Translate

Thursday, June 18, 2015

BANK MORTGAGE CLERKS HYPER SCRUTINIZE FIVE YEARS OF YOUR DEPOSITS & WITHDRAWALS BEFORE MAKING COMMITMENTS~HUD WANTS TO REGULATE "INEQUALITY" IN WEALTHY NEIGHBORHOODS

BANKS DEMANDING CUSTOMERS ACCOUNT FOR EVERY DEPOSIT & WITHDRAWAL BEFORE OFFERING MORTGAGES

Information reportedly being sent to IRS
Banks Demanding Customers Account for Every Deposit & Withdrawal Before Offering Mortgages
SEE: http://www.infowars.com/banks-demanding-customers-account-for-every-deposit-withdrawal-before-offering-mortgages/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Banks are beginning to demand that customers account for every deposit and withdrawal in their account before they can obtain a mortgage, another illustration of how capital controls imposed on the middle class are intensifying.
“My sister just bought a house and to get the mortgage she had to explain every deposit and cash withdrawal in her account going back five years. My mother had simply written her a check for $400 to reimburse her for picking up some medicine. They wanted her to explain why my mother gave her $400,” writes economist Martin Armstrong, adding that his sister was also grilled on the $2,000 she withdrew ever few months to pay for incidental purchases.
Another of Armstrong’s friends who shared an apartment with his girlfriend was also forced to account for five and a half years worth of rent checks he had written her before they could get a mortgage together.
“It is no longer good enough that you pay your taxes. Now they want to know to whom you are giving any money, right down to $50,” writes Armstrong, warning that the controls will have a negative impact on the housing market and force buyers to leave the United States.
The details are also reportedly being passed on to the IRS, with those who fail to account for payments being subject to five years in jail.
“This is all under the pretense of terrorism, whereby they have to know where every penny goes,” according to Armstrong, who is best known for predicting the 1987 Black Monday crash as well as the 1998 Russian financial collapse. “This is not applying a new law with notice that from this date forward you have to keep track of everything you do with anyone else, as in East Germany, Stasi, this is being applied retroactively.”
The financial elite are currently attempting to impose a myriad of new capital control on the middle class under the justification of preventing tax fraud and the financing of terrorism, including the idea of banning cash altogether which has already picked up steam in countries like Denmark and Sweden.
As we previously documented, influential voices across the spectrum have repeatedly invoked the need to ban cash in recent weeks, including former Bank of England economist Jim Leaviss, who penned an article for the London Telegraph last month in which he said a cashless society would only be achieved by “forcing everyone to spend only by electronic means from an account held at a government-run bank,” which would be, “monitored, or even directly controlled by the government.”
Banks in the United States and United Kingdom have also intensified policies that treat the deposit and withdrawal of relatively large amounts of cash as a suspicious activity.
In France, new measures are also set to come into force in September which will restrict French citizens from making cash payments over €1,000 euros.
____________________________________________________________


HUD Seeks to Address "Inequality" in Wealthy Neighborhoods Through Regulations


SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/21073-hud-seeks-to-address-inequality-in-wealthy-neighborhoods-through-regulations; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

