Where did he come from? ... And how did he get here? | The 2004 Elections |Axisoflogic.com

John Edwards: The Bilderberg Candidate (Revised)
by

John Edwards: The Bilderberg Candidate (Revised) 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.

Beforehand, Mr. Edwards traveled to Brussels to meet with NATO officials, brandishing his foreign-policy credentials.

"His performance at Bilderberg was important," said a friend of Mr. Kerry who was there. "He reported back directly to Kerry. There were other reports on his performance. Whether they reported directly or indirectly, I have no doubt the word got back to Mr. Kerry about how well he did."

(http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/07/politics/campaign/07tick.html?ex=1089777600&en=31c906f2640be40c&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE)

(And speaking of Bilderbergers, the following is a republication of an article from October 1998)

Where do candidates come from? Do they emerge out of nowhere?

Do they just erupt on the national scene?

Or, are they quietly chosen by covert power brokers to move the planet closer to a New World Order, a One World Government, a global dictatorship with high-tech feudalism as its goal?

Take for example Jimmy Carter. He was an obscure peanut farmer, the almost unknown governor of Georgia. Then -- as if by magic -- a media blitz blew him onto the covers of national magazines and established him as a front-runner in the 1976 election.

Likewise, Bill Clinton was an unknown governor of the state of Arkansas -- a defacto Rockefeller fiefdom, notorious for generational corruption that surpassed even the legendary graft of New York's Tammany Hall and the Democratic machine of the Daleys' Chicago.

After Clinton was invited to a 1991 meeting of the Bilderberg Group in Baden-Baden, Germany, he became a front-running candidate for President in 1992.

Then, despite --- or maybe because of -- his well-known sexual/drug addictions and compromised background, Clinton was selected as the Group's choice for U.S. President.

Since its inception in 1954, the supra-national and highly secretive Bilderberg Group has played an active role in coordinating economic and political policies on a global level.

An international cabal of corporate honchos and government officials, the Bilderbergers are simply the overlords of the Global Ruling Class. According to Peter Thompson's essay "Bilderberg and the West" from the book "Trilateralism" (edited by Holly Sklar, South End Press, Boston), "Bilderberg is neither a world super-government nor is it merely a club where incidental shoptalk takes place. Top executives from the world's leading multinational corporations meet with top national political figures at Bilderberg meetings to consider jointly the immediate and long-term policies facing the West. . . "

"Bilderberg is not the only means of Western collective management of the world order, it is part of an increasingly dense system of transnational management. . ." writes Thompson. "Where necessary, a consensus is engineered on issues which must get congressional/ parliamentary approval, but wherever possible executive agreements between governments are used to avoid the democratic process altogether."

Thompson writes that "bodies like the US Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the British Royal Institute for International Affairs, commonly known as 'Chatham House, and transnational counterparts like Bilderberg and the Trilateral Commission play a crucial role in formulating policy directions, molding establishment consensus and even testing for likely opposition."

At a GOP fundraiser in Paradise Valley, Montana, New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman denied that she was tapped by the Bilderberg Group to run for US President in 2000. "I was just learning," asserted Whitman, one of a literal handful of women invited to attend the secretive May 14-17, 1998 meeting in Turnberry Hotel, Ayrshire, Scotland.

At a picturesque ranch house about 40 miles north of Yellowstone National Park - where Dennis Quaid filmed his TNT movie "Everything That Rises" - Whitman was the guest of honor, introduced by Montana Gov. Mark Racicot at a fundraiser for Montana Rep. Rick Hill. Whitman's speech included the cryptic comment that "in the year 2000, the country's going to get the kind of president it deserves." Afterwards, in remarks to the press, Whitman alluded to the conspiratorial reputation of the Bilderberger Group, saying "it's not a cabal."

Notwithstanding her remarks, 1998 Bilderberg Group attendees included the usual Globalist Good Ole Boys, regulars like David Rockefeller, Chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank; and Henry Kissinger, former US Secretary of State and current Chairman of Kissinger Associates, Inc., a schmooze-for-hire firm that sells high-level introductions to world-class tyrants, arms dealers and their ilk. Women attendees at Turnberry were few.

