Author Topic: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized  (Read 35065 times)

nofakenews

  • Guest
On March 20, 1969, Dr. Richard Day, the National Medical Director of the Rockefeller-sponsored "Planned Parenthood" told a meeting  that American industry will be sabotaged and shown to be uncompetitive.

In view of the recent bankruptcy of General Motors, his remarks are especially pertinent.

"The stated plan was that different parts of the world would be assigned different roles of industry and commerce in a unified global system. The continued preeminence of the United States and the relative independence and self-sufficiency of the United States would have to be changed... in order to create a new structure, you first have to tear down the old, and American industry was one example of that."

"Each part of the world will have a specialty and thus become inter-dependent, he said. The US will remain a center for agriculture, high tech, communications, and education but heavy industry would be "transported out." 

These remarks to the Pittsburgh Pediatric Society were reported by Dr. Lawrence Dunegan, a Pittsburgh pediatrician who died in Jan. 2004. The speech described "A New World System" already in place which would permanently transform the world.

Dr. Day wanted the 80 or so physicians present to be prepared. The transcript of Dunegan's recollections has been posted here and should be read in full. However, I'll provide a summary here.

OMINOUS OMISSIONS

Much of what Day promised in 1969 is looking like a rear-view mirror today. But ominous events have yet to transpire. They do want to implant a chip in us so they can find and identify us, as well as monitor and control our purchases.

They are weaning us off national allegiance and will resort to terrorism to win our assent to their global police state. They may use "one or two nuclear bombs to convince people we mean business," Day said.

He refrained from mentioning who "we" are but said the names are recognizable. Given that he worked for the Rockefellers, I assume he meant the Rockefellers and their bosses, the Rothschilds.

This adds weight to the widely-held view that the central bankers are responsible for most terrorism, using MI-6, Mossad and the CIA. Dr. Day also said that "war is obsolete" given the danger of nuclear exchange so terrorism would be used instead. This was 1969.

He said that there are always two reasons for anything the Rockefellers do: the pretext which makes it palatable to the gullible public and the real reason. Thus, as I argued in my book "Cruel Hoax" (2007), we are being turned into homosexuals in the name of "women's and gay rights." Gender-neutered and promiscuous, fewer people are able to bond permanently with a member of the opposite sex for the purpose of procreation.

Dr. Day said sex will be separated from marriage and reproduction ( i.e. "sexual liberation") to break up the family and reduce population. Abortion, divorce and homosexuality will be made socially acceptable.

 "Homosexuals will be given permission to act out. Everyone including the elderly will be encouraged to have sex. It will be brought out into the open. Anything goes." [The "Stonewall Riots" which unleashed the "gay rights" movement, took place three months later.] The ultimate goal is to have sex without reproduction. Reproduction without sex will occur in laboratories. Family size will be limited as in China.

It will be made more difficult for families to stay together. More women will work outside the home and more people will remain single. Sports instead of dolls will be promoted to girls so they will seek achievement instead of family. Girls will be taught they are the same as boys.

In general, international sports like soccer and hockey will be pushed so Americans will see themselves as "world citizens." American sports like baseball and football will not be similarly encouraged.

BRUTALIZATION

Pornography, violence and obscenity on TV and in movies will be increased. People will be desensitized to violence and porn and made to feel life is short, precarious and brutish. Music will "get worse" and will be used for indoctrination. 

There will be unemployment and mass migration in order to uproot long established (conservative) communities. Social change will be introduced in port cities and work its way to the heartland. (Thus, the east and west coast are liberal.)

He said a cure to cancer exists in the Rockefeller Institute but is kept secret for purposes of  depopulation. He said there will be an increase in infectious man-made diseases.

Dr. Day, who worked in weather modification during the war, said weather can be used to wage war or create drought and famine. The food supply will be monitored so no one can get enough food to "support a fugitive from the New System." Growing your own food will be outlawed under the pretext of it being unsafe. 

He said people are controlled by means of the information they are given. Thus, information will be selective. Not everyone will be allowed to own books. "Certain books will disappear from libraries." Literary classics will be subtly altered. People will spend longer in school but not learn anything. There will be restrictions on travel; and private home ownership will disappear. 

He said people who don't want to go along will be "disposed of humanely." He said there will be no martyrs--"people will just disappear."

CONCLUSION

Our political and cultural "leaders" are accomplices in a plot to re-engineer humanity to serve the Judeo-Masonic central banking cartel. Wars, terrorism, depressions, political and social change, entertainment and fads are all contrived to gradually bring about an Orwellian police state.   

Dr. Day says politicians are manipulated "without their even knowing it." Their failure to protect us from this Satanic conspiracy is a betrayal of the first order. We have to alert the sincere ones and reach soldiers and police too. Civilization hangs in the balance. We are in real danger and should organize in small independent units.   

People are hurting now and are more receptive to this information. This "economic downturn" is deliberate and part of the police state agenda. We have to educate people who think these events are random. The Rockefellers and their traitorous lackeys won't bring this off if the intelligentsia and masses are aware of the truth. 

Progressives and Leftists need to learn that "progress" and "change" really refer to totalitarian world government. This is the change they "believe in." Dr. Day said in 1969, "people will have to get used to constant change."  I used to be a Liberal-Leftist myself. If I can see the real meaning of "changing the world," others can too.

We also have to take practical steps to defend ourselves, our families and our freedom.

Our society and culture are a fraud based on one central fraud, the monopoly over government credit in the hands of Cabalist private bankers. They are using this power to extend their monopoly over every aspect of our lives by manipulating world events and social behavior. The only way to save civilization from failure is to nationalize the Central Banks. 

http://www.savethemales.ca/confirmedrockefeller_plan_to_g.html

Just a little Rockefeller history and how what they planned is here.  ::)

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,308
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #1 on: June 23, 2009, 10:46:31 pm »
He said that there are always two reasons for anything the Rockefellers do: the pretext which makes it palatable to the gullible public and the real reason. Thus, as I argued in my book "Cruel Hoax" (2007), we are being turned into homosexuals in the name of "women's and gay rights." Gender-neutered and promiscuous, fewer people are able to bond permanently with a member of the opposite sex for the purpose of procreation.

Dr. Day said sex will be separated from marriage and reproduction ( i.e. "sexual liberation") to break up the family and reduce population. Abortion, divorce and homosexuality will be made socially acceptable.

Also to add too - it's no coincidence that we have WOLF "evangelists" like Rick Warren and Billy Graham(both of whom are labeled "America's pastors) condoning, and even at times subtlely promoting homosexuality. No wonder why more churches are starting to be quiet on this issue, some like the Episcopalian Church are welcoming it.

Quote

It will be made more difficult for families to stay together. More women will work outside the home and more people will remain single. Sports instead of dolls will be promoted to girls so they will seek achievement instead of family. Girls will be taught they are the same as boys.

Oh yeah - I've noticed this quite a bit over the last decade blowing into full fruition. This Title IX is utter BS. Don't get me wrong, I'm thrilled to see girls excel in team sports(after all, team sports DO make individuals have better character), but this whole "equality" issue where girls can participate in boys team sports like football and wrestling is REALLY getting very divisive. Now guess what...the boys are so angry, that out of revenge, they're joining girls team sports like volleyball and lacrosse(IMHO - I think boys who play on girls team sports look more rediculous than vice-versa).

Anyhow - yet another "divide and conquer" we're seeing here. BTW - I'm from Texas, where somehow there's an exception to this Title IX rule in high schools.(although they do apply to junior highs)

Quote
In general, international sports like soccer and hockey will be pushed so Americans will see themselves as "world citizens." American sports like baseball and football will not be similarly encouraged.

Good point - I was never a fan of either sport myself, but nonetheless, they've grown in quite a bit of popularity among the mainstream sports fans. I don't know why, but obviously, the NWO plan here worked.

Quote
BRUTALIZATION

Pornography, violence and obscenity on TV and in movies will be increased. People will be desensitized to violence and porn and made to feel life is short, precarious and brutish. Music will "get worse" and will be used for indoctrination.

I wonder if this is yet another Mind Control tool on people - anything in mass media. Take the movie "Natural Born Killers"(reportedly, Oliver Stone was on acid the entire time he made it). There have been numerous copycat crimes. I don't know if these people were really inspired by this movie, but at the same time, having seen it myself, it had Mind Control written all over it.

As for being desensitized to violence? I'll admit - when I INITIALLY saw the 9/11 attacks on that fateful day on tv before going to school, I did NOT think much of it(ditto my fellow classmates AND morning professors). A couple of days later, I told my friend this, and he responded, "I'll bet you were disensitized". He hit it on the nail. No - it wasn't to the point where I wanted to kill people, but it was as if my reaction to brutal crimes like this was, "Eh...". No wonder too why even when a mass amount of people witness a killing, they do NOTHING - it's b/c they've been PROGRAMMED like this.

Quote
He said a cure to cancer exists in the Rockefeller Institute but is kept secret for purposes of  depopulation. He said there will be an increase in infectious man-made diseases.

I figured - I mean how often do you hear news reports over how scientists were researching cures for ailments et al, and years later, they're STILL at square 1. I mean come on...people who went to med school aren't THIS stupid and lazy, right?

Quote
He said people are controlled by means of the information they are given. Thus, information will be selective. Not everyone will be allowed to own books. "Certain books will disappear from libraries." Literary classics will be subtly altered. People will spend longer in school but not learn anything. There will be restrictions on travel; and private home ownership will disappear.

