THE C.I.A. AND "IRANGATE" (revisited}

[...]The article then goes into considerable detail to describe conditions in Afghanistan then, several paragraphs later in the middle of the article, is this "sandwiched" item:

"In London yesterday, leading Americans, Europeans and Japanese -- members of the Trilateral Commission -- wound up three days of talks on global security that focused largely on the Afghan situation. The commission brings together politicians, diplomats and academics annually for informal exchanges on world affairs. British Foreign Secretary Lord Carrington urged 'neutrality and non-alignment' as the basis of an Afghan settlement after the Soviet withdrawl." It might be noted that the recent flurry of diplomatic activity in regard to the fate of the American hostages in Tehran began after the Trilateral conference was concluded.

A similar significant statement was similarly "buried" in a story dealing with the deposed Iranian Shah's flight from Panama to Egypt.

There was a lengthy report beginning on page one, then continued to an inside page. In the middle of the continuation was this statement:

"Matters (concerning the Shah's flight) were not made easier by the circulation of reports that Evergreen International Airlines, the Oregon-based charter company that leased the Shah's jet airliner, had once been owned by the CIA. Informed sources disputed these reports, pointing out that Evergreen had operatd for years as a helicopter-leasing firm in the Pacific Northwest. They said the company later expanded by buying equipment from a now defunct CIA-owned company, Intermountain Aviation."

Notice that the above is not a denial of the fact that Evergreen was owned by the CIA, but merely an admission that Evergreen bought out another company that was owned by the CIA.

[...]The Shah also made Chase Manhattan his favorite bank. He personally ordered subordinates to channel oil purchases and other transactions through the Rockefeller bank. And he shunted other lucrative deals to the Rockefeller crowd.. There has been much speculation over the involvement of the Chase Manhattan in precipating the Iran crisis for financial reasons.. A financial newsletter of December, 1979, drawing heavily from the Financial Times of London and other reputable sources weaves the following very disturbing scenario:

'It is not apparent that the Iranian crisis was provoked by the Chase Manhattan Bank to save itself from possible bankruptcy ... the circumstantial evidence is overwhelming." (unquote) [...]

Even more overwhelming is the circumstantial evidence of a conspiracy if we observe the Rockefeller-CIA-Pentagon-State Department interlock. It is a well known fact among informed Americans that David Rockefeller is Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations. He is also Chairman of the Trilateral Commission. Now, let's note the interlock of these organizations with federal government agencies:

The National Security Council is one of the most important agencies within the executive branch of our federal government. It advises the President with regard to "the integration of domestic, foreign, and military policies relating to the national security.

Its statutory members are President Jimmy Carter, Vice President Walter Mondale, Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, and Secretary of Defense Harold Brown. The National Security Adviser is Zbigniew Brzezinski. All of these men were members of the Trilateral Commission. They resigned only when they obtained public office.

Also, all of these men, with the exception of Jimmy Carter, are members of the Council of Foreign Relations. Just to complete this particular line-up: Brzezinski's Deputy Assistant is one David Aaron, also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Now let's look at the CIA, which is under the direction of the National Security Council and which the leading intelligence gathering agency.

The Director of CIA is Stansfield Turner, a member of the CFR. The Assistant Director is Frank Carlucci, also a member of the CFR. Furthermore, since 1947 when the CIA was created under the National Security Council, every Director of the CIA has been a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Rear Admiral Sidney Souers, Lt. Gen. Hoyt Vandenberg, Rear Admiral Roscoe Hillenkoetter, General Walter Bedell Smith, Allen Dulles, John McCone, Vice Admiral William Raborn Jr., Richard Helms, James Schlesinger, William Colby, George Bush and Stansfield Turner.

Just to complete this phase of the interlock between the Rockefeller crowd and the top national security agencies in our federal government, we should add that the budget of the CIA is hidden within the budget of the Defense Department, and the head of the Defense Department is Harold Brown, on leave from the Trilateral Commission, active member of the Council on Foreign Relations.

Considering all the foregoing, it might be said that the CIA is a Rockefeller subsidiary, financed by the taxpayers of the United States. Also, aside from its overseas operations in Iran, Africa, Southeast Asia, Central and South America and the rest of the world, it is the head of the intelligence gathering body of the entire United States, including the FBI.

