Tags, 상세검색
PJ 48CHAPTER 3
REC #1 HATONN
THU., MARCH 26, 1992 3:05 A.M. YEAR 5, DAY 223
THURSDAY, MARCH 26, 1992Henry Kissinger was now Bush's boss even more than Nixon was, and later, as the Watergate scandal progressed into 1973, the dominion of Kissinger would become even more absolute. During these years Bush, serving his apprenticeship in diplomacy and world strategy under Kissinger, became a virtual Kissinger clone in two senses. First, to a significant degree, Kissinger's networks and connections merged together with Bush's own, foreshadowing a 1989 administration in which the NSC director and the number two man in the State Department were both Kissinger's business partners from his consulting and influence peddling firm, Kissinger Associates. Secondly, Bush assimilated Kissinger's characteristic British-style geopolitical mentality and approach to problems, and this is now the epistemology that dictates Bush's own dealing with the main questions of world politics.
KISSINGER'S CLONE
U.S./CHINA BALANCES RUSSIA
RECIPE FOR NEW WARS
The most essential level of Kissinger was the British one. This meant that U.S. foreign policy was to be guided by British imperial geopolitics, in particular the notion of the balance of power: The United States must always ally with the second strongest land power in the world (Red China) against the strongest land power (The U.S.S.R.) in order to preserve the balance of power. I suggest you go back and read the preceding some eight or ten times. Don't believe this? Keep reading. This was clearly and succinctly expressed in the 1971-72 Nixon-Kissinger opening to Beijing, to which Bush would contribute from his U.N. post. The balance of power, since it rules out a positive engagement for the economic progress of the international community as a whole, has always been a recipe for new wars. Kissinger was in constant contact with British foreign policy operatives like Sir Eric Roll of S. G. Warburg in London, Lord Victor Rothschild, the Barings Bank and others.
On May 10, 1982, in a speech entitled "Reflections on a Partnership" given at the Royal Institute of International Affairs at Chatham House in London, Henry Kissinger openly expounded his role and philosophy as a British agent-of-influence within the U.S. government during the Nixon and Ford years:
"The British were so matter-of-fact helpful that they became a participant in internal American deliberations, to a degree probably never before practiced between sovereign nations. In my period in office, the British played a seminal part in certain American bilateral negotiations with the Soviet Union--indeed, they helped draft the key document. In my White House incarnation then, I kept the British Foreign Office better informed and more closely engaged than I did the American State Department.... In my negotiations over Rhodesia I worked from a British draft with British spelling even when I did not fully grasp the distinction between a working paper and a Cabinet-approved document."
Kissinger was also careful to point out that the United States must support colonial and neo-colonial strategies against the developing sector:
"Americans from Franklin Roosevelt onward believed that the United States, with its ' revolutionary' heritage, was the natural ally of people struggling against colonialism; we could win the allegiance of these new nations by opposing and occasionally undermining our European allies in the areas of their colonial dominance. Churchill, of course, resisted these American pressures.... In this context, the experience of Suez is instructive.... Our humiliation of Britain and France over Suez was a shattering blow to these countries' role as world powers. It accelerated their shedding of international responsibilities, some of the consequences of which we saw in succeeding decades when reality forced us to step into their shoes--in the Persian Gulf, to take one notable example. Suez thus added enormously to America's burdens."
Kissinger was the high priest of imperialism and neocolonialism, animated by an instinctive hatred for Indira Gandhi, Aldo Moro, All Bhutto, and other nationalist world leaders. Kissinger's British geopolitics simply accentuated Bush's own fanatically Anglophile point of view, which he had acquired from father Prescott and imbibed from the atmosphere of the family firm, Brown Brothers Harriman, originally the U.S. branch of a British counting house.
HENRY K. ZIONIST/RUSS/BRITISH AGENT.
Kissinger was and is also a Zionist, dedicated to economic, diplomatic, and military support of Israeli aggression and expansionism to keep the Middle East in turmoil, so as to prevent Arab unity and Arab economic development while using the region to mount challenges to the Soviets. In this he was a follower of British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli and Lord Balfour. In the 1973 Middle East war which he had connived to unleash, Kissinger would mastermind the U.S. resupply of Israel and would declare a U.S.-worldwide thermonuclear alert. In later years, Kissinger would enrich himself through speculative real estate purchases on the West Bank of the Jordan, buying up land and buildings that had been virtually confiscated from defenseless Palestinian Arabs.
Kissinger was also Soviet in a sense that went far beyond his sponsorship of the 1970's detente, SALT I, and the ABM treaty with Moscow. Polish KGB agent Michael Goleniewski is widely reported to have told the British government in 1972 that he had seen KGB documents in Poland before his 1959 defection which established that Kissinger was a Soviet asset. Kissinger had been recruited by the Soviets during his Army service in Germany after the end of World War II, when he had worked as a humble chauffeur. Now, in addition, I hope that you readers are keeping uppermost in your minds that in this new "Post Cold
War" era in Russia that the first internationally MAJOR company in Moscow is KISSINGER ASSOCIATES the head of which is now Gorbachev!!! This is not only known and sanctioned by the joint "Intelligence" Services but is wholly protected and guarded at YOUR expense by your CIA operatives in Moscow. This same scenario was established fully in Red China--with Kissinger Associates.
I certainly do hope that you are beginning to suspect that you do not get NEWS! If you can keep something the size of the invasion of Pearl Harbor and the lies of a President's assassination from you-the-people, how much easier it is now to control the press and media and keep anything and everything unwanted for your eyes and ears--from you. They can tell you black is white and you don't know the difference but, rather, think there is some new food dye afoot.
Kissinger was recruited to an espionage cell called ODRA, where he received the code name of "BOR" or "COLONEL BOR". This group was largely composed of homosexuals, and homosexuality was a most important part of the way that Kissinger had been picked up by the KGB. The late James Jesus Angleton, of whom we have been extensively writing, was the CIA Counterintelligence Director for 20 years up to 1973, and was the U.S. official who was given the reports thereof by the British. Angleton later talked a lot about Kissinger being "objectively a Soviet agent". Angleton had the information investigated under a codename and found Kissinger to be everything the service could desire and was notified that Kissinger would be coming aboard whether or not it was liked by the CIA.
