[1rudeboy]

I don't lump all conspiracies together, actually. I try to separate them out believability . . . meaning that I am less inclined to believe something is an element of a conspiracy because the State Dept. used a (relatively) obscure rule in the interests of diplomacy, as opposed to believing that something is an element of a conspiracy by looking at the element itself.

And I do come down hard on Prof. Corsi, because he's intelligent enough to make the distinction. He just refuses to do so because he's in the conspiracy industry. Basically, when I read that George W. Bush has a secret plan to erase our national border by 2010, I like to see why the author thinks so, instead of sifting through BS of no probative value.

In this case, Corsi does a decent job of reporting what was said at the conference, but the thing about the Chatham Rule is carnival-barker material.

[hedgetrimmer]

George W. Bush has a secret plan to erase our national border by 2010

It's no secret. "free traders" open abhor borders as they are a 'barrier to trade'.

It's all about the supply chain, just as the executives in the article state. Can't stop the supply chain for an inspection, that just interferes with the transnationals. Little people(citizens) get national id's and open borders, but to do anything a transnational opposes is a cardinal sin to our corrupt politicians and their fascist relationships with global corporations.

Oh and by the way, thank goodness Jeb Bush is heading that ethanol commission promoting investment in Brazilian sugar. It sure has help Bill Clinton's portfolio as he invests in slave labor on the sugar plantations down there. No wonder citizens don't see an iota of difference between the parties, they are out scratching each others backs at great cost to our sovereignty and our taxpayers.

[Designer]

"..a secret plan to erase our national border by 2010.."

I don't think we can refer to this plan as "secret" as it is in the public sphere.

Not widely publicized, of course, but generally available.

And it is not just President Bush, either.

[Carry_Okie]

In this case, Corsi does a decent job of reporting what was said at the conference, but the thing about the Chatham Rule is carnival-barker material.

Your blandishments befit your usual BS. About ten seconds of search time I came up with this description:

Chatham House Rule

"When a meeting, or part thereof, is held under the Chatham House Rule, participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s), nor that of any other participant, may be revealed".

A search of the two literals, "Chatham House Rule" and "Department of State," yields sufficient results to convince me that it is a practice used in official meetings.