Only Her Majesty Queen of the Netherlands; CFR member Jessica Tuchman Matthews, President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace; Margaret MacMillan, Editor of International Journal; Marie-Josee Kravis, senior fellow at the Hudson Institute; and several European Community bureaucrats shared this "honor" with the New Jersey Governor.

Whitman herself acknowledged the fact that the obsessive secrecy has roiled many within the Group. She hinted that there was internal dissent regarding the bizarre and restrictive protocols, but defended the exclusion of the media, saying that people can speak privately and acknowledge their mistakes without being held to task by their constituents.

Her congenial husband, Bill Whitman, who facetiously referred to himself as "the first lady of New Jersey in drag," added that when he flew in from London, he stayed in a motel down the road; he wasn't even allowed to sleep at the Turnberry Resort with his wife, the Governor.

Playing a round of golf at the exclusive resort the next day, Bill Whitman remarked in amusement that "people would be popping up from behind the shrubbery taking pictures." The Bilderbergers' tradition of secrecy has evidently created its own mystique and celebrity status. It's not hard to see why the Group, command-and-control globalists, tapped Gov. Whitman. She's photogenic; she's attractive; and her politics reflect the Group's agenda --- people control under the guise of "environmentalism" and "free trade."

In Montana, dressed in an ivory blouse, dark slacks and cowboy boots, Whitman, with her blonde Princess Di hairstyle, appeared casually elegant even in a country setting. She spoke passionately of her "goal of preserving one million acres in New Jersey that's undeveloped but not preserved" as a "protective" measure, a faux-environmentalist stance that will undoubtedly win her many supporters.

Likewise her veto of a New Jersey bill that would have banned so-called partial birth abortions earned her the animosity of the religious right. Her answer to continuing criticism? "I'm not pro-abortion," said Whitman. "I'm pro-choice." This kind of sophistry is also highly respected by the political elites.

Repeating the mantra that "we are in a global economy," she inferred agreement with the Group's agenda --- linking countries through entangling economic treaties like GATT and NAFTA, as well as financial strangleholds through the International Monetary Fund and other multinational corporate loans with the usual draconian conditions.

After the scandalous record of the disgraced Clinton administration, Gov. Whitman as a "pragmatic" pro-choice Republican woman would appear to be the Group's obvious choice for President. Since its founding, the Bilderberg Group has functioned as a defacto private Global Politburo with 120 attendees at recent yearly meetings. Historically, the Group's power is awesome.

Bill Clinton, an obscure Arkansas governor, was tapped to run for president.

Likewise, Margaret Thatcher as well as Tony Blair were tapped by the Bilderbergers to assume the reins of government in the United Kingdom. Congressman Gerald Ford --- later US president --- also attended Group meetings in 1964 and 1966.

After Gov. Whitman's attendance at Turnberry, it's highly probable that she will either be a Republican vice presidential candidate with George W. Bush in 2000 or a presidential candidate herself in 2004. In fact, the propaganda machine has already started.

Bilderberger Bill Kristol, publisher of The Weekly Standard, has had his editor Fred Barnes write a glowing report of Bush Jr. as "The Heavyweight." This puff piece on behalf of the Texas governor attempts to establish him as a primary contender for president in the next election.

Objections to Bilderberg range from all sides of the political spectrum. A private, secret --- and by all accounts conspiratorial --- consensus on matters of public importance is considered at least in bad taste if not poor judgment by all serious advocates of representative government.

In fact, the diffidence and arrogance of the Global Ruling Class, the elites and their technocrats, the New World Orderlies - seems outrageously antiquated in the face of continuing global problems. These interlocking supranational elites - members of the Bilderberg Group, Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, Royal Institute of International Affairs, as well as the foundations and think tanks of the Global Plutocrats, would do well to reconsider their activities.

If global techno-feudalism, as posited by George Orwell's blueprint for world tyranny, "1984," and H. G. Wells' "The Open Conspiracy" is the Group's objective, then sovereign individuals of every nation will rise up with unprecedented fervor.

