Secret or private?

The enclosed article says:

In an interview given to BBC six years ago, the Viscount emphasized the fact that they were not a global ruling class, but an influential group of people interested in speaking to other influential individuals. He was referring to the annual meeting of the group. He does not consider the Bilderbergs a secret group but a “private” one.

The Bilderbergers may not be a global ruling class just yet, but they’re rapidly closing in on it considering the group was founded in 1954.

Private not secret applies to Skull & Bones, the Mafia, and numerous other enterprises as well. Once the public knows an organization exists it is no longer secret although its rituals, membership, agenda, etc., remain secret and private.

Any honestly complied list of organizations dangerous to America would have the Bilderbergs and the Council On Foreign Relations fighting it out for top spot. Those two organizations share the same goals. The CFR was founded on 1921; so it is the senior partner.

The United Nations is by far the most dangerous organization to America and the world, but the UN is neither secret nor private, and its global government agenda is well-known.

The names in this next excerpt caught my attention:

Henry Kissinger, Etienne Davignon, Zbigniew Brzezinsky, George Soros, Bill Gates, and Alan Greenspan are often present at annual meetings.

One wonders what they have in common?

I have been critical of Jimmy Carter’s mouthpiece, Zbigniew Brzezinski, for a long time. I always considered him a UN-loving quisling; a committed totalitarian if not an outright communist. My opinion did not mean much to my opposites on previous message boards, but criticism coming from long-time Brzezinski-admirer, Professor Pau Kangor, is a different matter. Kangor says this:

Literal "lists" of greedy "speculators" is exactly what Lenin did. A "worldwide" "movement" to assemble and publish such lists? "Bankers" specifically identified? This is Leninism 101, pure and simple.

If anyone on the planet should know this, it's Zbigniew Brzezinski.

Brzezinski is often a guest of the people he now attacks. To be fair, I can’t be sure if Brzezinski wants to list all greedy speculators? It’s hard to believe that he wants to list members of the Bilderberg Group or their guests. It’s just as difficult to believe a totalitarian would attack government and the United Nations.

NOTE: Younger Americans probably never heard of Zbigniew Brzezinski. Kangor’s article is in part two for those who know the name, and the undeserved respect Brzezinski always got on the talkies. I even recall Nobel Peace Prize winner Henry Kissinger fawning all over Brzezinski when they appeared together on the News Hour. I had to laugh watching two European-born geniuses talking like they knew what the hell they were talking about.

This final excerpt says much about the Bilderberg Group:

The June 2011 meeting in Switzerland opened without Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the embattled IMF chief. Christine Lagarde, the former French Finance Minister with alleged ties to a Chicago law firm, immediately replaced him at the helm of the IMF and at the meeting.

The scourge of hotel maids, Dominique Straus-Kahn, is out. The IMF stays in.

Here’s nice bit of Bilderberg history and current doings:

Bilderberg Group in Bucharest and the EU
Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh Saturday, October 22, 2011

On October 14, Viscount Etienne Davignon, the president of the Bilderberg group gave a speech in Bucharest at the conference entitled, “European Union after the Sovereign Debt Crisis.” A Belgian businessperson, Davignon was born in Budapest in 1934.

Former vice president of the European Commission and president of International Agency for Energy, Davignon seldom gives interviews, particularly since he became president of the Bilderbergs in 2000.

Founded officially in 1954, the secretive group met for the first time at the Bilderberg Hotel in Oosterbeek. The owner of the hotel was Price Bernhard of Holland, the father of Queen Beatrix. According to Cristina Martin Jimenez, who studied the group, Joseph H. Retinger, a Jewish businessperson born in Poland, asked Prince Bernhard to invite NATO leaders to an open debate on international issues. All NATO member states sent representatives. In addition, John D. Rockefeller, CIA director Walter Bedell Smith, and Paul Rijkens, president of the multinational corporation Unilever, completed the 66 participants. The first president of the Bilderberg group was Prince Bernhard who kept the post until 1976. He was forced to resign that year because of a personal financial scandal.

Joseph H. Retinger was instrumental in founding the European Coal and Steel Community as a first step towards European unification. The Marshall Plan helped strengthen the economic and political role of the Bilderbergs. In 2009, Etienne Davignon declared that the Bilderbergs had an important role in the European reconstruction and the creation of the European currency.