The federal government continues to reach far beyond its constitutional parameters by proposing regulations to increase diversity in wealthy neighborhoods. Officials at the Department of Housing and Urban Development argue that a new rule entitled “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” would simply clarify obligations under the Fair Housing Act of 1968, but critics view it as another example of federal overreach.
The Hill reports, “The regulations would use grant money as an incentive for communities to build affordable housing in more affluent areas while also taking steps to upgrade poorer areas with better schools, parks, libraries, grocery stores and transportation routes as part of a gentrification of those communities.”
According to HUD’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, the proposed rule is to ensure that public housing agencies, as well as local governments and states receiving Community Development Block Grants, HOME Investment Partnerships, Emergency Solutions Grants, and Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS are properly adhering to the Fair Housing Act. In order to do so, the proposal entails the completion of an assessment of fair housing (AFH). Program participants would then be required to incorporate the findings from the AFH into subsequent housing plans: the Consolidated Plan, which would “describe how the priorities and specific objectives of the jurisdiction would further fair housing,” and the Action Plan, which specifies “actions to be taken during the next year that address fair housing issues identified in the AFH.” The proposal identifies four goals of the AFH:
The AFH focuses program participants’ analysis on four primary goals: improving integrated living patterns and overcoming historic patterns of segregation; reducing racial and ethnic concentrations of poverty; reducing disparities by race, color, religion, sex, familial status, national origin, or disability in access to community assets such as education, transit access, and employment, as well as exposure to environmental health hazards and other stressors that harm a person’s quality of life; and responding to disproportionate housing needs by protected class. HUD would provide all program participants with nationally uniform data on these four areas of focus as well as outstanding discrimination findings. Once program participants have analyzed the HUD data, as well as local or regional information they choose to add, they would identify the primary determinants influencing fair housing conditions, prioritize addressing these conditions, and set one or more goals for mitigating or addressing their determinants. 
The AFH is subject to HUD approval, which is granted only if it does not violate fair housing or civil rights laws, as deemed by HUD. According to The Hill, the regulations would apply to roughly 1,250 local governments.
Failure to comply would risk federal block grants, which critics argue is virtual blackmail. Fox News writes:
Critics point to the case of Westchester County, N.Y., which has been locked in a battle with HUD since it settled in a lawsuit brought by the nonprofit Anti-Discrimination Center over the county's lack of affordable housing units. The 2009 settlement, which HUD helped broker with the Justice Department, mandated the affluent county spend $50 million of its own money to build units, most of which would be in predominantly white neighborhoods. The county and HUD have been arguing ever since over compliance, with Westchester claiming HUD has been changing the rules along the way. As a result, HUD has repeatedly withheld annual funding from the county. 
"It’s an overreach on our liberties to live and work and move to wherever we want,” declared Representative Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), who has led the efforts against the proposal, sponsoring an amendment to the House HUD spending bill Wednesday, blocking any future funding for the new rule.
“American citizens and communities should be free to choose where they would like to live and not be subject to federal neighborhood engineering at the behest of an overreaching federal government,” Gosar stated, adding,
[The rule] tells us how we can live, where we go to school, how we will vote, what this utopian type of neighborhood should look like. These rules want to manipulate the way American neighborhoods look.
But defenders of the rule claim it is about fairness and leveling the playing field. “This rule is not about forcing anyone to live anywhere they don’t want to,” insisted Margery Turner, senior vice president at the left-leaning Urban Institute. “It’s really about addressing long-standing practices that prevent people from living where they want to. In our country, decades of public policies and institutional practices have built deeply segregated and unequal neighborhoods."
However, liberty-lovers have pointed out that regulating to address inequality is misguided. As observed by the CATO Institute, inequality is just a symptom of economic problems, which result from a number of issues, including “awful public schools dominated by teachers unions,” broken families that are plagued by unemployment, substance abuse and criminality perpetuated through government programs, and ineffectively harsh drug laws. Likewise, a complicated tax code that features loopholes and favors cronyism and a free market that is stifled by regulation all conspire to create the economic problems that contribute to inequality. Using the Fair Housing Act to correct inequality is merely attempting to put a band-aid on broken leg.
Still, supporters of the proposal claim that the rule would help alleviate some housing discrimination issues. But Hans von Spakovsky, a fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, notes that such a rule does not deemphasize race in an effort to alleviate discrimination, but rather emphasizes it. He asserted that the Obama administration “too race conscious.” “It’s a sign that this administration seems to take race into account on everything,” Spakovsky said.
Tyler Durden of Zero Hedge characterized the proposal as an attempt to “create a wealth-adjusted community utopia.”
If passed, the proposal would have far-reaching consequences beyond its alleged aims, including empowering HUD with authority over local zoning laws. Gosar asserts it would allow the agency the power to dictate what types of homes can be built where, and who may live in them.
Gosar also warns that the rule had the potential to depress property values as cheaper homes crop up in wealthy neighborhoods, raise taxes, and even influence elections as more minorities are funneled into Republican-leaning neighborhoods.
The Supreme Court is expected to make a decision on a housing discrimination case in the coming weeks. The case concerns whether Texas violated the Fair Housing Act by disproportionately awarding low-income housing tax credits to developers who own properties in poor, minority-dominated neighborhoods. The court is being asked to weigh in on whether government policies that unintentionally create a disparate impact for minority communities violate federal laws against segregation. That decision could influence the future of HUD's proposed rule.


