Bilderburg Group

[TomPaine]

No, the problem with the whole Bilderberg thing is that none of the anti-semites who go on and on about how it runs the world can ever come up with a decent argument about why it should be of any interest to the left unless it is all about the joooooooooooooooooos.

Come on that is just nonsense (the whole Jews thing). There are a lot of very valid reason why it should opposed or at least why there should be opposition to MPs going. These have nothing to do with grandiose views about ruling the world or Jews.
With no public oversight it is incredibly difficult to see if corruption results from events like this, now you might say "well it would happen anyway" but to be honest where it can be opposed it should be rather then just ignoring it.

It might not be priority number one, but I don't think ignoring it because some whackos have taken it as their cause is necessarily a good idea either.

Various organisations and people openly 'run the world' and 'control the media', why should anybody give a fuck whether they do it by phone, email or in a luxury hotel?

Well if the attitude is why should anyone give a fuck about people 'running the world', then why bother discussing it all?

G8 and WTO summits receive attention because the G8 and WTO use them as PR exercises, they don't need them to make decisions.

Of course, however if people should only openly oppose globalization on mass at "PR events" does that mean we should just ignore other manifestations of it? Of course not.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

So basically anyone you like then, making the term rather redundant.

Honestly, you cant half spout bollocks yourself.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Of course, however if people should only openly oppose globalization on mass at "PR events" does that mean we should just ignore other manifestations of it? Of course not.

Now here's a thing: Many on the left oppose "globalization". But on the right the same basic phenomena is usually termed "globalism".

 

[CUMBRIANDRAGON]

An oldish but good primer piece on the subject from a left perspective

https://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2005/01/303652.html

This is interesting as some of the left wing people I've spoken to did not even believe it existed lol.

 

[CUMBRIANDRAGON]

Take out the conspiraloon hyperbole and there isnt much to disagree with there: the NaZi's wrote the rule book on modern politics, and you could easily argue that Goebbels has been the single most influential person in the last 100 years - the propaganda techniques developed under his control are all pervasive in all modern global communications formats.

To be fair to Icke his "Obama = Hitler" analogy was that Obama used a form of mass rhetoric, devoid of meaning, but full of symbolic and emotional content, a la the NaZi propaganda model. That's true of all US elections going back decades now, but it has become a fine art in the dumded down years we live in.

As to the stuff about Zbigniew Brzezinski, Ive been banging on about this to anyone who will isten for a while now -
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=269270
though Im a bit embaressed to have Icke's endorsement!

Icke comes up with alot of really good research .But sadly he also comes out with mass delusions as well. reptilians etc.
But alot of his research I take my hat off to him

 

[Dillinger4]

Icke comes up with alot of really good research .But sadly he also comes out with mass delusions as well. reptilians etc.
But alot of his research I take my hat off to him

I am curious.

Could you point out a piece of his own amazing research?

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

He doesn't say entangled, he says subordinate. I didn't assume he was an anti-semite because he hangs around with them, I checked his work and found that he repeats their ideas, I really can't be bothered to find whether that's because he's stupid or an anti-semite himself.


No, the problem with the whole Bilderberg thing is that none of the anti-semites who go on and on about how it runs the world can ever come up with a decent argument about why it should be of any interest to the left unless it is all about the joooooooooooooooooos.

Ethnicity doesnt come into it, unless one is seeking to mythologise and build straw men of course.

This link details some of the more illustrious attendees (I dont know if it includes all the death trade scum who attend to drum up business)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Bilderberg_attendees

Some may be Jews, I have no idea. The big majority aint.

Bildeberg is a secret, unelected and unaccountable meeting of the global elite. That is why it should be of interest to the left. Pretty obvious. Oh, and the group was started by an SS Officer. Can you explain to us how biased towards the jews that makes it?

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

This is interesting as some of the left wing people I've spoken to did not even believe it existed lol.

Oh yeah. People from all over the spectrum said for years that it didnt exist, just a nutty conspiracy theory.

Then they admit it does exist but it doesnt really matter. Hell no, its just a secret unaccountable meeting of an unelected elite. Why would that matter?

But we have to rally in our 10s of thousands for the less secret and more accountable G8. I guess that makes sense to some people: Those who more interested in sticking to orthodox perceptions and hand-me-down stereotypes.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Icke comes up with alot of really good research .But sadly he also comes out with mass delusions as well. reptilians etc.
But alot of his research I take my hat off to him

Alot of Ickes research is derivative of Jordan Maxwell FWIW.

