zondag, september 02, 2007

Vragenuurtje





Debunker Mark Roberts (die in het dagelijkse leven toeristen door New York rondleidt) en Ronald Wieck over allerlei aspecten van 9/11. In het vragen (half) uurtje belt natuurlijk weer een schuimbekkende kook die helemaal stil valt als Roberts vraagt waar hij zijn informatie vandaan heeft.

Labels: ,

24 Comments:

At 8:43 a.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

Wie is Billy?
De man heet Eric Krebbers en zijn bilmaatje is Harry Westerink.


Zie ook deze website: http://nl.bilgibog.org/www/Hoofdpagina

Billythekid werkt samen met De Fabel van Illegaal, AFA en Kafka.
Deze laatste twee zouden volgens MM ook zijn geinfiltreerd door zionisten… Zie oa: http://wikiresear.ch/AFA

Het lijkt mij niet onredelijk om aan te nemen dat iemand die moeite doet om z’n identiteit te verbergen niet zomaar uitgebreid aan z’n ‘tegenstanders’ gaat vertellen wie hij is.

 
At 8:59 a.m., Anonymous Braad Spitt said...

Ja hoor Anoniem/FotonX..

daar kwam je op 6 juni ook al een keer mee aanzetten, maar toen werd je ook al weggelachen door je mede-complottertjes.
Wat dacht je? We zetten het er gewoon weer opnieuw? Wat een onderzoeker ben jij!

 
At 9:19 a.m., Blogger Billythekid said...

Inmiddels weer een hoop bilmaatjes van FotonX weggehaald.

 
At 9:25 a.m., Anonymous Crap said...

"Het lijkt mij niet onredelijk om aan te nemen dat iemand die moeite doet om z’n identiteit te verbergen niet zomaar uitgebreid aan z’n ‘tegenstanders’ gaat vertellen wie hij is."

Doe jij dat wel, dan?

 
At 10:11 a.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

He billies!
vergeet niet te schakelen tussen de postingnamen he. braad, billy, crap en jay staan allemaal al vroeg tegelijk op om te posten om 1 minkukelsite

 
At 10:13 a.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

Goh, braad=billy=jay=crap
Wat een belangrijk voor je dat jij alle postings allemaal volgt.

 
At 10:17 a.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

http://www.ditrianum.org/Nederlands/multimedia.htm

 
At 10:20 a.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

Gisteren keek ik sinds lange tijd naar het NOS-journaal (de herhaling van 0:25) omdat iemand mij attent maakte op het stukje van 2,5 minuut dat zij uitzonden over samenzweringstheorieën omtrent de aanslagen van 11 september 2001. Wat mij opviel, was dat zeer de nadruk werd gelegd op het woord “gelovigen”. De kijker wordt voorgehouden dat degenen die deze theorieën aanhangen gelovigen zijn die als het ware een ideologie aanhangen. Let maar eens op de woordkeuze die de redacties van dergelijke nieuwszenders hanteren. Zij zijn meesters in het hanteren van woorden om het menselijke denken een vooraf bepaalde richting te geven.

Wat gebeurt hier feitelijk? Zoals altijd, en zoals we door de eeuwen heen hebben gezien, worden feiten van gebeurtenissen op een specifieke manier benoemd en naar voren gebracht om er een eigen kleur aan te geven met de bedoeling de aandacht in één bepaalde richting te sturen. De enige motivatie om dat te doen is mensen afleiden van een ander beeld waarvan men niet wil dat dat aandacht krijgt, m.a.w., de kijk op de gebeurtenissen wordt gemanipuleerd, en als er ergens wordt gemanipuleerd, dan is er een vooraf bepaalde bedoeling in het spel. Wat de westerse media betreft: het uitoefenen van macht door het handhaven van de status-quo van de huidige machtsverhoudingen in de wereld.

Wat dit stukje van 2,5 minuut betreft (dat ik ook heb opgenomen), er wordt gezegd: “het aantal gelovigen blijft klein, maar het groeit, ook in Nederland”, en “een golf aan boeken en vlot gemonteerde documentaires overspoelt momenteel de wereld” en “de theorieën zijn, hoe vaak ook weerlegd, onuitroeibaar”. Dan zegt de journalist die Albert Toby interviewt: “Er ligt een rapport van de 11-septembercommissie, die heeft jaren lang onderzoek gedaan, ben ik naïef als ik dat geloof?”

Dit is niet alleen een slechte manier van journalistiek bedrijven (de betreffende journalist beweert rustig dat de 11-septembercommissie jaren lang onderzoek heeft gedaan, wat ronduit een leugen is), het werkelijke beeld dat bestaat, wordt o.a. in dit stukje bewust omgekeerd om te verbergen wat het machtsblok van mediamagnaten zelf doet, namelijk het in stand houden van de ideologie dat zij macht kunnen uitoefenen over de massa door manipulatie en valse geschiedschrijving, immers, de hele journalistiek GELOOFT de officiële lezing van de regering, de geheime diensten en de onderzoekscommissie en vindt het niet nodig om zelf onafhankelijk onderzoek te doen, wat de makers van de “vlot gemonteerde documentaires” wel doen. De journalistiek zet niet op onpartijdige wijze de feiten tegen elkaar af, maar steunt actief de officiële lezing, ook al probeert zij te doen voorkomen dat zij onpartijdig verslag uitbrengt van wat er zich in de wereld afspeelt. De reguliere media gaat elke wetenschappelijke discussie uit de weg en probeert ons van kritisch en wetenschappelijk denken af te houden door in te spelen op onze emoties en door de nadruk te leggen op “geloof” en “aanhangers” alsof het een alternatieve beweging – bijna een sekte – is. Deze houding is een belediging voor de menselijke intelligentie en je kunt je afvragen hoe lang zij dit beeld nog in stand kunnen houden.

