JANET RENO DIDN'T MAKE THAT COMMENT. IT WAS MADE BY A 19TH CENTURY JOURNALIST TO A GATHERING OF JOURNALISTS OVER 100 YEARS AGO AND, I ADD, IT IS BOTH OBSOLETE AND IRRELEVANT TODAY WHEN TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE OPERATE COMPLETELY INDEPENDENT PUBLICATIONS.
Joe Shea | 1812 N. Ivar, No. 5
Editor-in-Chief | Hollywood, CA 90028-5026
The American Reporter | (213)467-0616
http://www.american-reporter.com | joeshea@netcom.com
On Sun, 10 Jan 1999, Clifford H. Hume wrote:
You may have read this first item before; the addition below it is to allow viewing from a different perspective. Cliff.
I can't believe that Janet Reno would have been so stupid as to make a pronouncement such as is claimed below, but then look at all the stupid things the Rhodes Scholar has been doing. If many more of these FR people are this stupid, we have a lot better chance of winning this battle than I had originally thought. The closer the get to their goal the more mistakes they are going to make. A lot of people still believe the lies and deception of 60 minutes and it still has a large audience. If she really said those things, she will have hit one large chunk of the US population. Good ammunition for us.
Janet Reno is a member of the pro-communist Council on Foreign Relations
whose stated goal call for the dissolution of the United States Constitution and its merging into a One World Government under the United Nations which FR members, Rockefeller and Carnage founded in 1945. John D. Rockefeller put up eight and a half million dollars worth of property for this GO - Non Governmental Organization. Page 461 - Everywoman's United Nations, A Basic History of the Organization 1945 to
1963. That would be about $850,000,000.00 in today's inflated Fiat..
The Council on Foreign Relations consists of 3,400 members. Bill Clifton is a member. His former Professor and mentor, Carol Quigley was also a members. About this organization, Prof. Quigley has this to say: "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 Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other group, and frequently does so. I know of the operation 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...." Page 950.
To give an idea as to how permeated our government has become with those who would destroy it, a list of names of members would be in order here; many people have been deliberately conditioned to have a very short attention span and bad news is not much help in such a situation. My list may miss a few, but here we go: William Jefferson Clifton, also Trilateral commission; Dick Thorn burgh, United Nations; Anthony Lake, National Security Advisor; Warren Christopher, Medallion Alb right - Secretary of State & UN Ambassador; William Coven - Secretary of Defense, Lees Aspen - deceased; Colleen Power - Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff; James Woolly & John Dutch - Director Central Intelligence Agency; Laura Tyson - Council of Economic Advisors; Bruce Rabbit - Secretary of Interior; Henry Censors - Secretary of Housing and Urban Development; Donna Shall - Secretary of Health and Human Services; Sandra Day O'Conor - Associate Justice, U.S. Supreme Court; Steve G. Brier - Chief Judge, U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit, Boston; Ruth B. Gins burg - U.S. Court of Appeals, Wash., DC Circuit; Lawrence H. Silberman - U.S. Court of Appeals, Wash., DC Circuit.
U.S. Institute for Peace:
John Norton More - Chairman; Elspeth Advise Roots - Vice Chairman; Samuel W. Luis - President; John Richard son - Councilor; David Little - Senior Scholar; William R. Knitter - Director; W. Scott Thompson - Director.
Office of U.S. Trade Representative:
Gary R. Epson - Chief of Staff & Councilor; Joshua Bottom - General Council; Daniel M. Price - Deputy General Council.
Treasury Department:
Roger Alumna - Deputy Secretary; Robert R. Gladder - Under Secretary, Finance; David C. Mulford - Under Secretary, International Affairs; Robert M. Boston - Deep Act Sec., - International Monetary Affairs; J. French Hill - Dep. Asst. Sec., Crop Finance; John M. Nieces - Deep, Asst. Sec., International Monetary Affairs.
Office of Technology Assessment:
John M. Gibbons - Director; Joshua Lederberg - V. Chairman Advisory Council; Luis M. Branscomb - Advisory Council;
Environmental Protection Agency
James M. Stroke - Asst. Adm., Enforcement And Compliance.