CHINA OBSSESSION
Kissinger's Chinese side was very much in evidence during 1971-73 and beyond; during these years he was obsessed with anything remotely connected with China and sought to monopolize decisions and contacts with the highest levels of the Chinese leadership. This attitude was dictated most of all by the British mentality and geopolitical considerations indicated above, but it is also unquestionable that Kissinger felt a strong personal affinity for Chou En-lai, Mao Tse-tung, and the other Chinese leaders, who had been responsible for the genocide of 100 million of their own people after 1949.
Kissinger possessed other dimensions in addition to these, including close links to the Zionist underworld. These would also look very, very large in George Bush's career and will continue to become ever larger.
At the time in point and with all of the Kissingerian enormities, Bush became the principal spokesman. In the process, he was to become a Kissinger clone.
This is often referred to as "The China Card". The defining events in the first year of Bush's U.N. tenure reflected Kissinger's geopolitical obsession with his China card. Remember that in his 1964 campaign, Bush had stated that Red China must never be admitted to the U.N. and that if Beijing ever obtained the Chinese seat on the Security Council, the U.S.A. must depart forthwith from the world body. This statement came back to haunt him once or twice. His stock answer went like this: "That was 1964, a long time ago. There's been a awful lot of changes since... A person who is unwilling to admit that changes have taken place is out of things these days. President Nixon is not being naive in his China policy. He is recognizing the reality of today, not the realities of seven years ago." The only thing changed in this world, friends, are the lies they tell you while they wrap the bindings tighter and tighter and get you backed into a corner wherein you are TRAPPED--FOR-EVER!
No, no, and no, friends--do not say to me that "We" have to do something about all this as I bring it to you--"I" don't have to do anything more than what I am doing. YOU HAVE TO DO SOMETHING IF SOMETHING IS TO BE DONE. HOW-EVER, IF YOU DO NOT DEMAND 'THAT YOUR OWN POTENTIAL LEADERS TAKE TIME TO GET THIS IN-FORMATION INTO THEIR KNOWLEDGE-WHAT GOOD WILL IT DO TO CHANGE THE HORSES? HORSES ONLY PULL TOWARD THE GOAL LAID FORTH FOR THEM AND IF THE GOAL IS NOT CHANGED IT IS NO GOOD TO CHANGE THE HORSES.
I am continually asked, these days, "What about Brown and can't we support him?" Of course you can support him and it will be a grass-roots wonder--HOWEVER--he only plans to alter slightly the map--not the road. Does he know better? NO! He really thinks he has the world by the tail now and who knows, perhaps he does. He has announced that Jesse Jackson will be his running-mate. Boy, doesn't that sound good? Well, in fact, if Jackson comes in he will demand that Washington D.C. be made the 51st State--negating your CONSTITUTION instantly. Next, Jesse Jackson is a member of "the organization" of the Elite Conspiracy, The Council on Foreign Relations. Chelas, I KNOW it is bewildering and baffling--I can only ask that you study ALL the information I have given unto you for I gave these things to you over and over--long ago. I can offer the information--no more--for YOU must take the lessons. These webs are so tangled that I cannot give you a five-minute overview of the Universe and wham-bam, its done and you are in total wisdom. I remind you--"I" don't have to do anything. I have a magnificent silver ship that has every technology as is available in the Universe--"I" certainly do not need any of your headaches nor do I need to bargain with, lift off, argue or do anything else "with" or "for" you. Now that we have that clear--I assure you that I do have a mission and I shall see to it that it is done--that is to bring the Word of Truth unto you and it is strictly up to you as to what you do with it.
Ones suggest that I must continue to spoon-feed and chew your food and take your medicine for you--NO, I DO NOT! YOU DUMPED YOUR LOAD OF GUILT AND SIN ON THE CROSS OF ONE BEFORE ME--YE SHALL NOT DO THAT TO ME OR TO "MINE" AGAIN!
God gave unto you every wondrous miracle creation you could desire and you have turned and spat in His face for the effort--so, continue to do that which you will for the re-ward shall be solely in like-manner of actions and intent. Forgiveness has nothing to do with it for it is not even in question--intent and actions are all that merits consideration. YOU WILL NOT TELL ME WHO I HAVE TO TAKE OR WHO I SHALL LEAVE AND I SUGGEST WE UNDERSTAND THAT WITHOUT ARGUMENT RIGHT NOW. YOUR OPINION IS PERFECTLY FINE--IT SIMPLY HAPPENS TO BE FACT THAT YOUR OPINION MAKES NOT ONE IOTA OF DIFFERENCE TO ME.
NATIONALIST CHINA OUSTED FROM U.N.
One of the realities of 1971 was that the bankrupt British had declared themselves to be financially unable to maintain their military presence in the Indian Ocean and the Far East, in the area "East of Suez". Part of the timing of the Kissinger China card was dictated by the British desire to acquire China as a counterweight to India in this vast area of the world, and also to insure a U.S. military presence in the Indian Ocean, as seen later in the U.S. development of an important base on the island of Diego Garcia.
On a world tour during 1969, Nixon had told President Yahya Khan, the dictator of Pakistan, that his administration wanted to normalize relations with Red China and wanted the help of the Pakistani government in exchanging messages. Regular meetings between the United States and Beijing had gone on for many years in Warsaw, but what Nixon was talking about was a total reversal of U.S. China policy. Up until 1971, the U.S.A. had recognized the government of the Republic of China on Taiwan as the sole sovereign and legitimate authority over China. The United States, unlike Britain, France, and many other Western countries, had no diplomatic relations with the Beijing Communist regime.
The Chinese seat among the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council was held by the government of Taipei. Every year in the early autumn there was an attempt by the non-aligned bloc to oust Taipei from the Security Council and replace them with Beijiing, but the vote had always failed because of U.S. arm-twisting in Latin America and the rest of the Third World. One of the reasons that this arrangement had endured so long was the immense prestige of R.O.C. President Chiang Kai-shek and the sentimental popularity of the Kuomintang with the American electorate. There still was a very powerful China lobby, which was especially strong among right-wing Republicans of what had been the Taft and Knowland factions of the party, and which Goldwater continued. In the midst of the Vietnam non-War (officially), with U.S. strategic and economic power in decline, the Anglo-American elite decided in favor of a geopolitical alliance with China against the Soviets for the foreseeable future. This meant that the honor of U.S. commitments to the R.O.C. had to be dumped overboard as so much useless ballast, whatever the domestic political consequences might be. This was the task given to Kissinger, Nixon, and George Bush.