Iedereen die een beetje zelf nadenkt, weet dat er veel meer speelde op die bewuste dag van 11 september 2001, maar de machthebbers willen geen onderdanen die zelf nadenken, zij willen onderdanen die luisteren naar wat zij zeggen en die blind gehoorzamen, en als er iemand teveel uit de pas dreigt te gaan lopen, worden er maatregelen genomen om de kudde bijeen te houden. Ja, de machthebbers doen zich voor als heel vriendelijke en capabele hoeders van het volk, maar in werkelijkheid zijn zij wolven in schaapskleding met een niet te stillen honger naar macht, en zij zullen werkelijk alle middelen aangrijpen, zoals de vele geënsceneerde aanslagen, om hun macht te handhaven en te verstevigen.

Het wordt hoog tijd dat wij - het volk, de onderdanen – onszelf wakker schudden uit de droom van valse onderdanigheid en opstaan en vanuit eigen intelligentie een andere ideologie gaan manifesteren, namelijk de ideologie van gelijkheid, broederschap en naastenliefde, in plaats van manipulatie en onderdrukking. En feitelijk zijn wij met z’n allen al aan het ontwaken, gegeven de grote toename van geïnteresseerden in de alternatieve berichtgevingen op internet, en ageren wij steeds meer tegen de leugens en de beledigingen die via de reguliere media naar ons toekomen. De geloofwaardigheid van de reguliere media is hard, heel hard aan het afbrokkelen, en het zal niet lang duren alvorens zij hun zeggenschap helemaal kwijtraken. Het internet is de nieuwe media waar mensen vrij, open en eerlijk hun kijk op gebeurtenissen kunnen geven zonder dat die wordt gefilterd en gecensureerd door een kleine minderheid. En wetenschappers, onderzoekers en studenten kunnen vrij hun bevindingen delen met alle mensen in de wereld. Lang leve de nieuwe media!

 
At 10:26 a.m., Anonymous Braad Spitt said...

"Wat mij opviel, was dat zeer de nadruk werd gelegd op het woord “gelovigen”. De kijker wordt voorgehouden dat degenen die deze theorieën aanhangen gelovigen zijn die als het ware een ideologie aanhangen."

Mensen die roepen dat "911 een inside job!" is, en vervolgens op geen enkele manier kunnen duidelijk maken hoe zo'n inside job er hypothetisch uit zou kunnen zien zijn gelovigen; ze trekken hun conclusies en proberen daar bewijs bij te sprokkelen die aansluit bij hun conclusies, al het andere wordt weggeworpen. Feiten zijn niet interessant, alleen feiten die de vaststaande conclusies bevestigen.
Precies zoals in elke religieuze beweging.

Het journaal heeft het goed.

 
At 10:29 a.m., Anonymous crap said...

"Goh, braad=billy=jay=crap
Wat een belangrijk voor je dat jij alle postings allemaal volgt."

Nu nog een keer en en dan de woorden even goed achter elkaar zetten!

 
At 10:38 a.m., Anonymous bee said...

Anoniem,

Op eloquente wijze heb je precies uitgelegd waarom de complotter een geloof aanhangt. Mijn dank daarvoor.

 
At 11:03 a.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

He FotonX, hoe is de truth movement in Alkmaar?

 
At 11:14 a.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

Wat een onnozel gebrabbel weer in de reacties. Jammer dat het niet over het artikel gaat.

>De man heet Eric Krebbers en zijn bilmaatje is Harry Westerink.

Lijkt me pure onzin, verder boeit het me ook weinig wie de mensen hier "in werkelijkheid" zijn.

 
At 12:10 p.m., Anonymous Braad Holmaat said...

Het stilvallen leek meer op een telefoonverbinding die wegviel maar goed. Op het laatst kon ik nog amper horen wat meneer te vertellen had.

Voor de rest wel een aardig filmpje.

 
At 12:59 p.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

1.245 geheime CIA-vluchten
door het Europese Parlement blootgelegd
Bron: ABC News
vertaald uit het Engels door Joost van den Beuken

29 november 2006

ABC NEWS, 28 November 2006 - De CIA vloog 1.245 geheime vluchten binnen Europees luchtruim, volgens een ontwerpverslag van het Europees Parlement, dat door ABC News werd verkregen. Het rapport is het resultaat van het een jaar durende onderzoek naar de CIA zijn “buitengewoon uitgevoerde” vluchten en geheime gevangenissen in Europa. Geen Europees land heeft officieel erkend deel uit te maken van het programma.

Maar verslagen aanhalend van een informele vergadering van Europese en ministers van de NAVO die vorig jaar december plaatsvond en waaraan ook Condoleezza Rice, concludeert het ontwerpverslag van het Europees Parlement “dat de lidstaten op de hoogte waren van het programma van buitengewoon uitgevoerde vluchten en geheime gevangenissen.

Het rapport vermeld dat het onlangs ontslagen hoofd van de Italiaanse geheime dienst, generaal Nicolo Pollari, “de waarheid verborg”, toen hij voor de onderzoekende commissie van het Parlement verscheen en verklaarde “dat de Italiaanse geheim agenten geen rol speelde in welke ontvoering van de CIA dan ook”.

