Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) -- This True?

[INRM]

Is it true that in David Rockefellers Memoirs he actually admitted that he was part of a cabal that was operating against the best interests of the US with the attempt of creating a One World government?

INRM

[dudalb]

Is there ANY crackpot ,paranoid conspiracy rumor that you won't buy into?

[Klimax]

Is there ANY crackpot ,paranoid conspiracy rumor that you won't buy into?

I think: Is there any conspiracy he won't get scared by?

[INRM]

Dudalb, Klimax,

Well, I do remember reading a quote which David Rockefeller said. I'm not sure if it's true.

It would be pretty bad if I just bought into it whole-heartedly without asking any questions to verify if it's true or not. However I am not, that's why I am asking questions.


INRM

[Malkuth]

In 2002 Rockefeller authored his autobiography “Memoirs” wherein, on page 405," Mr. Rockefeller writes: “For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Rockefeller

I have his book. The wiki is reliable in this, and if you paid more attention to Alex Jones, you would have known all about this many years ago.

[Klimax]

In 2002 Rockefeller authored his autobiography “Memoirs” wherein, on page 405," Mr. Rockefeller writes: “For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Rockefeller

I have his book. The wiki is reliable in this, and if you paid more attention to Alex Jones, you would have known all about this many years ago.

Selfdebunking...

[Praktik]

In 2002 Rockefeller authored his autobiography “Memoirs” wherein, on page 405," Mr. Rockefeller writes: “For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Rockefeller

I have his book. The wiki is reliable in this, and if you paid more attention to Alex Jones, you would have known all about this many years ago.

Right, but in the context of the quote he's not admitting to be a member of a "cabal" or that he was working "against the best interests of the United States".

He was agreeing to the charge that they were "internationalists" working to build a "more integrated political and economic structure".

Free trade and all that jazz.

Pretty banal stuff.

[Malkuth]

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

Looks to me like a single sentence and he admitted to it wholesale.

And I was serious about alex, the truthers have know about all this for a long long time.

[Klimax]

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

Looks to me like a single sentence and he admitted to it wholesale.

And I was serious about alex, the truthers have know about all this for a long long time.

What does word "believe" mean to you?

[Malkuth]

I'm not going to debate a known unpopular position on this. I gave the quote and gave my opinion. I answered the OP, I'm done.

[Praktik]

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

Looks to me like a single sentence and he admitted to it wholesale.

And I was serious about alex, the truthers have know about all this for a long long time.

No, the first part of the sentence is an intentionally satirical take on the charges laid against him: "Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States..."

Notice the incredulity: "some even believe..."

Moving on, he fleshes out his interpretation of the criticism: "characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure"

"Internationalists" are in quotes to demonstrate the pejorative use of the term by his critics.

At the end he's closing with his "guilty as charged" in answer to what his critics are "characterizing" him as, not in answer to his own satirical take that forms the beginning of the sentence prior to "characterizing".

[Klimax]

I'm not going to debate a known unpopular position on this. I gave the quote and gave my opinion. I answered the OP, I'm done.

True,you answered,but not in the way you think,opinion based upon misunderstanding(or twisting) your own quote and withdrawing from discussion.

You do know we have label for such posters,don't you.

[Horatius]

Looks to me like a single sentence and he admitted to it wholesale.



Look at it again. It's two sentences.

Don't make me Stundie this.

[Praktik]

Besides, I have no doubt that Rockefeller truly believes that his internationalist outlook is for the "best interests" of the USA - free trade mantra and being the beacon on the hill and all that.

I don't think there's one major leader in the USA that hasn't convinced him/herself that they're working for the "best interests" of the USA.

[Malkuth]

hah, you're honestly going to start the whole semantics argument to try to ridicule me?

After I answered the OP directly and precisely with a quote from a book I own?

After I pleaded no contest to any debate whatsoever on this issue?

I only offered my observation that the entire section of the quote where he was describing what he was admitting to was a single sentence, and that it sounded to me like he admitted to it wholesale, with glee even.

I'm leaving you to draw all your own conclusions.

