Wake up to the Democrat/Republican Paradigm & NEW WORLD ORDER

No matter who you vote for in the next election it will most likely be someone pushing the same Globalist agenda. Research The Trilateral Commission, Council on Foreign Relations and Bilderberg Group. The past three presidents are members of all three who wish to accomplish a one world government. Hillary is also a member of these groups along with her husband Bill. Prove to Gruber that “The voters are not stupid” as he so arrogantly believes. We need a Libertarian president to step in and get the votes. It’s our only hope.

The United Nations (U.N) was specifically designed to accomplish this malevolent agenda. The U.N. was suppose to eliminate wars and bring about peace to the world, but it couldn’t be further from the truth. We have established strategic positions around Iran over the past few decades using “Terrorism” and “Freedom” as a way to get everyone on board with their tyranny in the Middle East.

Notice Libya isn’t on that list anymore. After the CIA went in and started a Arab Spring to assassinate Qaddafi. First thing they did was replace his banks that were full of a rare African gold, and turned them into Rothschild banks. Never spent a dime on rebuilding Libya either. The bricks still lay on the ground as they were after the conflict. 

Although I don’t own a gun I find it quite alarming that the government has attempted or at least considered restricting our gun rights.

The Republican/Democrat paradigm has become all too real.

The “monopoly of a one-party system” is all too evident in the midterm elections, according to former Texas congressman Ron Paul.

George H. Bush once said “He considers Bill Clinton as a son of his”. George H. Bush went around the world talking about a “New World Order” 

That scared a lot of people, so they decided they needed a Democrat to take the White House, and that was none other than Bill Clinton. Then they assured W. would be next and so on. 

All of these presidents have been prepped for their duty years before they take office in the White House. They are merely “actors” who take the stage and use words like “Freedom” & “Terrorism” to justify their greedy wars overseas and get everybody on board. 

NEW WORLD ORDER QUOTES FROM PROMINENT PEOPLE 

According to retired NATO Secretary General Wesley Clark, a memo from the Office of the US Secretary of Defense just a few weeks after 9/11 revealed plans to “attack and destroy the governments in 7 countries in five years”, starting with Iraq and moving on to “Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.” In a subsequent interview, Clark argues that this strategy is fundamentally about control of the region’s vast oil and gas resources. 
According to former French foreign minister Roland Dumas, Britain had planned covert action in Syria as early as 2009: “I was in England two years before the violence in Syria on other business”, he told French television: 

“I met with top British officials, who confessed to me that they were preparing something in Syria. This was in Britain not in America. Britain was preparing gunmen to invade Syria.” 
Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter’s North field, contiguous with Iran’s South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets crucially bypassing Russia. Assad’s rationale was “to protect the interests of [his] Russian ally, which is Europe’s top supplier of natural gas.” When Putin refused, the Saudi Prince vowed military action. 
The Iran-Iraq-Syria pipeline plan was a “direct slap in the face” to Qatar’s plans. No wonder Saudi Prince Bandar bin Sultan, in a failed attempt to bribe Russia to switch sides, told President Vladmir Putin that “whatever regime comes after” Assad, it will be “completely” in Saudi Arabia’s hands. 

It would seem that contradictory self-serving Saudi and Qatari oil interests are pulling the strings of an equally self-serving oil-focused US policy in Syria, if not the wider region. It is this – the problem of establishing a pliable opposition which the US and its oil allies feel confident will play ball, pipeline-style, in a post-Assad Syria – that will determine the nature of any prospective intervention: not concern for Syrian life.