Re: more conspiracy

Yes, sorry - 'World Economic Forum'

Jeffrey Beatty is right to point out the political opportunism of 
labeling some grouping as conspiratorial.

I guess the issues might include:

- degree of secrecy
- focussed and well-defined intent
- nature of intent and whether it would violate the law/ human rights
- non-discriminatory/exclusive access to participation
- non-discriminatory/exclusive access to proceedings
- degree of power of the participants, and potential to override the 
    democratic process

One could ask what is the difference between a Bilderberger conference, 
a World Economic Forum, a G7 Summit, summit of the International Socialists ?

The Bilderberger is possibly the most closed and exclusive.  The Trilateral 
Commission less closed but possibly more focussed (was, and possibly 
still is involved in presidential king-making ?).

The G7 Summit is made up of elected leaders and might theoretically include 
a socialist leader.

The International Socialists have no power.

Geoff.


At 08:52 AM 08/02/2000 -0400, you wrote:

>Perhaps you mean World Economic Forum, a not-for-profit foundation at
>Davos, Switzerland?
>
>Umm--and perhaps it would be nice to think about this notion of "conspiracy
(cut)