Official 2008 Bilderberg Participant List

then I'll vote for him. I like Sanford a lot, and McCain is going to kick the bucket any day.

.

Should U.S. office holders be required to disclose contacts with foreign interests at Bilderberger meetings?:

http://forums.wnd.com/ind...

.
.

Patrick
Polk County, Florida

From Wikipedia: "While in Congress, Sanford was a staunch conservative (he garnered a lifetime rating of 92 from the American Conservative Union), but displayed an occasional independent streak. He often would be one of two members of Congress, along with Ron Paul, voting against bills that otherwise got unanimous support."

And a Paul supporter's recommendation: http://www.dailypaul.com/...

McCain would be smart to pick him, in order to attract more Constitutionalist/libertarian-minded people to his ticket.

--------
Barr's GLOWING support and admiration of Paul: http://youtube.com/watch?... Dr. Paul says Barr is an ally (http://www.newsweek.com/i...)
and would do "a very good job" as president (http://www.youtube.com/wa...

But that post just done it for me. Your a globalist. I got no room for that crap. Everything you say from now on will be ignored by these two ears. If you don't know what is bad about a global government there is no helping you. Just go vote for him but I'm done hearng this crap. If they give out National ID tell them you want to bring mine to my door ok I'll show you why its a bad idea.

We the people don't march in and break this thing up? Are we totally powerless? These has to be a way to stop these things.

bump

Treg, RE your comment "The fact is only a few of us believe Mankind would be better off WITHOUT a One World Government (let alone a UN) and DISAGREE with the policy of interventionism, for humanitarian reasons or security reasons, however its justified. We are few, they are most everyone else....." What is that supposed to mean? I watch videos frequenty, read the responses, many many people from other countries hate the EU, etc. All the Ron Paul people in my meetup hate the idea of a NAU, for many reasons, but mostly giving up our national sovereignty. I don't want a One World Government, and basically from what I read from most RP'ers, neither do they.
So I don't understand how you figure there are only a few of us against a One World Government! Who's side are you on here? Am I misunderstanding you?

http://www.justin.tv/wear...

about Bilderberg at wearechange.org....

so my advice to you is, be very very careful on what you think you know.

One of the real reasons science is so slow and also so good, is its a process of vetting out the truth. And to vet out the truth one must practice science by being fully aware of all the ways we humans can and do deceive ourselves. Facts from nature are simply there, not trying to deceive us, with no intention to deceive us, yet we Humans have an amazing ability for self-deception....ie fooling our own selves. So by practicing good science, we test, we conduce "double blind tests" we repeat tests and we do many other tests that looks at nature from a hundred different angles. To "know the truth" about just a simple piece of nature, say a chemical bond and how it bonds, takes a good long time.

But for we Humans to buy in and believe a story, that takes but a few minutes. Gossip is believed more times than doubted. Particularly insightful is this book, THE MIND OF THE MARKET and I recommend it highly. Here it is at Amazon.com

http://www.amazon.com/Min...

We humans are particularly inclined to believe as true stories about other Humans. Trust me, there are no Spock's in the Human race that would rationally and objectively tell me about the story of your life, and you would not want your wife to do it either (wink)! So since this is true we must be very, very careful and take a very long time to accept story lines about other people. Particularly when they aim to be causal and explanation of major events, especially events that are complicated and took many human beings to produce. I am sure someone is busy writing about what it looked on the "inside of the Revolution". Perhaps it will be a good book. But will it be reality? Will it be what really happened?. Furthermore, the farther we go back in time, from events last week, to events last year, to events 100 years ago, to events over 2,000, we need to see that the story is a narrative, further and further away from being factually correct. And when a story throws in "motivations", as in the Reason Ron Paul did not advertise better or pay more for TV commercials in New Hampshire, well then we are getting really speculative.

Even facts which should be easy one way or the other get hotly debated. Was the 16th Amendment Ratified correctly or not? So far, its hard for me to tell, and I am inclined to believe that if indeed it was widely proved to be the case, then the American people through Congress would quickly rise up and tax themselves, this time "legally". Since I hold that point of view, the issue, factually true or not, matters little to me.

I do agree with John Birchers that through the years those interested in foreign policy, 99% of those people bought into the ideology of the day, which was interventionism and one world government, such is the power of ideology. Since people then and now buy into those ideas, they naturally work to gain power and influence and bring those ideas about, either openly or behind closed doors. That is expected.

But I part ways with the John Birch society's thinking that the whole thing shows a Master Conspiracy at work. I think they link historical facts selectively, to fit their ongoing narrative (remember how dangerous a gossipy narrative can be) and looks convincing because so many people doing the research already buy into that ideology.

