• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

The Bilderberg Conference

Simonstooge wrote,"Yes and no. Many of the lies that were once told about Jews are now told about capitalists, bankers, merchants etc. Same people that the Nazis sought to portray as morally corrupt. The very notion of the 'big conspiracy' has its roots in anti Jewish hysteria. Conspiracists today [and through out history] seek to blame specific groups (others and outsiders) for the problems faced by their societies." I have a few points to make. First, Adam is completely right that Simon is trying to hijack the thread and totally move it away from discussion of the bilderbergers. Second, simonstooge has blundered in grouping merchants with capitalists. No anti-globalist would ever group mom and pop shops with conglomerations. Third, to equate the depiction of capitalist pigs with nazi depictions of Jewish people is ludicrous and disgusting. Finally, it is the capitalist swine which is responsible for the world's lack of peace and justice. Here in America most are starting to see how devoid of honesty the leadership is. History shows that it is the historical power that is fully to blame for the f%$^cked state we are in. Ralph Nader is right. Howard Zinn and Chomsky are right. Stooges with small minds will continue to try to warp the truth. Yes, bankers, corporations, military asswipes, etc. are to blame for the mess. The Carlisle Group, bilderbergers, and all fascist pigs are to blame. And these right wing nut jobs in power are on their last fumes. Fabricating a war on terrorism is their last ditch effort to control the world. As Bob Marley sung, none of them can stop the time.
 
Ugghhh. Well that was constructive.

I think, nwoisevil, that you should consider changing your medication.
 
Yeah, sure thing stooge, problem with your phony ilk is that you never respond to the points made. You are a bully and a petty thinker. Socrates would have had a field day with a third rate schmo like yourself. Enron and Carlisle group bilderberger fcks do exist because of shites like you. Erich Fromm wrote about the roots of fascism and told us how in an authoritarian, fascist society like those found in the west there are the asswipes who spit on those below while those stooges do the same to the ones under them. You are the classic stooge. You would have made a nice member of the warren commission. As Adam wrote u should shut up or stop trying to hijack threads dumbass.
 
Where is the Bilderberg meeting?

BBC : Virginia

The Guardian : A small island off the Swedish coast

Conspiracy theorists : Virginia

So which one's dis-info?
 
Adam, what are you gonna do about the Bilderbergers, besides inform people that some
unknown people were talking in a unknown place about unknown things??

Arn't you only contributing to the conspiracy??:D
 
You would rather I deleted the thread and put masking tape over my mouth??

Contributing to the conspiracy? No, i'm simply trying to discuss it. It's the poeple like you who by ignoring it are contributing to it.
 
No, I was just wondered what you were personally gonna do about it? What am I
ignoring I just asked you a question about the event.
 
What am I gonna do?

Right now....

I'm going to spread the news article from the Guardian and the recording from the BBC to make poeple more aware of this 'Global think tank' and their odd tactics.

Later....

Wait and see.
 
See, thats all I was asking, and about the tape over your mouth, you can still type with
your hands, can'tcha??:D

I'd put money on a remote building in Virginia, pertaining to your previous question.
 
Sorry Adam, I'm not trying to disrupt the thread, just wanted to recommend to people The anatomy of human destructiveness by Erich Fromm. What most don't realize is that a lot of Jewish scholars have written about the roots of fascism in the west. One needn't be a conspiracy theorist to see that there is an institutional conspiracy. It is so blatantly obvious, and so are the shallow attempts to demonize anyone who speaks the truth.
 
Jon Ronson and Them

Adam Rang said:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4193031,00.html
Click to expand...
If Jon Ronson's Bilderberger book is to be believed, it's not only those who rule the world who receive an invite to join the grand conspiracy. But if you do find yourself behind the scenes, don't drink the water.

The Guardian page to which Adam referred contained a link to an extract from Jon Ronson's book Them: Adventures With Extremists.

In the extract, an unnamed source (don't you just love them?) from inside the Bilderbergers says that Margaret Thatcher attended Bilderberg in 1975 and "sat there for the first two days and didn't say a thing" until prompted.

