Barack & Hillary at latest Bilderberg Conference?

[Guest David Guyatt]

Bilderberg baptizes Obama for president? Will Hillary be his VP?

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/cia-drugs/message/43743

Did they or didn't they?

Speculation about Obama, Clinton attending Bilderberger meeting

Posted: June 07, 2008

By Alyssa Farah

Westfields Marriott in Chantilly, Va., site of the Bilderberg conference this weekend

WASHINGTON – Sen. Barack Obama ditched his unsuspecting press entourage yesterday to attend a secretive meeting with Sen. Hillary Clinton.

But where did that meeting take place? Was it at the secretive Bilderberg conference in Chantilly, Va.? So far, neither campaign is talking.

The 56th Bilderberg meeting is still going on this weekend at the Westfields Marriott, according to various sources. But attendance is a well-guarded secret – along with the agenda, which tends toward the promotion of globalist ideas.

Obama's spokesman Robert Gibbs confirmed Clinton and Obama met but declined to inform the press of the location of the meeting. However, it was reportedly not held at Clinton's Washington home. Hillary's spokesman also declined to give the location of the rendezvous.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told Fox News the two candidates met at her house in Washington. Feinstein said she was working upstairs while Clinton and Obama sat by her fireplace.

Asked if Obama attended more than one meeting last night, Gibbs declined to "get into all the details."

Speculation about the pair meeting yesterday began when reporters traveling with Obama arrived at Dulles International Airport, in Northern Virginia, to find Obama was not aboard the plane, as was scheduled.

"Reporters traveling with Obama sensed something might be happening between the pair when they arrived at Dulles International Airport after an event in Northern Virginia and Obama was not aboard the airplane," the Associated Press reported.

Members of the press were outraged over the way Obama's campaign organizers covered up the meeting. Reporters were led to believe they would be getting on a plane back to Obama's campaign headquarters in Chicago with the senator. But while they were in the airport, the presidential candidate remained in the area for a secret meeting.

Dulles is just three miles from the Westfields Marriott Hotel in Chantilly, where Henry Kissinger and David Rockefeller, among other globalists, are gathered for the annual Bilderberg Group conference.

"Asked at the time about the Illinois senator's whereabouts, Gibbs smiled and declined to comment," the AP report continued.

Bilderberg is a highly-secretive meeting where the most influential men and women of North America and Western Europe meet ostensibly to discuss policy. But the group has spent years promoting a globalist agenda, according to reports from journalists who have penetrated the meeting.

The Bilderberg Group made a press release available explaining the agenda for the meeting.

"The conference will deal mainly with a nuclear free world, cyber terrorism, Africa, Russia, finance, protectionism, U.S.-European Union relations, Afghanistan and Pakistan, Islam and Iran. Approximately 140 participants will attend, of whom about two-thirds come from Europe and the balance from North America," the release stated. "About one-third is from government and politics, and two-thirds are from finance, industry, labor, education and communications. The meeting is private in order to encourage frank and open discussion."

Additionally, a list of the conference's attendees was released and included James A. Johnson, who was named this week to the three-person team vetting possible running mates for Obama. Rampant speculation in the blogosphere says the Obama-Clinton meeting last night was held to arrange the New York senator as Obama's vice-presidential candidate.

Attendees at the Bilderberg conference included Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, former Senate majority leader Tom Daschle and Ben Bernanke, the chairman of the board of governors for the Federal Reserve.

Hillary Clinton is no stranger to Bilderberg. Bill Clinton attended the 1991 meeting in Germany shortly before he was elected president. According to reports, he attended again in 1999 when the meeting was held in Sintra, Portugal, and Hillary herself may have attended the 2006 meeting in Ottawa, Canada.

"Why were we not told about this meeting until we were on the plane, the doors were shut and the plane was about to taxi to take off?" one reporter asked Obama spokesman Gibbs in a heated exchange caught on camera by CNN.

