1Candyman1

Hope for the future Lex Fridman (02:58:53) What hope, positive hope do you have for the future of human civilization in say 50 years, 100 years, 200 years? Tucker Carlson (02:59:01) People are great just by their nature. I mean, they’re super complicated, but I like people. I always have liked people. If I was sitting here with Nikki Haley, who I guess I’ve been pretty clear I’m not a mega fan of Nikki Haley’s, I would enjoy it. I’ve never met anybody I couldn’t enjoy on some level given enough time. So as long as nobody tampers with the human recipe, the human nature itself, I will always feel blessed by being around other people. That’s true around the world. I’ve never been to a country, and I’ve been to scores of countries, where I didn’t, given a week, really like it and the people. So yeah, bad leaders are a recurring theme in human history. They’re mostly bad, and we’ve got an unusually bad set right now, but we’ll have better ones at some point. One thing I don’t like more than nuclear weapons and more than AI, the one thing that really, really bothers me is the idea of using technology to change the human brain permanently. Because you’re tampering with the secret sauce. You’re tampering with God’s creation, and totally evil. I mean, I literally sat there the other day with Klaus Schwab. I was with Klaus Schwab. He was like a total moron, like 100 years old and has no idea what’s going on in the world. But he’s one of these guys who, speaking of mediocre, everyone’s so afraid of Klaus Schwab, I don’t think Klaus Schwab is going to be organizing anything. Again, he’s just like a total figurehead, like a douchebag. (03:00:40) But anyway, but he was talking and he’s reading all these talking points, all the cool kids are talking about Adapos and whatever, and he starts talking about it in his way, his accent, he was saying, “I think it’s so important that we follow an ethical way, always in an ethical way, of course, very ethical. I’m a very ethical man, that we follow using technology to improve the human mind and implant the chips in the brain.” I’m like, “Okay, you have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re as senile as Joe Biden.” But what was so striking is that no one in the room is like, “Wait, what? You’re with people’s brains. Oh my God. What are you even talking about? Who do you think you are?” Lex Fridman (03:01:26) I mean, you’re right, the secret sauce. The human mind is really special. We should not mess with it. Tucker Carlson (03:01:26) It’s all that matters, dude. Lex Fridman (03:01:32) We should be very careful. Whatever special thing it does, it seems like it’s a good thing. Human beings are fundamentally good. These sources of creativity, the creative force in the universe we don’t want to mess with. Tucker Carlson (03:01:48) Oh, I mean, what else matters? I don’t understand. I mean, I guess, look, I don’t want to seem like the Unabomber and I’m not. Lex Fridman (03:01:59) We are in a cabin in the woods. Tucker Carlson (03:02:00) No. Well, I’m sympathetic to some of his ideas, but not of course sending mail bombs to people because I like people and I don’t believe in violence at all. But I think the problem with technology, one of the problems with technology is the way that people approach it in a very kind of mindless heedless way. I think it’s important, this idea that it’s inexorable and we can’t control it, and if we don’t do it, someone else will. There’s some truth in that, but it’s not the whole story. We do have free will and we are creating these things intentionally, and I think it’s incumbent on us, it’s a requirement, of a moral requirement of us that we ask, is this a net gain or a net loss? What, to the extent we can foresee them, will the effects be, et cetera, et cetera? (03:02:46) It’s not super complicated. So I prize long-term thinking. I don’t always apply to my own life, obviously. I want to, but I prize it. I think that people with power should think about future generations and I don’t see that kind of thinking at all. They all seem like children to me, and don’t give children handguns because they can hurt people. Lex Fridman (03:03:07) Fundamentally, you want people in power to be pro-humanity. Tucker Carlson (03:03:11) By the way, you don’t want people who are 81 who are going to die anyway. Why do they care? By the way, if your track record with your own family is miserable, why would I give you my family to oversee? Again, these are autistic level questions that someone should answer. Lex Fridman (03:03:28) Well, thank you for asking those questions, first of all, and thank you for this conversation. Thank you for welcoming me to the cabin in the woods. Tucker Carlson (03:03:38) Thank you. Full Episode, with links and transcript. 3+ hours. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_lRdkH_QoY

Transcript: https://www.c-span.org/video/cc/?progid=342338 LEADERS AND DIGNITARIES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, REPRESENTATIVES OF OUR NATO ALLIANCE, DISTINGUISHED GUESTS, WE MEET HERE AT A MOMENT OF TESTING FOR EUROPE AND THE UNITED STATES. AND FOR THE INTERNATIONAL ORDER THAT WE HAVE WORKED FOR GENERATIONS TO BUILD. THROUGHOUT HUMAN HISTORY, SOCIETIES HAVE GRAPPLED WITH FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS OF HOW TO ORGANIZE THEMSELVES. THE PROPER RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE INDIVIDUAL AND THE STATE, THE BEST MEANS TO RESOLVE INEVITABLE CONFLICTS BETWEEN STATES, AND IT WAS HERE IN EUROPE THROUGH CENTURIES OF STRUGGLE, THROUGH WAR AND ENLIGHTENMENT, REPRESSION, AND REFVOLUTION THAT A PARTICULAR SET OF IDEALS BEGAN TO EMERGE, THE BELIEF THAT THROUGH CONSCIENCE AND FREE WILL, EACH OF US HAS THE RIGHT TO LIVE AS WE CHOOSE. THE BELIEF THAT POWER IS DERIVED FROM THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED AND THAT LAWS AND INSTITUTIONS SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED TO PROTECT THAT UNDERSTANDING. AND THOSE IDEAS EVENTUALLY INSPIRED A BAND OF COLONIALISTS ACROSS AN OCEAN, AND THEY RODE THEM INTO THE FOUNDING DOCUMENTS THAT STILL GUIDE AMERICA TODAY. INCLUDING THE SIMPLE TRUTH THAT ALL MEN AND WOMEN ARE CREATED EQUAL. BUT THOSE IDEALS HAVE ALSO BEEN TESTED HERE IN EUROPE AND AROUND THE WORLD. THOSE IDEALS HAVE OFTEN BEEN THREATENED BY AN OLDER, MORE TRADITIONAL VIEW OF POWER. THIS ALTERNATIVE VISION ARGUES THAT ORDINARY MEN AND WOMEN ARE TWO SMALL MINDED TO GOVERN THEIR OWN AFFAIRS. THAT ORDER AND PROGRESS CAN ONLY COME WHEN INDIVIDUALS SURRENDER THEIR RIGHTS TO AN ALL-POWERFUL SOVEREIGN. OFTEN, THIS ALTERNATIVE VISION ROOTS ITSELF IN THE NOTION THAT BY VIRTUE OF RACE OR FAITH OR ETHNICITY, SOME ARE INHERENTLY SUPERIOR TO OTHERS. AND THAT INDIVIDUAL IDENTITY MUST BE DEFINED BY US VERSUS THEM. OR THAT NATIONAL GREATNESS MUST FLOW NOT BY WHAT PEOPLE STAND FOR BUT WHAT THEY ARE AGAINST. IN SO MANY WAYS, THE HISTORY OF EUROPE IN THE 20th CENTURY REPRESENTED THE ONGOING CLASH OF THESE TWO SETS OF IDEAS, BOTH WITHIN NATIONS AND AMONG NATIONS. THE ADVANCE OF INDUSTRY AND TECHNOLOGY, OUTPACED OUR ABILITY TO RESOLVE OUR DIFFERENCES PEACEFULLY, AND EVEN AMONG THE MOST CIVILIZED OF SOCIETIES ON THE SURFACE, WE SAW A DESCENT INTO BARBARISM. THIS MORNING AT FLANDERSFIELD, I WAS REMINDED OF HOW WAR BETWEEN PEOPLES SENT A GENERATION TO THEIR DEATHS IN THE TRENCHES AND GAS OF THE FIRST WORLD WAR. AND JUST TWO DECADES LATER, EXTREME NATIONALISM PLUNGED THIS CONTINENT INTO WAR