Het rapport detailleerde de betrokkenheid van veel Europese landen in wat het “onwettige” programma van de CIA wordt genoemd.

Ook stelde het een lijst samen van het aantal tussenlandingen van de CIA, die in een verschillende Europese landen konden worden vastgesteld:

Italië: 46 tussenlandingen.

Het Verenigd Koninkrijk: 170 tussenlandingen.

Duitsland: 336 tussenlandingen.

Spanje: 68 tussenlandingen.

Portugal: 91 tussenlandingen.

Ierland: 147 tussenlandingen.

Griekenland: 64 tussenlandingen

Cyprus: 57 tussenlandingen.

Roemenië: 21 tussenlandingen.

Polen: 11 tussenlandingen.

 
At 1:02 p.m., Anonymous Braad Spitt said...

gaan we maar weer een ander onderwerp proberen?

 
At 1:14 p.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not
behind the scenes." --Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli of England, in 1844.

"The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) is the American Branch of a society which originated in England ... (and) ... believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule
established."-- Professor of History Carroll Quigley, Georgetown University, in his book "Tragedy and Hope".

"Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of something. They know that there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it." - Woodrow Wilson

"[The New World Order] cannot happen without U.S. participation, as we are the most
significant single component. Yes, there will be a New World Order, and it will force the United
States to change it's perceptions." -- Henry Kissenger, World Affairs Council Press Conference,
Regent Beverly Wilshire Hotel , April 19th 1994

"David Rockefeller is the most conspicuous representative today of the ruling class, a multinational fraternity of men who shape the global economy and manage the flow of its capital. Rockefeller was born to it, and he has made the most of it. But what some critics see as a vast international conspiracy, he considers a circumstance of life and justanother day's work... In the world of David Rockefeller it's hard to tell where business ends and politics begins" . Bill Moyers

"We know in the not too distant future, a half dozen corporations are going to control the media.
We took this step (merger) to ensure we were one of them"--Time Warner spokesperson.

"We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether
World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent." -- Statement made before the
United States Senate on Feb. 7, 1950 by James Paul Warburg ("Angel" to and active in the
United World Federalists), son of Paul Moritz Warburg, nephew of Felix Warburg and of Jacob
Schiff, both of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. which poured millions into the Russian Revolution through
James' brother Max, banker to the German government - See the Siss?on Report

"All of us will ultimately be judged on the effort we have contributed to building a NEW WORLD ORDER."--Robert Kennedy, former U.S. Attorney-General, 1967.

"The real rulers in Washington are invisible and exercise their power from behind the
scenes."-- Justice Felix Frankfurter, U.S. Supreme Court.

"I am concerned for the security of our great nation; not so much because of any threat from without, but because of the insideous forces working from within." -- General Douglas MacArthur

"For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from it's original
assignment. It has become an operational and at times a policy making arm of the government." --
President Harry Truman

"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson."-- U.S. President Franklin D. Roosevelt in a letter written Nov. 21, 1933 to Colonel E. Mandell House.

"The real menace of our Republic is the invisible government which like a giant octopus sprawls
its slimy legs over our cities, states and nation."-- Mayor (1918-1925) John F. Hylan of New York.

"Fundamental Bible-believing people do not have the right to indoctrinate their children in their
religious beliefs because we, the state, are preparing them for the year 2000, when America will be
part of a one-world global society and their children will not fit in." --Nebraska State Senator Peter Hoagland, speaking on radio in 1983.

"When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical
Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of freedom to Americans..." "And so alot of people say there's
too much personal freedom. When personal freedom's being abused, you have to move to limit it.
That's what we did in the announcement I made last weekend on the Housing Projects, about how
we're going to have weapon sweeps and more things like that to try to make the people feel safer
in their communities"--President Bill Clinton 3-22-94, MTV's "Enough is Enough"

"We can't be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans.."--
Bill Clinton USA Today--3-11-93, page 2a

"Gun registration is not enough"--Attorney Generral Janet Reno--12-10-93--Associated Press

"Waiting periods are only a step. Registration is only a step. The prohibition of private firearms
is the goal"--Janet Reno

"If a nation values anything more than freedom, then it will lose it's freedom; and the irony of it is
that if it is comfort and security that it values, it will lose that too.Unknown Americans must decide :
Are we to be governed by Americans or by an International organization ? I, for one, owe no
alliegence to the United Nations nor will I give it any. I obey only the U.S. Constitution. You had
better think about this issue, for if the U.N. can violate the Sovereignty of Haiti, Iraq and other
countries, it can violate ours...The United States may not be the top dog 15 years from now. U.N.
security council resolutions, backed by say chinese soldiers, could be aimed at us."-Charley
Reese-Orlando Sentinel

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great
publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected the promises of discretion
for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if
we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more
sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty
of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National autodetermination
practiced in past centuries"--David Rockefeller in an address to a Trilateral Commission meeting
in June of 1991

"From the days of Sparticus, Weishaupt, Karl Marx, Trotski, belacoon, Rosa Luxenberg and
Ema Goldman, this world conspiracy has been steadily growing. This conspiracy played a definite
recognizable role in the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement
during the 19th century. And now at last, this band of extraordinary personalities from the under-
world of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their
head and have become the undisputed masters of that enormous empire."--Winston Churchill to
the London press in 1922.

