MayWeggen is een toneelspeelster !
Michael Collins Š
Iedereen kon zien dat ze de heren op het gemoed aan het spelen was.
Oud vrouwentrukje waar nog steeds veel mannen intrappen.
---------------------------------------------
Franc ©
Reply: dhrr...@xs4all.nl
http://www.kurdistan.org/
http://www.kjemi.unit.no/~sauar/kurdsturks.html
http://www.clark.net/kurd/
http://www.ib.be/med/
http://shrike.depaul.edu/~sconneel/open.html
(And Europe should not accept Turkey into the European Union as long as
Turkey has not demonstrated an ability to be a civilized nation).
theo1610
>MayWeggen is een slechte toneelspeelster !
>Iedereen kon zien dat ze de heren op het gemoed aan het spelen was.
>Oud vrouwentrukje waar nog steeds veel mannen intrappen.
Onwijs......
>---------------------------------------------
>Franc Š
>Reply: dhrr...@xs4all.nl
> http://www.kurdistan.org/
> http://www.kjemi.unit.no/~sauar/kurdsturks.html
> http://www.clark.net/kurd/
> http://www.ib.be/med/
> http://shrike.depaul.edu/~sconneel/open.html
>(And Europe should not accept Turkey into the European Union as long as
>Turkey has not demonstrated an ability to be a civilized nation).
theo1610 @wxs.nl
"lievebeheersbeestjes bv."
Michael Collins Š
>>MayWeggen is een slechte toneelspeelster !
>>Iedereen kon zien dat ze de heren op het gemoed aan het spelen was.
>>Oud vrouwentrukje waar nog steeds veel mannen intrappen.
>
>Eindelijk een realist aan het woord. Volkomen onbetrouwbaar die
>May-Weggen
Eeen échte kuttenkop dat is ze !
---------------------------------------------
Franc ©
wim borremans
> dhr...@xs4all.nl (Michael Collins Š) wrote:
>
> >MayWeggen is een slechte toneelspeelster !
> >Iedereen kon zien dat ze de heren op het gemoed aan het spelen was.
> >Oud vrouwentrukje waar nog steeds veel mannen intrappen.
>
> Onwijs......
>
>
dat is nu eens iedere keer hetzelfde liedje. als een politica enkele tranen
laat, is ze een huichelaarster of een flauw wijf, als een politicus dat
doet, (denk maar aan good old bertje anciaux) dan heet dat "emotie in de
politiek" en krijgt hij van heel vlaanderen en staande ovatie. heet zoiets
niet: hypocrisie?
> >(And Europe should not accept Turkey into the European Union as long as
> >Turkey has not demonstrated an ability to be a civilized nation).
>
> theo1610 @wxs.nl
> "lievebeheersbeestjes bv."
pff, alsof spanje en engeland zo beschaafd zijn.
wimbo
theo1610
>pff, alsof spanje en engeland zo beschaafd zijn.
Of jij en ik.....
>wimbo
theo1610 @wxs.nl
"lievebeheersbeestjes bv."
jbuyse
tussen Margret Thatcher en Jeanne d'Arc
Joris van Oostveen
<wim.bor...@student.kuleuven.ac.be> wrote:
>theo1610 wrote:
>
>> dhr...@xs4all.nl (Michael Collins Š) wrote:
>>
>> >MayWeggen is een slechte toneelspeelster !
>> >Iedereen kon zien dat ze de heren op het gemoed aan het spelen was.
>> >Oud vrouwentrukje waar nog steeds veel mannen intrappen.
>>
>> Onwijs......
>>
>>
>
>dat is nu eens iedere keer hetzelfde liedje. als een politica enkele tranen
>laat, is ze een huichelaarster of een flauw wijf, als een politicus dat
>doet, (denk maar aan good old bertje anciaux) dan heet dat "emotie in de
>politiek" en krijgt hij van heel vlaanderen en staande ovatie. heet zoiets
>niet: hypocrisie?
>
Dat zou kunnen. Vlaanderen zei je? Tja. Gelukkig bestaat er nog wereld
buiten Vlaanderen.
>
>> >(And Europe should not accept Turkey into the European Union as long as
>> >Turkey has not demonstrated an ability to be a civilized nation).
>>
>> theo1610 @wxs.nl
>> "lievebeheersbeestjes bv."
>
>pff, alsof spanje en engeland zo beschaafd zijn.
Of Vlaanderen, niet te vergeten.
>
>wimbo
>
Joris
Fustigator
22:03:59 GMT, in littera <36f08e24...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
War ligt dat niet te definiëren "land"?
>>wimbo
>>
>Joris
Fusti
Joris van Oostveen
wrote:
> Tu, us...@domain.here (Joris van Oostveen), die Fri, 12 Mar 1999
>22:03:59 GMT, in littera <36f08e24...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
>be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>
>>On Fri, 12 Mar 1999 13:57:17 +0100, wim borremans
>><wim.bor...@student.kuleuven.ac.be> wrote:
>>
>>>dat is nu eens iedere keer hetzelfde liedje. als een politica enkele tranen
>>>laat, is ze een huichelaarster of een flauw wijf, als een politicus dat
>>>doet, (denk maar aan good old bertje anciaux) dan heet dat "emotie in de
>>>politiek" en krijgt hij van heel vlaanderen en staande ovatie. heet zoiets
>>>niet: hypocrisie?
>>>
>>Dat zou kunnen. Vlaanderen zei je? Tja. Gelukkig bestaat er nog wereld
>>buiten Vlaanderen.
>>>
>>>> >(And Europe should not accept Turkey into the European Union as long as
>>>> >Turkey has not demonstrated an ability to be a civilized nation).
>>>>
>>>pff, alsof spanje en engeland zo beschaafd zijn.
>>
>>Of Vlaanderen, niet te vergeten.
>
>War ligt dat niet te definiëren "land"?
Vlaanderen? Ik weet het niet, zou het onuitgepakt onder de kerstboom
zijn blijven liggen?
>
>>>wimbo
>>>
>>Joris
>
>Fusti
Joris
Fustigator
19:07:54 GMT, in littera <36f959d4...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>On Sun, 14 Mar 1999 20:49:44 GMT, fusti...@icone.org (Fustigator)
>wrote:
>
>> Tu, us...@domain.here (Joris van Oostveen), die Fri, 12 Mar 1999
>>22:03:59 GMT, in littera <36f08e24...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
>>be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>>
>>>On Fri, 12 Mar 1999 13:57:17 +0100, wim borremans
>>><wim.bor...@student.kuleuven.ac.be> wrote:
>>>
>
>>>>dat is nu eens iedere keer hetzelfde liedje. als een politica enkele tranen
>>>>laat, is ze een huichelaarster of een flauw wijf, als een politicus dat
>>>>doet, (denk maar aan good old bertje anciaux) dan heet dat "emotie in de
>>>>politiek" en krijgt hij van heel vlaanderen en staande ovatie. heet zoiets
>>>>niet: hypocrisie?
>>>>
>>>Dat zou kunnen. Vlaanderen zei je? Tja. Gelukkig bestaat er nog wereld
>>>buiten Vlaanderen.
>>>>
>>>>> >(And Europe should not accept Turkey into the European Union as long as
>>>>> >Turkey has not demonstrated an ability to be a civilized nation).
>>>>>
>
>>>>pff, alsof spanje en engeland zo beschaafd zijn.
>>>
>>>Of Vlaanderen, niet te vergeten.
>>
>>War ligt dat niet te definiėren "land"?
>
>Vlaanderen? Ik weet het niet, zou het onuitgepakt onder de kerstboom
>zijn blijven liggen?
Of is het een vergeten ei in de tuin op Paasmorgen ?
>>
>>>>wimbo
>>>>
>>>Joris
>>
>>Fusti
>
>Joris
Fusti
Joris van Oostveen
wrote:
> Tu, us...@domain.here (Joris van Oostveen), die Mon, 15 Mar 1999
>19:07:54 GMT, in littera <36f959d4...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
>be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>
>>On Sun, 14 Mar 1999 20:49:44 GMT, fusti...@icone.org (Fustigator)
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Tu, us...@domain.here (Joris van Oostveen), die Fri, 12 Mar 1999
>>>22:03:59 GMT, in littera <36f08e24...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
>>>be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 12 Mar 1999 13:57:17 +0100, wim borremans
>>>><wim.bor...@student.kuleuven.ac.be> wrote:
>>>>
>>
>>>>>dat is nu eens iedere keer hetzelfde liedje. als een politica enkele tranen
>>>>>laat, is ze een huichelaarster of een flauw wijf, als een politicus dat
>>>>>doet, (denk maar aan good old bertje anciaux) dan heet dat "emotie in de
>>>>>politiek" en krijgt hij van heel vlaanderen en staande ovatie. heet zoiets
>>>>>niet: hypocrisie?
>>>>>
>>>>Dat zou kunnen. Vlaanderen zei je? Tja. Gelukkig bestaat er nog wereld
>>>>buiten Vlaanderen.
>>>>>
>>>>>> >(And Europe should not accept Turkey into the European Union as long as
>>>>>> >Turkey has not demonstrated an ability to be a civilized nation).
>>>>>>
>>
>>>>>pff, alsof spanje en engeland zo beschaafd zijn.
>>>>
>>>>Of Vlaanderen, niet te vergeten.
>>>
>>>War ligt dat niet te definiëren "land"?
>>
>>Vlaanderen? Ik weet het niet, zou het onuitgepakt onder de kerstboom
>>zijn blijven liggen?
>
>Of is het een vergeten ei in de tuin op Paasmorgen ?
Oei, dan zou het er al bijna een jaar liggen. Dan wordt het oppassen dat
niemand er op trapt, rotte eieren stinken zo.....
>>>
>>>>>wimbo
>>>>>
>>>>Joris
>>>
>>>Fusti
>>
>>Joris
>
>Fusti
Joris
Fustigator
19:51:00 GMT, in littera <36f7b599...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>On Tue, 16 Mar 1999 07:34:28 GMT, fusti...@icone.org (Fustigator)
>wrote:
>
>> Tu, us...@domain.here (Joris van Oostveen), die Mon, 15 Mar 1999
>>19:07:54 GMT, in littera <36f959d4...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
>>be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>>
>>>On Sun, 14 Mar 1999 20:49:44 GMT, fusti...@icone.org (Fustigator)
>>>wrote:
[...]
>>>>>Dat zou kunnen. Vlaanderen zei je? Tja. Gelukkig bestaat er nog wereld
>>>>>buiten Vlaanderen.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >(And Europe should not accept Turkey into the European Union as long as
>>>>>>> >Turkey has not demonstrated an ability to be a civilized nation).
>>>>>>>
>>>
>>>>>>pff, alsof spanje en engeland zo beschaafd zijn.
>>>>>
>>>>>Of Vlaanderen, niet te vergeten.
>>>>
>>>>War ligt dat niet te definiëren "land"?
>>>
>>>Vlaanderen? Ik weet het niet, zou het onuitgepakt onder de kerstboom
>>>zijn blijven liggen?
>>
>>Of is het een vergeten ei in de tuin op Paasmorgen ?
>
>Oei, dan zou het er al bijna een jaar liggen. Dan wordt het oppassen dat
>niemand er op trapt, rotte eieren stinken zo.....
och chocolade eieren stinken toch niet zo,
zelfs na een jaar full-exposure...
>>>>
>>>>>>wimbo
>>>>>>
>>>>>Joris
>>>>
>>>>Fusti
>>>
>>>Joris
>>
>>Fusti
>
>Joris
Fusti
Fusti once more foetsie:
I will be away from usenet from Thursday March 18th
till Sunday 21th.Please behave during my absence.
And if you can't behave, be at least cautious.
Madonna ©
http://www.tlio.demon.co.uk/bernhard.htm
Bilderberg | 1998 | 1997 | 1996 | 1995 | Reports | Origins | Bernhard
Bilderberg Conferences
For more up to date page see new site
Prince Bernhard - personal background
and his part in the earlier Bilderberg
Conferences
1975 - The Lockheed Scandal - The Grease Machine Exposed - extract
from
David Boulton's book: 'The Lockheed Papers'
At The Hand Of Man - The White Man's Game - Extract from Raymond
Bonner's book on Bernhard's World Wildlife Fund
Project CA-35 - Recent research into Nazi-Bilderberg connections in
Boston,
Mass.
The Prince and the Nazis - Extract from 'H. R. H. Prince Bernhard of
the
Netherlands; an authorized biography' Harrap, 1962. by Alden Hatch
Extract from - The Lockheed Papers -
David Boulton - Jonathan Cape - 1978 pp 258-261
The Grease Machine Exposed - extract
Certainly there was no hint, late in 1974, of a Lockheed connection.