Posted by at
Labels: , , ,

POPE CALLS FOR GLOBAL AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE CLIMATE CHANGE AGENDA~NORTHERN HEMISPHERE HAS TOO MUCH WEALTH?

WILL POPE FRANCIS BE THE 

"GLOBAL AUTHORITY", 

OR WILL IT BE THE UN OR THE BILDERBERGS?



FROM: http://www.cathnewsusa.com/2015/06/pope-francis-calls-global-warming-a-threat-and-urges-action/

"“Laudato Si’ ” is addressed not only to Catholics but to “every person who lives on this planet,” the pope wrote. In it, the pontiff related ecological concerns to his signature theme of economic justice, especially the gap in wealth between the global north and south."


SENATOR INHOFE LECTURES POPE TO PROTECT OUR SOVEREIGNTY

POPE CALLS FOR GLOBAL AUTHORITY TO IMPOSE CLIMATE CHANGE AGENDA

Encyclical arrives ahead of international 
climate negotiations
by KURT NIMMO
SEE: http://www.infowars.com/pope-calls-for-global-authority-to-impose-climate-change-agenda/; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:

Pope Francis would like to see a new global political authority to coerce the “rich” nations of the West to force citizens to adopt radical lifestyle and energy consumption changes in response to unverified and widely debunked climate change alarmism.
“Humanity is called to take note of the need for changes in lifestyle and changes in methods of production and consumption to combat this warming, or at least the human causes that produce and accentuate it,” he wrote in a draft of a papal encyclical. “Numerous scientific studies indicate that the greater part of the global warming in recent decades is due to the great concentration of greenhouse gases … given off above all because of human activity.”
The leaked draft echoes one issued by Francis’ predecessor, Pope Benedict XVI, who in 2009 proposed an authoritarian United Nations on steroids to deal with the world’s economic problems and injustices.
The release of the encyclical comes ahead of international climate negotiations in Paris this December.
“By staking out the Vatican’s position on climate change, the pope is telling the world that protecting the environment is not a niche issue — it’s a human, personal and moral issue,” writes Jennifer Andreassen for the Environmental Defense Fund, an organization partnered with the Carlyle Group, Walmart and McDonalds.
The draft declares Pope Francis is in sync with the environmental movement and its objectives.
No Scientific Proof of Man-made Climate Change
Some members of the environmental movement, however, are less than unanimous in the opinion that climate change is a result of human activity.
“There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years,” Dr. Patrick Moore, a co-founder of Greenpeace, argued before the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight last February.
Moore aded that “perhaps the simplest way to expose the fallacy of extreme certainty is to look at the historical record.”
“When modern life evolved over 500 million years ago, CO2 was more than 10 times higher than today, yet life flourished at this time. Then an ice age occurred 450 million years ago when carbon dioxide was 10 times higher than today,” he said.
Moore quit Greenpeace after the organization veered hard to the political left. The organization is funded by the Rockefeller Brothers and other globalist foundations.
____________________________________________________________

Senator Inhofe Advises Pope 

to Avoid Climate Change Discussion

BY WARREN MASS
republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:



Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who chairs the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, said during his opening breakfast keynote speech at the Heartland Institute’s Tenth International Conference on Climate Change in Washington, D.C., on June 11 that Pope Francis should stay out of the ongoing debate regarding climate change and man’s alleged contribution to global warming.



“Everyone is going to ride the pope now. Isn’t that wonderful,” Inhofe was quoted as saying by The Guardian. “The pope ought to stay with his job, and we’ll stay with ours.”



A few moments later, Inhofe said: “I am not going to talk about the pope. Let him run his shop, and we’ll run ours.”



As was noted in a June 12 article in The New American, Inhofe also told attendees at the conference that he agreed with former French President Jacques Chirac’s statement that global warming “is the first component of authentic global governance.”



“The United Nations is the reason that this all came along. We all know that,” Inhofe said.



“They want independence. They don’t want to be accountable to anybody, to the United States or any other country,” the senator continued, explaining that global climate change policies would give the United Nations its own funding source and make it unaccountable to its member countries.



