The European Union: A Creation of the Bilderberg Group | ARTICLE

By | February 2, 2024

Just for fun, I thought I would write something non-UFO related. No audio for this but I hope it’s a good read. While I didn’t include hyperlinks for the most part in the text, my sources are listed at the bottom. My goal isn’t to make a moral judgment one way or the other, but to highlight a part of our history that seems essentially forgotten. 



The European Union: A Creation of the Bilderberg Group

By Richard Dolan

During the last two years, the war in Ukraine has changed many things in this world and brought much else to light. We are seeing a major geopolitical shift taking place, very much to the detriment of the so-called Collective West, to a degree that would have shocked most people just a few years ago. But one thing that has gained tremendous public attention during this time is the European Union. 

Not so surprisingly, there has been tremendous public backlash against many of the EU policies during this war. Protests are spreading throughout Europe due to a combination of economic hardships brought directly upon the people of Europe as a result of EU decision-making, as well as a number of repressive policies entirely separate from the war. This led me to ask: just how much do we know about the origins of the EU?

Of course, the information is easily searchable — somewhat. When you try to learn the history of the EU you find a series of fairly dry articles and books about the treaties that have come to make up the EU. For the record, there are three big ones: the Treaty of Rome (1957), the Maastricht Treaty (1992), and the Lisbon Treaty (2007). There were other developments along the way, but these three treaties can be considered the major milestones. But how many of us really know about them? Moreover, if we think of the EU as a political entity, which it certainly is, who are the people who created it? Who is the “George Washington” of the EU, if there is such a person? 

The Flailing European Union

This is especially interesting in light of recent EU policies and outcomes. At this point, there can be no question that the European Union’s policies over the last few years have resulted in significant damage to the continent’s economy and the living standards of its citizens. To give a few examples: 

  1. The EU’s subservience to American policies, particularly against Russia, and its promotion of the eastward expansion of NATO, including the inclusion of Ukraine into the EU and NATO, above more than twenty years of Russian objections, shows its recklessness and failure to engage in genuine diplomacy. 
  2. The EU’s indiscriminate sanctions policies, again particularly against Russia, have led to a fall in the bloc’s economic position. The sanctions and the drive to abandon Russian energy (Nord Stream) have been described as shooting the European economy first in the foot and then in the knee. As a result, Europeans are now paying four times as much for gas as Americans and three times as much for electricity as people in China. Right now nearly every national economy in Europe is reeling and the prospect for the next decade or more is grim. 
  3. The EU’s approach to the Ukraine conflict, which has been marked by the call to support for Ukraine “for as long as it takes,” backed them into a political corner in which genuine negotiations with Russia have become out of the question. The irony is that the failure to negotiate has by now not only harmed Europe, but has actually strengthened Russia’s military and economy far more than anyone had predicted. And have resulted in mounting costs to the EU itself. Note: Russia’s economic growth is currently outpacing that of every European nation and its military is now stronger than ever before. 
  4. The EU’s strained relationship with China, viewed as an economic rival, has also hurt the bloc’s economy. This is an area that has potential to do much more damage in the future to the EU.
  5. The EU’s handling of the Israel-Palestine conflict has also discredited the bloc, with decisions being outsourced to the US, thereby damaging the EU’s image across the Islamic world and the Global South. 
  6. The EU’s close alignment with the US has resulted in the bloc becoming mostly a monolithic vassal for US interests at the expense of its own. This has led to an overdependence on American fuel, driving inflation, and harming European industrial exports due to high energy costs.
  7. The EU’s handling of the migrant crisis, sparked after the Collective West’s destruction of the nation of Libya (2011) and its ravaging of the Middle East as well, has also put a strain on the bloc, to put it mildly. 
  8. Along with its decision to eliminate cheap Russian gas from its economy, the EU has also pushed through — against public desires — costly climate policies. The result is rising energy costs and protests across the bloc. Farmers across the EU have demanded fair prices for energy and have also protested against heavy taxation and the flooding of the EU market with cheap foreign imports — such as agricultural products from Ukraine, a non-EU state. 
  9. The EU’s decision to cap cash payments and promote digital currency has also been a sign of encroaching state control, raising legitimate concerns about abuses of power. 
  10. The EU’s unwillingness to investigate the destruction of its most important piece of energy infrastructure: the Nord Stream pipeline, which was blown up in an act of sabotage/terrorism in 2022. Everyone knows it wasn’t done by the Russians, and clearly it would be an embarrassment to find out who actually did it and how close those parties were to Washington and Brussels. 
  11. The EU’s recent threat to cut off all funding for Hungary, jeopardizing its currency and undermining investor confidence in Budapest, has been revealing, making the EU look increasingly like a reboot of the old Soviet Warsaw Pact, where dissent is not tolerated.

