Bilderberg 2012 list.

Tzar Chasm · 29-05-2012 12:26AM

We've had the selfdetermination discusion before I think, but this is not even a case of that, what Right do these small cabals have to remove the Elected leader of a country if he displeases them, in both cases Elections should have happened straightaway, however many Austerity bills were rushed through in the hope that the Fiskal compakt would be enshrined in law before any elections were 'allowed'

profitius · 29-05-2012 12:27AM

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Entirely justified in those cases though. Greece and Italy were going down the toilet under Berlusconi and the whole farrago of corrupt Greek muppet leaders. I suppose countries should have the right to turn themselves into failed states, but for the greater good of the populace, I don't have a huge issue with installing competent leaders on a temporary basis with the support of their democratically elected parliaments.

Its just replacing criminals with more criminals.

enno99 · 29-05-2012 12:53AM

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Yes - if you were a woman who wanted contraception, or you wanted to read some (banned) great literature, or you happened to be gay, or whatever.

well that goes to show how much influence institutions and specific groups can have on governments

Run_to_da_hills · 29-05-2012 04:10AM

Neelie Kroes is on the list and no doubt she will be pushing the following agenda on a global scale.

Neelie Kroes, the EU's Digital Agenda Commissioner, will present by the beginning of June a new legislative proposal which aims “to facilitate cross-border electronic transactions” through the adoption of harmonised e-signatures, e-identities and electronic authentication services (eIAS) across EU member states, according to an internal document seen by EurActiv.

http://www.euractiv.com/infosociety/brussels-wants-identities-eu-citizens-news-512833

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 06:40AM

profitius wrote: »

Its just replacing criminals with more criminals.

Not really, no.

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 06:41AM

enno99 wrote: »

well that goes to show how much influence institutions and specific groups can have on governments

It also shows that we enjoy more freedom now than we did in the past, contrary to what was claimed.

enno99 · 29-05-2012 09:08AM

Monty Burnz wrote: »

It also shows that we enjoy more freedom now than we did in the past, contrary to what was claimed.

No you are just being argumentative

Yes there are certain things that people can do now that they could not before that is true but there have been other bans put in place that were not there before

But the country as a whole we have become less free to determine our own way and are being dictated to from outside sources

And we shall be voting on whether to concede more on Thursday

Now to get back on topic

The Bilderberg group how many Irish attorney generals have been attending over the years

And what can they bring to the group?

How many referendums have we had over the years that were instigated by Europe

Tzar Chasm · 29-05-2012 09:30AM

Monty Burnz wrote: »

It also shows that we enjoy more freedom now than we did in the past, contrary to what was claimed.

what is your opinion on the statement
we have more fredom than the 50's but Less than the 90's ?

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 10:00AM

Tzar Chasm wrote: »

what is your opinion on the statement
we have more fredom than the 50's but Less than the 90's ?

I'd have to think about it, and I suppose it would depend on how you define 'freedom'. I can't think of any freedoms I've lost since the 90s, but security checks on airlines etc. are more thorough which is a pain in the ass. On the other hand, the internet has greatly added to the freedoms I have.

Can you think of freedoms lost vs freedoms gained in the last 20 years?

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 10:02AM

enno99 wrote: »

No you are just being argumentative

Yes there are certain things that people can do now that they could not before that is true but there have been other bans put in place that were not there before

Such as?

enno99 wrote: »

But the country as a whole we have become less free to determine our own way and are being dictated to from outside sources

By choice. We could have told those 'outside forces' to take a hike but we'd have a had a sovereign default. Our elected representatives thought that cooperating with these 'outside forces' for a period would be less painful for the people (and certainly less painful to their chances of surviving as a political party).

enno99 · 29-05-2012 10:30AM

Off the top of my head smoking ban

How about answering the rest of my post

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 11:00AM

enno99 wrote: »

Off the top of my head smoking ban

Um...which allows me the freedom to eat in a restaurant without somebody polluting the air? Or work in a bar without risking serious health effects?

I'm sorry, but I'd regard the ban on smoking as similar to the ban on shooting people that you don't like - an improvement in freedom.

Do you have anything better? Any unambiguous loss of freedom?

enno99 wrote: »

How about answering the rest of my post

The rest of your post can be answered with info in the public domain, my opinion on it isn't worth much extra surely?

enno99 · 29-05-2012 11:31AM

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Um...which allows me the freedom to eat in a restaurant without somebody polluting the air? Or work in a bar without risking serious health effects?