Inhofe also said that the UN’s 1997 Kyoto Protocol is “about leveling the playing field for big business worldwide,” and if bureaucrats control carbon emissions, “you control life.”



The Oklahoma senator has made the climate change debate an important part of his agenda, and has even written a book on the subject: The Greatest Hoax: How the Global Warming Conspiracy Threatens Your Future. He has been the foremost Republican defending the side of the climate change argument that receives scant coverage in the media — that climate change is a natural cyclical occurrence that has little to do with human activity. 



Inhofe is supported in that viewpoint by a large number of scientists, including Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia; William Happer, professor of physics at Princeton University; J. Scott Armstrong, professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School; John Coleman, founder of the Weather Channel; Howard Hayden, professor of physics emeritus at the University of Connecticut; David Legates, professor of climatology at the University of Delaware; Roy Spencer, former senior scientist for climate studies at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center; Thomas Wysmuller, former NASA meteorologist for the Apollo program, and many others.



Back in January, Pope Francis told reporters that he is convinced global warming is “mostly” man-made and said he hopes his upcoming encyclical on the environment will encourage negotiators at a climate change meeting in Paris to make “courageous” decisions to protect God's creation.



“I don't know if it [human activity] is the only cause, but mostly, in great part, it is man who has slapped nature in the face,” Francis said. “We have in a sense taken over nature.”



The Pope’s opinions on climate change have been challenged not only by Inhofe, who is a Presbyterian, but also by former senator and Republican presidential candidate Rick Santorum, who is Catholic.



“The church has gotten it wrong a few times on science, and I think that we probably are better off leaving science to the scientists and focusing on what we're really good at, which is theology and morality,” Santorum said on a radio show earlier this month. “When we get involved with political and controversial scientific theories, I think the church is not as forceful and credible.”



While Catholics regard their Church as an infallible teacher on matters of faith and morals that have been proclaimed as dogma, no such authority is claimed for matters of science, unless conflicts arise, as when scientists deny moral truths such as the dignity of human life or the sanctity of marriage.



While the Catholic Church does teach respect for the environment and careful stewardship of God’s creation, the scientific debate over whether climate change is a natural occurrence or caused by man is ongoing and far from settled. Some scientists have asserted that global warming has ceased, or even reversed itself, as has happened throughout recorded history.



Inhofe’s statement at the Heartland conference apparently anticipated the release of a papal encyclical on climate change scheduled for Thursday, June 18. However, the Italian magazine L’Espresso broke the embargo on the document and published it online on June 15.



The Vatican said that the document posted by L’Espresso is only a draft and the rules of the embargo remain in place. The New American will respect that embargo and will publish commentary on the encyclical on Thursday.







Related articles:




















 UN’s Climate Chief Pachauri Is “Dr. Lecherous” in Indian Media

_______________________________________________________________



Scientists' Message to Pope: 



Be Skeptical of Climate Change Alarm





republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:





A team of independent climate scientists and public policy experts is traveling to Rome to enlighten Pope Francis about climate science in advance of the Vatican's April 28 environmental conference. They plan to host two public workshops to explain that there is no global warming crisis and to discourage the pontiff from relying on faulty information from climate alarmists within the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.



"Sadly, the pope is aligning himself with a U.N. agenda that will limit development for billions of the world's desperately poor residents," says Marc Morano, former communications director for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and founder of the watchdog website Climate Depot. Morano is one of the policy experts slated to speak at the workshops scheduled on Monday, April 27 and Tuesday, April 28 in Rome. He explains, "The pope has been misled on climate science, and his promotion of the U.N. agenda will only mean the poor will be the biggest victims of climate change policies."



Scientists with The Heartland Institute, a think tank promoting scientific skepticism about man-made global warming, will join Morano to promote the same message. "Humans are not causing a climate crisis on God's Green Earth — in fact, they are fulfilling their Biblical duty to protect and use it for the benefit of humanity," said Heartland Institute President Joseph Bast. "The world's poor will suffer horribly if reliable energy — the engine of prosperity and a better life — is made more expensive and less reliable by the decree of global planners."