I've noticed that in my libraries in recent years as well as my Barnes & Noble et al - when you go to their religious sections, VERY few fundamental biblical doctrine ones are there. Charles Stanley is the only one I can think of, however - most are filled with Billy Graham, WOF, John Hagee, Robert Schuller, Christian Science, Roman Catholicism, Rick Warren, and other universal garbage. 

Quote
CONCLUSION

Our political and cultural "leaders" are accomplices in a plot to re-engineer humanity to serve the Judeo-Masonic central banking cartel. Wars, terrorism, depressions, political and social change, entertainment and fads are all contrived to gradually bring about an Orwellian police state.

I can honestly say that New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin is part of this group. I've explained it in other threads - but to make a long story short, he was the head of a very popular media company(Cox) who waltzed in out of nowhere. For anyone who knows New Orleans politics, they're largely runned by prominent political families. Nagin was nowhere near.   

Quote
Our society and culture are a fraud based on one central fraud, the monopoly over government credit in the hands of Cabalist private bankers. They are using this power to extend their monopoly over every aspect of our lives by manipulating world events and social behavior. The only way to save civilization from failure is to nationalize the Central Banks.

Yep - one BIG cover-up. I really wished Oliver Stone would have said ANYTHING about the bankers in his "JFK" film(instead, he largely made the CIA/Military Industrial Complex the conspirators, sprinkled in with LBJ and a few elements of the mafia). 


Offline Monkeypox

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,849
  • He Loved Big Brother
    • Monkeypox
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #2 on: June 23, 2009, 10:53:47 pm »
 :o Wow!  That was the whole blueprint laid out - in 1969.

I guess all of us here are going to be  "disposed of humanely."

War Is Peace - Freedom Is Slavery - Ignorance Is Strength


"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."

—Thomas Jefferson

JBS

  • Guest
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #3 on: June 23, 2009, 11:18:12 pm »
Mainly because the USA produced everything it needed and was too self sufficient, now it's what, corruption and banks?

Offline Monkeypox

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,849
  • He Loved Big Brother
    • Monkeypox
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #4 on: June 23, 2009, 11:19:14 pm »
Mainly because the USA produced everything it needed and was too self sufficient, now it's what, corruption and banks?

A strong, free, self-sufficient USA was the only thing that could stand in the way of the NWO.  That's why they had to destroy it.
War Is Peace - Freedom Is Slavery - Ignorance Is Strength


"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."

—Thomas Jefferson

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,308
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #5 on: June 23, 2009, 11:20:29 pm »
Mainly because the USA produced everything it needed and was too self sufficient, now it's what, corruption and banks?

Yeah - too bad I was brainwashed to think the former when I was in college.

Offline heavyhebrew

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,988
  • Laughter is the best medicine.
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #6 on: June 23, 2009, 11:21:53 pm »
:o Wow!  That was the whole blueprint laid out - in 1969.

I guess all of us here are going to be  "disposed of humanely."



We will see who disposes who.
We work jobs we hate to pay for stuff we don't need to impress people we don't like. Am I the crazy one here?

Offline TheCaliKid

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,574
  • What can we do about it, really?
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #7 on: June 23, 2009, 11:37:20 pm »
A strong, free, self-sufficient USA was the only thing that could stand in the way of the NWO.  That's why they had to destroy it.

100% correct.
Better to beg for forgiveness, than to ask for permission

Offline PainInDaBrain

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,070

Offline vCFy7W3SFb

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,092
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #9 on: June 24, 2009, 12:16:39 am »
the thing is i don't see how 'being gay' factor is having any effect on the family

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,308
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #10 on: June 24, 2009, 12:22:16 am »
the thing is i don't see how 'being gay' factor is having any effect on the family

The fact that academia and even some church institutions nowdays are brainwashing their people with how "acceptable" this homosexuality is says ALOT.

Also - it's no coincidence as well that "America's pastors", albeit false preachers Rick Warren and Billy Graham have used their influence to go around and condone/promote it.

Offline heavyhebrew

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,988
  • Laughter is the best medicine.
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #11 on: June 24, 2009, 12:23:39 am »
The fact that academia and even some church institutions nowdays are brainwashing their people with how "acceptable" this homosexuality is says ALOT.

Also - it's no coincidence as well that "America's pastors", albeit false preachers Rick Warren and Billy Graham have used their influence to go around and condone/promote it.

Still doesn't explain how being gay effects families.
We work jobs we hate to pay for stuff we don't need to impress people we don't like. Am I the crazy one here?

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,308
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #12 on: June 24, 2009, 12:24:49 am »
Still doesn't explain how being gay effects families.

How can gay couples "reproduce"? That's where the depopulation theory comes into play. Also - how will kids feel growing up having 2 dads or 2 moms?

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #13 on: June 24, 2009, 12:32:50 am »
Quote
In general, international sports like soccer and hockey will be pushed so Americans will see themselves as "world citizens." American sports like baseball and football will not be similarly encouraged.

I don't think That hasn't happened yet. America is not into a "world" sport except maybe Golf.

Since 1970 we've been psychologically pounded over and over for 39 years that abortion is OK and being gay is OK and what the social morality of the U.S. is and MUST be. No propaganda there, no soviet RE-EDUCATION camp here, oh no...

Offline Monkeypox

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,849
  • He Loved Big Brother
    • Monkeypox
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #14 on: June 24, 2009, 12:40:22 am »
I don't think That hasn't happened yet. America is not into a "world" sport except maybe Golf.

Since 1970 we've been psychologically pounded over and over for 39 years that abortion is OK and being gay is OK and what the social morality of the U.S. is and MUST be. No propaganda there, no soviet RE-EDUCATION camp here, oh no...


They even tried to teach us that THIS was OK:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSqV3rWM4iQ
War Is Peace - Freedom Is Slavery - Ignorance Is Strength


"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."

—Thomas Jefferson

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,308
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #15 on: June 24, 2009, 12:40:48 am »
Forget about this homosexual issue for a minute, let's just look at the BIG PICTURE...

In other previous writings by Dr. Makow, he talked about how men are the aggressive, power hungry, et al people, while the women are the more compassionate, loving, et al people.

For the most part, he talked about how the Rockefellers and the bankers started to feel threatened as time went on that they will be exposed, so they came up with a plan to *soften up* the men through means like creating this women's lib movement, which in turn gave birth to abortion(the "depopulation" aspect), homosexuality(the *softening up* of especially men), and also give more power to women(i.e. while women had more "equal rights" and power, they STILL kept their compassionate and loving traits, according to Makow).

I know this sounds complicated, and I know I'm going to get flamed for what I said above, but this Makow theory seems to have alot of meat to it(For the record, he got FIRED from his university for comparing men vs. women traits like this, as well as, I think, calling out the women's lib movement).

The BS in our schools that is Title IX has also done everything possible to soften up our males from the very young - like I was saying, I'm thrilled to see these academia institutions encouraging girls to play sports. However - Title IX going as far as saying that girls have every right to play on BOYS teams like wrestling is going WAY too far. I remember John Stossel did a 20/20 special on this 10 years ago, and he thought it was rediculous. I myself is from Texas, so I'm fortunate not to witness all this BS(as somehow TX has been able to make an exception).

Anyhow - it seems like the more the men can be *softened up* as a whole, the more the bankers can continue to do their criminal activities under the tables.

Offline heavyhebrew

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,988
  • Laughter is the best medicine.
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #16 on: June 24, 2009, 12:59:36 am »
How can gay couples "reproduce"? That's where the depopulation theory comes into play. Also - how will kids feel growing up having 2 dads or 2 moms?

About the same as kids who grow up with a mom and a dad. As long as they have parents who love them, nurture them and teach them self discipline then they will be just like every other kid from a well adjusted family. Don't project your uncomfortableness with homosexuality onto what other people experience.

One of my neighbors from my old graduate school days were a lesbian couple. They had a teen age boy they were raising. The kid did normal kid stuff and behaved like a normal kid. Being curious, I asked him once if having two moms was strange. He said no but that it was only uncomfortable when someone was judging one of his moms based on their sexuality. Oh and one of the lesbians was his actual birth mom. Yes, some gay people CAN reproduce. Just like normal, straight people can.

Oh and they can adopt too.




And that kid, totally straight. At least the browser history on our guest pc would suggest after the kid would house sit for us while we were on vacation.  ;D
Also taught my huskie how to roll over. Still wondering how he did that.
We work jobs we hate to pay for stuff we don't need to impress people we don't like. Am I the crazy one here?

Offline America2

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,308
  • Romans 10:9-10 King James Version
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #17 on: June 24, 2009, 01:04:16 am »
About the same as kids who grow up with a mom and a dad. As long as they have parents who love them, nurture them and teach them self discipline then they will be just like every other kid from a well adjusted family. Don't project your uncomfortableness with homosexuality onto what other people experience.

One of my neighbors from my old graduate school days were a lesbian couple. They had a teen age boy they were raising. The kid did normal kid stuff and behaved like a normal kid. Being curious, I asked him once if having two moms was strange. He said no but that it was only uncomfortable when someone was judging one of his moms based on their sexuality. Oh and one of the lesbians was his actual birth mom. Yes, some gay people CAN reproduce. Just like normal, straight people can.

Oh and they can adopt too.




And that kid, totally straight. At least the browser history on our guest pc would suggest after the kid would house sit for us while we were on vacation.  ;D
Also taught my huskie how to roll over. Still wondering how he did that.