"The Trilateral Commission is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the
commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States.
The Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and consolidate
the four centers of power--Political, Monetary, Intellectual, and Ecclesiastical."--U.S. Senator
Barry Goldwater from his 1964 book "No Apologies"

"I believe that if the people of this nation fully understood what Congress has done to them over the last 49 years, they would move on Washington; they would not wait for an election....It adds up
to a preconceived plan to destroy the economic and social independence of the United States!"
--George W. Malone, U.S. Senator (Nevada), speaking before Congress in1957.

"The invisible Money Power is working to control and enslave mankind. It financed
Communism, Fascism, Marxism, Zionism, Socialism. All of these are directed to making the United
States a member of a World Government ..." -- AMERICAN MERCURY MAGAZINE, December 1957, pg. 92.

"The Air Force is suffering from pilots who have lost faith in their generals, jet engines that still
don't work after repairs and maintenance depots with 'little quality or quantity of work being
produced', according to an internal Defense Department memorandum. The draft memo paints a
troubling picture of the state of American air power. 'The sad state of air-force readiness can be
blamed on the Clinton Administration, which treats the military as a toy to be deployed for
meals-on-wheels-type missionswithout due consideration for it's impact on readiness", said Robert
Maginnis, a retired Army Lieutenent colonel and an analyst at the conservative Family Research
Council

"The International government of the United Nations, stripped of it's legal trimming, then, is
really the International Government of the United States and the Soviet Union acting in Unison."
From the American Jewish Committee's official magazine "Commentary" of Nov. 1958, Pg. 376

"War to the hilt between communism and capitalism is inevidable. Today of course, we are not
strong enough to attack. Our time will come in 20 or 30 years...The Bourgeoisie will have to be
put to sleep. So we shall begin by launching the most spectacular peace movement on record.
There will be electrifying overtures and unheard of concessions. The capitalist countries, stupid
and decadent, will rejoice to cooperate in their own destruction. They will leap at another chance
to be friends. As soon as their guard is down, we shall smash them with our clentched fist."
Dimitry Z. Manuilsky in a speech made in 1931 before the Lenin School of Political Warfare.
(He became an officer of the U.N. Security Council in 1949)

"We must realize that we cannot co-exist eternally. One of us must go to his grave. We do not
want to go to the grave. They do not want to go to the grave, either. So what can be done? We
must push them to their grave." -- Sewren Bailer, a polish communist leader, who defected to the
west, charged that in April, 1955 Khrushchev said this to a group of Warsaw Communists.

"We operate here under directives which emulate (sic) from the White House ... The substance of
the directives under which we operate is that we shall use our grant making power to alter life in the
United States so that we can comfortably be merged with the Soviet Union." -- Rowan Gaither, President of the Ford Foundation, 1954.

"The old world order changed when this war-storm broke. The old international order passed away as
suddenly, as unexpectedly, and as completely as if it had been wiped out by a gigantic flood, by a great
tempest, or by a volcanic eruption. The old world order died with the setting of that day's sun and a new
world order is being born while I speak, with birth-pangs so terrible that it seems almost incredible that life
could come out of such fearful suffering and such overwhelming sorrow." -- Nicholas Murray Butler, in
an address delivered before the Union League of Philadelphia, Nov. 27, 1915

"The peace conference has assembled. It will make the most momentous decisions in history, and upon
these decisions will rest the stability of the new world order and the future peace of the world." -- M. C.
Alexander, Executive Secretary of the American Association for International Conciliation, in a
subscription letter for the periodical International Conciliation (1919)

"If there are those who think we are to jump immediately into a new world order, actuated by complete
understanding and brotherly love, they are doomed to disappointment. If we are ever to approach that
time, it will be after patient and persistent effort of long duration. The present international situation of
mistrust and fear can only be corrected by a formula of equal status, continuously applied, to every phase
of international contacts, until the cobwebs of the old order are brushed out of the minds of the people of
all lands." -- Dr. Augustus O. Thomas, president of the World Federation of Education Associations
(August 1927), quoted in the book "International Understanding: Agencies Educating for a New World"
(1931)

"... when the struggle seems to be drifting definitely towards a world social democracy, there may still be
very great delays and disappointments before it becomes an efficient and beneficent world system.
Countless people ... will hate the new world order ... and will die protesting against it. When we attempt
to evaluate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so of malcontents, many of
them quite gallant and graceful-looking people." -- H. G. Wells, in his book entitled "The New World
Order" (1939)

"The term Internationalism has been popularized in recent years to cover an interlocking financial,
political, and economic world force for the purpose of establishing a World Government. Today
Internationalism is heralded from pulpit and platform as a 'League of Nations' or a 'Federated Union' to
which the United States must surrender a definite part of its National Sovereignty. The World
Government plan is being advocated under such alluring names as the 'New International Order,' 'The
New World Order,' 'World Union Now,' 'World Commonwealth of Nations,' 'World Community,' etc. All
the terms have the same objective; however, the line of approach may be religious or political according
to the taste or training of the individual." -- excerpt from A Memorial to be Addressed to the House of
Bishops and the House of Clerical and Lay Deputies of the Protestant Episcopal Church in General
Convention (October 1940)

"In the first public declaration on the Jewish question since the outbreak of the war, Arthur Greenwood,
member without portfolio in the British War Cabinet, assured the Jews of the United States that when
victory was achieved an effort would be made to found a new world order based on the ideals of 'justice
and peace.'" -- excerpt from article entitled "New World Order Pledged to Jews," in the New York Times
(October 1940)

"If totalitarianism wins this conflict, the world will be ruled by tyrants, and individuals will be slaves. If
democracy wins, the nations of the earth will be united in a commonwealth of free peoples, and
individuals, wherever found, will be the sovereign units of the new world order." -- The Declaration of the
Federation of the World, produced by the Congress on World Federation, adopted by the Legislatures of
North Carolina (1941), New Jersey (1942), Pennsylvania (1943), and possibly other states.

