally, are also members of these same organizations. They quickly open the "conspiracy theory" bucket and paint with lavish strokes all who dare to focus the spotlight of truth on the real source of public policy initiatives.
There is nothing conspiratorial about it. These organizations have a common agenda — global governance. A solid history of the development of this agenda is available here. What is important now is the next step toward realization of this goal.
The next step is the April 2 meeting of the G20 in London. No one will be allowed to ask, but were it possible to identify the people in this meeting who are members of the Council on foreign Relations; the Royal Institute of International Affairs; the Trilateral Commission, or one of their international affiliated organizations, we'd find that the meeting is dominated by members of these groups. Perhaps after the meeting, a participants list can be secured to see exactly to what extent they dominated the meetings.
Another way to test this allegation is to compare the recommendations that come out of the meetings to the proposals that have been advanced by the various organizations whose members participate in the meetings.
The most important goal of the global governance advocates is an independent income stream for the United Nations. Another very important goal is to gain international control of the global economy through the regulation of capital flows, currency, and trade. If the recommendations that come out of the G20 meetings move toward these goals, it will be a pretty good indication of who dominated the meetings.
By surrounding himself with advocates of global governance, his campaign speech in Berlin, and with his public pronouncements, Obama has sent a strong signal to the world that he is ready to lead the United States into the United Nations' slaughter house. The gateway will be the mechanism to control the global economy produced by the G20 meeting.
The recommendation to come out of this meeting will most likely call for a new mechanism to control the global economy, and a mechanism for collecting taxes on fossil fuel energy. It will not be a full-blown proposal. That's not how the United Nations works. There will be a policy document agreed by all that sets forth the goals to be achieved over a period of time. The document will also define the working group(s) that will be charged with producing the proposal for the final structure.
The people who populate the working groups will be work-horses of the organizations which designed the agenda in the first place. The news media will report a successful meeting. All parties will go home encouraged, and the members of the behind-the-scenes policy-making groups will continue to shape public policy, now with the approval of the G20.
And Obama will think he did something, while all along he is simply playing the role of President while others use him to advance their own agenda.
© Henry Lamb
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
