West Posted January 23 Author Report Share Posted January 23 (edited) 51 minutes ago, Moonbox said: Look at the first post in the thread. If that's not garbage, than nothing here is. You can debate about the WEF and whether or not it's helpful or harmful, but you grossly conflate what is actually happening there and how much influence the organization itself has. When folks start talking about the "cabal" and pointing at it as a bogeyman pulling strings everywhere, it shows a pathetically small-minded view of our world and how it actually works. They may as well just disband the WEF, pick a different location, and have leaders meet at a different location at a different time of year from now on. The conspiracy clown parade loves their three-letter acronyms and shadow-groups, so instead we could call it, "Leaders from Around the World Getting Together and Talking about Stuff Once in Awhile". He's definitely a troll, and so far hasn't done anything but make himself look like a dumbass outside of the conservative base. Amplifying the anxiety over the WEF isn't anything but that. It's this sort of rabble-rousing populism that will allow him to defy all reason and logic and somehow manage to lose to Prime Minister Unicorn Farts. How do they not have influence? 1. Several prominent politicians attend including our deputy prime minister. She even sits on the board of directors. 2. Major players in business and finance ie Blackrock attend. To downplay their influence is just dumb, but to be expected from you Edited January 23 by West Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 10 minutes ago, West said: How do they not have influence? I didn't say they don't have influence. I said they don't have anywhere near the influence you attribute to them. 10 minutes ago, West said: 1. Several prominent politicians attend including our deputy prime minister. She even sits on the board of directors. So what? If she brings back dumb policies that make no sense, and we don't like them, then we turf them and/or her. This only worrying to you because you've already bought into the Masonic/Illuminati hysteria over Uncle Klaus and the GreAT ResET. 10 minutes ago, West said: 2. Major players in business and finance ie Blackrock attend. Okay, and? 10 minutes ago, West said: To downplay their influence is just dumb, but to be expected from you Yep yep, everyone else is dumb for not buying into your exaggerated nonsense. 🙄 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 (edited) 46 minutes ago, OftenWrong said: Coming from you this slur means nothing, just like your idlotic attempt at re-writing the rules of this forum... Man, the idea of people not being allowed to insult each other on an anonymous internet forum REALLY upset you, didn't it? Why don't you bring it up some more? 🤣🤡 Edited January 23 by Moonbox 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted January 23 Author Report Share Posted January 23 (edited) 41 minutes ago, Moonbox said: I didn't say they don't have influence. I said they don't have anywhere near the influence you attribute to them. So what? If she brings back dumb policies that make no sense, and we don't like them, then we turf them and/or her. This only worrying to you because you've already bought into the Masonic/Illuminati hysteria over Uncle Klaus and the GreAT ResET. Okay, and? Yep yep, everyone else is dumb for not buying into your exaggerated nonsense. 🙄 Your issue is you are setting up a strawman argument. I have never mentioned masons or whatever other bullshit you are suggesting. Shows you have really no argument, just a small man trying to make himself seem big. The rest of your points is just drivel. You are clearly outta touch if you believe heads of state, prominent politicians, and fortune 500 companies have no influence. Because the folks making laws for a country and businesses deciding which projects are worthy of investment have no influence... if you say so 😆 Edited January 23 by West Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 7 hours ago, OftenWrong said: 1. They have clout in this country, by having the support of Trudeau and Freeland. They don't need to invest their own money, if they have Canada as a playground and Canadian taxpayers money to play with. 2. You might not agree, because you don't know the issues. Quote from Poilievre- "I have made it clear that my ministers in my government will be banned from participating in the World Economic Forum,” Poilievre, an Ontario MP, said to applause in a May 23 federal Conservative leadership campaign video. “Work for Canada! If you want to go to Davos, to that conference, make it a one-way ticket. But you can’t be part of our government and working for a policy agenda that is against the interests of our people.” 3. Emphasis is mine. 4. So this man is the leader of a major party, and doesn't seem like a troll or a dumass to me. I say he knows more about it than you and me put together. Especially, where you are concerned. 1. Yes, and this has been going on for a long time with Conservative, and Liberal governments of many nations. 2. Yes, I am still asking - on this thread you - what the issues are. If governments find some value in attending these meetings to find out what others are doing, then why not? 3. Yes, I realize that Poilievre is making political hay over this forum. The substantive criticism I have read about it comes from the left. I still think that governments can attend and take away what is useful. 4. Then why doesn't he explain specifically what he's talking about? I don't let my political leaders do my thinking for me. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 5 hours ago, West said: 1. Backroom meetings are not... 2. Plus what's actually being said on camera is alarming enough if you cared to listen and actually try to comprehend without yelling "bad bad bad" 1. Yes, well they're there so who's to tell them they can't meet offsite? Secret meetings happen in Ottawa too. 2. Such as? