| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1lokiareJul 13, 2011 5:02:44 | www.activistpost.com/2011/07/daniel-estu... Bilderberg agenda released. Mainly economic plotting to favor the global banks and to form a 'One Corporation World' |
| #2ADHadhJul 13, 2011 7:09:42 | No source given. |
| #3homicidal_squirrelJul 13, 2011 8:33:05 | Horrible article. There is no mention of what time they had lunch or what they had for lunch. It's a lie. |
| #4QubeJul 13, 2011 9:18:06 | Apparently, this is the Bilderberg group. One World Company Limited? Meh, Shadowrun does it better! (10 corps ruling the world) |
| #5LFKJul 13, 2011 9:35:13 | Apparently, this is the Bilderberg group. Fer serious. Even Orewell pointed out that you need the illusion of conflict to keep things going, otherwise it's too easy for you to become the enemy. |
| #6bone_nagaJul 13, 2011 11:42:48 | No source, some stuff listed is completely wrong, and it just doesn't make sense. For example, the USG involvement in Iraq is dictated by the US and Iraqi governments. A few rich people getting together can't change that. And in the end just sounds ridiculous. |
| #7lokiareJul 13, 2011 12:02:18 | No source, some stuff listed is completely wrong, and it just doesn't make sense. For example, the USG involvement in Iraq is dictated by the US and Iraqi governments. A few rich people getting together can't change that. And in the end just sounds ridiculous. A few rich people with enough power to change national policy... |
| #8lokiareJul 13, 2011 12:03:25 | Also found the law that makes it illegal for anyone except diplomats or presidents to go to meetings like this: The Logan Act |
| #9LFKJul 13, 2011 12:17:10 | Also found the law that makes it illegal for anyone except diplomats or presidents to go to meetings like this: Looks like an old law that no one with power really cares about anymore. Also it doesn't prevent them from attending a meeting like this, only prevents them from "conducting foreign affairs" which is one of the vaguest statements ever made. Are you conducting foreign affairs right now by talking politics with a Canadian? Also the max term is three years in a minimum security resort and "there is no record of any convictions or even prosecutions under the Logan Act." |
| #10lokiareJul 13, 2011 12:46:40 | Also found the law that makes it illegal for anyone except diplomats or presidents to go to meetings like this: If it were just bankers there it would be ok, however there are other government reps from other countries there so yeah planning stuff with them is a violation of the Logan Act. Not to mention because its not open to the media other countries laws are being broken too... Its like the politicians just flat out don't care anymore... |
| #11LFKJul 13, 2011 13:04:08 | anymore... They ever did? Like I said last time this came up: it's barely different from the golf course non-meeting-meetings that we treat as a given. Also if you didn't notice we have phones now. People don't need to be in the same place to talk to each other. The entire purpose of the meeting is to make the people involved feel special. Nothing happens, discourse wise, that wouldn't happen over more boring channels. The sole reason for the meeting's existance is so that people will huff up over it and stamp their feet so the people involved can fuh fuh fuh and turn up their noses. It's a "secret" meeting invented so that others can get jelly that they didn't get an invite and the peeps that went get to go "u mad bro?" YOU ARE BEING TROLLED BY RICH PEOPLE. |
| #12lokiareJul 13, 2011 13:25:27 | anymore... There fixed that for ya. It used to be a secret meeting, and it takes place over the course of several days, so its a kind of 'let's compare sticks' kinda thing, but they also coordinate for specific goals and discuss the world around them. It wouldn't be a problem except the people attending act on these meetings and push the world in one direction: Globalism... |
| #13zombie_babiesJul 13, 2011 13:55:49 | What I can't figure is how these rich, influential and powerful people can't put a permanent muzzle on the folks that seem to keep giving away all of their secrets. So, either they aren't very powerful at all or the 'secrets' we're hearing about aren't what they're actually talking about. In either case, I ain't too concerned. |
| #14lokiareJul 13, 2011 14:41:28 | What I can't figure is how these rich, influential and powerful people can't put a permanent muzzle on the folks that seem to keep giving away all of their secrets. So, either they aren't very powerful at all or the 'secrets' we're hearing about aren't what they're actually talking about. In either case, I ain't too concerned. Well its places like Wiki-leaks that we have to thank as well as the people that work at the hotel and possibly a few 'lowly' influentail people that want to see the higher ups fall so they can take their place... |
| #15zombie_babiesJul 13, 2011 14:55:18 | Well its places like Wiki-leaks that we have to thank as well as the people that work at the hotel and possibly a few 'lowly' influentail people that want to see the higher ups fall so they can take their place... You missed the point. If these guys are so powerful and these leaks are so real, why haven't they permanently muzzled the people that keep talking? |
| #16calronmoonflowerJul 13, 2011 15:01:23 | A few rich people with enough power to change national policy... George Soros? |
| #17LFKJul 13, 2011 15:10:55 | I suspect that, for the most part, the atendees are actually the rich people who wish they were influential enough to impact policy. The ones that have the real power to influence policy are sitting around collecting a paycheck for "retained services." |