Which is why, in total ignorance
of the time-bomb on which his American friends were sitting, Prince
Bernhard of the Netherlands felt
confident enough in September to write to Burbank asking for a new
commission arrangement. The
sum involved this time: anything up to six million dollars.
2
Early in 1973 the Dutch government had begun to consider a long-term
replacement for the navy's
obsolete Lockheed P-2V Neptune patrol and anti-submarine planes. By
June the admiralty council
had three candidates under consideration: the British Nimrod from
Hawker Siddeley, the French
Breguet Atlantique Mark lA and II, and Lockheed's P-3C Orion.
The Dutch deliberations soon came to the notice of Fred C. Meuser in
his mountain retreat at St
Moritz. Mouser was by now something of an elder-statesman among the
master-salesmen of the
aerospace industry. He had served Lockheed, Northrop, and Lockheed
again. His loyalty to Prince
Bernhard, meanwhile, had never wavered. Now, with an immense new order
in the offing (the Dutch
admiralty were talking of spending up to 148 million guilders on
thirteen planes between 1974 and
1978, and a further 452 million in the 1979-83 period) his eye for the
main chance did not fail him.
Meuser contacted the prince and put to him a simple proposition. If
the Orion were selected, and if a
consultant's contract were concluded with Lockheed on the basis of
commission for aircraft supplied
to the Dutch navy and for the supply of spare parts, a large sum of
money would be at the prince's
disposal. He might wish to pass it, for instance, to his very own
prestige charity, the World Wildlife
Fund.
Bernhard didn't turn down the idea and Meuser was encouraged to take
it a step further. In April
1974 he gave the prince a draft note and suggested he send it to
Lockheed. It read:
Last time around it would have been of no use to accept Lockheed's
offer to appoint Dr. H.
Weisbrod agent for the reequipping of the Navy's ASW aircraft fleet
with Orions, as European
pressures required a European solution. This time around the situation
may be more
favourable for the Orion, in part due to Dr. Weisbrod's efforts, and
it would now seem
appropriate for Lockheed to appoint him their 'sub silentio' agent for
a prospective Orion
program. This could be done on the basis of an agent's agreement
between Lockheed and Dr.
Weisbrod, calling for a 4 per cent commission on all Lockheed billings
for complete aircraft
and 8 per cent for parts, services, etc., for the life of the program.
As and when payments are
received by Lockheed, corresponding commission payments to be made in
a manner to be
indicated by Dr. Weisbrod.
It was the same old formula that had proved so successful in the past:
The Meuser-Weisbrod
connection, with Bernhard as the intended principal beneficiary. When
Meuser wrote that the
Orion's prospects were good 'in part due to Weisbrod's effort,' he was
unmistakably signalling to
Lockheed that the prince himself had been, and could continue to be,
active on Lockheed's behalf.
In fact there is no evidence whatever that Bernhard really did involve
himself in any way with the
admiralty's evaluations. But what mattered was that Lockheed should
believe he was rooting for
them, and that this could be decisive.
Bernhard accepted Meuser's draft but did not send it to Lockheed
immediately. Possibly he was
shaken by the much-publicised conviction of his friend Tom Jones on
May 1 and fearful of further
revelations: but if so, he had overcome such fears by September. On
the ninth of that month he sent
the note to Roger Bixby-Smith, the intermediary with Lockheed on the
abortive Orion deal in 1968
when $100,000 had ended up in the pocket of 'Victor Baarn'. With it he
sent a covering letter in his
own handwriting. It was one of two letters which, when unexpectedly
made public, would finally
destroy his good name.
It was short and to the point. He recalled the talks of 'a few years
ago', evidently meaning 1968, and
said that 'after a hell of a lot of pushing and pulling' it now looked
as if something positive might
develop and that it therefore might be a good idea to 'process the
enclosed idea personally'. Neither
the letter nor enclosure referred to the World Wildlife Fund, which
seems by now to have dropped
from Bernhard's mind.
Bixby-Smith passed the letter and note on to Burbank, probably direct
to Haughton or Kotchian,
but when they calculated that commission at the rate suggested would
add up to between $4 million
and $6 million they decided the prince's price was altogether too
high. Smith was asked to convey as
much to Bernhard, and to explain that in any case commission wasn't
allowed on a
government-to-government contract - though this prohibition hadn't
always inhibited the company in
the past.
Accordingly, Bixby-Smith arranged to meet the prince on October 30 on
one of his frequent visits to
Paris in the elegant company of Miss Helen 'Pussy' Grinda. The prince
expressed surprise that the
commission rate he was asking had checked out at so high a total. He
had in mind, he told Smith,
'only about $1 million'. But he was angry at Lockheed's flat rejection
of his proposal, and as the
evening wore on he became angrier.
Three days later the prince despatched a second hand-written letter to
Burbank. He was to claim
later that he based it on a draft suggested by Smith. It seemed
incredible, he wrote, that his approach
had been rejected without discussion and without consideration of
other possibilities. And he added
bitterly: 'It would never have happened in the days of Bob or
Courtlandt Gross.' He had 'spent a
great deal of time and effort' since 1968 'to turn things in the right
direction and to prevent wrong
decisions influenced by political considerations'—meaning a French or
British purchase in the
interests of European unity (of which he was a professed champion.).
He had done this because of
his old friendship for Lockheed 'and based on its past actions'. He
now felt 'a little bitter' and would
do nothing more for the company. What's more, he would make his
attitude clear if he were
consulted on the procurement decision by the admiralty or government.
Finally, he was considering
writing to or phoning Courtlandt Gross, who was still on Lockheed's
board with the title 'Senior
Adviser', and—at least in Bernhard's view—not without influence.
The letter evidently made a strong impression on Haughton and
Kotchian. Whether moved by
Bernhard's recollections of old and productive friendships, or by the
implied threat to throw his
influence decisively against the Orion, Lockheed came up with a new
otter. Presumably Bixby-Smith
had conveyed to them the prince's expectation of 'about $1 million',
because that is exactly what was
now proposed: a fixed commission of $1 million provided at least four
aircraft were bought. The
prohibition of commission on a government-to-government sale was
conveniently forgotten.
Bixby-Smith conveyed the offer to the prince on December 2 during a
visit to the royal palace at
Soestdijk, and he accepted immediately. Weisbrod, however, was to be
cut out of the reduced sum.
The prince, for reasons which are not clear, told Smith he did not
wish the money to be paid through
the Weisbrod route and would prefer it to be paid into a numbered
account in Geneva specially
opened for the purpose.
As it turned out, Bernhard never received his million dollars. The
Dutch Government opted for
defence cuts and postponed its purchase of a successor to the
Neptunes. The prince's fateful,
tell-tale letter lay forgotten in Haughton's files. And meanwhile the
timebomb in Washington ticked
away on an ever-shortening fuse.
3
Concurrent with all the Watergate investigations and quite independent
of them was another which
had quite separate origins. In 1972 the Democratic Senator from Idaho,
Frank Church, had set up a
Sub-committee on Multinational Corporations of the powerful Senate
Committee on Foreign
Relations, to follow up disclosures of ITT's interventions in Chile
and to investigate how far big
companies were influencing or forming foreign policy. From ITT Church
and his Sub-committee
moved on to the oil giants, opening public hearings on Gulf, Exxon and
Mobil on May 16, 1975.
'What we are concerned with', Church told a huge array of press, radio
and television reporters who
would soon become very familiar with the dark-panelled Hearings Room,
No. 4221, in the Dirksen
Senate Building, 'is not a question of private or public morality.
What concerns us here is a major
issue of foreign policy for the United States.' Watergate had shown
how domestic corruption could
weaken democratic government. The multinationals' investigation would
show that corruption abroad
subverted the free world and weakened America's international
standing.
The Senate's revelations of huge, systematic bribery by the oil
companies caused a sensation.
Suddenly it was Church rather than Sam Irvin, Archibald Cox or Stanley
Sporkin who held the
limelight; and now the Sub-committee decided to expand its reach and
go after Northrop.
Preceeding extract was from 'The Lockheed Papers '- Chapter Entitled:
The
Grease Machine - By David Boulton
At The Hand Of Man - The White Man's
Game
Raymond Bonner
Prince Bernhard and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF)
The White Man's Game pp. 66-71
To attract donors, large and small, as well as media attention,
Nicholson, Scott and the founding
fathers of WWF wanted the royal family to lend their name. They
approached Prince Philip to be
president. Philip was an avid outdoorsman and hunter—in January 1961
he had bagged a Bengal
tiger in India—and he and Queen Elizabeth had been to Kenya, on a
safari best remembered
because King George VI died while they were watching wild animals and
Princess Elizabeth had
become Queen. Scott sent Philip a draft of the proposed charter.
Philip read it carefully, replying that
one provision was "unctuous," and another "to wordy." This careful
reading was not what Scott hold
expected. It is "a great bore that he suggests so much alteration,"
Scott wrote Nicholson. The
founding fathers had wanted the Prince only as a figurehead. Philip
agreed to head up the British
chapter of WWF, but he turned down the presidency of the International
and suggested his friend
Prince Bernhard for the post. The men were alike in many ways. Both
had been born into European
royal families, but not very distinguished ones, and had acquired
their status and string of titles when
they married—Bernhard to the future Queen Juliana of the Netherlands.
The two men were
handsome, dashing, and staunchly conservative politically.
Scott, who liked consorting with royalty, made the pitch. "Prince
Philip (who was sailing with me at
Cowes in the 12 metre 'sceptre' on Saturday) . . . told me that he was
very keen that you should
'head-up' the international Trustees," Scott wrote to Bernhard.
"Please may I ask Your Royal
Highness to say that you will be President of the Trustees of The
World Wildlife Fund.'' Prince
Bernhard he eventually said yes, and he served as president until
1976, when he was forced to
resign after it became public that he had solicited more than a
million dollars in 'commissions" from
Lockheed in exchange for Lockheed's receiving contracts to build
warplanes for the Netherlands.
(At One point after the scandal broke, Bernhard said that he had
intended to give the money from
Lockheed to WWF; a member of the board at the time insists this is not
true.
Bernhard remained active behind the scenes in WWF, but a couple of
years after he resigned, Philip
became president of the International, and though it was thought he
would serve for only a few
years, he is still in power. The Prince is a committed conservationist
and he undoubtedly has given
prestige and visibility to WWF around the world. At the same time,
however, many in the Third
World have questioned whether he is the right person to head an
organisation that does most of its
work in developing countries. At a meeting of the Commonwealth Heads
of state, most of them from
the Third World and black, Philip said to an aide, "You wouldn't think
the peace of the world rested
on this lot, would you'?" on another occasion, he referred to the
Chinese as "slitty-eyed."
WWF WAS SET UP to raise money, but in spite of the initial successes,
it did not prove very
effective. Nicholson had said that $1.5 million each year would be
needed for conservation, which
Scott thought he could easily raise; indeed, he anticipated coaxing
$25 million from the rich. Scott
discovered that socializing with the elite was one thing, getting them
to part with their money quite
another, and it was several years before the total of WWF's revenues
reached $1 million.
WWF's financial fortunes began to change dramatically after a
hard-driving South African
businessman, Anton Rupert, joined the board. An Afrikaaner from the
Cape, Rupert had already
made millions as the owner of Rothmans International tobacco company,
the foundation of the
Rembrandt Group, his wholly owned business empire. When Rupert
expanded beyond South
Africa, he bought Dunhill and Cartier, and eventually he became one of
the richest men in South
Africa, rivalled only by Harry Oppenheimer, the gold and diamond
industrialist. Rupert had long
been interested in conservation, including the restoration of historic
buildings, and in 1968 he joined
the WWF board of trustees; he stayed on the board for twenty-two
years, ill spite of a provision in
the organisation's original incorporation documents that limited
members to two three-year terms, a
provision that was routinely ignored for the benefit of several other
influential members of the board
as well. Rupert brought a considerable amount of his own money to WWF,
but, more important, he
conceived a plan that would raise millions
Rupert's idea was the "1001 Club" The "one" was Prince Bernhard The
other one thousand were
wealthy individuals who could be persuaded to part with $10,000. The
one-time donation brings
lifetime membership, and the names of the generous patrons are kept
secret by the organisation.
