Reed to participate in annual Bilderberg Meeting

[jakeXT]

Source: WXIA

(WXIA) -- Atlanta Mayor Kasim Reed is among nearly 150 people invited to the 62nd annual Bilderberg conference, being held this year in Copenhagen, Denmark, from May 29 to June 1

...

In the private meetings, the participants will discuss matters concerning global politics, economics and technology. The conference has released a preliminary list of key topics for discussion at this year's sessions, including:

Is the economic recovery sustainable?
Who will pay for the demographics?
Does privacy exist?
How special is the relationship in intelligence sharing?
Big sifts in technology and jobs
The future of democracy and the middle class trap
China's political and economic outlook
The new architecture of the Middle East
Ukraine
What next for Europe?
Current events

The meetings are governed by what is called the "Chatham House Rule" which stipulates that participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speakers, nor of any other participant may be revealed.



Read more: http://www.11alive.com/story/news/local/2014/05/28/reed-to-participate-in-bilderberg-group-meeting/9656857/

[DeSwiss]

1. Chatham House Rule: ''Snitches Get Stitches.''

- Boy, for a worldwide organization filled with elites and power-brokers, all bent on ruling the world -- that doesn't exist, their publicist is doing an outstanding job!


''Hillary won't tell either.''

K&R

[IDemo]

2. "middle class trap"

How do we retrieve the remaining wealth being held hostage by the Middle Class?

[L0oniX]

3. More Bilderberg Photos: Hillary Clinton

http://21stcenturywire.com/2013/06/07/more-bilderberg-photos-hillary-clinton-queen-beatrix-and-more/


...and the sheep will vote for her.

[840high]

5. ...

[dogknob]

21. Sheep? More like "hostages"

What are you going to do?

Vote Republican?

The GOP has got to GO... until then We will get more Feinsteins, more Hilarys

[OKNancy]

4. Don't go overboard with the crazy talk.

Last edited Wed May 28, 2014, 12:32 PM - Edit history (1)

Don't go overboard with the crazy talk.
Democratic Underground is not intended to be a platform for kooks and crackpots peddling paranoid fantasies with little or no basis in fact. To accommodate our more imaginative members we tolerate some limited discussion of so-called "conspiracy theories" under the following circumstances: First, those discussions are not permitted in our heavily-trafficked Main forums; and second, those discussions cannot stray too far into Crazyland (eg: chemtrails, black helicopters, 9/11 death rays or holograms, the "New World Order," the Bilderbergers, the Illuminati, the Trilateral Commission, the Freemasons, alien abduction, Bigfoot, and the like). In addition, please be aware that many conspiracy theories have roots in racism and anti-semitism, and Democratic Underground has zero tolerance for bigoted hate speech. In short, you take your chances.
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice
-------------------------

Why did I post the above?... because Skinner and the admins think it's crazy talk to twist the Bilderberg conference as some sort of spooky conspiracy talk.

[davidthegnome]

6. What!! We can't talk about Bigfoot?!?

But I could have sworn I saw him yesterday! He was going to a Bilderberger meeting!

[hibbing]

13. hehehe

[Turbineguy]

7. I have no problem with "Alien Abduction"

other than they seem to keep bringing the abductees back.

[nyabingi]

8. So in other words...

...you have freedom of speech here, just watch what you say.

Labeling someone a "conspiracy theorist" is a convenient way to shut down conversation on uncomfortable and/or unsettling topics, a way to avoid engaging alternative theories about world happenings that don't fit your frame of reference. The public's suspicion of groups like the TLC, Freemasons, and Bilderbergers, etc. is precisely because of the connection between their secrecy and their power their members hold over what happens around us. While some people with mental issues will look at the workings of these groups as almost something supernatural and nefarious, there are also those of us who believe personal inquiry and curiosity are the best ways to decide if something makes sense or not. OKNancy, you seem to be attempting to discourage personal inquiry and curiosity and that ain't good.

I've read as much available literature on the events of 9/11, from many authors (architects, engineers, etc.) who don't believe the official government-sanctioned theory of what happened, and I've read defenses of the official theory from sources who believe everything happened the way the 9/11 Commission explained. In my opinion though, I haven't seen a single defender of the official theory satisfactorily explain all the problems with the official theory. Now, to many people that will earn me the label of "kook" and "crackpot" but I've arrived at my conclusions based on my own interest in it after carefully considering both sides. I assure you I am perfectly sane and able to decide for myself what is believable and what is not.

Yes, Alex Jones and other folks on the far-right question the validity of the government's 9/11 story, but trying to lump them all under the "racist" and "anti-Semitic" umbrella is intellectually lazy and shows no attempt to consider differing viewpoints.