I'm sorry, but I'd regard the ban on smoking as similar to the ban on shooting people that you don't like - an improvement in freedom.

Do you have anything better? Any unambiguous loss of freedom?

The rest of your post can be answered with info in the public domain, my opinion on it isn't worth much extra surely?

So your right to a smoke free area trumps mine to enjoy a cigarette with my coffee or a pint

So its ok to impose restrictions when it don't effect you

Do you think there could have been a middle ground and the freedom to choose rather than just an outright ban

On the contrary your opinion would be as valid as anybody's

With almost 9000 posts I'm sure you professed your opinion on many things

hooradiation · 29-05-2012 11:36AM

enno99 wrote: »

So your right to a smoke free area trumps mine to enjoy a cigarette with my coffee or a pint

Pretty much.
Because while you might be ok with the damage the cigarette does to your body, you're also doing damage to people around you. You don't get to make that choice for them.

Deal with it.

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 11:37AM

enno99 wrote: »

So your right to a smoke free area trumps mine to enjoy a cigarette with my coffee or a pint

So its ok to impose restrictions when it don't effect you

Do you think there could have been a middle ground and the freedom to choose rather than just an outright ban

Strange argument. Your right to ruin my meal and poison my workplace trumps my right to eat in peace and work safely?

And let me guess - I have the freedom to eat at home, and work somewhere else? Why don't you - the person spreading the pollution - not have to face the restriction, rather than the innocent victim?

enno99 wrote: »

On the contrary your opinion would be as valid as anybody's

With almost 9000 posts I'm sure you professed your opinion on many things

I have indeed, but the number of referenda in Ireland is not a matter of my opinion.

enno99 · 29-05-2012 12:31PM

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Strange argument. Your right to ruin my meal and poison my workplace trumps my right to eat in peace and work safely? And let me guess - I have the freedom to eat at home, and work somewhere else? Why don't you - the person spreading the pollution - not have to face the restriction, rather than the innocent victim?

No I dont want to infringe on your rights at all

If the choice was available I would use an establishment that suited my needs
I fear you would do the same

In regards to the working place I think the business or company also have the right to set rules for their employees

I don't disagree with smoking restrictions in some cases

I have indeed, but the number of referenda in Ireland is not a matter of my opinion.

That was not the whole question but you are intent on avoiding it

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 12:34PM

enno99 wrote: »

No I dont want to infringe on your rights at all

If the choice was available I would use an establishment that suited my needs
I fear you would do the same

The choice was never available. The solution arrived at was the best compromise to protect the rights of smokers (you can still smoke) and the majority of people who don't smoke (you can't smoke anywhere you want).

enno99 wrote: »

That was not the whole question but you are intent on avoiding it

If you point out exactly what you want an opinion on I will offer one if possible.

Jonny7 · 29-05-2012 05:39PM

Are you guys really doing this?

Laws regarding discrimination, equality in the workplace, equal rights pay, social welfare, health benefits, statutory rights, company and corporate law, public safety, road safety, police regulation, education rights, the list goes on and on.

Not just Ireland, but everywhere. Go to Russia, China, South Africa, the whole of Eastern Europe, virtually all of South America, Spain, Germany, Italy and you are visiting vastly different places than what they were in the 50's.

The argument that we in Ireland or "we" in the world are less free, have less rights and have less equality than 60 years ago is frankly ridiculous.

superluck · 29-05-2012 05:44PM

Yeah, but not everyone had to live the debt-mocratic way Jonny7

At one time many people lived in tribes and were quite content without having to work for a bank.

It's all relative really, some have benefit greatly from debtmocracy while others have lost and suffered immeasurably.

I think you're bit ignorant to believe everything is better for everyone, that's too simplistic a view.

Jonny7 · 29-05-2012 06:02PM

superluck wrote: »

Yeah, but not everyone had to live the debt-mocratic way Jonny7

At one time many people lived in tribes and were quite content without having to work for a bank.

It's all relative really, some have benefit greatly from debtmocracy while others have lost and suffered immeasurably.

I think you're bit ignorant to believe everything is better for everyone, that's too simplistic a view.

The world is freer in general.