For the most part, I'm very uncomfortable over the fact that the Rockefellers were behind all this. Prior to knowing anything about this, I never had any problems with G&L's.

And for that matter too - this isn't the only Rockefeller issue that has bothered me...vaccine shots, "creating" mental illnesses, et al have bothered me alot more. Heck - prior to knowing this, I thought mental illnesses were hereditary.

Offline vCFy7W3SFb

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,092
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #18 on: June 24, 2009, 01:06:06 am »
How can gay couples "reproduce"? That's where the depopulation theory comes into play. Also - how will kids feel growing up having 2 dads or 2 moms?

Sperm banks seem to work well, if the elite hate populations so much they should just ban sperm banks

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #19 on: June 24, 2009, 01:45:16 am »
Quote
For the most part, I'm very uncomfortable over the fact that the Rockefellers were behind all this. Prior to knowing anything about this, I never had any problems with G&L's

The point to get out of this , prior to the "liberation movements of the 60's and 70's morality was based from the church. Now that "Moral Authority" is based where? with the state? with yourself? Who defines that? Who defined you?

What the rockefeller's et al are saying is that you are all the same, their slaves, to their system, their rules.

Offline vCFy7W3SFb

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,092
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #20 on: June 24, 2009, 01:47:36 am »
morals don't come from 'a church' .

Offline Monkeypox

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16,849
  • He Loved Big Brother
    • Monkeypox
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #21 on: June 24, 2009, 01:48:42 am »
morals don't come from 'a church' .

Especially a church that tortured people and sheltered pedophiles.
War Is Peace - Freedom Is Slavery - Ignorance Is Strength


"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."

—Thomas Jefferson

Offline JonTheSavage

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,657
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #22 on: June 24, 2009, 10:07:47 am »
Rockef**ker should, instead, start an org called Adopt-a-fella, instead of Abort-a-fella.

Rockeflacker should have aborted himself.

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #23 on: June 24, 2009, 12:22:24 pm »
Related article by Dennis Cuddy mentions Lawrence Dunegan and Dr. Richard Day

http://www.newswithviews.com/Cuddy/dennis83.htm

DIALECTICS, ROCKEFELLERS, AND POPULATION CONTROL  Part 1

By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
November 27, 2006
NewsWithViews.com


As I have mentioned many times before, the power elite's favorite means of controlling people is the dialectical process. This often involves creating a "threat" to a particular population. For example, the terrorist threat after 9/11 caused Americans to be willing to give up certain of their freedoms which they had been unwilling to give up before 9/11.

I advise people to look at any incident not just in terms of its face value, but also in terms of how it might fit into the power elite's dialectical process. For example, the CIA in 2003 learned from captured Al-Qaeda operatives about their planned "American Hiroshima" to explode 7 nuclear devices in American cities. Paul Williams, author of THE AL-QAEDA CONNECTION, has explained that several of these devices were developed, sent to Mexico, and slipped into the U.S. Why haven't they been used? They would have if one takes this at face value, because Al-Qaeda wouldn't wait for the weapons to degrade or be discovered. They would not have been used, however, if the operation is really controlled by people above these radical Islamic front men !

Do you think this sounds too conspiratorially outlandish? Then ask yourself this---if Osama bin Laden could find 19 terrorists willing to kill themselves for the cause, do you really think that in the last 5 years he couldn't find any others willing to bring the U.S. economy to a halt by simple terrorist acts nationwide against our rail, food, etc., systems without having to kill themselves in the process? Of course, he could find many such people. But they haven't attacked, have they? Ask yourself, "Why haven't they?" Could it be because they are controlled by those above Al-Qaeda?

Another example of the dialectical process used to threaten a particular population can be seen in the leader of Iran recently making threats against Israel. A tendency of most people is to see this as only that---a radical Muslim's anger toward Israel. But if you look at it as part of a dialectical process, it becomes quite different.

Many times before, I have quoted Lincoln Bloomfield's 1961 study for the U.S. State Department as stating that if the Communist dynamic/threat were greatly abated, the West would lose whatever incentive it has for world government. In case you think this is just a theory, remember what happened to Hungary. By October 28, 1956, Hungarian patriots had driven the Soviets away, but the U.S. State Department then sent a cable to Yugoslavian dictator Tito saying "the government of the United States does not look with favor upon governments unfriendly to the Soviet Union on the borders of the Soviet Union." This was a green light for the Soviets to crush the Hungarians, thus leaving the Communist dynamic/threat alive and well.

Now apply this princple to Iran and Israel. If the radical Islamic (Iranian) threat were greatly abated, Israel would have less incentive to become part of a world government. Just as the American population is being manipulated/controlled, so are the Israelis.

You might ask why Isreal doesn't simply bomb Iranian nuclear facilities, but another part of the dialectical process involves "pressure." Israel, like every other nation, must worry about the consequences of any action, and if it bombed Iran, what would be the responses of Muslims, the U.S., Russia, China, etc., not just militarily but also economically in terms of foreign aid, investments, and the world's oil supply?

One of the families connected to the power elite is the Rockefeller family, as former Congressman William Dannemeyer has recounted that David Rockefeller told him that some men are born to rule, but most men are born to be ruled. Therefore, it would be useful to look at a chronology regarding the Rockefellers and population control:

1) August 1904---EVERYBODY'S MAGAZINE publishes Thomas Lawson's "Frenzied Finance," in which he reveals that Standard Oil (Rockefeller) agents are "in every hamlet in the country," and that once someone is within their network, "punishment for disloyalty is sure and terrible, and in no corner of the earth can he escape it."

2) 1910---The Eugenics Record Office is established at Cold Spring Harbor in New York. It is funded by the Carnegie Institute, and will receive funding from the Rockefeller Foundation which will be founded in 1913. The Rockefeller Foundation also will fund Nazi Dr. Ernst Rudin's eugenics research at the Kaiser Wilhelm Brain Research Institute in Berlin. At the Third International Congress on Eugenics held in New York in 1932, Rudin will be unanimously elected president of the International Federation of Eugenic Societies. Rudin and other Nazis will be transported to the Congress on George Herbert Walker's and Prescott Bush's Hamburg-Amerika Lines.

3) 1911---John D. Rockefeller, Jr., forms the Bureau of Social Hygiene, and in 1913 the Rockefeller Foundation will help organize and fund the American Social Hygiene Association "for reconsideration of public attitudes toward prostitution." Via the National Research Council, the Rockefeller Foundation's Medical Division for many years will fund the horrible sex research of Alfred Kinsey. In the early 1900s, Rockefeller introduces Margaret Sanger to the monied elite who help her form the Birth Control League that will become Planned Parenthood. She eugenically advocates limiting "dysgenic stocks" such as Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians and Catholics, as well as "slum dwellers" such as Jewish immigrants.

4) August 1912---Frederick Gates, head of the Rockefeller General Education Board (GEB, founded in 1902), writes in THE WORLD'S WORK that "in our dream we have limitless resources, and the (rural) people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hand."

5) March 27, 1922---THE NEW YORK TIMES reports that New York City Mayor John Hylan yesterday said: "One of my first acts as mayor was to pitch out, bag and baggage, from the educational system of our city the Rockefeller agents" who supported "the kind of education the coolies receive in China."

6) April 11, 1933---Rockefeller Foundation president Max Mason assures trustees that in their program, "the Social Sciences will concern themselves with the rationalization of social control,...the control of human behavior."


7) Fall 1937---Rockefeller Foundation gives a grant to Princeton University to study the influence of radio on different groups, and a grant by the GEB will be made to study how the broadcast of "The War of the Worlds" fit into the Princeton Project.

8) 1937---Robert Havighurst becomes director of the GEB and suggests the "global servant" concept and educating youth for some form of world citizenship.


9) 1939---Rockefeller Foundation organizes a series of secret seminars involving communications scholars with the aim of manipulating Americans to accept involvement in World War II. This is part of a larger effort before 1945 whereby the Rockefeller Foundation underwrites Harold Laswell and Walter Lippmann, who advocated a world in which elites ruled by manipulating mass sentiment.

10) March 27, 1942---Senator Harry Truman refers to the Standard Oil (Rockefeller) dealings with the Nazis as "approaching treason." For part two click below.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Cuddy/dennis84.htm

DIALECTICS, ROCKEFELLERS, AND POPULATION CONTROL  Part 2

By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
December 4, 2006
NewsWithViews.com

Chronology continues:

11) 1945---Rockefeller Foundation medical director Alan Gregg begins search for an institution that will see if wartime psychology could be relevant for civilian society. Regarding this, the foundation will fund the Tavistock Institute of Human Relations.

12) 1950-51---Rockefeller Foundation chairman John Foster Dulles takes John D. Rockefeller III on a tour of Third World countries stressing the need eugenically to control the growth of non-white populations.

13) 1952---John D. Rockefeller III and John Foster Dulles found the Population Council to fund population control measures.

14) 1959---Rockefeller Brothers Fund (for whom a young Henry Kissinger has worked) publishes THE MID-CENTURY CHALLENGE TO U.S. FOREIGN POLICY, in which one reads: "We cannot escape, and indeed should welcome, the task which history has imposed on us. This is the task of helping to shape a new world order in all its dimensions---spiritual, economic, political, social."

15) September 1961---Former Rockefeller Foundation president Dean Rusk (Rhodes scholar) as Secretary of State publishes "Freedom From War" detailing a 3-stage disarmament plan, including "the disbanding of all national armies...other than those required to preserve internal order and for contributions to the United Nations Peace Force."