"New World Order Needed for Peace: State Sovereignty Must Go, Declares Notre Dame Professor" --
title of article in The Tablet (Brooklyn) (March 1942)

"Undersecretary of State Sumner Welles tonight called for the early creation of an international
organization of anti-Axis nations to control the world during the period between the armistice at the end of
the present war and the setting up of a new world order on a permanent basis." -- text of article in the
Philadelphia Inquirer (June 1942)

"The statement went on to say that the spiritual teachings of religion must become the foundation for the
new world order and that national sovereignty must be subordinate to the higher moral law of God." --
American Institute of Judaism, excerpt from article in the New York Times (December 1942)

"There are some plain common-sense considerations applicable to all these attempts at world planning.
They can be briefly stated: 1. To talk of blueprints for the future or building a world order is, if properly
understood, suggestive, but it is also dangerous. Societies grow far more truly than they are built. A
constitution for a new world order is never like a blueprint for a skyscraper." -- Norman Thomas, in his
book "What Is Our Destiny" (1944)

"He [John Foster Dulles] stated directly to me that he had every reason to believe that the Governor
[Thomas E. Dewey of New York] accepts his point of view and that he is personally convinced that this
is the policy that he would promote with great vigor if elected. So it is fair to say that on the first round
the Sphinx of Albany has established himself as a prima facie champion of a strong and definite new
world order." -- excerpt from article by Ralph W. Page in the Philadelphia Bulletin (May 1944)

"The United Nations, he told an audience at Harvard University, 'has not been able--nor can it be able--to
shape a new world order which events so compellingly demand.' ... The new world order that will answer
economic, military, and political problems, he said, 'urgently requires, I believe, that the United States
take the leadership among all free peoples to make the underlying concepts and aspirations of national
sovereignty truly meaningful through the federal approach.'" -- Gov. Nelson Rockefeller of New York, in
an article entitled "Rockefeller Bids Free Lands Unite: Calls at Harvard for Drive to Build New World
Order" -- New York Times (February 1962)

"The developing coherence of Asian regional thinking is reflected in a disposition to consider problems
and loyalties in regional terms, and to evolve regional approaches to development needs and to the
evolution of a new world order." -- Richard Nixon, in Foreign Affairs (October 1967)

"He [President Nixon] spoke of the talks as a beginning, saying nothing more about the prospects for
future contacts and merely reiterating the belief he brought to China that both nations share an interest in
peace and building 'a new world order.'" -- excerpt from an article in the New York Times (February
1972)

"If instant world government, Charter review, and a greatly strengthened International Court do not
provide the answers, what hope for progress is there? The answer will not satisfy those who seek simple
solutions to complex problems, but it comes down essentially to this: The hope for the foreseeable lies,
not in building up a few ambitious central institutions of universal membership and general jurisdiction as
was envisaged at the end of the last war, but rather in the much more decentralized, disorderly and
pragmatic process of inventing or adapting institutions of limited jurisdiction and selected membership to
deal with specific problems on a case-by-case basis ... In short, the 'house of world order' will have to be
built from the bottom up rather than from the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing
confusion,' to use William James' famous description of reality, but an end run around national
sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault."
-- Richard N. Gardner, in Foreign Affairs (April 1974)

"The existing order is breaking down at a very rapid rate, and the main uncertainty is whether mankind
can exert a positive role in shaping a new world order or is doomed to await collapse in a passive posture.
We believe a new order will be born no later than early in the next century and that the death throes of
the old and the birth pangs of the new will be a testing time for the human species." -- Richard A. Falk, in
an article entitled "Toward a New World Order: Modest Methods and Drastic Visions," in the book "On
the Creation of a Just World Order" (1975)

"My country's history, Mr. President, tells us that it is possible to fashion unity while cherishing diversity,
that common action is possible despite the variety of races, interests, and beliefs we see here in this
chamber. Progress and peace and justice are attainable. So we say to all peoples and governments: Let us
fashion together a new world order." -- Henry Kissinger, in address before the General Assembly of the
United Nations, October 1975)

"At the old Inter-American Office in the Commerce Building here in Roosevelt's time, as Assistant
Secretary of State for Latin American Affairs under President Truman, as chief whip with Adlai
Stevenson and Tom Finletter at the founding of the United Nations in San Francisco, Nelson Rockefeller
was in the forefront of the struggle to establish not only an American system of political and economic
security but a new world order." -- part of article in the New York Times (November 1975)

"A New World Order" -- title of article on commencement address at the University of Pennsylvania by
Hubert H. Humphrey, printed in the Pennsylvania Gazette (June 1977)

"Further global progress is now possible only through a quest for universal consensus in the movement
towards a new world order." -- Mikhail Gorbachev, in an address at the United Nations (December 1988)

"We believe we are creating the beginning of a new world order coming out of the collapse of the
U.S.-Soviet antagonisms." -- Brent Scowcroft (August 1990), quoted in the Washington Post (May 1991)