In short, the EU’s policies have obviously resulted in economic woes, a failure of democratic processes, increasing poverty, lower standards of living, and a bleak long-term economic and social outlook for its citizens.

Enter the Bilderberg Group

But love or hate the EU, one thing that I never see discussed anywhere, is how it was the creation of the infamous Bilderberg Group. Yes, that notorious secretive, ultra-elite annual collection of the world’s most powerful individuals and organizations, to determine the fate of the world. The EU was not created by democratic means in any way that can be remotely described as accurate. It was instead the product of the most secretive, anti-democratic, and nefarious group of modern times. 

For years, discussion of the Bilderberg Group was restricted to fringe rebels like David Icke and Alex Jones. An excellent book was written about the group by the researcher Daniel Estulin roughly twenty years ago. In fact, there has been a good amount of scholarly and accurate information about the group which has filtered out to the rest of the world over the past two decades. For instance, the names of the attendees of the annual meetings have generally leaked out over the years. I don’t know if this is inclusive of all the meetings, but certainly of many of them. And we also have minutes and discussion points of many of the Bilderberg meetings. Yes, security is very strict but there is also much that we have learned. 

And one of the most important accomplishments of this powerful and secretive organization was the creation of the European Union. It was a project that took extensive planning and implementation over several decades. 

Origins of the Bilderberg Group

The Bilderberg Group was established in the early 1950s by Polish socialist Joseph Retinger and Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands. The idea for the group came from their suggestion for regular meetings of European foreign ministers. These meetings led to the formation of the customs union in 1948 known as the Benelux Countries (Belgium, Netherlands, and Luxemburg), a precursor to the European Community.

Retinger’s vision for Europe was one in which countries would ‘relinquish part of their sovereignty’. He met with Averell Harriman, then US Ambassador to England, who arranged for him to visit the United States to gather support from such people as Russel C. Leffingwell, senior partner in the J.P. Morgan bank and official of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR); David Rockefeller, the CFR chairman from 1946-53; Nelson Rockefeller (CFR); Sir William Wiseman, partner in Kuhn, Loeb (a firm with strong connections to the Rothschild family); George Franklin, the CFR executive director from 1953-71 and an in-law to the Rockefeller family; John Foster Dulles, and many other familiar characters. 

From these discussions, the idea emerged of grouping together leading politicians, political advisors, media owners and executives, multinational company and banking executives, military leaders, and educationalists. 

[NOTE: The names on the above image did not copy to this post, but you can read them at this link]

This became the Bilderberg Group, which in 1954 first met under the auspices of the Dutch royal crown and the Rockefeller family at the luxurious Hotel Bilderberg in the Dutch town of Oosterbeek. At this time, the group initiated a policy that has remained in place ever since, which is never to allow the press to attend its meetings or release any statements on its conclusions. 

The group’s meetings are essentially a forum for lobbying at the highest political level to ensure that consensual – or perhaps compliant – policies are adopted by the West in general, and signatories to the NATO Alliance in particular. The group claims to have no formal organization, no ‘membership’ as such, no charter, and no elected officers. However, it does have a chairman, a steering committee, and annual conferences, so there is obviously some kind of formal organization. 

The Bilderberg Group’s vision for a united Europe goes directly to its origin. The group’s founders — exclusively influential figures from the United States and Europe — saw the potential for a unified Europe as a counterbalance to the influence of the Soviet Union during the Cold War. The idea was to create a bloc of nations that could stand together economically and politically, with the idea of fostering peace and stability in the region. That was the official reason, as you can find in the many statements of Bilderberg members throughout that period of time. 

