Bilderberg participants 2010   (in alphabetic order) (Present) Occupation

BEL Davignon, Etienne F. Honorary Chairman, Bilderberg Meetings; Vice Chairman,
Suez Tractebel

DEU Ackermann, Josef Chairman of the Management Board and the Group Executive
Committee, Deutsche Bank AG

USA Alexander, Keith B. Director, National Security Agency

GRC Alogoskoufis, George Member of Parliament

USA Altman, Roger C. Chairman and CEO, Evercore Partners, Inc.

GRC Arapoglou, Takis Chairman and CEO, National Bank of Greece

TUR Babacan, Ali Minister of State and Deputy Prime Minister

GRC Bakoyannis, Dora Minister of Foreign Affairs

NOR Baksaas, Jon Fredrik President and CEO, Telenor Group

PRT Balsemão, Francisco Pinto Chairman and CEO, IMPRESA, S.G.P.S.; Former Prime
Minister

FRA Baverez, Nicolas Partner, Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP

ITA Bernabè, Franco CEO Telecom Italia SpA

SWE Bildt, Carl Minister of Foreign Affairs

SWE Björklund, Jan Minister for Education; Leader of the Lìberal Party

CHE Blocher, Christoph Former Swiss Counselor; Former Chairman and CEO, EMS Group

FRA Bompard, Alexandre CEO, Europe 1

USA Boot, Max Jeane J. Kirkpatrick Senior Fellow for National Security Studies, Council
on Foreign Relations

AUT Bronner, Oscar Publisher and Editor, Der Standard

FRA Castries, Henri de Chairman of the Management Board and CEO, AXA

ESP Cebrián, Juan Luis CEO, Grupo PRISA

BEL Coene, Luc Vice Governor, National Bank of Belgium

USA Collins, Timothy C. Senior Managing Director and CEO, Ripplewood Holdings, LLC

GRC David, George A. Chairman, Coca-Cola Hellenic Bottling Co. (H.B.C.) S.A.

GRC Diamantopoulou, Anna Member of Parliament

ITA Draghi, Mario Governor, Banca d'Italia

USA Eberstadt, Nicholas N. Henry Wendt Scholar in Political Economy, American
Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research

DNK Eldrup, Anders President, DONG Energy A/S

ITA Elkann, John Chairman, EXOR S.p.A.; Vice Chairman, Fiat S.p.A.

DEU Enders, Thomas CEO, Airbus SAS

ESP Entrecanales, José Manuel Chairman, Acciona

AUT Faymann, Werner Federal Chancellor

USA Ferguson, Niall Laurence A. Tisch Professor of History, Harvard University

IRL Gleeson, Dermot Chairman, AIB Group

USA Graham, Donald E. Chairman and CEO, The Washington Post Company

NLD Halberstadt, Victor Professor of Economics, Leiden University; Former
Honorary Secretary General of Bilderberg Meetings

NLD Hirsch Ballin, Ernst M.H. Minister of Justice

USA Holbrooke, Richard C. US Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan

NLD Hommen, Jan H.M. Chairman, ING N.V.

INT Hoop Scheffer, Jaap G. de Secretary General, NATO

USA Johnson, James A. Vice Chairman, Perseus, LLC

USA Jordan, Jr., Vernon E. Senior Managing Director, Lazard Frères & Co. LLC

FIN Katainen, Jyrki Minister of Finance

USA Keane, John M. Senior Partner, SCP Partners; General, US Army, Retired

USA Kent, Muhtar President and CEO, The Coca-Cola Company

GBR Kerr, John Member, House of Lords; Deputy Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell plc

DEU Klaeden, Eckart von Foreign Policy Spokesman, CDU/CSU

USA Kleinfeld, Klaus President and CEO, Alcoa Inc.

TUR Koç, Mustafa V. Chairman, Koç Holding A.S.

DEU Koch, Roland Prime Minister of Hessen

TUR Kohen, Sami Senior Foreign Affairs Columnist, Milliyet

USA Kravis, Henry R. Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute, Inc.

