A lot of the time, if anyone mentions or raises questions about the Bilderberg meetings they get dismissed as a conspiracy theorist by some of the people on this site. The type of people that make these assertions is of course unknown, so they could be trolls; however, I know quite well of the strong distaste towards 'conspiracy' topics amongst activist groups, and I understand that the activists, or should I say the people in general who are concerned about the world and want to make a change, are most often the ones who are most dismissive of others concerns whenever they could be deemed 'conspiracy'.

I think this is due to people wanting whatever they're concerned about to be taken seriously by others, it very much brings back to mind the schoolyard mentality of wanting to be liked by everyone.

But, Bilderberg?

Do people honestly not think there's any conflict of interest in any of the participants of it?

Bilderberg choose the leaders of countries, the leaders of banks, what wars happen and which side wins. With a smidget of research this sort of information can be found out. We can also trawl through the mounds upon mounds of mainstream dis-info that has been put out in a desperate attempts to try and subdue interest in the issue.

This is a call out to all those who haven't already looked into the Bilderberg group.

Please do so at you're own leisure.

Here's a funny little set of quotes from some of it's most prominent members:

Viscount Davignon, to the Telegraph newspaper: “When people say this is a secret government of the world I say that if we were a secret government of the world, we should be bloody ashamed of ourselves.”

then on the other hand, we have David Rockefeller:

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected the promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National autodetermination practiced in past centuries."

I'd like to highlight the section saying,

"SUPRANATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY OF AN INTELLECTUAL ELITE AND WORLD BANKERS IS SURELY PREFERABLE TO THE NATIONAL AUTO-DETERMINATION PRACTICED IN PAST CENTURIES"

I think there's something more to these people than meets the eye.