In an interview given to BBC six years ago, the Viscount emphasized the fact that they were not a global ruling class, but an influential group of people interested in speaking to other influential individuals. He was referring to the annual meeting of the group. He does not consider the Bilderbergs a secret group but a “private” one.

According to Spanish writer Cristina Martin Jimenez, three concentric circles help explain the power structure in the group. She studied the Bilderbergs and presented her findings in the book, “The Bilderbergs, Masters of the World.”

The first circle, the Committee of the Wise is composed of four members. John D. Rockefeller is the only one known publicly; he is 96 years old.

As President, Etienne Davignon is part of the Director Committee, the intermediate circle composed of secretaries and treasuries of members from both sides of the Atlantic, 15 permanent American members and 24 European members. They assemble the list of guests to the annual meetings. Each member invites two guests of international reputation: a politician and a businessman/professor/journalist. The final list has over 100 names each year.

Henry Kissinger, Etienne Davignon, Zbigniew Brzezinsky, George Soros, Bill Gates, and Alan Greenspan are often present at annual meetings. The June 2011 meeting in Switzerland opened without Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the embattled IMF chief. Christine Lagarde, the former French Finance Minister with alleged ties to a Chicago law firm, immediately replaced him at the helm of the IMF and at the meeting.

The last circle is composed of permanent guests and occasional ones. The occasional guests are called “innocents” because, according to Cristina, they are used by “initiates” to reach goals set by the permanent members.

The Bucharest Conference, organized by the National Bank of Romania and Governor Mugur Isarescu, numbered approximately 100 attendees, members of the diplomatic core, businesspersons, specialists in global financial strategy, and Richard Haas, president of the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations.

Davignon did not attend the conference to calm the nervous officials and investors. He advised them to get used to the new reality as a new norm of the status quo. He urged Europeans to avoid the mistakes of the past born by faulty fiscal policies that were not sanctioned and penalized by European forums. Davignon suggested that Europe should apply penalties to those countries that have a hazardous fiscal policy, echoing Germany’s recent request.

Richard Haas, the president of the Council on Foreign Relations, declared that states must get used to the “new normal,” referring to a very low and slow economic growth. He suggested that fiscal policies must be redefined and retirement and educational systems must be revised.

Richard Haas was of the opinion that politics reacted slower to various economies and markets. This should come as no surprise, he said, considering the global economic crisis, the social inequities plaguing countries to the point of crisis, and the persistently high unemployment rates.

The European Union crisis seemed to deepen as the fiscal interdependence threatened the solvency of countries that ran more conservative fiscal policies and social programs when compared to countries like Greece which had adopted very lavish social programs and unwise fiscal policies.

Jean-Claude Trichet, the president of the European Committee for Systemic Risk, warned that it was necessary and urgent to stabilize the EU financial crisis. He added that a fund for a flexible European bailout without the involvement of the European Central Bank would be helpful.

The capacity to loan money to European governments for the financial stability of their banks should include countries that are not members of the program called the European Facility Capacity for Financial Stability, said Trichet.

EU countries have agreed to 100 billion Euros in bailout, only half of what was requested for solvency. According to experts, private creditors of Greece alone would suffer losses of over 60 percent. Angela Merkel warned that, if the EU disintegrates, dark times would follow.

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/41571

 

PART TWO:

Has Zbigniew Brzezinski Lost It?
By Paul Kengor on 10.21.11 @ 6:08AM
The noted anti-Communist was last heard channeling Roseanne Barr.

I could write at length about what Zbigniew Brzezinski has meant to me. It's a long story, but his work was instrumental in my switch from being a pre-med major at the University of Pittsburgh in the late 1980s to a career studying and writing and teaching about the Cold War and foreign policy. His 1989 book, The Grand Failure, which brilliantly described the crisis level of various communist nations and the order in which they would implode, changed my life.

When I got to Washington as a grad student at American University, I began working at the Center for Strategic & International Studies. Brzezinski was there -- and still is. I wrote him a note explaining what his work had meant to me; it was why I was there. The next day, his assistant responded, telling me how much he was moved by my letter. He sent me not only a signed copy of The Grand Failure but inscribed copies of all his books. They remain on my shelf today as treasured possessions.

In my classes today at Grove City College, as any student will attest, I quote Brzezinski all the time. I defend him as a rare positive in a horrendous Jimmy Carter presidency. When we put Jimmy Carter on the cover of my latest book -- smooching Leonid Brezhnev above the giant letters, DUPES -- I made sure that I retained my respect for Brzezinski inside.