ONCE AGAIN WITH POPULATIONS ENSLAVED AND GREAT CITIES REDUCED TO RUBBLE AND TENS OF MILLIONS SLAUGHTERED, INCLUDING THOSE LOST IN THE HOLOCAUST. IT IS IN RESPONSE TO THIS TRAGIC HISTORY THAT IN THE AFTERMATH OF WORLD WAR II, AMERICA JOINED WITH EUROPE TO REJECT THE DARKER FORCES OF THE PAST. AND BUILD A NEW ARCHITECTURE OF PEACE. WORKERS AND ENGINEERS GAVE LIFE TO THE MARSHALL PLAN, SENTINELS STOOD VIGILANT IN A NATO ALLIANCE THAT WOULD BECOME THE STRONGEST THE WORLD HAS EVER KNOWN. AND ACROSS THE ATLANTIC, WE EMBRACED A SHARED VISION OF EUROPE. A VISION BASED ON REPRESENTATIVE DEMOCRACY, INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS, AND A BELIEF THAT NATIONS CAN MEET THE INTERESTS OF THEIR CITIZENS THROUGH TRADE AND OPEN MARKETS, A SOCIAL SAFETY NET, RESPECT FOR THOSE OF DIFFERENT FAITHS AND BACKGROUNDS. FOR DECADES, THIS VISION STOOD IN SHARP CONTRAST TO LIFE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF AN EASTERN CURTAIN. FOR DECADES, A CONTEST WAS WAGED AND ULTIMATELY, THAT CONTEST WAS WON, NOT BY THANKS OR MISSILES. BUT BECAUSE OUR IDEALS STIRRED THE HEARTS OF HUNGARIANS WHO SPARKED A REVOLUTION. POLES IN THEIR SHIPYARD WHO STOOD IN SOLIDARITY, CZECHS WHO WAGED A DEVELOPMENT REVOLUTION WITHOUT FIRING A SHOT. AND EAST BERLINERS WHO MARCHED PAST THE GUARDS AND FINALLY TORE DOWN TA WALL. TODAY WHAT WOULD HAVE SEEMED IMPOSSIBLE IN THE TRENCHES OF FLANDERS, THE RUBBLE OF BERLIN, A DISSIDENT'S PRISON CELL, THAT REALITY IS TAKEN FOR GRANTED. A GERMANY UNIFIED, THE NATIONS OF CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE WELCOMED INTO THE FAMILY OF DEMOCRACIES. HERE IN THIS COUNTRY, ONCE THE BATTLEGROUND OF EUROPE, WE MEET IN THE HUB OF A UNION THAT BRINGS TOGETHER AGE OLD ADVERSARIES IN PEACE AND COOPERATION. THE PEOPLE OF EUROPE, HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF CITIZENS, EAST, WEST, NORTH, SOUTH, ARE MORE SECURE AND MORE PROSPEROUS BECAUSE WE STOOD TOGETHER FOR THE IDEALS WE SHARE. AND THIS STORY OF HUMAN PROGRESS WAS BY NO MEANS LIMITED TO EUROPE. INDEED, THE IDEALS THAT CAME 0 DEFINE OUR ALLIANCE ALSO ENSPEIERED MOVEMENTS ACROSS THE GLOBE. AMONG THOSE VERY PEOPLE IRONICALLY WHO HAD, TOO. OFTEN BEEN DENIED THEIR FULL RIGHTS BY WESTERN POWERS. AFTER THE SECOND WORLD WAR. >> PEOPLE FROM AFRICA TO INDIA THREW OFF THE YOKE OF COLONIALISM TO SECURE THEIR INDEPENDENCE. IN THE UNITED STATES, CITIZENS TOOK FREEDOM RIOTS AND ENDURED BEATINGS TO PUT AN END TO SEGREGATION AND TO SECURE THEIR CIVIL RIGHTS. AS THE IRON CURTAIN FELL HERE IN EUROPE, THE IRON FIST OF APARTHEID WAS UNCLENCHED. AND NELSON MANDELA EMERGED UPRIGHT, PROUD, FROM PRISON TO LEAD A MULTIRACIAL DEMOCRACY. LATIN AMERICAN NATIONS REJECTED DICTATE ARESHIP AND BUILT NEW DEMOCRACIES AND ASIAN COMPANY NATION SHOWED THAT DEVELOPMENT AND DEMOCRACY COULD GO HAND IN HAND. THE YOUNG PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY, YOUNG PEOPLE LIKE LAURA, WERE BORN IN A PLACE AND A TIME WHERE THERE IS LESS CONFLICT, MORE PROSPERITY, AND MORE FREEDOM THAN ANY TIME IN HUMAN HISTORY. BUT THAT'S NOT BECAUSE MAN'S DARKEST IMPULSES HAVE VANISHED. EVEN HERE IN EUROPE, WE'VE SEEN ETHNIC CLEANSING IN THE BALKANS THAT SHOCKED CONSCIENCE. THE DIFFICULTIES OF INTEGRATION AND GLOBALIZATION, RECENT LIAM APPLY FIED BY THE WORST ECONOMIC CRISIS OUR LIFETIMES, STRAINED THE EUROPEAN PROJECT AND STIRRED THE RISE OF A POLITICS THAT, TOO. OFTEN TARGETS IMMIGRANTS OR GAYS OR THOSE WHO SEEM SOMEHOW DIFFERENT. WHILE TECHNOLOGY HAS OPENED UP VAST OPPORTUNITIES FOR TRADE AND INNOVATION AND CULTURAL UNDERSTANDING, IT'S ALSO ALLOWED TERRORISTS TO KILL ON A HORRIFYING SCALE. AROUND THE WORLD, SECTARIAN WARFARE AND ETHNIC CONFLICTS CONTINUE CLAIM THOUSANDS OF LIVES AND ONCE AGAIN, WES ARE CONFRONTED WITH THE BELIEF AMONG SOME THAT BIGGER NATIONS CAN BULLY SMALLER ONES TO GET THEIR WAY. THAT RECYCLED MAXIM THAT MIGHT SOMEHOW MAKES RIGHT. SO I COME HERE TODAY TO INSIST THAT WE MUST NEVER TAKE FOR GRANTED THE PROGRESS THAT HAS BEEN WON HERE IN EUROPE AND ADVANCED AROUND THE WORLD. BECAUSE THE CONTEST OF IDEAS CONTINUES. FOR YOUR GENERATION. AND THAT'S WHAT'S AT STAKE IN UKRAINE TODAY. RUSSIA'S LEADERSHIP IS CHALLENGING TRUTHS THAT ONLY A FEW WEEKS AGO SEEMED SELF-EVIDENT. THAT IN THE 21st CENTURY, THE BORDERS OF EUROPE CANNOT BE REDRAWN WITH FORCE. THAT INTERNATIONAL LAW MATTERS. THAT PEOPLE AND NATIONS CAN MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS ABOUT THEIR FUTURE. TO BE HONEST, IF WE DEFINE OUR INTERESTS NARROWLY, IF WE APPLIED A COLD-HEARTED CALCULUS, WE MIGHT DECIDE TO LOOK THE OTHER WAY. OUR ECONOMY IS NOT DEEPLY INTEGRATED WITH UKRAINE'S. OUR PEOPLE AND OUR HOMELAND FACE NO DIRECT THREAT FROM THE INVASION OF CRIMEA. OUR OWN BORDERS ARE NOT THREATENED BY RUSSIA'S ANNEXATION. BUT THAT KIND OF CASUAL INDIFFERENCE WOULD IGNORE THE LESSONS THAT ARE WRITTEN IN THE CEMETERIES OF THIS CONTINENT. IT WOULD ALLOW THE OLD WAY OF DOING THINGS TO REGAIN A FOOT HOLD IN THIS YOUNG CENTURY, AND THAT MESSAGE WOULD BE HEARD NOT JUST IN EUROPE BUT IN ASIA IN THE AMERICAS, IN AFRICA, AND THE MIDDLE EAST. AND THE CONSEQUENCES THAT WOULD ARISE FROM COMPLACENCY ARE NOT ABSTRACTIONS. THE IMPACT THAT THEY HAVE ON THE LIVES OF REAL PEOPLE, MEN AND WOMEN JUST LIKE US, HAVE TO ENTER INTO OUR IMAGINATIONS. JUST LOOK AT THE YOUNG PEOPLE OF UKRAINE WHO ARE DETERMINED TO TAKE BACK THEIR FUTURE FROM A GOVERNMENT ROTTED BY CORRUPTION, THE PORTRAITS OF THE FALLEN SHOT BY SNIPERS. THE VISITOR WHO'S PAY THEIR RESPECTS. THERE WAS THE UNIVERSITY STUDENT RAPPED IN THE UKRAINIAN FLAG EXPRESSING HER HOPE THAT EVERY COUNTRY SHOULD LIVE BY THE LAW. POSTGRADUATE STUDENT SPEAKING OF HER FELLOW PROTESTERS SAYING I WANT THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE HERE TO HAVE DIGNITY. IMAGINE THAT YOU ARE THE YOUNG WOMAN WHO SAID THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT FEAR, POLICE STICKS AND TEAR GAS CANNOT DESTROY. WE'VE NEVER MET THESE PEOPLE. BUT WE KNOW THEM. THEIR VOICES ECHO CALLS FOR HUMAN DIGNITY THAT RANG OUT IN EUROPEAN STREETS AND SQUARES FOR GENERATIONS. THEIR VOICES ECHOED THOSE AROUND THE WORLD WHO AT THIS VERY MOMENT FIGHT FOR THEIR DIGNITY. THESE UKRAINIANS REJECTED A GOVERNMENT THAT WAS STEALING FROM THE PEOPLE INSTEAD OF SERVING THEM AND ARE REACHING FOR THE SAME IDEALS THAT ALLOW US TO BE HERE TODAY. NONE OF US CAN KNOW FOR CERTAIN WHAT THE COMING DAYS WILL BRING IN UKRAINE. BUT I AM CONFIDENT THAT EVENTUALLY, THOSE VOICES, THOSE VOICES FOR HUMAN DIGNITY AND OPPORTUNITY AND INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND RULE OF LAW, THOSE VOICES ULTIMATELY WILL TRIUMPH. I BELIEVE THAT OVER THE LONG NAUG AS NATIONS THAT ARE TREE, AS FREE PEOPLE, THE FUTURE IS OURS. I BELIEVE THIS NOT BECAUSE I'M NAIVE AND I BELIEVE THIS NOT BECAUSE OF THE STRENGTH OF OUR ARMS OR THE SIZE OF OUR ECONOMIES. I BELIEVE THIS BECAUSE THESE IDEALS THAT WE AFFIRM ARE TRUE. THESE IDEALS ARE UNIVERSAL. YES, WE BELIEVE IN DEMOCRACY. WITH ELECTIONS THAT ARE FREEN AFFAIR. AND INDEPENDENT JUDICIARIES AND OPPOSITION PARTIES. CIVIL SOCIETY. AND UNSENSE SCORED INFORMATION SO THAT INDIVIDUALS CAN MAKE THEIR OWN CHOICES. YES, WE BELIEVE IN OPEN ECONOMIES BASED ON FREE MARKETS AND INNOVATION AND INDIVIDUAL INITIATIVE AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND TRADE AND INVESTMENT THAT CREATES A BROUTDER PROSPERITY. AND YES, WE BELIEVE IN HUMAN DIGNITY THAT EVERY PERSON IS CREATED EQUAL NO MATTER WHO YOU ARE OR WHAT YOU LOOK LIKE OR HOW LOVE OR WHERE YOU COME