16) 1968---James Simon Kunen's THE STRAWBERRY STATEMENT is published and includes a report from a meeting of the radical Students for a Democratic Society, which indicated they "were offered ESSO (Rockefeller) money to make a lot of radical commotion so they (left wing of ruling class) can look more in the center as they move more to the left."

17) March 11, 1969---Vice-President of Planned Parenthood-World Population Frederick Jaffe's "Activities Relevant to the Study of Population Policy for the U.S." is printed containing a memo to Population Council president Bernard Berelson. It includes examples of proposed measures to reduce U.S. fertility, such as (a) encourage increased homosexuality, (b) fertility control agents in water supply, (c) encourage women to work, (d) abortion and sterilization on demand, and (e) make contraception truly available and accessible to all.

18) March 20, 1969---Dr. Lawrence Dunegan attends a meeting of Pediatric physicians in Pittsburgh where the speaker is Dr. Richard Day, national medical director of Planned Parenthood (funded by the Rockefeller Foundation) from 1965-68. Dr. Dunegan recounts that Dr. Day said that in the future there will be hard-to-cure diseases created, and that cures for nearly all cancers had been developed but were being hidden at the Rockefeller Institute so that populations would not increase.

19) July 1, 1970---Senate Appropriations hearings are held for the Department of Defense and refer to eminent biologists who believe that within 5 to 10 years it would be possible to produce a synthetic biological agent (infective micro-organism), an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired. Tentative plans to initiate a program to develop such an agent were discussed by the National Research Council (remember it was via the National Research Council that the Rockefeller Foundation funded Alfred Kinsey's research). Hearings in the British House of Commons from April 8 to May 13, 1987 regarding AIDS will include the following: "Every biological scientist who has dispassionately studied the virus and the epidemic knows that the origins of the virus could lie in the developments of modern biology....Some who know perfectly well what has happened are deliberately fudging scientific data to keep the heat off them and fellow members of their molecular biological 'club'."

20) 1970---David Rockefeller becomes chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) until 1985. During this time, Rhodes scholar Richard Gardner will write "The Hard Road to World Order" in the CFR's FOREIGN AFFAIRS (April 1974), in which he will advocate that "an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece-by-piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault."

21) March 7, 1972---The Rockefeller Commission on Population issues a report advocating population control, stating that further growth of the American population could cause economic problems, and that "in any case, no generation needs to know the ultimate goal or the final means, only the direction to which they will be found." In other words, they will control population, but they're not going to tell us how!

22) August 10, 1973---THE NEW YORK TIMES publishes an article by David Rockefeller praising "the social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership," despite the fact that tens of millions of innocent people have been slaughtered by the Communist dictatorship there.

23) 1973---The Trilateral Commission is begun by David Rockefeller and will issue a report stating that "population planning should be an integral part of social and economic development."

24) 1973---George H.W. Bush praises the Population Crisis Committee (PCC) for having played a "major role in assisting government policy makers and in mobilizing United States' response to the world population challenge." The PCC was founded by General William Draper, Jr. (vice-chairman of Planned Parenthood), and is largely funded by the Rockefeller Foundation.

25) 1973---THE SECOND AMERICAN REVOLUTION by John D. Rockefeller III is published and applauds sexual liberation and the "humanistic revolution" while disparaging "old-fashioned nationalism."

26) 1974---CFR chairman David Rockefeller (and other globalists) encourage David R. Young to form in early 1975 Oxford Analytica, which will be the first private-sector, overt, global intelligence network. Among its clients will be the U.N., NATO, the World Bank, Chase Manhattan Bank, Bechtel, ChevronTexaco, Shell Oil, IBM, etc. Among its international advisory board will be Rhodes scholar and former U.S. Senator Bill Bradley as well as James O'Toole who is Mortimer J. Adler Senior Fellow at The Aspen Institute. And among its members will be Rick Warren, mega-church pastor and author of THE PURPOSE DRIVEN LIFE, who is also a member of the CFR.

27) 1974---Toward the end of the year, John D. Rockefeller III addresses delegates to the Population Tribune in Bucharest, Rumania, and declares that "population planning must be a fundamental and integral part of any modern development program, recognized as such by national leadership and supported fully."

28) December 10, 1974---The National Security Council's NSSM 200, "Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests," is marked "classified" and "confidential." It is proposed by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger (formerly with the Rockefeller Brothers Fund) and will be given final approval by National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft. The document states that "if future numbers are to be kept within reasonable bounds, it is urgent that measures to reduce fertility be started and made effective in the 1970s and 1980s....(Financial) assistance will be given to other countries, considering such factors as population growth....Food and agricultural assistance is vital for any population sensitive development strategy....Allocation of scarce resources should take account of what steps a country is taking in population control....There is an alternative view that mandatory programs may be needed...."

29) 1975---Rockefeller Foundation president John Knowles in the annual report states: "The web of interdependence is tightening. We are one world and there will be one future---for better or for worse---for us all. Central to a new ethic of making less more is controlled economic growth which conserves scarce resources, provides equitable distribution of income and wealth....It is also necessary to control fertility rates at the replacement level and to achieve zero population growth as rapidly as possible."

30) November 1977---The Soviet NEW TIMES reports that David Rockefeller just sent a message to Kremlin leaders saying: "My congratulations on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the October Revolution." This is despite the fact that the Soviets have killed tens of millions of innocent people.


31) December 1980---Archbishop Peter Proeku Dery of Ghana reveals that "the World Bank denied loans to Ghana until my country agreed to institute a nationwide contraception and family planning policy. There was also pressure to legalize abortion, although the Church and the people have so far been able to prevent this. For how long, I don't know. The World Bank's attitude shows a total disregard for the beliefs of the people of the Third World." Some years later, Kofi Annan of Ghana will receive the approval of the power elite to become U.N. Secretary-General, and he will do nothing to stop the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Rwandans.


32) April 19, 1985---Jim Grob of "The Rockefeller Project" writes a memo on Seattle Public Schools stationery, and it cautions that "the term 'global education' is an extreme, political hot potato at this time" with "right-wing Christian groups" opposing its use, and that instead of using the term "global education,' district personnel should note that a "temporarily safe term is---multicultural/international curriculum development."


Order Dennis Cuddy's new book "Cover-Up: Government Spin or Truth?"
http://www.newswithviews.com/HNB/Hot_New_Books10.htm

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #24 on: June 24, 2009, 12:44:11 pm »
Related article by Dennis Cuddy mentions Lawrence Dunegan and Dr. Richard Day

http://www.newswithviews.com/Cuddy/dennis83.htm

DIALECTICS, ROCKEFELLERS, AND POPULATION CONTROL  Part 1

By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D.
November 27, 2006
NewsWithViews.com


As I have mentioned many times before, the power elite's favorite means of controlling people is the dialectical process. This often involves creating a "threat" to a particular population. For example, the terrorist threat after 9/11 caused Americans to be willing to give up certain of their freedoms which they had been unwilling to give up before 9/11.



^^^^ This is a must read article, thanks for posting it.

I will be adding it to other threads as approprate.

All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Offline jofortruth

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12,781
    • The Great Deception
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #25 on: June 24, 2009, 12:56:31 pm »
Check out this Army War College document dated 1992 entitled "World 2010 A New Order of Nations"
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showtopic=6765&st=0


I found this at a used bookstore. It's 97 pages.
Don't believe me. Look it up yourself!

The Great Deception - Forum/Library - My Research
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showforum=110

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #26 on: June 24, 2009, 01:18:53 pm »
Quote
http://www.newswithviews.com/Cuddy/dennis83.htm
DIALECTICS, ROCKEFELLERS, AND POPULATION CONTROL  Part 1
By Dennis L. Cuddy, Ph.D. November 27, 2006 NewsWithViews.com

9) 1939---Rockefeller Foundation organizes a series of secret seminars involving communications scholars with the aim of manipulating Americans to accept involvement in World War II. This is part of a larger effort before 1945 whereby the Rockefeller Foundation underwrites Harold Laswell and Walter Lippmann, who advocated a world in which elites ruled by manipulating mass sentiment.

Just to back this up and something not in your history books:

British Security Coordination Spy Ring in the U.S. prior to Pearl Harbor

British Security Coordination Spy Ring in the U.S. prior to Pearl Harbor

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2006/aug/19/military.secondworldwar

The secret persuaders

It was 1940, the Nazis were in the ascendant, the Blitz at its deadliest, and Britain's last hope was to bring a reluctant United States into the war. So it was that the largest covert operation in UK history was launched. William Boyd sheds light on a forgotten spy ring
William Boyd
The Guardian, Saturday 19 August 2006


"British Security Coordination". The phrase is bland, almost defiantly ordinary, depicting perhaps some sub-committee of a minor department in a lowly Whitehall ministry. In fact BSC, as it was generally known, represented one of the largest covert operations in British spying history; a covert operation, moreover, that was run not in Occupied France, nor in the Soviet Union during the cold war, but in the US, our putative ally, during 1940 and 1941, before Pearl Harbor and the US's eventual participation in the war in Europe against Nazi Germany.