African Development Foundation
Leonard H. Robins, Jr., President
White House Staff:
George Stephanopoulos - Director, Communications; William J. Crow - Chief Foreign Intelligence Advisory Bd.; Nancy Soderberg - Staff Director. National Security Council; Samuel B. Berber - Deputy Advisor, National Security; W. Bowman Cutter - Deputy Assistant, National Economic Council:
Office of Management & Budget:
Alice Revlon - Deputy Director
Export-Import Bank:
John D. Macabre - President & Chairman; Eugene K. Lausanne - 1st VP & Vice Chairman; Rite M. Rodriguez - Director; Hart Fessenden - General Council:
Office of Science & Technology:
William R. Graham, Jr., - Science Advisor to President & Director:
Library of Congress:
James H. Billing ton - Librarian, Chin. Trust Fund Board; Ruth Ann Steward - Asst. Librarian National Program:
National Science Foundation
Frank H. T. Rhodes, Bd of Directors; James B. Holder man, Bd. of Directors; D. Allen Brambly, Bd of Directors:
U.S. Arms Control & Disarmament Agency
Thomas Graham Jr., - General Council; William Stonier - Chin., General Advisory Council; Richard Burt - Negotiator on Strategic Defense Arms; David Smith - Negotiator, Defense & Space:
Federal Judicial Center
William W. Schwarzer - Director
Department of State
Madeleine Albright - U.N. Ambass, Secretary of State; Clifton Wharton, Jr., - Deputy Sec.; Lynn Etheridge Davis - Under Sec. for Inter. Security Affairs, VP Chase Manhattan Bank; Brandon H. Grove - Dir. of Foreign Service Institute; H. Allan Holms - Asst. Sec., Near East-South Asian Affairs; Alexander F. Watson - Deputy Rep., United Nations; Jonathan Moore - UN Mission; Joseph Verner Reed - Chief of Protocol; Dennis B. Ross - Director, Policy Planning Staff; Edward Perkins - Director of Personnel; Abraham David Sofaer - Legal Advisor; Peter Tarnoff - Under Sec. for Political Affairs; Joan E. Spero - Under Sec. Eco. & Ag. Affairs; George E. Moose - Asst. Sec. African Affairs; Winston Lord - Asst. Sec., East Asian & Pacific Affairs; Stephen A Oxman - Asst. Sec., European Affairs; Timothy E. Wirth - Counselor
Department of State - Ambassadors
Strobe Talbot - (Special Advisor For CIS); Thomas R. Pickering (Russia); Morton I. Abramowitz (Turkey); Michael H. Armacost (Japan); Shirkey Temple Black (Czechoslovakia); Julia Chang Bloch (Nepal); Henry E. Catto, Jr. (Great Britain); Frances Cook (Cameron); Edward P. Djerejian (Syria); George E. Moose (Senegal); John D. Negroponte (Mexico); Edward N. Ney (Canada); Robert B. Oakley (Pakistan); Robert H. Pelletreau, Jr. (Tunisia); Christopher H. Phillips (Brunei);
This is just to page seven of this intelligence report; Thirty more pages of these traitors to type into the computer. Will ship the rest to everyone when finished. In the meantime, make the best use of this information that you possibly can. Our banker controllers intend to implement a world tyranny during the chaotic conditions they are deliberately causing with the well-staged Y2K.
Recently we were asked some Questions that other members undoubtedly encounter from time to time: Why should a responsible citizen look into the evidence of a conspiracy? Does it really matter whehether our national problems are the result of a conspiracy or some other cause? Would not the results be the same if our nation is merely the victim of some combination of poor judgement by our leaders, the unprincipled actions of ambitious politicians. or the uncoordinated activism of adherents to destructive ideologies? If it does matter and there is a conspiracy with a grip on our nation, what should a citizen try to learn about it?
Of course, a great deal of ammunition to handle these questions can be found in the "Conspiracy" issue of The New American. However, the challenge of persuading sufficien numbers of our fellow citizens to join our "conspiracy-fighting" brigade warrants a constant search for effective ways to communicate understanding. Just as no sermon will touch every heart, no one article on the subject of conspiracy will satisfy every concern or question. So let's take another crack at making a contribution.
IT MATTERS
The fundamental reason why it is important to recognize that our nation is in the grip of a conspiracy, if such be the case, is that the probhlems created by a conspiracy cannot be solved by ignoring it. Not only will the problems not be solved, but citizens will become more and more frustrated and more and more demoralized as they see repeated attempts to address the results of a conspiratorial agenda fail. If concerned citizens aren't willing to consider the real cause, they will ultimately conclude that nothing can be done.