FROM. THAT IS WHAT WE BELIEVE. THAT'S WHAT MAKES US STRONG. AND OUR ENDURING STRENGTH IS ALSO REFLECTED IN OUR RESPECT FOR AN INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM THAT PROTECTS THE RIGHTS OF BOTH NATIONS AND PEOPLE. A UNITED NATIONS AND A UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS. INTERNATIONAL LAW AND THE MEANS TO ENFORCE THOSE LAWS. BUT WE ALSO KNOW THAT THOSE RULES ARE NOT SELF-EXECUTING. THEY DEPEND ON PEOPLE AND NATIONS OF GOOD WILL CONTINUALLY AFFIRMING THEM, AND THAT'S WHY RUSSIA'S VIOLATION OF INTERNATIONAL LAW, ITS ASSAULT ON U JANE'S INTEGRITY MUST BE MET WITH CONDEMNATION, NOT BECAUSE WE'RE TRYING TO KEEP RUSSIA DOWN BUT BECAUSE THE PRINCIPLES THAT HAVE MEANT SO MUCH TO EUROPE AND THE WORLD MUST BE LIFTED UP. OVER THE LAST SEVERAL DAYS, THE UNITED STATES, EUROPE AND OUR PARTNERS AROUND THE WORLD HAVE BEEN UNITED IN DEFENSE OF THESE IDEALS. AND UNITIED IN SUPPORT OF THE UKRAINIAN PEOPLE. TOGETHER, WE'VE CONDEMNED RUSSIA'S INVASION OF UKRAINE AND REJECTED THE LEGITIMACY OF THE CRIMEAN REFERENDUM. TOGETHER, WE HAVE ISOLATED RUSSIA POLITICALLY, SUSPENDING IT FROM THE G-8 NATIONS AND DOWNGRADING OUR BILATERAL TIES. TOGETHER, WE ARE IMPOSING COSTS THROUGH SANCTIONS THAT HAVE LEFT A MARK ON RUSSIA AND THOSE ACCOUNTABLE FOR ITS ACTIONS. AND IF THE RUSSIAN LEADERSHIP STAYS ON ITS CURRENT COURSE TOGETHER WE WILL INSURE THAT THIS ISOLATION DEEPENS. SANCTIONS WILL EXPAND. AND THE TOLL ON RUSSIA'S ECONOMY AS WELL AS ITS STANDING IN THE WORLD WILL ONLY INCREASE. AND MEANWHILE, THE UNITED STATES AND OUR ALLIES WILL CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THE GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE AS THEY CHART A DEMOCRATIC COURSE. TOGETHER, WE ARE GOING TO PROVIDE A SIGNIFICANT PACKAGE OF ASSISTANCE THAT CAN BE HELP STABILIZE THE UKRAINIAN ECONOMY AND MEET THE BASIC NEEDS OF THE PEOPLE. MAKE NO MISTAKE. NEITHER THE UNITED STATES NOR EUROPE HAS ANY INTEREST IN CONTROLLING UKRAINE. WE HAVE SEPTEMBERNT NO TROOPS THERE. WHAT WE WANT IS FOR THE UKRAINIAN PEOPLE TO MAKE THEIR OWN DECISIONS JUST LIKE OTHER FREE PEOPLE AROUND THE WORLD. UNDERSTAND, AS WELL, THIS IS NOT ANOTHER COLD WAR THAT WE'RE ENTERING INTO. AFTER ALL, UNLIKE THE SOVIET UNION, RUSSIA LEADS NO BLOC OF NATIONS, NO GLOBAL IDEOLOGY. THE UNITED STATES AND NATO DO NOT SEEK ANY CONFLICT WITH RUSSIA. IN FACT, FOR MORE THAN 60 YEARS, WE HAVE COME TOGETHER IN NATO NOT TO CLAIM OTHER LANDS BUT TO KEEP NATIONS FREE. WHAT WE WILL DO ALWAYS IS UPHOLD OUR SOLEMN OBLIGATION, OUR ARTICLE 5 DUTY TO DEFEND THE SOVEREIGNTY AND TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY OF OUR ALLIES. AND IN THAT PROMISE, WE WILL NEVER WAIVER. NATO NATIONS NEVER STAND ALONE. TODAY, NATO PLANES PATROL THE SKIES OVER THE BAT TICKS AND WE'VE REINFORCED OUR PRESENCE IN POE LAND, AND WE'RE PREPARED TO DO MORE. GOING FORWARD, EVERY NATO MEMBER STATE MUST STEP UP AND CARRY ITS SHARE OF THE BURDEN. BY SHOWING THE POLITICAL WILL TO INVEST IN OUR COLLECTIVE DEFENSE AND BY DEVELOPING THE CAPABLES TO SERVE AS A SOURCE OF INTERNATIONAL PEACE AND SECURITY. OF COURSE, UKRAINE IS NOT A MEMBER OF NATO. IN PART BECAUSE OF ITS CLOSE AND COMPLEX HISTORY WITH RUSSIA. NOR WILL RUSSIA BE DISLODGED FROM CRIMEA OR DETERRED FROM FROM FURTHER EXCALATION BY MILITARY FORCE. BUT WITH TIME, SO LONG AS WE REMAIN UNITED, THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE WILL RECOGNIZE THAT THEY CANNOT ACHIEVE THE SECURITY, PROSPERITY AND THE STATUS THAT THEY SEEK THROUGH BRUTE FORCE. THAT'S WHY THROUGHOUT THIS CRISIS, WE WILL COMBINE OUR SUBSTANTIAL PRESSURE ON RUSSIA WITH AN OPEN DOOR FOR DIPLOMACY. I BELIEVE THAT FOR BOTH UKRAINE AND RUSSIA, A STABLE PEACE WILL COME THROUGH DEESCALATION. DIRECT DIALOGUE BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE AND THE INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY, MONITORS WHO CAN ENSURE THAT THE RIGHTS OF ALL UKRAINIANS ARE PROTECTED, A PROCESS OF CONSTITUTIONAL REFORM WITHIN UKRAINE, AND FREE AND FAIR ELECTIONS THIS SPRING. SO FAR, RUSSIA HAS RESISTED DIPLOMATIC OVERTURES ANNEXING CRIMEA AND MASSING LARGE FORCES ALONG UKRAINE'S BORDER. RUSSIA'S JUSTIFIED THESE ACTIONS AS AN EFFORT TO PREVENT PROBLEMS ON ITS OWN BORDERS. AND TO PROTECT ETHNIC RUSSIANS INSIDE UKRAINE. OF COURSE, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE, NEVER HAS BEEN OF SYSTEMIC VIOLENCE AGAINST ETHNIC RUSSIANS INSIDE OF UKRAINE. MOREOVER, MANY COUNTRIES AROUND THE WORLD FACE SIMILAR QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR BORDERS AND ETHNIC MINORITIES ABROAD. ABOUT SOVEREIGNTY AND SELF-DETERMINATION. THESE ARE TENSIONS THAT HAVE LED IN OTHER PLACES TO DEBATE AND DEMOCRATIC REFERENDUMS. CONFLICTS AND UNEASY COEXISTENCE, THESE ARE DIFFICULT ISSUES AND IT IS PRECISELY BECAUSE THESE QUESTIONS ARE HARD THAT THEY MUST BE ADDRESSED THROUGH CONSTITUTIONAL MEANS. AND INTERNATIONAL LAWS. SO THAT MAJORITIES CANNOT SIMPLY SUPPRESS MINORITIES AND BIG COUNTRIES CANNOT SIMPLY BULLY THE SMALL. IN DEFENDING ITS ACTIONS, RUSSIAN LEADERS HAVE FURTHER CLAIMED KOSOVO AS A PRECEDENT. AN EXAMPLE THEY SAY OF THE WEST INTERFERING IN THE AFFAIRS OF A SMALLER COUNTRY JUST AS THEY'RE DOING NOW. BUT NATO ONLY INTERVENED AFTER THE PEOPLE OF KOSOVO WERE SYSTEMATICALLY BRUTALIZED AND KILLED FOR YEARS. AND KOSOVO ONLY LEFT SERBIA AFTER A REFERENDUM WAS ORGANIZED NOT OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARIES OF INTERNATIONAL LAW BUT IN CAREFUL COOPERATION WITH THE UNITED NATIONS AND WITH KOSOVO'S NEIGHBORS. NONE OF THAT EVEN CAME CLOSE TO HAPPENING IN CRIMEA. MOREOVER, RUSSIA HAS POINTED TO AMERICA'S DECISION TO GO INTO IRAQ AS AN EXAMPLE OF WESTERN HYPOCRISY. IT IS TRUE THAT THE IRAQ WAR WAS A SUBJECT OF VIGOROUS DEBATE, NOT JUST AROUND THE WORLD BUT IN THE UNITED STATES, AS WELL. I PARTICIPATED IN THAT DEBATE. AND I OPPOSED OUR MILITARY INTERVENTION THERE. BUT EVEN IN IRAQ, AMERICA SOUGHT TO WORK WITHIN THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM. WE DID NOT CLAIM OR ANNEX IRAQ'S TERRITORY. WE DID NOT GRAB ITS RESOURCES FOR OUR OWN GAIN. INSTEAD, WE ENDED OUR WARREN AN LEFT IRAQ TO ITS PEOPLE IN A FULLY SOVEREIGN IRAQI STATE THAT CAN MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT ITS OWN FUTURE. OF COURSE, NEITHER THE UNITED STATES NOR EUROPE ARE PERFECT IN ADHERENCE TO OUR IDEALS. NOR DO WE CLAIM TO BE THE SOLE ARBITOR OF WHAT IS RIGHT OR WRONG IN THE WORLD. WE ARE HUMAN, AFTER ALL. AND WE FACE DIFFICULT DECISIONS ABOUT HOW TO EXERCISE OUR POWER. BUT PART OF WHAT MAKES US DIFFERENT IS THAT WE WELCOME CRITICISM. JUST AS WE WELCOME THE RESPONSIBILITIES THAT COME WITH GLOBAL LEADERSHIP. WE LOOK TO THE EAST AND THE SOUTH AND SEE NATIONS POISED TO PLAY A GROWING ROLE ON A WORLD STAGE AND WE CONSIDER THAT A GOOD THING. IT REFLECTS THE SAME DIVERSITY THAT MAKES US STRONGER AS A NATION. AND THE FORCES OF INTEGRATION AND COOPERATION THAT EUROPE HAS ADVANCED FOR DECADES. AND IN A WORLD OF CHALLENGES THAT ARE INCREASINGLY GLOBAL, ALL OF US HAVE AN INTEREST IN NATIONS STEPPING FORWARD TO PLAY THEIR PART. TO BEAR THEIR SHARE OF THE BURDEN. AND TO UPHOLD INTERNATIONAL NORMS. SO OUR APPROACH STANDS IN STARK CONTRAST TO THE ARGUMENTS COMING OUT OF RUSSIA THESE DAYS. IT IS ABSURD TO SUGGEST, AS A STEADY DRUM BEAT OF RUSSIAN VOICES DO, THAT AMERICA IS SOMEHOW CONSPIREING WITH FASCISTS INSIDE OF UKRAINE OR FAILING TO RESPECT THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE. MY GRABBED FATHER SERVED IN PATTON'S ARMY. JUST AS