INT Kroes, Neelie Commissioner, European Commission

GRC Kyriacopoulos, Ulysses Chairman and Board member of subsidiary companies
of the S&B Group

FRA Lagarde, Christine Minister for the Economy, Industry and Employment

INT Lamy, Pascal Director General, World Trade Organization

PRT Leite, Manuela Ferreira Leader, PSD

ESP León Gross, Bernardino General Director of the Presidency of the Spanish
Government

DEU Löscher, Peter CEO, Siemens AG

GBR Mandelson, Peter Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory
Reform

INT Maystadt, Philippe President, European Investment Bank

CAN McKenna, Frank Former Ambassador to the US

GBR Micklethwait, John Editor-in-Chief, The Economist

FRA Montbrial, Thierry de President, French Institute for International Relations

ITA Monti, Mario President, Universita Commerciale Luigi Bocconi

ESP Moratinos Cuyaubé, Miguel A. Minister of Foreign Affairs

USA Mundie, Craig J. Chief Research and Strategy Officer, Microsoft Corporation

CAN Munroe-Blum, Heather Principal and Vice Chancellor, McGill University

NOR Myklebust, Egil Former Chairman of the Board of Directors SAS, Norsk Hydro ASA

DEU Nass, Matthias Deputy Editor, Die Zeit

NLD Beatrix, H.M. the Queen of the Netherlands 

ESP Nin Génova, Juan Maria President and CEO, La Caixa

FRA Olivennes, Denis CEO and Editor in Chief, Le Nouvel Observateur

FIN Ollila, Jorma Chairman, Royal Dutch Shell plc

GBR Osborne, George Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer

FRA Oudéa, Frédéric CEO, Société Générale

ITA Padoa-Schioppa, Tommaso Former Minister of Finance; President of Notre Europe

GRC Papahelas, Alexis Journalist, Kathimerini

GRC Papalexopoulos, Dimitris Managing Director, Titan Cement Co. S.A.

GRC Papathanasiou, Yannis Minister of Economy and Finance

USA Perle, Richard N. Resident Fellow, American Enterprise Institute for Public
Policy Research

BEL Philippe, H.R.H. Prince 

PRT Pinho, Manuel Minister of Economy and Innovation

INT Pisani-Ferry, Jean Director, Bruegel

CAN Prichard, J. Robert S. President and CEO, Metrolinx

ITA Prodi, Romano Chairman, Foundation for Worldwide Cooperation

FIN Rajalahti, Hanna Managing Editor, Talouselämä

CAN Reisman, Heather M. Chair and CEO, Indigo Books & Music Inc.

NOR Reiten, Eivind President and CEO, Norsk Hydro ASA

CHE Ringier, Michael Chairman, Ringier AG

USA Rockefeller, David Former Chairman, Chase Manhattan Bank

USA Rubin, Barnett R. Director of Studies and Senior Fellow, Center for
International Cooperation, New York University

TUR Sabanci Dinçer, Suzan Chairman, Akbank

CAN Samarasekera, Indira V. President and Vice-Chancellor, University of Alberta

AUT Scholten, Rudolf Member of the Board of Executive Directors, Oesterreichische
Kontrollbank AG

USA Sheeran, Josette Executive Director, UN World Food Programme

ITA Siniscalco, Domenico Vice Chairman, Morgan Stanley International

ESP Solbes, Pedro Vice-President of Spanish Government; Minister of Economy and
Finance

ESP Sophia, H.M. the Queen of Spain 

USA Steinberg, James B. Deputy Secretary of State

INT Stigson, Bjorn President, World Business Council for Sustainable Development

GRC Stournaras, Yannis Research Director, Foundation for Economic and Industrial
Research (IOBE)

IRL Sutherland, Peter D. Chairman, BP plc and Chairman, Goldman Sachs International

INT Tanaka, Nobuo Executive Director, IEA

GBR Taylor, J. Martin Chairman, Syngenta International AG

USA Thiel, Peter A. President, Clarium Capital Management, LLC

DNK Thorning-Schmidt, Helle Leader ofThe Social Democratic Party

DNK Thune Andersen, Thomas Partner and CEO, Maersk Oil

AUT Treichl, Andreas Chairman and CEO, Erste Group Bank AG

INT Trichet, Jean-Claude President, European Central Bank

GRC Tsoukalis, Loukas President of the Hellenic Foundation for European and
Foreign Policy (ELlAMEP)

TUR Ugur, Agah CEO, Borusan Holding

FIN Vanhanen, Matti Prime Minister

CHE Vasella, Daniel L. Chairman and CEO, Novartis AG

NLD Veer, Jeroen van der Chief Executive, Royal Dutch Shell plc

USA Volcker, Paul A. Chairman, Economic Recovery Advisory Board

SWE Wallenberg, Jacob Chairman, Investor AB

SWE Wallenberg, Marcus Chairman, SEB

NLD Wellink, Nout President, De Nederlandsche Bank

NLD Wijers, Hans Chairman, AkzoNobel NV

GBR Wolf, Martin H. Associate Editor & Chief Economics Commentator, The Financial
Times