"Senator Obama had a desire to do some meetings, others had a desire to meet with him tonight in a private way, and that is what we are doing." Gibbs replied.

"Is there more than one meeting, is there more than one person with whom he is meeting?" asked another reporter.

"I am not going to get into all the details of the meeting." Gibbs replied.

Obama's spokesman explained the Clinton meeting was not planned in advance, and it was a last minute decision to attend.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=...mp;pageId=66442

~~~~

Hillary & Obama In Secret Bilderberg Rendezvous

Campaign spokespeople refuse to disclose location of meeting, but reports admit Democratic candidates convened at "an event in Northern Virginia"

Paul Joseph Watson

Prison Planet

Friday, June 6, 2008

Both Hillary and Obama have deep rooted connections to the Bilderberg elitists.

According to news reports, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton went out of their way to hold their long-awaited private meeting in a very specific location - not at Hillary's mansion in Washington - but in Northern Virginia, which also just happens to be the scene of the 2008 Bilderberg meeting.

Obama's spokesman Robert Gibbs told the media that Obama and Clinton held a private meeting last night but he refused to disclose where it taken place, except that it was not at Clinton's home in Washington, as had been widely reported. Hillary campaign managers also refused to disclose the location of the rendezvous.

"Reporters traveling with Obama sensed something might be happening between the pair when they arrived at Dulles International Airport after an event in Northern Virginia and Obama was not aboard the airplane," reports the Associated Press.

Dulles just happens to be walking distance from the Westfields Marriott hotel in Chantilly where Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller and the rest of the Bilderberg globalists are convening.

"Asked at the time about the Illinois senator's whereabouts, Gibbs smiled and declined to comment," the reports adds.

What is the only political "event" taking place in Northern Virginia at the moment? The Bilderberg Group meeting of course. Rather than taking the easier option of meeting at Clinton's Washington mansion, Obama and Hillary went out of their way to grace the Bilderberg elitists with their presence.

The neo-liberal website Wonkette, which had previously ridiculed "conspiracy theorists" for ascribing power to Bilderberg, seemed to take a somewhat different tone when it made the connection between Obama and Hillary's meeting and the Bilderberg Group.

"Guess who had a very private talky-talk in (maybe) romantic Northern Virginia tonight, probably at the Bilderberg Group meeting in Chantilly? Your Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton!," states the blog. "They really met and talked, in private, Thursday night. And really, it sounds like they did this at that creepy Bilderberg Group meeting, which is happening now, and which is so secret that nobody will admit they’re going, even though everybody who is anybody goes to Bilderberg."

To have the potential future President and Vice-President of America attend a conference that debunkers have dismissed as a mere talking shop for old white men once again underscores the real influence that Bilderberg enjoys.

Not one U.S. corporate media outlet has made the connection between the location of the Bilderberg Group conference this year and Obama and Hillary's decision to venture out to Chantilly for their confidential "tet a tet".

Not one U.S. corporate media outlet has yet uttered one word about 125 of the world's most influential power brokers meeting behind closed doors to discuss the future of the planet on U.S. soil - while being met by the probable future President of the United States.

Both Hillary and Obama have deep rooted connections to the Bilderberg elitists.

Bill Clinton attended the 1991 meeting in Germany shortly before becoming President and he attended again in 1999 when the conference was held in Sintra, Portugal (despite Clinton's lie that he had not attended in 15 years).

Hillary herself was rumored to have attended the 2006 meeting in Ottawa, Canada.

As we reported last month, Bilderberg luminary and top corporate elitist James A. Johnson will select Democratic candidate Barack Obama's running mate for the 2008 election and in turn potentially act as kingmaker for America's future President.

Johnson also selected John Kerry's running mate John Edwards in 2004 after Edwards had impressed Bilderberg elitists Henry Kissinger and David Rockefeller with a speech he gave at the globalist confab in Italy that year.

Johnson, who attended last year's Bilderberg meeting in Turkey, is a representative for Friends of Bilderberg, an offshoot group that organizes Bilderberg's annual meeting.

Hillary and Obama's attendance of the 2008 Bilderberg meeting, and the complete failure of the mainstream media to report on the fact, once again betrays the super-secretive nature and influential reputation that the 54-year-old organization still maintains.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/june2...llary_obama.htm