Among other climate experts scheduled to address the skeptic conferences are:



• Dr. Thomas Sheahen, director of the Institute for Theological Encounter with Science and Technology, which is headquartered at the Catholic Archdiocese of St. Louis and funded largely by the Catholic publishing company, Our Sunday Visitor;



• Dr. Richard Keen of the Department of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at the University of Colorado;



• Lord Christopher Monckton, chief policy advisor to the Science and Public Policy Institute and former special advisor to Margaret Thatcher when she served as U.K. prime minister from 1982 to 1986;



• Retired physicist/engineer and current NASA consultant Harold Doiron;



• Jim Lakely, director of communications at the Heartland Institute and former White House correspondent for The Washington Times; and



• Dr. E. Calvin Beisner, founder and national spokesman for the Cornwall Alliance, a Biblically-based public policy network of inter-faith religious leaders and scholars dedicated to free-market solutions to economic, social, and environmental challenges.



Beisner issued a press release about the upcoming events in Rome. "Adding carbon dioxide to the atmosphere isn't going to cause dangerous global warming," he noted. "But it sure will enhance all life on earth — including human life, especially among the poor."



Both media and public are invited to attend the conferences. For those who cannot be there, the Heartland Institute provides an action plan here and encourages everyone to contact the pope by postal mail (His Holiness, Pope Francis PP., 00120 Via del Pellegrino, Citta del Vaticano) or email: cdf@cfaith.va. The Heartland website also includes links to valuable research and commentary about the pressing importance of the climate change debate.



"If Pope Francis embraces the Climate Change agenda, he will be aligning himself with the biggest enemies of the Church and of Catholic moral principles," warns Morano. "These activists are pro-population control and have bought into 'population bomb' hype."

______________________________________________________________



PAPAL PROPAGANDA:










































Posted by



at






















Labels:
,
,
,
,

















          

        

          

        

Monday, June 15, 2015


          

        










BILDERBERGERS EXIT AUSTRIA TIGHT LIPPED~REPORTERS THROWN OUT OF INTERALPEN HOTEL, TREATED POORLY, THREATENED WITH "PROBLEMS" FOR NOT COMPLYING
















NO COMMENT FROM ELITES



"BILDERBERG WEBSITE SPEAKS FOR ITSELF"

















Bilderberg 2015 Best Footage of Hotel And Security
























Infowars Reporters Thrown Out Of Bilderberg Hotel






Published on Jun 14, 2015





Despite there being no Bilderberg members remaining, the InterAlpen Hotel manager and police kicked out Infowars reporters Rob Dew, Paul Joseph Watson and Josh Owens, telling them they would have “problems” if they returned.

Related:
BILDERBERG 2015: WHERE CRIMINALS MINGLE WITH MINISTERS - http://www.infowars.com/bilderberg-20...

AUSTRIANS MAD AS HELL AT BILDERBERG 2015 - http://www.infowars.com/austrians-mad...

THE MOST CHILLING QUOTES BY BILDERBERG INSIDERS - http://www.infowars.com/the-most-chil...

BILDERBERG MEDIA MOGUL CONFRONTED AT AIRPORT - http://www.infowars.com/bilderberg-me...

BILDERBERG 2015 TO FOCUS ON RE-BRANDING AUTHORITARIANISM - http://www.infowars.com/bilderberg-20...

BILDERBERG 2015: BEST FOOTAGE OF HOTEL AND SECURITY - http://www.infowars.com/bilderberg-20...

PHOTOS: STUNNING VIEW OF AUSTRIAN MOUNTAINSIDE RUINED BY BILDERBERG TYRANNY - http://www.infowars.com/photos-stunni...

DID YOU KNOW BILDERBERG CREATED THE 1973 OIL CRISIS? - http://www.infowars.com/did-you-know-...

THE BILDERBERG GROUP: FOUNDED BY A NAZI AND CONTINUING THE AGENDA OF THE NAZIS - http://www.infowars.com/the-bilderber...

BEHIND BILDERBERG, TRILATERAL: THE GLOBALISTS HAVE A MAJOR PROBLEM - http://www.infowars.com/behind-bilder...

MAINSTREAM REPORTERS ATTEND BILDERBERG – BUT WON’T REPORT ON IT - http://www.infowars.com/mainstream-re...