HATCHING "TWO CHINAS" DECEIT
The maneuver on the agenda for 1971 was to oust the R.O.C. from the U.N. Security Council and assign their seat to Beijing. Kissinger and Nixon calculated that duplicity would insulate them from domestic political damage: While they were opening to Beijing, they would call for a "two Chinas" policy, under which both Beijing and Taipei would be represented at the U.N., at least in the General Assembly, despite the fact that this was an alternative that both Chinese governments vehemently rejected. The U.S.A. would pretend to be fighting to keep Taipei in the U.N., with George Bush leading the fake charge, but this effort would be defeated. Then the Nixon Administration could claim that the vote in the U.N. was beyond its control, comfortably resign itself to Beijing in the Security Council, and pursue the China card. What was called for was a cynical, duplicitous diplomatic charade in which Bush would have the leading part.
This scenario was complicated by the rivalry between Secretary of State Rogers and NSC boss Kissinger. Rogers was an old friend of Nixon, but it was of course Kissinger who made foreign policy for Nixon and the rest of the government, and Kissinger who was incomparably the greater evil. Between Rogers and Kissinger, Bush was unhesitatingly on the side of Kissinger. In later congressional testimony, former CIA official Ray Cline tried to argue that Rogers and Bush were kept in the dark by Nixon and Kissinger about the real nature of the U.S. China policy. The implication is that Bush's efforts to keep Taiwan at the U.N. were in good faith. According to Cline's fantastic account, "Nixon and Kissinger actually 'undermined' the department's efforts in 1971 to save Taiwan." Rogers may have believed that helping Taiwan was U.S. policy, but Bush did not. Cline's version of those events is an insult to the intelligence of any serious person.
The Nixon-era China card took shape during July 1971 with Kissinger's "Operation Marco Polo I", his secret first trip to Beijing. Kissinger says in his own memoirs that Bush was considered a candidate to make this journey, along with David Bruce, Elliot Richardson, Nelson Rockefeller, and Al Haig. Kissinger first journeyed to India, and then to Pakistan. From there, with the help of Yahya Khan, Kissinger went on to Beijing for meetings with Chou En-lai and other Chinese officials. He returned by way of Paris, where he met with North Vietnamese negotiator Le Duc Tho at the Paris talks on Indo-China. Returning to Washington, Kissinger briefed Nixon on his understanding with Zhou. On July 15, 1971 Nixon announced to a huge television and radio audience that he had accepted "with pleasure" an invitation to visit China at some occasion before May of 1972. He lamely assured "old friends" (meaning Chiang Kai-shek and the R.O.C. government on Taiwan) that their interests would not be sacrificed. Later in the same year, between October 16 and 26, Kissinger undertook operation "Polo II", a second, public visit with Zhou in Beijing to decide the details of Nixon's visit and hammer out what was to become the U.S.-P.R.C. Shanghai Communique, the joint statement issued during Nixon's stay. During this visit, Zhou cautioned Kissinger not to be disoriented by the hostile Beijing propaganda line against the U.S.A., manifestations of which were everywhere to be seen. Anti-U.S. slogans on the walls, said Zhou, were meaningless, like "firing an empty cannon". Nixon and Kissinger eventually journeyed to Beijing in February of 1972.
FARCE IN THE U. N. OF "TWO CHINAS"
It was before this backdrop that Bush waged his farcical campaign to keep Taiwan in the U.N. The State Department had stated through the mouth of Rogers on August 2 that the United States would support the admission of Red China to the U.N., but would oppose the expulsion of Taiwan. This was the so-called "two Chinas" policy. In an August 12 interview, Bush told the Washington Post that he was working hard to line up the votes to keep Taiwan as a U.N. member when the time to vote came in the fall. Responding to the obvious impression that this was a fraud for domestic political purposes only, Bush pledged his honor on Nixon's commitment to "two Chinas". "I know for a fact that the President wants to see the policy implemented," said Bush, with his usual straight "lips moving" face. He added that he had discussed the matter with Nixon and Kissinger at the White House only a few days before. Bush said that he and other members of his mission had lobbied 66 countries so far, and that this figure was likely to rise to 80 by the following week. Ultimately Bush would claim to have talked personally with 94 delegations to get them to let Taiwan stay, which a fellow diplomat called "a quantitative track record".
It was noted that the U.S. activity was entirely confined to the high-profile "glass palace" of the U.N., and that virtually nothing was being done by U.S. ambassadors in capitals around the world. But Bush countered that if it were just a question of going through the motions as a gesture for Taiwan, he would not be devoting so much of his time and energy to the cause. The main effort was at the U.N. because "this is what the U.N. is for", he commented. Bush said that his optimism about keeping the Taiwan membership had increased over the past three weeks.
By late September, Bush was saying that he saw a better than 50-50 chance that the U.N. General Assembly would seat both Chinese governments. By this time, the official U.S. position as enunciated by Bush was that the Security Council seat should go to Beijing, but that Taipei ought to be allowed to remain in the General Assembly. Since 1961, the U.S. strategy for blocking the admission of Beijing had depended on a procedural defense, obtaining a simple majority of the General Assembly for a resolution defining the seating of Beijing as an important question, which required a two-thirds majority in order to be implemented. Thus, if the U.S.A. could get a simple majority on the procedural vote, one-third plus one would suffice to defeat Beijing on the second vote.
The General Assembly convened on September 21. Bush and his aides were running a ludicrous full-court press on scores of delegations. Twice a day, there was a State Department briefing on the vote tally. "Yes, Burundi is with us.... About Argentina we're not sure," etc. All this attention got Bush an appearance on Face the Nation, where he said that the two-Chinas policy should be approved regardless of the fact that both Beijing and Taipei rejected it. "I don't think we have to go through the agony of whether the Republic of China will accept or whether Beijing will accept," Bush told the interviewers. "Let the United Nations for a change do something that really does face up to reality and then let that decision be made by the parties involved," said Bush with his usual inimitable rhetorical flair.