According to these secret lists, American givers have included August
A Busch, Jr, of the beer
company; Henry Ford II; Peter Grace; Nelson Bunker Hunt, the silver
trader; Mrs Geoffrey Kent,
of Abercrombie & Kent; Robert S. McNamara; Cyril Magnin; Lew
Wasserman, of MCA; Thomas
Watson, of IBM. Many of the donors understandably wish to remain
anonymous (in part to avoid
being badgered by other charities), but it is also understandable why
WWF does not want the list
made public. It has included many less savoury individuals—Zaire's
President Mobutu, Sese Seko,
one of the most corrupt leaders in Africa; Daniel K Ludwig, the
reclusive American billionaire,
whose companies destroyed thousands of miles of the Amazon rain
forest; Agha Hasan Abedi, the
founder of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCC1);
Robert Vesco, the financier
who fled the United States in the 1970s to escape trial on charges of
fraud, embezzlement and
obstruction of justice; Tibor Rosenbaum, founder of a Swiss bank that
laundered billions of dollars
of organised crime money and who was accused of embezzling Israeli
deposits in the bank; Thomas
Jones, who was forced out as chief executive of Northrop after it was
revealed that the company
paid $30 million in bribes to government officials and agents around
the world in exchange for
contracts; Lord Kagan, a British businessman convicted of theft and
conspiracy to defraud the
British tax service; a Norwegian shipowner convicted of taking a £1
million bribe; an individual who
was the conduit for the money from Lockheed to Prince Bernhard.
There has been another remarkable feature about the 1001 Club—the
number of South Africans.
On the 1989 list, at least sixty individuals were from South Africa,
including seven of Rupert's
relatives. Many were also members of the Broederbond, the secret,
conservative Afrikaaner society
that has traditionally wielded immense political power in South
Africa. Only five countries had more
donors, and as a percentage of their population, South African whites
had three hundred times as
many members as the United States. It is easy to understand why so
many South Africans have been
willing to part with $10,000 to Join the 1001 and not all of it has to
do with conservation. Not many
international clubs welcomed white South Africans, and membership in
the 1001 provided them an
opportunity to mingle and do business with tycoons, as well as with
Prince Philip and Prince
Bernhard. What else they may have gained from the membership is
unknown, in part because so
much of what WWF-lnternational does is kept from the public and even
from the organisation's own
trustees. Because of the secrecy and closed nature of the WWF club, it
is also difficult to know the
extent of the influence that so much South African money has had on
the organisation's conservation
work. There can be little doubt, however, that WWF-International's
initial opposition to the ivory
ban reflected South African power on the board—South Africa was
adamantly opposed to the ban,
because its elephants were not being poached and it made money from
selling ivory.
One place where South Africa's clout has been felt is in the office of
the director-general, the man
who runs WWF. Since 1977 that man has been Charles de Haes. Much of de
Haes's past is vague,
which seems to be by design: he has chosen to reveal very little about
his background and some of
what the organisation does say publicly about him is at odds with the
facts. On WWF's public list of
officers and trustees, de Haes is identified as being from Belgium,
and he was born there, in 1938.
But as a young boy, he moved with his family to South Africa. After
graduating from Cape Town
University with a law degree, he got a job with Rothmans
International, Rupert's tobacco company.
De Haes's Official resume—that is, the one WWF distributes—makes a
point of noting that he went
to work for the tobacco company "although himself a nonsmoker." It
then says de Haes "helped
establish companies" in Sudan, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. What it
does not say is that these
were companies that sold cigarettes. Maybe de Haes didn't smoke, but
he made money by
encouraging others to do so.
De Haes was brought to WWF through the back door by Anton Rupert in
1971. He was first
assigned to be personal assistant to Prince Bernhard. One of his tasks
was to implement the 1001
Club project. He was tremendously successful. Ten thousand dollars was
worth even more back
then, yet it took de Haes only three years to find one thousand
donors. Prince Bernhard provided
the letters of introduction, but de Haes was the salesman who clinched
the deals. Even de Haes's
fiercest critics—and they are many—use the word "brilliant" when
describing his fund-raising skills.
In 1975, with the backing of Rupert and Prince Philip de Haes was
named joint director-general of
WWF, and two years later he had the top position to himself. De Haes
had no education or
experience in conservation, other than his few years at WWF, yet he
was now in charge of the most
prestigious and influential conservation organisation in the world. It
was a position that would have
appealed to the most qualified and eminent individuals in the field,
yet no effort was made to recruit
any of them.
WWF may have taken on someone without conservation experience, but
then, it cost the
organisation nothing: Rupert agreed to pay de Haes's salary—which,
according to a British trustee,
goes far in explaining why de Haes got the Job. WWF never said at the
time that Rupert was paying
de Haes, and it still tries to conceal this fact. The organisation's
chief spokesman, Robert
SanGeorge, stated emphatically during an interview in 1991 that de
Haes had not been seconded
from Rothmans to Prince Bernhard and WWF during the early years. But
an internal WWF
memorandum signed by the organisation's executive vice-president in
1975 talks specifically about
"Mr. de Haes's period of secondment to WWF." What this means, of
course, is that de Haes was
still employed by a South African corporation while working for WWF.
"I thought it was a scandal,"
says a former board member from North America, Who added that it was
only by accident that he
learned that Rupert was paying de Haes. This board member did not like
the arrangement. "Who
does the director general serve'? Is the interest of a South African
tobacco company synonymous
with the world conservation movement? Even more troubling to this
director was the fact that it was
kept a secret. "lf it was such a good thing, why weren't they willing
to say so in the annual report?"
In a similar vein, the organisation treats as a state secret the
question of who paid de Haes after he
became director-general. It was "an anonymous donor" SanGeorge says.
Even board members have
been in the dark. When on occasion one asked, he was told that the
donor wished to remain
anonymous.
It is unlikely that any other charitable organisation that depends on
public support operates with such
little accountability and in such secrecy as WWF has under de Haes. It
is easier to penetrate the
CIA. And when WWF has been caught in embarrassing conducts it has
engaged in damage control
and cover-ups of the kind that might be expected from a company whose
products have caused
injury to consumers and the environment. Under rules de Haes
promulgated, WWF employees are
prohibited from talking to anyone outside the organization about
anything except what the
organisation has already made public; the obligation to secrecy binds
the employee even after he or
she has left WWF. Few are willing to break this code of silence—given
their fear of de Haes and, in
the case of current employees, the generous salaries and pleasant
living conditions in Switzerland.
It may well be, as one senior WWF officer put it somewhat defensively,
that a dollar given to WWF
is still a dollar well spent for conservation. But, as this person
added, "imagine what the organisation
could be with better leadership."
Over the years there has been increasing dissatisfaction with de
Haes's leadership. One of the most
serious challenges to his rule came in the early 1980s, when the heads
of the WWF organisations in
Britain, the Netherlands and Switzerland began to discuss among
themselves changes they thought
were necessary in the organisation. These organisations should be able
to effect change because they
provide most of the funds for the International—WWF-UK alone
contributes nearly one-third of the
International's budget, and Switzerland and the Netherlands rank
second and third. The way WWF
was set up, two-thirds of the money raised by the national
organisations goes to the International,
while one third remains with the national organisation. The
"dissident" leaders of the three national
organisations objected to this because there was no accountability
over how the International spent
the money. They also did not like the fact that the WWF-International
board of trustees doesn't
represent the national organisations. The board is a self-selected
body— that is, those on the board
decide whom to place on it—and the national organisations, even though
they give the money, have
no right of representation. In short, the heads of the British, Dutch
and Swiss organisations felt that
too much power was concentrated in Gland—the Swiss town where
WWF-lnternational's
headquarters is located—and that the local organisations should have
more autonomy.
Sir Arthur Norman, the head of WWF-UK at the time, was particularly
disturbed by the manner in
which WWF-International set up chapters in other countries. He thought
they should "be triggered
off by local people, local enthusiasm, and not by someone in Bland
saying "it's time".
The White Man's Game - pp78-81
Phillipson found that "a diligent auditor set among the project
account files in Switzerland would
surely open a cupboard full of skeletons." He was referring to the
International's field projects—from
some there were no reports at all, and many others had made no
accounting of how the money was
spent. Phillipson's conclusion that WWF's attitude engendered
accusations of "neo-colonialism"
remained in the summary.
Occasionally other skeletons got out, and when they did, it became
clear that WWF had lost its
ethical way, at least in carrying out its conservation work in Africa.
In the late 1980s, for example,
WWF provided Zimbabwe's Department of National Parks and Wildlife
Management with funds to
buy a helicopter for its anti-poaching operations in the Zambezi
Valley, where the black rhino was on
the verge of extinction because of poachers. The department used the
helicopter to deploy
anti-poaching units when it received reports of poachers in an area.
At least fifty-seven poachers
were killed in the helicopter-supported operations, and the WWF office
in Zimbabwe reported that
the helicopter "has made an enormous difference to staff morale and
efficiency" in the wildlife
department.
That WWF was involved was not flown publicly until the environment
correspondent of the British
newspaper The Guardian, Paul Brown, broke the story. WWF responded
with a statement saying
that it had provided the funds for the helicopter "on the strict
understanding that the helicopter would
never be used as a gun-ship," and that it was "official WWF policy not
to use any of its funds for
purchase of arms or ammunition." The truth is the organisation knew
that the helicopter would be
used in operations in which poachers would be killed. Indeed, there
had been a long and fierce
debate within WWF about the project, and many on the staff were
opposed because Zimbabwe's
policy was "Shoot first, ask questions later," as one of those
involved in the debate puts it. Providing
the helicopter "made the policy more effective," he said. As for WWF's
statement that it did not
provide funds for arms or ammunition, the organisation's internal
documents show that it was doing
precisely that for at least one project in Tanzania in 1987.
De Haes and WWF-International had to work harder to cover up another
scandal in Africa, this one
involving mercenaries, intrigue, high level WWF officials and Prince
Bernhard. The mercenaries were
former British commandos who worked for KAS Enterprises, a company
headed by Sir David
Stirling, the legendary founder of Britain's Special Air Services
(SAS), Britain's most elite commando
force. Stirling, who died in 1990, engaged in clandestine activities
throughout the world, setting up
ostensibly private companies that were in fact covers for Britain's
MI-5 and MI-6. In Africa s
conservation wars, in the late 1980S KAS, as part of its arrangement
with WWF officials, trained
anti-poaching units in Namibia, which was then still under the control
of South Africa, as well as
Mozambicans in South Africa. (The South African government was trying
to destabilise
Mozambique.) KAS also set up a "sting" operation to catch traffickers
in ivory and rhino horn. The
project was code-named "Operation Lock," Lock being the maiden name of
the wife of a former
SAS officer, Lieutenant-Colonel Ian Crooke, who was in charge of it.
Some of KAS's anti-poaching activities were exposed in July 1989 by
Robert Powell, the Reuters
correspondent in Nairobi. Powell, however, was unable to link WWF to
the operation, and so
WWF remained silent when Powell's story appeared, and continued
working with KAS. But
Powell's article provoked Stephen Ellis, editor of Africa
Confidential, a fortnightly newsletter
published in London, to probe further. Ellis, also a freelance
journalist, got an assignment from The
Independent to write an article about Operation Lock. In the course of
his reporting he called WWF
and talked with Robert SanGeorge, the organisation's chief spokesman.
SanGeorge, an American,
had come to WWF-International in 1940 along with his wife, a tough
lawyer who became executive
assistant to de Haes. Without telling Ellis, SanGeorge, who has been
seen with a recording device
attached to his phone, made a verbatim transcript of their
conversation, which he passed on to de
Haes—SanGeorge even noted when Ellis "paused to fetch a cup of coffee
he had left in another
room.
A few days later, SanGeorge faxed a statement to Ellis. The statement
began: "it is, and always has
been, the policy of WWF not to engage in clandestine or covert
operations which might be
considered unethical by governments, the public, or supporters of
WWF." The organisation then
went on to lay the blame for the covert operation on John Hanks, head
of the Africa Programme at
WWF-International. It said that Hanks had initiated the project
"without the knowledge or approval
of WWF-lnternational's management." Six months earlier Hanks had been
forced out of WWF by
de Haes and had gone to South Africa as director of the Southern
African Nature Foundation, the
name of WWF's affiliate in South Africa. Not wanting to cross de Haes
again and being loyal to
WWF, Hanks signed a statement assuming responsibility for Operation
Lock.
Ellis wrote his story, and the day it appeared, SanGeorge sent a
memorandum to all WWF national
organisations. The memo reiterated what SanGeorge had told Ellis, and
emphasised that Operation
Lock "was initiated without the knowledge or authority of the Director
General" and that "no funds
for the Operation were channelled through WWF International's books."
It was a carefully crafted
statement, befitting the work of a lawyer who wants to keep his client
out of Jail. But it was hardly an
honest explanation befitting a charitable organisation.
