Page
9 , AMERICAN
FREE PRESS * May
31, 2010
* Issue 22 AMERICAN FREE PRESS
BEHIND THE SCENES WITH MICHAEL COLLINS PIPER
Is
Power Elite Planning New Third Party?
 POWERFUL
FORCES seem to be laying the ground-work for
staging a “third party” rebellion
under their control. Don’t let them lead
good patriotic Americans astray. Here’s
the story you need to know about. You won’t
read it anywhere else..
 |
. Grass-roots
Americans — fed up with corrupt and incestuous
Republican-and Democratic-politics-as-usual —
would love to see a genuine “third”
party or independent movement rise up to throw
the rascals out and restore the Constitution,
bring back fiscal sanity and put an end to senseless
imperial wars of conquest around the globe.
However,
what many of those grass-roots Americans do not
recognize is that there is — even now —
a not-too covert effort afoot to bring some sort
of “new” party into being in time
for the 2012 presidential election. The problem
is that those working to conjure up this “new”
movement are the very people responsible for the
mess that America is in today.
 |
In
fact, elements working behind the scenes —
using the self-appointed “mainstream media”
as their megaphone — seem to be setting
the stage to spring some sort of “centrist,”
“bipartisan” or “coalition”-type
opposition movement on the American people.
Americans
will be told that this is the solution to the
gridlock and partisan squabbling now plaguing
Washington and that they finally have a “real
alternative” to those bickering Democrats
and Republicans who’ve brought morass and
malaise to the American system.
The
recent rise of a “third” party in
Britain — the Liberal Democrats —
now part of a new coalition government in partnership
with the Conservative (or “Tory”)
Party — is being hailed as an example Americans
can follow, in the tradition of our so-called
“Mother Country.”
The
American people do need an alternative to the
Democrats and the Republicans. But right now they
need to know that the “solution” being
set in place is not a real solution at all.
Here’s
the story, one that you’ve never heard presented
anywhere else before: an assembly of diverse material
that demonstrates clearly that there is at work
an effort to hoodwink people and lead them into
a trap that will ensure that the elite retain
control in the face of expanding public awareness
that there’s something wrong in Washington.
The
truth is that one of the primary reasons that
the mass media—including The Washington
Post and The New York Times —on
an almost daily basis has been hyping the so-called
“tea party” movement is that these
elite media powers want to keep the pot boiling.
That’s evidently part of the bigger agenda
in the campaign to create a new political movement
that will be under the control of the big money
interests.
In
fact, although few grass-roots tea party supporters
know it, a major player behind the initial “from
the top” orchestration of the tea party
phenomenon was Grover Norquist, a figure in high-level
Republican and conservative circles who was recruited
some years ago into the ranks of Council on Foreign
Relations (CFR).
The
CFR is the New York-based affiliate of the Royal
Institute of International Affairs in London,
the de facto foreign policy arm of the Rothschild
banking dynasty whose tentacles reach into the
privately owned money monopoly known as the Federal
Reserve System, which controls the American economic
system.
Likewise,
another power behind the sudden burst of the tea
party into national prominence was Fox News, the
centerpiece of the global media empire of pro-Zionist
hard-liner Rupert Murdoch, whose own rise to international
influence came as a result of the sponsorship
of the Rothschild dynasty, a point explored in
some depth in various aspects in this author’s
works The Judas Goats and The New
Babylon.
So
while there are many good people involved in the
tea party, it might be said that there are some
suspicious elements at work, utilizing the movement
for their own insidious purposes. And one of those
purposes, it does appear, is the orchestrated
“reform” of the two-party system.
But real reform is not what these intriguers have
in mind.
Why,
some might ask, would the power elite —
who have benefited from a strangle hold on the
traditional two-party system — want to bring
it toppling down?
|
|
The
answer is simple: The power elite recognize that there
is widespread discontent among American voters, and
those high-level manipulators want to ensure that they
are able to contain and corral that discontent, channeling
it into a “controlled opposition,” even
if that means setting up a new “centrist”
party or movement to do it.