USA Wolfensohn, James D. Chairman, Wolfensohn & Company, LLC

USA Wolfowitz, Paul Visiting Scholar, American Enterprise Institute for Public
Policy Research

INT Zoellick, Robert B. President, The World Bank Group

GBR Bredow, Vendeline von Business Correspondent, The Economist (Rapporteur)

GBR McBride, Edward Business Editor, The Economist (Rapporteur)

• AUT Austria
• BEL Belgium
• CHE Switzerland
• CAN Canada
• DEU Germany
• DNK Denmark
• ESP Spain
• FRA France
• FIN Finland
• GBR Great Britain
• GRC Greece
• IRL Ireland
• INT International
• ITA Italy
• NOR Norway
• NLD Netherlands
• PRT Portugal
• SWE Sweden
• TUR Turkey
• USA United States of America

Source: Cryptome

Other:

Everything about this year’s Bilderberg Conference!

Bilberberg 2010 – List of Participants and Meeting Agenda - (againstnwo.com)

Bilderberg 2010 Agenda Leaked – (blacklistednews.com)

Of all the chemicals approved by the agency for use on oil spills, Corexit 9500 is among the most toxic to certain organisms, according to EPA tests. It also is among the least effective in breaking up the kind of oil that is prevalent in the area around the spill site, EPA tests concluded. Corexit 9500 was available in large quantities at the time of the accident, however, and was on the EPA’s list of approved dispersants. - wsj

As of May 10th, over 250,000 gallons of COREXIT 9500A, a chemical known as a ‘dispersant,’ – designed to break down substances like oil into smaller, less visible particles – has been dumped into the ocean at the site of the Deepwater Horizon disaster.

According to a fact sheet released by the Food & Water Watch group, while dispersants like COREXIT 9500A may break down surface oil particles easing the eye and minimizing contact with oil for a select few animals, they actually encourage oil exposure deeper in the water column to various marine life, including fish, oysters, and eggs – many organisms sold as food commodity around the world.

Not only does COREXIT 9500A (developed by Exxon and now manufactured by Nalco Holding Company) create the illusion removing oil, it is extremely toxic. COREXIT 9500A is three times as toxic than any other dispersant used before according to Food & Water Watch. The dispersant has been found to be less effective than prior dispersants.

Patents on the substance have helped keep the true nature of its structure secret, but the company’s material safety data indicates three major hazardous substances. According to the Food & Water Watch bulletin, “many experts are concerned about the use [of COREXIT 9500A], which adds additional toxins to the ocean and may lead to longer-term ecological problems.”

COREXIT 9500A has been identified as an Immediate (Acute) Health Hazard by the EPA, and the substances it contains are on the EPA’s Toxic Substance list.

In 1990 the Oil Pollution Act was written, including the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP). The NCP includes a schedule of dispersants that can be used to mitigate oil spills, the water they can be used in, and the amounts that can be used. The power of this plan is delegated to the president.

All the information a company needs to add their product to the NCP list is their own set of data, including the effectiveness and toxicity. This information is not tested or verified by any government criteria before being added to the list.

“Within the category of dispersants,” the Food & Water Watch fact sheet states, “there are chemicals that are less toxic and more effective than COREXIT 9500A…an oil spill should not be an opportunity for a company to profit from a chemical that may not be safe for the marine environment.”

The EPA …said Thursday that it had ordered BP to find “a less toxic and more effective” chemical to break up the oil slick. The EPA ordered the British company to find an alternative to the chemical, Corexit 9500 made by Nalco Co. of Naperville, Ill., by late Thursday night and to begin using it by late Sunday night. – wsj

The Food & Water Watch COREXIT 9500A fact sheet (.pdf)

COREXIT 9500A Safety Data Sheet (.pdf)

(5.21.10) EPA Orders Use of Milder Dispersant; Scientists Fear Extensive Damage – wsj.com

Over 100 miles further off the coast than the Deepwater Horizon, Atlantis is drilling in 7,000 feet of water – approximately 2,000 feet deeper than the former, and pumps 200,000 barrels of crude oil per day. However, concerns have been raised regarding the legitimacy of the rig’s operation following initial findings of Abbott, then-BP sub-contractor, and subsequent investigations:

The Associated Press has learned that an independent firm hired by BP substantiated the complaints in 2009 and found that the giant petroleum company was violating its own policies by not having completed engineering documents on board the Atlantis when it began operating in 2007 - abcnews.com

The corporation supposedly fired Abbott after he initially voiced these concerns. On May 17th, Abbott filed a federal lawsuit against BP, calling for the project to be shut down until proper structural documents are presented, and safety concerns are addressed.