"While the Director of Central Intelligence is the head of the CIA, he is at the same time leader of the Intelligence Community of which CIA is but one component. The Intelligence Community refers in the aggregate to those Executive Branch agencies and organizations that conduct the variety of intelligence activities which comprise the total U.S. national intelligence effort. The Community includes the Central Intelligence Agency; the National Security Agency; the Defense Intelligence Agency; offices within the Department of Defense for collection of specialized national foreign intelligence through reconnaisance programs; the Bureau of Intelligence and Research of the Department of State; intelligence elements of the military services, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Energy and the Drug Enforcement Administration; and staff elements of the Office of the Director of Central Intelligence.

Members of the Intelligence Community advise the Director of Central Intelligence through their representation on a number of specialized committees that deal with intelligence matters of common concern. Chief among these groups is the National Foreign Intelligence Board which the Director chairs and which includes as an observer a representative of the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (Brzezinski - Ed.)."

Two events occurred in the history of the CIA which have contributed toward making the agency what it is today.

The first of these events occurred when a man whom we call "The Spoiler," James R. Schlesinger became its Director on February 2, 1973.

He immediately began to "reorganize" the CIA by firing its oldest, most dependable and trustworthy agents, installing leftwingers to replace them. (it hasn't stopped - it's even worse)

Keyes Beech, writing for the Chicago Daily News, reported that morale of the CIA "has sunk to an all-time low under the impact of a drastic reorganization under the new director." Even more significantly: "under an administration that seems to insist on absolute loyalty to the President, the CIA will lose its most precious assets -- its integrity and independence of judgment, regardless of who is in power."

"Absolute loyalty to the President" really meant "absolute loyalty to Dr. Kissinger," who then occupied the post now held by Brzezinski.

It was Kissinger who ordered the purge, and Schlesinger fired three experienced deputy directors and more than a thousand employees. Schlesinger headed the CIA only 6 months, but that was long enough to make of it a tool of Kissinger, who was in turn a tool of the Rockefeller crowd, as is Brzezinski.

After "reorganizing" the CIA Schlesinger became Secretary of Defense. In that capacity, reported Phyllis Schlafly and Chester Ward in "Kissinger on the Couch": "He has replaced the MAD strategy of Mutual Assured Destruction -- and we are the ones whose destruction is assured. That is, he has assured the Soviet leaders in advance that, even if they launch a missile attack against us, we would not effectively retaliate against the Soviet population."

After "reorganizing" the policies of the Defense Department, we next find The Spoiler in the role of Secretary of the newly created Department of Energy.

He didn't stay in this position long, either. But he was there long enough to convert an energy shortage into an energy crisis that Carter could call "the moral equivalent of war" (though Irangate isn't?) And he did institute policies that brought on ever-rising prices for gas and oil, and a new kind of peoples' tax called "windfall profits."

The second event in the life of the CIA received little coverage by the media. There was a great clamor for an investigation of the CIA and a cleanup of its activities, many of which were said to be illegal.

So, to investigate the CIA, a committee was appointed, and Nelson Rockefeller was named as Chairman of the Investigation Committee. He found everything "in order" and exactly as the Rockefellers would wish the CIA to be. Incidentally, we are informed that Nelson Rockefeller appointed Ronald Reagan as a member of that Investigation Committee and that Reagan also, at least tacitly, found everything in order in the CIA.

So, since Reagan's campaign staff contains members of the CFR, it could be assumed that Ronald Reagan isn't any more independent of the Rockefeller power structure than Carter was when he was selected to be our President. (I think it was GEORGE SCHULTZ-Gorbachev)

During the past weeks there has been great diplomatic hullabaloo but no action concerning the hostages in Tehran. One wonders: would they be released if the American people focused their attention on Rockefeller instead of the Shah? It's about time that Congress investigated Rockefeller and our foreign policy. We are not very secure under our present National Security Council. http://www.kingsbenchletter.com/donbell/db27_14.html

Funding Subversion of National Security

[...]One example is the arms-control area. “They identify their best and brightest cadres interning in the arms-control and disarmament movement, give them Herbert Scoville Fellowships from the Council for a Livable World, subsidize their Ph.D.s and place them with like-minded mentors in senior government posts,” says Ronay, who authored the center’s study. “There are a number of them in the Clinton administration today with top-secret clearances, hired to run U.S. national security.