[Ohnoes]

Then why isn't he in jail if this was a true admission?

Please do not respond if your just going to say anything along the lines of "He controls blah blah NWO secret Cabal blah blah blah."

What I would rather hear is..."We have evidence he conspired to commit treason and so we undertook a citizens arrest and placed him in the hands of the proper authorities."

[Ohnoes]

hah, you're honestly going to start the whole semantics argument to try to ridicule me?

After I answered the OP directly and precisely with a quote from a book I own?

After I pleaded no contest to any debate whatsoever on this issue?

I only offered my observation that the entire section of the quote where he was describing what he was admitting to was a single sentence, and that it sounded to me like he admitted to it wholesale, with glee even.

I'm leaving you to draw all your own conclusions.

My last post wasn't directed at you just so you know...It was more of a general question that you can answer if you like.

I have no angst against your opinion on the matter and even thank you for the quoted article for discussion.

My only question is do you ever question Alex Jones or take everything he says for truth?

[Malkuth]

What I would rather hear is..."We have evidence he conspired to commit treason and so we undertook a citizens arrest and placed him in the hands of the proper authorities."

I'd really like to hear that too.

Alas, the 17 unclimbable mountains of evidence is all entirely circumstantial.

[Malkuth]

My only question is do you ever question Alex Jones or take everything he says for truth?

YES, I question everything. Even people who believe they are already entirely correct.

Especially people who believe they are already entirely correct.

ETA: My last post you quoted was aimed at Klimax, not you Ohnoes, btw. I should have quoted him, sorry for misunderstanding.

[Ohnoes]

ETA: My last post you quoted was aimed at Klimax, not you Ohnoes, btw. I should have quoted him, sorry for misunderstanding.

No worries...

YES, I question everything. Even people who believe they are already entirely correct.

Especially people who believe they are already entirely correct.

I guess I'm just wondering why you would refer us to Jones as if he had the answer unless I'm misreading and you are just using him as a reference to a timeline even though this is nothing new to some of us.

and if you paid more attention to Alex Jones, you would have known all about this many years ago.

I just guess I question it because I still to this day have no clue why people listen to that man. Most of the things he says never pan out like he says or are outright lies, yet people depend on him and pay him for his bogus information or articles he twisted to his advantage.

[Malkuth]

No worries...

I guess I'm just wondering why you would refer us to Jones as if he had the answer unless I'm misreading and you are just using him as a reference to a timeline even though this is nothing new to some of us.

I just guess I question it because I still to this day have no clue why people listen to that man. Most of the things he says never pan out like he says or are outright lies, yet people depend on him and pay him for his bogus information or articles he twisted to his advantage.

I'm not saying he's right about everything, infact I think he's been wrong about a lot of things. Over the years, he's even apologised about some of them. On more than a few occasions he has gone too far.

He has, however, been talking about Rockefeller etc for many years. As I said, Alex and many others in what you all call the 'troof' movement have known about this, the UN connections etc etc for many many years.

Just that no 'debunkers' will take it seriously, purely because they see it as an unreliable source.

I read Memoirs more than a few years ago, on Alex Jones' advice. It's a very interesting read.

[dudalb]

......and if you paid more attention to Alex Jones, you would have known all about this many years ago.


:dl:

[dudalb]

You know, citing Alex Jones as a reliable source is a textbook example not of shooting youself in the foot, but of blowing your own head off.

[Drudgewire]

:dl:

And may I add...

:dl: :dl: :dl:

[Malkuth]

I only said who I heard about a book from, years ago. I'm not by default a true believer as you'd call them.

[Ohnoes]

Take what you said here...

I'm not saying he's right about everything, infact I think he's been wrong about a lot of things. Over the years, he's even apologised about some of them. On more than a few occasions he has gone too far.

and Here...

Just that no 'debunkers' will take it seriously, purely because they see it as an unreliable source.

And I think you will see where I'm going.