When Winston Churchill became prime minister in May 1940, he realised immediately - if he had not realised before - that he had to achieve one thing in order to ensure that Britain was not defeated by Hitler's Germany: he had to enlist the US as Britain's ally. With the US alongside Britain, Hitler would be defeated - eventually. Without the US (Russia was neutral at the time), the future looked unbearably bleak. Roosevelt, as president, was predisposed to help - after a fashion and for cash on delivery - but the situation in America was overwhelmingly isolationist. One easily forgets this, in the era of our much-vaunted, so-called "special relationship", but at the nadir of Britain's fortunes, polls in the US still showed that 80% of Americans were against joining the war in Europe. Anglophobia was widespread and the US Congress was violently opposed to any form of intervention.

After the fall of France in June 1940, Britain's position became even weaker - it was assumed that British capitulation was simply a matter of time; why join the side of a doomed loser, ran the argument in the US. Roosevelt's hands were therefore firmly tied. Much as he might have liked to help Britain (and this, I feel, is a moot point: just how enthusiastic was FDR himself?) he dared not risk alienating Congress - and he had a presidential election looming that he did not want to lose. To go to the country on a "Join the war in Europe" ticket would have been electoral suicide. He had to be very pragmatic indeed - and there was no greater pragmatist than FDR.

All the same, Churchill's task, as he himself saw it, was clear: somehow, in some way, the great mass of the population of the US had to be persuaded that it was in their interests to join the war in Europe, that to sit on the sidelines was in some way un-American. And so British Security Coordination came into being.

BSC was set up by a Canadian entrepreneur called William Stephenson, working on behalf of the British Secret Intelligence Services (SIS). An office was opened in the Rockefeller Centre in Manhattan with the discreet compliance of Roosevelt and J Edgar Hoover of the FBI. But nobody on the American side of the fence knew what BSC's full agenda was nor, indeed, what would be the massive scale of its operations.

What eventually occurred as 1940 became 1941 was that BSC became a huge secret agency of nationwide news manipulation and black propaganda. Pro-British and anti-German stories were planted in American newspapers and broadcast on American radio stations, and simultaneously a campaign of harassment and denigration was set in motion against those organisations perceived to be pro-Nazi or virulently isolationist (such as the notoriously anti-British America First Committee - it had more than a million paid-up members).

Stephenson called his methods "political warfare", but the remarkable fact about BSC was that no one had ever tried to achieve such a level of "spin", as we would call it today, on such a vast and pervasive scale in another country. The aim was to change the minds of an entire population: to make the people of America think that joining the war in Europe was a "good thing" and thereby free Roosevelt to act without fear of censure from Congress or at the polls in an election.

BSC's media reach was extensive: it included such eminent American columnists as Walter Winchell and Drew Pearson, and influenced coverage in newspapers such as the Herald Tribune, the New York Post and the Baltimore Sun. BSC effectively ran its own radio station, WRUL, and a press agency, the Overseas News Agency (ONA), feeding stories to the media as they required from foreign datelines to disguise their provenance. WRUL would broadcast a story from ONA and it thus became a US "source" suitable for further dissemination, even though it had arrived there via BSC agents. It would then be legitimately picked up by other radio stations and newspapers, and relayed to listeners and readers as fact. The story would spread exponentially and nobody suspected this was all emanating from three floors of the Rockefeller Centre. BSC took enormous pains to ensure its propaganda was circulated and consumed as bona fide news reporting. To this degree its operations were 100% successful: they were never rumbled.

Nobody really knows how many people ended up working for BSC - as agents or sub-agents or sub-sub-agents - although I have seen the figure mentioned of up to 3,000. Certainly at the height of its operations in late 1941 there were many hundreds of agents and many hundreds of fellow travellers (enough finally to stir the suspicions of Hoover, for one). Three thousand British agents spreading propaganda and mayhem in a staunchly anti-war America. It almost defies belief. Try to imagine a CIA office in Oxford Street with 3,000 US operatives working in a similar way. The idea would be incredible - but it was happening in America in 1940 and 1941, and the organisation grew and grew.

From a novelist's point of view, to discover such a forgotten corner of 20th-century history is a wonderful and unique gift. I had long wanted to write a novel about a spy, a woman spy in fact, but to have her spying in America - rather than in Russia or Germany or Occupied France - seemed an irresistible bonus. The more I investigated BSC's activities, the more intrigued I became. Some of BSC's schemes verged on the absurd; some were highly sophisticated media manipulation.

BSC invented a game called "Vik", described as "a fascinating new pastime for lovers of democracy". Printed booklets described up to 500 ways of harassing and annoying Nazi sympathisers. Players of Vik were encouraged to ring up their targets at all hours of the night and hang up. Dead rats could be put in water tanks, air could be let out of the subject's car tyres, anonymous deliveries could be made to his house and so on. In the summer of 1941, BSC sent a sham Hungarian astrologer to the US called Louis de Wohl. At a press conference De Wohl said he had been studying Hitler's astrological chart and could see nothing but disaster ahead for the German dictator. De Wohl became a minor celebrity and went on tour through the US, issuing similar dire prognostications about Hitler and his allies. De Wohl's wholly bogus predictions were widely published.

However, one of BSC's most successful operations originated in South America and illustrates the clandestine ability it had to influence even the most powerful. The aim was to suggest that Hitler's ambitions extended across the Atlantic. In October 1941, a map was stolen from a German courier's bag in Buenos Aires. The map purported to show a South America divided into five new states - Gaus, each with their own Gauleiter - one of which, Neuspanien, included Panama and "America's lifeline" the Panama Canal. In addition, the map detailed Lufthansa routes from Europe to and across South America, extending into Panama and Mexico. The inference was obvious: watch out, America, Hitler will be at your southern border soon. The map was taken as entirely credible and Roosevelt even cited it in a powerful pro-war, anti-Nazi speech on October 27 1941: "This map makes clear the Nazi design," Roosevelt declaimed, "not only against South America but against the United States as well."

The news of the map caused a tremendous stir: as a piece of anti-Nazi propaganda it could not be bettered. But was the South America map genuine? My own hunch is that it was a British forgery (BSC had a superb document forging facility across the border in Canada). The story of its provenance is just too pat to be wholly believable. Allegedly, only two of these maps were made; one was in Hitler's keeping, the other with the German ambassador in Buenos Aires. So how come a German courier, who was involved in a car crash in Buenos Aires, happened to have a copy on him? Conveniently, this courier was being followed by a British agent who in the confusion of the incident somehow managed to snaffle the map from his bag and it duly made its way to Washington.

The story of the South America map and the other BSC schemes was written up (in an extensive document of some hundreds of pages) after the war for private circulation by three former members of BSC (one of them Roald Dahl, interestingly enough). This secret history was a form of present for William Stephenson and a selected few others; it was available only in typescript and only 10 typescripts ever existed. Churchill had one, Stephenson had one and others were given to a few high officials in the SIS but they were regarded as top secret.

When Stephenson's highly colourful and vividly inaccurate biography was written (A Man Called Intrepid, 1976), the BSC typescript was drawn on by its author, but very selectively - in order to spare American blushes. The story of BSC seemed to be one of those wartime secrets that was never to be wholly revealed, like Bletchley Park and the Enigma machine decryptions. But the Enigma story was eventually made public and has been written about endlessly since the mid-1970s, fostering films, TV plays and novels in the wake of the revelations. But somehow BSC and the role of British agents in the US before Pearl Harbor has remained almost wholly undisclosed - one wonders why.

In 1998 the BSC typescript (one of only two remaining) was eventually published. To say it fell stillborn from the press would be an understatement. Yet here is a book of some 500 pages, written just after the war by former BSC agents, telling the whole story of Britain's US infiltration in great detail, recounting all the dirty tricks and the copious and widespread news manipulation that went on. I think it's fair to say that historians of the British Secret Services know about BSC and its operations, yet in the wider world it still remains virtually unheard of.

The reason is the story of BSC and its operations before Pearl Harbor is deeply embarrassing and remains so to this day. The document is explicit and condescending about American gullibility: "The simple truth is the United States is inhabited by people of many conflicting races, interests and creeds. These people, though fully conscious of their wealth and power in the aggregate, are still unsure of themselves individually, still basically on the defensive." BSC set out to manipulate "these people" and was very successful at so doing - hardly the kind of attitude countries involved in a "special relationship" should display. But that relationship is a Churchillian myth, invented and fostered by him after the war, and has been bought into wholesale by every subsequent British prime minister (with the possible exception of Harold Wilson).

As the secret history of the BSC unequivocally shows, sovereign states act exclusively to serve their own interests. A commentator in the Washington Post who read the BSC history remarked, "Like many intelligence operations, this one involved exquisite moral ambiguity. The British used ruthless methods to achieve their goals; by today's peacetime standards, some of the activities may seem outrageous. Yet they were done in the cause of Britain's war against the Nazis - and by pushing America towards intervention, the British spies helped win the war." Would BSC's activities eventually have encouraged the US to join the war in Europe? It remains one of the great "what ifs" of historical speculation. The tide of US public opinion seemed to be turning towards the end of 1941 - though isolationist sentiments remained very strong - and BSC's propaganda and relentless news manipulation deserved much of the credit for that change but, in the event, matters were taken out of BSC's hands. On the morning of Sunday, December 7 1941 the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor - the "day of infamy" had dawned and the question of American neutrality was gone for ever.

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #27 on: June 24, 2009, 01:39:27 pm »
Check out this Army War College document dated 1992 entitled "World 2010 A New Order of Nations"
http://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showtopic=6765&st=0
I found this at a used bookstore. It's 97 pages.

