Activists from around the country united to protest the Bilderberg conference at the Westfield’s Marriott in Chantilly Virginia just over a week ago. Ever heard of it? If not, I'm not surprised; because the meetings are supposed to be secret. The annual conference includes over a hundred North American and Western European elitists active in: politics and government, industry and energy, communications and media, education and the arts, the list goes on. Since the Bilderberg’s conference origin in 1954, the meeting has remained closed to the public.

Many conspirators, (as they are labeled), suspect the Bilderberg hierarchy is directly involved in international policies that effect global finances and political agendas. Concern for the "golden rule" (whoever owns the gold controls the rule) has inspired numerous historians, politicians, political activists, and investigative journalists to expose the Bilderberg organization and their plan for a "New World Order." Alex Jones, radio show host, has been following the conference's activities for about a decade and produced numerous unveiling documentary films that give credit to "conspirator" testimony. This year Jones's purpose was to expose the conference to the U.S. public by forcing the mainstream media to report on it.

However, thus far, the annual conference has been neglected in mainstream media. In fact, the U.S. media has denied the very existence of the conference since its conception; mocking anyone who dares  to speak about the meetings as a small paranoid subpopulation that invents the group as an excuse to justify their own misunderstandings of human struggles and hardships. Currently, a mass of alternative news reporting on Bilderberg has forced the masses to finally admit, that the Bilderberg’s do exist. Despite the acknowledgement of this covert group, popular U.S. press/media still do not report on this. Is it not news worthy? These are the most powerful few of our time; meeting in complete secrecy, and for what means?

To date, I have found only two U.S. news outlets that have covered the Bilderberg protest that took place May 31 to June 3. Presumably, the Washington Times and the Washington Post were the only two Medias to cover the event because they had to - the protest took place in their backyard, Chantilly Virginia. Both newspapers are sure to label the protesters as conspirators without subjecting the Bilderberg group to the same taboo description.  The Washington Times in particular, portrayed the protesters as an irrational group fueled by preposterous ideologies. It is unfortunate that neither of the newspapers were able to produce any real journalism by investigating the history of Bilderberg; its members and/or agendas. For example, the Washington Post reports that "conspiracy buffs have embraced notions such as the group is behind the creation of the euro." If the Washington Post had done any research into this claim they would have known that Etienne Davignon, (decade-long chairman of the Bilderberg group) admitted to the EUobserver Online in 2009 that Bilderberg "helped create the Euro in the 1990s."

Since attending the protest myself, I feel as though the two Washington newspapers left out important information needed to adequately describe the movement. For starters, they failed to mention the immense amount of alternative and international media sources that traveled hundreds if not thousands of miles to expose the Bilderberg group and document the event. To my knowledge, the International news outlets included Russia Today, The Guardian, and Hispan while alternative media also covered the event.   Several observed were, We Are Change, Info Wars, The Intel Hub, Truth Exposed Radio, Press for Truth, Oath Keepers, the list goes on. If the Washington Times or Post were concerned with understanding the motives for the protest wouldn't they interview those leading the movement? The Washington Post did interview at least one info warrior that stated that the Bilderberg conference was illegal under the Logan Act.

The Logan Act, is never mentioned in either article in-spite of how the law is used as a primary focus in the attempt to expose the Bilderberg meetings for their true illegal intentions. The Logan Act states that:

“Any citizen of the United States, wherever he may be, who, without authority of the United States, directly or indirectly commences or carries on any correspondence or intercourse with any foreign government or any officer or agent thereof, with intent to influence the measures or conduct of any foreign government or of any officer or agent thereof, in relation to any disputes or controversies with the United States, or to defeat the measures of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.”

In 2008, American Friends of Bilderberg stated that "Bilderberg's only activity is its annual Conference. At the meetings, no resolutions are proposed, no votes taken, and no policy statements issued," immunizing the group from the Logan Act. However, this statement contradicts statements made by many Bilderberg members, including the statement quoted above by Etienne Davignon. Consider the following:

Alison Redford, "I am very pleased to be able to be attending a conference in Washington made up of international leaders who are making decisions, involved in decisions that affect the Canadian economy and the oil sand."

Gideon Rachman, “In general, the Union has progressed fastest when far-reaching deals have been agreed by technocrats and politicians – and then pushed through without direct reference to the voters."

David Rockefeller, "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 lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is 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."

The list of quotes from Bilderberger's exposing Bilderberg should be enough evidence for an investigation into the group’s illegality. But should the Logan Act even have to be used as a weapon against Bilderberg? Shouldn't it just be common sense to question and demand transparency from a secret conference whose members have a history of corruption? These are the few that control our international institutions and are capable of implementing any global agenda they wish.