The truth, which has never come out publicly, is found in a series of
communications from Frans
Stroebel, executive director of WWF's South African affiliate when
Operation Lock commenced
and the man who had introduced Lieutenant-Colonel Crooke to senior
police and conservation
officials in South Africa. Stroebel wrote Prince Philip:
I have given Mr. de Haes a number of comprehensive briefings on the
project since I first became
involved. In May 1989, I gave him full details. He then went to HRH
Prince Bernhard to confirm that
Prince Bernhard was indeed the sponsor. Mr. de Haes satisfied himself
with the developments, and
in subsequent discussions with me he never expressed any concern about
my involvement, or, for
that matter, the covert programme itself.
As for the funds for the operation, Stroebel said, in another letter,
"The funds for Operation Lock
were actually WWF funds." The money had come to WWF-lnternational,
then was channelled back
out to Bernhard for Operation Lock in a series of strange
transactions. First, in December 1988,
Sotheby's auctioned two paintings owned by Bernhard—The Holy Family, a
seven-by-five-foot oil
by Bartolome Esteban Murillo, and The Rape of Europa, a
four-by-five-foot oil by Elisabetta Sirani.
Together they brought in £610,000. On Bernhard's instructions the
proceeds were donated to
WWF-International; Sotheby's had noted in its catalogue that they
would be. But if the buyer—who
remains anonymous—thought the money was going toward WWF's general
conservation work, he
was mistaken. Within a few weeks after the sale, Bernhard called the
administrator of the 1001 Club
and asked her to transfer £500,000 from the 1001 Club account to Queen
Juliana's (his wife's)
account in the Netherlands. The £500,000 was needed for Operation
Lock, according to Stroebel,
and de Haes "agreed to the use of these funds as requested." (Bernhard
told WWF it could keep the
remaining £110,000, which at the time was worth a little less than
$200,000.)
After Ellis's story appeared, many Western conservationists working in
Africa were embarrassed,
because Operation Lock had been exposed—not because they thought it
was wrong to engage in a
covert operation to stop the illegal trade in rhino horn and ivory.
Indeed, the possibility of covert
operations had often been discussed by elephant and rhino specialists.
On one occasion, at a
meeting attended by conservationists from WWF, AWF and other
organisations, Hanks outlined
what he had in mind and the general response, as described by a person
who attended, was "Get on
with it. Don't tell us what you're doing, but get on with it."
Government officials in Zambia, Tanzania
and Kenya did not feel quite the same way. They declined offers of
assistance from KAS.
That there was a schism as big as a canyon between the approach to
conservation taken by the
Africans on the one hand and the conservation organisations on the
other was not surprising, not
when one looked at the conservation organisations: they were the
monopoly of white Westerners.
Whites headed them, hired whites to staff them, and implemented
programs that reflected Western
values.
WWF-International has its headquarters in Gland, a quintessential
Swiss town—small, quiet, neat,
and white. It carries out programs around the world, most of them in
the Third World, yet one has
rarely seen other than a white face in the Gland offices.. For thirty
years, not a single African, and
only a handful of Asians and Latin Americans, were ever hired by
WWF-International. Only one
black has ever held a professional position in the Africa section of
WWF-US, and he was not hired
until 1991. In the field—that is, in Africa—walk into the
organisation's offices, and it is like colonial
days: white at the top, blacks in the inferior positions. WWF's major
presence in Africa has been its
regional office in Nairobi, which in various incarnations has existed
since the 1960s; it has always
been headed by whites, and not until 1989 was there a single African
in a professional position. Only
one WWF program anywhere on the continent has ever been headed by an
African.
Project CA-35
A JOINT VENTURE BY: Sub Sea Recovery Inc. and Trident Research &
Recovery, Inc.
CA-35 website: A Preliminary Brief On The Search For Historical Truth
- ©1998 Trident Research
& Recovery Inc. - Sub Sea Recovery Inc. "On Site Operations are in
progress, updates will be
forthcoming"
The wreck of a giant and secret WWII U-boat has been found off Cape
Cod,
Mass. in the USA. It slipped out of Germany on the same day as the
assassination attempt on Adolf Hitler.
What was it's mission and what happened between its first signal
messages to
the map room at the White House and its sinking? Why, moreover, was
the
Dutch Royal family, and possibly Bilderberg supremo Prince Bernhard,
holidaying on the coast that day?[TG]
VIII. RECENT RESEARCH - extract from CA-35 website
There have been some very interesting revelations in the Project's
follow-up of research data. Due to
the efforts of contributing researcher Mr. Eric Brothers U.S. State
Department Protocol documents
are now available to confirm one of this investigation's long-standing
curiosities - the visit of members
of the Dutch Royal Family to Chatham, Cape Cod during the very same
time-frame in which the
German Type XI-B U-Boat was known to have been operational off Cape
Cod.
These documents consist of a series of notifications between the
representatives of the Dutch Royal
Family in exile and the Protocol Section of the Department of State.
On the surface they do indeed
appear to be routine in nature. It is only when viewed with the other
known occurrences off Cape
Cod at this time that these Protocol records seem to indicate more
than just routine procedure.
For example: One of the most obvious details that stand out is the
sudden departure from Chatham
of Princess Juliana and her royal attendants on the morning of the
26th. of August, 1944, only hours
after the known destruction of the Type XI fourteen miles to the
southeast. This, combined with a
published news report in the local Cape Cod Times for that date, quote
the Princess as opening a
short public statement upon her departure, stating: "I will not talk
about anything political and cannot
take questions". She goes on to say how the Royal Family enjoyed their
stay at the Chatham Bars
Inn, etc.
Within five minutes the impromptu interview is over and the Royal
Family departs by car for Boston
enroute to Canada. The fact that these State Department Protocol
documents were only declassified
at the time Mr. Brothers requested to view them in July of 1997 is
possibly indicative - fifty four
years after the fact.
To add to this new information Trident had conducted background
research into the Dutch Royal
Family due to its suspicions and has confirmed the following:
1) The Royal Consort, Prince Bernhardt, Husband of Juliana since 1937,
was previous to their
marriage an active card-carrying member of Hitler's black-shirted SS.
2) Prince Consort Bernhardt was employed prior to, during, and after
the war by I.G.Farben's
Industrial Espionage Unit "NW-7" which, needless to say, placed him
under great suspicions by both
the British and American intelligence communities. The mere fact of
his employment as an "industrial
spy" for Farben places him squarely within the sphere of the German
Industrial community, links for
which have already been established with the Type XI-B U-Boat.
There are many more details regarding the Dutch Royal Family, Prince
Bernhardt, Princess Juliana
and theGerman Industrialists which have not been included in this
specific brief due to space
considerations. However, the basic facts as listed above give very
strong indications regarding the
Dutch Royal visit to Cape Cod at this specific time in July and August
of 1944. Suffice it to say that
there is the very strong possibility that Prince Consort Bernhardt,
through his wife Princess Juliana,
may very well have been acting as a sort of liaison or facilitator in
connections for Armistice
Negotiations between German Industrialists and certain members of the
American Department of
State and Intelligence Community. The final proof for this is as yet
not confirmed, but the stage is
certainly set for such endeavors. Perhaps the amplified documentation
for such a situation is
contained within the hull of the Type XI off Cape Cod.
Used with permission - from http://www.mallofmaine.com/ca35/
©1998 Trident Research & Recovery Inc. - Sub Sea Recovery Inc.
[this article] All Rights Reserved. No part of this site may be
reproduced or transmitted in any form
or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording, downloading or any
information storage and retrieval system, without permission in
writing from the publishers of:
The CA-35 website.
The Prince and the Nazis
Extract from 'H. R. H. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands; an
authorized
biography' Harrap, 1962. by Alden Hatch
In order to finish his education quickly Bernhard had to make some
compromises with the monstrous
political system that was fastening its grip on Germany. The story
that the Prince of the Netherlands
once wore the black uniform of Hitler’s SS is quite true. It came
about in this way.
Only eleven days after his father’s death, on June 30, 1934, Hitler’s
first purge, known as ‘The
Night of the Long Knives,’ shocked Germany and the world. On that
pleasant summer evening Ernst
Rohm, who had been Hitler’s friend and ally from the beginning, and
other leaders of the
brown-shirted SA (Storm Troopers), the private army which had brought
Hitler to power and who
were now challenging his will, were taken in their beds and their
offices, in beer-halls and on railway
trains or in the streets, and shot without even a drumhead
court-martial. They were an evil and
degenerate crew who lived by violence and appropriately died by it,
but the capricious manner of
their liquidation proved that justice in Germany had been replaced by
the will of a tyrant.
Nor were they the only victims. General Kurt von Schleicher, who had
opposed Hitler politically,
was shot in the doorway of his home, and when his wife protested too
much she was murdered too.
All sorts of private grudges were satisfied in the slaughter which was
said at the Nuremberg trials to
have taken over a thousand lives. It lasted for thirty-six hours.
From that moment no man or woman in the land was safe from the terror,
especially not those who
wielded power, least of all Hitler himself. The SA was disbanded and
replaced by Heinrich
Himmler’s black-uniformed SS (Schutzstaffel), and the Gestapo (Secret
State Police). They quickly
set about tightening the screws of the police state.
At the beginning of his serious studies Bernhard learned that a new
sort of test had been decreed for
every one graduating from the universities - a written and oral
‘political attitude” examination. With
his ideals and high temper he knew that was one examination he could
not pass.
However, there was a way round it. Members of the various Nazi
paramilitary organizations were
ipso facto considered “politically reliable.” Bernhard had joined the
League for Air Sports because
he wanted to learn to fly. It had been started by the Nazi Party as a
sub-rosa method of training war
pilots, but it had virtually no political implications. Its leaders
were the old World War I airmen like
Ernst Udet, who were not Nazis and cared only about teaching young
people to fly.
So Bernhard was all set until he went larking around the sky with a
wild young friend who flew their
plane into a lake. They swam ashore, but the plane had ceased to
exist.
When they got back to the base their commander was furious. “He was
right, of course,” says
Bernhard, “and we were wrong. Even though I was not at the controls, I
knew I was out. So while
the commandant was screaming at my friend I said, “ I resign too.” It
was just a question of who
could get the words out first.”
His ignominious ejection from Air Sports left Bernhard in a very
vulnerable position. He belonged to
no organization and had no uniform or badge to wear. He knew that the
law examinations were
made doubly difficult for uncommitted people, and that even if he
passed them the political attitude
test would eliminate him. So he looked around for a harmless cover. He
found it by the grace of the
son of the man who owned Bernhard’s favourite Berlin pub.
Young Walter Wunderlich was an idealistic Nazi: there were many such
young men who truly
believed in the noble aspirations of the party as voiced, but not
practised, by Hitler and his
lieutenants. Wunderlich was head of the Berlin unit of the Motor SS,
which was made up of young
men who had their own cars. They put on their uniforms and met once a
week for what almost
amounted to a sportscar rally. Bernhard and five or six friends in the
same boat as he, including the
Langenheim brothers from Morocco, went to Wunderlich.
Bernhard knew that a man had to serve in the SS for a year and a half
before he was admitted to
membership; until then he was on probation. Speaking for all of them,
he said, “Look, Walter, you
know exactly how we think and what we are. But we need some sort of
protection. Will you take us
into your motor unit until we finish our studies? Then out we go.”
Is that how you want it?” Walter asked.
“Yes,” said Bernhard. “You know just why we are doing this. Under no
circumstances does any of
us want to become and SS man by quicker promotion or whatsoever. We’ll
come in our motorcars,
and we’ll all drive together till we graduate. Then out. That is the
understanding.”
Though Walter was a dedicated Nazi, he was a loyal friend ready to
stick his neck out to help. “I’ll
take you,” he said.
They were issued overcoats, and went to the best tailor in Berlin to
have their uniforms specially
made. “I must say we looked smart in them,” Bernhard says. “The extent
of my services included the
weekly rallies and standing guard occasionally, because if you did
that you could have a free garage.
We had a lot of fun and no trouble.”
At the end of their studies Bernhard’s whole group, with one
exception, left the SS and severed all
connection with the party. This fellow appeared later in Holland and
took advantage of Bernhard’s
trusting nature to commit an act of treachery.
By the time Bernhard had graduated he was completely determined to get
out of Germany. Von
Hindenburg was dead. The last vestige of constitutionalism had
disappeared as the office of
President of the German Republic was abolished and Hitler named
himself Fuhrer. He was now
more powerful than any German Emperor had ever been, and more obsessed
by lust of conquest
than old Frederick Barbarossa.