Zbigniew Brzezinski was superb on the Soviets and communism generally. He belonged in the Reagan administration, not the Carter administration. In fact, in the 1980s, behind the scenes, he was helping the Reagan folks and John Paul II to take down the Soviets in Poland.

Later, in the 2000s, Brzezinski's statements on President George W. Bush were not nearly as persuasive. To the contrary, they were way over the top, vitriolic, and lacking the persuasive logic that had pervaded his Cold War writings. Still, we could reasonably disagree on whether the Bush push to spread the "March of Freedom" to the Middle East was viable and realistic. In my classes, I continued to share Brzezinski's Cold War material -- including, notably, his superb seven common characteristics of totalitarian regimes.

All of that is background to my strong appraisal of what Brzezinski said in the last few days. I heard it while serving dinner to the kids. It turned my stomach. It made me think that Brzezinski has either lost it or is being influenced (way too easily) by the poisonous class-warfare of Barack Obama and his mindless followers, who apparently dominate Brzezinski's circles in Washington. Brzezinski stated:

You know, I've been looking at these worldwide riots that are developing. They're all a reflection of deep passion, deep resentment and fear. Now the question is "Where will this go? How can this be sort of concretized?" And one thought that has occurred to me -- and let me sort of mention it here casually without having really thought it through systematically -- I think it would be increasingly helpful if there was a movement to publish, worldwide, lists of who make, largely through speculation, enormous amounts of money almost instantly, and basically hide the fact from their social context. You know, how many Americans are really fully aware of how many other good people, let's say like Warren Buffett and others, who really donate a lot of their earnings to charities, to philanthropy? But how many more are there in the hedge funds, in the banks, in a variety of other places, who, on the basis of speculation, literally make millions of dollars that would take a century or two for the average person ever to make? I'd like to see those lists. And they shouldn't be that difficult to produce.

I find these comments from Brzezinski more disturbing, more upsetting, than even the unhinged remarks from Roseanne Barr calling for wealthy bankers to be forcibly re-educated and literally guillotined. After all, Roseanne is clearly a crackpot, unable to separate her comedy from commentary -- in this case, dark comedy; Brzezinski, on the other hand, has been one of America's foremost foreign-policy minds for parts of five decades.

What's so shocking about Brzezinski's statements is their classist and even Marxist-Leninist nature. They are, to put it bluntly, communist in their thinking.

Does Zbigniew Brzezinski not realize that? His suggestion -- especially its global application -- is precisely what communists did in places like his native Poland and elsewhere in the Soviet bloc and around the world. This is what Lenin's and Stalin's Comintern wanted in order to facilitate the process of the worldwide class revolution.

Literal "lists" of greedy "speculators" is exactly what Lenin did. A "worldwide" "movement" to assemble and publish such lists? "Bankers" specifically identified? This is Leninism 101, pure and simple.

If anyone on the planet should know this, it's Zbigniew Brzezinski.

I understand that such poisonous class rhetoric flows naturally from the lips of Barack Obama, but it should be inherently incapable of emanating from the lips of Zbigniew Brzezinski. That a thoughtful, unwavering, lifetime anti-communist like Brzezinski could fall prey to such Marxist claptrap shows the incredible, pervasive power of anyone -- and I mean anyone -- to be manipulated by Obama's class-warfare agitprop. And it's clearly an Obama influence, right down to upholding Warren Buffet as American Angel.

Sure, I expect the Wall Street "Occupiers" to be suckered by such language. The majority of them are the liberal/progressive dupes that hard-line communist ringleaders have always easily manipulated. Nothing new there -- as Brzezinski would understand. But to see Zbigniew Brzezinski succumb to class-based demagoguery leaves one in despair for this country.

Such is the noxious, toxic result of a White House and entire political party that adopts Deadly Sin -- i.e., envy (class envy) -- as a political philosophy and strategy. What a shame.

I will hold out hope for one thing: Brzezinski did say that he was offering his international policy prescription "casually," that is, "without having really thought it through systematically."

Let's hope he thinks it through a bit more systematically; that he clarifies and retracts. A worldwide list of greedy bankers and speculators and hoarders -- what Lenin called capitalist "reptiles" and "harmful insects" -- is not a casual thought. It's a scary thought.

Say it ain't so, Zbig. Say it ain't so.

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/10/21/has-zbigniew-brzezinski-lost-i