Creating the European Union

The first powerful outcome of the Bilderberg plans was the Treaty of Rome, signed in 1957. This treaty established the European Economic Community (EEC), better known as the Common Market. This treaty standardized some tariffs, opened borders to free trade, promoted industry cooperation, regulated industry standards, and synchronized export practices among the six founding members: France, Germany, Belgium, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and Italy. This was the beginning. 

Many Bilderberg attendees were intimately involved in creating the treaty. George McGhee, a former US Ambassador to West Germany and a member of the Bilderberg Group’s steering committee, confirmed the group’s influence on this process. He stated, “I believe you could say the Treaty of Rome which brought the Common Market into being, was nurtured at these meetings.”

George McGhee

During the 1960s and 1970s, the Bilderberg Group continued to push for European integration. The idea of a unified Europe continued to gain traction, but perhaps the main coup of this period was how leading Bilderberger David Rockefeller created the Trilateral Commission in 1973 with the help of Zbigniew Brzezinski. This was a major development in the push towards global cooperation and integration. Brzezinski had been researching how to bring about closer integration between the trilateral nations of Europe, North America, and Asia. The Trilateral Commission was another step towards the globalization that the Bilderberg Group had been advocating for. Although the membership of the Trilateral Commission was not secret, many of its members were already part of the Bilderberg Group or the CFR. Obviously there was tremendous overlap in the agendas and memberships of these organizations.

By the 1980s and 1990s, the Bilderberg Group’s influence became more overt. In 1986, the group fostered the signing of the Single European Act, which aimed to create a single market across Europe, and was a precursor to the creation of the EU itself. This led to the Maastricht Treaty of 1992. 

The Maastricht Treaty marked the official establishment of the European Union. It opened European frontiers, established a single market, and paved the way for ever-greater expansion, especially now with the end of the Cold War. By the mid-1990s, the EU had grown to fifteen members, and in 1999, the Euro was launched as a currency for banks, and then in 2002 it replaced the national currencies of twelve European nations. While I could not find direct evidence of Bilderberg fingerprints on the Maastricht Treaty, the group clearly had to be deeply involved in its creation, which was entirely in accord with its longstanding wishes. 

The vision of a united Europe, with the end of nationalism and the growth of a regional and eventually global community, seemed to be progressing well. However, by 2005, the group’s plan for a global government hit a snag. The group had anticipated that Europe would soon become a single superstate. However, France and the Netherlands failed to ratify the EU constitution in 2005, preventing this from taking effect. 

The Lisbon Treaty (2007) – The Final Nail

Despite this setback, EU member states agreed on the Lisbon Treaty in 2007. This treaty was essentially a rebranded and reframed version of the EU constitution, but it was ratified through parliaments rather than referendums. This was key: avoiding rejection by popular vote. Of all the EU nations, only Ireland held a referendum on the treaty – which initially resulted in a no vote. But no worries, Ireland was forced into a second vote on the matter, after various assurances, concessions, and (mostly) pressure, and – guess what? – this time they voted yes. Although I didn’t research this exhaustively, it does appear that the establishment media had a role to play here in helping the Irish see the light for the second referendum and vote the “proper” way.

It seems to me that the Lisbon Treaty has not been openly discussed enough. It significantly affected national sovereignty, establishing a more centralized European leadership and foreign policy, and a streamlined process for enacting new policies. All in the name of efficiency. It extended the European Parliament’s full legislative power to many new fields, including agriculture, energy security, immigration, justice, and EU funds. This shift of power to the EU over areas traditionally controlled by national governments has been substantial and has had a major effect on national sovereignty. Although the rhetoric was always that national sovereignty remains, it is easy to see how it has become ever-more restricted over time. Just look at the current war in Ukraine in which EU member states are heavily pressured to follow a single policy. 

Suppression of Democracy as the Goal

Although the Bilderberg Group has long been associated with the push for European integration, the group’s ambitions extend far beyond this. The group’s members, no different from the much more public World Economic Forum (WEF) seek a fully integrated global society — a “New World Order” where national boundaries become irrelevant. This phrase has become fully embedded in the popular psyche and has been much maligned in establishment media, but there is no question that this is indeed a major goal. 