BP “rebutted allegations that its Atlantis platform in the Gulf of Mexico operated with incomplete and inaccurate engineering documents.” The corporation states  that it thoroughly reviewed and addressed the concerns originally voiced by Abbott back in 2009, though investigation suggests otherwise.

The Department of the Interior and the Minerals Management Service aren’t saying anything to the press. In direct conflict with statements made by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar, BP reported on its website: “The design, construction, installation and operation of Atlantis have received a high level of oversight by…the US Minerals Management Service (MMS).”

However, at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing about the explosion on the Deepwater Horizon, Salazar said the exact opposite in reference to the role the groups were playing in preventative efforts stating, “Responsibility starts first at the Department of Interior and the Minerals Management Service. We have to clean up that house.”

More than 20 lawmakers have signed a letter urging the Minerals Management Services to shut the project down until it is properly investigated. BP, the Department of the Interior, and the Minerals Management Service apparently feel that such a move is unnecessary, despite facts stating the opposite.

More information surrounding BP’s Atlantis project, and the lawsuit, can be found at the Food & Water Watch BP Atlantis Campaign website.

BP rebuttal press-release: BP Atlantis.

More:

(5.20.10) U.S. Should Shut BP Atlantis Platform, Lawmaker Says (Update2) – BusinessWeek.com

(5.19.10) U.S. lawmakers to urge BP to idle its Atlantis rig – reuters.com

(5.18.10) U.S. probes another BP rig, seeks MMS shakeup – reuters.com

(5.17.10) Federal lawsuit seeks shutdown of BP rig Atlantis – wwltv.com

All the beliefs, habits, tastes, emotions, mental attitudes that characterize our time are really designed to sustain the mystique of the Party and prevent the true nature of present day society from being perceived. Physical rebellion, or any preliminary move toward rebellion, is at present not possible. From the proletarians nothing is to be feared. Left to themselves, they will continue from generation to generation and from century to century, working, breeding, and dying, not only without any impulse to rebel, but without the power of grasping that the world could be other than it is. – 1984

Soon we’ll be housing the (our) oppressors (a modern-day Quartering Act) as if we hadn’t been already.

 Currently, as victims of the search for unattainable satisfaction by a small group of elites, as objects of the distancing of (un)satisfaction so as to avoid its acknowledgment, citizens of at least 130 nations have come to bear forcefully imposed government and military presence. At present, billions of worthless dollars (and most importantly life and freedom) are being “spent” by a government, obviously disconnected from those it governs, toward a – personally defined – means to an end that has proved itself so far to be unattainable.

The general public’s conception of the government entity is no doubt floating on a carpet in the realms of the magical. Almost an enigma, government is perceived as necessary in some certain sense, but without the need or room for the habitual, natural analysis and consideration of its end and function by those who are supposedly meant to give it meaning and purpose. 

In some sense it is understandable how the citizens of a governing “body” that legislates militaristic command and action at its own discretion, in a nation that supposedly stands for and represents the very opposite, would not be aware of, and therefore, not feel responsible for this annihilation of liberty of those “others” who inhabit a nation with borders that exist outside the world of their own, the others whose borders come to signify and mark the location of the unapproved, and in an important sense unacknowledged, action of corporate fraternities under the guise of “government.” On one level it may seem right to say here that there’s no permission without asking and that the government does not, in fact, ask. But the government shouldn’t have to ask. There should be no question of asking. Not in the sense that “government” dominates individuals and is the arbiter in all matters, but on the contrary, in the sense that government (albeit possibly only ideally) is the product that, because it works both for, and on behalf of the citizens which define it, is directly representative of each and all those individuals that are affected by its definition.

This of course draws a discussion about the role and purpose of the citizen in interaction with his government – ultimately himself. This is becoming increasingly important as tyrannic corporate psychopaths from a long line of in-bred families continue to narrow their sights on the minds of the citizens of this very country. There is a war on for your mind. There is a war on for your body, and for it’s product – labor.

Based on the structure of the constitutional republic upon which our country was framed, the interaction described above necessitates a sense in which the individual citizen is responsible for himself, his fellow citizens, and his government.