The source also says that Bill Clinton attended in 1991.

Now, Margaret Thatcher didn't become Prime Minister until 1979. In 1975, she was the newly-elected leader of the Opposition.

Bill Clinton didn't become President until 1993. He wasn't even nominated until 1992. In 1991, he was only the Governor of Arkansas.

No wonder Bilderberg meetings get expensive, if they invite all these politicians who aren't part of government.

Maybe they confused themselves with the AMORC, which retro-enlists famous historical figures - backdated to before they were famous, of course.

I also have a hard time convincing myself that Margaret Thatcher could contain her opinions for two whole days. What did the Bilderbergers put in her water?

Now there's a secret worth having.
 
Jon Ronson's bilderberg book is to be beleieved... he managed to get Dennis Healy talking about it. Ronsons asked him if he could see some photos taken inside the bilderberg meetings and Healy replied (on camera) "fuck off".

The point about bilderberg, which you've highlited, is that they invite less important poeple to their meetings and immidiatly their carreer takes off.
 
THe career enhancing effects of Bilderberg are interesting... if you employed a Bilderberger, would you DARE not promote them?

8¬)
 
I think the media silence is even more interesting... a big meeting of the World's leaders and the only mention is a guardian article and a smal mention at 3:00 in the morning on the BBC World Service? The best part of Ronson's book was when Icke went on tv and started talking about the bilderbergas...

Icke: Ok, lets talk about the bilderbergas

Host: Well, why dont we discuss...

Icke: No, lets talk about the Bilderbergas.

Host:listening to ear piece We don't want to talk about that right now.

Icke: a knowing smile I bet you don't.
 
Re: Where is the Bilderberg meeting?

Adam Rang said:
BBC : Virginia

The Guardian : A small island off the Swedish coast

Conspiracy theorists : Virginia

So which one's dis-info?
Click to expand...

The Guardian article is from May 2001, so that's one little mystery solved :)

With regard to the secrecy surrounding Bilderberg meetings - well, security is obviously an issue, but that doesn't explain why such meetings are not publicised after the event.

If they have nothing to hide, then why are they hiding?

Jane.
 
Re: Re: Where is the Bilderberg meeting?

mejane said:
The Guardian article is from May 2001, so that's one little mystery solved :)
Click to expand...

Well spotted. I guess i should have noticed that. Not to sure why it's being promoted round the web then for this years Bilderberg conference.
 
A time-slip perhaps?

I didn't notice the date either when I first read the article; only when I re-read it for 2nd or 3rd time.

Out of interest, how did you find the Guardian article? If you search Guardian Online for "Bilderberg" this is the 5th item mentioned (source ), and it is not at all clear from the layout that this story is a year old.

The first story only tangently relates to Bilderberg, but in a very interesting way:

Lord Black of Crossharbour, the owner of the Daily Telegraph is a member of the secrective Bilderberg Group
Click to expand...

Hmmm... freedom of the press. Nice concept, shame about reality.

Jane.
 
Adam - I've read quite a bit of the spotlight and there's definately something just a little screwy about some of the writers...

read this article (Anti-Muslim Hate Rhetoric Sounds Like Tel Aviv TV) and see how clear you find it, and what the overall message that comes out is.

There is a genuine problem of anti-semitism within conspiracy culture, and I don't think the freedom of speech issue is really going to work here. What might be a distracting passtime to some is nigh on a religion to others, and, as you'll know having read THEM, the boundary between white-supremecism, militia men, 'freedom of speech' advocates and conspiracy theorists is a fine one. It's the same argument as the 'right to bear arms' brigade - there's no discussion about what we have the right to and what we don't, it's all based on historical documents that relate to certain periods in history, and a harking back to the good ol' days when men was men.

Freedom of speech has to be tempered with the freedom not to be persecuted, and many pamphleteers like Jim Tucker (although I side with him on the bilderberg issue and would like to see more accountability from these types) are quite influential amongst people who may not have the ability to discern well written anti-semitism from well written investigative journalism. I'm not saying stupidity is the problem, but having the ability, or desire, to sift through the paper watching out for tell tale signs of racism is hard when faced with something you really want to believe in.
 
dot23 said:
There is a genuine problem of anti-semitism within conspiracy culture
Click to expand...