~~~

Bilderberg, Shadow Supergovernment

03.6.2008

The economic summit will take place this week near Washington

It was particularly difficult this year to find out when and where the annual conclave of world powerbrokers, the Bilderberg Group, would take place. Finally, it appears certain that the highly secret meeting of western political-military elites will take place from June 5 – 8 in Chantilly, Virginia, near Washington, in a luxury hotel immersed in nature, the Westfield’s Marriott.

What is Bilderberg? The Bilderberg group, which convened for the first time in 1954 in Holland, is considered the most powerful decision-making organization in the world. Semi-secret (without even a website), the group consists of elite political, financial, managerial, military, and media leaders from North America and Western Europe. In contrast with the Trilateral Commission, which was created out of the Bilderberg Group specifically to work with emerging Asian nations (Japan in the Seventies, China and India today), the Bilderberg Group is a genuine “shadow government” of the West that, some critics say, decides the fate of the world to suit the interests of the restricted oligarchy it represents.

On the Table. Two years ago, a press release sent out on the date of the opening session in 2006 (held in Ottawa, Canada), explained that the annual meeting would discuss the War on Terrorism, the situation in Iran and the Middle East, Oil, Russia, US-EU relations, and relations between the West and Asia, as well as Immigration. It is to be supposed that this year’s meeting will include discussion of current international emergencies, such as Afghanistan, the high cost of oil, and the world economic crisis. Concerning oil: after the Ottawa meeting, indiscreet leaks reported that a decision had been announced by oil producers to raise the cost of oil to over $100 a barrel over the course of two years.

The most recent list of Bilderberg members dates from the 2006 meeting, and includes high Bush administration officials, Henry Kissinger, the directors of the Federal Reserve Bank, Credit Suisse, Rothschild Europe (Vice President Franco Bernabè), representatives of Shell, BP, and ENI (Paolo Scaroni), Coca Cola, Phillips, Unilever, Time Warner, AOL, Tyssen-Krupp, and Fiat (Vice President John Elkann). Also present were representatives from Nato, the United Nations, the World Bank, the European Union, and economists (including Giulio Tremonti and Mario Monti) and many Western leaders (Italy’s representative was Tommaso Padoa-Schioppa). See below other Italian participants at past Bilderberg meetings.

Why all the privacy? Considering the grave importance to the public of the subjects discussed and the people present at the meetings, it would be logical – if for no other reason that to discourage paranoid theories – not to keep the meetings so private (or secret, if you prefer), and not to hold them behind closed doors in super-secure locations surrounded by armed guards, far from the prying eyes of journalists and the curious. If they have nothing to hide, why are they hiding?

[Mark Stapleton]

Bilderbergs? Obama's been a busy boy, and his comments on Jerusalem are profoundly stupid and dangerous:

No, I Can't! Obama and The Israeli Lobby

by Uri Avnery

Global Research, June 7, 2008

AFTER MONTHS of a tough and bitter race, a merciless struggle, Barack Obama has defeated his formidable opponent, Hillary Clinton. He has wrought a miracle: for the first time in history a black person has become a credible candidate for the presidency of the most powerful country in the world.

And what was the first thing he did after his astounding victory? He ran to the conference of the Israel lobby, AIPAC, and made a speech that broke all records for obsequiousness and fawning.

That is shocking enough. Even more shocking is the fact that nobody was shocked.

IT WAS a triumphalist conference. Even this powerful organization had never seen anything like it. 7000 Jewish functionaries from all over the United States came together to accept the obeisance of the entire Washington elite, which came to kowtow at their feet. All the three presidential hopefuls made speeches, trying to outdo each other in flattery. 300 Senators and Members of Congress crowded the hallways. Everybody who wants to be elected or reelected to any office, indeed everybody who has any political ambitions at all, came to see and be seen.