"We can see beyond the present shadows of war in the Middle East to a new world order where the
strong work together to deter and stop aggression. This was precisely Franklin Roosevelt's and Winston
Churchill's vision for peace for the post-war period." -- Richard Gephardt, in the Wall Street Journal
(September 1990)

"If we do not follow the dictates of our inner moral compass and stand up for human life, then his
lawlessness will threaten the peace and democracy of the emerging new world order we now see, this long
dreamed-of vision we've all worked toward for so long." -- President George Bush (January 1991)

"But it became clear as time went on that in Mr. Bush's mind the New World Order was founded on a
convergence of goals and interests between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, so strong and permanent that
they would work as a team through the U.N. Security Council." -- excerpt from A. M. Rosenthal, in the
New York Times (January 1991)

"I would support a Presidential candidate who pledged to take the following steps: ... At the end of the
war in the Persian Gulf, press for a comprehensive Middle East settlement and for a 'new world order'
based not on Pax Americana but on peace through law with a stronger U.N. and World Court." -- George
McGovern, in the New York Times (February 1991)

"... it's Bush's baby, even if he shares its popularization with Gorbachev. Forget the Hitler 'new order'
root; F.D.R. used the phrase earlier." -- William Safire, in the New York Times (February 1991)

"How I Learned to Love the New World Order" -- article by Sen. Joseph R. Biden, Jr. in the Wall Street
Journal (April 1992)

"How to Achieve The New World Order" -- title of book excerpt by Henry Kissinger, in Time magazine
(March 1994)

"The Final Act of the Uruguay Round, marking the conclusion of the most ambitious trade negotiation of
our century, will give birth - in Morocco - to the World Trade Organization, the third pillar of the New
World Order, along with the United Nations and the International Monetary Fund." -- part of full-page
advertisement by the government of Morocco in the New York Times (April 1994)

"New World Order: The Rise of the Region-State" -- title of article by Kenichi Ohmae, political reform
leader in Japan, in the Wall Street Journal (August 1994)

The "new world order that is in the making must focus on the creation of a world of democracy, peace
and prosperity for all." -- Nelson Mandela, in the Philadelphia Inquirer (October 1994)

The renewal of the nonproliferation treaty was described as important "for the welfare of the whole world
and the new world order." -- President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, in the New York Times (April 1995)

"Alchemy for a New World Order" -- article by Stephen John Stedman in Foreign Affairs (May/June
1995)

"We are not going to achieve a new world order without paying for it in blood as well as in words and
money." -- Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., in Foreign Affairs (July/August 1995)

 
At 1:20 p.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

Noem mij gelovig, maar leg mij eens uit hoe dat paspoort(tenzij het uit kryptoniet is gemaakt) onbeschadigd uit een hellevuur van weetikveel hoeveel graden 'toevallig' naar beneden dwarrelde en 'toevallig' door de FBI gevonden werd.

Leg me dat eens uit!

 
At 1:32 p.m., Anonymous Braad Spitt said...

Leg mij dan eens uit waarom je je dat alleen maar afvraagt bij dat paspoort en niet bij de andere items uit het vliegtuig die later teruggevonden zijn. Zijn die ook allemaal gefaket?

 
At 1:39 p.m., Anonymous Rogier said...

"Noem mij gelovig, maar leg mij eens uit hoe dat paspoort(tenzij het uit kryptoniet is gemaakt) onbeschadigd uit een hellevuur van weetikveel hoeveel graden 'toevallig' naar beneden dwarrelde en 'toevallig' door de FBI gevonden werd."

Volgens mij was het niet onbeschadigd, en bij de impact kunnen wel degelijk allerlei voorwerpen naar buiten zijn geslingerd. Een koffer zal zo'n val niet overleven, maar een paspoort dwarrelt uiteindelijk naar beneden zonder dat hij in stukjes uit elkaar valt.