I'm sure you understand that you can only cry wolf so many times before people stop listening. I don't know if their was a more legitimate route for him, but he chose not to take it. I have never heard him apologize for anything, but I admit I don't listen to him very often and on the off chance that I do then he turns something he was wrong about into a Victory because "They" were able to stop it by getting the information out there.

He has, however, been talking about Rockefeller etc for many years. As I said, Alex and many others in what you all call the 'troof' movement have known about this, the UN connections etc etc for many many years.

I read Memoirs more than a few years ago, on Alex Jones' advice. It's a very interesting read.

I understand, but once again I must stress that if they knew about it why haven't they presented this "evidence" tot he proper authorities. I know it's one of the usual arguments used here, but it still is quite strong.

However, I'll give credit where credit is due as far as reading the book goes and not completely relying on the internet for information.:cool:

[Malkuth]

I'm guessing this isn't the smoking gun because it's an open secret, long known about, rarely talked about in public. Look at the history.

http://www.amazon.com/David-Rockefeller-Memoirs/dp/0679405887

[Donal]

Malkuth, you promised you were leaving.

Also, the comment section in your link is awesome.

[Malkuth]

Malkuth, you promised you were leaving.

Also, the comment section in your link is awesome.

I promised to leave after answering the OP, then continued to be attacked. You expect me not to respond when baselessly attacked? By someone who refuses to address the question being asked here?

When you look at one quote from one guy, sure it's easy to say it's out of context and rationalise it away, saying it doesn't REALLY mean what it says. But when you look at history, the people who paid for a lot of the big things that happened, and what many of these people have written in hundreds of books about it, it really does suggest quite strongly that history isn't a big carnival of coincidental events driven by uncontrolled madmen with no connections.

[LightinDarkness]

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

Looks to me like a single sentence and he admitted to it wholesale.

And I was serious about alex, the truthers have know about all this for a long long time.

Its called sarcasm. People accused of insane nutty conspiracies get so tired of it eventually that they start to play with the rabid accusers. I do it all the time with anti-masons. And somewhere, on some conspiracy board, they are posting proclaiming "OH MY GOD I ASKED A 32ND DEGREE FREEMASON AND HE ADMITTED THEY HAVE LUCIFER WORSHIPING ORGIES WHILE STEALING PINEAPPLES FROM THE GROCERY STORE TO FEED THEM TO THE GOAT THEY RIDE BEFORE THE RITUALZ!!!!!11111"

At some point the accusations and paranoia from CTers reaches such a high level that no amount of truth or reality will convince them of anything other than what they want to Believe. At that point, all you can do is have fun with them for the luls.

[Malkuth]

I would say it's probably closer to admitted truth dressed up as sarcasm, to allow people to say "Ohh it's just sarcasm", and dismiss it without further investigation.

You can't PROVE it was sarcasm, I can't PROVE it wasn't. Go read his book and make up your own mind. Don't listen to EITHER side asserting any "interprtation".

[WildCat]

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

Looks to me like a single sentence and he admitted to it wholesale.
Reading comprehension FAIL.

[Thunder]

"conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure"

what exactly is wrong with this? The world would be much better off if we had more uniform environmental, labor, health, economic, and political laws.

[Malkuth]

"conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure"

what exactly is wrong with this? The world would be much better off if we had more uniform environmental, labor, health, economic, and political laws.

His choice of the world 'conspiring' intrigues me, a term when any normal person uses it to describe the actions of the world's 'elite' many people loudly shout "WOO-WOO", but when he uses it to describe his own actions, then admits to it gladly, it seems to inspire confidence in many people that all of his actions and intentions are noble and just. Many of his actions either are so or seem to be generally believed to be so and many defend that particular view tooth and nail. Can you say 'dogma' or even 'groupthink' or perhaps we should settle for a degree of 'consensus reality'?

The world would be much better off if we had more equitable environmental, labor, health, economic, and political laws.

[Thunder]

he is being accused of "conspiring".

either way, a more integrated world is a good thing.

[stilicho]

His choice of the world 'conspiring' intrigues me...