| #18bone_nagaJul 13, 2011 17:53:16 | Also found the law that makes it illegal for anyone except diplomats or presidents to go to meetings like this: They're not negotiating with a foreign government. They are meeting with other people, SOME of whom may be work in the government, but are not necessarily THE government. I work for the government, but my power to influence US policy amounts to right about nothing. Anything they discuss is not legally binding, and you don't actually know what they discussed anyway. They could have spent the whole time smoking cigars and talking about hookers and blow for all you know. |
| #19bone_nagaJul 13, 2011 17:55:15 | No source, some stuff listed is completely wrong, and it just doesn't make sense. For example, the USG involvement in Iraq is dictated by the US and Iraqi governments. A few rich people getting together can't change that. And in the end just sounds ridiculous. You miss the point. They can try to influence policy, but they don't have the power to change it. Not to mention they also have to get the Iraqi government to agree as well. Sounds pretty costly and what do they actually gain from it? |
| #20grehnheweJul 13, 2011 19:54:00 | I thought it was Build-a-Burger. "Have it your Way" On a more serious note, I personally believe that Bilderberger conferences probably have the same capability as any time people of influence meet or socialise. I believe that any widespread secret agendas or secret societies are probably pretty secret...But then there is that hiding out in the open thing. ![]() |
| #21lokiareJul 14, 2011 0:13:17 | I don't believe its some kind of HUGE COORDINATED CONSPIRACY™ (I don't give them that much credit for intelligence as they seem to forget what happens to people with absolute power that anger the citizenry that outnumber them 10,000 to 1) rather I think its greedy and immoral people that will do anything for money and power making individual 'back room' deals and discussing world events. It leads to the same outcome though... Globalism... which I wouldn't have a problem with in and of itself if say, they based it on the Constitution of the United States, but they are basing it on a kingdom/fiefdom kind of setup. Basically you'll eventually have no rights at all and only work for the few rich people that will be determined through inheritance and marriage, not the kind of world I want to live in... Sure the information we are getting could be completely fabricated, but with the number of unconnected individuals that are getting the same information from different sources, its kind of unlikely. I'd rather take the evidence to mean Globalization, and be wrong, than to think its all innocent fun and be wrong if you know what I mean... |
| #22Luis_CarlosJul 14, 2011 3:12:38 | I don´t like "criptocracy". I meant it isn´t good secret groups can have got more influence by lobbies, contacts and "chain (=network of exchange) of favours" that millions of votes from the ballot box. The health of democracy isn´t good if main candidate of most parties are more worried about to please those lobbies that millions of voters? (A example, let´s imagine masonery lodges don´t Nativity Scene in the school for December, but a lot parents like seing it for those dates.. It´s like "who am I going to vote, skrull party or workers or skrull party to help people?". but what if I don´t want vote skrull, but I can´t? (are you thinking I am now inciting interestelar xenophobia?) What can I do? Well, sometimes I participate take part in a ciberlobby (sending emails to protest and similar actions). Is Club Bildeberg a "criptocrazy"? I don´t known, but I sure a thing. Here in Spain I don´t like our main cadidate of opposion, Mariano Rajoy, has got a behavior like his main goal is avoid the rage, the vote of punishment by the "red one" or lefty and not pleasing the people who ha voted him. |
| #23bone_nagaJul 14, 2011 6:52:17 | I don't believe its some kind of HUGE COORDINATED CONSPIRACY™ (I don't give them that much credit for intelligence as they seem to forget what happens to people with absolute power that anger the citizenry that outnumber them 10,000 to 1) rather I think its greedy and immoral people that will do anything for money and power making individual 'back room' deals and discussing world events. It leads to the same outcome though... Globalism... which I wouldn't have a problem with in and of itself if say, they based it on the Constitution of the United States, but they are basing it on a kingdom/fiefdom kind of setup. Basically you'll eventually have no rights at all and only work for the few rich people that will be determined through inheritance and marriage, not the kind of world I want to live in... Prove it. I haven't seen a shred of evidence that a couple rich guys hanging out together will somehow invalidate the US Constitution. Sure the information we are getting could be completely fabricated, but with the number of unconnected individuals that are getting the same information from different sources, its kind of unlikely. I'd rather take the evidence to mean Globalization, and be wrong, than to think its all innocent fun and be wrong if you know what I mean... Source? |
| #24QubeJul 14, 2011 7:03:09 | Is Club Bildeberg a "criptocracy"? nope. the people attending are pretty much known. We just don't know what they are doing. If they are ruling the word, then they are not much different then a technocracy or mertitocracy ... (ruled by the most powerfull; instead of the smartest or best) |