MANY OF YOUR FATHERS AND GRANDFATHERS FOUGHT AGAINST FASCISM. WE AMERICANS REMEMBER WELL THE UNIMAGINABLE SACRIFICES MADE BY THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE IN WORLD WAR II, AND WE HAVE HONORED THOSE SACRIFICES. SINCE THE END OF THE COLD WAR, WE HAVE WORKED WITH RUSSIA UNDER SUCCESSIVE ADMINISTRATIONS TO BUILD TIES OF CULTURE AND COMMERCE AND INTERNATIONAL COMMUNITY. NOT AS A FAVOR TO RUSSIA, BUT BECAUSE IT OF IN OUR NATIONAL INTERESTS. AND TOGETHER WE'VE SECURED NUCLEAR MATERIALS FROM TERRORISTS. WE WELCOMED RUSSIA INTO THE G-AND THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION. FROM THE REDUCTION OF NUCLEAR ARMS TO THE ELIMINATION OF SYRIA'S CHEMICAL WEAPONS, WE BELIEVE THE WORLD HAS BENEFITED WHEN RUSSIA CHOOSES TO COOPERATE ON THE BASIS OF MUTUAL INTERESTS AND MUTUAL RESPECT. SO AMERICA AND THE WORLD AND EUROPE HAS AN INTEREST IN A STRONG AND RESPONSIBLE RUSSIA. NOT A WEAK ONE. WE WANT THE RUSSIAN PEOPLE TO LIVE IN SECURITY, PROSPERITY AND DIGNITY LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. PROUD OF THEIR OWN HISTORY. BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT RUSSIA CAN RUN ROUGHSHOD OVER ITS NEIGHBORS. JUST BECAUSE RUSSIA HAS A DEEP HISTORY WITH UKRAINE DOES NOT MEAN IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO DICTATE UKRAINE'S FUTURE. NO AMOUNT OF PROPAGANDA CAN MAKE RIGHT SOMETHING THAT THE WORLD KNOWS IS WRONG. IN THE END, EVERY SOCIETY MUST CHART ITS OWN COURSE. AMERICA'S PATH OR EUROPE'S PATH IS NOT THE ONLY WAYS TO REACH FREEDOM AND JUSTICE. BUT ON THE FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLE THAT IS AT STAKE HERE, THE ABILITY OF NATIONS AND PEOPLES TO MAKE THEIR OWN CHOICES, THERE CAN BE NO GOING BACK. IT'S NOT AMERICA THAT IF I HAD THE MADON WITH PROTESTERS. IT WAS UKRAINE CANADIANS. NO FOREIGN FORCES COMPELLED THE CITIZENS OF TUNIS AND TRIPOLI TO RISE UP. THEY DID SO ON THEIR OWN. FROM THE BURMESE PARLIAMENTARIAN PURSUING REFORM TO THE YOUNG LEADERS FIGHTING CORRUPTION AND INTOLERANCE IN AFRICA, WE SEE SOMETHING IRREDUCIBLE THAT ALL OF US SHARE AS HUMAN BEINGS. A TRUTH THAT WILL PERSEVERE IN THE FACE OF VIOLENCE AND REPRESSION AND WILL ULTIMATELY OVERCOME. FOR THE YOUNG PEOPLE HERE TODAY, I KNOW IT MAY SEEM EASY TO SEE THESE EVENTS AS REMOVED FROM OUR LIVES. REMOTE FROM OUR DAILY ROUTINES. DISTANT FROM CONCERNS CLOSER TO HOME. I RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH IN THE UNITED STATES AND IN MUCH OF EUROPE, THERE'S MORE THAN ENOUGH TO WORRY ABOUT IN THE AFFAIRS OF OUR OWN COUNTRIES. THERE WILL ALWAYS BE VOICES WHO SAY THAT WHAT HAPPENS IN THE WIDER WORLD IS NOT OUR CONCERN. NOR OUR RESPONSIBILITY. BUT WE MUST NEVER FORGET THAT WE ARE HEIRS TO A STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM. OUR DEMOCRACY, OUR INDIVIDUAL OPPORTUNITY, ONLY EXISTS BECAUSE THOSE WHO CAME BEFORE US HAD THE WISDOM AND THE COURAGE TO RECOGNIZE THAT OUR IDEALS WILL ONLY ENDURE IF WE SEE OUR SELF-INTEREST IN THE SUCCESS OF OTHER PEOPLES AND OTHER NATIONS. MOU IS NOT THE TIME FOR BLUSTER. THE SITUATION IN UKRAINE LIKE CRISISES IN MANY PARTS OF THE WORLD, DOES NOT HAVE EASY ANSWERS. NOR A MILITARY SOLUTION. BUT AT THIS MOMENT, WE MUST MEET THE CHALLENGE TO OUR IDEALS. TO OUR VERY INTERNATIONAL ORDER WITH STRENGTH AND CONVICTION. AND IT IS YOU, THE YOUNG PEOPLE OF EUROPE, YOUNG PEOPLE LIKE LAURA, WHO WILL HELP DECIDE WHICH WAY THE CURRENTS OF OUR HISTORY WILL FLOW. DO NOT THINK FOR A MOMENT THAT YOUR OWN FREEDOM, YOUR OWN PROSPERITY, THAT YOUR OWN MORAL IMAGINATION IS BOUND BY THE LIMITS OF YOUR COMMUNITY, YOUR ETHNICITY OR EVEN YOUR COUNTRY. YOU'RE BIGGER THAN THAT. YOU CAN HELP US TO CHOOSE A BETTER HISTORY. THAT'S WHAT EUROPE TELLS US. THAT'S WHAT THE AMERICAN EXPERIENCE IS ALL ABOUT. I SAY THIS AS THE PRESIDENT OF A COUNTRY THAT LOOKED TO EUROPE FOR THE VALUES THAT ARE WRITTEN INTO OUR FOUNDING DOCUMENTS AND WHICH SPILLED BLOOD TO ENSURE THAT THOSE VALUES COULD ENDURE ON THESE SHORES. I ALSO SAY THIS AS THE SON OF A KENYAN WHOSE GRANDFATHER WAS A COOK FOR THE BRITISH. AND AS A PERSON WHO ONCE LIVED IN IPNDIANA DOENESIA AS IT EMERGED FROM COLONIALISM. THE IDEALS THAT UNITE US MATTER EQUALLY TO THE YOUNG PEOPLE OF BOSTON OR BRUSSELS OR JAKARTA OR NAROBI OR KIEV. IN THE END THE SUCCESS OF OUR IDEALS COMES DOWN TO US INCLUDING THE EXAMPLE OF OUR OWN LIVES, OUR OWN SOCIETIES. WE KNOW THAT THERE WILL ALSO BE INTOLERANCE. INSTEAD OF FEARING THE IMMIGRANT WE CAN WELLCOMEWELCOME. WE CAN INSIST ON POLICIES THAT BENEFIT THE MANY AND NOT JUST THE FEW, THAT AN AGE OF GLOBALIZATION AND DIZZYING CHANGE OPENS THE DOOR OF OPPORTUNITY TO THE MARGINALIZED AND NOT JUST A PRIVILEGED FEW. INSTEAD OF TARGETING OUR GAY AND LESBIAN BROTHERS AND SISTERS WE CAN USE OUR LAWS TO PROTECT THEIR RIGHTS INSTEAD OF DEFINING OURSELVES IN OPPOSITION TO OTHERS WE CAN AFFIRM THE ASPIRATIONS THAT WE HOLD IN COMMON. THAT IS WHAT WILL MAKE AMERICA STRONG. THAT IS WHAT WILL MAKE EUROPE STRONG. THAT'S WHAT MAKES US WHO WE ARE. AND JUST AS WE MEET OUR RESPONSIBILITIES AS INDIVIDUALS, WE MUST BE PREPARED TO MEET THEM AS NATIONS. BECAUSE WE LIVE IN A WORLD IN WHICH OUR IDEALS ARE GOING TO BE CHALLENGED AGAIN AND AGAIN BY FORCEST THAT WILL DRAG US BACK INTO CONFLICT OR CORRUPTION. WE CAN'T COUNT ON OTHERS TO RISE TO MEET THOSE TESTS. THE POLICIES OF YOUR GOVERNMENT, THE PRINCIPLES OF YOUR EUROPEAN UNION WILL MAKE A CRITICAL DIFFERENCE IN WHETHER OR NOT THE INTERNATIONAL ORDER THAT SO MANY GENERATIONS BEFORE YOU HAVE STRIVED TO CREATE CONTINUES TO MOVE FORWARD OR WHETHER IT RETREATS. THAT'S THE QUESTION WE ALL MUST ANSWER. WHAT KIND OF EUROPE, WHAT KIND OF AMERICA, WHAT KIND OF WORLD WILL WE LEAVE BEHIND? I BELIEVE IF WE HOLD FIRM TO OUR PRINCIPLES AND ARE WILLING TO BACK OUR BELIEF WITH COURAGE AND RESOLVE THEN HOPE WILL ULTIMATELY OVERCOME FEAR AND FREEDOM WILL CONTINUE TO TRIUMPH OVER TYRANNY. BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT FOREVER STIRS IN THE HUMAN HEART.

In Dec. 2002, Dr. Anthony Fauci described how the distinction between "bioweapons" and "biodefense" does not exist, as later demonstrated by his gain-of-function research: "I found myself again, never imagining that I would be doing this, needing to learn from people that I never thought I would be learning things from, namely bioweaponers. People who are our own bioweaponers in the US decades ago, international figures, people from other countries, the UK, and also importantly, defectors particularly from the Soviet Union who had vast experience in the ways of biowarfare."

The Out Of Shadows documentary lifts the mask on how the mainstream media & Hollywood manipulate & control the masses by spreading propaganda throughout their content. Our goal is to wake up the general public by shedding light on how we all have been lied to & brainwashed by a hidden enemy with a sinister agenda. This project is the result of two years of blood, sweat and tears by a team of woke professionals. It’s been independently produced and funded and is available on many different platforms for FREE for anyone to watch. Patriots made this documentary with the sole purpose of getting the truth out there. If you like the documentary, please share this video. You can support our team and future projects by making a donation below. Visit the Out of Shadows Website and support them. - https://www.outofshadows.org/

Dutch MEP Rob Roos says "climate change" is a fabricated crisis, adding, "We are heading to a new kind of communism."