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 (edited) 1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said: Then why doesn't he explain specifically what he's talking about? It's been explained to you. I asked you to view the second link about globalism, among other things. Yet you didn't, you reject the claims then when I show you someone else who's credible, you're back to asking what he's talking about. #circle-jerk #useless conversation Edited January 23 by OftenWrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 16 minutes ago, OftenWrong said: It's been explained to you. I asked you to view the second link about globalism, among other things. Yet you didn't, you reject the claims then when I show you someone else who's credible, you're back to asking what he's talking about. #circle-jerk #useless conversation Sorry I only looked at the first link. All the criticisms I read are generally about the influence of multinationals. That's fine, and I agree that they have far too much influence. But that's not really what's going on with this criticism here. All the criticism of this is related to g7 protests and leftist criticism of the elite. Do we really think that the conservatives are lining up with that? It's a very generalized call to nationalism, and it's done for an audience that is suspicious of international cooperation. What specifically is going to be done to keep multinationals out of canada? Is someone going to nationalize the energy industry that's 70% foreign owned? Why is the energy industry always suspiciously left out of discussions about the international elite? I'll try and find the second link now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OftenWrong Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 7 hours ago, Moonbox said: Man, the idea of people not being allowed to insult each other on an anonymous internet forum REALLY upset you, didn't it? Why don't you bring it up some more? 🤣🤡 I did what? You just got played, sucka. Pimp the pimp 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Contrarian Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 (edited) 24 minutes ago, OftenWrong said: I did what? You just got played, sucka. Pimp the pimp What is your main idea here? You talk like you know alot but I have seen your geo-political skills. Just say plainly my friend and stop beating around the bush: "I don't like this system because I was not lucky so I dream of a Soviet system where people can value my talents and get more money". ---> You said to me that it was peace and it would have been better to raise your kids there. So of course men like you will hate everything that has to do with western financial organizations. You think everyone is against you, this is why oftenwrong is not the star in society.All a conspiracy. buuuhuu. I admire @Michael Hardnerand @Moonboxfor debating more ellegantly, they are better men than me. With me, I am not as educated with wording but I can talk to the point. Edited January 23 by Contrarian 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted January 23 Author Report Share Posted January 23 2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. Yes, well they're there so who's to tell them they can't meet offsite? Secret meetings happen in Ottawa too. 2. Such as? 1. But you suggested everything is on camera which isn't true. 2. That's already been (attempted to) discussed already but you refuse to watch clips from the meetings... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goddess Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said: Secret meetings happen in Ottawa too. Ottawa is the seat of our government. We elected them The WEF is not our government. We did not elect them. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 1 hour ago, Goddess said: Ottawa is the seat of our government. We elected them The WEF is not our government. We did not elect them. Neither is the UN. Neither are the uncountable number of international associations, lectures, groups and such that we belong to and attend regularly for environment, economic development, trade and on and on and on. Somebody started a meme about WEF for some reason and people are seizing on that one. Why ? Yes, I know they have influence. So does UNESCO, the WTO, the UN, USMCA, ... Is it Climate Change that bothers you ? Other than that, the only thing I get out of the criticism is that Corporations have influence, maybe too much. The G7 protests in the 1990s brought this to the public imagination: do you remember kids with bandanas and pink hair getting tear gassed by the riot squads in Seattle ? Were you on their side ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 1 hour ago, West said: 1. But you suggested everything is on camera which isn't true. 2. That's already been (attempted to) discussed already but you refuse to watch clips from the meetings... 1. The WEF meetings themselves are. If you are in town and, say, the French Defense minister is there too - why wouldn't you reach out if you had something to discuss ? As far as I can tell that's what we're talking about. There is plenty of publicity about this meeting, so if they wanted to keep it secret maybe they shouldn't invite 100s of journalists ? 2. I reviewed the two links provided that I have seen: 1 - Rex Murphy spending many paragraphs telling me that people who care about the environment really only want to control you. So if there is actually an environmental problem... who do you go to ? Maybe the oil industry that pays Rex I guess. 2 - The criticism that there's too much influence. Yes, I agree with that but I have commented elsewhere. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 1 hour ago, Goddess said: Ottawa is the seat of our government. We elected them The WEF is not our government. We did not elect them. and the WEF doesn't run our government, therefore this point is completely irrelevant. You might as well be complaining about which Church our MPs belong to, because we didn't elect those churches and they influence our leaders. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Somebody started a meme about WEF for some reason and people are seizing on that one. Why ? Acronyms, especially if they're three-letter acronyms. Acronyms are bad m'kay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted January 23 Author Report Share Posted January 23 1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said: Neither is the UN. Neither are the uncountable number of international associations, lectures, groups and such that we belong to and attend regularly for environment, economic development, trade and on and on and on. Somebody started a meme about WEF for some reason and people are seizing on that one. Why ? Yes, I know they have influence. So does UNESCO, the WTO, the UN, USMCA, ... Is it Climate Change that bothers you ? Other than that, the only thing I get out of the criticism is that Corporations have influence, maybe too much. The G7 protests in the 1990s brought this to the public imagination: do you remember kids with bandanas and pink hair getting tear gassed by the riot squads in Seattle ? Were you on their side ? The issue with the UN has already been brought up in the same discussion as the WEF. -Agenda 2030 -Sustainable Development -ESG investing -Stakeholder Capitalism Etc it ALL falls under the same umbrella. Selling out national sovereignty to foreign unaccountable entities, whether that be multinational corps, the United Nations etc.. thats at the heart of the criticism.. Has nothing to do with a "cabal' or "free masons" or whatever other bullshit you folks try and throw in there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted January 23 Author Report Share Posted January 23 5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: 1. The WEF meetings themselves are. If you are in town and, say, the French Defense minister is there too - why wouldn't you reach out if you had something to discuss ? As far as I can tell that's what we're talking about. There is plenty of publicity about this meeting, so if they wanted to keep it secret maybe they shouldn't invite 100s of journalists ? 2. I reviewed the two links provided that I have seen: 1 - Rex Murphy spending many paragraphs telling me that people who care about the environment really only want to control you. So if there is actually an environmental problem... who do you go to ? Maybe the oil industry that pays Rex I guess. 2 - The criticism that there's too much influence. Yes, I agree with that but I have commented elsewhere. 1. I don't get your point. Perhaps we agree that lobbying is an issue that should be done in public... especially when it involves politicians.. then again you have some multinational companies that carry much larger asset portfolios than the government of Canada's budget so we are sort of small potatoes anyway... I would imagine some of this stuff should violate anti trust laws but imagine that's the point in having politicians involved. We saw it with covid where companies did the dirty work of governments under their protection. 2. The issue is selling out the soul of the country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 14 minutes ago, West said: The issue with the UN has already been brought up in the same discussion as the WEF. -Agenda 2030 -Sustainable Development -ESG investing -Stakeholder Capitalism Etc it ALL falls under the same umbrella. Selling out national sovereignty to foreign unaccountable entities, whether that be multinational corps, the United Nations etc.. thats at the heart of the criticism.. Has nothing to do with a "cabal' or "free masons" or whatever other bullshit you folks try and throw in there Right. So, you mix some legitimate concerns about the concentration of power with some hardcore conspiracy stuff. Here's the thing: nothing these people do is BINDING. Governments have to sell any policy at home and get elected on it. Anything else ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 5 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Right. So, you mix some legitimate concerns about the concentration of power with some hardcore conspiracy stuff. Here's the thing: nothing these people do is BINDING. Governments have to sell any policy at home and get elected on it. Anything else ? Oh Michael, the paranoia runs deep. The conspiracy runs deeper. Yet, they keep on doing what they have always done....as much as they cry, things remain the same LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted January 23 Author Report Share Posted January 23 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Right. So, you mix some legitimate concerns about the concentration of power with some hardcore conspiracy stuff. Here's the thing: nothing these people do is BINDING. Governments have to sell any policy at home and get elected on it. Anything else ? What is "conspiracy stuff"? Seems to be a blanket statement you use. And yes, lots of stuff at the UN is binding... same with contracts... Edited January 23 by West Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 1 minute ago, West said: What is "conspiracy stuff"? Seems to be a blanket statement you use. Agenda 2030 Isa bundle of ideas, carried forward from Agenda 21. We were scare mongered on that. It came to nothing, didn't it? Sustainable Development... What is the issue with that? Is unsustainable development preferable? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 2 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Sustainable Development... What is the issue with that? Is unsustainable development preferable? There's a lot of stupidity around that - the idea that ESG, stakeholder capitalism and sustainability are codewords for DESTROYING OUR ECONOMY. West apparently went to "business school" or at least took classes and learned about these, but somehow doesn't actually know anything about them beyond his usual hysterics. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
West Posted January 23 Author Report Share Posted January 23 13 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said: Agenda 2030 Isa bundle of ideas, carried forward from Agenda 21. We were scare mongered on that. It came to nothing, didn't it? Sustainable Development... What is the issue with that? Is unsustainable development preferable? Sustainable Development is a conspiracy theory? https://www.un.org/en/sustainable-development-goals Agenda 2030 is a conspiracy theory? https://sdgs.un.org/2030agenda ESG investment is a conspiracy theory? https://www.rbcgam.com/en/ca/about-us/responsible-investment/?utm_dc=ga_SEG_1591924734_96750851246_623551894035_aud-1014319794123:kwd-299973852369_m_g_&gclid=Cj0KCQiA_bieBhDSARIsADU4zLcw1o75a3orrhwB9Y77D9nvLYBXMTOcz6NIwji9Ms-yUbwcSfVHn8caAsytEALw_wcB 😆... okay Mike.. quick Google search Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted January 23 Report Share Posted January 23 15 minutes ago, Moonbox said: West apparently went to "business school" or at least took classes and learned about these, but somehow doesn't actually know anything about them beyond his usual hysterics. Whatever... let's at least follow this discussion train to the 'agree to disagree' station. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.