An historical precedent, of course, is the collapse of the Tower of Babel, a case of seeming divine intervention which shattered the globalists' plan for their precious One World Government. Those who pride themselves as the descendants of Nimrod had better think twice. There will be no cushions for them when they fall the next time around. Gov. Whitman's choice is after all the Hobbes' choice. She is merely a pawn in the game, another contingency in the Group's global ledger of assets and liabilities.

And the Group - covert global king-makers and king-breakers - is known to hedge its bets. Walter Mondale and Dianne Feinstein were Bilderbergers once too, but their political stars rose only so high.

Gov. Whitman's choice is after all the Hobbes' choice. She is merely a pawn in the game, another contingency in the Group's global ledger of assets and liabilities.

(Postscript: Christie Todd Whitman was sworn in as EPA Administrator on January 31, 2001 in the Bush Cheney Regime. She resigned on May 21, 2003)

* URI DOWBENKO is one of Alternative Media's foremost writers and media analysts and the author of"Bushwhacked: Inside Stories of True Conspiracy." His latest book to be published in Spring 2004 is called"Hoodwinked: Watching Movies with Eyes Wide Open" the most politically incorrect movie reviews ever published. He can be reached at u.dowbenko@lycos.com

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=117&contentid=1372&page=2

ALSO ...

Financial Times Covers Up Bilderberger Frauds
by C.GORDON TETHER

(From Tony Gosling -- http://www.bilderberg.org --Just got hold of this article banned by the Financial Times editor back in the seventies. C. Gordon Tether lost his job at the FT because he refused to bow to self-censorship and editorial pressure. It shows just how fraudulent the concept of a 'free press' can be in the West as well as being fitting memory to his integrity. I'm not planning to cover the Bilderberg Conference next year. Check out American Free Press for that. I'm leaving the website to get a life for a while so it might be a good time to grab the whole site??? Best wishes to all on my list - Tony)

03May76 - Banned Financial Times 'Lombard' column - The Prince and the Bilderbergers -- http://www.bilderberg.org/bilder.htm#banned

The Banned Articles of C. Gordon Tether (Extracts from a pamphlet of 46 banned Financial Times articles entitled 'The Banned Articles of C. Gordon Tether', Goodhead News Press - Bicester - 1977 ISBN 0 905821 00 9)

Gordon Tether

On the afternoon of 20th July last, a letter from the Editor of the Financial Times, Mr M. H. Fisher, arrived on my desk. It was to inform me that he was no longer prepared to publish my copy in the Lombard column, which from that moment would be written by other writers on his staff.

This marked a new turn in the struggle, in which I had been engaged for some three years, to preserve the independence of the internationally renowned column I had created and had written daily without interruption, holidays apart, for more than twenty years.

Beyond a sentence inserted at the foot of the column a few days later saying that I had ceased to write it, no explanation was offered for my sudden departure and no indication given that it was not my wish nor my intention to desert the column.

The attack on my independence had taken several forms, of which the most conspicuous was the total suppression of columns on an ever-increasing scale.

In all nearly fifty articles suffered this fate, about half of this number during the six months before I was finally exiled on 20th July 1976.

Al these banned articles are now being published for two reasons. In the first place, many of those who were not acquainted with the background may have been puzzled by the Financial Times' treatment of my column, or may have gained a false impression of what was involved. They will now be able to see for themselves what they were being denied the opportunity of reading.

Secondly, their publication can make a useful contribution to the important debate on Press freedom now taking place with special regard to the writer's duty - as expressed in the NUJ's code of conduct - 'to defend the principle of freedom of the Press in relation to the collection of information and the
expression of comment and criticism'.

The Editor of the Financial Times wrote to me on 8th July 1974, '...like any other journalist on this paper you are subject to the directives of the Editor who alone decides what appears or does not appear in the Financial Times.' My experience will demonstrate what one interpretation of this proposition can mean for a writer who has devoted the whole of his working life to the creation of a responsible column that has made a not inconsiderable contribution to the national and international debate.
-- C Gordon Tether, February 15th 1977

Article 30 in 'The banned articles of C. Gordon Tether'
This censored Financial Times' 'Lombard' Column was written 3rd May 1976 Published in Verdict - November 1976

The Prince and the Bilderbergers

Whatever the conclusions reached by the committee which the Dutch Government has very sensibly set up to inquire into the charge that Prince Bernhard was a recipient of Lockheed largess, one thing is certain.