Leroy Fletcher Prouty Jr. 00.00.00-00.04.08: DISC 1, press (free) 00.04.09-00.07.20: hemp, sassafras, Moxy 00.07.21-00.15.00: tungsten, rubber, Garden of Eden, Vietnam, Kissinger 00.15.00-00.23.20: oil(petroleum)/“fossil fuel”, 1892, Rockefeller 00.23.21-00.25.02: Federal Reserve, Treasury Act, Executive Orders, silver dollars 00.25.03-00.30.28: JFK, LBJ, Hoover 00.30.29-00.44.00: Gen. Lansdale, Carino(Philippines), CIA in Vietnam 1945-1965 00.44.01-00.54.36: Tehran Conference, FDR, Stalin, Mao, Chang, Churchill 00.54.36-01.01.10: Russia, Nazis, Cold War, $6 trillion 01.01.11-01.03.12: DISC 2, Bay of Pigs, Castro 01.03.13-01.07.00: computers in banks, Airlink, Federal Reserve 01.07.00-01.14.30: Amtrak, infrastructure 01.14.31-01.16.22: media 01.16.23-01.21.45: childhood, singing 01.21.45-01.26.12: US fighting in Russia 01.26.12-01.30.15: Stilwell, paid in opium 01.30.15-01.37.05: E.I.C., smuggling drugs via Gulf oil rigs, Air Defense Command 01.37.05-01.40.02: B-2 bomber, whistleblower, C-17 01.40.02-01.59.38: follow up questioning: Tehran Conference, Skull & Bones, … 01.59.39-02.03.59: JFK film(Costner, Sutherland, Stone, …) Leroy Fletcher Prouty Jr., 84, a retired Air Force colonel who also worked for Washington area corporations, died of multiple organ failure June 5 at Inova Alexandria Hospital. He lived in Alexandria. Col. Prouty was born in Springfield, Mass. As a young man, he sang with professional big bands in New England. He was a graduate of the University of Massachusetts. He served with the Army Air Forces during World War II as a transport pilot in North Africa and Saudi Arabia. After the war, he was assigned to Yale University, where he established an ROTC program, and to the Air Defense Command in Colorado Springs in 1950. He was a squadron commander stationed in Japan during the Korean War. Prior to his retirement in 1963, he worked at the Pentagon. His honors included the Legion of Merit. After he left the military, Col. Prouty was vice president for general operations of General Aircraft Corp., vice president and Pentagon branch manager of First National Bank of Arlington and vice president of marketing at Madison National Bank. Prior to his second retirement in the 1970s, he helped establish the government marketing division at Amtrak and was a speechwriter for the corporation's president. Col. Prouty held a patent for a disposable razor with a continuous, rotating blade and wrote two books, "The Secret Team" and "JFK: The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy." He was a consultant to Oliver Stone on the movie "JFK." His other interests included painting. Survivors include his wife of 59 years, Elizabeth Prouty of Alexandria; three children, David Prouty of Laurel, Jane Prouty of Santa Fe, N.M., and Lauren Prouty of Lynchburg, Va. Col. L. Fletcher Prouty (USAF) Born: Springfield, Mass., January 24, 1917. Attended public schools. President, High School Student Government. Member, undefeated Golf Team. Vocalist with Big Bands, sang in most large dance halls, hotels and colleges in Northeast. Graduate: Mass. State College 1941, A.B. degree and 2nd Lt. Commission, U.S. Cavalry. June 1941 Began military career with 4th Armored Division, Pine Camp, NY. At Communications Officer School, Ft. Knox, KY, on December 7, 1941[Pearl Harbor]. Transferred to Air Force 1942. Earned Pilot's wings November, 1942. Arrived British West Africa [Ghana], February 1943 as pilot with Air Transport Command. Assigned to V.I.P. flying, summer 1943. Personal pilot for Gen. Omar Bradley, Gen. J. C. H. Lee and Gen. C. R. Smith (Founder and President - American Airlines), among others. Landed U.S. Geological Survey Team in Saudi Arabia, Oct 1943, to confirm oil discoveries for Cairo Conference. Assigned special duties at Cairo and Teheran Conferences, November-December 1943. Flew Chiang Kai Shek's Chinese delegation (T.V. Soong's delegates) to Teheran. Chief Pilot (1,200 pilots), Cairo for Air Transport Command. Led special air mission into Soviet Union, and others into Turkey, 1944. Evacuated "Guns of Navaronne" British commandos from Turkey to Palestine. Assisted in capture of leader of German Gold smuggling ring (The actor, Bruce Cabot) in Turkey and Cairo. Led large flight of transport aircraft to Turkish-Syrian border to evacuate 750 American POW's and OSS-selected Ex-Nazi Intelligence experts from the Balkans, September 1944. The first "overt" Cold War mission. 1945 Transferred to SW Pacific, flew in New Guinea, Leyte and was on Okinawa at end of war. Landed near Tokyo at surrender with first three planes carrying Gen. MacArthur's bodyguard troops. Flew out with American POWs. Photographed Hiroshima, that date. 1946-49 Assigned by Army to Yale University to begin first USAF ROTC program. Taught "Aeronautics" and "Evolution of Warfare". Transferred to U.S. Air Force ROTC headquarters to write college text books. Wrote the college textbook on "Aeronautics" and another on "Rockets and Missiles". 1950-52 Transferred to Colorado Springs to establish Air Defense Command. There, Director, Personnel Planning for Command (77,000 men) and first to put personnel records on Computer. Attended Nuclear Weapons school, Sandia, N.M. Selected for Air Force Command and Staff College, Montgomery, Ala. 1952-54 Assigned to Korean War duties in Japan. Military Manager, Tokyo International Airport (Haneda) during Occupation. Commander, Military Air Transport Service, Heavy Transport Squadron responsible for military and diplomatic flights from Toyko to Saudi Arabia and back, in addition to daily flights to Korea, Honolulu and Pacific Islands. Founder, Toyko Toastmasters Club. Attended, JCS operated Armed Forces Staff College, Norfolk, 1955 1955-1964 Assigned to Headquarters, U.S. Air Force and directed to create an Air Force world-wide system for "Military Support of the Clandestine Operations of the CIA", as required by a new National Security Council Directive, 5412 of March, 1954. Wrote this policy in conjunction with Air Force General Counsel and CIA's General Counsel. Set up a TOP SECRET world wide support force and communications system. Was sent around the world by the Director, Central Intelligence, Allen W. Dulles, to meet the CIA Station Chiefs, 1956. Directed Air Force participation in countless CIA operations during this period. As a result of a CIA Commendation for this work, awarded the Legion of Merit by the Air Force, promoted to Colonel and assigned to the Office of the Secretary of Defense to carry out this same type of work for all military services. Assigned to the Office of Special Operations. With the creation of the Defense Intelligence Agency by Secretary McNamara and the abolishment of the OSO, was transferred to the Office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to create a similar, world-wide office and was the Chief of Special Operations, with the Joint Staff all during 1962-1963. Received orders to travel as the Military Escort officer for a group of VIPs who were being flown to the South Pole, Nov 10 - Nov 28, 1963, to activate a Nuclear Power plant for heat, light and sea water desalination at the U.S. Navy Base at McMurdo Sound, Antarctica. Retired as Colonel, U.S. Air Force, 1964 and was awarded one of the first three Joint Chiefs of Staff Commendation Medals by General Maxwell Taylor, Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff. 1964-1965 VP International Operations, General Aircraft Corporation... a company created by MIT and Harvard specialists that designed and built aircraft that were used by the CIA and Army Special Forces. 1965-1968 VP-Manager, Pentagon Branch, First National Bank, Arlington, VA, later VP-Marketing, 1965-1968. VP-Marketing, Madison National Bank, Washington, DC, 1968-1971. Graduate, Graduate School of Banking, University of Wisconsin, 1966 - 1968. Charter Member, American Bankers Association committee for Automation, Planning and Technology to develop plans to convert all U.S. banks to automation, including the Federal Reserve System. President, Financial Marketing Council of Greater Washington, D.C. Member, Advertising Club of Washington, D.C. 1971 AMTRAK, as Manager, created nationwide Government and Military Marketing organization. Senior Director, Public Affairs, corporate speechwriter for Presidents and members of the Board, 1972-1982. Retired. Author, Public Speaker, radio and TV, 1950 to present. Book "The Secret Team", Prentice-Hall, 1973, and paperback by Ballantine, 1974. Worked with all major USA TV networks, and with BBC-TV, CBC-TV, Japanese, Australian Broadcast Commission and others. For McGraw-Hill Scientific Encyclopedia wrote "Railroad Engineering" section, and for its "Scientific Yearbook-1982" yearbook, wrote "Foreign Railroad Technology". For Traffic Quarterly and Congressional Record, wrote "Transportation at the Crossroads", July 1981. Numerous magazine articles from New Republic to Air Force, Gallery, Genesis, and Freedom magazines. Recently - Consultant: Rail Transportation for Northrop Services Inc., Northrup Corp. and for Ohio Rail Transportation Authority. Assisted Chairman, Joint Economics Committee of the Congress to set up International Hearings and to write "Rail Passenger Services Act of 1981". At request of Oliver Stone, worked as Creative Advisor (1990-1991) on production of his film "JFK" and was the original for "Man X" character played by Donald Sutherland. New Book, "JFK, the CIA, Vietnam and the Plot to Assassinate John F. Kennedy" published by Birch Lane Press, 1992. Additional data: a) By direction of the Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara, a Founder, of the International Air Traffic Controllers Assn. b) Founder, Tokyo Toastmasters Club c) A Charter member, American Bankers Assn, Committee of Automation Planning and Technology. d) A graduate of the American Bankers Assn, Graduate School of Banking, University of Wisconsin. e) Guest Lecturer, American University. f) Staff, Cairo Conference, 1943 g) Staff, Teheran Conference, 1943

BILDERBERG MEETINGS Noteworthy author: Daniel Estulin, for more in depth information. BEHIND THE SCENES By William P. Litynski Extract from H. R. H. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands: an authorized biography by Alden Hatch The Hôtel de Bilderberg At a small hotel near Arnhem in the deeply wooded uplands of eastern Holland on May 29, 30, and 31, 1954, a group of eminent statesmen, financiers, and intellectuals from the principal nations of Europe and the United States met together in, perhaps, the most unusual international conference ever held until then. There was absolutely no publicity. The hotel was ringed by security guards, so that not a single journalist got within a mile of the place. The participants were pledged not to repeat publicly what was said in the discussions. Every person present-Prime Ministers, Foreign Ministers, leaders of political parties, heads of great banks and industrial companies, and representatives of such international organizations as the European Coal and steel Community, as well as academicians-was magically stripped of his office as he entered the door, and became a simple citizen of his country for the duration of the conference. Thus everybody could and did say what he really thought without fear of international, political, or financial repercussions. That meeting and the subsequent ones that stemmed from it, which have had a great if indefinite impact on the history of our times, are, perhaps, int this writer's opinion, Prince Bernhard's proudest achievement in the field of Western unity and international amity. It was not Bernhard's original idea, but had its inception in the brilliant brain of Dr. Joseph H. Retinger. Retinger was an extraordinary character who flitted through Europe talking on intimate terms with Prime Ministers, labour leaders, industrial magnates, revolutionaries, and intellectuals-in short, all the non-Communist rulers and would-be rulers of the free nations of Europe. Kraków, in