 
At 6:34 p.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

All the Shah's Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror
Intelligence in Recent Public Literature
By Stephen Kinzer. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 2003. 258 pages.
Reviewed by David S. Robarge
________________________________________
At an NSC meeting in early 1953, President Dwight Eisenhower said "it was a matter of great distress to him that we seemed unable to get some of these down-trodden countries to like us instead of hating us."1 The problem has likewise distressed all administrations since, and is emerging as the core conundrum of American policy in Iraq. In All the Shah's Men, Stephen Kinzer of the New York Times suggests that the explanation may lie next door in Iran, where the CIA carried out its first successful regime-change operation over half a century ago. The target was not an oppressive Soviet puppet but a democratically elected government whose populist ideology and nationalist fervor threatened Western economic and geopolitical interests. The CIA's covert intervention—codenamed TPAJAX—preserved the Shah's power and protected Western control of a hugely lucrative oil infrastructure. It also transformed a turbulent constitutional monarchy into an absolutist kingship and induced a succession of unintended consequences at least as far ahead as the Islamic revolution of 1979—and, Kinzer argues in his breezily written, well-researched popular history, perhaps to today.
British colonialism faced its last stand in 1951 when the Iranian parliament nationalized the sprawling Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (AIOC) after London refused to modify the firm's exploitative concession. "[B]y a series of insensate actions," the British replied with prideful stubbornness, "the Iranian Government is causing a great enterprise, the proper functioning of which is of immense benefit not only to the United Kingdom and Iran but to the whole free world, to grind to a stop. Unless this is promptly checked, the whole of the free world will be much poorer and weaker, including the deluded Iranian people themselves."2 Of that attitude, Dean Acheson, the secretary of state at the time, later wrote: "Never had so few lost so much so stupidly and so fast."3 But the two sides were talking past each other. The Iranian prime minister, Mohammed Mossadeq, was "a visionary, a utopian, [and] a millenarian" who hated the British, writes Kinzer. "You do not know how crafty they are," Mossadeq told an American envoy sent to broker the impasse. "You do not know how evil they are. You do not know how they sully everything they touch."4
The Truman administration resisted the efforts of some British arch-colonialists to use gunboat diplomacy, but elections in the United Kingdom and the United States in 1951 and 1952 tipped the scales decisively toward intervention. After the loss of India, Britain's new prime minster, Winston Churchill, was committed to stopping his country's empire from unraveling further. Eisenhower and his secretary of state, John Foster Dulles, were dedicated to rolling back communism and defending democratic governments threatened by Moscow's machinations. In Iran's case, with diplomacy having failed and a military incursion infeasible (the Korean War was underway), they decided to take care of "that madman Mossadeq"5 through a covert action under the supervision of the secretary of state's brother, Director of Central Intelligence (DCI) Allen Dulles.6 (Oddly, considering the current scholarly consensus that Eisenhower was in masterful control of his administration, Kinzer depicts him as beguiled by a moralistic John Foster and a cynical Allen.) Directing the operation was the CIA's charming and resourceful man in Tehran, Kermit Roosevelt, an OSS veteran, Arabist, chief of Middle East operations, and inheritor of some of his grandfather Theodore's love of adventure.
The CIA's immediate target was Mossadeq, whom the Shah had picked to run the government just before the parliament voted to nationalize the AIOC. A royal-blooded eccentric given to melodrama and hypochondria, Mossadeq often wept during speeches, had fits and swoons, and conducted affairs of state from bed wearing wool pajamas. During his visit to the United States in October 1951, Newsweek labeled him the "Fainting Fanatic" but also observed that, although most Westerners at first dismissed him as "feeble, senile, and probably a lunatic," many came to regard him as "an immensely shrewd old man with an iron will and a flair for self-dramatization."7 Time recognized his impact on world events by naming him its "Man of the Year" in 1951.
Mossadeq is Kinzer's paladin—in contrast to the schemers he finds in the White House and Whitehall—but the author does subject him to sharp criticism. He points out, for example, that Mossadeq's ideology blinded him to opportunities to benefit both himself and the Iranian people: "The single-mindedness with which he pursued his campaign against [the AIOC] made it impossible for him to compromise when he could and should have."8 In addition, Mossadeq failed at a basic test of statecraft—trying to understand other leaders' perspectives on the world. By ignoring the anticommunist basis of US policy, he wrenched the dispute with the AIOC out of its Cold War context and saw it only from his parochial nationalist viewpoint. Lastly, Mossadeq's naïvete about communist tactics led him to ignore the Tudeh Party's efforts to penetrate and control Iranian institutions. He seemed almost blithely unaware that pro-Soviet communists had taken advantage of democratic systems to seize power in parts of Eastern Europe. By not reining in Iran's communists, he fell on Washington's enemies list. Kinzer throws this fair-minded assessment off kilter, however, with a superfluous epilogue about his pilgrimage to Mossadeq's hometown. Intended to be evocative, the chapter sounds maudlin and contributes little to either an understanding of the coup or Kinzer's speculations about its relevance today.
Kinzer is at his journalistic best when—drawing on published sources, declassified documents, interviews, and a bootleg copy of a secret Agency history of the operation9—he reconstructs the day-to-day running of TPAJAX. The plan comprised propaganda, provocations, demonstrations, and bribery, and employed agents of influence, "false flag" operatives, dissident military leaders, and paid protestors. The measure of success seemed easy enough to gauge—"[a]ll that really mattered was that Tehran be in turmoil," writes Kinzer. The design, which looked good on paper, failed on its first try, however, and succeeded largely through happenstance and Roosevelt's nimble improvisations. No matter how meticulously scripted a covert action may be, the "fog of war" affects it as readily as military forces on a battlefield. Roosevelt may have known that already—he and his confreres chose as the project's unofficial anthem a song from the musical Guys and Dolls: "Luck Be a Lady Tonight."10
TPAJAX had its surreal and offbeat moments. Kinzer describes Roosevelt calmly lunching at a colleague's house in the embassy compound while "[o]utside, Tehran was in upheaval. Cheers and rhythmic chants echoed through the air, punctuated by the sound of gunfire and exploding mortar shells. Squads of soldiers and police surged past the embassy gate every few minutes. Yet Roosevelt's host and his wife were paragons of discretion, asking not a single question about what was happening." To set the right mood just before Washington's chosen coup leader, a senior army general named Fazlollah Zahedi, spoke to the nation on the radio, US officials decided to broadcast some military music. Someone found an appropriate-looking record in the embassy library and put on the first song; to everyone's embarrassment, it was "The Star-Spangled Banner." A less politically discordant tune was quickly played, and then Zahedi took the microphone to declare himself "the lawful prime minister by the Shah's order." Mossadeq was sentenced to prison and then lifetime internal exile.11
The Shah—who reluctantly signed the decrees removing Mossadeq from office and installing Zahedi, thereby giving the coup a constitutional patina—had fled Iran during the crucial latter days of the operation. When he heard of the successful outcome from his refuge in Rome, he leapt to his feet and cried out, "I knew it! They love me!"12 That serious misreading of his subjects' feeling toward him showed that he was out of touch already. Seated again on the Peacock Throne, the insecure and vain Shah forsook the opportunity to introduce constitutional reforms that had been on the Iranian people's minds for decades. Instead, he became a staunch pro-Western satrap with grandiose pretensions. He forced the country into the 20th century economically and socially but ruled like a pre-modern despot, leaving the mosques as the only outlet for dissent. Although the next 25 years of stability that he imposed brought the United States an intelligence payoff the price was dependence on local liaison for information about internal developments. The intelligence gap steadily widened, and Washington was caught by surprise when the Khomeini-inspired Islamist revolution occurred in February 1979.
That takeover, according to Kinzer, links the 51-year-old coup with recent and current terrorism.
With their devotion to radical Islam and their eagerness to embrace even the most horrific kinds of violence, Iran's revolutionary leaders became heroes to fanatics in many countries. Among those who were inspired by their example were Afghans who founded the Taliban, led it to power in Kabul, and gave Osama bin-Laden the base from which he launched devastating terror attacks. It is not far-fetched to draw a line from Operation Ajax through the Shah's repressive regime and the Islamic Revolution to the fireballs that engulfed the World Trade Center in New York.13
This conclusion, however, requires too many historical jumps, exculpates several presidents who might have pressured the Shah to institute reforms, and overlooks conflicts between the Shia theocracy in Tehran and Sunni extremists in Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, and elsewhere.
Kinzer would have been better off making a less sweeping judgment: that TPAJAX got the CIA into the regime-change business for good—similar efforts would soon follow in Guatemala, Indonesia, and Cuba—but that the Agency has had little success at that enterprise, while bringing itself and the United States more political ill will, and breeding more untoward results, than any other of its activities.14 Most of the CIA's acknowledged efforts of this sort have shown that Washington has been more interested in strongman rule in the Middle East and elsewhere than in encouraging democracy. The result is a credibility problem that accompanied American troops into Iraq and continues to plague them as the United States prepares to hand over sovereignty to local authorities. All the Shah's Men helps clarify why, when many Iraqis heard President George Bush concede that "[s]ixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe,"15 they may have reacted with more than a little skepticism.