[msanthrope]

9. You are on a private web board. You are subject to the TOS. You retain your freedom of speech

to make your own web board, and post whatever it is you wish.

[nyabingi]

11. Thanks for letting me do that, msanthrope

[stevenleser]

14. Instead of being snarky, you should have acknowledged your mistake and moved on.

You were wrong and she corrected you.

[nyabingi]

15. Wrong about what stevenleser?

And what is the "mistake" you're referring to?

These people, and people like them, aren't worth engaging because they've dismissed hearing anything contrary to what they believe to be true. Their minds are closed, yet they probably think they are enlightened, modern, open-minded and tolerant people who have a firm grasp on their surroundings. The fact that I was dismissed outright as a "crackpot" and "kook" told me that it was not worth getting carpal tunnel to have any sort of conversation with them.

I'd debated and argued for years with some very right-wing, knuckle-dragging racists and conservatives, and the only difference I see between those sites and this one is that they'll at least engage you and seriously try to take you on (but only after you piss them off really bad lol).

"Snark" is something I'm particularly good at, so thanks for noticing that.

[stevenleser]

17. Spare me the poor attempt at self-righteous diatribe and if you click respond on my post

the site software is smart enough to put your reply underneath mine in a way where it's obvious the response is to me. You don't have to use my name in the subject line. I'm assuming you didn't know better because if you did that is pretty pedantic.

Free Speech and the first amendment are rights that pertain to the government not private individuals. That is what they corrected you about, and you needed that correcting. Most discussion forums on the web are privately run and they have a topic and TOS either formally or informally. You don't go to a forum dedicated to discussion about movies and start posting about politics. You will be thrown off that forum and you dont get to cry "But my free speech!!!!111!11!"

I assume you work or are retired and have worked at some point in your life? You didn't have the right to say anything you wanted at the job without putting your job at risk. Same concept.

Now was it necessary for me to explain that? Are you going to tell me this is new to you?

[nyabingi]

19. I know what the First Amendment says, stevenleser...

...but I appreciate you repeating to me what has already been said. I'll do my best not to come between you and your friends on this website lol.

Now, if you look back at what I was responding to, it was the fact that the one person (who's name I can't recall) was setting restrictions on what is appropriate or not in a discussion of the Bilderberger meetings. She/He appointed themselves as moderator and censor, ready to pounce upon any unsuspecting "crackpot" or "kook" who dared soil the sanctity of these sacred DU grounds.

Maybe this person is the Ultimate Democratic Underground Person (with like 2,598,340 posts) and started this website, in which case, he/she should have the Power to dismiss people like me who don't appreciate being told what can be discussed or not (when no one had even gone "out there" at that point).

And no, it's not necessary to explain anything at all to me, stevenleser, but if you think you're schooling me in any way, I won't burst your bubble...

[stevenleser]

20. It's only necessary to repeat things to people who don't get it.

DU is moderated mostly by its own members through a system of alerts and juries. The admins rarely get involved. There is a consensus of behavior here of what is and is not appropriate. So your comment about the 'ultimate' DU person doesnt make sense. We all moderate the site and we all are empowered to tell people when their posts are not appropriate.

Conspiracy theories are generally not appropriate. There is a small exception for the Creative speculation group http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=forum&id=1135 but even there, some of the more whackjob theories like 'chemtrails' etc. will result in the admins stepping in and pulling your ability to post. They are not appreciated in the Latest Breaking news forum at all.

[nyabingi]

22. Naturally one person's conspiracy theory is another's

reality - it, like all else in life, all depends on your perspective (which is far more powerful than facts).

I can appreciate this site's attempt to keep it from becoming a lair for trolls who just want to disrupt and have nothing of substance to contribute, but everyone who argues a point that may sound bizarre to a DU jury is not crazy and irrational. Dismissing someone's ideas as beneath your consideration is something I have a problem with and it seems somewhat snobbish, but that could be a quirk of personality.

I've been dissed by the DU jury before, but I can take rejection. We all should be comfortable in our own minds and bodies without having to feel like the best route is conformity and fitting in with the crowd.

[OKNancy]

10. I didn't make the rules.. I was offering caution to those who may get

kicked off for Bilderberg conspiracy rants.

Yes, I do think 9/11 truthers are crackpots

[nyabingi]

12. I'll be changing my name to Crackpot soon...thanks

[JI7]

16. Bilderberg, the very secret organization that everyone seems to know everything about

[stevenleser]

18. Funny that, no?