The U.N. debate on the China seat was scheduled to open on October 18; on October 12, Nixon gave a press conference in which he totally ignored the subject, and made no appeal for support for Taiwan. On October 16, Kissinger departed with great fanfare for Beijing. Kis singer says in his memoirs that he had been encouraged to go to Beijing by Bush, who assured him that a highly publicized Kissinger trip to Beijing would have no impact whatever on the U.N. vote. On October 25, the General Assembly defeated the U.S. resolution to make the China seat an "Important Question" by a vote of 59-54, with 15 abstentions. Ninety minutes later came the vote on the Albanian resolution to seat Beijing and expel Taipei, which passed by a vote of 76 to 35. Are you beginning to recognize the tactics? Bush then cast the U.S. vote to seat Beijing, and then hurried to escort the R.O.C. delegate, Liu Chieh, out of the hall for the last time. Do you actually think it disturbs Bush to have you complain about his "lips"? The General Assembly was the scene of a jubilant demonstration led by Third World delegates over the fact that Red China had been admitted, and even more so that the United States had been defeated. The Tanzanian delegate danced a jig in the aisle. Henry Kissinger, flying back from Beijing, got the news on his teletype and praised Bush's "valiant efforts"-- read their lips.
Having connived in selling Taiwan down the river, it was now an easy matter for the Nixon regime to fake a great deal of indignation for domestic political consumption about what had happened. Nixon's spokesman Ron Ziegler declared that Nixon had been outraged by the "spectacle" of the "cheering, hand-clapping and dancing" delegates after the vote, which Nixon had seen as a "shocking demonstration" of "undisguised glee" and "personal animosity"--oh barf!! Notice that Ziegler had nothing to say against the vote, or against Beijing, but concentrated the fire on the Third World delegates, who were also threatened with a cutoff of U.S. foreign aid.
This was the line that Bush would slavishly follow. On the last day of October, the papers quoted him as saying that the demonstration after the vote was "something ugly, something harsh that transcended normal disappointment or elation." "I really thought we were going to win," said Bush, still with that lying straight face with moving lips. "I am so...disappointed." "There wasn't just clapping and enthusiasm," after the vote, he whined. "When I went up to speak I was hissed and booed. I don't think it's good for the United Nations and that's the point I feel very strongly about." In the view of a Washington Post staff writer, "The boyish looking U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations looked considerably the worse for wear. But he still conveys the impression of an earnest fellow trying to be the class valedictorian, as he once was described."
* * *
Bush expected the Beijing delegation to arrive in New York soon, because they probably wanted to take over the presidency of the Security Council, which rotated on a monthly basis. "But why anybody would want an early case of chicken pox, I don't know," said Bush with that same indignant straight face.
When the Beijing delegation did arrive, Chinese Deputy Foreign Minister Ch'aio Kuan-hua delivered a maiden speech full of ideological bombast along the lines of passages Kissinger had convinced Zhou to cut out of the draft text of the Shanghai Communique some days before. Kissinger then telephoned Bush to say in his own speech that the United States regretted that the Chinese had elected to inaugurate their participation in the U.N. by "firing these empty cannons of rhetoric". Bush, like a ventriloquist's wooden dummy with movable lips, obediently mouthed Kissinger's one-liner as a coded message to Beijing that all the public bluster meant nothing and was right on target as planned. These two allies were already deep into the secret and increasingly public partnership.
This is why I suggest you attend that which "appears" to be happening around your globe and consider the truth of what is lying behind the lies.
LOW FREQUENCY PHASERS OUT OF CONTROL
You are run by the United Nations under the control of these Conspirators who have actually now absorbed your country and set aside your Constitution, America. You allowed this to hap-pen the minute the treaties and agreements were set forth in the United Nations. Bush has total control of your nation according to his Executive Authority through granted resources and control set up through FEMA and he sits and laughs at you as you dangle and grumble in the winds. This bunch of Global terrorists know exactly what they are doing and the work they do this very day may well set your entire atmosphere afire. Do you actually think they are giving you a "heavenly light show" and training your children to listen FOR ELF BLASTS? Oh, indeed, the low frequency phasers are at work--and right now, out of control. It is exactly like saying to the world--" ...now everyone listen and you will hear the last sound you will ever hear!" The next experience will be oblivion!
Moreover--do you actually believe the lies regarding the Russian delay on bringing their cosmonauts back? Lack of money? Come, come--you hit their craft for there is no need whatsoever to have a nearly crippled cosmonaut come off anything--the space stations allow full activities. Indeed yes, this day you have gone a bit too far and the "Bear" is ready to eat you alive. READ MY LIPS!
Allow us rest, Dharma. Thank you for service. It has been an incredibly long and tedious day of sorting and extinguishing fires and distractions but that, too, comes in the course of "living". I shall, however, withdraw you from much of it for you cannot be all unto all and ones are going to begin to take responsibility for their actions for I cannot do more to help them understand how it IS and it is not yours to handle--release it.
As readers, I suggest that to ones who can't make up their minds how they feel about "Command", God or Spiritual matters-- PAY ATTENTION-FOR TRUTH IS COMING WHETHER OR NOT THEY LIKE OF IT AND RESOURCE OF TRUTH IS OF NO IMPORTANCE WHATSOEVER. SALU.
PJ 48CHAPTER 4
REC #2 HATONN
FRI., MARCH 27, 1992 9:41 A.M. YEAR 5, DAY 224
FRIDAY, MARCH 27, 1922
TODAY'S WATCH"THE PHASER CANNONS HAVE BLOWN THEIR FUSES" is what the "news" reports say this day. Fuses? Brothers, you are in such terrible circumstances that I know not how to impress you with the serious plight. Neither is any of this "stuff" coming from a nice new shuttle craft launched for your visual deceit a few days past. You are basically into and within a "Space War" which will surely fall-out onto your surface. This is a war that the U.S. CANNOT WIN. So be it.
