BILDERBERG GROUP EXPLAINED

[Solar]

How do we know this isn't an effort to discredit the Bilderbergers --- by the Bilderbergers themselves?


Now that they are internationally suspect (in the eyes of the Illuminati-fearing tinfoil-wearing "intelligentsia"), isn't it reasonable they'd want to downplay their importance by having palpably-suspect people try to discredit them?


As long as you're looking at THEM, you're not looking at the REAL conspiracy, see. And the one after that, and after that.

Sleight of hand. :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :))

[msbobbie]

So...I assume you have a point?

I was responding to your reply #6.  Did you have a point?

[msbobbie]

Of course not. Why bandy words with a fool who's incapable of seeing the plain truth that's so apparent to you?

If anyone's gotten to the second sentence of this post, my theory is that conspiratorialism is a self-administered intelligence test that proves the insightfullness of the test-taker. Msbobbie's no exception.

A little bit of challenge to the various pronouncements proves I'm too stupid to see the oh-so-obvious truth, truth that's obvious to msbobbie, which leaves two options - elevate the nose so as not to be troubled by the stupid unbeliever or redouble efforts to try to beat the challenger into submission with a tsunami of text, but not of facts.

Watch those fingers, arpad; when you start pointing one, you have three pointing back at yourself.

[Solar]

I was responding to your reply #6.  Did you have a point?

Yes, obviously one that went over your head.

[arpad]

Watch those fingers, arpad; when you start pointing one, you have three pointing back at yourself.

Anybody else want to advance a hypothesis for conspiratorialism? I think it's pretty clear that "stupid" isn't a viable hypothesis so if anyone else is reading this care to pick at my "self-administered intelligence test" explanation? msbobbie's has no worthwhile response to make to the idea so is responding as if it were a personal attack.

[quiller]

Anybody else want to advance a hypothesis for conspiratorialism? I think it's pretty clear that "stupid" isn't a viable hypothesis so if anyone else is reading this care to pick at my "self-administered intelligence test" explanation? msbobbie's has no worthwhile response to make to the idea so is responding as if it were a personal attack.

 

Sleight of hand. :)) :)) :)) :)) :)) :))

Triple-think becomes a way of life to propagandists.

What's to say that the loons in the Truther movement are just trying to become national laughingstocks, deliberately undermining efforts to open any serious investigation (before witnesses do die of old age).

Did George Soros fund the 9/11 attacks, in order to --- well, that's another conspiracy, yes?

[msbobbie]

The worst enemy the United States has is it’s people who are too self absorbed to pay attention to what is going on around them; in their communities, their State or our Federal government, much less world events and how it affects our Republic.

There has been concern over the stability of the U.S. Dollar for quite some time and quite a few organizations and several nations have considered replacing the dollar as the monetary standard at least since 2007 and more so since S&P downgraded our credit rating.  It has been reported in the Wall Street Journal and by World Net Daily among others.


The United Kingdom’s Market Oracle issued this report in December 2007.

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article2942.html

(I have to add that this was after Democrats had been in control of the United States Congress for only 1 year)

Two years ago

The UN Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD) has said the system of currencies and capital rules which binds the world economy is not working properly, and was largely responsible for the financial and economic crises.

It added that the present system, under which the dollar acts as the world's reserve currency , should be subject to a wholesale reconsideration.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/currency/6152204/UN-wants-new-global-currency-to-replace-dollar.html


Here is an IMF report from early this year:

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/shocking-new-imf-report-the-u-s-dollar-needs-to-be-replaced-as-the-world-reserve-currency-and-that-sdrs-could-constitute-an-embryo-of-global-currency


More here:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=&q=the+u.s.+dollar+and+world+currency&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS370US356&ie=UTF-8&aq=1h&oq=


Myself and others choose to consider the possibilities of what we are in for.  Then there are others who choose to ignore those possibilities.

.

[msbobbie]

Back to the Bilderberg Group.

Agenda 21 (the U.N. Plan for a One World Order) IS real.  I believe the Bilderberg Group is supportive of this plan and aim to get as much of it as they can for themselves, and like the CFR will use their money, power and influence to control our elections to be sure the people elected favor that plan.

[arpad]

The worst enemy the United States has is it’s people who are too self absorbed to pay attention to what is going on around them; in their communities, their State or our Federal government, much less world events and how it affects our Republic.

Probably why Ben Franklin wasn't to optimistic about the survival of the republic; he was a well known cynic. He probably would've been surprised the republic would last over two hundred years and getting pretty close to two hundred and fifty. But here we are.

And self-absorption isn't a new phenomenon, any more then is a desire to impose your authority over your fellow human beings. Both existed long before the Constitution was a gleam in the Founding Father's eyes so while our almost inconceivable wealth, by the standards of the Found Fathers, has a bearing on our tolerance for self-absorption the phenomena, and the danger it represents, aren't new.

The genius of the Constitution lies, I believe, in an appreciation for and acceptance of human failings. If you were an engineer you'd appreciate the redundancy, a concept familiar to engineers, in the division of powers and system of checks and balances that's the foundation of our government. That won't stop assaults on liberty but, like barbed wire, it slows those assaults so they can be dealt with.