It’s not simply about economic cooperation or political alliances. It’s about the creation of supranational entities that can override national governments. This vision was stated c;early by David Rockefeller himself, who argued for the “supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers” as preferable to national self-determination.

To achieve goals like these, the group long ago concluded that it had to suppress natural democratic tendencies. The democratic process, with its emphasis on national sovereignty and the will of the people, is seen as a hindrance to the group’s globalist agenda. As Prince Bernhard of Denmark, a Bilderberg Group founder and father of Denmark’s Queen Beatrix, stated, it is difficult to “reeducate” people brought up on nationalism to the idea of relinquishing part of their sovereignty to a supranational body. But that’s what must be done.  

The opposite of open democratic governance is secrecy, and to this day, secrecy surrounding the Bilderberg Group is integral to its operations. The group’s meetings are closed to the public and the media, and attendees are sworn to secrecy. This lack of transparency is what allows the group to discuss and plan its agenda without public scrutiny or accountability. It also enables the group to exert influence behind the scenes, shaping policy and public opinion through its network of powerful members.

The European Union as a Bilderberg-Created Technocracy

The European Union remains the greatest — or worst — creation of the Bilderberg Group. It is a reflection not only of its goal of European integration, but of its preferred form of governance: a technocracy. That is, a form of governance where decision-makers are selected based on their expertise. Or, in practice, political operatives willing to push the agenda of European integration and population control. It’s a system of appointed officials, “experts,” and others who have demonstrated either technical skill and knowledge, or more commonly an ability to game the system and get into power. Very much it seems to me in the old Soviet style of enforcing stringent ideological adherence. 

You can see the technocratic centralization of the EU everywhere. The European Commission, for instance, is composed of Commissioners who are appointed rather than being directly elected by the public. They are solely responsible for proposing legislation, implementing decisions, and upholding the EU treaties. Then there’s the European Central Bank, which also is run by technocrats not directly accountable to the public through elections, but rather are appointed because of their expertise – or their loyalty. 

The EU has expanded its regulatory reach into virtually every aspect of life, from the Digital Services Act, ever greater levels of digital control over people’s money, environmental policy (emissions, renewable energy, waste management, etc.), banking, finance, investment services, employment law, DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion), and more.

A generation or two ago, many of these areas were either less regulated at the EU level or not regulated at all, with member states having greater discretion over their own policies. The deepening of regulations reflects the EU’s evolution towards greater integration among member states. It should not be surprising that the current wave of protests in Europe are in direct response to centrally-directed EU laws and regulations that the people have no control over. Nor should we be surprised that such protests are being systematically suppressed by the various governments and ignored or misrepresented by the controlled media. 

But perhaps this is the only way such an institution as the EU can function. Can one really have a strong democratic ethos and reality within such a system as this? It’s a fair question to ask whether a different trajectory was possible for Europe after the Second World War. That is a hard question to answer and I don’t know how I would try. The pressures of an increasingly globalized economy even in the 1950s were quite strong, and integration was seen by many people, not just the elites and technocrats, to be a good thing for Europe. 

Be that as it may, the result has been what it is: the creation of a European Super State of sorts that is driven by the longstanding Bilderberg agenda to weaken democratic processes in favor of rule by technocrats. The EU rhetoric for “democracy” is as strong as ever, perhaps even stronger than ever, but this seems purely as a masking device to conceal the bitter truth: the peoples of Europe don’t control their destiny. Until recently perhaps they had less reason for concern. Now, however, that the EU project looks to be in potentially serious trouble, it’s not surprising that they are beginning to think otherwise.


The sources I used to prepare this article are:

Lukas Kantor, Global Elite and its Clubs- The Case of Bilderberg Group

Daniel Estulin – The True Story of the Bilderberg Group

Jim Marrs, Rule by Secrecy: The Hidden History That Connects The Trilateral Commission, The Freemasons and The Great Pyramids (2000)

David Icke, And The Truth Shall Set You Free

Bilderberg conference 2004 – Stresa, Italy 3-6 June 2004

Bilderberg Conference 2005, 5-8 May, Rottach-Egern, Munich, Germany – and this year’s Bilderberg news.