SUICIDAL GRID EXPERIMENTS
The current lies regarding "Northern Lights" and phaser beams and other excuses for the heinous experiments and testings going on through your grid system are inexcusable. A chain reaction was begun along the system and we have managed to get it stopped but the idiots simply plan to desperately try the whole experiment again. I simply cannot say whether or not your orb can stand such bombardment. In this very process, every one of your inhabitants was struck by low frequency beams which has, if nothing else, caused mass confusion in heavily targeted areas--which, of course, is exactly the plan.
There were many messages intended for the ones who know circumstances and intent but you are in serious trouble. You Americans have terminally damaged a Soviet Space Station and, fortunately for you, the Cosmonauts were brought back from one of the shuttle craft damaged by the assault. The Cosmo-sphere Command is in the process of deciding what to do about the attack and herein you are dealing with MEN who have great power--greater than any weapons you of the U.S. have to counter. Space Command (WE) brought the reaction of the electromagnetic field under control but YOU ARE DEALING NOW WITH MEN--SOVIET MEN. I SUGGEST YOU KEEP YOUR GOGGLES HANDY AT ALL TIMES BECAUSE THEY CAN DRAIN OFF THE ELECTRONIC PLASMA SHIELD UNDER WHICH YOUR HOODLUMS WORK.
CIA RELEASE OF DOCUMENTS RE; KENNEDY MURDER
As you read along in this information you will note that clandestine activities are not new and were not new at the assassination (MURDER) of John Kennedy. To assume that such a remarkable organization will allow any incriminating evidence to slip through the sieve of operatives is as ridiculous as believing that all those evil conspirators will come forth and commit suicide having found that God disapproves of murder. There have been some thirty years to wipe all that evidence from the files. Do you not think that in that amount of time, without half trying, all documents are destroyed or reconstructed? I note that every typewriter and computer has the ability to print anything put in by any and all keystrikes. I could date this very document October 23, 1963, carry through with the timing and YOU WOULD NEVER KNOW THE DIFFERENCE.
CHECK IT OUT: Just yesterday it was questioned of two persons on the Warren Commission about the sealing of the documents in the first place. The response? Oh, any documents "left over" when a matter is settled are authorized to be sealed for anywhere from 30 to 50 years. WELL, WHAT ABOUT 75 YEARS IF IN FACT THE STATEMENT IS TRUTH? YOU-THE-PEOPLE ARE SET UP TO BE ELABORATELY LIED TO AS NEVER BEFORE. I REMIND YOU: E. HOWARD HUNT WAS THE ONE WHO FIRED THE FIRST FATAL SHOT, THEN A TEXAN USING THE NAME OF "WHITE" (A CIA OPERATIVE) AND THE DRIVER OF THE LIMOUSINE. MOREOVER, THERE WERE OTHERS ALSO FIRING OR AVAILABLE FOR BACKUP FROM ALL OVER THE PLACE IN VARIOUS LOCATIONS TO MAKE SURE NO POSSIBILITIES WERE OVERLOOKED. YOU MUST FACE FACTS AMERICA--YOU GET NO TRUTH AND NEITHER SHALL YOU GET IT NOW.
CIA CLANDESTINE MENTALITY
One of Colby's principal functions was to strengthen the Vietnamese economy in order to improve the lot of the average Vietnamese peasant, and thereby make him less susceptible to Vietcong appeals and more loyal to the Thieu government. To win over the peasants, Colby insisted that corruption within the Saigon government had to be greatly reduced. At one point he even proposed a systematic campaign called the "Honor the Nation" program, which was to be an attack on illegal practices at all levels of Vietnamese society. At that time Colby was well aware that black-market trafficking in money was one of the biggest corruption problems in Vietnam. All U.S. personnel in Vietnam were under strict orders not to buy Vietnamese piasters on the black market, and a number of Americans had either been court-martialed by the military or fired by their civilian agencies for violating these orders. But Colby also knew that for many years the CIA had been obtaining tens of millions of dollars in piasters on the black market, either in Hong Kong or in Saigon. In this way the agency could get two to three times as much buying power for its American dollars. Additionally, the Clandestine Services claimed, black market piasters were untraceable and thus ideal for secret operations. Given more than 500,000 Americans in Vietnam all using Vietnamese piasters, and a chaotic Vietnamese banking system, the CIA could of course have obtained untraceable or "sterile" money without resorting to the black market. Although from a strict budgetary point of view the agency's currency purchases were sound fiscal policy, they directly violated both Vietnamese law and U.S. official policy. Moreover, the purchases helped to keep alive the black market which the U.S. government was professedly working to stamp out.
During the mid-1960's while Colby was still in Washington, the Bureau of the Budget learned that the CIA budget for Vietnam provided for dollar expenditures figured at the legal exchange rate. Since in truth the agency was buying its piasters on the black market, it actually had two to three times more piasters to spend in Vietnam than its budget showed. The Bureau of the Budget then insisted that all figures be listed at the actual black-market rate, so at least examiners of the agency's budget in Washington would have a true idea of how much money the CIA was spending. The bureau then also tried to cut U.S. government costs by having the CIA buy piasters for other agencies on the black market. The agency was unenthusiastic about this idea and managed to avoid doing it, not because massive black-market purchases would have negated the government's avowed efforts to support the piaster, but because the agency did not want the secrecy of its money-exchange operation disturbed.
Compared to other aspects of the Vietnam war, the CIA's use of the black market is not a major issue. It simply points up the fact that the CIA is not bound by the same rules that apply to the rest of the government. The Central Intelligence Agency Act of 1949 makes this clear: "The sums made available to the Agency may be expended without regard to the provisions of law and regulations relating to the expenditures of Government." The CIA in Vietnam even escaped the Johnson administration's worldwide edict that all cars purchased by the American government would be of American manufacture. While State Department and AID personnel were forced to navigate Saigon's narrow streets in giant Chevrolets and Plymouths, the agency motorpool was full of much smaller and more practical Japanese Toyotas. [H: Now I ask you, is it not fun to unravel the web and find all those tid-bits which YOU THOUGHT were new in today's concerns?]