North Korea is worse than it used to be, DRC is worse than it used to be, but the world in general is freer and people have more rights than they did half a century ago.

On average, the standard of living has increased, the populations relative wealth has risen, our individual rights have increased..

We all still complain about it on a daily basis, such is life, but anyone who actually thinks that we in general had more rights, freedom and equality over six decades ago seriously needs to pick up a history book or get their head examined.

Whatever "evil" the Bilderburg group is up to - they aren't doing a very good job of it.

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 06:14PM

superluck wrote: »

Yeah, but not everyone had to live the debt-mocratic way Jonny7

At one time many people lived in tribes and were quite content without having to work for a bank.

And they were quite happy to be massacred by any passing tribe, or enslaved, or see their wives die in childbirth 1 time in 3.

But we know better now.

superluck wrote: »

It's all relative really, some have benefit greatly from debtmocracy while others have lost and suffered immeasurably.

I think you're bit ignorant to believe everything is better for everyone, that's too simplistic a view.

So if you look at the average wealth and well-being of the average person today, you don't think there's been any measurable improvement in human welfare in the last couple of thousand years?

Ok.

superluck · 29-05-2012 06:23PM

Well, I did say you'd have to be ignorant to believe every single person benefit from debt-based system, that's perfectly reasonable.

For every "miracle" of the debt-mocratic way i could no doubt list a dozen casualties of it but why would I bother since you're already convinced everything is so much better now?

As things continue, the only planet we know capable of supporting life in the entire universe will be destroyed between 50-75 more years, I guess that's what you call "progress" ?

Ignorance is bliss.

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 06:28PM

superluck wrote: »

Well, I did say you'd have to be ignorant to believe every single person benefit from debt-based system, that's perfectly reasonable.

Yes, and you'd have to be ignorant to believe that every single person benefits from the existence of cars, aeroplanes and computers. Does that make them bad?

superluck wrote: »

For every "miracle" of the debt-mocratic way i could no doubt list a dozen casualties of it but why would I bother since you're already convinced everything is so much better now?

What would that prove?

How many lives did the invention of stairs cost throughout human history? Should we ban stairs? :rolleyes:

superluck wrote: »

As things continue, the only planet we know capable of supporting life in the entire universe will be destroyed between 50-75 more years, I guess that's what you call "progress" ?

Ignorance is bliss.

The planet will not be destroyed. Life will be fine. We may be toast, but as a massive misantrope, that would probably suit you fine.

superluck · 29-05-2012 06:49PM

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Yes, and you'd have to be ignorant to believe that every single person benefits from the existence of cars, aeroplanes and computers. Does that make them bad?

What would that prove? How many lives did the invention of stairs cost throughout human history? Should we ban stairs? :rolleyes:

The planet will not be destroyed. Life will be fine. We may be toast, but as a massive misantrope, that would probably suit you fine.

Seriously MB, I have no energy to respond to this drivel, today.

I have to say though, you put very little thought into your posts on this forum and I don't think you even take this stuff seriously, you're just here to amuse yourself which is pretty sad.

Did you know 90% of all sharks, tuna and swordfish are completely disappeared from our oceans? 90% of whales...

Salt-Water Fish Extinction Seen By 2048

That's just 1 of hundreds of examples that illustrate white man has sh!t for brains.

In the scope of our very short existence on this planet, our "progress" has been to completely destroy everything on it.

I think if I was hungry and given the choice of having an iPod or piece of fresh unpolluted fish, I'd take the fish, wouldn't you?

Or do you think mass-extinction is a sign of "progress"?

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 06:54PM

superluck wrote: »

Seriously MB, I have no energy to respond to this drivel, today.

I have to say though, you put very little thought into your posts on this forum and I don't think you even take this stuff seriously, you're just here to amuse yourself which is pretty sad.

Did you know 90% of all sharks, tuna and swordfish are completely disappeared from our oceans? 90% of whales...

Salt-Water Fish Extinction Seen By 2048

That's just 1 of hundreds of examples of how white man has sh!t for brains.

In the scope of our very short existence on this planet, our "progress" has been to completely destroy everything on it.

I think if I was hungry and given the choice of having an iPod or piece of fresh unpolluted fish, I'd take the fish, wouldn't you?

Or do you think mass-extinction is a sign of "progress"?