Citizen Jounalist Scares Elites











Bilderbergers Flee From Press At Innsbruck Airport











Bilderberg Media Mogul and Bankers 
Confronted At Airport











Rothschild Head Confronted At Bilderberg

Published on Jun 14, 2015





Franco Bernabe Vice Chair of Rothschild Europe and Bilderberg Steering Committee member was confronted at a train station in Innsbruck, Austria as he was leaving the secretive Bilderberg 2015 confab . Reporter Tilman Knechtel from Germany upset that his defense minister is being tapped as the next chancellor gave Mr Bernabe several chances to identify himself. He also chastised the Bilderberg Steering Committee member for being part of a secret organization with tax payer funded security. The Rothschild Vice Chair that he was just attending a private meeting and everything was on the internet for all to see.

Subscribe to Tilman Knechtel’s Youtube Channel
http://www.youtube.Com/buergerberg




















Franco Bernabè (born 18 September 1948) is an Italian banker and manager, formerly the Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Telecom Italia, appointed on 3 December 2007.



Bernabè was born at Vipiteno/Sterzing (Italy). He graduated in 1973 from the University of Turin and worked as a post-graduate fellow in economics at the Einaudi Foundation from 1973 to 1975. He is the author of several publications in economics, and has received an honorary Doctor’s degree in Environmental Sciences from the University of Parma.



He joined Eni in 1983 as an Assistant to the Chairman and became subsequently the Head of Corporate Planning, Financial Control and Corporate Development. Prior to his joining Eni, he worked in the planning department of Fiat as a Chief Economist. He started his career as a Senior Economist at the OECD Department of Economics and Statistics in Paris.



Bernabè has served pro bono on different public assignments: in 1999 he was appointed by the Italian Prime Minister as a special representative of the Italian government for the reconstruction of Kosovo; between 2001 and 2003 he was the Chairman of La Biennale di Venezia, and since 2004 he is the Chairman of Mart, the foremost Italian museum of modern art. He has served on the Advisory Board of the Council on Foreign Relations and currently serves on the Board of the Peres Center for Peace, on the Advisory Board of the Observatoire Méditerranéen de l'Énergie, and on the Board of Petrochina. In the past Mr. Bernabè has also served on the boards of several Italian and international listed companies.



Bernabè has also been Chairman and majority shareholder of FB Group, an investment company that he founded in 1999, which was active in the areas of ICT and renewable energy. He has been particularly active in the telecom sector - as a founder of Andala H3G, and as one of the controlling shareholders of Netscalibur and of Telit, contributing to the turnaround of the two companies – and in the software sector through the companies of the Kelyan Group, focusing on ICT solutions for the extended enterprise as well as on value-added services for the telecommunication industry. Besides, he is a Vice Chairman of Rothschild Europe. He is a member of the Steering Committee of the Bilderberg Group.



_____________________________________________________________







Bürgerberg: Bilderberg 2015 - Die Eindrücke von Donnerstag und Freitag











Bilderberg 2015: Mystery Surrounds Shadowy Globalist Summit



BY Alex Newman



SEE: http://www.thenewamerican.com/world-news/europe/item/21064-bilderberg-2015-mystery-surrounds-shadowy-globalist-summit; republished below in full unedited for informational, educational, and research purposes:









A shadowy collection of globalists embedded throughout centers of power worldwide — political, military, banking, media, intelligence, business, academia, and more — wrapped up their annual Bilderberg summit on June 14 in Telfs-Buchen, Austria. The secrecy-obsessed confab has been receiving increased attention, relatively speaking, even from even the establishment press in recent years, following decades of complete silence. This year was no exception. But what humanity’s alleged public servants and self-appointed masters were discussing behind closed doors and armies of taxpayer-funded security officially remains a mystery — potentially in violation of numerous laws such as the U.S. Logan Act. Essentially, though, your future and the future of your nation were on the agenda.    



The “key topics” on the official agenda released to the public included a number of vague but alarming subjects to anyone concerned about the inordinate power wielded by Bilderberg attendees. Among the topics listed: “artificial intelligence,” cybersecurity, chemical weapons, “current economic issues,” European “strategy,” globalization, Greece, Iran, the Middle East, NATO, Russia, terrorism, the United Kingdom, the United States, and even “U.S. elections.” In its 2015 “press release,” following similar releases issued in recent years amid escalating public outrage over the paranoid secrecy surrounding the annual summits, the Bilderberg leadership noted that “around 140” participants from 22 countries were planning to attend.



