Why is secretive Bilderberg lobbying confab NOT frontpage news?

The UK political scene has been rocked this past week by two new cash-for-questions allegations.  Last week, Conservative MP Patrick Mercer was in the media cross hairs thanks to a Panorama investigation, and yesterday evening Tim Yeo announced he was stepping aside as Energy & Climate Change Select Committee chair to clear his name from a similar scandal brought about by undercover Times reporters.

The latest allegations against Mr Yeo – a vocal Smart Meter supporter – are clearly very serious and warrant investigation and attention.

But if one takes a moment to step back, it is possible to observe that these two concurrent stories have provided very useful cover for a scandal that should be splashed across every broadsheet; namely the highly secretive lobbying meetings known as Bilderberg.

This strictly “off the record” confab was attended this weekend by Prime Minister David Cameron, Chancellor George Osborne, Lord Peter Mandelson, Ken Clarke (who is also a member of the Bilderberg Steering Committee) and more than 100 other names from the worlds of government, banking, finance, technology, media, energy and even royalty to exchange ideas and come to agreements on … well, actually … we have no idea what they agreed.

Because they aren’t saying.

Did you even hear about the conference?  You would be forgiven for having not – since there has essentially been a media blackout on the meetings since it was established 69 years ago.  Try finding back stories on it from mainstream publications – just don’t hold your breath while you’re doing it.  Because whilst the BBC and the Times might be bathing in the glory of catching two political mice in their traps last week, a veritable rat’s nest has escaped any serious media attention for decades.

Why the apparent silent treatment on such a newsworthy meeting of global figures?  Does a meeting of some of the Western world’s most influential movers & shakers, including people we have elected to serve us, not deserve wide-spread attention by the fourth pillar of our democracy?  Especially when no details of the meetings are published and the meeting itself is held in total secrecy?

Protestor’s sign @ Bilderberg fringe 2013

At a time in history when political and technological landscapes have converged to almost complete a virtual panopticon for every aspect of our lives, the public servants who have attended Bilderberg refuse to disclose details of any comments and agreements they make with the owners and custodians of a very large part of the world’s wealth, influence and resources.

At the 1991 meeting of Bilderberg in Baden-Baden, Germany, David Rockefeller – a key member and former chair of the group – was quoted as saying:

“We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. … It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years.  But, the world is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government.  The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

11 years later, in his 2002 autobiography “Memoirs” he wrote:

“Some even believe we [Rockefeller family] are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as internationalists and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will.  If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Could it be, though, that after 69 years of total secrecy, the veil is starting to be lifted on Bilderberg?  Not only did the Times give a very brief nod to the event last week by reporting on Cameron’s attendance, but Ken Clarke was yesterday forced to break cover in Parliament thanks to a question from Michael Meacher MP.  You can see Meacher address the Bilderberg fringe festival below.

We would like to know what our public servants talked about at these meetings.  Why all the secrecy?  Was Smart Grid on the agenda at any point over the last 69 years?  And was Smart Grid a focal point of discussions when ‘Smart’ Meter “champion” Ed Milliband attended Bilderberg a few years ago?

We don’t know.

But they do.


  1. They don’t invite me to these things but I suspect population control was high on the agenda.

    What could be better than blanketing the entire world with microwaves from as many sources as possible to reduce fertility and stop the population growing?

    It could be applied covertly anywhere, especially in the Third World and would reduce the incidence of wars since there would be fewer people to fight over territory and the food that it produces. It’s much more benign than giving them guns that could be turned on us, which is the present practice.

    Another advantage is that mobile phones are so addictive that there is no need to keep pushing them as is the case with conventional contraceptives.

    The mobile phone industry can even make money out of them while they are waiting (probably for several generations) before the effects become so severe as to threaten the survival of the whole human race.

    Natural selection will weed out those who become sterile and we will be left with a smaller population largely resistant to the radiation, and and possible unable to do without it. This would make them much easier to manipulate by electronic means such as mobile phone radiation and the other electronic tags that are currently being developed.

    Horrified? So we should be. Regardless of whether it was discussed at Bilderberg, It is already happening!

    • “They don’t invite me to these things” – and they are very much worse off for it, Dr Goldsworthy.

      IIRC, it was Dr Devra Davis at a presentation for the National Institute for Environment Health who said that just four hours spent with a mobile phone in your pocket results in 50% reduction in sperm count. And to think they are putting wireless tablet devices into classrooms.

  2. Thanks for showing this.

    I’m a little concerned about Alex Jones’ involvememt in the broadcast of this in the media. He hijacks a subject, whips it up, polarises views and people back off with fatigue or disgust.

    He has vociferously campaigned against smart metres in the US but he is aggressively pro gun ! which damages his credibility.

    Polarising is a common tactic used to divide people into black and white camps, so that there less likelihood of listening, calm, debate and change.

    Is he genuine or a media puppet?

    • Whilst he is definitely an ‘acquired taste’ in the UK, his views on guns don’t damage his credibility in the US as they seem to be consistent with what the founding fathers of the US enshrined in the constitution; the right to bear arms as a means to defend oneself against tyranny. http://www.toptenz.net/top-10-most-horrific-genocides-in-history.php

      • It damaged his reputation in my eyes – once I knew he was pro-gun I felt repelled by his aggression and no longer wanted to hear him talk about anything.

