I am sorry to say this but this interviewer is acting according to format of the corporate media talking heads act in the UK/US. She needs to respect the people she interviews. It is perfectly fine that she does not have to agree with their views but she shall not need to speak her interviewee in condescending manner. She does this often when interviewing people whose views she does not like. This way of treating people legitimatising .

Alex Jones has been talking about this for years now!

Thank you RT for providing real news, and covering sensitive issues like the Bilderberg group in a very professional manner. Please have Daniel Estulin and other scholarly researchers on regarding this and similar topics. Progress and Freedom come through Truth and Justice.

Why not go all the way and talk about the committee of 300, and the the most powerful of all secret societies called the Illuminati who rules the world.!

PR101 I reckon the fact that upsets you about this interviewer is because she is obviously very pleased and happy to be part of the story revealing this demonic Bilderberg Group existence rather than her alleged condescending manner. You wrote: “It is perfectly fine that she does not have to agree with their views but she shall not need to speak her interviewee in condescending manner”,__I am puzzled that you say she does not agree with her interviewee when the fact is she agrees with him 100% and she appears to be happy about the revelation. Are you by any chance member of this demonic Bilderberg Group?

There is a world in the world that those outside of this world never see, and the symbolism for this hidden hand is everywhere around us. I have to agree with what Ella Wheeler Wilcox once wrote. To sin by silence when we should protest makes cowards out of men. Ella Wheeler Wilcox

krka Many of us have learned how to read the media in rhetoric according to the corporate media formula. For example, this interviewer acts according the CNN/BBC format when dealing with issues pertaining to the Middle East as well. In this interview, I had problem with her use of such terms as ‘socalled’ the Bilderberg Group! Her socalled works within the discourse of conspiracy theory. Terms such as ‘socalled’ etc be read as smart way of de-legitimatizes a point of view one does not like. Finally, I would like to know what is RT’s official position with respect to the capital city of Israel? Is it Tel Aviv as the international community recognizes it to be or Jerusalem as the Zionists and their supporters would like to insist. This journalist is well aware this controversy but yet she always uses the term “Jerusalem” as the capital of Israel. We watch RT and some of us read between the lines as we read and consume the news. I have noticed that some RT reports use the same format as the western corporate media formula in the way they deal with people they interview and how they read and frame the news. We pay attention to these dynamics because RT positions itself as an alternative to the corporate dominated monopoly. P/S. Since existence of this secret group has been out there for a long time and this author has been speaking about their dubious activities for a while now why may I ask the interviewer came across as completely surprised! Do not get me wrong, I like Alice Hebert. She is a fine journalist; She is smart and very effective. I just wish to point out certain slant she puts in some of the issues she deals with.

Shilka.maskirovka, "To sin by silence when we should protest makes cowards out of men." - great quote for now, and great one for the bulk of the European populations efforts in WW2 But what about this man made Global Orientated Democracy, created by these wise fellows. Isn't it just the best thing we could have, a world democracy, with free speech for everyone, representative parties, a free press, rule of law, no wars, as no countries, no conflict. Aren't we just overcome with comfort, aren't we just realising, that this is the best thing ever to happen, a real breakthrough in thinking. Universal democracy for all, wow, such fairness such justice, aren't these people doing Gods work to create a world government, aren't their intentions just so pure, so honourable, to create such a heaven, such a paradise for us. But hang on a minute! this all sounds too good to be true. What will check and balance this system. When the press is owned by the rich and only two controlled parties are on offer. What will happen when the officials just manipulate the world electorate for cash, to pay themselves with salaries and expense accounts. Who will stop it just becoming a world dictatorship. There will be no external points of reference, there will be no external opposition and support. Every thing will be internally relative, a system without reference, if old people are costing too much, cut down their money and care, if disabled are the same, then deal with them, after all it is all for the greater good. There are no comparisons. Hell we don't now have a man made Global Orienated Democracy. Instead we have a Device for Evil and Vile Intentions Legitamised We need diversity, we need balance, we need external references and oppositions. We are not perfect, so only multipolar checks through different nations and cultures keep us from a world of tyrany. We are humans and imperfect, not Gods. That is why we cannot become false ones, unless we truly want hell on earth.

Pasadena Why not go right at the top of the pyramid to the almighty Queen Elizabeth 2 and break the myth that she only holds a ceremonial position. This notion is circulated to protect her from public opinion wrongdoings which her appointed Prime Minister takes all the blames. Imagine if the public knew who really brings the decisions which many times are very unpopular such as GST tax, how long will the post of a King or a Queen last in England? In 1975 she sacked the then Prime Minister of Australia Edward Gough Whitlam who was democratically elected by the people.

I agree with the people who said the interviewer was condescending. She was laughing at him, not with him, using terms like "so-called", asking extremely skeptical questions, and ending by making fun of Mr. Estulin's hope of causing a serious stir-up in EP. "European Parliament"...what a joke. Makes it sound like they were elected or something.

PR101 The Interviewer uses the word “so-called” the Bilderberg Group for ethical reason, not to be understood by the public that this revelation is official stand of RT. If she used the phrase as if she knew it already it would appear that she would lead the claimant to say what RT wanted to and then RT would lose the credibility as an independent broadcaster. That is the difference between RT and American controlled media such as FOX, CNN etc. She never interrupted the claimant and she gave him the opportunity to say whatever he wanted to say, which is not the case of US broadcasters. Just a simple example of the US media, remember when the Georgian teenage girl was interviewed on FOX just after the Georgian—Russian War of 2008, this girl wanted to say who started the War but the host cut he short instantly and went on a commercial. US don’t have News Media but a controlling system censured by a committee at the top of the pyramid.

Kayleigh Which people do you agree with regarding the interviewer being condescending? Nobody else said that accept PR101 and yourself, if both of you are not one person only?!?

No man will be able to transcend this life or this world, as we know it, through the accumulation of material objects and power over other living beings. Such men who have subscribed to such a way of life are infantile in their approach to life and their own spirituality, and should be delegated to the lowliest positions in society, for their lack of spiritual wisdom and their inability to create beauty. Such men should be ignored and swept under the carpet by the masses, for these man are not men, but children who have been given far too much attention.

All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.”
- German philosopher Arthur Schopenhauer (1788 – 1860)