Bilderberg.org

[CJ]

Last year the Canadian media outed Bilderberg...this year its Turkey and the Netherlands! So whats so SECRET about Bilderberg now...I know its not March, but is this a "March Hare" season...lets get over excited....has this become the NWO design, leaking their propaganda? I wonder.

[marektysis]

Dear Cj,
Leaking or hiding. No one great media ( NYT, washinton Times, the FT, or other great media) is speaking about them or only to denounce the nutshell we are.When coming to our encounter in Versailles, Mr Rockefeller himself is speaking to Tony of good chef-coqs and good Restaurants in England, in which Tony will never invited in in his whole life.


...Just a few gentlemen and gentiles women gathering under the rules of Chatham House, to say the consensus rules.
But what do you understand by the word 'consensus' ?
There is a lot to say about 'consensus' and more than people generally believe. I could expose this in not so much words if you desire.

By discovering the real sense of consensus, you will understand the intellectual cuisine of Bilderberg..

Marek

[CJ]

Merk

I agree...you get consensus at a given level. This is important, like selling a product, you get the buyer to agree with certain points, after a while and many points agreed on, you close the deal. At Bilderberg, they might reach a consensus, that Iran is a dangerous state which should be contained...they agree on sanctions (already in effect). By taking all these small steps, you actually reduce your options...like the buyer, they now feel a bit of a fool if they don`t buy...

...so when the NWO carries out a false flag attack and blames it on Iran...the consensus has been lifted to such a level, that the majority of Bilderberg`s, NWO players, media, military and those nobodies in parliament are out of options....the public have been mentally prepared and either war is announced, or they just attack!

Once you understand this process, knowing exactly whats being said at Bilderberg is of minor use....many 1, 2 and 3 timer Bilderbergs are "MESSAGE REPEATERS", they go off and mix in their work/social circles...remember, the folk who get invited to Bilderberg are already highly respected and political attendees like Mandelson can deliver a "NWO message", knowing it will be shown on TV and reported in the print media all over Europe and even the wider world...

...the NWO agenda is led by consensus, but only upto a point. We invaded Iraq to remove Saddam....this was the consensus then, but we now know the elite had a much higher agenda...today the consensus is Iranian nukes. But the agenda is much higher and only a handful of Bilderberg`s might know this agenda and they certainly won`t be talking about it at the next Bilderberg meeting.

[WesLee]

hi CJ,
I agree with you, but if the bilderberg are 'movers', do you have an idea who might be the big players? Or who/what/where makes them move in the same direction?

greetz
wes

[marektysis]

Now strangely, all the well sold ideas as 'the end of petrol' are giving attendees to bilderberg meeting from the world of atomic energy, wind farms etc...no petrol, we have to choose atomic energy and treated coal, of windfarm or seafarms.The way consensus is leaded in effectively fooling a lot of people to forced temporary doctrine giving the believing people a pesudo common credence while the big business is pocketing the money.But i have made the constate that Bilderberg IS NEVER WORKING SHORT TIME VIEWS. The creation of doctrine ( military, business, social, energy, policy) with the help of the media, bankers,policy, secret services, governments is always a long trip.

Marek

[CJ]

Hi Weslee...they are very good questions!

We all know that as a general rule, people like to be led...its no different at Bilderberg. the inner circle, those who are always associated with Bilderberg have an important role in guiding guests to reach the set "CONSENSUS", the inner circle are also led by policies set out by Chatham House and the CFR.

The core value within the NWO is "GREED", but addiction to political power is a close second. The financial centers are greed based and political centers are...well you know. Wealth runs the agenda. MI6, the CIA are fully engaged in saiting the financial agenda...toppling governments, starting wars, carrying out invasions and of course, "THE WAR ON TERROR"!

Who am I to say, who waves the batton, but I strongly suspect the elite families (finance) led by Lord Jacob Rothschild of the Rothschild family would be a fair start. However, I must point out, that many alternative news sites and consipracy sites avoid the Rothschilds like the plague...I WONDER WHY?

Remember Weslee, I`m on a long trip, I know some modes of transport, I know some timings, I know the start and my final destination. Like myself, there are many others making this trip, but we don`t have the full itinerary.

Everywhere you go, you`ll find people trying their hardest to stop you...very often, their lack of action, their ignoring of vital points gives them away. Even this forum is "dirty"...all groups are infected by the NWO. My belief is to talk from the hip and get people to start thinking for themselves and while you agree with me on this thread. I`d recommend you try and find your own way and thats my big gripe with this site, I need people to question what I post, but thanks for the reply.

Question everything, believe no one!