Thus, a William Colby can, with no legal or ethical conflict, propose programs to end corruption in Vietnam while at the same time condoning the CIA's dubious money practices. And extending the concept of the agency's immunity to law and morals, a Colby can devise and direct terror tactics, secret wars and the like, all in the name of democracy. This is the clandestine mentality: a separation of personal morality and conduct from actions, no matter how debased, which are taken in the name of the United States government and, more specifically, the Central Intelligence Agency.
When Colby left his post as deputy ambassador to Vietnam in 1971, the CIA immediately "rehired" him, and Director Helms appointed him Executive Director-Comptroller, the number-three position in the agency. When James Schlesinger took over the agency in early 1973, he made Colby chief of the Clandestine Services. In May 1973, at the height of the personnel shake-ups caused by the Watergate affair, President Nixon moved Schlesinger to the Defense Department and named Colby to head the CIA. Thus, after about four months under the directorship of the outsider Schlesinger, control of the agency was again in the hands of a clandestine operator.
KENNEDY KILLERS
[H: When Watergate is under reference, it must always be remembered that the break-in was to retrieve PICTURES which were being held for blackmail which totally incriminated E. Howard Hunt, Nixon and George Bush as being present and INVOLVED INTIMATELY AND DIRECTLY WITH THE ASSASSINATION OF JFK. MOREOVER, YOU WILL FIND KISSINGER AND OTHER VERY HIGH-OPERATIVES AND POLITICIANS INVOLVED TO THEIR BLACK EVIL HEARTS.]
Senator Harold Hughes, for one, expressed grave reservations about Colby's appointment as CIA Director in a Senate speech on August 1, 1973: "I am fearful of a man whose experience has been so largely devoted to clandestine operations involving the use of force and manipulation of factions in foreign governments. Such a man may become so enamored with these techniques that he loses sight of the higher purposes and moral constraints which should guide our country's activities abroad."
* * *
Deeply embedded within the clandestine mentality is the belief that human ethics and social laws have no bearing on covert operations or their practitioners. The intelligence profession, because of its lofty "natural security" goals, is free from all moral restrictions. There is no need to wrestle with technical legalisms or judgments as to whether something is right or wrong. The determining factors in secret operations are purely pragmatic: Does the job need to be done? Can it be done? And can secrecy (or plausible denial) be maintained? [H: Do you not think that all of these questions are pretty well covered in the release of any secret documents as might be released by the CIA? The need is certainly there to make covering documents which clean the actions: it certainly needs to be done if the CIA is to be cleared and acceptance of the "fixed" Warren Commission (by the way, Earl Warren and Gerald Ford are both members of the Committee of 300!) is to be received by the "people". It also CAN BE DONE-- EASILY AND WITHOUT DIVULGING ONE IOTA OF SECRECY AND ALLOW THAT PLAUSIBLE DENIAL TO BE MAINTAINED. WAKE UP, "WE-THE-PEOPLE"!!]
One of the lessons learned from the Watergate experience is the scope of this amorality and its influence on the clandestine mentality. E. Howard Hunt claimed that his participation in the Watergate break-in and the other operations of the plumbers group was in "what I believed to be the...the best interest of my country." [H: Facts are that the "opposition" had pictures of Hunt with firing gun in action.] In this instance, at least, we can accept Hunt as speaking sincerely. He was merely reflecting an attitude that is shared by most CIA operators when carrying out the orders of their superiors.
Hunt expanded on this point when interrogated before a federal grand jury in April 1973 by Assistant U.S. Attorney Earl Silbert.
SILBERT: Now while you worked at the White House, were you ever a participant or did you ever have knowledge of any other so-called "bag job" or entry operations?
HUNT: No, sir.
SILBERT: Were you aware of or did you participate in any other what might commonly be referred to as illegal activities?
HUNT: Illegal?
SILBERT: Yes, sir.
HUNT: I have no recollection of any, no sir.
SILBERT: What about clandestine activities?
HUNT: Yes, sir.
SILBERT: All right. What about that?
HUNT: I'm not quibbling, but there's quite a difference between something that's illegal and something that's clandestine. [H: THERE IS ALSO A MASSIVE DIFFERENCE IN WHAT IS "ILLEGAL" AND WHAT IS "UNLAWFUL".]
SILBERT: Well, in your terminology, would the entry into Mr. Fielding's (Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist) office have been clandestine, illegal, neither or both?
HUNT: I would simply call it an entry operation conducted under the auspices of competent authority.
[H: So when you get released documents which are altered, reproduced, conjured, etc., you will find it all simply under "the auspices of competent authority". In the instance of release of Assassination related documents--it will be directly under the auspices of the President of the United States to cover his own assets and those of his buddies in crime. That "President" by the way, lest you forget--IS GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH--who was, AT THE TIME, AN ACTIVE MEMBER AND OPERATIVE OF THE CIA.]]
Within the CIA, similar activities are undertaken with the consent of "competent authority". The Watergate conspirators, assured that "national security" was at stake, did not question the legality or the morality of their methods; nor do most CIA operators. [H: Harken back to the weeping "patriot", Oliver North, as he lied directly to the Congress and to you-the-people and you wanted to run him for President because of his criminal activities!] Hundreds if not thousands of CIA men have participated in similar operations, usually--but not always--in foreign countries; all such operations are executed in the name of "national security". The clandestine mentality not only allows it; it veritably WILLS IT.
BRAZILIAN PLANE HIJACK ALLOWED
In early October, 1969, the CIA learned through a secret agent that a group of radicals was about to hijack a plane in Brazil and escape to Cuba. This intelligence was forwarded to CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia and from there sent on an "eyes only" basis to Henry Kissinger at the White House and top officials of the State Department, the Defense Department, and the National Security Agency. Within a few days, on October 8, the same radicals identified in the CIA report commandeered at gunpoint a Brazilian commercial airliner with 49 people aboard, and after a refueling stop in Guyana, forced the pilot to fly to Havana. Neither the CIA nor the other agencies of the U.S. government which had advance warning of the radicals' plans moved to stop the crime from being committed, although at the time the official policy of the United States--as enunciated by the President--was to take all possible measures to stamp our aerial piracy.
