96 of 105 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
"The henhouse is safe" assures the Fox, March 17, 2007
This review is from: Memoirs (Paperback)
Mr Rockefeller writes about the Bilderbergs (p. 410), at the "disppointment" of the "conspiracy-mongers" is just an "intensely interesting annual discussion group." Really? Then how come I'm never invited? What's all the secrecy about?
To give you an idea of why all the secrecy, here's an excerpt from a 1991 issue of the Hilaire duBerrier Report (also reported elsewhere in the French press):
"[Rockefeller] told his listeners: 'We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years....It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during these years....The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers ... is surely preferable to the national autodetermination practiced in the past centuries.'"
In "Tragedy and Hope" written By Bill Clinton's professor at Georgetown, Carroll Quigley (p. 950) writes:
"There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Group has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, of any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it...but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known."
Now why would the "Round Table Group" want to cooperate with the communists? James Kunen, in his "Strawberry Statement: Notes of a College Revolutionary," gives one reason:
"In the evening, I went up to the U. to check out a strategy meeting. A kid was giving a report on the SDS [Students for a Democratic Society] convention. He said that ... at the convention, men from Business International Round Tables, the meeting sponsored by Business International for their client groups and heads of government, tried to buy up a few radicals. These men are the world's leading industrialists and they convene to decide how our lives are going to go. These are the guys who wrote the Alliance for Progress. They are the left wing of the ruling class. They offered to finance our demonstrations in Chicago. We were also offered ESSO (Rockefeller) money. They want us to make a lot of radical commotion so they can look more in the center as they move to the left."
Is this not the reason why most people think George Bush is conservative? Because the liberal hates Bush?
Mr. Rockefeller on p. 405 claims that the "conspiracy theorists" fail to see the "benefit of our international role over the past half century." And what benefits are these? Quigley gives the answer in his book:
"The powers of financial capitalism had a far-reaching plan, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole."
Now how'd those silly kook populists miss to see the benefit in having a worldwide system of financial control vested in a few plutocrats?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
14 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
I read 500 pages of bore to get to 16 pages of meat, October 6, 2008
I have been intrigued by American Empire and its ascent over the last century. I wanted to read Mr. Rockefeller's words for myself. It seemed as though he was skipping major details throughout- for example he glides right over the death of his brother Nelson, leaving out details of the circumstance. Which pretty much proved to me that the rumors were more than true.
Chapter 27 was what I was hunting and in his own words on page 405 he solidifies accusations of his one-world agenda. Considering he has been a part of the Bilderbergs, CFR, and Trilaterals for most of his adult life- rather odd he only gives about a page a piece to each issue. A 500 page book and only 1 brief chapter on the bulk of his world vision. Dare I say conspiracy?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
48 of 59 people found the following review helpful:
1.0 out of 5 stars
Rockefeller is a servant of Evil, October 13, 2007
It may be disinformation, but reportedly at the Bilderberg/Trilateral meeting in 1991 in Baden Baden, Germany, David Rockefeller made the following statement, with Bill Clinton in attendance:
"We are grateful to the Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."
Whether or not he actually said this publicly, it does seem to capture the thinking of someone who makes the kind of decisions Rockefeller does. In his memoir on page 405, he actually does say this, "Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure---one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.".
In this section he also criticizes "populists" and "isolationists" for not appreciating that the "active role" the international bankers have played in world affairs has contributed to economic growth and the defeat of Communism.
[...]
The dollar's value has declined by 90% since the Fed's beginning in 1913 thanks to the mismanagement of "elites", and at the same time we have experienced tremendous economic growth; due to natural human activity and technological advances. Private bankers have figured out how to profit from human behavior and economics, but they're not a necessary middle man; the Constitution authorizes Congress to coin money.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No