The Washington of AIPAC is like the Constantinople of the Byzantine emperors in its heyday.

The world looked on and was filled with wonderment. The Israeli media were ecstatic. In all the world's capitals the events were followed closely and conclusions were drawn. All the Arab media reported on them extensively. Aljazeera devoted an hour to a discussion of the phenomenon.

The most extreme conclusions of professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt were confirmed in their entirety. On the eve of their visit to Israel, this coming Thursday, the Israel Lobby stood at the center of political life in the US and the world at large.

WHY, ACTUALLY? Why do the candidates for the American presidency believe that the Israel lobby is so absolutely essential to their being elected?

The Jewish votes are important, of course, especially in several swing states which may decide the outcome. But African-Americans have more votes, and so do the Hispanics. Obama has brought to the political scene millions of new young voters. Numerically, the Arab-Muslim community in the US is also not an insignificant factor.

Some say that Jewish money speaks. The Jews are rich. Perhaps they donate more than others for political causes. But the myth about all-powerful Jewish money has an anti-Semitic ring. After all, other lobbies, and most decidedly the huge multinational corporations, have given considerable sums of money to Obama (as well as to his opponents). And Obama himself has proudly announced that hundreds of thousands of ordinary citizens have sent him small donations, which have amounted to tens of millions.

True, it has been proven that the Jewish lobby can almost always block the election of a senator or a member of Congress who does not dance - and do so with fervor - to the Israeli tune. In some exemplary cases (which were indeed meant to be seen as examples) the lobby has defeated popular politicians by lending its political and financial clout to the election campaign of a practically unknown rival.

But in a presidential race?

THE TRANSPARENT fawning of Obama on the Israel lobby stands out more than similar efforts by the other candidates.

Why? Because his dizzying success in the primaries was entirely due to his promise to bring about a change, to put an end to the rotten practices of Washington and to replace the old cynics with a young, brave person who does not compromise his principles.

And lo and behold, the very first thing he does after securing the nomination of his party is to compromise his principles. And how!

The outstanding thing that distinguishes him from both Hillary Clinton and John McCain is his uncompromising opposition to the war in Iraq from the very first moment. That was courageous. That was unpopular. That was totally opposed to the Israel lobby, all of whose branches were fervidly pushing George Bush to start the war that freed Israel from a hostile regime.

And here comes Obama to crawl in the dust at the feet of AIPAC and go out of his way to justify a policy that completely negates his own ideas.

OK he promises to safeguard Israel's security at any cost. That is usual. OK he threatens darkly against Iran, even though he promised to meet their leaders and settle all problems peacefully. OK he promised to bring back our three captured soldiers (believing, mistakenly, that all three are held by Hizbullah - an error that shows, by the way, how sketchy is his knowledge of our affairs.)

But his declaration about Jerusalem breaks all bounds. It is no exaggeration to call it scandalous.

NO PALESTINIAN, no Arab, no Muslim will make peace with Israel if the Haram-al-Sharif compound (also called the Temple Mount), one of the three holiest places of Islam and the most outstanding symbol of Palestinian nationalism, is not transferred to Palestinian sovereignty. That is one of the core issues of the conflict.

On that very issue, the Camp David conference of 2000 broke up, even though the then Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, was willing to divide Jerusalem in some manner.

Along comes Obama and retrieves from the junkyard the outworn slogan "Undivided Jerusalem, the Capital of Israel for all Eternity". Since Camp David, all Israeli governments have understood that this mantra constitutes an insurmountable obstacle to any peace process. It has disappeared - quietly, almost secretly - from the arsenal of official slogans. Only the Israeli (and American-Jewish) Right sticks to it, and for the same reason: to smother at birth any chance for a peace that would necessitate the dismantling of the settlements.