Footnotes
1. "Memorandum of Discussion at the 135th Meeting of the National Security Council, Washington, March 4, 1953," US Department of State, Foreign Relations of the United States, 1952-1954, Volume X, Iran, 1951-1954 (Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office, 1989), 699.
2. Kinzer, p. 121, quoting the British delegate to the UN Security Council, Gladwyn Jebb.
3. Dean Acheson, Present at the Creation: My Years in the State Department (New York: W. W. Norton, 1969), 503.
4. Vernon A. Walters, Silent Missions (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1978), 247.
5. John Foster Dulles, quoted in Kermit Roosevelt, Countercoup: The Struggle for the Control of Iran (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1979), 8.
6. The British had a covert action against Mossadeq in train until he expelled all British diplomats (including undercover intelligence officers) in October 1952. As Kinzer describes, members of MI-6 collaborated with CIA officers in drawing up the TPAJAX operational plan.
7. Kinzer, 120.
8. Ibid., 206-7.
9. Details of the Agency history were publicized in James Risen, "How a Plot Convulsed Iran in '53 (and '79)," New York Times, 16 April 2000, 1, 16-17. Lightly redacted versions of the history are posted on two Web sites:
the New York Times at www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html; and the National Security Archive's at www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB28/index.html.
10. Kinzer, 175, 211, 13.
11. Ibid., 181, 183-84.
12. Ibid., 184.
13. Ibid., 203-4.
14. Such is the theme of Kinzer's previous venture (with Stephen Schlesinger) into covert action history, Bitter Fruit: The Untold Story of the American Coup in Guatemala, Anchor Books ed. (New York: Doubleday, 1990), wherein the authors ask, "Was Operation SUCCESS [in Guatemala] necessary and did it really advance US interests, in the long range and in the aggregate?" (xiii).
15. David E. Sanger, "Bush Asks Lands in Mideast to Try Democratic Ways," New York Times, 7 November 2003: A1.

Dr. David S. Robarge, is a member of CIA's History Staff. This article is unclassified in its entirety.
Posted: 2007-04-14 20:15
Last Updated: 2007-04-14 20:15
Last Reviewed: 2007-04-14 20:15

 
At 7:04 p.m., Anonymous Anoniem said...

Zo standaard als billy &co mensen 'complotters' noemt zo standaard ontkend hij alles wat de cia & co uitvoeren.
complotters & debunkers wake up!

 
At 7:55 p.m., Anonymous Braad Spitt said...

Ach ach ach, is er weer een mongool random boeken aan het koppiepeesten.. weer iemand die dus niks te melden heeft, of dat althans niet onder woorden kan brengen.
De frustratie moet wel erg diep zitten.

 
At 8:00 p.m., Blogger Jay said...

Lekker naief ben je wel he Anoniempje. Alleen omdat we die crackpot complot dwazen niet volgen, wil niet zeggen dat we ook alles wat de US doet voor zoete koek slikken. Als ze Bush morgen op straat zouden schoppen, dan zal ik dat alleen maar toejuichen. En ik denk dat de meesten hier wel zo over denken, maar daar mogen ze zich zelf over uitlaten.

 

Een reactie plaatsen

<< Home