I think it's more that there's a geniune problem of Zionism in the conspirators... no can deny that Israel has a very strong influence in the American goverment despite their attitude on the international scene. The US media also sucks about to Israel big time. The way they played down the Israeli spy scandal was quite interesting. There are also a number of rich, influently Jewish families living in the west... the Rockerfellers and the Rothschilds come to mind.

With the above in mind its not exactly going to be ground braking for a conspiracy theorist to suggest that somehow the Zionists have an important role within the global conspiracy, is it?

the boundary between white-supremecism, militia men, 'freedom of speech' advocates and conspiracy theorists is a fine one.
Click to expand...


I have to strongly dissagree with that one. First of all I think we should make a distinction between Zionism and semitism. I have not come accross a conspiracy theorist who believes that the world is secretly ruled by the Jews. You find this kind of belief among neo-nazi's and white supremists. Big Jim Tucker, David Icke, Alex Jones, even Matt Rivero Do not belief that the world is ruled by the Jews. They do ,however, from time to time put an empthasis on the role of Israel and the Zionists in the global conspiracy. Nothing wrong with that. As I said before Zionists are not a race. Semites are a race. Bad mouthing Zionists does not equate to bad mouthing semites. There are plenty of Jews that are anti-zionist as well.

Further more there is a big difference between simply wanting to bring to poeple's attention the (supposed) reality of a global conspiracy and wanting to annialate all jews off the face of the planet.
 
I've followed this thread with great interest and it has been eye-opening to see how the arguments involved can swing from one extreme to the other. While both sides make valid points, it's also worth bearing in mind that radical ideas from any socio-political standpoint are open to reinterpretation and this is what makes me slightly uneasy.

I mentioned way back on the first page that any theory that touches on Zionism (and as such anti-semitism) is heading into murky territory. Afterall, it seems obvious that those of you making your point on this board are articulate and are as such likely to be well-educated and so are Jim Tucker et al that Adam mentions in his last post. Therefore we, as readers, are able to make distinctions between Zionism and anti-semitism, however perhaps some of those individuals that make up the local militias in Hickesville Tennessee might not be so well up on their Chomsky...

So I suppose the moral of this story would be the conspiracy as you and I might understand it could take on a far more sinister turn when it gets down to Bubba in Tennessee... And he's the one with the rifle.
 
I do agree with that. Courtney Brown said there was a spaceship following Hale-bop and 40 poeple went and took there lifes under the theory that they were going to join the beings on board. Looking at this example its easy to see how it spiralled out of control but we can not blame Mr Brown for killing these poeple because ultimatly they made the decision to kill themselves. The same applies to conspiracy culture. The conspiracy theorists mentioned are not anti-semites but down the line someone like combat 18 may twist the info or interpret it differently so they can go pick on the jews. Ultimatly, anti-semitism is in the eye of the beholder when reading conspiracy literature. We must remember that poeple who act anti-semtitically based on Icke/tucker/jones etc's work only have themselves to blame.
 
We must remember that poeple who act anti-semtitically based on Icke/tucker/jones etc's work only have themselves to blame.
Click to expand...

Hmm, but you could say the same for Hitler and Nazis in general. If people choose to use mein kampf as an excuse to continue neo-nazi sentiment is it Hitler's fault? If people write essays such as those found on the american free press which are open to interpretation, and the author's do this deliberately so that conspiracy theorists can read it one way and fascists can read it another, aren't they to blame if people use this 'evidence' to further their own opinions about jews, blacks and others?

Perhaps there is a sinister zionist cabal which manipulates certain world events, but you must remember that this was the propaganda used by nazis to turn people against the jews in germany. It is also unfortunate for conspiracists as it tars us all with the same brush. This is why I'm very careful to distance myself from organisations or individuals who advocate these theories. It is also, perhaps, true that to tar anti-zionist sentiment with the brush of anti-semitism prevents healthy discussion about Israel and the power of jewish lobbyists.