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/people.cfm?authorID=549

CHARLES W. TAYLOR, a faculty member of the U.S. Army War College, is a strategic futurist with the Strategic Studies Institute and occupies the General Douglas MacArthur Academic chair of Research. His futures research extends over 25 years and includes major contributions in the form of narrative long-range strategic forecasts as well as in methods and designs of forecasts for studies requested by the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations and Plans, Department of the Army. He is known internationally for his strategic forecasts and for his contributions of methods and techniques to the field of forecasting.
He is the author of a number of future studies including The Technical Report to Forecast 90, A Concept of a Future Force, The Relationship of Forecasting to Long-Range Planning, The Pilot Delphi Project (strategic issues to the year 2030), A World 2010: A Decline of Superpower Influence, Alternative World Scenarios for Strategic Planning, Creating Strategic Visions, A World 2010: A New Order of Nations, and others.
Mr. Taylor is the originator of the Panel Consensus Technique, an internationally recognized contribution to participative decisionmaking, problem solving, and forecasting. He is a member of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, World Future Society, Population Reference Bureau, Association of Electronic Defense, Fellow of the Inter-University Seminar on Armed Forces and Society, Military Operations Research Society, and The Planning forum.

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?pubID=245

Alternative World Scenarios for a New Order of Nations
Authored by Dr. Charles W. Taylor 1993

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/download.cfm?q=245

Brief Synopsis
This futures book reflects the global trends and events of the recent past and those of today that are bringing about change to the world's political, economic, social, technological, and military environments. The forecasts found throughout the book are derived from analysis of the open literature and other media, the author's experience as a futurist, and his own futures writings. This book was written as a text and guide for long-range planners, policymakers, and others. It provides a set of plausible scenarios against which users can build policies and decisions while anticipating and judging their consequences before implementation.

Offline Revolt426

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,190
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #28 on: June 24, 2009, 02:26:30 pm »
Of course, de-industrialization is what is causing the current crisis , which Derivative Bubbles were created to substitute for.....



While many would mindlessly worship a monetary reform that would prevent the RE-Industrialization of the nation, as opposed to one that would solve this problem

The very same people are keen on blaming Franklin Roosevelt for "Starting world war II", "Stealing peoples Gold" , and "Socializing the entire country" , while completely ignoring the relevant history that is left out of many books, such as the history mentioned above and the history that has not been re-written
"Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate … It will purge the rottenness out of the system..." - Andrew Mellon, Secretary of Treasury, 1929.

Offline Catalina

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,511
  • Government Censorship, Protecting You From Reality
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #29 on: June 24, 2009, 10:50:02 pm »
It's very sad to see this come to fruition, yet you make a mention to anyone in the dark about the plans of the Rockefellers and they dismiss you as a nut job. Woe unto us all!
Spare no cost for truth's sake, neither depart from it for any gain. -Proverbs 23:23

Bestow not the gifts that God has given you to get worldly riches. -Proverbs 23:4

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #30 on: June 24, 2009, 11:45:09 pm »
Quote
2) 1910---The Eugenics Record Office is established at Cold Spring Harbor in New York. It is funded by the Carnegie Institute, and will receive funding from the Rockefeller Foundation which will be founded in 1913.

A bit of confusion came up on the show today 6/24/09 about Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory which hosted The Eugenics Record Office ... It looks like Watson basically took over the office after he discovered DNA....

Carlyle is never very far from Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory

David M. Rubenstein J.D.   
Co-Founder and Managing Director, The Carlyle Group
Board of Trustees Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Inc.



http://investing.businessweek.com/businessweek/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=4752557
Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Inc.

James D. Watson, Ph.D. served as President of Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory of New York, a genetics and biotechnology research center, from 1994 to 2003. Dr. Watson was a Prime Mover in the establishment of the federal government's human genome project and headed that project for a number of years from its inception.
...
He along with Drs. Francis H.C. Crick and Maurice Wilkins, won the Nobel Prize in medicine in 1962 for determining that the molecular structure of DNA is a double-helix, which made possible the dramatic developments relating to DNA which have followed that discovery
...
 In 2002, Queen Elizabeth declared him an Honorary Knight of the British Empire

OTHER AFFILIATIONS
Harvard University
Pall Corp.
Siemens Medical Solutions Diagnostics
The University of Chicago
SIBIA Neurosciences, Inc.
DNA Sciences
University of Cambridge
Indiana University, Bloomington
Orion Genomics, LLC
Seed Media Group LLC

http://investing.businessweek.com/businessweek/research/stocks/private/person.asp?personId=9130061
Bruce Stillman Ph.D.    
President and Chief Executive Officer, Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Inc.
BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEMBERSHIPS
Member of Medical Advisory Board Howard Hughes Medical Institute

http://www.shunya.net/Text/Blog/eugenics.htm
Eugenics Record Office

James Watson, co-discoverer of the structure of DNA, is in trouble again, this time for a racist remark that has led to wide criticism and his firing from the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (CSHL), where he had worked for 43 years. As a byproduct, this has again ignited old debates on whether some groups and races are inherently inferior than others. The blogosphere seems to be abuzz with passionate arguments -- a particularly good exchange took place here.

Watson, it seems, "has repeatedly supported genetic screening and genetic engineering in public lectures and interviews, arguing that stupidity is a disease and the 'really stupid' bottom 10% of people should be cured". He is on record for saying that darker skinned people have stronger libidos, that beauty could be genetically engineered: "People say it would be terrible if we made all girls pretty. I think it would be great."

Curiously enough, the CSHL also hosted the Eugenics Record Office (ERO) in the early decades on the 20th century (until 1944). The ERO once led the field of eugenics research in the US -- the first country to embark on systematic, forced sterilization programs for the purpose of eugenics. Their targets included "orphans, ne'er-do-wells, tramps, the homeless and paupers", "defective persons" who were a "menace to society", the "feeble minded", including most Russian and Polish immigrants, alcoholics, criminals, prostitutes, nomads, and other Americans "born to be a burden on the rest." While German immigrants were "thrifty, intelligent and honest," Italians had an innate "tendency to personal violence." And so the reproduction of inferior groups had to be controlled.
...
The ERO -- along with the American Breeders Association, the Race Betterment Foundation (founded by Kellogg, the cereal magnate), and the American Eugenics Society -- advocated eugenics laws that were institutionalized in about half of the US states.

Some states sterilized "imbeciles" for much of the 20th century. The U.S. Supreme Court ruled in the 1927 Buck v. Bell case that the state of Virginia could sterilize those it thought unfit. The most significant era of eugenic sterilization was between 1907 and 1963, when over 64,000 individuals were forcibly sterilized under eugenic legislation in the United States. A favorable report on the results of sterilization in California, the state with the most sterilizations by far, was published in book form by the biologist Paul Popenoe and was widely cited by the Nazi government as evidence that wide-reaching sterilization programs were feasible and humane. When Nazi administrators went on trial for war crimes in Nuremberg after World War II, they justified the mass sterilizations (over 450,000 in less than a decade) by citing the United States as their inspiration. [source]

The ERO received a great deal of private funding from railroad and steel magnates. Among the notable leaders of the ERO and the eugenics movement was the father of the telephone, Alexander Graham Bell. He served as the chairman of the board of scientific advisers at the ERO and advocated compulsory sterilization of those he considered "a defective variety of the human race."

http://www.eugenicsarchive.org/eugenics/list3.pl

 An especially appropriate host for this project, the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory was a center of research for the Human Genome Project, and ... served as the Eugenics Record Office during the early part of the last century. The website, first launched in January 2000, underwent a significant upgrade last November, and offers a series of Flash-interactive exhibits and a searchable image archive with more than 2,500 photographs, letters, articles, and scientific reports related to the eugenics movement. (Those who might prefer a lower-bandwidth, mainly HTML version of the site will find a link to the original production at the bottom of the Splash page.)   http://www.cshl.org/

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #31 on: June 25, 2009, 01:12:45 am »
IMF document admits de-industrialization of U.S. and EU...  is occuring
And because it is an IMF document, there conclusion is that Deindustrialization is GOOD!


http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/issues10/index.htm

Deindustrialization– Its Causes and Implications
Robert Rowthorn Ramana Ramaswamy
©1997 International Monetary Fund
September 1997


The following paper draws on material originally contained in IMF Working Paper 97/42, "Deindustrialization: Causes and Implications," by Robert Rowthorn, Professor of Economics, Cambridge University, and Ramana Ramaswamy of the IMF’s Research Department. Neil Wilson prepared the present version. Readers interested in the original Working Paper may purchase a copy from IMF Publication Services ($7.00).

Deindustrialization–Its Causes and Implications

During the past 25 years, employment in manufacturing as a share of total employment has fallen dramatically in the world’s most advanced economies, a phenomenon widely referred to as "deindustrialization." The trend, particularly evident in the United States and Europe, is also apparent in Japan and has been observed most recently in the Four Tiger economies of East Asia (Hong Kong, China, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan Province of China). Not surprisingly, deindustrialization has caused considerable concern in the affected economies and has given rise to a vigorous debate about its causes and likely implications. Many regard deindustrialization with alarm and suspect it has contributed to widening income inequality in the United States and high unemployment in Europe. Some suggest that deindustrialization is a result of the globalization of markets and has been fostered by the rapid growth of North-South trade (trade between the advanced economies and the developing world). These critics argue that the fast growth of labor-intensive manufacturing industries in the developing world is displacing the jobs of workers in the advanced economies.