[marektysis]

CONSENSUS- A SEMANTIC CROOKERY
Between consentiment and consensus the second term is passing better in the UNO organization.
In the past between the stoïcian the term " sunkatathesis "is designing assintiment agreement from the mind.In the midden age
The theme is explored by Richard de Saint Victor (1110-1173).The occasionnalist of the modern history to begin with Malebranche are wondering if the freedom of man is not consisting to consent or refuse to consent to divine interventions.

Today the word ‘consentement’ is eclipsed by its pseudnym ‘consensus’. These two words are taked in different acceptations that are interesting us directly. The first is given the sense to go accordingly to an adhesion to an affirmation.

The second sens is given to UN documents by instance in signifying decision not to oppose to a document .In the first sense it is signifying a decision to assess a truth .In the UN meaning not to oppose a meaning given by others .Today the sense given is dangerous because by meaning we may think it is an acceptance while it is referring to truth acceptance without reality behind.


In such a way adhesion to not verified principles is made easier by the human mind although it is not reckognized as truth by the human mind.

Marek

[CJ]

On this sites main page, is this years Bilderberg participants list, minus Europes royals...even Tony suspects that this list is a "Bilderberg leak".

So I ask the question again. Why is Bilderberg leaking?

We`ve had serious Bilderberg stalkers writing huge scripts of "alledged" conversations from Bilderberg meetings, so whats going on?

As I`ve said before. I think there are at least two layers of knowledge, maybe more. There is the central core, the people who go every (almost) year and those who may go two or three years....I call these, "messengers", and you know what, "they" don`t mind us knowing the basics of their chats, so we interested parties are near this level. Part of this function, is to mis-direct us and to avert serious shocks in the corporate world.

We must still hound Bilderberg, but we must think and speculate on a higher level. There are many on this forum who quote key players, its as if their real interest lies in deplomacy....I beg you all to raise your game, we must take what we know and inflate it with our imagination, we must speculate.

Their is a post on this forum, which is simple, but highly dynamic. I won`t mention the specific post, but its about "smoking bans" and the topic is like a flower in bloom, this is the way.

[Maximus]

The leak list is only a PARTIAL LIST. Only well-known members are on the list. There is 73 names. About 50 others person are invited. It is the same ratio that at the 2006 Bilderberg Conference.

[CJ]

I`ve asked Danial Estulin why/how he knows so much about what goes on behind Bilderberg`s closed doors. My post is number 18. I await a reply with interest.

[CJ]

Well, here we all (sorry, some) are pondering whats been said at this years Bilderberg meeting. I`ve done Bilderberg news searches on BBC and Google. Both provide scraps...minor break through`s. Turkey, Dalas US, Neatherlands, a few Central Asian states and of course, a swarm of alternative internet based news sites.

Yet, Daniel Estulin has all the inside info on this years meeting and his quill work can be seen on nearly all alternative news sites. Do any of the editors on these sites ask Estulin how he manages to get his story...does Estulin have a high level Bilderberg source and as a result, is Estulin being used to feed us rubbish?

You`d think that people like Tucker and Estulin would be well known to the CIA, MI6 and Mossad, you`d think that after years of Bilderberg leaks, some alledged entire Bilderberg conversations, yes, you`d think that Western SIS would know who was Tuckers and Estulin`s sources were, yet nothing appears to of have been done, to limit these leaks, if they are genuine.

I`m "not" saying Tucker and Estulin are knowingly working for Bilderberg, or some other NWO org. They may both believe that they are aquiring Bilderberg information by hard investigation, but I`d be inclined to believe they are both victims and are being feed information which at best is one half-step removed form what we can read in the NWO controlled media.

When one considers that all major leftwing media in the US is owned/controlled by the far-right, because the elite knows they can`t (as of now) stop people aspiring to think socialist/leftwing thoughts, so by controlling the media they see and read, they know where the left is and they get enough feed-back to know if these poor people are falling for the manufactured script.

I`m middle, but leaning more to the left in light of our deminishing prospects. But I don`t read any left-wing media. I read The Times (& Sunday), The Telegraph, and the FT. I alo read The Newstatesman, which is supposed to be left leaning, but I find in general that its bones are rightwing. You should read media which is targeted at the key voters, the ones who decide elections, you can then get the people to where you want them and the less fixing you`ll need to do. In the US its down to one or two key states and that makes it an easy fix.

The Guardian is supposed to be Britain`s most leftwing serious newspaper. Yet, in the runup to the Iraq invasion, it was turning out "propaganda" which was so pro-war that I couldn`t bring myself to finish these related articles due to the blatant lies and this the paper of the so called thinking left.

So in light of what I`ve just said and if you disagree, please reply. Its only natural to believe that alternative news sites are being infected with NWO generated material and in some cases are actual SIS fronts...one can only speculate on which one`s.

When I get food from the top table, somethings up and I start asking serious questions, so should you!