At
the same time, of course, they want to be certain that
they can direct the internal politics of both the Democratic
and Republican parties, making certain that legitimate
challengers to politics as usual are kept on the sidelines
and marginalized.
That
is why, for example, The Washington Post and
its sister publication, Newsweek, which is
now on the auction block, have been promoting the political
fortunes of Sarah Palin, advancing her move toward the
Republican presidential nomination in 2012.
Mrs.
Palin is clearly perceived by the elite interests who
control the Post as a “blocking candidate,”
who has the capacity to frustrate the ambitions of a
genuine maverick Republican such as Ron Paul, whose
refusal—unlike Palin—to endorse American
imperial globalism and warmongering is considered a
potential danger should he make further advances in
the GOP arena.
So
Sarah Palin is clearly being used as a shameless tool.
Yet, paradoxically, should Mrs. Palin capture the GOP
nod, this would further the elitist aim of saying that
the Republican Party was now fully in the control of
“extreme” elements and that “middle
of the road” GOP voters should begin looking elsewhere
for a “centrist” alternative since, of course,
most Republicans would find it hard to stomach voting
for Barack Obama or any other likely nominee of the
hated socialists in the
Democratic Party.
One
point that is little noticed and hardly mentioned regarding
the “liberal” elements of the Democratic
Party is the fact that many supporters of Israel within
the tightly knit group of families and financial interests
who control the major print and broadcast media in America
are concerned that there is a growing opposition to
Israel within the “left wing” of the Democratic
Party. Polls consistently demonstrate that Republicans
across the country are far more strongly in support
of Israel than Democrats, who for many years were considered
the bedrock of support for Israel in the American political
arena. Not so these days.
And
now that all of the key Jewish lobby organizations,
including the World Jewish Congress, the American Israel
Public Affairs Committee, the American Jewish Committee
and the Anti-Defamation League, have loudly condemned
the Obama administration for its perceived hostility
and intransigence toward Israel, the concerns about
Obama and the Democratic “left” have been
exacerbated even further.
Polls
show that 27 percent of Israelis consider Obama to be
“anti-Semitic.”
|
|
A
hint that there were high-level forces pulling the rug
out from under Obama and laying the groundwork for even
more substantial political convulsions on the national
level came when David S. Broder opined in The Washington
Post on Jan. 21 that the election of Republican
Scott Brown to succeed the late Edward M. Kennedy in
the Massachusetts Senate race was “a vote of no
confidence” for the president and “Democratic
controlled Washington.” Broder concluded by saying
that “Obama may recover . . . but it will take
a significant change of direction to turn things around.”
While
most Americans have never heard of Broder (a longtime
member of the CFR), it is no exaggeration to say that,
“When David Broder speaks, people listen.”
Broder’s Post column is considered “must”
reading among establishment insiders in Washington.
He is regularly hailed as the “dean” of
America’s political pundits.
While
publicly identified as being the fiefdom of the Meyer-Graham
publishing enterprise, the Washington Post Company,
which is perceived to be a tightly held family concern,
is actually an American extension — like the CFR
— of the global empire of the Rothschild banking
dynasty. Rothschild-connected holding companies and,
in particular, longtime Rothschild family associate,
Nebraska-based billionaire Warren Buffett, have a considerably
greater stake in the Post Company than even the Meyer-Graham
family.
All
of this having been said, it is critical to understand
that the Post, as one of the foremost media
powers on American soil, has been in the forefront of
propagating the theme that some sort of “centrist”
challenge
to the two-party system as now constituted is in order.
For
example, on Feb. 25, the Rothschild-dominated Post
featured a prominently placed item entitled “Washington
rancor angers bipartisan town.” The article proclaimed
that even in Newtown, Pa.—one of the famed well-to-do
“Mainline” suburbs of Philadelphia where
so-called middle-of-the-road or centrist Democrats and
Republicans alike have always competed on an even level
in local, state and federal elections—disgust
with partisan gridlock in Washington is growing steadily.
The
Post asserted that the situation in Newtown
is reflected all across the country in like-minded communities
said by the Post to reflect “what political
strategists consider the disaffected middle.”
