"Why Does The Mainstream Media Ignore The Bilderberg Group?" (Article)

[Dazed]

Perhaps you could shed some light on some of their evil plans. CE can't.

Their evil plan is to put the chief of the NSA and the CEO of google in the same room and let whatever happens, happen. It's not the talking points on the event itinerary I think would be interesting. It's the networking between the most powerful people and what could result from that. But the vast majority of people here have this beautiful faith in the nobility of the world's bankers and corporate CEOs.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Most important thing to the rich and powerful: Maintaining or increasing wealth and power.

They're not getting together to discuss what kind of kittens to buy for all the children of the world.

Thanks. So you agree that it logically follows that people with the
resources of the Bilderberg attendees would conspire to subvert democracy simply because they can, as we both agree that's human nature.

While an accurate statement about human nature in general, there's a significant problem when it comes to the idea of the rich and powerful conspiring to gain more wealth and power.

The proponents of such a theory believe that "the 1%" already control much of the global wealth and have much of the global power available, and that the plebs don't have much of either. If they want more wealth and power, they need to grab it from other rich and powerful individuals.

These meetings likely aren't conspiracies against the general public nearly as much as they are individuals attempting to get on each others' good side so that they or their organization don't get cannibalized.

 

[yodaluver28]

Gate's foundation probably started as an effort to mitigate the entire world hating him for being so unreasonably wealthy.

Or maybe he's a decent person who wanted to help people with some of the money he's EARNED. I don't see how Gates' fortune is unreasonable since he started a business that millions of people choose to buy products from every day. There are no guns to anyone's heads. Every one is free to buy Apple instead.

 

[Dazed]

While an accurate statement about human nature in general, there's a significant problem when it comes to the idea of the rich and powerful conspiring to gain more wealth and power.

The proponents of such a theory believe that "the 1%" already control much of the global wealth and have much of the global power available, and that the plebs don't have much of either. If they want more wealth and power, they need to grab it from other rich and powerful individuals.

These meetings likely aren't conspiracies against the general public nearly as much as they are individuals attempting to get on each others' good side so that they or their organization don't get cannibalized.

This assumes they can gain nothing from collusion. See my last statement.

 

[dafydd]

Gate's foundation probably started as an effort to mitigate the entire world hating him for being so unreasonably wealthy.

I never hated him. If you are jealous of the rich then that's your problem.

 

[dafydd]

Their evil plan is to put the chief of the NSA and the CEO of google in the same room and let whatever happens, happen. It's not the talking points on the event itinerary I think would be interesting. It's the networking between the most powerful people and what could result from that. But the vast majority of people here have this beautiful faith in the nobility of the world's bankers and corporate CEOs.

Evidence?

 

[carlitos]

But the vast majority of people here have this beautiful faith in the nobility of the world's bankers and corporate CEOs.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/straw-man.html

 

[dafydd]

Thanks. So you agree that it logically follows that people with the resources of the Bilderberg attendees would conspire to subvert democracy simply because they can, as we both agree that's human nature.

Evidence? The possibility that they are doing some good does not exist?

 

[JayUtah]

Their evil plan is to put the chief of the NSA and the CEO of google in the same room and let whatever happens, happen.

Can you name one thing that has happened, that was provably the result of the Bilderbergers' prior meetings?

It's the networking between the most powerful people and what could result from that.

Rainbow unicorns flying out of Zombie Adolf Hitler's butt falls into the category of things that "could" happen. We want to know if you have any evidence of what has happened. Clearly you don't. Therefore you're just blowing smoke.

But the vast majority of people here have this beautiful faith in the nobility of the world's bankers and corporate CEOs.

No. Rejecting your paranoia does not amount to irrational trust. One can be skeptical of the motives of powerful interests without waving one's hands frantically about the Bilderbergers.

 

[JayUtah]

This assumes they can gain nothing from collusion.

You assume that gathering means collusion.
You assume that collusion must be for their own gain, necessarily at others' expense.

In other words, you assume everything. You're begging the question.

See my last statement.

See the preceding four pages of rebuttal.

 

[jaydeehess]

Dazed, since no one else cares to answer a simple question, its now your turn.

Name one plan arranged by the BG that has come to fruition.

Btw I too have a healthy wariness about the motives of the rich and powerful. However that does not extend to irrational paranoia about them to the point where you see nefarious intent in absolutely everything a rich person does.

Gates? really ???
Gates started his charity out of real concern and a self recognized ability to help. There is no evidence whatsoever to back your assertion that he 'probably' did this to alleviate people's supposed dislike of him due to the fact that he is rich.

Ted Turner has done similar.

Yes people hated Rockefeller and he was one of the first to begin alturistic charities.