In a 1962 Bulletin, Robert Welch provided an excellent analogy that sheds light on the point we are trying to make. At the time, he was explaining why a prominent critic of his leadership was off base: He[the critic] insists that we must "forget about the arsonist and put out the fires"; that we must first win the fight against socialism and communism, and then worry about catching the Communists. The implication has been clear that this is the policy which will be followed as soon as his associates have had me replaced by somebody else. And we certainly admit there is diagreenent here. For, to use his own figure of speech, suppose an arsomnist is setting fires in a community, and you and your neighbors have all rushed to try to put out the fire in the case of two or three houses that are alredy visibly aflame. But much faster than you can subdue those fires the arsonist is setting fire to other houses on other widely scattered streets. And you are told: "Never mind catching the arsonist, we haven't got time for that. Let's put out these fires."
Frankly, it doesn't make sense to me - and I do think the analogy is a reasonably good one. Forgetting about the arsonist and simply working like heck to put out the fires has been the policy of most of the organizations fighting the advance of Communists in America for the past thirty years. And neither the policy, nor all the efforts and expenditures of these hundreds of groups and - in the aggregate - millions of supporters, have stopped the Communists any more than the same policy would stop the arsonist or save the homes of a community. This is why the Communists have never particularly disturbed, or been disturbed by, any of these groups. Fighting fires is an eminently respectable and praiseworthy endeavor (which salves a lot of consciences), which even the Communists hesitate to criticize. But trying to expose the arsonist who set the fires is likely to be a dirty business, especially if the arsonist , although a viscious criminal, is himself garbed in the garnents of respectability and is posing as one of the most industrious firefighters.
Only Joe McCarthy, during the last decade, both understood this situation and tried his utmost to do something about it. Which is why McCarthy simply had to be destroyed. The John Birch Society does not have the supoena powers or other authority and facilities of McCarthy, for exposing or identifying the individual arsonists. But we have at least been doing all we could to make clear that all of these disastrous and unceasinf fires were not the result of either accident or stupidity, but were due to criminal arsonists at work....
It is precisely because of this policy on our part that the Communists have so dilligently and repeatedly warned their people through their official publications of the real danger which we represent, and have engaged in such mighty efforts to destroy us. Unless we, or somebody, can expose the arsonists - or at least scare them into greater hesitation about repeatedly setting more fires - we haven't the slightest chance of saving our country (and the whole world) from being completely enveloped in the holocausts which result in Communist tyranny.
Along the same lines, Vilius Brazenas, a regular speaker at our summer camps for many years, used to tell the story of the psychiatrist who had an interesting test to determine if a prospective patient was crazy. The psychiatrist would have the patient wait in a room with a sink, a mop, and a bucket. The tap would be turned on with water overflowing the sink onto the floor. If the prospective patient tried to mop up the floor without first turning off the tap, the psychiatrist would figure the patient was insane.
THE RIGHT TACTICS
As suggested by the above analogies, our tactics in dealing with a conspiracy should be far different from what they would be if there were no conspiracy. In opposing a conspiracy, the smart course is to work to focus sufficient light on its objectives and influence so that its power will be muted and eventually destroyed. In the process, one might still find it opportune to generate a public outcry over symptoms, even though such pressure to do the right thing would be directed at the agents of a conspiracy or those subject to conspiratorial influence. But one cannot rely on such pressire alone to save the day. It is too easy for the conspirators to deflect the pressure of naive citizens by making hollow promises, offering false solutions, or - if necessary - retreating temporarily before advancing once again after public vigilance has subsided. On the other hand, a recognition of the conspiratorial agenda stiffens the resistance.
If public officials intend evil or are subservient to evil interests, then addressing them on the assumption that they are merely interested in the best way to implement good would be a waste of time. For example, if a local police department were corrupted by organized crime, then citi8zen pressure would be needed to generate proper house-cleaning, indictments, etc. Citizen complaints to corrupt officials, as though these officials were genuinely interested in carrying out the proper responsibilities of their office to curb rising crime, would be futile.
By contrast, if there were no major conspiratorial influence, then it would be reasonable to expect government officials, even politicians, to be responsive to visible expressions of genuine citizen concern.
Can targeting the arsonists make a difference? There are many examples illustrating that it can. An excellent example is the accomplishment of Society members during the '60s in exposing communist influence and agendas in the so-called civil rights movement. The efforts of our members through their TACT (Truth About Civil Turmoil)committees significantly frustated the efforts of communist agitators to precipitate racially based violence.
The successful installation of Fidel Castro as an absolute communist dictator in Cuba provided an example of what might have been. Castro was immesurably aided in his rise to power by the U.S. State Department and the Establishment media, particularly the New York Times, which billed him as a great democratic leader. Accordin to Major Pedro Diaz Lanz, the former head of Castro's Air Force, who toured our nation speaking on behalf of The John Birch Society during the '60s, the outcome would have been different if Cubans had been informed of Castro's background.