Austrian Poland, was Retinger's birthplace; his parents were landed gentry. When he went to the Sorbonne in Paris in 1906, at the age of eighteen, this boy talked his way into the heart of that city's literary and artistic life, and was called friend by such as André Gide, Giraudoux, François Mauriac, Maurice Ravel, and the raffish Marquis Boni de Castellane. When he moved on to England, Herbert Asquith, his wife, outspoken Margot, and Lord Balfour took him into their circle, and his most intimate friend was his fellow-Pole, Joseph Conrad. Retinger had what C. D. Jackson calls "a built-in instinct for intrigue" and a passionate love for Poland. During World War I his machinations for a free Poland made him uniquely unpopular. The Central Powers put a price on his head, the Allies banned him from all their countries, and the United States threw him into jail. These experiences taught him to be a better diplomat. In World War II Retinger was closely associated with General Sikorsky, head of the Polish Government in Exile, as liaison man with the other exiled Governments. In 1944 General Sir Colin Gubbins of The S.O.E. (the super-secret Special Operations Executive) arranged for him to be parachuted into Poland with several million dollars for the Polish Resistance. At the age of fifty-six Retinger jumped at night into a field in enemy territory, and accomplished his mission. However, his legs became paralysed, probably as a result of the jump, and he had to be spirited out of Poland on a stretcher. From that time until his death in 1960 Dr Retinger devoted his life to his one impassioned, idealistic purpose of uniting and strengthening the Western world against the danger from the East. Jackson says, "He was a sort of Eminence grise of Europe, a Talleyrand without portfolio." Certainly he had almost as many adventures as Ian Fleming's famous secret-service operative James Bond. Retinger was a frail, delicate little man with a deeply seamed face and quizzical eyes behind blue-tinted spectacles. His big jaw was never still, for he talked volcanically. After the parachute jump he always walked with a cane. C.D. jackson, who often clashed with him, said Retinger was "a very difficult, very opinionated man who would not take no for an answer and often achieved his purpose by very devious means. But nevertheless he was fearless and determined, a tremendously gallant guy." Though people persist in calling Retinger an eighteenth-century man functioning in the twentieth century, he was not that at all. He cam,e straight out of the Renaissance. Instead of the sceptical, précieuse attitude typical of the eighteenth century, his Jesuitical conviction that the end justified the means, and a Borgian aptitude for intrigue; but the ends he sought were never selfish. They were good. Though his name is virtually unknown except to the initiates, he made more history in his secret way than many a man who moved to the sound of trumpets and the howl of motor-cycle sirens. According to the official publication of the European Centre of Culture, "Retinger was the key figure in most of the great European union. The League of European Economic Cooperation (from which evolved the Common Market), the European Movement, and . the European Centre of Culture would not have seen the light without him. The Congress of Europe at The Hague was his doing, and the Council of Europe grew out of that." Being above all a realist, Retinger understood that even a united Europe could not stand by itself without America. In 1952 he became deeply concerned about the rising tide of anti-Americanism in practically every country of Western Europe. It was not confined to Communist-in?influenced or left-wing circles, but was equally prevalent among conservatives and liberals. The United States was disliked, feared, and sneered at with a unanimity that was remarkable among the peoples of Europe. This feeling threatened the solidarity of the Western world's defences against Communism. Retinger was not the type of man to sit wringing his hands. He evolved a brilliant plan for coping with this situation, but he needed powerful assistance to put it into effect. So he asked his friend Dr. Paul Rijkens to get him an appointment with Prince Bernhard, who has described their meeting: "It all stated when Retinger came to me and sat here in this room and told me about his worries concerning the rising tide of anti- Americanism in Europe. I was worried about it, too. It seemed illogical in the face of the Marshall Plan, military assistance, NATO, etc., which had done so much for all of us. I suppose it was partly the natural human instinct to bite the hand that feeds you, and partly real grievances. I said to him, 'Yes, you're quite right. It's very bad.' Retinger said, 'Well, would you like to do something about it?' And I said, 'Of course.'" Sitting on the edge of an easy chair in Bernhard's trophy-filled study, with his cane between his spindly legs, his inevitable cigarette burning furiously, and his eyes shooting sparks behind his blue-tinted spectacles, Retinger outlined his plan for bringing about better understanding between the touchy, suspicious Europeans and Americans. It consisted of two parts. The first was to get the leaders of opinion in the most important European countries to make an appraisal of where the Americans were wrong, apart from being rich,m powerful, generous, and rather stupid, and what they could do to put things right. The second was to present this frank critique to leaders of American opinion and give them an opportunity to answer the indictment at a completely private meeting of top-level people from both continents. Bernhard was all for it, but an unusual instinct for caution made him say, "It sounds wonderful, but I'd like another opinion. Let's find out what van Zeeland thinks about it." (Van Zeeland was Prime Minister of Belgium.) Van Zeeland thought something should be done, and quickly. Reinforced by his approval, Bernhard went to work with Retinger reckoned, could supply the answers. The idea was to get two people from each country who would give the conservative and liberal slant. Then Bernhard, using his personal prestige and royal leverage, induced, with the help of Retinger, who knew practically all of them, most of those selected to co-operate. It was quite a list. Van Zeeland wrote a paper for Belgium, Hugh Gaitskell and Lord Portal spoke for Great Britain, Prime Minister Alcide de Gasperi for Italy, Foreign Minister Ole Bjørn Kraft of Denmark for Scandinavia; Guy Mollet (former Socialist Prime Minister) and Conservative Prime Minister Pinay for France, and Max Brauer, Otto Wolff von Amerongen, and Dr Müller for West Germany. Prince Bernhard himself handled the complaints of Holland, with the help of leading Dutch politicians and industrialists. When all the reports came in Bernhard and Retinger found that many people of different countries and different parties gave the same reasons for disliking Americans, although there were, of course, some people with special grouses of their own. Bernhard, Retinger, and Rijkens synthesized the answers into a single report covering the main criticisms. Then Bernhard sent it confidentially to some of his American friends with the proposal that they organize an answer. The election of 1952 was in full swing in the United States, and political brickbats were flying. Nobody had any time for Prince Bernhard. Averell Harriman said, "I won't touch it. It's dynamite." Eisenhower said, "Great! I'd like to use it in the campaign," to which Bernhard replied, "Good God, NO!" The matter had to go over until after the election. Then Bernhard went to the United States-and, incidentally, got the bad news from Walter Reed. He saw a number of American politicians, and after several more rebuffs he went to his friend Bedell Smith, who was then head of the C.I.A. Smith said, "Why the hell didn't you come to me in the first place?" Even then things moved slowly. Smith became Under-Secretary of State for newly elected President Eisenhower, and was engulfed in the business of putting a new administration together. He finally turned the matter over to C. D. Jackson, a special assistant to the President, and things really got going. Jackson got in touch with John S. Coleman, President of the Burroughs Corporation of Detroit, who was a member of the newly formed Committee for a National Trade Policy under the presidency of Senator Robert Taft's brother, Charles Taft. This committee undertook to draft an American reply, and a number of private citizens. Other famous Americans were invited. Most of the administration officials ducked nervously, so the American delegation was rather weighted towards industry, but it included such eminent Americans as Joseph E. Johnson, of the Carnegie Endowment of International Peace, Dean Rusk, then head of the Rockefeller Foundation, as well as David Rockefeller and H.J. Heinz II. All this took time, which is why the first meeting did not take place until May 1954. By then, is spite of Eisenhower's personal popularity, the United States was at an all-time nadir of popularity in Europe. As the Europeans saw it, a soldier was in the White House, even though he was the least militant of military men. The Government was in the hands of the conservative Republican Party for the first time in twenty years. And, worst of all, Senator McCarthy was roaring through the land witch-hunting for Reds. His arrogant stooges had just completed their book-burning tour of American embassies in Europe, and the whole American career image of America, erstwhile land of democracy and freedom, was covered with mud. Under these circumstances it looked as though there would be a heated session at the Hôtel de Bilderberg. Prince Bernhard, who was chairman, said, "The meeting was most encouraging because people accepted the idea that there would be no publicity, and everybody could speak for himself, irrespective of his position, quite frankly-and fight!" At the memory Prince Bernhard’s eyes lit up, and he said, “It was a beautiful meeting because sparks were flying like crazy between Americans like C. D. Jackson and Britishers like Sir Oliver Franks and Denis Healey and Hugh Gaitskell.” Jackson himself described the meeting as follows: “It was all very new and different. We were tucked away in a forest way back in Holland. There were no reporters. Tight security with guards all over the hotel. IN the opening hours every one was uneasy, nervous, sniffing each other like strange dogs. They were afraid to talk very much. “Prince Bernhard was everywhere using his charming wiles. People began to thaw. Then they began to fight, which was good. The Prince kept things in hand. When feeling got too tense he was able to relax people with just the right witty crack, or assert his authority. Though he is so charming, he is made of pretty stern stuff. When he was to restore order he does so in such a way that no one can take offence. But there is no fooling. Order is restored.” Naturally the Europeans were continually needling the Americans about McCarthy. Many of them seemed genuinely fearful that the United States was heading for a Fascist dictatorship. Therefore, on the third day, Prince Bernhard announced, "Even though it is not on the agenda, there has been so much talk of McCarthyism that, if there is time, I am going to ask Mr. Jackson to tell us the American view on that." There was time, and Jackson stood up to address the meeting. He is a big man, well over six feet tall, fourteen stone of muscular weight with a big domed head and a bold, jutting profile; impressive by his stature and his slow, judicial way of speech. Almost in the manner of a university professor, Jackson told his audience a few facts of political life in the United States. He pointed out that in the American system of government and politics, "We are certain to get this kind of supercharged, emotional freak from time to time." Then he