 

[toblerone3]

Various organisations and people openly 'run the world' and 'control the media', why should anybody give a fuck whether they do it by phone, email or in a luxury hotel?

I agree with this basically except I don't believe any individual organisations completely control the world. There is still a fair degree of chaos in the world in the sense that chance plays a role in the way that things unfold and there are many powerful actors in the world who don't communicate much at all with the people who attend the Bilderburg meetings.

 

[butchersapron]

Alot of Ickes research is derivative of Jordan Maxwell FWIW.

Another nutter. Stop reading that sort of shit and read some politics.

 

[kyser_soze]

Quick question:

If this is meeting of the global elite, planning away and everything, why is it that GB, who has been PM for more than 2 Bilerberg conferences, has only been once, according to your list (and lets face it, it's pretty easy to retrospectively find out where the PMs been, being a public figure and all) and that was in 1991, the year before Kinnock lost the 92 election.

Since you've obviously done loads of research into this, do you have a list year by year of the regular attendees? You could then argue that this is the 'elite of the elite', who are always there. By this I don't mean those on the steering committee, I mean non-Group attendees. Of course, it's also worth bearing in mind that it has invitees from all the main European powers, with quite a few from those hotbeds of international monetarism, Sweden, Finland and Norway - perhaps they're the token lefties, invited so the global progressives can feel included?

In connection with this, do you have any numbers on the %s of those in business vs academia, government etc? I mean surely you'd be intrerested in the balance of power present, no?

Or hasn't your 'analysis' of the Group's meetings extended this far yet, and in fact only goes as far as 'Well they're rich, and they meet in secret* so it must be bad and evil and evidence of a conspiracy'...

*n.b. - 'secret' means 'not known', and since people know the location and dates of the meetings, many of the attendees etc the meetings themselves are hardly 'secret'. You can call the contents of the meetings secret, but then I can call a Drs appointment a 'secret meeting', because it's details are confidential. I've had to sign NDAs before now that I still can't break, so are the meetings that pertained to the contents of those some shadowy marketing cabal, intent on keeping it's activities completely hidden from the public eye...

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Another nutter. Stop reading that sort of shit and read some politics.

Not only do I wonder how you know if I dont, I also wonder what kind of politics you are reading that leads you to tell people what to do.

 

[butchersapron]

Not only do I wonder how you know if I dont, I also wonder what kind of politics you are reading that leads you to tell people what to do.

Well, you're clearly reading Icke and this other loon - is it really so odd for me to point out this is a waste of your time, and there's actually real relvant credible authors you could be reading - even ones that might help you in your hounding of 'the elite'.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

kyser_soze;

"If this is meeting of the global elite, planning away and everything, why is it that GB, who has been PM for more than 2 Bilerberg conferences, has only been once, according to your list (and lets face it, it's pretty easy to retrospectively find out where the PMs been, being a public figure and all) and that was in 1991, the year before Kinnock lost the 92 election."

Most people who end up as a political leader will "sing for their supper" at least one of these dos. The fact that many only go to a small amount might say more about the relative unimportance of surface political leaders.

"Since you've obviously done loads of research into this"

Actually I havent.

"do you have a list year by year of the regular attendees? "

It's pretty difficult to ascertain, what with the meeting being secret and all. I doubt that wiki list is comprehensive.

"Of course, it's also worth bearing in mind that it has invitees from all the main European powers, with quite a few from those hotbeds of international monetarism, Sweden, Finland and Norway - perhaps they're the token lefties, invited so the global progressives can feel included?"

LOL - token social market centre left you mean.

"In connection with this, do you have any numbers on the %s of those in business vs academia, government etc? I mean surely you'd be intrerested in the balance of power present, no?"

No I dont and yes I would.

"and in fact only goes as far as 'Well they're rich, and they meet in secret so it must be bad and evil and evidence of a conspiracy'..."

Well the G8 aint secret and we are all are into the routine of wanting to see large scale demos at that. Its certainly evidence of a possible conspiracy, how bad and evil it is I really couldnt say but anything started by a former SS officer with Kissinger in regular attendance is worth keeping an eye on.

"*n.b. - 'secret' means 'not known', and since people know the location and dates of the meetings, many of the attendees etc the meetings themselves are hardly 'secret'."