It’s like a presidential management internship program for the left. Their side rakes this very seriously and invests in it and acts on it. They understand that power lies not only in ideas but in people and programs. If you put enough into people and programs, especially media and pedagogy, you can sell bad ideas for long enough to bring dangerous results.”

The taxpayer-funded U.S. Institute of Peace targets high-school students with an annual essay contest on “peace” issues and has a fellowship program for graduate students to pursue “peace studies.”

The Council for a Livable World says that since 1987 it has mentored 71 graduate students into key activist, academic and government posts, including prominent defense contractors, the State Department, the Defense Intelligence Agency and the CIA.

The MacArthur Foundation’s Next Generation Program has spent a staggering $100 million during the last 15 years to train more than 5,000 graduate students in the international-relations and security arena. That’s nearly an entire generational cohort: from academics, journalists and foreign-service officers to NGO executives.

In contrast, Ronay says, “Conservative groups have to go begging for donors and justify every expense in terms of what it has done today. Only a few seem to have the vision or sense of strategy it takes to look a generation or even a decade ahead.”

Most of the defense and security grantmaking from the large foundations manifests itself in four basic programs, according to the Center for Security Policy study: media, academia and cadre-building, international legalism and arms control/disarmament, and institution-building. contin..
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1571/is_31_16/ai_64566664/pg_2/?tag=content;col1

The post Bretton Woods system: 1971 – present

An alternative name for the post Bretton Woods system is the Washington Consensus. While the name was coined in 1989, the associated economic system came into effect years earlier: according to economic historian Lord Skidelsky the Washington Consensus is generally seen as spanning 1980–2009 (the latter half of the 1970s being a transitional period).[14] The transition away from Bretton Woods was marked by a switch from a state led to a market led system.[4] The Bretton Wood system is considered by economic historians to have broken down in the 1970s:[14] crucial events being Nixon suspending the dollar’s convertibility into gold in 1971, the United states abandonment of Capital Controls in 1974, and Great Britain’s ending of capital controls in 1979 which was swiftly copied by most other major economies.

In some parts of the developing world, liberalisation brought significant benefits for large sections of the population – most prominently with Deng Xiaoping’s reforms in China since 1978 and the liberalisation of India after her 1991 crisis. contin...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_II#The_.22Revived_Bretton_Woods_system.22_identified_in_2003
http://www.brettonwoods.org/index.php/179/Leadership_Staff

“An alternative name for the post Bretton Woods system is the Washington Consensus.”

Anyone asked about this...?

“New United States Agency For International Development Contribution Helps Feed 7.3 Million Flood-Affected Pakistanis”

Article Date: 12 Nov 2010 - 2:00 PST

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) announced today that it will provide an additional $90 million to the World Food Program (WFP) in Pakistan to help 7.3 million flood-affected people.

Nancy Lindborg, the USAID Assistant Administrator for the Bureau of Democracy, Conflict, and Humanitarian Assistance, announced the contribution at the WFP Executive Board Meeting in Rome. “The United States has been able to use both in-kind food assistance and local procurement in this response,” Assistant Administrator Lindborg explained, “demonstrating how our new flexibility allows us to ensure aid is delivered in a way that supports a faster recovery.”

As part of the $90 million contribution, USAID is providing Food for Peace (formerly P.L. 480) Title II in-kind emergency food assistance valued at $45 million, including more than 37,000 tons of wheat flour, 6,100 tons of vegetable oil, and 2,700 tons of dried peas. To meet needs in early 2011, USAID will provide a portion of the food from a prepositioning facility abroad and is working with the United States Department of Agriculture to expedite the procurement of the remaining food.

To help address needs in the coming months, USAID is complementing its in-kind food assistance with a $45 million International Disaster Assistance grant from the Emergency Food Security Program which will allow WFP to meet immediate food assistance needs by purchasing food in local markets, including approximately 70,000 tons of wheat in Pakistan.

To date, the United States has provided more than $227 million in emergency food assistance to flood-affected Pakistanis through WFP and private voluntary organizations. This is in addition to USAID food assistance provided to populations affected by the ongoing complex emergency.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/207551.php

New flexibility? Isn’t that nice and on top of that you get to give your old scam “Food for Oil” a “new” name - “Food for Peace”!!!