reached back into history for the same sort of demagogue, telling them of the spectacular but short-lived careers of Father Coughlin and Huey Long. He said that he knew it was hard of Europeans to understand how a Senator of the President’s own party could say things on the floor of the Senate completely at variance with the Government’s policy. But, he pointed out, there was no way to stop a United States Senator when he went on a rampage. Party discipline was non-existent in that case. Therefore, Jackson said, the Europeans were right to be interested in this peculiar phenomenon of Senator McCarthy, but wrong to be fearful that he was the first step towards Fascism. Finally Jackson made a rash prediction: “Whether McCarthy dies by an assassin's bullet or is eliminated in the normal American way of getting rid of boils on the body politic, I prophesy that by the time we hold our next meeting he will be gone from the American scene.” The fact that within a comparatively short time McCarthy was rebuked by the Senate and lost virtually all his prestige and power made the Europeans feel that they had heard the truth about America. George McGhee of the United States Department of State says, “The really bad misunderstandings between Europeans and Americans were dissipated at the first Bilderberg. Since then there has never been such a sharp division between us and Europe.” The first Bilderberg Conference was such a success in promoting real understanding across the Atlantic that its sponsors decided to continue the meetings. A permanent Steering Committee was set up to plan the agenda for future meetings and decide whom to invite according to the subjects to be discussed. Dr. Retinger became permanent secretary, until he died and was succeeded by Ernst van der Beugel, who, incidentally, said to the writer, "I am allergic to international groups. I attended my first Bilderberg meeting with great reserve, but I was impressed by it and remained impressed." Joseph E. Johnson became the first Secretary on the American side. Otherwise the organization was kept as loose as possible to allow maximum flexibility. To insure this the Steering Committee tries to have a turnover of at least twenty percent. of new faces at each meeting. This was made clear at the outset, so that people who are not asked back every time would not consider it an affront. Combined with this is the unwritten rule that anybody who has ever been to a Bilderberg Conference should be able to feel that he can, in a private capacity, call on any former member he has met. To this end a list of names and addresses is maintained to which all participants have access. This makes possible an expanding continuation of association for people who might not otherwise have met. Three days at a Bilderberg Conference are not only a stimulating but also an extremely exhausting experience, especially for Bernhard and the other members of the Steering Committee. H. J. Heinz II described a typical day: "We sit from nine o'clock in the table. Right after lunch we go at it again until seven o'clock. Fifteen minutes to wash up, and then an executive session of the Steering Committee. That lasts an hour, and then we have dinner. After that we talk some more, informally. It's a fifteen-hour day, at least!" Another member of the group said, "We meet in such beautiful places, but we never have time to look at the scenery." Since 1954, meetings of the Bilderberg group have been held once a year, sometimes twice. The Steering Committee meets more frequently. The regular sessions are attended by from fifty to eighty people. Each meeting is held in a different country, but follows the same pattern. An entire hotel is taken over and closely guarded. The members all live together, eat and drink together, for three days. Wives are not invited. Dr. Rijkens says, "More important things are done and better understandings are often arrived at in private conversations at lunch or dinner than in the regular sessions. Through the years we have achieved a sort of brotherhood of friendship and trust." The expenses or each meeting are borne by private subscription in the host country, and Prince Bernhard always presides-though not by his own choice. At the very first meeting he tried rotating the chairmanship, putting van Zeeland in the second day and Mr. Coleman the third. It did not work. The other Europeans thought that van Zeeland was too political and the American Democrats felt that Coleman was too old-guard Republican. They all begged him to become permanent chairman. Because he was royal and therefore apolitical, and, furthermore, came from a small nation with no large axes to grind, he was, in fact, the logical choice. In addition every one agreed that he handled the meetings extremely well. Mr. Heinz says, “If Prince Bernhard had not existed Retinger would have had to invent him.” There was also the fact that his royalty gave him considerable leverage in inducing these very eminent men to give up their pressing affairs to attend the meetings. This rather worried Bernhard, who once said to van der Beugel, "Is it just snob-appeal that brings them?" Van der Beugel answered forthrightly, "If you can transfer snobbism into something fine and useful that's good. The authority with which you can ask people to attend meetings is important. On the other hand, you don't get eighty outstanding people to drop everything and go off to a foreign country just for snobbism. The way you manage the thing and the importance of the enterprise are what draws them." Meanwhile Retinger brought in many men of the non-Communist but radical left who might not have responded to an invitation from Prince Bernhard. However, even these would probably not have consented to attend a conference with the men of the conservative right had they not been reassured by having in the chair a completely non-political figure. As Dr. Rijkens said "No one but Bernhard could have induced such old antagonists as Guy Mollet and Antoine Pinay to sit at the same table." Prince Bernhard in his methodical way prepares very carefully for each meeting by an intensive study of all the subjects on the agenda. Then he takes copious notes at the meetings, and at the end of each session tries to sum up what has been said and perhaps add a few impartial words of his own to clear the air. In spite of his preliminary work, Prince Bernhard confesses, "I always go to the meetings with a feeling of great nervousness. There are so many explosive possibilities. But it is always tremendously stimulating and enormously interesting-in fact, great fun. "One thing that worries me beforehand is suppose some key person does not show up and the discussions are a flop? We have had very little trouble with that." One meeting Bernhard was particularly nervous about was the one at St Simons Island, Georgia. United States Senator J. William Fulbright, Senator Wiley and several American congressmen were coming for the first time. The rule of the meetings is that each man is allowed five minutes to talk, and at the end of this time the Prince is allowed five minutes to talk, and at the end of this time the Prince begins to make signals. But he generally gives them a minute more before taking action. "Once or twice I've had to be unpleasant to somebody, but that is very difficult for me," he says. "It is also difficult to keep a big boy from talking too long. I swing my wristwatch in front of his face and say, 'Ah, ah, more than five minutes!' And if somebody makes a really short speech I say, 'Now that is wonderful. The shorter the speech the more it sticks in our minds.' But that does not always help, you know. Some people are very difficult." At St Simons some of Bernhard's American friends said, "What are you going to do with the American politicians? You just can't shut up a United States congressman or senator. They aren't used to it." Bernhard didn't quite know himself. But before the meeting he went to the American politicians and in his most ingratiating way said, "Now, look, gentlemen, my American friends are afraid to tell you this, but we have had this rule about five-minute speeches at all our meetings. So would you be very king and do me a favour, a personal favour, and stick to the rule, because I will be finished for the future if I let you get away with a long speech." "They said they would be delighted; no problem at all. 'It is perfectly O.K. with us.' And they never broke the rule at all. The only person I had trouble with was a European." The only meeting, other than the first, at which Bernhard did not preside all the way through was the one in Switzerland in 1960. He arrived from one of his "selling trips" looking utterly exhausted and with a bad cold. After presiding at the opening session he developed virus pneumonia. He chose E. N. van Kleffens to take the chair. Prince Bernhard says, "This satisfied everybody, because van Kleffens had once served as President of the Assembly of the U.N." While the meeting went on Bernhard got sicker and sicker. Meanwhile, back at the Palace, Juliana was becoming very anxious. Professor Nuboer says, "I was in the Palace that Saturday evening when the Queen called Prince Bernhard. He was in a very bad mood, and said there was really nothing wrong with him. However, the next morning the Queen telephoned me and said that she had talked to her husband again and that his temperature had gone up. I said, 'I'll go immediately and ask my colleague Professor Jordan, our specialist on internal medicine, to go with me.'" Professor Nuboer had made their reservations on K.L.M. and borrowed some money-it was Sunday and the banks were shut-when the Queen called back. "I'm going with you," she said. "I'm too worried to stay here. We'll go in a military plane." Professor Nuboer says, "We found the Prince in the Conference Hotel near Lucerne. The Queen, Jordan, and I kidnapped him, literally kidnapped him. We brought him back in his own plane. A car met us at the airport, and we took him straight to the hospital at Utrecht. He was there for several weeks." The Bilderberg meetings are never dull. Even though the group has become, as McGhee says, "like belonging to a fraternity," sparks have flown at nearly every one. At St Simons in 1957 the French, British, and Americans almost came to blows over Suez. At another it was Quemoy and Matsu. The Europeans could understand the American attitude about Formosa, but defending the off-shore islands seemed to them military madness for the sake of tweaking the dragon's tail. "At least we made them understand the necessity of taking more interest in the Far East," says McGhee. Other hot issues have been the Common Market and British and American attitudes towards it. And Cuba! There is always something to make the sparks fly; and, like lightning, these electrical discharges clear the atmosphere. Any attempt to evaluate the effect of the Bilderberg group is made nearly impossible by the very nature and object of the conferences, which is not to act or even to convince, but rather to enlighten. As Prince Bernhard says, "You are not asked to agree, merely to listen." At one point the inevitable lack of concrete results you could put your finger on made Prince Bernhard wonder if its was worth while continuing. He sent out a query to that effect to the members. A storm of protest, especially from the Americans, convinced him that he should go on. Perhaps the only way of arriving at some assessment of the work is to question those participants who play an active role in international affairs. When asked for an example of a Bilderberg accomplishment George McGhee said, "I believe you could say the Treaty of Rome, which brought the Common Market into being, was nurtured at these meetings and aided by the main stream of our discussions there. Prince Bernhard is a great catalyst." The formation of an international corporation to finance industrial development in the Near East is another concrete