MovieChat Forums > Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement (2007) Discussion > If it's not true can someone explain thi...

If it's not true can someone explain this?

posted 15 years ago by bluecitydotcom
7 replies | jump to latest

This is pretty damning evidence of at least the intent of the Bildeberg group.

"...Some even believe we 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."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Rockefeller

This is a quote from David Rockefeller's 2002 autobiography. He is blatantly admitting that the group works AGAINST the best interests of the U.S. How he has not been investigated is beyond any logical conclusion.

[–] Tastentier 15 years ago

I suppose that you're familiar with Gene Roddenberry's vision: The utopia shown in Star Trek where hunger and poverty have been eliminated, money is no longer needed and so on. A great utopia, isn't it? Yet it would be very much AGAINST the best interests of the USA, i.e. against the interests of the capitalistic market elite.

That's one angle to view it from (but not my point of view actually). Here's another one: If the industrialized Western World were to help Third World countries, really help them that is, actively fight world hunger, help build up stable economies, educate the poor masses... that too would be very, VERY much against the best interests of the USA and the rest of the Western World.

Just food for thoughts, to show that everything can be viewed from several angles.

[–] jamesdrax 15 years ago

The Star Trek utopia has always been a nice fantasy, but that's all it is, an unattainable fantasy. Imagine taking that universe and putting Rockefeller at the top, it wouldn't be a pretty picture.

A global government that served the best interests of the people wouldn't be such a bad thing, but the kind that these elites want is nothing short of an abomination, and the very concept is open to far too much abuse as it is.

"Your views are as narrow as your tie."
- Bernard Herrmann

[–] ilon 12 years ago

I get sad when someone THINKS that something is an utopia because someone else SAYS that it is an utopia.

In the past sure that people said that it was an utopia turn around the world... you know, the land is flat, because someone says it is, someone believes.

[–] soulburnk5 14 years ago

it COULD be viewed in that way, but frankly that seems a bit naive. it can also be viewed in this way, if multi billionaire rockerfella was working towards solving global problems like hunger etc they would already be solved, they COULD be working to educate the poor masses, they COULD be working to eradicate hunger,

But they are not.

besides, i dont think eliminating hunger and poverty is contrary to human interests, perhaps a few power hungry and corrupt politicians but the majority of people would love to witness that.

maybe in a round about way he is doing this, but not in the right manner, instead of funding research into land irrigation or such things to provide more food in barren areas, he funds de-population, less people means more food for the remaining people, i guess its easier to create a virus that will kill a million people than it is to find a way to feed them all.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jhorschitz-1 15 years ago

Because the interests of the american people do not necessarily match the interests of earths population as a whole.

I do not know enough about rockefeller to comment on his intentions, but the quote in of itself makes sense.

[–] dreezzz14 14 years ago

he owns banks, he owns all. thats why