Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Israel to U.S. : Now Deal with Syria and Iran -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Doug R who wrote (16640)	10/6/2007 6:08:41 PM
From: sea_urchin	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 22250

Doug > The whole crowd is generally in agreement on the direction in which they want to take the world. I think this is the central sentence of your response and it turns around the word "they". Who are "they"? And is there a king or a don -- I'm not joking? Someone has to be in charge and there has to be a hierarchy of authority or command. To my knowledge, a document to this effect has never been found. > To keep that slice and expand it is the goal of each individual and the framework within which to do it is already set and agreed upon by the group. Do you know this or are you merely asserting it on the basis of what seems reasonable? > If someone someone acquired enough wealth and power outside the group, they would be approached and asked to join. The condition being that the prospective newcomer must agree to operate within the group's already set framework and also not to publicize it. That's quite logical and I would imagine, without the secrecy clause, forms the basis of admission to many clubs. But there are many wealthy and powerful people who would never be party to illegal acts so there would have to be a hidden agenda to ensure that only people with similar ideas are admitted. In other words, the members must be committed to acts which are outside of generally accepted or international law and it's that which worries me about your "tarring all the Bilderberg members with the same brush" because I don't believe people like Jimmy Carter would be prepared to do illegal acts. > The group does not have to decide every day which way they will direct the world. That's already been decided and is inherent in the group's structure This is what I'm trying to say, that only like-minded people would participate in the schemes you have in mind and that would, by necessity, exclude many wealthy and powerful ones who do not see eye-to-eye with the group. Now, do you, or the sources you refer to, know any of this as a fact or is it simply conjecture based on the concept of the NWO conspiracy? I'm sure you're also aware of the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion which attempted to attribute the secret organization to a Jewish conspiracy? > If Dr. Kelly was a threat to the members of the sub-group responsible for the illegal invasion of Iraq (a rather large sub-group I'd say) it wouldn't take the entire Bilderberg Group to mobilize against him and cover it all up. All it would take is Blair and maybe a couple others (another, very small, subgroup). Kelly was a threat to the Anglo-American invasion of Iraq because he knew as a fact that Blair's policy document concerning Saddam's WMDs was fiction and that there were no WMDs. And it was the fiction of the WMDs which Bush and the neocons used to justify the invasion of Iraq. As far as I'm concerned, the main players in the Kelly situation can be identified and one doesn't need to hypothesize anyone else. Likewise, it makes no difference whether his "suicide" was performed by MI5, MI6 or a US group. > Kennedy planned to break the CIA, withdraw from Viet Nam, dismantle the Federal Reserve system THEN he publically declared himself an enemy to the very people we're talking about while bringing them closer to the light of day. He was clearly a threat. And you can add to that his opposition to Israel's nuclear program. Clearly, to decide on and carry out his assassination required very few people so, once again, I would suggest that it is unnecessary to postulate the large Bilderberg group. A handful of powerful, determined Americans would have been sufficient. On the subject of major crimes committed by Americans on Americans we can add 9/11. And again, a big international crowd like the Bilderbergs would have been unnecessary.