These are not publically released. They are only generally found out by researchers. 2008 was the 1st time there was a BBerg press release because it was finally getting more of the attention many believe it warrants.

As I said before: For many years it was "tinfoil hat" to say the meeting even happened. Then when that became obviously false the goalposts had to shift because the agenda for some people is deriding "conspiracy theorists" ahead of discerning truth. So now its more a case of it being said to be "insignificant" but I doubt very much that it is.

 

[kyser_soze]

So basically, you've done absolute no analysis of the BG at all, yet think you have a credible argument on any of the issues. I would have thought that for someone who was so interested in their activities would at least have come up with something on attendence patterns.

Also - do you have any theories on specific policy directions/drifts that could be tracked from someone attending, then taking a markedly different tack in their work?

token social market centre left you mean.

Been to Sweden, Finland etc and seen how amazingly civilised they are? No, didn't think so. You wouldn't write them off with a 'lol' if you had.

The fact that many only go to a small amount might say more about the relative unimportance of surface political leaders.

So are you saying that there are more regular corporate attendees, perhaps ones that form a 'core'? I mean I know the wikilist isn't complete, but even that suggests that one or two invites is the norm.

I'm perfectly happy to accept the notion that these meetings produce an agenda that affects how countries are run, that could affect the global economy - such things are not unknown (indeed, there a huge raft of legislation in the US and elsewhere that specifically deals with cabals in individual industries). If the attendees were all of a similar political hue, I'd also give more weight to your unevidenced, unresearched claims - but they're not, they are from all hues who hold places in government. Plus, it's only 130 people - not being funny, but you'd need a gathering of at least 1,000 people to truly say you'd got any kind of Western elite, let alone a global one.

But all you ever do is put up the statement 'They're rich, they meet in secret, therefore there must be a conspiracy'. Huge amounts of international diplomacY - usually referred to as 'back channel' - happens in exactly this way; does this mean that back channel diplomacy, which often has massive effects, is also a 'conspiracy'?

Evidence and analysis taffboy - continual assertion that something is true doesn't make it so.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

"So basically, you've done absolute no analysis of the BG at all"

There isnt a great deal to go on as I said. If I were to quote The principle researchers people would just attack them instead I expect.


"Also - do you have any theories on specific policy directions/drifts that could be tracked from someone attending, then taking a markedly different tack in their work?"

allotting vast amounts of unscrutinised money to bankers who created the current mess is a possibility, seeing as it is a fairly international trend now. Note that bailouts are one thing, unscrutinised and unaccountable bailouts are another.

"Been to Sweden, Finland etc and seen how amazingly civilised they are?"

both, in 2000.

"No, didn't think so."

Try to work harder on your psychic talent and sarcasm.

"You wouldn't write them off with a 'lol' if you had." I was loling at the idea that they were "left wing" when they are the very definition of the centrist social market economies. I happen to agree they are very civilised.

"I'm perfectly happy to accept the notion that these meetings produce an agenda that affects how countries are run, that could affect the global economy - such things are not unknown (indeed, there a huge raft of legislation in the US and elsewhere that specifically deals with cabals in individual industries). If the attendees were all of a similar political hue, I'd also give more weight to your unevidenced, unresearched claims - but they're not"

If there are key messages to get over they might have to be gotten over to a fairly broad range (i.e centre to right wing)


"Plus, it's only 130 people - not being funny, but you'd need a gathering of at least 1,000 people to truly say you'd got any kind of Western elite, let alone a global one."

Once key people have learnt the latest thinking it might be fairly easy to disseminate outward. That's one way hierarchy works.

"But all you ever do is put up the statement 'They're rich, they meet in secret, therefore there must be a conspiracy'"

To be fair I havent. They are powerful, unelected (to BBerg) and secret. We have a right to know more. It could be conspiratorial.

 

[kyser_soze]

Ah, so you've moved from 'It is conspiratorial' to 'It could be'.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

Ah, so you've moved from 'It is conspiratorial' to 'It could be'.

Well if you could find where I specifically said it was conspiratorial it would be helpful.

I did say that any group like this set up by an SS officer with Kissinger as a regular is worth keeping an eye on.

I did say BBerg is a blind spot for the left.

I would stand by both those.

 

[Blagsta]

Did you read that David Harvey book yet?

 

[CUMBRIANDRAGON]

I am curious.

Could you point out a piece of his own amazing research?

Sorry I mean the research he pinches of other people lol.