 Naturally, those who posit and conceptualize their government as some uninterpretable but necessary fact concede that they have no effect on their government, but only that government has an effect on them. Government becomes representation alienated. In this case it is the citizen that does give government its power, but it is not through active participation that the power is given, but rather through submission.

The inescapable responsibility of the individual citizen who is a necessary part of a nation that is in its foundation directly modeled on (and is still accountable for) aspects of a representative government that exists and functions under the interpretation of representation, not as an alienation, but a unification, certainly implies also in all citizens (thus, in each citizen) a type of responsibility for the mode of his government’s action. What I mean is that this responsibility on the subjective level requires active participation. Through interaction a “temporary ethics” can be derived, generally agreed upon, usually unique to a particular epoch (do the ethics define the epoch, or does the epoch define the ethics?), but never a concrete, determinate (if you will) ethics that is either always or instantly universally applicable. Again, here I do not wish to digress into, or instigate a discussion on the nature of ethics beyond which the term directly (and admittedly, vaguely) applies to this particular discussion.

 The individual who experiences a wanting – a longing even – for participation without responsibility in a system that in itself depends on both is sure to achieve at best a false sense of participation. This false participation cannot ever satisfy simply because it is false. It never serves to demystify that which it is participant of. Rather, it is a crucial part of the mystification itself. It serves only to ensure the inevitable presence of the mystical. False participation will not cease to haunt the individual who lives it. He is reminded of it in his every day actions. Even those aspects of life that are least influenced by this mystified government always remind him of it. The nature of his relationship to mystical presence is necessary to his particular mode of “participation” because it defines the ways in which he can participate, while at the same time constantly reminds him through this participation that he really cannot participate. Any possible upsurge of questioning is stifled by false participation. Questioning requires a sturdy foundation on which to question: responsibility. This foundation of questioning in responsibility requires that before the questioning of any empirical knowledge can begin, one must accept the pretenses on which knowledge can be questioned.

The acceptance of responsibility is the crux of the individual who exists amidst a world of social interaction (which is what makes “government” necessary.) This is simply because the individual becomes accountable. His views, his choices, they define him. He recognizes this fact in others. The responsible individual (by default a citizen) does not experience government as mystification the way that one who lives under the premise of false participation inevitably does. The individual who accepts responsibility feels a sense in which his participation means everything precisely because he is consciously participating. Participating in the sense that he attempts to consider all aspects of an act, posited or factual, past, present, or future and its relationships to freedom. All actions ultimately have inexhaustible implications. What is significant of responsibility is not the quantity of effects considered, but the facticity of the act of considering.

False participation is not distinguished from genuine participation based simply on a certain level of empirical knowledge of government. In fact, as has been established above, empirical knowledge cannot be considered in absence of some type of participation. Government knowledge and social-political awareness are ultimately notions derived from subjective interpretation of empirical knowledge. As there must occur an instance in everyone’s life where at least some (if not all) objects of consciousness are at some point “mystified,” or made “unclear,” in ways not unfamiliar to the apparent “mystification” of government by the general public. That is, the majority of the population has both the conception and perception of “government” that is more perplexing than palpable (this is changing every day as more and more innocent citizens of these States are being physically and mentally accosted, tortured, and man-handled by the elite masters.) In a sense, everything needs solid ground upon which to build; a point of evolution, an end toward which one can project action. Beginning from the conception of government as mystical, all thought of or about that government is also in some sense mystical or mystified. It inherently possess a mystical quality simply because it is directly linked to the mystical. As established above, any act of false participation is consumed by the mystery, thus can never elude it. But that does not have to be true. One can choose how they participate. False participation does not deny all forms of reflection.

 The mystification of government by the false participant – the constant recognition through daily action and interaction of the alienation from a necessary “structure” that creates, contains, and enforces “law” that governs, and also that the structure necessarily alienates; a realization of irrelevance for government that results in irrelevance for an individual – are precisely the terms in which the he can find motivation and accept responsibility, become a participant, become accountable.
From this standpoint it is easy to recognize a situation in which one is, in terms of freedom, importantly related to government. This realized situation forever gives birth to choice. At any given instant the possibility of facticity of a particular goal’s achievement at some point in the future is in a way meaningless. It is the choice of action in the present that reflects the particular end, regardless of the achievement of that end. This does not intend to ignore the undeniable positivities that result from achievement, certainly, and especially, when that achievement is reached by a responsible project. But achievement, no matter what kind is ultimately always unsatisfactory. However, taking responsibility for the approach to (un)satisfaction can be arguably stated as achieving the closest state to “true” satisfaction. 

