The Bilderberg Conference

[Anonymous]

Absolutely - and this did concern them - up until very recently - as it was a media black-list subject. Why media blacklist if secrecy was not considered important?

What do you mean by "media blacklist"?

 

[Leaferne]

Stuart: Well, it's a well known fact, sunny Jim, that there's a secret society of the five wealthiest people in the world, known as "The Pentaverate", who run everything in the world, including the newspapers, and meet tri-annually at a secret country mansion in Colorado known as "The Meadows."
Tony: So, who's in this Pentaverate?
Stuart: The Queen, the Vatican, the Gettys, the Rothschilds, and Colonel Sanders before he went tits up. Oooh I hated the Colonel, with his wee beady eyes and that smug look on his face. "Oooh you're gonna buy my chicken, oooh!"
Charlie: Dad? How can you hate...the Colonel?!
Stuart: Because he puts an addictive chemical in his chicken that makes you crave it fortnightly, smart-arse.

sorry, couldn't help myself

 

[Bilderberger]

Media Blacklist...

What do you mean by "media blacklist"?

The following are extracts from Robin Ramsay's Conspiracy Theories (published Pocket Essentials 2000)

In the early post-world war 2 other groups of elite managers were formed. One was the Bilderberg group, begun in 1954 by the Polish eminence grise Joseph Retinger, pobablythough not provably - working for the British secret service, and funded by the CIA. For almost 30 years Bilderberg was simply not reported on by the major Anglo-American media. One British journalist, who tried to write about the group in the Financial Times, Gordon Tether, had those columns pulled from the paper, eventually lost his job after 20 years, and ended up publishing the columns which the FT refused to print, including three on Bilderberg, in a little pamplet (the banned articles of C Gordon Tether , C Gordon Tether, ISBN 00905821009)

In the last couple of years, apparently in response to the stories about the group on the Net, Bilderberg has ceased to be quite as secretive as it used to be and a couple of major British newspapers, The Mail on Sunday and The Scotsman, have published pieces - albeit not very good pieces - about the group. In late 1999 for the first time in the group's existence, the minutes of that year's meeting were leaked, extracts were published in the magazine The Big Issue, and the whole document was posted on the interenet. This remarkable event was not recorded by any of the British media. It was apparently not a story (no cleraer indication of the influence of Bilderberg could be asked for, really, than its ability to persuade the entire British media to ignore those minutes......

Writers Footnote - By using "persuade" here I am not suggesting that Bilderberg rang around the media and shut it down, thought that may have happened. My suspicion would be that self-censorship rather than censorship is the order of the day. Why write a stroy that you know your editor is not going to be interested in?

(all emphasis my own)

 

[Mike_Pratt33]

One British journalist, who tried to write about the group in the Financial Times, Gordon Tether, had those columns pulled from the paper, eventually lost his job after 20 years

They must be really powerful if it takes them 20 years to get a guy sacked.

 

[Bilderberger]

They must be really powerful if it takes them 20 years to get a guy sacked.

I think you misunderstand (willfully? - I am not sure if you are claiming ignorance for effect?)

It refers to him working for FT for 20 years before getting sacked not him getting sacked 20 years after writing the articles!

EDIT - Just thought I'd better double check the dates on this....

A quick Google turned up the following

On one of the few occasions when Bilderberg meetings were mentioned in a major British newspaper, the outcome was quite interesting. In the 'Lombard' column of the Financial Times, C. Gordon Tether wrote on May 6 1975: 'If the Bilderberg Group is not a conspiracy of some sort, it is conducted in such a way as to give a remarkably good imitation of one.' In a column written almost a year later, for the March 3 l976 edition, Tether wrote: 'The Bilderbergers have always insisted upon clothing their comings and goings in the closest secrecy. Until a few years back, this was carried to such lengths that their annual conclave went entirely unmarked in the world's press. In the more recent past, the veil has been raised to the extent of letting it be known that the meetings were taking place. But the total ban on the reporting of what went on has remained in force....Any conspiratologist who has the Bilderbergers in his sights will proceed to ask why it is that, if there is so little to hide, so much effort is devoted to hiding it.

This column never appeared: it was censored by the Financial Times editor Mark Fisher (himself a member of the Trilateral Commission), and Tether was finally dismissed from the 'Lombard' column in August 1976 . '

http://www.bilderberg.org/bildhist.htm

 

[Bilderberger]

Just a thought - should this thread be moved to the Conspiracy section? (seeing as it now contains discussion over and above the original announcement).

I note that there is a Bilderberg 2002 Conference thread on that section.

Perhaps the two could be combined into an overall Bilderberg thread?

I do know how you Mods like to keep things neat and tidy

 

[Mighty_Emperor]

Just a thought - should this thread be moved to the Conspiracy section? (seeing as it now contains discussion over and above the original announcement).

I note that there is a Bilderberg 2002 Conference thread on that section.

Perhaps the two could be combined into an overall Bilderberg thread?

I do know how you Mods like to keep things neat and tidy

Yes sorry I put it in Announcement as a (admittedly poor) joke and was going to move it over - and now is that time

I'll leave this to run for a bit and then merge them all into one thread.

Carry on.

Emps

 

[Mike_Pratt33]

I think you misunderstand (willfully? - I am not sure if you are claiming ignorance for effect?)

Willfully? - I suppose so, but thats the way I read it first time.

Even so 5 months delay doesn't seem like they were in any hurry

 

[Bilderberger]

Willfully? - I suppose so, but thats the way I read it first time.

Even so 5 months delay doesn't seem like they were in any hurry

I would imagine that ruling the world (secretly) is a rather time consuming job. Its not 9 to 5 when you're the puppet master pulling the strings of all our lifes. When could they find the time?

That said, you'd think they'd employ minions to sort these things out. They could wear smart coloured uniforms, be rather thick and hang around the Bilderberg headquarters in a dormant volcano by Hawaii.

 

[Anonymous]

Who controls the British Crown?
Who keeps the metric system down?
We do, we do.

Who keeps Atlantis off the maps?
Who keeps the Martians under wraps?
We do, we do.

Who holds back the electric car?
Who makes Steve Guttenberg a star?
We do, we do.

Who robs cave fish of their sight?
Who rigs every Oscar night?
We do, we do!