To disprove their narrative, one would have to work very hard at it, tracking down ever conjecture of fact, fact, or rework the causal events. Its hard enough to do this with murder cases, its next to impossible to do this with a conspiracy narrative. To cut a conspiracy narrative to the quick, we listeners should always require those who are claiming a conspiracy to be indeed a fact, to suggest ways, facts, or information that they would agree would --If found or existed--would disprove their contention. Thus if I said that Ron Paul, never ever intended or truly wanted to be President, he just wanted to fill his campaign coffers for the purpose of having his own political library, and only he and a few other insiders know this was the real goal of running for office--I would have to both come up with facts linking it together (thus making a believe narrative) and suggest a way that this could be simply disproved - say interviews with his wife & family and 10 of his best friends, nothing written by Ron saying that was his intention, etc. My point is that Conspiracy Theories do not do what science does, that is, suggest what ways or data that could disprove the theories contention. With conspiracy theories, we are left with chasing down each and every rat hole, following each and every turn...and that may just take a lifetime of work to disprove or prove it as true.

Does that make for a good historian? I don't think so. That many of those in the past bought into One World Government, to me, goes to show how few of "us" there has been historically and even today! The fact is only a few of us believe Mankind would be better off WITHOUT a One World Government (let alone a UN) and DISAGREE with the policy of interventionism, for humanitarian reasons or security reasons, however its justified. We are few, they are most everyone else. We have never owned the moral high ground on these two twin issues, nor have we ever dominated the intellectual and business elites on this issue.

Take my own real estate industry as an example. Many republicans who are big-time real estate developers, have lots of money and influence, nevertheless BELIEVE in City General Plans and Zoning, despite the fact that it makes their world a living hell - they even conspire to evade or take a short cut around the system, but get rid of it? You must be kidding! The idea of not having an overall ALL ENCOMPASSING City General LAND USE Plan (think One World Government) and Zoning Laws (think specific UN Rules) is completely OUTSIDE of their imagination. Indeed, the few times I have suggested it, they made sure I was "just joking". Such is the power of an ideology so widely accepted that every actor helps to maintain the system.

The same goes for the storyline or ongoing narrative about what is or is not the SSP, which detractors call The North American Union. Which by the way, some of the supposed bad things about it sound very good to me - I would love to drive from Toronto to Buenos Aires on a perfectly safe US style free way in a camper trailer, but the loss of national sovereignty or control over our dollar (do we even have that now?) does not sound so good and is thus is a possible concern.

http://webskeptic.wikidot...
http://www.debunk911myths...

So I am inclined to agree with Obama. The CFR is not some secretive nefarious institution. But of course I don't have a corner on the truth, but if you do, send your facts to me anytime.

In Peace & Liberty,

Treg

I heard somewhere there's supposed to be some broadcast of this meeting. Anyone know if that's happening, and if so, where, and is it still going on right now (8:15pm EDT), and how in the heck is this being broadcast if it's all supposed to be so "hush-hush"?

Inquiring minds want to know!

just was thinking hard about 3 people on this list, the governor of SC, Mark Sanford (republican), could he become McCain's running mate??

Also read up on "James A. Johnson", interesting wikpedia article on him. He is one of the people appointed to pick Obama's running mate.

Also I saw the Gov. of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius (democrat) was also in attendance, could she be Obamas running mate?? She has already endorsed him!

US Gov't = puppet regime (reminds me of some wartime goverments in WWII)...

I'd bet talks on lowering (artificially) the price of oil this summer to be palatable to sheepish America prior to the elections...as well as talks on "marginalizing" MacCain is in the works to usher in elitist Obamanation...

HYDROMAN

is there. He McCain's running mate?

The PM of Holland is there as is the Queen and Prince Alexander. Also a representative of TomTom which I thought is corporation, and another Dutch guy who is involved with European Union.

It doesn't seem to have representatives of the Apec countries.. the other big Union involving Australia and Asian countries. Am I overlooking them?

in attendance. Hmmmmmmm

BUMP

Governors of Kansas and South Carolina? Anyone have any ideas why they would be there. To me those 2 really stand out among the crowd.

This one gave me a "uh wtf" moment.
USA "Farah, Martha J." "Director, Center for Cognitive Neuroscience; Walter H. Annenberg Professor in the Natural Sciences, University of Pennsylvania"
Read up on Farah's realm of study.
http://www.psych.upenn.ed...

BUMP

Seems like it is strictly European or North American. Are all of these people really part of the elite or are some of them 'wannabes?"

Healthnut4freedom

"Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct thy paths." Proverbs 3:5,6