Diaz Lanz reportedly told an acquaintance following his defection that if there had been even one chapter of The John Birch Society in Havana prior to 1959, Cuba would not have fallen to communism. Diaz Lanz maintained that he and thousands of other Cubans fell for Castro because there was no one to tell them who he really was. What Cubans needed was exposure of Castro(and his supporters), not a debate on the merits of Castro's proposals. Recognizing a conspiracy does matter.
ROLE OF HISTORICAL FORCES
We do not go so far as to say that every significant event anywhere in the world was planned or intended by a few men at the top of a powerful conspiracy. Certainly forces can be unleashed whose course is difficult to forsee or to control. Who, for example, among our Founding Fathers could have forseen the rapid rise in our standard of living or the technological revolution that resulted from limiting government and allowing men to keep the fruits of their labors?
Yet it is folly to suppose that world leaders do not over time sow what they intend to harvest. People conspire because they have an expectation of success. In fact, the actions of a few conspirators have had deadly and tragic consequences in the 20th century. The birth of the Soviet Union was not inevitable; it was not the product of irresistible historical forces. The support given by a few Western Insiders to Trotsky and Lenin, which enabled them to topple the Kerensky government, proved pivotal.
Similarly, China did not have to fall to communism. In Again, May God Forgive Us! Robert Welch provided an outstanding expose of the role played by American conspirators in the tragic betrayals that led to Communist victory in China.
And without the rise of communism in Russia and China, Americans would never have become involved in no-win wars in Korea and Vietnam. Simolarly, many other tragedies of this century can be legitamately traced to intended evil actions of a few. Yes, it does matter if there is a conspiracy with a grip on our nation.
NOT JUST ANY CONSPIRACY
"There is nothing so powerful as the truth - and often nothing so strange."
-- Daniel Webster
One central problem persuading many people to consider the existance of a powerful conspiracy is their failure to realize that conspiracy is a natural result of the evil side of human nature, just like thievery, adultery, and murder. Evil can be restrained, but it just doesn'y disappear because most of us are nice people. Given the attack on moral restraints in our society, and in the absence of evidence to the contrary, conspiracies should be expected.
The only tough question should be WHICH conspiracies are real. Conspiracy theories by themselves are of little use - and often harmful. The fact that men and women engage in adultry does not prove that any particular association is adulterous. Suspicions, without corroberating evidence , should not be good enough to decide the matter. As the movie Conspiracy Theory demonstrates, it is not too hard to invent a conspiracy theory and find some corroberating evidence to lend it support. For example, following the car accident in which Princess Diana was killed, a number of conspiracy theories cropped up which would have made Jerry Fletcher proud. While ther is often nothing so strange as the truth, we should be extremely slow to give credence to conspiracies. We should demand to see the evidence.
OBSTACLES TO ACCEPTANCE
Ultimately, the conclusion that a conspiracy of a particular character has a grip on our nation should be reached after carefulconsideration of the evidence. But many people have false notions and prejudices regarding conspiracy which have to be overcome before they will give the evidence a fair hearing. Robert Lee covered many of these in his excellent article "Overruled by the Evidence" which appeared in the expanded second edition of the "Conspiracy" issue.
Let us take a moment to consider just three obstacles. The first is the difficulty that many have in imagining how a conspiracy of major scope could opewrate in a still-free society without its existance becoming grnerally known. Perhaps the solution is to recognize that our freedom is vgery much in transition - we are being tested daily. It may also help to recognize that although there are inherent strengths in our institutions and culture, our defense against conspiratorial influence have been seriously weakened through steady assault.
Speaking out against corruption requires moral courage normally associated with stron religious convictions. But without those convictions being held widely, even a benign stronghold of influence in the major media could impose a political correctness on the nation - by ridiculing those who challenge the accepted orthodoxy. In fact, the corruptive influence in our nation is such that many media representatives, for example, have been deterred from considering the evidence of s government cover-up of the Oklahoma City bombing. Often individuals become convinced of the possibility that the information flow to the American people is being managed when a JBS member shows them significant information that they woul have expected to have seen reported.
A second obstacle is the inherent naivete of the American people. They like to think the best of the friendly people they meet. They find it difficult to entertain the possibility that a smiling politician who says the right things could be a crook, let alone a front man for something far more sinister. This is the trust of those who haven'y been mugged. Of course, we are trying to help people learn from the experience of others so we don't have to repeat a tragedy. The best safe cure we can recommend for the weakness of being too trusting is a lot of reading. But keep in mind that this medicine won't work for everyone.