My assertion is that we do deal with them.

[msbobbie]

Probably why Ben Franklin wasn't to optimistic about the survival of the republic;

Ah, yes.  “A Republic if you can keep it”. 

The day after tomorrow we (well, some of us) will celebrate the 224th anniversary of the signing of the Constitution of the United States.  Only 39 of the 55 delegates who attended that convention did sign it, but it was a majority.

Efforts continue today for another Constitutional Convention, where the whole document will be layed open for revision, word for word.

My assertion is that we do deal with them.

In the past we have dealt with them but it is becoming more difficult.  The U.N. and the Bilderbergs are promoting stuff like “sustainable development” and a one world order.  They support legislators who agree with that concept, but in order to get elected and keep getting elected; those same legislators support the welfare programs and tax the evil rich to pay for them.

Our Republic was founded on a principle of equal opportunity and personal responsibility, but in the last generation too many people have come to rely on a nanny state government to provide everything for them. They not only do not want to lose what they have, they want even more from others that have earned what they have.

Taxpayers are already outnumbered.  My fear is that gimme generation, raising another gimme generation is going to drive us over the cliff and we won’t have the Constitution to protect us.

[arpad]

Ah, yes.  “A Republic if you can keep it”. 

The day after tomorrow we (well, some of us) will celebrate the 224th anniversary of the signing of the Constitution of the United States.  Only 39 of the 55 delegates who attended that convention did sign it, but it was a majority.

Efforts continue today for another Constitutional Convention, where the whole document will be layed open for revision, word for word.

People have been trying to undermine the Constitution since the day it was signed. Even before the signing.

The legalization of slavery occurred because powerful interests were quite willing to see the Constitution still-born rather then risk putting ink to a document that might spell the end of the institution of slavery. So, a nation conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal had in its foundation document the somewhat uncomfortable acceptance of slavery.

But, we finally got around to dealing with the problem although it did take a while.

In the past we have dealt with them but it is becoming more difficult.  The U.N. and the Bilderbergs are promoting stuff like “sustainable development” and a one world order.  They support legislators who agree with that concept, but in order to get elected and keep getting elected; those same legislators support the welfare programs and tax the evil rich to pay for them.

Our Republic was founded on a principle of equal opportunity and personal responsibility, but in the last generation too many people have come to rely on a nanny state government to provide everything for them. They not only do not want to lose what they have, they want even more from others that have earned what they have.

Taxpayers are already outnumbered.  My fear is that gimme generation, raising another gimme generation is going to drive us over the cliff and we won’t have the Constitution to protect us.

You've just got to have a little faith that, given an opportunity and some time to consider, we the people will do the right thing.

As an example of all us mere proles blindly scrabbling toward the right answer, there's the diminishing momentum of the radical environmentalist movement. Our betters have been hectoring us for two decades of the crucial necessity of switching away from fossil fuels for a whole variety of reasons and I'd submit that their reasoning has been rejected along with their agenda. That's good, isn't it? Maybe the case for the demise of the radical environmentalist movement isn't as clear-cut as some others but I believe there's more then a bit of evidence to suggest that bloom is off the rose.

But if you really want to get a clear view of the slow-motion collapse of the left you've got to take a trip down memory lane to the museum of failed and forgotten lefty ideas.

Where's the unilateral nuclear disarmament movement now? Gone and largely forgotten.

How about project housing for the poor? Pornography for the explosion-addicted.

Gun control? I get some push-back from gun owners but there's no arguing with the fact that when left wing Democrats had a majority in the House, Senate and the White House the gun control crowd was persona non grata. Not a law was passed and precious little in the way of executive branch action was taken in support of the anti-gun agenda. My personal opinion is that they really are as dead as an issue as the anti-nuclear energy movement.

Then there's communism. You've got to go to a college campus to see real, live communists now and it wouldn't surprise me if some day soon they're put on display for public edification. Sort of like rare and exotic critters at the zoo. People will marvel at them and gasp at the unbelievable nonsense they spout and then go look at the peccaries. But is there much doubt that the day of the communist is past?

[taxed]

msbobbie, even if there was some post-crash conspiracy, it doesn't matter because we have our hands full anyway with our current government and economical issues...

[msbobbie]

You've just got to have a little faith that, given an opportunity and some time to consider, we the people will do the right thing.

I will soon be 70 years old.  I have seen too many changes and there have been more bad (for our Republic) than good in my opinion.

If we could rewind to the 1950s the only thing I would miss is air conditioning.

[msbobbie]

msbobbie, even if there was some post-crash conspiracy, it doesn't matter because we have our hands full anyway with our current government and economical issues...

Yep. But it is all a part of the plan, taxed, and distraction from what is going on "behind the scenes". They are still creeping forward with their plan.

[Solar]

I will soon be 70 years old.  I have seen too many changes and there have been more bad (for our Republic) than good in my opinion.

If we could rewind to the 1950s the only thing I would miss is air conditioning.

If we could go back to the 50s, I would gladly give up air if it meant killing liberalism.
Besides, the music was better.