What
this means, effectively, in the carefully crafted code
words utilized by the Post, is that many people
consider both the Democrats and the Republicans to be
“too extreme”—the Democrats perceived
to be “too left wing” and the Republicans
to be “too right wing.”
Putting
aside the argument as to what constitutes either “left”
or “right” politically, the point is that
the Post is suggesting, as it has repeatedly
in recent months, joined by The NewYork Times,
that Americans are looking for a “middle ground”
or “centrist” alternative.
On
May 2, the Post — which heretofore never
had anything good to say about relatively larger-scale
“independent” or “third party”
efforts, ranging from those of George Wallace, Ross
Perot or Pat Buchanan to Ralph Nader — featured
a lead item in its much-read Sunday opinion section
raising the question: “Should the two party system
be challenged?”
That
the Post would even open up the question for
discussion is very telling. While opinions, both pro-
and con-, were presented, the words of one commentator
in particular, Dan Schnur, director of the University
of Southern California’s Unruh Institute of Politics,
reflected precisely the tone of recent and notably repetitive
Washington Post commentary and reportage regarding
the issue.
While
Schnur says that the emergence of a third party is unlikely
“anytime soon,” he suggests that “angry
centrists” have “the best opportunity they’ve
had in many, many years” over the next six months
to begin laying the foundation for “the need for
a new, centrist political entity that will free the
country from the grip of liberal and conservative extremists.”
He points out that a bevy of “besieged middle-of-the-road
political figures could conceivably remake the American
political landscape.”
As
examples, Schnur cites such figures as longtime liberal
Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.), who is now actually being
seriously challenged for renomination by a candidate
perceived to be even more liberal than even Lincoln
herself; Republican-turned-Democrat Arlen Specter of
Pennsylvania, who gave up running for renomination in
the GOP primary facing a serious conservative challenge
only to find his reelection endangered by a fight for
renomination in the Democratic Party; and Florida Republican
Gov. Charlie Crist, who, failing badly in his bid for
the GOP Senate nomination against a conservative challenger,
has now, to great fanfare in the “mainstream”
media, announced his campaign as an independent.
And
it’s probably no coincidence that Schnur should
be one echoing the Post’s propaganda
line in so many respects. In 2008, Schnur was the communications
director for vaunted “maverick” Sen. John
McCain, the GOP presidential nominee that year, who,
just four years before, was being touted as a possible
partyjumping running mate for Democratic presidential
candidate Sen. John Kerry.
Perhaps
not surprisingly,considering his own conflicts over
the years with more “conservative” elements
in his own party, McCain himself faces a renomination
challenge—from the “right”—from
former Rep. J. C. Hayward.
What
is particularly interesting in that another featured
commentator in the Post’s give-and-take
on the issue was former GOP House Speaker Newt Gingrich,
who said that a third party challenge was “not
a path America should follow.”
What
Gingrich did not say, however, was something that Washington
insiders do know: the fact that Gingrich has been privately
“mentioning” to figures in the capital city’s
power elite that he is considering picking retiring
Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh of Indiana (who — like
Gingrich — is another member of the CFR) as his
running mate if he (Gingrich) manages to procure the
Republican Party’s 2012 presidential nomination.
This is apparently the “Gingrich Solution”
to partisan gridlock, some sort of “bipartisan,
middle-of-the-road” approach.
|
|
| Gingrich: Front
Man for Shady, Shadowy Interests |
| |
|
|
 |
|
Former
House Speaker Newt Gingrich is still considerably
influential in high-level political circles in
no small part because of the fact that his substantial
political and public relations enterprises have
been bankrolled by Sheldon Adelson, an international
gambling tycoon.
Known
for his devotion to the interests of Israel, Adelson,
said to be the third-richest American, has been
described by the web site of the American-Israeli
Cooperative Enterprise as “the world’s
richest Jew.”
It
should also be noted that Gingrich benefited from
the lucrative Israeli-connected intrigues of his
second wife, Marianne, whom he divorced some years
ago, and who was on the payroll of the Israel
Export Development Company (IEDCO), which was
promoting the importation into the United States
of Israeli products — even as Gingrich was
using his influence as a member of Congress to
advance U.S.-Israeli trade.