Taking responsibility can be considered a task that is both “easy” and “hard” depending on the perspective of which it is assumed.

It is certainly clear how false participation can be observed as the “easier” approach. This is because the false participant can still exist alongside the responsible and in fact must exist alongside the responsible by virtue of participation – that is the common denominator here – so in an external sense does not feel, at least in terms of government, any more limited than the responsible individual in the ability to respond. However, from the perspective of the responsible individual there exists an apparent limit to the ability in which the false participant truly responds. But the responsible one can never impose that trait on another individual. That would be against its very nature. An individual has to choose, in this case, and if not in all cases, responsibility. And with responsibility comes realization of choice, or responsible choice. But again freedom, participation, and accountability are not qualities that once adopted or represented in action are established indefinitely; they must constantly be reaffirmed. That is ultimate responsibility.

To reiterate, in some way it is understandable the instance of “self-governed government” springing forth from the very same entity that was (we are told) formed on the principles of individual freedom, liberty, and equality. To describe the country today in the same context as it was upon its foundation is a distinct act of false participation. It’s true, based on empirical fact, that our country has deviated significantly in ideology and practice from that of our country’s founders. We’ve trained ourselves, just as much as we have been trained, to not genuinely participate; to become both temporarily and permanently satisfied with pseudo-participation within the matrix. We must accept responsibility. We are human beings. Likewise, so are all those who keep government “alive” through thinking it, being it, participating in it. We make it. Why do we as human beings seem disposed in some ironic fashion to the thickening of the fogs of mystery?

The negative presence of our military is lived directly by millions of individuals each day. Still one rarely, it seems, ever attempts to see from the perspective of those other civilians, other citizens. They pose no threat to us, the way our government wants us to believe, those citizens of other nations but of our same status as human. But false participation accounts for their lack of consideration by the very community they are a part of. It’s of no direct concern to any one of us.

 Not until we’ve got those who are determined to enforce a certain concept freedom, distinguishable as such simply because it was in the past, enforcing on those of its own country who are supposed to be free! We can and must acknowledge, without also bearing a shame that is discouraging to action, the inherent selfishness implied in not recognizing the freedoms of others become jeopardized by an entity that we are associated with until that entity (that is in some sense ours) poses the very same threat to our own freedom. We can realize now a situation in which freedom is equivalent in its meaning for all humans. We can as a people reconcile the necessity of this freedom and the eternal importance of establishing it as fact for all individuals.

We must act now. If at this moment we recognize such limitations on responsibility, one can also imagine the limitations a total military state can impose. What if it takes a scenario such as the one forewarned in the news article? Are we consumed by materialism, 21st century distractions, or by mystification, alienation, and fear? Materialism is in effect an excuse for false participation. Involvement and consideration don’t imply abandoning a convenience, even in a material sense. In fact, involvement ultimately creates a sense of convenience.

There is absolutely no reason to have faith in the individual who acts under the pretenses of false participation, just as there is no reason to have faith in one who is at this moment responsible. That is the nature of the definition of responsibility. 

It’s not a question of teaching responsibility directly, or of being able to change the outlook or perspective of the individual. Only the individual can change himself. Those responsible can adopt the task of creating situations that serve to demystify concepts such as government and freedom through enabling the ability of response. The effort must necessarily be grassroots, all the way down to the individual root. Humans must encourage responsibility in every, and all other human.

Without adoption of responsibility we will continue as people, as humans, to be stomped on, crushed, annihilated, by those other humans who live falsely in power with the guise of language and its resulting concepts, such as “government.” We will be denied all forms of response. We will be denied. Our individual cessation is of no concern to their cause, for that cause in its very nature denies taking responsibility for any of its ends.

Subject: The Employee Meeting

I would like to start by thanking you for attending this   meeting, though it’s not like you had much of a choice. After all, attendance was mandatory. I’m also glad many of you accepted my invitation to your family members to be here as well. I have a few remarks to make to all of you, and then we’ll retire to the ballroom for a great lunch and some employee awards.

I felt that this meeting was important enough to close all 12 of our tire and automotive shops today so that you could be here. To reassure you, everybody is being paid for the day — except me. Since our stores are closed we’re making no money. That economic loss is mine to sustain. Carrington Automotive has 157 full time employees and around 30 additional part-timers. All of you are here. I thank you for that.