The Nazi movement had gathered such momentum that Bernhard could see
no hope of stopping it
short of bloody catastrophe. This is not to say that he foresaw the
future clearly in all its Wagnerian
tragedy. He did not. But neither did he believe for a moment that the
Third Reich would last a
thousand years, or fifty for that matter. Even if it did he could not
conceive of living in a land of
government by terror. And despite the military tradition of his family
and h is own creed of loyalty, he
had not the conscience to become, as conscription would soon compel
him to, part of a military
machine dedicated to conquest.
Had he been older and his character more hardened by adversity he
might have considered
remaining to oppose the regime, hopeless as opposition seemed. Even
so, open dissent was
impossible, and he had neither the talent nor the taste for
conspiracy. In addition, the only organized
underground resistance was the Communist Party, which was equally
distasteful to him.The only
solution was self-exile.
Bernhard did not burn all his bridges immediately. As a first step he
got a job in the Paris office of
I.G.Farben, the great German chemical combine. Though his training had
been in law, he was
fascinated by industry and finance, and thought that his talents lay
in this direction. Which proved to
be the case.
In Paris Bernhard threw all his energy into his new career. He says
that he wanted to prove that it
was not nepotism that got him the job. But the truth is that by now he
was so geared to
high-pressure work that he could not have done otherwise. Also, the
more he learned about business
the more interested he became.
Though his working hours were from 8 am to 7 pm he was among the first
to reach the office in the
morning and the last to leave at night. In addition he took a course
in shorthand and typing in the
evening or during his lunch-hour, munching a sandwich while he worked.
“They were mad for garlic
in that school,” he says. “I have never smelt anything like it. I
started eating it in self-defence and
learned to like it very much. I still do, though my family is not
quite in agreement with me.”
I.G.Farben’s Paris manager, Dr Passarge, soon recognized Bernhard as
executive material and sent
him on a training course through the various departments. In the sales
department he really found his
metier. He negotiated several barter deals with French Indo-China -
rice for chemicals - and took
part in various other selling campaigns. It gave him a chance to use
all his talents - financial
acuteness, ability to think fast, persuasiveness, and that God-given
charm of which he was
completely aware. He did so well that Dr Passarge said, “If you don’t
do something stupid you’ll be
a manager by the time you’re thirty.” A little later he got the same
promise in writing.
In Paris Bernhard lived in the luxurious house of his uncle and aunt
by marriage, Count and Countess
Paul de Kotzebue. The Countess was an American, Allene Tew, whose
first husband had been
Anson Wood Berther, an executive of General Electric from whom she
inherited a fine old-fashioned
American fortune. Countess Kotzebue doted on Bernhard, Princess
Armgard says, “She spoiled him
terribly. All her cars were his to drive. She never refused him
anything he asked. His wish was
literally her command. The Kotzebues had no children, and she regarded
him as a son.”
Bernhard, who always returned affection in full measure, was
completely devoted to “Aunt Allene,”
and equally willing to gratify her wishes. Count Kotzebue says that
many years later, when the
Countess was dying at Nice, Bernhard drove all the way from Soestdijk
to see her once more.
“Though my wife seemed to be unconscious,” he said, “she recognized
his horn in the courtyard and
said, ‘That’s my Bernilo come to see me.’ ”
It is not to be supposed that the life of a bachelor prince in Paris
was a social blank. No matter how
hard Bernhard worked he always had energy left for fun. He was invited
to a great many parties and
went to most of them. He was a great favourite in the embassies, with
one exception. “Soon after I
began working for I.G.Farben [see note below],” he says, “ the German
Ambassador sent a man to
ask me if I would join the organization of Germans living abroad. It
was, of course, a party
organization, so I said, ‘No’. They gave me no further trouble, but I
was never invited to the German
Embassy.”
However, the Belgian Ambassador, Count van Kerckhoven, was especially
friendly. He had been
Ambassador to Berlin when Bernhard was a student there and had been
“awfully nice” to him. Their
friendship continued in Paris. Though Bernhard had only an hour off at
noon, the Ambassador often
invited him for lunch and arranged things so that the meal was served
the moment he arrived and
protocol dispensed with, so that he could eat and run back to his job.
At one of these luncheons late in 1935 Bernhard found himself seated
next do Dr Loudon, the Dutch
Minister to Portugal, whom he also knew quite well. The conversation
turned to the Winter
Olympics at Garmisch-Partenkirchen, where Bernhard planned to go
during his winter holidays. Dr
Loudon told him that Queen Wilhelmina and her daughter, Princess
Juliana, also planned to go to the
Olympics. “They will be staying at Igls, just over the mountain,” he
said. “Perhaps you would like to
call Her Majesty’s aide-de-camp and arrange to pay them a courtesy
visit.”
“Thank you, I believe I will,” Bernhard said. “It might be amusing.”
Preceding extract from:
Hatch, Alden, 'H. R. H. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands; an
authorized biography'.
Subject : Bernhard Leopold, consort of Juliana, Queen of the
Netherlands,
Harrap, 1962.
Notes:
A celebration was held at the Petersburg Hotel in 1937 with top Nazis
and the IG Farben board and
friends to celebrate 'Nazification'.
During World War Two IG Farben paid the SS 3 marks a day for unskilled
concentration camp
workers and 4 marks a day for skilled. For child labour they paid the
SS 1.5 marks a day.
Return to the main index
---------------------------------------------
Franc ©
Reply: dhrr...@xs4all.nl
http://www.kurdistan.org/
http://www.kjemi.unit.no/~sauar/kurdsturks.html
http://www.clark.net/kurd/
http://www.ib.be/med/
http://shrike.depaul.edu/~sconneel/open.html
Madonna ©
Bilderberg | 1998 | 1997 | 1996 | 1995 | Reports | Origins | Bernhard
Bilderberg Conferences
Prince Bernhard - personal background
and his part in the earlier Bilderberg
Conferences
U.S./Nazi connections - Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler -
Bernhard's
employer, I.G.Farben, is discussed
1975 - The Lockheed Scandal - The Grease Machine Exposed - extract
from
David Boulton's book: 'The Lockheed Papers'
At The Hand Of Man - The White Man's Game - Extract from Raymond
Bonner's book on Bernhard's World Wildlife Fund
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Congress/7727/bernhard.htm
Project CA-35 - Recent research into Nazi-Bilderberg connections in
Boston,
Mass.
The Prince and the Nazis - Extract from 'H. R. H. Prince Bernhard of
the
Netherlands; an authorized biography' Harrap, 1962. by Alden Hatch
WALL STREET AND THE RISE OF
HITLER
Anthony C Sutton 1976
Chapter 12
CONCLUSIONS
We have demonstrated with documentary evidence a number of critical
associations between Wall
Street international bankers and the rise of Hitler and Nazism in
Germany.
First: that Wall Street financed the German cartels in the mid-1920s
which in turn proceeded to bring
Hitler to power.
Second: that the financing for Hitler and his S.S. street thugs came
in part from affiliates or
subsidiaries of U.S. firms, including Henry Ford in 1922, payments by
I.G. Farben and General
Electric in 1933, followed by the Standard Oil of New Jersey and
I.T.T. subsidiary payments to
Heinrich Himmler up to 1944.
Third: that U.S. multi-nationals under the control of Wall Street
profited handsomely from Hitler's
military construction program in the 1930s and at least until 1942.
Fourth: that these same international bankers used political influence
in the U.S. to cover up their
wartime collaboration and to do this infiltrated the U.S. Control
Commission for Germany.
Our evidence for these four major assertions can be summarised as
follows:
In Chapter One we presented evidence that the Dawes and Young plans
for German reparations
were formulated by Wall Streeters, temporarily wearing the hats of
statesmen, and these loans
generated a rain of profits for these international bankers. Owen
Young of General Electric, Hjalmar
Schacht, A. Voegler, and others intimately connected with Hitler's
accession to power had earlier
been the negotiators for the U.S. and German sides, respectively.
Three Wall Street houses - Dillon,
Read; Harris, Forbes; and, National City Company - handled
three-quarters of the reparations loans
used to create the German cartel system, including the dominant I.G.
Farben and Vereinigte
Stahlwerke, which together produced 95 per cent of the explosives for
the Nazi side in World War
II.
The central role of I.G. Farben in Hitler's coup d'etat was reviewed
in Chapter Two. The directors
of American I.G. (Farben) were identified as prominent American
businessmen: Walter Teagle, a
close Roosevelt associate and backer and an NRA administrator; banker
Paul Warburg (his brother
Max Warburg was on the board of I.G. Farben in Germany); and Edsel
Ford. Farben contributed
400,000 RM directly to Schacht and Hess for use in the crucial 1933
elections and Farben was
subsequently in the forefront of military development in Nazi Germany.
A donation of 60,000 RM was made to Hitler by German General Electric
(A.E.G.), which had four
directors and a 25-30 percent interest held by the U.S. General
Electric parent company. This role
was described in Chapter Three, and we found that Gerard Swope, an
originator of Roosevelt's
New Deal (its National Recovery Administration segment), together with
Owen Young of the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Clark Minor of International
General Electric, were the
dominant Wall Streeters in A.E.G. and most significant single
influence.
We also found no evidence to indict the German electrical firm
Siemens, which was not under Wall
Street control. In contrast, there is documentary evidence that both
A.E.G. and Osram, the other
units of the German electrical industry - both of which had U.S.
participation and control - did
finance Hitler. In fact, almost all directors of German General
Electric were Hitler backers, either
directly through A.E.G. or indirectly through other German firms. G.E.
rounded out its Hitler support
by technical co-operation with Krupp, aimed at restricting U.S.
development of tungsten carbide,
which worked to the detriment of the U.S. in World War II. We
concluded that A.E.G. plants in
Germany managed, by a yet unknown manoeuvre, to avoid bombing by the
Allies.
An examination of the role of Standard Oil of New Jersey (which was
and is controlled by the
Rockefeller interests) was undertaken in Chapter Four. Standard Oil
apparently did not finance
Hitler's accession to power in 1933 (that part of the "myth of Sidney
Warburg" is not proven). On
the other hand, payments were made up to 1944 by Standard Oil of New
Jersey, to develop
synthetic gasoline for war purposes on behalf of the Nazis and,
through its wholly owned subsidiary,
to Heinrich Himmler's S.S. Circle of Friends for political purposes.
Standard Oil's role was technical
aid to Nazi development of synthetic rubber and gasoline through a
U.S. research company under
the management control of Standard Oil. The Ethyl Gasoline Company,
jointly owned by Standard
Oil of New Jersey and General Motors, was instrumental in supplying
vital ethyl lead to Nazi
Germany - over the written protests of the U.S. War Department - with
the clear knowledge that the
ethyl lead was for Nazi military purposes.
In Chapter Five we demonstrated that International Telephone and
Telegraph Company, one of the
more notorious multi-nationals, worked both sides of World War II
through Baron Kurt von
Schröder, of the Schroder banking group. I.T.T. also held a 28-percent
interest in FockeWolfe
aircraft, which manufactured excellent German fighter planes. We also
found that Texaco (Texas Oil
Company) was involved in Nazi endeavours through German attorney
Westrick, but dropped its
chairman of the board Rieber when these endeavours were publicised.
Henry Ford was an early (1922) Hitler backer and Edsel Ford continued
the family tradition in 1942
by encouraging French Ford to profit from arming the German Wehrmacht.
Subsequently, these
Ford-produced vehicles were used against American soldiers as they
landed in France in 1944. For
his early recognition of, and timely assistance to, the Nazis, Henry
Ford received a Nazi medal in
1938. The records of French Ford suggest Ford Motor received kid glove
treatment from the Nazis
after 1940.
The provable threads of Hitler financing are drawn together in Chapter
Seven and answer with
precise names and figures the question, who financed Adolf Hitler?
This chapter indicts Wall Street
and, incidentally, no one else of consequence in the United States
except the Ford family. The Ford
family is not normally associated with Wall Street but is certainly a
part of the "power elite."
In earlier chapters we cited several Roosevelt associates, including
Teagle of Standard Oil, the
Warburg family, and Gerard Swope. In Chapter Eight the role of Putze
Hanfstaengl, another
Roosevelt friend and a participant in the Reichstag fire, is traced.
The composition of the Nazi inner
circle during World War II, and the financial contributions of
Standard Oil of New Jersey and I.T.T.
subsidiaries, are traced in Chapter Nine. Documentary proof of these
monetary contributions is
presented. Kurt von Schroder is identified as the key intermediary in
this S.S. "slush fund."
