Corrections Please! William Jasper on the Bilderberg “Cover Up” that Wasn’t

You may also like...

8 Responses

  1. I'm a Turk says:

    When are you going to write ”The Illusion of Elite Unity (Part 2)?

    • Will.B says:

      A valid question. It’s half-finished, there have distractions, competing commitments, writer’s block, part 1 came together better than part 2 currently looks etc etc.

      To quote an orange skinned man with a double comb-over who tweets more than he governs, “We will see…”

      • I'm a Turk says:

        I have a question. What is the relationship between Evangelicals and The American Power Elite?

        I wonder what you’re thinking.

        • Will.B says:

          I’m thinking that evangelicals are an integral part of the American power elite, one because of they have a lot of money, two, because they are able to mobilise large segments of the US population guiding voting intentions thus giving evangelical leaders political leverage, and three, because they actively seek and gain access to US politicians to push their particular points of view, they are important players in their own right. So they are power center in the US political landscape that even the plutocrats cannot ignore. They must be accommodated rather than excluded.

  2. Will.B says:

    A good question, to which I don’t have an solid answer as I haven’t investigated the evangelical leadership. I would suspect they wouldn’t be globalists, but one would have to take a serious closer look to be sure. I guess it might depend on which way the foreign policy wind is blowing within the GOP.

  3. Tom Hall says:

    Are you paid by the WaPo? It appears to be the case. Are you a CNN-fed conspiracy theory-debunker, or a conspiracy theorist who doesn’t like false conspiracy theories because they spoil the credibility of real conspiracy theories. After reading many of your articles, I really cannot tell.

    • Will.B says:

      No I am not paid by the Washington Post, and I’m really not sure why you’d reach that conclusion. Pointing out that Jasper misrepresented the amount of reporting on the 2019 Bilderberg meeting by the Washington Post doesn’t mean I work for them or received any money from them. It just means that I bothered to test Jasper’s claims and found that they weren’t quite true.

      And to clarify further: I am not paid by that media outlet or any media outlet, mainstream or otherwise in the United States or anywhere else in the world, to do what I do, which is in my own time and at my own expense.

      Nor am I a hard-wired “CNN-fed conspiracy theory debunker.”

      Your last description is perhaps closest to the truth as I have indeed been called a “conspiracy theorist”, and at the same time my objective is to test claims of elite malfeasance and criminality, to treat seriously what supposedly more enlightened people are eager to dismiss as deranged and unhinged conspiracy theorizing. I find that digging deeper into many of these derided theories one sometimes finds they are closer to the truth than most supposedly rational accounts. I think my piece on Bilderberg, Nixon and China is a particularly strong example of this. On the other hand, one inevitably finds that many theories are the product of lazy thinking, or function as little more than political propaganda, drawing unwarranted inferences, and relying on dubious sources, or on the misrepresentation of reputable sources to deliver a sensational narrative, as in Jasper’s case.

      I don’t work from the assumption that some explanations, particularly those that posit conspiratorial activity, deceit and deception by elite actors (however one wants to define it – “Deep State”, “Establishment”, “Military-Industrial Complex”, “Insiders”, or “Power Elite”), must be dismissed as “conspiracy theories” and therefore unworthy of consideration; on the contrary, given my skepticism about the supposed benevolence of these elite actors, I think it worthy to test and scrutinise these these claims. I hope that explains things.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.