When you walked into this auditorium you were handed a rather thick 78-page document. Many of you have already taken a peek. You were probably surprised to see that it’s my personal tax return for 2008. Those of you who are adept at reading these tax returns will see that last year my taxable income was $534,000.00. Now I’m sure this seems rather high to many of you. So … let’s talk about this tax return.

Carrington Automotive Enterprises is what we call a Sub-S – a Subchapter S corporation. The name comes from a particular part of our tax code. Sub-S status means that the income from all 12 of our stores is reported on my personal tax return. Businesses that report their income on the owner’s personal tax return are referred to as “small businesses.” So, you see now that this $534,000 is really the total taxable income – the total combined profit from all 12 of our stores. That works out to an average of a bit over $44,000 per store.

Why did I feel it important for you to see my actual 2008 tax return? Well, there’s a lot of rhetoric being thrown around today about taxes, small businesses and rich people. To the people in charge in Washington right now I’m a wealthy American making over a half-million dollars a year. Most Americans would agree: I’m just another rich guy; after all … I had over a half-million in income last year, right? In this room we know that the reality is that I’m a small business owner who runs 12 retail establishments and employs 187 people. Now here’s something that shouldn’t surprise you, but it will: Just under 100 percent … make that 99.7 percent of all employers in this country are small businesses, just like ours.

Every one of these businesses reports their income on a personal income tax return. You need to understand that small businesses like ours are responsible for about 80 percent of all private sector jobs in this country, and about 70 percent of all jobs that have been created over the past year. You also need to know that when you hear some politician talking about rich people who earn over $200,000 or $500,000 a year, they’re talking about the people who create the jobs.

The people who are now running the show in Washington have been talking for months about raising taxes on wealthy Americans. I already know that in two years my federal income taxes are going to go up by about 4.5 percent. That happens when Obama and the Democrats allow the Bush tax cuts to expire. When my taxes climb by 4.5 percent the Democrats will be on television saying that this really isn’t a tax increase. They’ll explain that the Bush tax cuts have expired .. nothing more. Here at Carrington we’ll know that almost 5% has been taken right off of our bottom line. And that means it will be coming off your bottom line.

Numbers are boring, I know … but let’s talk a bit more about that $534,000. That’s the money that was left last year from company revenues after I paid all of the salaries and expenses of running this business. Now I could have kept every penny of that for myself, but that would have left us with nothing to grow our business, to attract new customers and to hire new employees. You’re aware that we’ve been talking about opening new stores in Virginia Beach and Newport News . To do that I will have to buy or lease property, construct a building and purchase inventory. I also have to hire additional people to work in those stores. These people wouldn’t immediately be earning their pay. So, where do you think the money for all of this comes from? Right out of our profits .. right out of that $534,000. I need to advertise to bring customers in, especially in these tough times. Where do you think that money comes from? Oh sure, I can count it as an expense when I file my next income tax return .. but for right now that comes from either current revenues or last year’s profits. Revenues right now aren’t all that hot … so do the math. A good effective advertising campaign might cost us more than $300,000.

Is this all starting to come together for you now?

Right now the Democrats are pushing a nationalized health care plan that, depending on who’s doing the talking, will add anywhere from another two percent to an additional 4.6 percent to my taxes. If I add a few more stores, which I would like to do, and if the economy improves, my taxable income … our business income … could go over one million dollars! If that happens the Democrats have yet another tax waiting, another five percent plus! I’ve really lost track of all of the new government programs the Democrats and President Obama are proposing that they claim they will be able to finance with new taxes on what they call “wealthy Americans.”

And while we’re talking about health care, let me explain something else to you. I understand that possibly your biggest complaint with our company is that we don’t provide you with health insurance. That is because as your employer I believe that it is my responsibility to provide you with a safe workplace and a fair wage and to do all that I can to preserve and grow this company that provides us all with income. I no more have a responsibility to provide you with health insurance than I do with life, auto or homeowner’s insurance. As you know, I have periodically invited agents for health insurance companies here to provide you with information on private health insurance plans.

The Democrats are proposing to levy yet another tax against Carrington in the amount of 8 percent of my payroll as a penalty for not providing you with health insurance. You should know that if they do this I will be reducing every person’s salary or hourly wage by that same 8 percent. This will not be done to put any more money in my pocket. It will be done to make sure that I don’t suffer financially from the Democrat’s efforts to place our healthcare under the control of the federal government. It is your health, not mine. It is your healthcare, not mine. These are your expenses, not mine. If you think I’m wrong about all this, I would sure love to hear your reasoning.