Finally, in Chapter Ten we reviewed a book suppressed in 1934 and the
"myth of 'Sidney
Warburg.'" The suppressed book accused the Rockefellers, the Warburgs,
and the major oil
companies of financing Hitler. While the name "Sidney Warburg" was no
doubt an invention, the
extraordinary fact remains that the argument in the suppressed "Sidney
Warburg" Book is remains
that the argument in the suppressed "Sidney Warburg" book is
remarkably close to the evidence
presented now. It also remains a puzzle why James Paul Warburg,
fifteen years later, would want to
attempt, in a rather transparently slipshod manner, to refute the
contents of the "Warburg" book, a
book he claims not to have seen. It is perhaps even more of a puzzle
why Warburg would choose
Nazi von Papen's Memoirs as the vehicle to present his refutation.
Finally, in Chapter Eleven we examined the roles of the Morgan and
Chase Banks in World War II,
specifically their collaboration with the Nazis in France while a
major war was raging.
In other works, as in our two previous examinations of the links
between New York international
bankers and major historical events, we find a provable pattern of
subsidy and political manipulation.
The Pervasive Influence of International Bankers
Looking at the broad array of facts presented in the three volumes of
the Wall Street series, we find
persistent recurrence of the same names: Own Young, Gerard Swope,
Hjalmar Schacht, Bernard
Baruch, etc.; the same international banks: J.P. Morgan, Guaranty
Trust, Chase Bank; and the same
location in New York: usually 120 Broadway.
This group of international bakers backed the Bolshevik Revolution and
subsequently profited from
the establishment of a Soviet Russia. This group backed Roosevelt and
profited from New Deal
socialism. This group also backed Hitler and certainly profited from
German armament in the 1930s.
When Big Business should have been running its business operations at
Ford Motor, Standard of
New Jersey and so on, we find it actively and deeply involved in
political upheavals, war, and
revolutions in three major countries.
The version of history presented here is that the financial elite
knowingly and with premeditation
assisted the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 in concert with German
bankers. After profiting
handsomely from the German hyper-inflationary distress of 1923, and
planning to place the German
reparations burden onto the backs of American investors, Wall Street
found it had brought about the
1929 financial crisis.
Two men were then backed as leaders for major Western countries:
Franklin D. Roosevelt in the
United States and Adolf Hitler in Germany. The Roosevelt New Deal and
Hitler's Four Year Plan
had great similarities. The Roosevelt and Hitler plans were plans for
fascist take-overs of their
respective countries. While Roosevelt's NRA failed, due to
then-operating constitutional constraints,
Hitler's Plan succeeded.
Why did the Wall Street elite, the international bakers, want
Roosevelt and Hitler in power? This is
an aspect we have not explored. According to the "myth of 'Sidney
Warburg,'" Wall Street wanted a
policy of revenge; that is, it wanted war in Europe between France and
Germany. We know even
from Establishment history that both Hitler and Roosevelt acted out
policies leading to war.
The link-ups between persons and events in this three-book series
would require another book. But
a single example will perhaps indicate the remarkable concentration of
power within a relatively few
organisations, and the use of this power.
On May 1st, 1918, when the Bolsheviks controlled only a small fraction
of Russia (and were to
come near to losing even that fraction in the summer of 1918), the
American League to Aid and
Co-operate with Russia was organised in Washington, D.C. to support
the Bolsheviks. This was not
a "Hands off Russia" type of committee formed by the Communist Party
U.S.A. or its allies. It was a
committee created by Wall Street with George P. Whalen of Vacuum Oil
Company as Treasurer
and Coffin and Oudin of General Electric, along with Thompson of the
Federal Reserve System,
Willard of the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad, and assorted socialists.
When we look at the rise of Hitler and Nazism we find Vacuum Oil and
General Electric well
represented. Ambassador Dodd in Germany was struck by the monetary and
technical contribution
by the Rockefeller-controlled Vacuum Oil Company in building up
military gasoline facilities for the
Nazis. The Ambassador tried to warn Roosevelt. Dodd believed, in his
apparent naiveté of world
affairs, that Roosevelt would intervene, but Roosevelt himself was
backed by these same oil interests
and Walter Teagle of Standard Oil of New Jersey and the NRA was on the
board of Roosevelt's
Warm Springs Foundation. So, in but one of may examples, we find the
Rockefeller-controlled
Vacuum Oil Company prominently assisting in the creation of Bolshevik
Russia, the military build-up
of Nazi Germany, and backing Roosevelt's New Deal.
Is the United States Ruled by a Dictatorial Elite?
Within the last decade or so, certainly since the 1960s, a steady flow
of literature has presented a
thesis that the United States is ruled by a self perpetuating and
unelected power elite. Even further,
most of these books aver that this elite controls, or at the least
heavily influences, all foreign and
domestic policy decisions, and that no idea becomes respectable or is
published in the United States
without the tacit approval, or perhaps lack of disapproval, of this
elitist circle.
Obviously the very flow of anti-establishment literature by itself
testifies that the United States cannot
be wholly under the thumb of any single group or elite. On the other
hand, antiestablishment literature
is not fully recognised or reasonably discussed in academic or media
circles. More often than not it
consists of a limited edition, privately produced, almost hand-to-hand
circulated. There are some
exceptions, true, but not enough to dispute the observation that
anti-establishment critics do not
easily enter normal information/distribution channels.
Whereas in the early and mid-1960s, any concept of rule by a
conspiratorial elite, or indeed any
kind of elite, was reason enough to dismiss the proponent out of hand
as a "nut case," the
atmosphere for such concepts has changed radically. The Watergate
affair probably added the final
touches to a long-developing environment of scepticism and doubt. We
are almost at the point
where anyone who accepts, for example, the Warren commission report,
or believes that the decline
and fall of Mr. Nixon did not have some conspiratorial aspects, is
suspect. In brief, no one any
longer really believes the Establishment information process. And
there is a wide variety of
alternative presentations of events now available for the curious.
Several hundred books, from the full range of the political and
philosophical spectrum, add bits and
pieces of evidence, more hypotheses, and more accusations. What was
not too long ago a kooky
idea, talked about at midnight behind closed doors, in hushed and
almost conspiratorial whispers, is
now openly debated - not, to be sure, in Establishment newspapers, but
certainly on non-network
radio talk shows, the underground press, and even from time to time in
books from respectable
Establishment publishing houses.
So let us ask the question again: Is there an unelected power elite
behind the U.S. Government?
A substantive and often-cited source of information is Carroll
Quigley, Professor of International
Relations at Georgetown University, who in 1966 had published a
monumental modern history
entitled Tragedy and Hope. Quigley's book is apart from others in this
revisionist vein, by virtue of
the fact that it was based on a two-year study of the internal
documents of one of the power centres.
Quigley traces the history of the power elite:
.The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim,
nothing less than to create a world
system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the
political system of each county and
the economy of the world as a whole.
Quigley also demonstrates that the Council on Foreign Relation, the
National Planning Association,
and other groups are "semi-secret" policy-making bodies under the
control of this power elite.
In the following tabular presentation we have listed five such
revisionist books, including Quigley's.
Their essential theses and compatibility with the three volumes of the
"Wall Street" series are
summarised. It is surprising that in the three major historical events
noted, Carroll Quigley is not at all
consistent with the "Wall Street" series evidence. Quigley goes a long
way to provide evidence for
the existence of the power elite, but does not penetrate the
operations of the elite.
Possibly, the papers used by Quigley had been vetted, and did not
include documentation on elitist
manipulation of such events as the Bolshevik Revolution, Hitler's
accession to power, and the
election of Roosevelt in 1933. More likely, these political
manipulations may not be recorded at all in
the files of the power groups They may have been unrecorded actions by
a small ad hoc segment of
the elite. It is noteworthy that the documents used by this author
came from government sources,
recording the day-to-day actions of Trotsky, Lenin, Roosevelt, Hitler,
J.P. Morgan and the various
firms and banks involved.
On the other hand, such authors as Jules Archer, Gary Allen, Helen P.
Lasell, and William Domhoff,
writing from widely different political standpoints, are consistent
with the "Wall Street" evidence.
These writers present a hypothesised "power elite" has manipulated
specific historical events.
Obviously any such exercise of unconstrained and supra-legal power is
unconstitutional, even though
wrapped in the fabric of law-abiding actions. We can therefore
legitimately raise the question of the
existence of a subversive force operating to remove constitutionally
guaranteed rights.
The New York Elite as a Subversive Force
Twentieth-century history, as recorded in Establishment textbooks and
journals, is inaccurate. It is a
history which is based solely upon those official documents which
various Administrations have seen
fit to release for public consumption.
But an accurate history cannot be based on a selective release of
documentary archives. Accuracy
requires access to all documents. In practice, as previously
classified documents in the U.S. State
Department files, the British Foreign Office, and German Foreign
Ministry archives and other
depositories are acquired, a new version of history has emerged, the
prevailing Establishment version
is seen to be, not only inaccurate, but designed to hide a pervasive
fabric of deceit and immoral
conduct.
The centre of political power, as authorised by the U.S. Constitution,
is with an elected Congress
and an elected President, working within the framework and under the
constraints of a Constitution,
as interpreted by an unbiased Supreme Court. We have in the past
assumed that political power is
consequently carefully exercised by the Executive and legislative
branch, after due deliberation and
assessment of the wishes of the electorate. In fact, nothing could be
further from this assumption. The
electorate has long suspected, but now knows, that political promises
are worth nothing. Lies are the
order of the day for policy implementors. Wars are started (and
stopped) with no shred of coherent
explanation. Political words have never matched political deeds. Why
not? Apparently because the
centre of political power has been elsewhere than with elected and
presumably responsive
representatives in Washington, and this power elite has its own
objectives, which are inconsistent
with those of the public at large.
In this three-volume series we have identified for three historical
events the seat of political power in
the United states - the power behind the scenes, the hidden influence
on Washington - as that of the
financial establishment in New York: the private international
bankers, more specifically the financial
houses of J.P. Morgan, the Rockefeller-controlled Chase Manhattan
Bank, and in earlier days
before amalgamation of their Manhattan Bank with the former Chase
Bank), the Warburgs.
The United States has, in spite of the Constitution and its supposed
constraints, become a
quasi-totalitarian state. While we do not (yet) have the overt
trapping of dictatorship, the
concentration camps and the knock on the door at midnight, we most
certainly do have threats and
actions aimed at the survival of non-Establishment critics, use of the
Internal Revenue Service to
bring dissidents in line, and manipulation of the Constitution by a
court system that is politically
subservient to the Establishment.
It is in the pecuniary interests of the international bankers to
centralise political power - and this
centralisation can best be achieve within a collectivist society, such
as socialist Russia, national
socialist Germany, or a Fabian socialist United States.
There can be no full understanding and appreciation of
twentieth-century American politics and
foreign policy without the realisation that this financial elite
effectively monopolises Washington
policy.
In case after case, newly released documentation implicates this elite
and confirms this hypothesis.
The revisionist versions of the entry of the United States into World
Wars I and II, Korea, and
Vietnam reveal the influence and objectives of this elite.
For most of the twentieth century the Federal Reserve System,
particularly the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York (which is outside the control of congress, unaudited
and uncontrolled, with the
power to print money and crate credit at will), has exercised a
virtual monopoly over the direction of
the American economy. In foreign affairs the Council on Foreign
Relations, superficially an innocent
forum for academics, businessmen, and politicians, contains within its
shell, perhaps unknown to
many of its members, a power centre that unilaterally determines U.S.
foreign policy. The major
objective of this submerged - and obviously subversive - foreign
policy is the acquisition of markets
and economic power (profits, if you will), for a small group of giant
multi-nationals under the virtual
control of a few banking investment houses and controlling families.
Through foundations controlled by this elite, research by compliant
and spineless academics,
"conservatives" as well as "liberals," has been directed into channels
useful for the objectives of the
elite essentially to maintain this subversive and unconstitutional
power apparatus.
Through publishing houses controlled by this same financial elite
unwelcome books have been
squashed and useful books promoted; fortunately publishing has few
barriers to entry and is almost
atomistically competitive. Through control of a dozen or so major
newspapers, run by editors who
think alike, public information can be almost orchestrated at will.
Yesterday, the space program;
today, an energy crisis or a campaign for ecology; tomorrow, a war in
the Middle East or some
other manufactured "crisis."
The total result of this manipulation of society by the Establishment
elite has been four major wars in
sixty years, a crippling national debt, abandonment of the
Constitution, suppression of freedom and
opportunity, and creation of a vast credibility gulf between the man
in the street and Washington,
D.C. While the transparent device of two major parties trumpeting
artificial differences, circus-like
conventions, and the cliché of "bipartisan foreign policy" no longer
carries credibility, and the financial
elite itself recognises that its policies lack public acceptance, it
is obviously prepared to go it alone
without even nominal public support.