Afterwards, when officials of the State Department questioned their colleagues in the CIA on why preventive measures had not been taken to abort the hijacking, the agency's clandestine operators delayed more than a month before responding. During the interim, security forces in Brazil succeeded in breaking up that country's principal revolutionary group and killing its leader, Carlos Marighella. Shortly after the revolutionary leader's death on November 4, the CIA informally passed word back to the State Department noting that if any action had been taken to stop the October skyjacking, the agency's penetration of the radical movement might have been exposed and Marighella's organization could not have been destroyed. While it was never quite clear whether the agent who alerted the clandestine operators to the hijacking had also fingered Marighella, that was the impression the CIA tried to convey to the State Department. The agency implied it had not prevented the hijacking because to have done so would have lessened the chances of scoring the more important goal of "neutralizing" Marighella and his followers. To the CIA's clandestine operators, the end--wiping out the Brazilian radical movement--apparently had justified the means, thus permitting the hijacking to take place and needlessly endangering forty-nine innocent lives in the process.
During the next twenty-five years American foreign policy was to be dominated (and still is) by the concept of containing Communism; almost always the means employed in pursuit of "national security" have been justified by the end. Since the "free world" was deemed to be under attack by a determined enemy, sincere men in the highest government posts believed--and still do believe--that their country could not survive without resorting to the same distasteful methods employed by the other side. In recent years the intensity of the struggle has been reduced as monolithic Communism has split among several centers of power; as a result, there have been tactical changes in America's conduct of foreign affairs. Yet the feeling remains strong among the nation's top officials, in the CIA and elsewhere, that America is responsible for what happens in other countries and that it has an inherent right--a sort of modern Manifest Destiny--to intervene in other countries' internal affairs. Changes may have occurred at the negotiating table, but not in the planning arena; intervention--either military or covert--is still the rule.
* * *
ROBERT ROBERTSON (MARTYR)
I would like to leave this chapter at this point and take up the subject of Robert Robertson (Martyr).
As you readers accept this next I want you to bear uppermost in mind: It is not the beliefs of the man in point and it is not the guilt or innocence of the man as valid to his incarceration and/or sentence--OUR ASSISTANCE TO THE MAN IS CAUSED BY UNLAWFUL (UNCONSTITUTIONAL) TREATMENT OF THE PERSON IN POINT. I must, however, leave it in the hands of the Constitutional Law Center as to whether or not they pursue this matter for I have just been denied entry into the case in point and I hereby withdraw from participation. I suggest that a copy of my letter to "Mr. Martyr" be printed also in this edition of the paper so that the readers have access to why this reprint of Mr. Martyr's letter.
I do not interject into any situation, right or wrong, in projection when denounced. I believe that Mr. Martyr decides that which will be beneficial to his own character and it would appear that the entire point of participation of you precious readers has been sorely overlooked. I also object to such insidious assumptions as to placing Sandy Green into the category of "earthbound female redneck". Sandy simply did as asked and sent forth information as requested. I, further, do not think that shooting "three Scum-Punks" is recommendation for release without question. THE ONLY QUESTION IN POINT IS REGARDING CONSTITUTIONAL LAW REGARDING SENTENCE AND/OR TREATMENT OF THIS INDIVIDUAL IN POINT--AND THAT IS UP TO THE LAW CENTER AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY WISH TO PURSUE IT FURTHER. Mr. Martyr has sent America West an "ad" with a $200 check enclosed to allow printing. America West does not accept advertising in this manner and therefore the $200 will be returned to the sender. I request that we print all the documents in hand for you readers, including the "ad", and then we shall have to give less space in the LIBERATOR to this matter. You will find that God treads not where not invited--so it behooves all ones to discern most clearly WHO IS GOD AND WHO ARE HIS MESSENGERS!
COPY:
March 23rd, '92.
Dear Sandy Green;
I got a letter from Hatonn, which I am going to consider in my "RED NECK" ways to be a letter from Sandy Green. It is a lot easier for us Red Necks to relate to a Sandy Green, an Earth Bound female, than to relate to a Hatonn, Commander of the Sky Ship Enterprise, of the United Federation of Planets; Capt. Kirk at the controls.
I am a Libertarian Red Neck. What that means is this: You believe in what you want to believe in, & I'll believe in what "I" want to believe in. What I believe in, is pretty far to the RIGHT. If you want to believe in Flying Saucers then that is perfectly FINE with me, I don't mind. If you want to ACT OUT under the CODE NAME Commander Haton of the Star Ship HOST OF GOD; then that is OK with me. I am NOT going to CON YOU, into to telling you that, "YEAH, I believe in ALL that". You see, Sandy, if I were a CON, I wouldn't even BE locked up behind BARS right now. If I were a CON, I would of Conned MY way into a DISCHARGE, way back in 1978, by the latest. All that I would have to have done, is to LIE my ASS OFF to a Psychologist Sullivan, way back in 1978, & I would have been FULL DISCHARGED. Just 30 minutes of Lying, & I could have been so-called FREE 14 years ago. The only reason that that I am locked up now, is because: I DON'T LIE. Every other reason for being locked up is either:
1. A Secondary Reason such as: Poverty, No Lawyer, I Shot 3 Scum-Punks, Etc
2. Is a BULL SHIT Reason such as: Mental Illness, Criminal Acts, Refusal to accept Treatment, Etc....
I DO NOT believe in any Flying Saucers, I will NEVER LIE to you, by saying that, oh now I DO BELIEVE in Flying Saucers.
BUT: You may believe in Flying Saucers if you want to, it is OK with me.
Here are 2 THINGS that I must take issue with you on:
1. Do NOT send the letters c/o Bernard Mailman. I find it to be VERY INSULTING & EMBARRASSING, to have to get a letter that was sent c/o a low functioning NUT, who in fact is no longer even on the same Cell Block with me. IF YOU want to write to Bernard Mailman, then you must send him a separate letter. If you want to write to me, then you must use ONLY my name. You can NOT say, well there are 2 NUTS at this Nut House, & so I kill 2 Nuts with the same letter.