Rileston is right to back up my point (obviously!) that it's fine for people who are more discerning and can pick apart these arguments with the benefit of a good education, but others are not as fortunate. Ignorance is a big problem, and often leads to religious intolerance - cf the riots in the north of england last year, as well as general media manipulation in terms of the depiction of Islam.
 
dot23 said:
If people choose to use mein kampf as an excuse to continue neo-nazi sentiment is it Hitler's fault?
Click to expand...

Most probably. I'm not fammiler with what exactly Hitler says in Mien Kampf but if it has pro neo-nazi writings in it then I'm guessing that neo-nazism that stems from it is his fault.

David Icke, Matt Rivero, Big Jim Tucker, Alex Jones put absolutly no anti-semitism in their writings.

Its important to distinguish anti-religion between anti-poeple (David Icke is anti-jewish religion but not anti-Jewish poeple). So if someone reads something that is anti-religion and becomes an anti-semite its not going to be the writers fault.

If people write essays such as those found on the american free press which are open to interpretation....
Click to expand...

Open to interpretation? They all appear pretty factual to me.

.....and the author's do this deliberately so that conspiracy theorists can read it one way and fascists can read it another....
Click to expand...

Wow, slow down...thats a serious allegation which i think is completely untrue. To suggest that they are deliberatly puting code in their work so they can reach fasists/nazis is without any justification.
 
really Adam? without justification? According to whom? It's a tactic widely used by racists worldwide - appeal to people problems (ie. our need to get answers about mysterious events) and then lace the text with subliminal content which unnerves us and puts ideas into our heads. did you go and read the article in the AFP that I posted? It mentioned Nick Griffin, hardline racist and anti-semite leader of the BNP, without so much as a word of criticism. You need to be really careful with your reading habits - without being sceptical of peoples motivation for writing peices you could end up believing in things which make you a racist. I know this because it's all to easy to fall for this method.
 
Dot, you have to understand their motives. What they're trying to do is pull down the viel from the global conspiracy. Unfortuatly they arnt all decided who's global conspriacy it is. Be Lizards, Bilderbergas, Bohiemians, Zionists, Vatica etc. Its clear to most however that the Zionists do have quite a part to play and I wont defend them for exploring that issue. In that article they were pointing out the current propaganda issue there is for Israel and how the pro-israel poeple are also anti-muslims. On the worls stage and in conspraicy literature this kind of thing is very important. I didnt however notice any signs of anti-semitism in it.

I don't think they said anything about Nick Griffon that is cause for alarm.
 
but you can see how jewish people could be pro-israel for the right reasons (ie. the end to centuries of persecution) and offended at the accusation that somehow they're involved in something which has lead to the death and persecution of others. Also I don't think it's true to say that *all* zionists are anti muslim - the essence of zionism is that jewish people have the right of return to ancestral land (which some have called into question). Of course extreme zionism calls for all arab 'invaders' to be chucked out and ignores the regions history of tribal groups sharing the area between them (although not always peacefully!).

The fact that zionism has become popular amongst the diaspora since the holocaust is unsurprising, and especially so in the US. That the jewish lobby is a powerful voice is again unsurprising, and that the US remains staunchly pro-Israel (despite their continued breaking of UN mandates and international law) is a natural concequence of that.

I agree that it seems odd that jewish people seem to have a disproportionately strong influence on foreign policy considering the percentage of them in the US. However from a historical perspective its not that surprising - many powerful jewish families fled the nazis in the 30s taking their money and resources with them, not to mention the strong family ties to relatives alreasdy living in the states. In the US, as has been shown by the Enron scandal amongst countless other examples, money buys policy, and the jewish lobby's influence on the Republican party is directly through financial support (as well as the zionists and pro-israelis in congress and the senate).

That there is no similar pro-palestinian or pro-arab influence is no surprise either, as there isn't a history of mass Arab emigration to the states. There a tactical reason for the US supporting Israel also, as it is of course (apart from the 51st state) the only overtly US friendly country on the mediterranean coast, and remains very handy for oil exporting, as well as it's position as a military base for the US.