They do the old socialist switcheroo - change the name - back in business.

We’re broke, they’ll squeeze the last dollar, and when we’re no longer useful (elderly). it’s off to the camp! They only want 1 billion people...I take them at their word.

I think this is the woman who loves Huffpo and also uses the regime refrain - “never waste a crisis”!!!

1995, George Shultz - Chairman of the Board of Advisors - Mikhail Gorbachev Foundation to “build a global consensus for our common future”. He also co-chaired Gorbachev’s first annual State of the World Forum in San Francisco along with Ted Turner, Maurice Strong, Clinton, Wirth, and others “chosen for their internationally recognized contributions to designing our emerging global civilization.”

SOVIET INDOCTRINATION IN AMERICA

Shultz’s friendship with Gorbachev dates back to his years as Secretary of State in the Reagan administration [9] — a time when many of us simply trusted the Republican cabinet to represent American families. In the early eighties, few of us realized that Shultz and David Hamburg, President of the globalist Carnegie Corporation, were using their authority to negotiate a binding international agreement with Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze.[10] Its terms required that we trade our sophisticated education and data tracking technology for the brainwashing strategies used to indoctrinate Soviet children, modify behavior, and monitor the masses to ensure compliance with Soviet ideology. [11]

To see what George Shultz did to undermine our American education system, rewrite history, change values, and prepare America to accept a new role in the “international community,” ponder the following quotes from The Keys of This Blood by Malachi Martin:

“Within scant months of Gorbachev’s election in March of 1985 to the post of General Secretary of the Central Committee of the CPSU, he and President Reagan met at their first summit in Geneva. . . November 19-20,1985.... [They signed] the General Agreement on Contacts, Exchanges and Scientific Technical Education and Other Fields... It authorized mutual exchange programs, the homogenization of curricula, the sharing of facilities and the mutual indoctrination of the two peoples involved. . . .

“Cooperation would cover all computer-based instruction, instructional hardware and curriculum design for all grades of primary and secondary education, as well as college and university studies. The obvious goal was a total homogenization not only of the methods of teaching and learning, but what was to be taught. . . .

“Cooperation, for instance, in the ‘social sciences’ turned a blind eye to the official prostitution of psychiatry and psychology by the Soviet Union as clinical tools for inflicting mental and physical torture as political punishment and for disposing of dissidents. The USSR had been banned from the World Psychiatric Association in 1983 for such practices. ...

“Or take cooperation in the humanities. As taught in the Soviet Union, all humanities are marinated in Leninist Marxism as a matter of course. And history is distorted by a thoroughgoing Marxisation of ideas, by the systematic suppression of facts, and by downright lies. One might wonder what common curricula might be drawn up between the USSR and the US. . . . “

“. . .the aim of the General Agreement — at least from the point of view of the Wise Men of the West — was ‘to transform the shape of the world’. . . because ‘sooner or later we are going to have to face restructuring our institutions so that they are not confined merely to the nation-states. . . . ‘”

“That agreement came from already established drawing boards. . . . For both parties intend to create nothing less than a new arrangement in all human affairs — ‘a new world order,’ to use a consecrated phrase both Gorbachev and the Wise Men employ. . . .

“Those early policies also reflected that blithe and trusting acceptance by the Wise Men of basic Leninist thinking. . . as they took the field with the leader who had been judged. . . most likely to succeed in fulfilling Lenin’s ultimate dream of Soviet messianism. . . .”[12]

That messianic leader was Gorbachev. His blueprint for revolution came, not from Lenin, but from Antonio Gramsci.[...]
http://www.crossroad.to/text/articles/Bush4-99.html

Fr. Malachi Martin (RIP) got the Alinsky treatment - mocked, ostracised, smeared, reputation in tatters. He ended up selling his books on the Art Bell radio show. It worked - God is good. Fr Malachi also left interviews on tape which tells us a little more. Fake whistleblowers are reporting on good bankers who want no part of them - they suffer. The bad guys who don’t play ball get the same or worse. I wonder what really happened at Lehman Bros - methinks many of the alma mater are onto much bigger things. Everything is done in the name of “Public Safety”. Toy call backs, food - egg scare, ....play ball or else...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.