However, despite pretenses of increased transparency, virtually nothing is known publicly about what “the money-changers and the self-appointed masters of the universe,” as the U.K. Guardian’s Kevin McKenna described them, were plotting at their mega-luxury hotel (shown). “Only bankers, the CEOs of multinationals and western political leaders who have been on their payroll for a minimum of 10 years get to attend,” McKenna wrote in a sarcastic and humorous piece. Of course, key establishment media operatives are also invited to attend, but only under conditions of strict secrecy. Along with the “journalists,” editors, propagandists, and media magnates were prime ministers, foreign ministers, defense ministers, top globalist bureaucrats, a president, CEOs, royalty, and even some convicted globalist criminals (anti-U.S. sovereignty fanatic Gen. David Petraeus) for good measure.    



At this year’s summit, a variety of media outlets sent reporters, including the U.K. Guardian, Infowars, American Free Press, some local outlets, and others. As has generally been the case, reporters and even locals were treated with disdain, hostility, and suspicion by the tax-funded security operatives guarding the globalists inside. More than 2,000 police, paid for with public funds, were reportedly on hand to guard the paranoid globalists against a handful of protesters, reporters, and local residents at the resort. The security was so on edge that a “COBRA” officer reportedly accidently fired an assault rifle at a police helicopter flying overhead.  



The Guardian’s Charlie Skelton, who has humorously covered multiple Bilderberg confabs over the years, was harassed by police — complete with an armored personnel carrier and military helicopters overhead — amid repeated searches of his hotel, vehicle, papers, and more. Infowars reporters Rob Dew and Josh Owens were also visited by police as Bilderberg organizers exhibit growing levels of paranoia about the public, in addition to being “constantly followed and harassed” throughout the three-day confab. Even an 11-year-old boy playing in the woods was reportedly terrorized by the paranoid security operatives.



According to news reports, Bilderberg security teams even erected a jamming system to block communications in the vicinity of the InterAlpen hotel where the summit took place, reportedly to further hamper media coverage. “Apparently, Bilderberg is so afraid of media coverage, that police checkpoints miles away from the hotel are not enough, now they have resorted to installing expensive devices which shut down communications, presumably at taxpayer expense,” reported Infowars editor Paul Joseph Watson. A communications expert source also told Infowars that the system can also be used to monitor communications, Watson added in an update.         



Despite numerous past statements by participants indicating that Bilderberg meetings and attendees help guide policy around the world, the official press release framed the gathering as a mere discussion forum. “Founded in 1954, the Bilderberg conference is an annual meeting designed to foster dialogue between Europe and North America,” it claimed. “The conference is a forum for informal discussions about major issues facing the world. The meetings are held under the Chatham House Rule, which states that participants are free to use the information received, but neither the identity nor the affiliation of the speaker(s) nor of any other participant may be revealed.”



And indeed, the secrecy is tight, with journalists generally left to speculate about what their taxpayer-funded government officials are plotting behind closed doors with so-called “banksters,” media barons, Big Business crony capitalists, and other assorted globalists. Bilderberg’s press release, though, framed that all as a positive development, perfectly illustrating the chasm that exists between the thinking of summit attendees and the rest of humanity. “Thanks to the private nature of the conference, the participants are not bound by the conventions of their office or by pre-agreed positions,” the statement said. “As such, they can take time to listen, reflect and gather insights.”



In the official release, Bilderberg bigwigs also claimed, “There is no desired outcome, no minutes are taken and no report is written.” “Furthermore, no resolutions are proposed, no votes are taken, and no policy statements are issued,” it also said. However, those claims fly in the face of a wide array of public statements by numerous Bilderberg attendees. For example, in 2010, former NATO boss and two-time Bilderberg attendee Willy Claes said in a radio interview that reports of speeches given at the summit are, in fact, compiled. “The participants are then obviously considered to use this report in setting their policies in the environments in which they affect,” Claes added, which analysts said was essentially an admission that Bilderberg attendees are secretly plotting your future behind closed doors.