result. However, the intangible results are admittedly the greatest-the bringing together in friendship, even intimacy, of the leaders from many nations and the effect of their confidential reports on the governments of their countries. An example is the case of the United States during President Eisenhower's administration. When asked if he thought Eisenhower had been influenced by the Bilderberg discussions Prince Bernhard said, "I don't know. Of course, I talked to Ike about it when I needed his help to give American officials the green light to come to the conferences. Although C. D. Jackson and Bedell Smith were in favour of it, there were a lot of people in the State Department who thought one should not go. They would not allow their people to come at first. Then after the first meeting they lifted the ban. Anybody could come. The same thing happened with de Gaulle. "As to whether Ike paid any attention to the reports of our discussions, I could not say." However, General Eisenhower said to this writer: "I always had one of my people go to the Bilderberg Conferences [Dr. Gabriel Hauge]. I'm in favour of anything-any study of that kind which helps international understanding. The Bilderberg meetings enlightened me; I'd get viewpoints from other than official channels. Not that I always agreed with them; there were so many points of view that somebody had to be wrong; but it was still important to know them." The present American Government is even closer to Bilderberg because President Kennedy has virtually staffed the State Department with what C.D. Jackson calls "Bilderberg alumni"-Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Under-Secretary of State George W. Ball, George McGhee, Walter Rostow, McGeorge Bundy, Arthur Dean, and Paul H. Nitse over at Defence. However, the Steering Committee tries to keep a fairly even balance between Republicans and Democrats. Mr Ball recently said, "I think the most useful feature of the Bilderberg meetings is the opportunity for responsible people in industry, statecraft, or politics to have a frank discussion where they will not be publicly quoted and are able to give their personal views without their remarks being considered official. "This is unique and without parallel. \the character of the meetings has been shaped by the very devoted and astute leadership of Prince Bernhard himself. Without his special position, intelligence and goodwill nothing like this could come about." Then the Under-Secretary of State added, "I certainly hope to continue to go the meetings . So does Dean Rusk." The Italian Ambassador in London, Signor Quaroni, said "What a pleasant change! In other places diplomats always lie to each other." From Prince Bernhard's point of view the Bilderberg group gives him an opportunity to work in private, without violating the parliamentary taboo against royalty mixing in politics, for the unification of Europe and, indeed, of the Atlantic Community as well. He regards this as the best hope of humanity not only in Europe but in all the world. Furthermore, he is highly optimistic about its chances of success. "It may be oversimplification," Prince Bernhard said, "but I think that with a little bit of goodwill on both sides we will find practical solutions for the British problem, the Commonwealth, and the so-called 'Outer Seven." We would apply the main lines of the Treaty of Rome in principle with certain provisos. For example, it might take certain countries twenty years to adapt to its pattern of tree movement of labour, free movement of goods and raw materials, the lowest possible customs barriers or none, co-ordination of industry, etc. "I'd like to see us all agree on basic principles, and then let one man, like Jacques Rueff, with a few helpers, work it out. Big committees always fight. If we could all agree beforehand in principle it would result, without doubt, not in Utopia, but in an extremely strong and healthy Europe. This in turn would bring the United States into the economic community. It would encourage a great deal of free trade throughout the world. "Now, the more free trade you have the more difficult you will make it for the new countries of Africa and Asia to set up an autarchy and live in economic isolation, to adopt trade barriers and quotas which after a hundred years or more we are finding out don't pay. From sheer necessity these people will have to join in free trade. And once you get that you can help an underdeveloped county much more easily than if there are a hundred and fifty thousand restrictions. Also it would be easier for them – their national pride – to accept help. That to my mind is the best possible guaranty against Communist influence." Within Europe itself Prince Bernhard would like to go even further than economic union. “One thing we need for free exchange of goods is complete interchangeability of money, a common currency. I’m flat out for that,” he said. “And this implies a certain political unity. Here comes our greatest difficulty. For the governments of the free nations are elected by the people, and if they do something the people don’t like they are thrown out. It is difficult to re-educate people who have been brought up on nationalism to the idea of relinquishing part of their sovereignty to a supra-national body.” “Then there is, of course, national selfishness, putting internal problems first. For instance, no nation in Europe has met its full NATO quota. There is just so much money, and there are so many things needed inside each country. People don't think European enough or Atlantic enough to put the good of all before party politics or national advantage.” “This is the tragedy. Due to the freedom and democracy we cherish, we aren't able to achieve what we all basically want to do. We don't show the world clearly enough that our way is better than the Communist way, because we quibble and throw bricks at each other's heads. Real unity comes only when we are scared-when the Soviets put the pressure on and the issue is war or not war, though I should not say that because it is so old and sad and obvious. . We are moving towards unity, but we crawl like snails when we should run.” Even if Europe moves too slowly towards political unity Prince Bernhard optimistically believes that it will arrive if the whole place is not blown up first. He foresees a United States of Europe in which borders are reduced to an absolute minimum, and there is a common currency, a common financial policy, a common foreign policy, and a common policy of trade. The nations will give up so much of their sovereignty as is necessary to implement this. However, the Prince thinks they will retain their national identities. "Each country has its history and traditions, and the cultural, philosophical, and ethical backgrounds of which it can be extremely proud, and which make us what we are," he said. "It would be extremely stupid to throw all that away. It would be like blowing up your old house before you get a new one built. I think the nations of the United States of Europe will want to keep their flags and their monarchs, certainly for the first fifty or one hundred years, though in that case the monarchs should be jolly good-there will be more demands on a person than ever before. “What I say is let's abolish our borders in the sense that we are not any longer going to curse our neighbours over them, or deep them out, or try to frighten them as we used to do, but let us live across them as brothers, while maintaining our national characteristics, not only for our own advantage, but for the benefit of all.” Prince Bernhard in his higher flights of optimism even look to the day, fifty or a hundred hears from now, when the Iron Curtain may be rolled up and put away. He believes that as the old Bolsheviks die off and the young Russians, who have lost the hot crusading fervour of the Marxist Revelation, take over, there will be a return to a more democratic type of socialism and a loosening of discipline that will make it possible to bring those lost lands back into the European sphere. "Allen Dulles laughs at me," he says, "but I think that the Russians will again become friends with us, as they have been before. "For this I know, and even Allen Dulles agrees, that Communism inside Russia is not the sacred shibboleth it used to be. A lot of Russians frankly admit that they use it in other countries as propaganda in order to bring them into their sphere. But that in Russia itself it is getting a little out of date. That's a lovely thought, but when it will come, or if it comes in time, who shall say.." Preceding extract from: Hatch, Alden, 'H. R. H. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands; an authorized biography'. Subject : Bernhard Leopold, consort of Juliana, Queen of the Netherlands, Harrap, 1962. Source: http://www.bilderberg.org/bildhist.htm#1954 ________________________________________________________________________________ BILDERBERG MEETINGS VENUES & CONFERENCES SINCE 1954 1. 29-31 May 1954: Oosterbeek, Netherlands 2. 18-20 March 1955: Barbizon, France 3. 23-25 September 1955: Garmisch-Partenkirchen, West Germany 4. 11-13 May 1956: Fredensborg, Denmark 5. 15-17 February 1957: St. Simons Island, Georgia, USA 6. 4-6 October 1957: Fiuggi, Italy 7. 13-15 September 1958: Buxton, England 8. 18-20 September 1959: Yesilköy, Turkey 9. 28-29 May 1960: Bürgenstock, Switzerland 10. 21-23 April 1961: St. Castin, Canada 11. 18-20 May 1962: Saltsjöbaden, Sweden 12. 29-31 May 1963: Cannes, France 13. 20-22 March 1964: Williamsburg, Virginia, USA 14. 2-4 April 1965: Villa d’Este, Italy 15. 25-27 March 1966: Wiesbaden, West Germany 16. 31 March - 2 April 1967: Cambridge, England 17. 26-28 April 1968: Mont Tremblant, Canada 18. 9-11 May 1969: Marienlyst, Denmark 19. 17-19 April 1970: Bad Ragaz, Switzerland 20. 23-25 April 1971: Woodstock, Vermont, USA 21. 21-23 April 1972: Knokke, Belgium 22. 11-13 May 1973: Saltsjöbaden, Sweden 23. 19-21 April 1974: Megìve, France 24. 25-27 April 1975: Çesme, Turkey 25. 22-25 April 1976: Hot Springs, Virginia, USA CANCELLED [Prince Bernhard-Lockheed Martin bribery scandal] 26. 22-24 April 1977: Torquay, England 27. 21-23 April 1978: Princeton, New Jersey, USA 28. 27-29 April 1979: Baden, Austria 29. 18-20 April 1980: Aachen, W. Germany 30. 15-17 May 1981: Bürgenstock, Switzerland 31. 14-16 May 1982: Sandefjord, Norway 32. 13-15 May 1983: Montebello, Canada 33. 11-13 May 1984: Saltsjöbaden, Sweden 34. 10-12 May 1985: Rye Brook, New York USA 35. 25-27 April 1986: Gleneagles, Scotland 36. 24-26 April 1987: Villa d’Este, Italy 37. 3-5 June 1988: Telfs-Buchen, Austria 38. 12-14 May 1989: La Toja, Spain 39. 11-13 May 1990: Glen Cove, New York, USA 40. 6-9 June 1991: Baden-Baden, Germany 41. 21-24 May 1992: Evian-les-Bains, France 42. 22-25 April 1993: Athens, Greece 43. 3-5 June 1994: Helsinki, Finland 44. 8-11 June 1995: Zurich, Switzerland 45. 30 May - 2 June 1996: Toronto, Canada 46. 12-15 June 1997: Lake Lanier, Georgia, USA 47. 14-17 May 1998: Turnberry, Ayrshire, Scotland 48. 3-6 June 1999: Sintra, Portugal 49. 1-4 June 2000: Genval, Brussels, Belgium 50. 24-27 May 2001: Gothenburg, Sweden 51. 30 May - 2 June 2002: Chantilly, Virginia, USA 52. 15-18 May 2003: Versailles, France 53. 3-6 June 2004: Stresa, Italy 54. 5-8 May 2005: Rottach-Egern, Germany 55. 8-11 June 2006: Ottawa, Canada 56. 31 May - 3 June 2007: Istanbul, Turkey 57. 5-8 June 2008: Chantilly, Virginia, USA 58. 14-17 May 2009: Vouliagmeni, Greece

Chief Council Robert David Steele at the International Tribunal for Natural Justice Speaks on Child Trafficking/Adrenochrome/Satanic Rituals Using Children

Eustace Mullins already knew it: "Vaccination is really a time bomb.” He quoted a book a doctor has written in the year 1936: "I have never seen an unvaccinated person with cancer." Other doctors said the same thing, that vaccines attack the immune system 5 years, 10 or 40 years later.

VIEWER DISCRETION ADVISED!!!