In brief, we now have to consider and debate whether this New
York-based elitist Establishment is
a subversive force operating with deliberation and knowledge to
suppress the Constitution and a free
society. That will be the task ahead in the next decade.
The slowly Emerging Revisionist truth
The arena for this debate and the basis for our charges of subversion
is the evidence provided by the
revisionist historian. Slowly, over decades, book by book, almost line
by line, the truth of recent
history has emerged as documents are released, probed, analysed, and
set within a more valid
historical framework.
Let us consider a few examples. American entry into World War II was
supposedly precipitated,
according to the Establishment version, by the Japanese attack on
Pearl Harbor. Revisionists have
established that Franklin D. Roosevelt and General Marshall knew of
the impending Japanese attack
and did nothing to warn the Pearl Harbour military authorities. The
Establishment wanted war with
Japan. Subsequently, the Establishment made certain that Congressional
investigation of Pearl
Harbour would fit the Roosevelt whitewash. In the words of Percy
Greaves, chief research expert
for the Republican minority on the Joint Congressional Committee
investigation Pearl Harbor:
The complete facts will never be known. Most of the so-called
investigations have been attempts to
suppress, mislead, or confuse those who seek the truth. For the
beginning to the end, facts and files
have been withheld so as to reveal only those items of information
which benefit the administration
under investigation. Those seeking the truth are told that other facts
or documents cannot be
revealed because they are intermingled in personal diaries, pertain to
our relations with foreign
countries, or are sworn to contain no information of value.
But this was not the first attempt to bring the United States into
war, or the last. The Morgan
interests, in concert with Winston Churchill, tried to bring the U.S.
into World War 1 as early as
1915 and succeeded in doing so in 1917. Colin Thompson's Lusitania
implicates President
Woodrow Wilson in the sinking of the Lusitania - a horror device to
generate a public backlash to
draw the United States into war with Germany. Thompson demonstrates
that Woodrow Wilson
knew four days beforehand that the Lusitania was carrying six-million
rounds of ammunition plus
explosives, and therefore, "passengers who proposed to sail on that
vessel were sailing in violation of
statute of this country."
The British Board of Inquiry under Lord Mersey was instructed by the
British Government "that it is
considered politically expedient the Captain Turner, the master of the
Lusitania, be most prominently
blamed for the disaster."
In retrospect, given Colin Thompson's evidence, the blame is more
fairly to be attributed to
President Wilson, "Colonel" House, J.P. Morgan, and Winston Churchill;
this conspiratorial elite
should have been brought to trial for wilful negligence, if not
treason. It is to Lord Mersey's eternal
credit that after performing his "duty" under instructions from His
Majesty's government, and placing
the blame on Captain Turner, he resigned, rejected his fee, and from
that date on refused to handle
British government commissions. To his friends Lord Mersey would only
say about the Lusitania
case that it was a "dirty business.
Then in 1933-4 came the attempt by the Morgan firm to install a
fascist dictatorship in the United
States. In the words of Jules Archer, it was planned to be a Fascist
putsch to take over the
government and "run it under a dictator on behalf of America's bankers
and industrialists." Darlington
Butler, who blew the whistle on the Wall Street conspiracy. And once
again Congress stands out,
particularly Congressmen Dickstein and MacCormack, by its gutless
refusal to do no more than
conduct a token whitewash investigation.
Since World War II we have seen the Korean War and the Vietnamese War
- meaningless,
meandering no-win wars costly in dollars and lives, with no other
major purpose but o generate
multibillion-dollar armaments contracts. Certainly these wars were not
fought to restrain communism,
because for fifty years the Establishment has been nurturing and
subsidising the Soviet Union which
supplied armaments to the other sides in both wars - Korea and
Vietnam. So our revisionist history
will show that the United States directly or indirectly armed both
sides in at least Korea and
Vietnam.
In the assassination of President Kennedy, to take a domestic example,
it is difficult to find anyone
who today accepts the finding of the Warren Commission - except
perhaps the members of that
Commission. Yet key evidence is still hidden from public eyes for 50
to 75 years. The Watergate
affair demonstrated even to the man in the street that the White House
can be a vicious nest of
intrigue and deception.
Of all recent history the story of Operation Keelhaul is perhaps the
most disgusting. Operation
Keelhaul was the forced repatriation of millions of Russians at the
orders of President (then General)
Dwight D. Eisenhower, in direct violation of the Geneva Convention of
1929 and the long-standing
American tradition of political refuge. Operation Keelhaul, which
contravenes all our ideas of
elementary decency and individual freedom, was undertaken at the
direct orders of General
Eisenhower and, we may now presume, was a part of a long-range program
of nurturing
collectivism, whether it be Soviet communism, Hitler's Nazism, or
FDR's New Deal. Yet until recent
publication of documentary evidence by Julius Epstein, anyone who
dared to suggest Eisenhower
would betray millions of innocent individuals for political purposes
was viciously and mercilessly
attacked.
What this revisionist history really teaches us is that our
willingness as individual citizens to surrender
political power to an elite has cost the world approximately
two-hundred-million persons killed from
1820 to 1975. Add to that untold misery the concentration camps, the
political prisoners, the
suppression and oppression of those who try to bring the truth to
light.
When will it all stop? It will not stop until we act upon one simple
axiom: that the power system
continues only so long as individuals want it to continue, and it will
continue only so long as
individuals try to get something for nothing. the day when a majority
of individuals declares or acts as
if it wants nothing from government, declares it will look after its
own welfare and interests, then on
that date power elites are doomed. The attraction to "go along" with
power elites is the attraction of
something for nothing. That is the bait. The Establishment always
offers something for nothing, but
the something is taken from someone else, as taxes or plunder, and
awarded elsewhere in exchange
for political support.
Periodic crises and wars are used to whip up support for other
plunder-reward cycles which in
effect tighten the noose around our individual liberties. And of
course we have hordes of academic
sponges, amoral businessmen, and just plain hangers-on, to act as
non-productive recipients for the
plunder.
Stop the circle of plunder and immoral reward and elitist structures
collapse. But not until a majority
finds the moral courage and the internal fortitude to reject the
something-for-nothing con game and
replace it by voluntary association, voluntary communes, or local rule
and decentralised societies,
will the killing and the plunder cease.
AUTHOR :Sutton, Antony C.
TITLE :Wall Street and the rise of Hitler
PLACE :Seal Beach, California
PUBLISHER :'76 Press,
ISBN/ISSN :0892450045
See Also Wall Street/SS connections Bernhard/Dulles
http://www.silcom.com/~patrick/mag3/pwrprnts.htm
martin bier
Er is niemand die zoiets langs gaat lezen. Het is te lang en te
zeurderig!!!
Misschien dat jij, als groot bewonderaar van
mensenvriend/marathon-speechgever Castro, even kort en bondig commentaar
kunt geven op de recente vonnissen tegen vier "andersdenkenden" in je
Caraibische heilstaat.
martin bier
Madonna ©
(martin bier) wrote:
>Franc,
>Misschien dat jij, als groot bewonderaar van
>mensenvriend/marathon-speechgever Castro, even kort en bondig commentaar
>kunt geven op de recente vonnissen tegen vier "andersdenkenden" in je
>Caraibische heilstaat.
Zeg LuldeHanger, kun je ook wat meer details geven over dat viertal
'andersdenkenden' ?
>martin bier
Rob Barends
> On Wed, 17 Mar 1999 19:42:07 GMT, mb...@surgery.bsd.uchicago.edu
> (martin bier) wrote:
>
> >Franc,
>
> >Misschien dat jij, als groot bewonderaar van
> >mensenvriend/marathon-speechgever Castro, even kort en bondig commentaar
> >kunt geven op de recente vonnissen tegen vier "andersdenkenden" in je
> >Caraibische heilstaat.
>
> Zeg LuldeHanger, kun je ook wat meer details geven over dat viertal
> 'andersdenkenden' ?
Zeg Franc ©, ik geloof niet dat je Martin "LuldeHanger" zou noemen
als je hem kende. Behalve misschien in een arak-bezopen bui.
> Franc ©
Rob
zzone
Anders Floor wrote in message <36effad8...@fb1.euro.net>...
>Madonna wrote:
>
><gaap>
>
>Leuk, zo'n lap tekst. Ik lees het wel eens wanneer ik omkom in mijn
>vrije tijd. Als ik 80 ben of zo.
>
>Anders
Diep treurig dat kennelijk de meeste nederlanders er zo over denken.
We worden getiraniseerd door een stelletje facisten die claimen blauw
bloed te hebben.
Schrijven ons de wet voor die op hun zelf niet van toepassing is, maar
goed voorbeeld doet goed volgen, e.e.a. is zichtbaar in o.a. EU het
I.O.C. en alle andere ambtenaren clubjes.
Laten we maar over gaan tot de orde van de dag, wat een kutweer he!
MVG Ed.
Joris van Oostveen
wrote:
> Tu, us...@domain.here (Joris van Oostveen), die Tue, 16 Mar 1999
>19:51:00 GMT, in littera <36f7b599...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
>be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Mar 1999 07:34:28 GMT, fusti...@icone.org (Fustigator)
>>wrote:
>>
>>> Tu, us...@domain.here (Joris van Oostveen), die Mon, 15 Mar 1999
>>>19:07:54 GMT, in littera <36f959d4...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
>>>be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 14 Mar 1999 20:49:44 GMT, fusti...@icone.org (Fustigator)
>>>>wrote:
>[...]
>
>>>>>>Dat zou kunnen. Vlaanderen zei je? Tja. Gelukkig bestaat er nog wereld
>>>>>>buiten Vlaanderen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> >(And Europe should not accept Turkey into the European Union as long as
>>>>>>>> >Turkey has not demonstrated an ability to be a civilized nation).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>>pff, alsof spanje en engeland zo beschaafd zijn.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Of Vlaanderen, niet te vergeten.
>>>>>
>>>>>War ligt dat niet te definiëren "land"?
>>>>
>>>>Vlaanderen? Ik weet het niet, zou het onuitgepakt onder de kerstboom
>>>>zijn blijven liggen?
>>>
>>>Of is het een vergeten ei in de tuin op Paasmorgen ?
>>
>>Oei, dan zou het er al bijna een jaar liggen. Dan wordt het oppassen dat
>>niemand er op trapt, rotte eieren stinken zo.....
>
>och chocolade eieren stinken toch niet zo,
>zelfs na een jaar full-exposure...
Vlaanderen is dus een chocolade-ei....... Dat verklaart inderdaad
veel.....
>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>wimbo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>Joris
>>>>>
>>>>>Fusti
>>>>
>>>>Joris
>>>
>>>Fusti
>>
>>Joris
>Fusti
>Fusti once more foetsie:
>I will be away from usenet from Thursday March 18th
>till Sunday 21th.Please behave during my absence.
>And if you can't behave, be at least cautious.
I'll think about it. Don't expect too much.
Joris
martin bier
wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Mar 1999 19:42:07 GMT, mb...@surgery.bsd.uchicago.edu
> (martin bier) wrote:
>
> >Franc,
>
> >Misschien dat jij, als groot bewonderaar van
> >mensenvriend/marathon-speechgever Castro, even kort en bondig commentaar
> >kunt geven op de recente vonnissen tegen vier "andersdenkenden" in je
> >Caraibische heilstaat.
>
> Zeg LuldeHanger, kun je ook wat meer details geven over dat viertal
> 'andersdenkenden' ?
>
> >martin bier
Onderstaand bericht komt uit de Telegraaf van 1 maart. Onder totalitaire
regimes duren politieke processen meestal niet zo lang, dus de 4 zijn
inmiddels eerder deze week tot gevangenisstraffen van een jaar of vijf
veroordeeld.
martin bier
____________________________________________________
Op Cuba begint vandaag de berechting van vier bekende
dissidenten wegens rebellie tegen de staat. De vier staan
terecht omdat zij in pamfletten, boeken en tijdens besloten
bijeenkomsten opriepen voor een democratische
hervorming van het communistische bestel.
De dissidenten hangt maximaal zes jaar gevangenisstraf
boven het hoofd. Hun berechting vindt nog plaats onder de
oude en iets meer tolerante wetgeving die het politieke
leven op het eiland aan banden legt.
Eerder deze maand besloot het parlement van Cuba op
voordracht van president Fidel Castro de maximumstraf voor
dissidenten te verhogen naar twintig jaar opsluiting.