In other words, somebody is lying: Either the official Bilderberg press release, or the attendees. There are plenty of other statements that also contradict the official narrative. The year before Claes’ admission, then-Bilderberg chairman Etienne Davignon — a former European Union commissar and Belgian minister of state — told the online EUobserver that the summits “helped create” the controversial euro currency imposed on 17 formerly sovereign European nations. Much evidence also suggests that the summits played a major role in foisting the EU super-state on the peoples of Europe against their will — a process that continues despite the lack of public support.  



More recently, despite protestations to the contrary, a Bilderberg attendee and the leader of the Socialist International-aligned Dutch Labor Party admitted on camera at last year’s summit that he was there in his official capacity as parliamentary leader. Asked if he was there in an informal capacity, he responded: “Well, I’m formal, because being a politician, you’re 24/7, so there’s no way of exiting my role.” The Bilderberg website claimed, by contrast, “Participants take part in the conference as individuals in their own right.” But the comments by the Dutch lawmaker and “sustainability” zealot Diederik Samsom suggested otherwise.



More than 15 years ago, far-left Bilderberg attendee Will Hutton — a former British newspaper editor, pro-EU extremist, and vehement opponent of American conservatism — also hinted at the influence of the gathering. “[Bilderberg] is one of the key meetings of the year,” he wrote in 1998. “The consensus established is the backdrop against which policy is made worldwide.” The admission could not get much clearer than that — despite claims in the official release about the confab, summit attendees themselves have regularly boasted that Bilderberg does, in fact, plot policy behind the backs of the very same people who pay their salaries and are expected to submit to their extremist “policy.”  



Bilderberg also downplayed its extraordinary guest list. “Every year, between 120-150 political leaders and experts from industry, finance, academia and the media are invited to take part in the conference,” it said. “About two thirds of the participants come from Europe and the rest from North America; approximately one third from politics and government and the rest from other fields.” While largely “accurate,” at least technically speaking, the truth is that, combined, attendees represent many of the world’s top powerbrokers and wield vast power over humanity. Among others at this year’s summit were top technology giant executives, former EU Commission boss and ex-Maoist revolutionary leader José Manuel Barroso, representatives of Big Oil, Big Banking, Big Media, Big Government, and more. For the semi-complete official guest list, which often omits key participants, visit the official Bilderberg site.   



Of course, activists from across the political spectrum have long argued that Americans at the confab are feloniously violating the Logan Act. That federal law specifically bars any U.S. citizen without formal government permission from working with foreign officials on matters of policy. Passed under the John Adams administration in 1799, the Logan Act was amended as recently as the 1990s and, despite almost never being used, remains on the books today. And that, Bilderberg opponents say, means that Americans meeting with foreign officials at the secretive gathering should be investigated and eventually prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law if found to be in violation of it. As admitted by myriad attendees, practically the entire summit revolves around policy. Violators can be imprisoned for up to three years. Other nations also have laws about working on policy behind closed doors with special interests.  



What sort of policy do the Bilderberg globalists have in mind? Well, examining their actions outside the secret meetings certainly provides a good clue. But in 2001, former British Chancellor of the Exchequer and Bilderberg bigwig Denis Healey gave a relatively concrete answer. He told the U.K. Guardian that it was a little “exaggerated, but not wholly unfair” to say that the outfit’s overall goal was essentially to impose a global government on humanity. “Those of us in Bilderberg felt we couldn't go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing people and rendering millions homeless,” he claimed. “So we felt that a single community throughout the world would be a good thing.” By “community,” globalists really mean government — after all, the European Union was the European “Community” before the full-blown super-state was openly announced.



As governments around the world influenced by Bilderberg attendees continue to wage war on the privacy rights — and other liberties — of everyday citizens, perhaps the time has come for everyday citizens, acting through their governments, to strip the privacy rights of Bilderberg attendees and their summit. After all, if they having nothing to hide, they should have no problem with losing their privacy — at least that is what they and their minions constantly tell the rest of humanity to justify the increasinlgy lawless and Orwellian surveillance of the public. The globalists in attendance should practice what they preach. If they continue to refuse, Americans and Europeans should use their remaining freedoms to ensure that transparency and legitimate government prevail.



Related articles:




































Posted by



at






















Labels:
,

















        

      









Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)