reply to post by TheBandit795
There are so many posts on this thread to potentially reply to, and this one is about as good as any. First I want to say that I am not
pro-Bilderberger group by any means, and I think it is horrible that they meet in secret and thwart media coverage. On the other hand, we have to ask
ourselves who does the group consist of? It's made up of about 150 or so of the world's most influential in terms of "power and control"
(politics), and this of course includes people from finance, politics, and those with a lot of influence. They meet to discuss issues and work
towards solutions of mutual benefit...maybe the solutions are in the public's best interest, but perhaps not...how do we actually know what goes in
the meetings because there has been so much secrecy surrounding them, and maybe part of that reason is for security reasons???
Yet it's quite a stretch to assume that Obama is a member. We have people who are his best advisors, two of whom on here we see some connections to
the group, yet if I were a candidate and not a member of bilderberger, I do think I would want my foreign advisors and other big level advisors
(cabinet if I'm in office) to be in direct contact with the movers and shakers of the world, as apposed to keeping my head in the sand and being an
isolationist. This sounds more like "guilty by association" to me. Are you guys actually saying you wouldn't want him in contact with the
world's most powerful?
Finally, this is how politics works. Deals are constantly brokered. It may be that one of their goals it be sure that since they didn't get their
girl (Clinton, and even that is quite the allegation to assume that she is a member based on evidence that she went to a few meetings...) that they
would want to meet with Obama and try to secure her on the ticket. In return Obama can work towards having some of his goals met in return for a
In terms of the O.P. and his being linked up to big hedge funds...this is how people in politics raise the money for their campaigns. It isn't going
to change until we have real campaign finance reform. Again, just because a person on his campaign works at a big financial investment firm, and is
colleagues with someone who is pro-Bilderburger, does not automatically make Obama "one of them". While I am saying what you posted is quite a
stretch, I do think it's a good thread you started, and of course we should keep our eyes open and watch these people like a hawk.
The biggest problem I have with this, and judging by all the posts I have read, I think it's safe to say we can all agree that the secretiveness of
the Bildergurger group is what is the most alarming. It's insane that we turn on the news and nobody is talking about this or investigating and
putting forward what the goals and purpose of these meetings are all about. Instead we get Alex Jones and that's it. Unless there has been more
coverage that I'm unaware of? I know at the Toronto one in the past, there were a lot of Canadian reporting going on, but again, nothing in the USA
on it, and that alone is disturbing.
Anyway, bottom line, is that I think we need to be careful with our speculation and not wildly run off a cliff with exaggerations and such. I like
ATS, and yes we can get closer to understanding what is really going on, but we run the risk of getting a reputation of extreme bias just like Fox
news if we all take something like some associations and then state without any definitive proof that this person or that person is in fact a member
of the Bilderbergers. Also, these are the big movers and shakers in a global (business and travel) society, and I would move that we would want our
leaders in communications with these people, so just because we have some connections here, does not make Obama a bad person. I would say he's
incredibly competent and you want him traveling in such circles. It's the secrecy we can all do without.
To close, I want to leave everyone with a strong warning not to fall for dis or mis information and deliberate propaganda aimed at changing a
perception amongst people about a person the oposition wants defined. If you recall, when Hillary was in the lead everyone was speculating about her
involvement...this same thing happens every single election, and a meme is inserted that says "they are all [politicians] the same" and in fact
nothing could be further from the truth. Keep asking questions, but be careful not to throw the baby out with the water!