In prior US presidential races, the pandering candidates thought that it was enough to promise that the US embassy would be moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. After being elected, not one of the candidates ever did anything about this promise. All were persuaded by the State Department that it would harm basic American interests.

Obama went much further. Quite possibly, this was only lip service and he was telling himself: OK, I must say this in order to get elected. After that, God is great.

But even so the fact cannot be ignored: the fear of AIPAC is so terrible, that even this candidate, who promises change in all matters, does not dare. In this matter he accepts the worst old-style Washington routine. He is prepared to sacrifice the most basic American interests. After all, the US has a vital interest in achieving an Israeli-Palestinian peace that will allow it to find ways to the hearts of the Arab masses from Iraq to Morocco. Obama has harmed his image in the Muslim world and mortgaged his future - if and when he is elected president.

SIXTY FIVE years ago, American Jewry stood by helplessly while Nazi Germany exterminated their brothers and sisters in Europe. They were unable to prevail on President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to do anything significant to stop the Holocaust. (And at that same time, many Afro-Americans did not dare to go near the polling stations for fear of dogs being set on them.)

What has caused the dizzying ascent to power of the American Jewish establishment? Organizational talent? Money? Climbing the social ladder? Shame for their lack of zeal during the Holocaust?

The more I think about this wondrous phenomenon, the stronger becomes my conviction (about which I have already written in the past) that what really matters is the similarity between the American enterprise and the Zionist one, both in the spiritual and the practical sphere. Israel is a small America, the USA is a huge Israel.

The Mayflower passengers, much as the Zionists of the first and second aliya (immigration wave), fled from Europe, carrying in their hearts a messianic vision, either religious or utopian. (True, the early Zionists were mostly atheists, but religious traditions had a powerful influence on their vision.) The founders of American society were "pilgrims", the Zionists immigrants called themselves "olim" - short for olim beregel, pilgrims. Both sailed to a "promised land", believing themselves to be God's chosen people.

Both suffered a great deal in their new country. Both saw themselves as "pioneers", who make the wilderness bloom, a "people without land in a land without people". Both completely ignored the rights of the indigenous people, whom they considered sub-human savages and murderers. Both saw the natural resistance of the local peoples as evidence of their innate murderous character, which justified even the worst atrocities. Both expelled the natives and took possession of their land as the most natural thing to do, settling on every hill and under every tree, with one hand on the plow and the Bible in the other.

True, Israel did not commit anything approaching the genocide performed against the Native Americans, nor anything like the slavery that persisted for many generations in the US. But since the Americans have repressed these atrocities in their consciousness, there is nothing to prevent them from comparing themselves to the Israelis. It seems that in the unconscious mind of both nations there is a ferment of suppressed guilt feelings that express themselves in the denial of their past misdeeds, in aggressiveness and the worship of power.

HOW IS it that a man like Obama, the son of an African father, identifies so completely with the actions of former generations of American whites? It shows again the power of a myth to become rooted in the consciousness of a person, so that he identifies 100% with the imagined national narrative. To this may be added the unconscious urge to belong to the victors, if possible.

Therefore, I do not accept without reservation the speculation: "Well, he must talk like this in order to get elected. Once in the White House, he will return to himself."

I am not so sure about that. It may well turn out that these things have a surprisingly strong hold on his mental world.

Of one thing I am certain: Obama's declarations at the AIPAC conference are very, very bad for peace. And what is bad for peace is bad for Israel, bad for the world and bad for the Palestinian people.

If he sticks to them, once elected, he will be obliged to say, as far as peace between the two peoples of this country is concerned: "No, I can't!"

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?con...va&aid=9243

Nice article, Jan.

AIPAC, Bilderbergs--how many masters does a President have to serve?

I hope Obama was just paying lip service to both of them but realisation of a nightmare scenario might soon occur anyway, courtesy of Israel (who else?).

Edited June 8, 2008 by Mark Stapleton