The
aforementioned IEDCO was an operation run by mob-connected
Larry Silverstein, the billionaire owner of theWorld
Trade Center towers at the time of the 9-11 tragedy,
best known for his now infamous urging —
“pull it” — in reference to
the trade center’s Building 7 which was
deliberately imploded, a point that 9-11 researchers
have documented relentlessly. |
|
 |
|
PICTURED:
Sheldon Adelson and Larry Silverstein are two
powerful Zionist figures who have bankrolled the
intrigues of GOP kingpin Newt Gingrich
|
|
|
And
while Gingrich has not yet made any major formal steps
toward running for the presidency, he maintains considerable
influence in Washington, (See accompanying story)
That
Gingrich should mention Bayh as a possible running mate
is very interesting in the context of an orchestrated
toppling of the two-party system by the powerful financial
interests that control the mass media — the global
money lords who are the forces dominating the Federal
Reserve System.
In
fact, on the very day that The New York Times,
another major voice for the barons of finance, featured
a commentary by Bayh entitled “Why I’m Leaving
the Senate,” in which Bayh complained of “strident
partisanship” and “unyielding ideology,”
former Republican Sen. Lincoln Chafee, one of those
much-touted “centrists” who is now running
as an independent for governor of Rhode Island, was
also featured on that same page in the Times
predicting: “Expect Democratic and GOP dysfunction
to lead to a third party.”
Chafee
wrote of the fact that, in 2001, pollster John Zogby
told the Republican Senate caucus that “There
is a burgeoning centrist third party waiting to be formed.”
In
Chafee’s summary of Zogby’s words, “Either
party could make a strategic decision to capture the
center . . . or both could wait for a third party to
fill the vacuum.” For his own part, Chafee wrote:
With
our hopes for a post-partisan era still unmet, I say
to Senator Bayh: Welcome to the club of independents
who are looking for a better way to serve. Before
long, we centrists may even come together to define
the third party that Mr. Zogby foresaw in 2001.
It
has happened before. In 1856, my former party ran
a credible presidential campaign just two years after
its founding. Four years later, Abraham Lincoln won
the White House under that new Republican banner.
If my friend Evan Bayh can walk away from the United
States Senate and not look back, more power to him.
But my guess is, he has a modern-day reprise of the
Lincoln victory in mind.
It
may be no coincidence that Bayh’s name happens
to be one of those popping up in the type of scenario
discussed here. In 1999 Bayh was a participant in the
Sintra, Portugal convocation of the annual meeting of
the Bilderberg group, the secretive international policymaking
power bloc created jointly in the mid-1950s by the combined
forces of the Rothschild dynasty and their American
satellites in the Rockefeller family network.
Is
Bayh now slated with other key “centrists,”
who are said to be “fed up with partisan gridlock,”
to be part of a phony “third party” conjured
up by the power elite? That question remains to be answered.
But as the overview of the continuing propaganda campaign
for a third party appearing in the controlled media
demonstrates, it appears that something is definitely
afoot.
You
heard it here first.
. . ..Michael Collins Piper can be
heard every week day night live on the Internet
at republicbroadcasting.org.
He is the author of Final
Judgment, the controversial
“underground bestseller” documenting
the collaboration of Israeli intelligence
in the assassination of John F. Kennedy.
He is also the author of The
High Priests of War, The
New Jerusalem: Zionist Power in America
, The
Judas Goats: The Enemy Within,
Dirty
Secrets: Crime, Conspiracy & Cover-Up
in the 20th Century,
The
GOLEM: Israel's Hell Bomb,
and Target:
Traficant. These works
can be found at America
First Books and FIRST
AMENDMENT BOOKS:
1-888-699-NEWS. He has lectured
on suppressed topics in places as diverse
as Malaysia, Japan, Canada, Russia and Abu
Dhabi. |
|
(Issue #22, May 31, 2010, AMERICAN
FREE PRESS)
|
|