So where's the conspiracy? Perhaps some of the same people who support Zionism were involved in the Kennedy plot, the CIA missions in the Middle East; perhaps some were involved in Vietnam. Probably we'll never know for sure. On the whole though, I contend that the only real connection is that very rich people with control over the media, the arms industry etc etc tend to work together to fulfil their main objectives - mass control over consumer markets, territory and resources.
 
There's two main reasons why poeple are suspicous of Zionism in conspiracy circles...

1. They are powerful.

2. They can not be questioned.

Its as simple with that, added in with their destructive attitude on the international front. To me, they are enough reasons to be suspicous.

It's right to say there are Jews who are pro-Israel but do not like its current actions. But unfortunatly these people are silenced or hushed up. There was a protest in New York not long ago by anti-Israel Jews but it got very little coverage in the mainstream media.

I havent come accross anyone who believes that Zionism is anything more than a tool, not as certain poeple would want you to believe the actual perpetraters of the conspiracy. I was reading this article earlier today and I think we should ask ourselves why people naturally asume that anti-semitism is the message being put out by conspiracy theorists. The biggest creaters of anti-Jewsish paranoia are the Jews themselves. Remember how the Canadian Jewish Congress with help from the ADL managed to shut down various Icke lectures.
 
The article about Icke which you have linked to (at the Wordsmith site) seems quite balanced and sensible to me.

You write about Zionism as if it were one movement with a single and unified creed. It isn't. Zionism was simply a movement which sought the establishment of a Jewish state in the area called Palestine. Palestine has never yet been a country. Palestinian activitists, likewise, seek the establishment of a Palestinian state within that area. These two goals are not mutually exclusive. It is simply (ugh?) a question of deciding where the borders should lie.

Zionism is not a single movement. Zionists simply support, in general, the continued existence of an Israeli state. There is no other definition. There are Zionists who are left wing and others who are right wing. Some Zionists support the establishment of a Palestinian state. Others say that it already exists and is called Jordan. All manner of other opinions exists between and outside these simple definitions. WRT religion - Zionists maybe authodox, semi mystical, reformed, agnostic or aetheist.

Describing someone as a Zionist is like describing someone as a Christian or Muslim. Equally it is like describing someone as a liberal, conservative or socialist. The term has no fixed meaning since it will mean something different to all different people.

Use of the words 'Zionism' and 'Zionist' is nearly always pejorative. There is no Zionist Conspiracy. It's a myth perpetuated by evil and idiotic people.
 
I had a nice neat reply all typed out here. My connection timed out and I lost it.

Dot23,
Of course extreme zionism calls for all arab 'invaders' to be chucked out and ignores the regions history of tribal groups sharing the area between them (although not always peacefully!).
Click to expand...
Since 1948 and 1967, 420 palestinian village have been abandoned and have been, or will be buldozed into oblivion. Hundreds of thousands, at the very least, were edit dispossessededit. `Tribal groups' indeed. that's a bit of Israeli government misinformation.
"Oh, there were just a few tribes of bedouin and tuaregs before we came." Yeah, right!

Palestinian historical info, here:
http://www.palestine-net.com/history/

Simon,
Describing someone as a Zionist is like describing someone as a Christian or Muslim. Equally it is like describing someone as a liberal, conservative or socialist. The term has no fixed meaning since it will mean something different to all different people.
Click to expand...

Nowadays, `Zionist' has Also come to mean the kind of ultra-Nationalism symbolised by Sharon and Yahu and their actions. You're right It is pejorative.
Edward Said, Palestinian exile and academic, essay, here:
http://www.ahram.org.eg/weekly/2002/582/op2.htm

There is no Zionist Conspiracy.
Click to expand...
Seventy odd years ago the theory was used to help justify marching six million men, women and children into the extermination camps. The `Great Global Zionist Conspiracy Theory' still has the bloody fingerprints of Hitler, Goebels and Himmler all over it. No one wants to even discuss it? Not surprising really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top