It is that the affair will breathe new life into that long-smoldering controversy over the role that the Bilderberg group and its clandestine get-togethers play in world economics and
business affairs. For the prince took a large part in the formation of this organisation, its first meeting having been held under his chairmanship in 1954. And, as the president, he has been the master of ceremonies at its annual conferences ever since.

A pamphlet published by an organisation calling itself the 'American Friends of Bilderberg' says that the group owes its origin to the fact that, in the early 1950's a number of people on both sides of the Atlantic were seeking a means of bringing together leading citizens - in and out of government - for informal discussions on problems facing the Atlantic community. 'It was felt' it goes
on, 'that such meetings would create a better understanding of the forces and trends affecting Western nations, and, in particular, would help to clear up differences and misunderstandings that might weaken the West.'

Nothing much wrong with that, you might say. Are there not, indeed, many other organisations that concern themselves with the same good cause? And this being so, why should the activities of the Bilderberg group be singled out for special attention - and largely hostile attention at that?

Two Reasons

There seems to be two main reasons for this. One is that the 'Bilderbergers' have always insisted upon clothing their comings and goings in the closest secrecy. Until a few years back, this was carried to such lengths that their annual conclave went entirely unmarked in the world's Press. In the more recent past, the veil has been raised to the extent of letting it be known that the
meetings were taking place. But the total ban on the reporting of what went on has remained in force.

This acute concern with privacy is usually justified on the grounds - as the American Friends of Bilderberg put it - that 'the gatherings have to be closed and off the record in order to assure freedom of speech and opinion.' But there has been an inevitable tendency for conspiratologists to argue that only those with something to hide could consistently behave in such clandestine fashion.

The other main reason why the Bilderberg set-up has come to be a favourite target for the finger of suspicion is to be found in the nature of its 'cast-list'. There are no members of Bilderberg as such. 'Each year' - and again I quote - 'an invitation list is compiled by Prince Bernhard in consultation with an informal international steering committee.' Yet invariably included in the 80
to 100 participants are representatives of many of the world's largest
capitalist empires - men wielding immense power in the fields of economics and business. And many of these attend all the meetings , along with a number of 'regulars' operating in other parts of the corridors of power - one of them being Mr. Healy, the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Evidence

It is this close identification with the megaton-weights of the international business community that has encouraged the growth of the idea that Bilderbergism is the arm of a movement whose main aim is to create - 'a world fit for multinationals to live in' - which may indeed even see itself as spear-heading the establishment of World Government by such interests. And it is because of this that prince Bernhard's involvement in the Lockheed affair must be expected to give new impetus to the Bilderberg controversy.

It naturally has to be accepted that the Prince did not take bribes from Lockheed unless and until the investigating body has proved otherwise. But this does not alter the fact that there is a strong suggestion in what has emerged so far that he was involved in some degree in the 'wheeling and dealing' processes which have evidently played an extremely important part in the international fight for aircraft business.

There is no difficulty in seeing that this does not prove anything so far as the Bilderberg group is concerned. But it would hardly be surprising if the fact that light of this kind has been thrown on the activities of its top man was not seized upon as supporting evidence by those who maintain that Bilderbergism is an unseen force of great significance in world affairs that we aught to know a lot more about.
I should add that official accounts I have seen of Bilderberg meetings issued on a 'personal and strictly confidential' basis do not contain anything that would not rank as standard fare at any international conference whose purpose was 'to clear up differences and misunderstandings that might weaken the West.'

But any conspiratologist who has the Bilderbergers in his sights will quickly make the point that the real meat of their discussions - the alleged global conspiracy work - will find no place in such documentation and then proceed to ask why it is that, if there is so little to hide, so much effort is devoted to hiding it?

http://www.conspiracyplanet.com/channel.cfm?channelid=117&contentid=516