Try to understand what I’m telling you here. Those people that Obama and the Democrats call “wealthy Americans” are, in very large part, America ‘s small business owners. I’m one of them. You have the evidence, and surely you don’t think that the owner of a bunch of tire stores is anything special. That $534,000 figure on my income tax return puts me squarely in Democrat crosshairs when it comes to tax increases.

Let’s be clear about this … crystal clear. Any federal tax increase on me is going to cost you money, not me. Any new taxes on Carrington Automotive will be new taxes that you, or the people I don’t hire to staff the new stores I won’t be building, will be paying. Do you understand what I’m telling you? You’ve heard about things rolling downhill, right? Fine … then you need to know that taxes, like that other stuff, roll downhill. Now you and I may understand that you are not among those that the Democrats call “wealthy Americans,” but when this “tax the rich” thing comes down you are going to be standing at the bottom of the mud slide, if you get my drift. That’s life in the big city, my friends … where elections have consequences.

You know our economy is very weak right now. I’ve pledged to get us through this without layoffs or cuts in your wages and benefits. It’s too bad the politicians can’t get us through this without attacking our profits. To insure our survival I have to take a substantial portion of that $534,000 and set it aside for unexpected expenses and a worsening economy. Trouble is, the government is eyeing that money too … and they have the guns. If they want it, they can take it.

I don’t want to make this too long. There’s a great lunch waiting for us all. But you need to understand what’s happening here. I’ve worked hard for 23 years to create this business. There were many years where I couldn’t take a penny in income because every dollar was being dedicated to expanding the business. There were tough times when it took every dollar of revenues to replenish our inventory and cover your paychecks. During those times I earned nothing. If you want to see those tax returns, just let me know.

OK … I know I’m repeating myself here. I don’t hire stupid people, and you are probably getting it now. So let me just ramble for a few more minutes.Most Americans don’t realize that when the Democrats talk about raising taxes on people making more than $250 thousand a year, they’re talking about raising taxes on small businesses. The U.S. Treasury Department says that six out of every ten individuals in this country with incomes of more than $280,000 are actually small business owners. About one-half of the income in this country that would be subject to these increased taxes is from small businesses like ours. Depending on how many of these wonderful new taxes the Democrats manage to pass, this company could see its tax burden increase by as much as $60,000. Perhaps more.

I know a lot of you voted for President Obama. A lot of you voted for Democrats across the board. Whether you voted out of support for some specific policies, or because you liked his slogans, you need to learn one very valuable lesson from this election. Elections have consequences. You might have thought it would be cool to have a president who looks like you; or a president who is young, has a buff body, and speaks eloquently when there’s a teleprompter in the neighborhood. Maybe you liked his promises to tax the rich. Maybe you believed his promise not to raise taxes on people earning less than a certain amount. Maybe you actually bought into his promise to cut taxes on millions of Americans who actually don’t pay income taxes in the first place. Whatever the reason .. your vote had consequences; and here they are.

Bottom line? I’m not taking this hit alone. As soon as the Democrats manage to get their tax increases on the books, I’m going to take steps to make sure that my family isn’t affected. When you own the business, that is what you’re allowed to do. I built this business over a period of 23 years, and I’m not going to see my family suffer because we have a president and a congress who think that wealth is distributed rather than earned. Any additional taxes, of whatever description, that President Obama and the Democrats inflict on this business will come straight out of any funds I have set aside for expansion or pay and benefit increases. Any plans I might have had to hire additional employees for new stores will be put aside. Any plans for raises for the people I now have working for me will be shelved. Year-end bonuses might well be eliminated. That may sound rough, but that’s the reality.

You’re going to continue to hear a lot of anti-wealth rhetoric out there from the media and from the left. You can chose to believe what you wish .. .but when it comes to Carrington Automotive you will know the truth. The books are open to any of you at any time. I have nothing to hide. I would hope that other small business owners out there would hold meetings like this one, but I know it won’t happen that often. One of the lessons to be learned here is that taxes … all taxes … and all regulatory costs that are placed on businesses anywhere in this country, will eventually be passed right on down to individuals; individuals such as yourself. This hasn’t been about admonishing anyone and it hasn’t been about issuing threats. This is part of the education you should have received in the government schools, but didn’t. Class is now dismissed.