What has any of that got to do with what I posted? I suggest if you can't follow my posts and hence think they are ill-thought out, ask me about the bits you don't understand and I'll try to explain them in more simple language.

superluck · 29-05-2012 07:06PM

Plenty my friend.

You believe progress is having material wealth...a car, iPod, a plasma TV or being able to take a cheap flight abroad, microwaves and computers...oh yes, that's wonderful "progress" but it comes at the expense of the planet earth and everything on it, hope it's worth it.

Guns or butter, Monty?

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 07:14PM

superluck wrote: »

Plenty my friend.

You believe progress is having material wealth...a car, iPod, a plasma TV or being able to take a cheap flight abroad, microwaves and computers...oh yes, that's wonderful "progress" but it comes at the expense of the planet earth and everything on it, hope it's worth it.

Guns or butter, Monty?

You have a very sophmorish depth in your thinking which you seem to confuse with genuine profundity. You ascribe beliefs to others to suit your arguments, and you seem to equate the massive social and moral development of the last centuries with the purely material development that runs in parallel.

But sure whatever. Down with white people...and 'stuff'!

superluck · 29-05-2012 07:37PM

Monty, I care about the environment as much as you do.

It's perfectly fine to believe progress manifests itself in mans technological advancements.
However, at least acknowledge our planet is being destroyed in exchange for it.

You can hardly argue the extinction of earths animals and destruction of it's resources are signs of progress in the last 50 years now, can you?

Yes, you can have all the technology you want but what good will it do you?

Monty Burnz · 29-05-2012 08:11PM

superluck wrote: »

Monty, I care about the environment as much as you do.

It's perfectly fine to believe progress manifests itself in mans technological advancements.
However, at least acknowledge our planet is being destroyed in exchange for it.

You can hardly argue the extinction of earths animals and destruction of it's resources are signs of progress in the last 50 years now, can you?

I agree that all progress has not been good. However I quibble with your notion that we are 'destroying the planet' - even if we make the world unliveable for ourselves, and we may, the world will carry on just the same with our brief hegemony marked by just one of many mass extinction events that have come and gone in the last billion years.

superluck wrote: »

Yes, you can have all the technology you want but what good will it do you?

Well, ideally, we can harness technology in such a way that we can end our species' reliance on this one planet with all the ecological problems that is clearly causing, and spread human life to new worlds and out into the wider galaxy. Whether that will happen before we render the planet inhospitable to ourselves remains to be seen, but I'd like to think that a lot of progress will be made on that front in the next 500 years.

namloc1980 · 29-05-2012 10:59PM

Jonny7 wrote: »

Well they've been around since the 1950's. Human rights, freedom and equality have all improved since..

I suppose it depends on your point of view. While personal rights have come a long way modern society in many respects is as unequal as ever. A small percentage of people own the vast majority of the world's wealth. That is unequal.

Jonny7 wrote: »

so obviously their indoctrination and controlling methods aren't really working so well.

I would beg to differ. The modern form of "slavery" or control, in particular in the western world, is debt, debt, debt and of course the ever increasing influence of undemocratic or even anti-democratic bodies making the big decisions in our world.

Let's look at Ireland. Look at the tens and hundreds of thousands of people in this country locked into crippling and essentially unrepayable debt obligations as a result of the collapse of the property pyramid scheme. Are these people free? Many of them have a very bleak future and face decades of paying tax and debt to keep the people who created the scheme in power and to pay for their pensions etc. The people at the bottom are picking up the pieces while those at the top who created the bubble have got their massive payoffs and bailouts and are quite safe in the knowledge that they will never have to face up to any responsibility for what happened. Is this equal?

As for control etc. we currently have a situation where a number of undemocratic and unaccountable bodies are essentially running this country. Our monetary policy is fully controlled by the ECB who are unelected and are essentially not accountable to anyone. Our fiscal policy is dictated and operated by the IMF (an organisation which is wholly undemocratic and whose Head pays no income tax yet is overseeing massive taxation increases on the Irish people!), ECB (above) and the European Commission (another unelected, undemocratic and essentially unaccountable body). Our country is being controlled by unaccountable elites and we have no say in it. That in my view is an affront to human rights and freedom because after-all, the fundamental basis of freedom and human rights is democratic accountability.

Bilderberg 2012 list.

Comments