The company I work for arranges food bank food drives and donates a matching amount that is raised in our communities. We have also run campaigns to re-unite families that have split for various reasons and built stadiums and libraries as well as donated money and advertising to smaller local charity groups such as cat shelters. Do they do this because people have ill feelings towards cable TV companies. Yep, partially. However I take part not because I have to but because I want to and I'm just a company plebe.

Personally I admire many people who manage to make themselves wealthy. I personally do not have the drive and stamina to do what people like Gates or Jobs or even Bernanke. I have less admiration for others who were born to wealth and seem to hold the creation of personal wealth above all other concerns, people such as, to my mind and IMHO, Mitt Romney and those responsible for Bain Capital and similar investment groups.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Yes thank you. I answered the question which is more than CE seems capable of doing. I still don't know what the Bilderbergers are being accused of.

I think that they are being accused of meeting. I have seen no evidence of anything else.

 

[jaydeehess]

You assume that gathering means collusion.
You assume that collusion must be for their own gain, necessarily at others' expense.

In other words, you assume everything. You're begging the question.

I assume that the Bilderbergers began as a gathering of wealthy individuals who wanted to play a tournament of backgammon. Back in that day though they could not be seen gathering for such a frivolous reason so they put out press releases saying they were discussing the effects of world events and what their companies should do in response.

However now, when it really would not matter to most people that all they are really doing is playing a very exclusive board game tournament they have so many decades of saying they are actually doing work of some gravity they cannot now come clean.
it all fits!!

However that's just my assumption and is just as valid as Dazed's

See the preceding four pages of rebuttal.

Bah, humbug, the world IS a loaded gun and they are pointing it at me.

 

[jaydeehess]

I think that they are being accused of meeting. I have seen no evidence of anything else.

,,,, and of releasing their agenda for said meetings, to the world's press.

,,,,,,,,,,,oh ,and of banning Alex Jones from attending even if he issues himself press pass. Can't forget that!

 

[dafydd]

I think that they are being accused of meeting.

The swine!!!

 

[Dazed]

Dazed, since no one else cares to answer a simple question, its now your turn.

Name one plan arranged by the BG that has come to fruition.

Kindly provide a list of the Bilderberg group's plans, and we can determine which ones have come to fruition.

 

[Dazed]

Rainbow unicorns flying out of Zombie Adolf Hitler's butt falls into the category of things that "could" happen. .

Firstly, Godwin's law. (for the second time in this thread for this who wish to go back.)

Secondly, this is crude, as well as incorrect. This is not something that could happen. NSA backdoors in google and illegal surveillance is something that could conceivably happen, and also has a historical precedent. (https://www.aclu.org/national-security/aclu-v-nsa-challenge-illegal-spying)

I'm not saying this has happened. I'm saying if nobody's looking for it, it's a lot easier to pull the wool over our eyes. But let's leave the vigilant oversight of those we've given power over us to those who are qualified.

Who is that again?

 

[carlitos]

Kindly provide a list of the Bilderberg group's plans, and we can determine which ones have come to fruition.

You seem to have your burden of proof reversed. Please try again.

 

[JayUtah]

Edited by Tricky: 

Edited for off topic stuff that got sent to AAH.

This is not something that could happen.

Nonsense. Reductio ad absurdum. The most you can say for your theory is that it has a non-zero probability of happening. I assert there is a non-zero probability of Zombie Hitler pooping gay unicorns. A vastly smaller probability than covert surveillance, I grant you. But you're missing the qualitative failure in your argument: you're relying on mere non-impossibility. It's simply the argument from silence/ignorance. The reason that line of reasoning always fails is because all it does is to identify the desired hypothesis as belonging to an infinite class of such non-impossible things. A proponent applies an arbitrary preference to his hypothesis to elevate it up and away from Bigfoot, space aliens, and shape-shifting reptilians. The reductio ad absurdum rebuttal reveals that biased elevation.

We note further that you can present absolutely zero evidence that anything you say about the Bilderbergers has come to pass. You can't cite a single example of a Bilderberger plan that really happened. All you can do is wave your hands wildly about what "might" happen and speculate nonsensically about what you think may have happened in the past. In short, you have exactly as much evidence for your claim as I do that there exists a Zombie Hitler, rainbow unicorns, and a sphincter big enough to put that show on the road.

Evidence of actuality is what every conspiracy theorist lacks, and what makes them all unworthy of rational attention.

NSA backdoors in google and illegal surveillance is something that could conceivably happen...

"Has a non-zero probability of occurring."
"No actual evidence it has occurred."

You need to learn the difference between actuality and conceivability.

I'm not saying this has happened.

I'm not saying unicorns are flying out of Hitler's butt.

But let's leave the vigilant oversight of those we've given power over us to those who are qualified.

Who is that again?

Not you. Too paranoid, and you don't know what evidence is.

 

[JayUtah]

Kindly provide a list of the Bilderberg group's plans...

Why should we do your homework? You mean you don't actually know what the Bilderbergers talk about?