  3. I felt like you about Alex Jones Stephanie as besides of what you say, I can’t bear his voice BUT, having talked to a 70 year old American woman, who certainly was a good kind human being bearing arms and supporting Ron Paul, I have changed my mind about the whole gun issue.What she told me about living in the US scared the Life out of me. Did you know that they really are not allowed to grow their own veg in the back garden and that the TSA is all powerful. According to her she keeps her gun buried in her garden to protect herself against the government and most of her friends do the same. She has seen the Fema camps herself and tells me that there are many `prepers'( those who are prepared to defend themselves against government forces)in the US who keep guns for exactly that reason.Sometimes you read these stories on the net and don’t quite believe them, but when you hear them from people who have actually suffered harassment from government agencies like the TSA, just because she didn’t want to go through the XRay scanner at the airport, it gets very scary. The following info regarding surveillance I just received is even more disturbing :

    “But what nobody is yet revealing is that all these companies are required by law to LIE to their own customers about secret government surveillance.

    The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, you see, makes it a federal crime for any company participating in the surveillance to publicly acknowledge the existence of that surveillance. Thus, executives at Facebook, Google, Skype and others would all face arrest and federal prosecution as “terrorists” if they admitted the truth to their own users.

    Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040692_NSA_spying_tech_companies_FISA.html#ixzz2Vgs11JBt

  4. Thank you for your response Ingrid. If true that is worrying, but regarding your comment about gun ownership I will never see guns as a solution for anything.

  5. Guns are a bit off topic here, but when you read a story of a granny living in an area where suddenly there is a spate of burglaries and rapes and so gets her own gun, then one night someone breaks in to her place and she defends herself with the gun and the serial pest gets put away for a long time it makes one think there is a place for such measures.

  6. Unfortunately guns are not off topic because, like most things, they can be used wisely or abused. Don’t get me wrong, I am totally anti-violence and I am anti-war. However, if I was forced to defend myself or my family I would much prefer to have a defence weapon handy.

    Also, don’t be misled and deceived by the rabid anti-gunners who like to tell people that ‘less guns = less crime’. Once you start looking at the truth, the amount of civilian firearms in circulation have absolutely nothing to do with levels of crime – except to reduce them. America has an extremely low homicide rate and a very high legal firearm ownership rate. Compare American with other countries where firearm ownership is low and firearm crime is high. The figures just don’t justify the anti-gunner’s propaganda. Remember also that there are millions of legitimate owners of firearms who don’t commit crimes yet thousands upon thousands of firearms owners defend themselves from crime.

    Governments find it far easier to control the populations when they are disarmed and Hitler and the Jews is a prime example.

    Firearms are not a problem – criminals are the problem. And governments who provoke and agitate are the problem.

  7. There are a lot of people out there who have vested interests to make the smart meters popular. Who decided to put one in every home other than for commercial benefits?
    I am very concerned. Mobile phones give me headaches and I avoid them – the meters you cannot avoid.

    • That is correct – and why we believe this programme could be considered as unlawful. Involuntary exposure to up to 190,000 pulses of microwave radiation per day, loss of privacy, security and safety risks, environmental harm, etc. Insane.

  8. Wi-Fi is essential only to those who hope to profit from Smart Meters! Until the advent of Wi-Max and 4G, Wi-Fi WAS the most inimical aspect of emissions from Telecommunications’ apparatus -recently it was Wi-Max – now possibly 4G?! It is very dangerous for all living things (plants, insects , animals – and of course – human beings!). When these (pulsed) emissions, they interfere with human and animal cells’ communications’ systems – which are ALSO pulsed! In association with the pulsation, cells form impermeable membranes; cannot communicate with other cells – but are still alive! They continue to develop on their OWN -splitting; dividing and becoming what we know as cancer! I knew this the moment I first read Dr. Neil Cherry’s paper on the Schwarzenburg tests which resulted on the Swiss government turning off the important Radio Transmitter which had caused people and animals’ insomnia etc. Read: ‘EMR Reduces Melatonin in Animals and people’- by Dr. Cherry. Melatonin should take over from Serotonin to put us to sleep at night- without it we CANNOT SLEEP! As soon as a phone mast was activated in our village on 1.9.2001 – residents (in order of frequency!)had insomnia; headaches; nausea and dizziness; ulcerated lips, mouths and throats -plus loss of voice; earache and tinnitus; sore, itching, bloodshot eyes; nose-bleeds; raised blood-pressure, blood-clotting in legs; heart problems and strokes! Pets got cancer and died within 2 to 3 years of the masts arrival- and my best friend- Mary Cutler died of cancer 30.03.2011 – in the care home she – and her husband, Steve – were rushed to when she could no longer care for Steve (he lost the use of his legs). NO ONE WOULD LISTEN TO ME -not even our Parish Council! I sent a copy of Dr. Cherry’s paper (above- which had shown me the truth!)- to the HPA – naively thinking that they had not seen the evidence! Dr. Jill Meara responded to me – ‘There is no proof!’That is when I realised that no-one was going to listen to us – NOT even anyone in Government! The ONLY person who tried to help us was our wonderful, caring M.P.- Andrew Selous. I knew there was a strong limit to what he could achieve – especially when he told me, that the person who decided the rate of importance of subjects to be discussed would put anything he didn’t consider ‘essential’ for discussion at the bottom of the pile – and that any item left at the end of the session would be thrown out! Gillian Lyden