2. As far as ALL those Scum Bags are concerned who don't like my writings, I can only say, TUFF SHIT. You see, it is ME who does NOT like THEM! So, if in turn they DO NOT LIKE ME, well then that really doesn't cut any ICE, with me. You see, I believe that GOD supports my work. My work is TRUE. The opinions of DEMONS is important to me, only in that-- DON'T WANT THEIR GOOD WILL. I am NOT in the BUSINESS to WIN the GOOD WILL of DEMONS. So I DO CARE WHAT DEMONS HAVE TO SAY, BECAUSE, I WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT SAYING THE SAME THING. If you were to write me a letter, & were to say that, "ALL THE DEMONS AGREE WITH YOU NOW, ROBERT MARTYR"; then I would CHANGE my MESSAGE. But when you write to me a letter, in which you say that, "ALL THE DEMONS ARE OPPOSED TO YOU", then I say, "WELL THAT IS JUST WONDERFUL"!!!!
Blessings unto you, I come in TRUTH from the land of Sodomy,
Robert R. Martyr
Oh, & that REMINDS ME: I don't want to see anymore of this: Dear Mr. Robertson a.k.a. Martyr; either pass the word onto Hatonn, too. I have given you my correct name in past letters, you have used my correct name in the past letters, and so in the future I will not read any letter that does NOT begin with the correct name, just as I use it, which is:
Robert R. Martyr-or-Robert Martyr (The R. is optional)
I don't NEED a Mr., but some people feel that they Must use a Mr., & so if you must, then you must.
Thank You, Robert R. Martyr, 348-C
2600 Center street, N.E.
Salem, OR 97310
Robert R. Martyr, 48-C, Victim of God's Enemies, 2600 Center St. N.E., Salem, OR 97310--(Signature).
END OF COPY.
* * *
Readers, I have presented this information unto you for a very good reason. You cannot make judgments nor can you discern anything accurately without knowing facts and gaining insight into the whole of an issue.
I do not use Robert Martyr as anything other than as example of explanation.
He has obviously "lied" even in his denial of same. One thing factual upon which to base this discernment is that in all his ads he has proclaimed innocence of any wrong-doing and I personally consider shooting of 3 Scum-Punks quite unacceptable. (I am told the shootings were over the smoking of cigarettes in his presence. This is hardly "self-defense". However, I have also been told the three men in point entered his home uninvited. The truth will emerge, I am sure.) Next, he has proclaimed that he is allowed NO MAIL and CANNOT WRITE LETTERS! It is quite obvious that this is a lengthy letter typed on a typewriter of some sort and therefore nullifies his (prior) objection to "short pencils".
Since there is no response to the issue of Constitutional legal assistance, I must make assumption that Mr. Robertson (his name) is not interested in anything other than pleading a distracting case to gain sympathy and attention to which I will no longer contribute to, either. My correspondence was solely to offer explanation regarding the Legal investigation by a source of respected authority--if that be considered evil and accepted as an insulting "CON JOB" by a beautiful third party totally uninvolved in any way whatsoever--then I see no measure of reasonable interaction.
I thank all of you who have responded to my request to write this poor man--for it is the Goodly thing to do and I would hope that some of you will continue to effort at some sort of communication. I do request that the Constitutional Law Center look into the treatment and justice of the institution involved to determine the level of abuse in point. If the institution is (and it is) abusing inmates, then it is THAT ISSUE IN POINT--not one Robert Robertson. Irritation and foul language is just as abusive in many circumstances--but the FACTS are that this represents a "HOSPITAL" wherein the inmates should not be considered to act with the same professional character as those of the wardens. ABUSE is not acceptable. The assumption is that the ones incarcerated in this "prison hospital" are "sick" and are there for "treatment". If the ones giving treatment act more sick than do the inmates--it MUST be brought to the attention of Constitutional LAW and set to RIGHT. So be it.
The second lie is also evident--Mr. Martyr has continually said that the "Scum-bags" and "Queers" are starving him to death. This has been a complaint for some many, many months and I believe that Mr. Martyr is still alive and very verbally aggressively functioning.
It is true that his mail is confiscated and even the "Certified" documents have been hidden in many instances so it is with regret that I withdraw from the issue. I will ask that the "ad" be placed in the LIBERATOR along with this writing. It is not for any of us to "force" anything on another--even if it be freedom and justice. It begins to appear that justice may well be served in this instance as it is not exactly public policy to allow shooting three people for smoking in your presence. It further appears that anyone efforting to assist the man in response to his pleas is simply labeled a "low functioning NUT" and/or "DEMONS".
He states that he wants nothing from us--then he shall get nothing from us. In acceptance of his own projections his attitude is "WELL THAT IS JUST WONDERFUL"!!!! Therefore I hereby withdraw all attention to the matter in response to his request.
COPY OF AD IN POINT:
CHALLENGE TO MY CAPTORS & ENEMIES (And they are Numerous)
Show me where I have ever broke the Law.
Show me where I ever Created a Victim.
Show me when I have ever been allowed before a Jury. For any of these things, just one & I will:
#1 - Pay you a $100 Reward.
#2 - Stop running my ads.
#3 - Stop my mass mailings.
#4 - Stop calling you Criminals and Degenerates
#5 - Stop calling myself a Martyr.
My Enemies know that for 13 years I have been making these kinds of Challenges. No one who knows me, from Judge to Shyster to Drug Pusher, has been able to take me up on it.
At the Judgement Day, it will all be very simple. If I am a Criminal, then where is the Evidence? If I am not a Criminal, then I am a Martyr.
Criminals "MUST" know that I am innocent. Why else was I never allowed to have a Trial? Because they "like" me? Or because they want to Shut Me Up? Which is the most Logical?
Robert R. Martyr, #48
2600 Center St. NE
Salem, OR 97310
**If the Truth Hurts too much, Write: "RETURN TO SENDER" on this card, & I will scratch your name from my mailing list. **
By the way, this man states unequivocally that Armageddon (the end) is coming in 1997. No voice of God would project such a thing for not even the "Son of God" knows the moment of HIS COMING and that is exactly that of which is intended by the statements. I ask that you give love unto this weary traveler for he is sorely in pain. Amen.
Thank you Dharma, may we simply close this now for you need to be elsewhere. Blest be ye ones of the WORD for in your hands lies the fate of your nations. So be it. Salu.