This paper maintains that deindustrialization is primarily a feature of successful economic development and that North-South trade has very little to do with it. Measured in real terms, the share of domestic expenditure on manufactured goods has been comparatively stable over the two past decades. Consequently, deindustrialization is principally the result of higher productivity in manufacturing than in services. The pattern of trade specialization among the advanced economies explains why some countries deindustrialize faster than others. Finally, the paper suggests that advances in the service sector, rather than in the manufacturing sector, are likely to encourage the growth of living standards in the advanced economies in the future.
...
Conclusions
Deindustrialization is not a negative phenomenon, but a natural consequence of further growth in advanced economies.

The main reason for deindustrialization is the faster growth of productivity in manufacturing than in services.

North-South trade has played very little role in deindustrialization.

Trade among industrial countries (rather than between industrial countries and the developing world) accounts for some of the differences in employment structure between different advanced economies.

Future growth within the developed world is likely to depend increasingly on productivity growth in services.

The nature of the service sector is less suited to centralized wage bargaining.

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #32 on: June 25, 2009, 01:12:16 pm »
They must perform research as to the effectivness of their PROGROMS

"...research was made possible by grants from the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Carnegie Foundation..."

For reference:
http://www.poverty.smartlibrary.org/newinterface/segment.cfm?segment=1845
Changes in U.S. Economy Lead to Increasing Urban Poverty

In his book, When Work Disappears (1996), Harvard sociologist William Julius Wilson reports that employment among low-skill workers in U.S. inner-cities has declined dramatically since the late 1960s. Wilson notes that despite a overall decrease in unemployment from 1969 and 1989, unemployment actually increased for low-skilled male workers between the ages of 22 and 58.
Additionally:

The proportion of men who dropped out of the labor force doubled.
Real wages declined by more than 30% for the poorest wage earners.
Opportunities for advancement have declined for low-skilled workers.
For black men, 7 of 10 worked full-time, year-round in 8 of 10 years in the 1970s, but only 3.5 of 10 did so in the 1980s.

Why is Inner-City Employment Declining?
Wilson attributes part of the decline in employment for low-skilled, inner-city workers to changes in the U.S. economy.

The Decline in Mass Production. As the U.S. economy has shifted from a manufacturing to a service base, it has lost a number of the blue-collar jobs formerly available to inner-city workers. During the 1980s, the country lost 16 production, transportation and laborer jobs per 1,000 workers while gaining 27 clerical, sales, and service jobs per 1,000. Men have been slow to move into these "pink collar" jobs, leaving them for women. This has been especially devastating to low-skilled African-American workers.

One study reports that since the 1960s, "deindustrialization and the erosion of job opportunities especially in the Midwest and Northeast...bear responsibility for the growth of the ranks of the 'truly disadvantaged.'"

Increased Internationalization of the U.S. Economy. Wilson argues that trade imbalances during the 1980s made it easier to move low-skill jobs abroad. As jobs moved out of the country, less-educated immigrants supplemented the pool of low-skilled workers in the U.S.

The Decline of Unions. As mass production has decreased, so has the rate of union membership. Because union jobs typically provide higher pay and better benefits than non-union employment, as it declines so have wages and benefits for low-skilled workers.

Technological Advancements. Technology has revolutionized the workplace. Advances in technology have increased jobs for skilled workers and have eliminated many low-skill positions. As one 33-year-old South Side janitor said:
The machines were putting a lot of people out of jobs. I worked for Time magazine for 7 years on a videographic printer and they come along with the Abedic printer, it cost them half a million dollars: they did what we did in half the time, eliminated 2 shifts.

The Decline in the Relative Supply of College Graduates.During the late 1960s and early 1970s, college enrollment grew rapidly. Wilson cites work by economists Richard Freeman and Lawrence Katz which argues that this growth in the supply of college graduates overwhelmed demand, leading to decreased returns to college education.

Increasing Immigration.The final economic factor cited by Wilson; immigration during the 1980s increased the supply of low-income workers. According to one estimate, nearly one-third of the decline in earnings for male high school dropouts can be linked to immigration. Wilson does qualify this finding, though, with additional evidence from Sheldon Danziger and Peter Gottschalk that indicates that wages for low-skilled workers declined in both states with high and low levels of immigration. This would indicate that immigration is only one factor contributing to the decline in low-skilled earnings.
...

The above research was made possible by grants from the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Carnegie Foundation, Joyce Foundation, Spencer Foundation, William T. Grant Foundation, Lloyd A. Fry Foundation, Woods Charitable Fund, Chicago Community Trust, Institute for Research on Poverty, John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, Household International, Department of Health and Human Services, and MacArthur Research Program on Successful Adolescents in High Risk Areas

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #33 on: June 25, 2009, 01:34:29 pm »
More on the history of the Eugenic Records Office and Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory :

http://ecosyn.us/Bush-Hitler/Rockefeller_Institute_for_Medical_Research_Eugenics.html
Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research - Links

The Rockefeller clan had a powerful control over the Bush ancestors.

Samuel Prescott Bush (grandfather to George Herbert Walker Bush and great-grandfather to George Walker Bush) Was employed by John D Rockefeller's brother Frank at Buckeye Steel Castings Company.

Sam Bush succeeded as president of Buckeye when Frank Rockefeller retired. Sam Bush was also director of William Rockerfeller's interests in the Pennsysvania Railroad, and was enlisted to aid Percy Rockefeller's Remington Arms get more government business during WWI. Sam Bush's son Prescott Sheldon Bush was an eugenicist on record, lost his first election attempt as Connecticut senator when it was revealed that he was Treasurer of Planned Parenthood in Connecticut. As usual Bush lied about his past. Prescott Bush's connection to eugenics is listed elsewhere. http://ecosyn.us/Bush-Hitler/Bush_Eugenics.html

This collection is assembled just to demonstrate John D. Rockefeller's ties to the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research eugenics mentality. Step by step the story becomes clear about supporting mass murder willfully, deliberately, intentionally, knowingly.
...
In 1901, the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research was created.
In 1902, the Rockefeller General Education Board (GEB) began four decades of tremendously controversial influence over American schools and universities.
...
http://www.american-buddha.com/reddouble.htm
In 1904, the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory (home to today's Human Genome Project) was built on the estates of John Foster and Allen Dulles, lawyers for the Rockefeller Standard Oil Company. The Dulles Brothers, who openly professed John D. Rockefeller's racial hygiene doctrines, later directed the U.S. military's Office of Strategic Services (OSS) and after World War II, the CIA.

Charles B. Davenport constructed the Cold Spring Harbor facility to provide a home for racial hygiene research, what was then called "eugenics research." The first racial hygiene laws in the world evolved from investigations and reports issued from here. The John D. Rockefeller and Averell Harriman, America's wealthiest oil and railroad magnates, invested more than $11 million-an extraordinary fortune at that time-in funding this facility. Soon thereafter, in 1909, the first genetics laboratory was established at the Rockefeller Institute and directed by Dr. Phoebus Aaron Theodor Levene.
...
http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/53/rockefeller.html
That same year 1902, J.D. Rockefeller and Averell Harriman, a business partner of Prescott Bush and George Herbert Walker in Brown Brothers Harriman, gave $11 million to create the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. Built on Manhattan property owned by the Dulles brothers, it spawned America’s ground-breaking “eugenics” research and the world’s first “racial hygiene” laws.
By 1907, Rockefeller funding was heavily influencing America’s medical institutions. The Rockefeller Institute created the first genetics lab in 1909.
The following year, the Eugenics Research Association and the Eugenics Records Office were founded near Cold Spring Harbor, New York, on land donated by the widow of Averell Harriman. In 1911, John Foster Dulles summed up eugenics, saying that by eliminating “the weakest members of the population” a purer race could be created.

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #34 on: June 25, 2009, 11:25:53 pm »
Quote
"Each part of the world will have a specialty and thus become inter-dependent, he said. The US will remain a center for agriculture, high tech, communications, and education but heavy industry would be "transported out."

Found this little gem:

http://www.rbf.org/usr_doc/Global_Interdependence_(Social_Stewardship).pdf

GLOBAL INTERDEPENDENCE AND THE NEED FOR SOCIAL STEWARDSHIP
1997

GLOBAL INTERDEPENDENCE INITIATIVE
RBF ROCKEFELLER BROTHERS FUND

ROCKEFELLER BROTHERS FUND
1290 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10104-0233

Preface

On October 7–8, 1996, at the Pocantico Conference Center of the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, the Fund joined with the World Bank to host an unusual gathering of foundation executives, leaders of major humanitarian and environmental NGOs (nongovernmental organizations), and officers of large multilateral institutions. The meeting was entitled “Building a Constituency for Global Interdependence,” and its
agenda reflected a deep sense of shared concern about the apparent waning of public and political support (in the United States but also in other developed nations) for the policies, programs, and agencies of cooperative international engagement. Despite considerable talk about the globalization of the economy and the unifying effects of communications technology, there has been a growing and worrisome tendency on the part of governments, the general public, and private funders to withdraw or withhold their support from international development, exchange, and capacity-building initiatives that reflect the reality and implications of global interdependence. A serious lack of funding,
commitment, and vision—the resources on which effective cooperative engagement depends—now threatens to undermine the capacity of nations and peoples to collaborate in building a just and sustainable global community.
...
Introduction