Bilderberg Conference 2000 – 1-3 June 

Bilderberg Conference 2001 – May 24-27

Bilderberg Conference 1998 – 14-17 May – Turnberry, Scotland

Origins of the Bilderberg meetings

Western Civilization – History Of European Society – Hause-Maltby


12 thoughts on “The European Union: A Creation of the Bilderberg Group | ARTICLE

  1. GrannyChanie

    This was a good explanation of the European Union’s beginnings and the behind the scenes work of the Bilderbergs. I feel that our world is racing toward total control by an elitist group that cares little to nothing for the welfare of mankind. The migrations of people going on all over the world are seemingly being promoted by governments and organizations with a hidden agenda of disruption and destruction of national sovereignty. Are these events merely being controlled by diabolical humans, or might there be another element involved in this carrying out of the New World Order? There’s an interesting mention of a taxonomy of beings talked about by “Tyler” in Diana Pasulka’s new book Encounters. God was at the top of this, next angels, then off-planet beings, “certain factions within intelligence communities,” then humans, and lastly animals. It’s a very strange world, but I don’t think we have any idea how very strange it actually is.

  2. Craig Champion

    Awesome historical summary. Thanks for researching and providing this overview.

    Power corrupts, and absolute power…

    This centralized hub of control is clearly out-of-touch with the needs of the citizenry of the respective countries supposedly “represented.” One might summarize the evolution of this “democratic” endeavor as, “greed over need.”

    Tragic and dangerous.

    Thanks, Richard!

  3. Henk Kersaan

    Just a small correction in the article, prince Bernhard was the husband of Queen Juliana, father of Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, not Denmark.
    Yes, France and We, Holland had a referendum in 2005 to ratify the EU Constitution. And France and Holland voted NO. But “democray” was set aside ! I still remember well, because I voted no too. In my opinion the EU at that time was already “to large”, and We, the EU, couldn’t speak with one voice ! We in Holland had a referendum, again in 2015 about Ukraine which was influenced by the “not listened vote” of 10 years before. Now, I believe, referenda are cancelled altogether in Holland !
    By the way, Tracey’s input and conscience; marvellous ! It’s more close connected with UFO/UAP than we even consider or understand.

  4. Thomas Hickey

    Thanks for doing this Richard. I grew up in Ireland and saw some of this and kept in touch with my parents during the Irish “re-vote’ on the treaty. It amazes me that a country that would fight for their sovereignty for almost 800 years would turn and hand it over to another empire! The mechanism in the case of Ireland is interesting and basically comes down to greed. You say that access to the union will enrich everyone but in reality it is the elite and the top of the professional class that reap the benefits. Then that group fights tooth and nail to keep the rest of the country from political discourse. It is the same template every empire uses. The same logic was at play in 2014 Ukraine albeit in a more extreme form.

  5. Ian Roberts

    Is there is any alternative to this future that does not involve violence against those responsible? And, what are the consequences of one’s answer to that question, regardless? Short of surrender, what bureaucratic word-play and bloodless paper-pushing can possibly counter the plans of the most powerful people on Earth?

    1. Richard Dolan Post author

      THIS is a good question and something I wonder about quite a lot. I don’t have a sureshot answer, to be honest. How to “fix” things …. Back in 1789 in France, you could soothe yourself that by chopping off enough heads, you could create utopia. Well, that didn’t quite happen. So how do you do it today?

  6. Patrick Eakin

    I really hope that one day you and James Corbett from the Corbett Report could get together. You have so much overlap yet he is either ignorant of or uninterested in the UAP issue. I’m assuming so as I don’t recall him ever discussing it.

    1. Richard Dolan Post author

      I’ve followed him for a long time and agree that he has much of interest to say. But yes, I think he seems to discount the UFO/UAP subject. I haven’t heard much from him lately so I will try to check him out.

    1. Richard Dolan Post author

      That’s a tougher order. Bilderbergers don’t publish much on this but you know what? I would like to do a project connecting Bilderberger attendees to any UFO connections I can find. That’s a bit of a project, and I’d first like to finish my USO book.

Leave a Reply