Dit weekeinde arresteerde de politie in Havana meer dan
veertig bekende voorvechters van democratie in een poging
enkele kleinschalige manifestaties te verijdelen die in verband
met de rechtszaak op het programma stonden. Een
regeringswoordvoerder zei dat de andersdenkenden over
enkele dagen hun vrijheid zullen herkrijgen wanneer de
rechtszaak voorbij is.
Het Vaticaan, de Europese Unie, Amnesty Internationale en
vele regeringen hebben de afgelopen maanden vergeefs bij
de Cubaanse regering aangedrongen op de vrijlating van de
vier dissidenten.
Jackal ©
Barends) wrote:
>> Zeg LuldeHanger, kun je ook wat meer details geven over dat viertal
>> 'andersdenkenden' ?
>
>Zeg Franc ©, ik geloof niet dat je Martin "LuldeHanger" zou noemen
>als je hem kende. Behalve misschien in een arak-bezopen bui.
Zeg Robbie, wat weet jij over Martin Bier wat ik niet weet ?
Vertel eens wat is er zo bijzonder aan die vent ?
>> Franc ©
>
>Rob
Rob Barends
> On Wed, 17 Mar 1999 19:52:16 -0600, rbar...@earthlink.net (Rob
> Barends) wrote:
>
>
> >> Zeg LuldeHanger, kun je ook wat meer details geven over dat viertal
> >> 'andersdenkenden' ?
> >
> >als je hem kende. Behalve misschien in een arak-bezopen bui.
>
> Zeg Robbie, wat weet jij over Martin Bier wat ik niet weet ?
> Vertel eens wat is er zo bijzonder aan die vent ?
Goede Russisch-sprekende gitaarspeler/zanger met een interessante
baan en onconventionele gezichtspunten.
Mazzel,
Rob
theo1610
>Het Vaticaan, de Europese Unie, Amnesty Internationale en
>vele regeringen hebben de afgelopen maanden vergeefs bij
>de Cubaanse regering aangedrongen op de vrijlating van de
>vier dissidenten.
Dat soort zakkenvullende hypocrieten zou ik ook niet erg serieus
nemen als het over omgang met "dissidenten" in eigen gelederen gaat.
In de US en nog wat van die lekkere landjes ga je voor heel wat
minder net zo lang achter slot, so......??
theo1610 @wxs.nl
"lievebeheersbeestjes bv."
Jackal ©
Barends) wrote:
>> Zeg Robbie, wat weet jij over Martin Bier wat ik niet weet ?
>> Vertel eens wat is er zo bijzonder aan die vent ?
>
>Goede Russisch-sprekende gitaarspeler/zanger met een interessante
>baan en onconventionele gezichtspunten.
Inderdaad zijn er weinig russisch sprekende gitaarspelers, maar zijn
denkbeelden vindt ik echt niet onconventioneel.
Althans ik heb zo het een en ander van hem gelezen en daar werdt niet
echt opgewonden van, eerder zou ik zeggen dat zijn mening naadloos
aansluit bij de algemeen geldende mening van de amerikaanse regering.
>Mazzel,
>Rob
Fustigator
18:17:19 GMT, in littera <36f341a8...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>On Tue, 16 Mar 1999 22:42:31 GMT, fusti...@icone.org (Fustigator)
>wrote:
>
>> Tu, us...@domain.here (Joris van Oostveen), die Tue, 16 Mar 1999
>>19:51:00 GMT, in littera <36f7b599...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
>>be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>>
>>>On Tue, 16 Mar 1999 07:34:28 GMT, fusti...@icone.org (Fustigator)
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Tu, us...@domain.here (Joris van Oostveen), die Mon, 15 Mar 1999
>>>>19:07:54 GMT, in littera <36f959d4...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro
>>>>be.politics (et aliis) scripsisti:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sun, 14 Mar 1999 20:49:44 GMT, fusti...@icone.org (Fustigator)
>>>>>wrote:
>>[...]
>>
>>>>>>>Dat zou kunnen. Vlaanderen zei je? Tja. Gelukkig bestaat er nog wereld
>>>>>>>buiten Vlaanderen.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> >(And Europe should not accept Turkey into the European Union as long as
>>>>>>>>> >Turkey has not demonstrated an ability to be a civilized nation).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>pff, alsof spanje en engeland zo beschaafd zijn.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Of Vlaanderen, niet te vergeten.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>War ligt dat niet te definiëren "land"?
>>>>>
>>>>>Vlaanderen? Ik weet het niet, zou het onuitgepakt onder de kerstboom
>>>>>zijn blijven liggen?
>>>>
>>>>Of is het een vergeten ei in de tuin op Paasmorgen ?
>>>
>>>Oei, dan zou het er al bijna een jaar liggen. Dan wordt het oppassen dat
>>>niemand er op trapt, rotte eieren stinken zo.....
>>
>>och chocolade eieren stinken toch niet zo,
>>zelfs na een jaar full-exposure...
>
>Vlaanderen is dus een chocolade-ei....... Dat verklaart inderdaad
>veel.....
>
Is toch lekker, vooral met Pasen...
>>
>>>>>>
[...]
>>Fusti once more foetsie:
>>I will be away from usenet from Thursday March 18th
>>till Sunday 21th.Please behave during my absence.
>>And if you can't behave, be at least cautious.
>
>I'll think about it. Don't expect too much.
About your thinking? ;-))))
>
>Joris
Fusti (back in town)
Fustigator
19:52:16 -0600, in littera
<MPG.115a1848e...@news.earthlink.net> in foro be.politics
(et aliis) scripsisti:
>In article <36f2333...@news.xs4all.nl>, dhr...@xs4all.nl says...
>> On Wed, 17 Mar 1999 19:42:07 GMT, mb...@surgery.bsd.uchicago.edu
>> (martin bier) wrote:
>>
>> >Franc,
>>
>> >Misschien dat jij, als groot bewonderaar van
>> >mensenvriend/marathon-speechgever Castro, even kort en bondig commentaar
>> >kunt geven op de recente vonnissen tegen vier "andersdenkenden" in je
>> >Caraibische heilstaat.
>>
>> Zeg LuldeHanger, kun je ook wat meer details geven over dat viertal
>> 'andersdenkenden' ?
>
>Zeg Franc ©, ik geloof niet dat je Martin "LuldeHanger" zou noemen
>als je hem kende.
Ik deel je mening in deze.
>Behalve misschien in een arak-bezopen bui.
Na een handvol WTT's in dit huis opgezopen te hebben kon Martin zich
bij mij nog steeds netjes gedragen....
>
>> Franc ©
>
>Rob
Fusti
martin bier
wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Mar 1999 10:09:21 -0600, rbar...@earthlink.net (Rob
> Barends) wrote:
>
>
> >> Zeg Robbie, wat weet jij over Martin Bier wat ik niet weet ?
> >> Vertel eens wat is er zo bijzonder aan die vent ?
> >
> Althans ik heb zo het een en ander van hem gelezen en daar werdt niet
> echt opgewonden van, eerder zou ik zeggen dat zijn mening naadloos
> aansluit bij de algemeen geldende mening van de amerikaanse regering.
>
> Franc
In Praise of the Holy Clint
Wat Bill zegt is wat ik vind.
Ik adem zijn luchten
en laat een wind
als hij moet zuchten.
Ik lig aan zijn voeten
in een vurig hopen
in zijn plaats te mogen boeten
als hij gonereu heeft opgelopen.
Kun jij, Franc, ook niet zoiets moois dichten, maar dan over Cuba's Castro?
martin bier
theo1610
Ooit kwam Fidel aan 't bewind,
piefpafpoef net als die Clint.
Huilden die amerikanen tranen met tuiten,
naar Havanna konden ze fluiten.
Nixon Ford Reagan en Bush
ze kwamen niet verder dan zielig gesmoes.
Nog steeds is die ouwe daar de baas,
ondanks Martin Bier's muzikaal geblaas.
>martin bier
>
theo1610 @wxs.nl
"lievebeheersbeestjes bv."
Jackal ©
(martin bier) wrote:
>In Praise of the Holy Clint
>
>Wat Bill zegt is wat ik vind.
>Ik adem zijn luchten
>en laat een wind
>als hij moet zuchten.
>Ik lig aan zijn voeten
>in een vurig hopen
>in zijn plaats te mogen boeten
>als hij gonereu heeft opgelopen.
>
>
>Kun jij, Franc, ook niet zoiets moois dichten, maar dan over Cuba's Castro?
Natuurlijk kan ik dat niet, ik ben tenslotte maar een onderontwikkelde
marxist en cultuurbarbaar.
An jenem Tag waren Wir ein handvol Menschen,
Jetst sind wir ein ganses Volk das seine Zukunft erobert.
Fidel
>martin bier
Fustigator
in littera <36f7a8f8...@news.xs4all.nl> in foro be.politics (et
aliis) scripsisti:
>On Mon, 22 Mar 1999 19:36:13 GMT, mb...@surgery.bsd.uchicago.edu
>(martin bier) wrote:
>
>>In Praise of the Holy Clint
>>
>>Wat Bill zegt is wat ik vind.
>>Ik adem zijn luchten
>>en laat een wind
>>als hij moet zuchten.
>>Ik lig aan zijn voeten
>>in een vurig hopen
>>in zijn plaats te mogen boeten
>>als hij gonereu heeft opgelopen.
>>
>>
>>Kun jij, Franc, ook niet zoiets moois dichten, maar dan over Cuba's Castro?
>
>Natuurlijk kan ik dat niet, ik ben tenslotte maar een onderontwikkelde
>marxist en cultuurbarbaar.
Ach Franc©, deze autokritiek van je siert je wel, hoor....
>
>An jenem Tag waren Wir ein handvol Menschen,
>Jetst sind wir ein ganses Volk das seine Zukunft erobert.
>Fidel
>
ik wist niet dat Fidel zo goed Duits sprak.
weet je wie ooit zei:
"Creo en Alemaña y combato por eso, hoy, manaña y en el futuro, hasta
que la victoria sea la nuestra" ???
Adolfo H. !
>>martin bier
martin bier
wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Mar 1999 19:36:13 GMT, mb...@surgery.bsd.uchicago.edu
> (martin bier) wrote:
>
> >In Praise of the Holy Clint
> >
> >Wat Bill zegt is wat ik vind.
> >Ik adem zijn luchten
> >en laat een wind
> >als hij moet zuchten.
> >Ik lig aan zijn voeten
> >in een vurig hopen
> >in zijn plaats te mogen boeten
> >als hij gonereu heeft opgelopen.
> >
> >
> >Kun jij, Franc, ook niet zoiets moois dichten, maar dan over Cuba's Castro?
>
> Natuurlijk kan ik dat niet, ik ben tenslotte maar een onderontwikkelde
> marxist en cultuurbarbaar.
>
> An jenem Tag waren Wir ein handvol Menschen,
> Jetst sind wir ein ganses Volk das seine Zukunft erobert.
> Fidel
>
>
> Franc
Jij, Frnac, hebt wat we hier een "attitude problem" noemen. Juist voor
onderontwikkelde marxistische cultuurbarbaren zijn opzwepende liederen van
groot belang. Marxisten veschillen namelijk niet wezenlijk van
voetbalvandalen of gewone nazis. Goed, ik heb zelf dan maar een korte
lofzang op Cuba's Castro voor je geschreven.
HEIL FIDEL!!
Oh, mijn heilige bebaarde Fidelborst,
gesel van dissidenten en homo's,
opperhoofd van't communistisch Staphorst,
Ik, Franc Rollo, vreet Uw propagandavullis
net zo braaf & kritiekloos
als 30 jaar terug die Harry Mullis.
Voor de jongere potsers & lurkers vermeld ik nog even dat Harry Mullis een
linkse nederlandse schrijver is, die op een gegeven moment naar Castro's
Cuba vloog om bij de suikerrietoogst te helpen. "Eindelijk gaat die Harry,
die het altijd zo met arbeiders op heeft, zelf eens zweten!" dacht heel
nederland. Maar nee, het fotomateriaal uit Castro's Cuba toonde Harry
uitsluitend met sigaren & cocktails in een ligstoel bij een zwembad.
Misschien dat je nog iets voor me terug kunt doen, Franc. Ik vergeet
steeds de naam van die dichter die tot en met de revolutie zij aan zij met
Cuba's Castro had gevochten, maar toen "die Zukunft erobert war" in het
gevang belandde. In 1982 kwam hij door bemiddeling van Mitterand vrij.
Hij kwam toen naar Franrijk. In een rolstoel welteverstaan, want z'n
ruggegraat had het onder de martelingen begeven. Kun jij die naam niet
even voor me nazoeken?
martin bier