In a world made smaller by global commerce and communication, cooperative engagement among nations is more possible—and more necessary—than ever before.
“Cooperative engagement,” in this context, refers to the complex of policies, programs, treaties, investments, and regimes by which nations collaborate to advance common interests. Those interests fall into three broad categories: military security, economic growth and trade, and what might be called social stewardship—the promotion of health, social stability, and human potential. The United States is the world leader in efforts to ensure military security and has intensified efforts to open  international markets and foster economic growth. But, as this paper will elaborate, the United States has fallen far behind in the realm of social stewardship.
...
We live in an era of stark contrasts. The global economy produces wealth on a previously unimaginable scale—gross world product has grown by more than 40 percent since 1980 14—yet the absolute number of people in poverty continues to rise, and the chasm between rich and poor is widening in many countries.15 With the end of the Cold War, the threat of nuclear annihilation has diminished, yet bloody civil conflicts erupt with frightening frequency and intensity. Medical science has conquered
diseases that plagued humanity for millennia, yet millions die each year because they lack basic sanitation, nutrition, and health care. Our capacity to shape the environment to meet human needs has brought comfort and convenience to many, as well as unforeseen side effects— climate change, species loss, soil erosion, water shortages—that may threaten the planet’s ability to sustain life itself.
...
As the twenty-first century nears, it is time to recognize that prosperity and security are closely connected to human well-being. In a world where boundaries are porous, where everything—people, ideas, capital, weapons, and disease—moves easily across national borders, we cannot
afford to turn our backs on the world. Instead, we must strengthen our ties with the people of other nations and work together to create a world that invests in the potential of each of its citizens.

And this complete:

http://www.population-security.org/rockefeller/001_population_growth_and_the_american_future.htm
Population and the American Future
 

The Report of The Commission on Population Growth and the American Future

March 27, 1972

To the President and Congress of the United States:

I have the honor to transmit for your consideration the Final Report, containing the findings and recommendations, of the Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, pursuant to Sec. 8, PL 91-213.

After two years of concentrated effort, we have concluded that, in the long run, no substantial benefits will result from further growth of the Nation’s population, rather that the gradual stabilization of our population through voluntary means would contribute significantly to the Nation’s ability to solve its problems. We have looked for, and have not found, any convincing economic argument for continued population growth. The health of our country does not depend on it, nor does the vitality of business nor the welfare of the average person.

The recommendations offered by this Commission are directed towards increasing public knowledge of the causes and consequences of population change, facilitating and guiding the processes of population movement, maximizing information about human reproduction and its consequences for the family, and enabling individuals to avoid unwanted fertility.

To these ends we offer this report in the hope that our findings and recommendations will stimulate serious consideration of an issue that is of great consequence to present and future generations.

Respectfully submitted for the Commission,

John D. Rockefeller 3rd
Chairman

...

It is the instability over time of proportions of the young, the elderly, and the productive. For the family and the individual, it is the control over one’s life with respect to the reproduction of new life—the formal and informal pronatalist pressures of an outmoded tradition, and the disadvantages of and to the children involved.

...
The Immediate Goal
...
Our immediate goal is to modernize demographic behavior in this country: to encourage the American people to make population choices, both in the individual family and society at large, on the basis of greater rationality rather than tradition or custom, ignorance or chance. This country has already moved some distance down this road; it should now complete the journey. The time has come to challenge the tradition that population growth is desirable:
What was unintended may turn out to be unwanted, in the society as in the family.
...

Offline Revolt426

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,190
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #35 on: June 25, 2009, 11:42:04 pm »
Of course, all of this is a repetition of history, the very same history that lead us to the Civil War after the nation was first De-Industrialized by "Free Trade" and monetarism.

The very same history that lead us to the Great Depression under Andrew Mellon's treasonous reign as Treasury Secretary for 13 years prior to Roosevelt's inauguration, in which he colluded with JP Morgan and the American Legion, a fake libertarian movement designed to bust unions and de-industrialize the nation under free trade agreements....... this legion developed into the American Liberty League , whom attempted to overthrow FDR when he turned on the bankers and decided it was time to prevent a complete economic collapse of the United States.

Isn't so interesting how History repeats itself, and the people never remember how the de-industrialization occurs in the first place... (FREE TRADE and Privatized Currency)

Very good research as usual, Tahoe.
"Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate … It will purge the rottenness out of the system..." - Andrew Mellon, Secretary of Treasury, 1929.

Offline Revolt426

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6,190
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #36 on: June 25, 2009, 11:53:48 pm »
Sorry this is the correct American Liberty League link : http://coat.ncf.ca/our_magazine/links/53/all-both.html

"Liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate … It will purge the rottenness out of the system..." - Andrew Mellon, Secretary of Treasury, 1929.

Offline Dig

  • All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man.
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 63,099
    • Git Ureself Edumacated
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #37 on: June 26, 2009, 12:43:07 am »
Yup Tahoe, outstanding research!
All eyes are opened, or opening, to the rights of man. The general spread of the light of science has already laid open to every view the palpable truth, that the mass of mankind has not been born with saddles on their backs, nor a favored few booted and spurred, ready to ride them legitimately

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #38 on: June 26, 2009, 02:10:03 am »
Thanks, I am trying. Can anyone find a pdf of THE MID-CENTURY CHALLENGE TO U.S. FOREIGN POLICY
I've tried scribd and can't find it. Quotes from it are referenced everywhere and I can't believe no one has scanned the 74 pages.....

Quote
14) 1959---Rockefeller Brothers Fund (for whom a young Henry Kissinger has worked) publishes
THE MID-CENTURY CHALLENGE TO U.S. FOREIGN POLICY, in which one reads: "We cannot escape, and indeed should welcome, the task which history has imposed on us. This is the task of helping to shape a new world order in all its dimensions---spiritual, economic, political, social."

The mid-century challenge to U. S. foreign policy (Open Library)]

Online TahoeBlue

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9,940
Re: In 1969, Rockefeller Official Said US Would Be De-industrialized
« Reply #39 on: June 26, 2009, 10:21:54 pm »
Rockefeller's corner the market in "Population Management"

http://www.aslo.org/lo/toc/vol_41/issue_3/0578.pdf

COHEN, J. E. 1995. How many people can the earth support?
W. W. Norton & Company, New York. 532 p. ISBN 0-393-
03862-9. $30.00.

Daddy Daddy, it was just like you said Now that the living outnumber the dead
Laurie Anderson, Bright Red

The issue, of course, is that if people don’t have enough freshwater where they live to grow their crops, water their livestock, and remove their wastes, they don’t have the luxury of considering
the niceties of water quality. Joel Cohen makes just this point in his book How many people
can the earth support?


Although he avoids assigning to any particular resource the present or future role of setting the earth’s carrying capacity for humans- indeed, he studiously avoids answering the question that the title of his book poses-he does often use freshwater as an example.
...
Cohen cites a World Health Organization statistic that nearly half of the people in the world suffer from diseases related to insufficient or contaminated water.
...
He concludes that population growth will end, very probably in the coming century. He asks how soon, by what means, and at whose expense? Cohen concludes by modestly suggesting several courses of action that may help resolve these questions: promote institutions that balance the
goals of efficiency and equality; consider explicitly our accounting of social well-being, resources, and the consequences of our actions; foster research on the links between population growth
and culture, economics, and the environment; and clarify the benefits that relatively wealthy people and countries derive from helping those less well-off.


http://www.rockefeller.edu/labheads/cohenje/cohenvita.php

Joel E. Cohen

Joel E. Cohen is the Abby Rockefeller Mauzé Professor of Populations at the Rockefeller University, New York.
He heads the Laboratory of Populations at the Rockefeller and Columbia Universities.
At Columbia University, New York, he is Professor of Populations in the Earth Institute, with appointments in the Departments of International and Public Affairs; Earth and Environmental Sciences; and Ecology, Evolution, and Environmental Biology.

Cohen serves as a member of the worldwide Board of Directors of The Nature Conservancy, since 2000;
the Board of Trustees of the New York State Nature Conservancy since 2001;
the Board of Trustees of the Population Reference Bureau, Washington, DC, since April 2004; the Board of Trustees of the Black Rock Forest Preserve, New York, since 1989; and the Council (governing board) of the American Philosophical Society since 2008.
He is a member of the advisory council of the Education Policy and Data Center, Washington, DC, since 2004.
He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and an Honorary Senior Fellow of the Foreign Policy Association, both in New York.


Cohen was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1989 in evolutionary and population biology and ecology, the American Philosophical Society in 1994 in the professions, arts, and affairs, and the U.S. National Academy of Sciences in 1997 in applied mathematical sciences.

His research deals with the demography, ecology, epidemiology and social organization of human and non-human populations and with mathematical concepts useful in these fields. He earned doctorates in applied mathematics in 1970 and population sciences and tropical public health in 1973 from Harvard University.
He has published 14 books (4 written as sole author, 4 co-authored, 5 edited, and one translated) and 350 papers and chapters. His most recent book is Educating All Children: A Global Agenda (co-edited with David E. Bloom and Martin Malin; MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2007).
Forthcoming is International Perspectives on the Goals of Universal Basic and Secondary Education (co-edited with Martin Malin; Routledge, New York, London, 2009).
...
In March 1997, he was the first winner of the Olivia Schieffelin Nordberg Award “for excellence in writing in the population sciences.” The Nordberg Prize recognized his book,
How Many People Can the Earth Support? (W. W. Norton, New York, 1995), which has been translated into Japanese and Italian.