It's funny that this all-powerful Rockefeller cabal has been conspiring since before David was born and still those pesky nation-states exist. His work has been so wide-ranging and energetic that it's probable he would have taken the same academic and career course even if he hadn't been born into a wealthy family. The accident of his last name doesn't matter to his life's work.

He also said this:

"I suspect that many corporations have begun to understand that they have an important role to play in the lives of their communities, and that allocating funds to support local groups helps them discharge that function and also burnish their image."

That's the kind of much more common attitude you get from David Rockefeller but it doesn't play well with conspiracists so they ignore it and go for the good stuff.

[LightinDarkness]

I would say it's probably closer to admitted truth dressed up as sarcasm, to allow people to say "Ohh it's just sarcasm", and dismiss it without further investigation.

You can't PROVE it was sarcasm, I can't PROVE it wasn't. Go read his book and make up your own mind. Don't listen to EITHER side asserting any "interprtation".

While you can't prove sarcasm you can provide overwhelming evidence that it was - were anyone really involved in a global cabal bent on world domination, the first thing they wouldn't be doing is admitting it in their own memoirs. This is in fact why conspiracy theories are so resilient and never seem to move on, because they are non-falsifiable myths.

[Malkuth]

You expect someone's opponents not to use the good stuff?

[Elizabeth I]

I promised to leave after answering the OP, then continued to be attacked. You expect me not to respond when baselessly attacked? By someone who refuses to address the question being asked here?

When you look at one quote from one guy, sure it's easy to say it's out of context and rationalise it away, saying it doesn't REALLY mean what it says. But when you look at history, the people who paid for a lot of the big things that happened, and what many of these people have written in hundreds of books about it, it really does suggest quite strongly that history isn't a big carnival of coincidental events driven by uncontrolled madmen with no connections.

How can it be such a big secret if it's out there in "hundreds of books"?

[Malkuth]

How can it be such a big secret if it's out there in "hundreds of books"?

Because very few people ever take the time to read them all.

[Brainster]

"Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."

Looks to me like a single sentence and he admitted to it wholesale.

And I was serious about alex, the truthers have know about all this for a long long time.

This is what I refer to as a "Merry Pason" confession. Remember the old TV show, Perry Mason? Perry always managed to get his clients off on their murder rap by cleverly questioning the actual guilty party, ensnaring them in their own web of lies until finally they had to admit their crimes.

Well, in the Merry Pason world, no clever questioning is required. Conspirators blurt out their guilt with little or no prompting. Larry Silverstein says "pull it". Donald Rumsfeld admits that it was a missile that hit the Pentagon. David Rockefeller acknowledges he's part of the secret cabal to unite the world under one banner.

But here's the rub: Nobody recognizes it except the conspiracy theorists. Well, almost nobody:

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/thum_977749d7cf1456066.jpg (http://forums.randi.org/vbimghost.php?do=displayimg&imgid=15919)

[Malkuth]

While you can't prove sarcasm you can provide overwhelming evidence that it was .

Isn't overwhelming evidence that something was usually considered proof?

I've seen no 'overwhelming evidence that it was' except for people's preferred interpretations that it was.

were anyone really involved in a global cabal bent on world domination, the first thing they wouldn't be doing is admitting it in their own memoirs.

Yet he quite clearly does so.

[stilicho]

You expect someone's opponents not to use the good stuff?

I expect this was directed at me.

Most of the goals that David Rockefeller has pursued in his life vary little from those who protest against authoritarianism. Read his memoirs again. You will find no support for oppressive government and plenty of faith in the institutions you enjoy.

[LightinDarkness]

Isn't overwhelming evidence that something was usually considered proof?

I've seen no 'overwhelming evidence that it was' except for people's preferred interpretations that it was.



Yet he quite clearly does so.

Another clear case of Believing instead of looking at the evidence - you simply want to believe this is true so the obvious signs that its SARCASM ends up being ignored by you because you want to Believe.

If conspiracy theories like you want to Believe in were really true no one would admit to being in them. This is a staple characteristics of CTs required to make them not falsifiable.

[mark4mark]

In 2002 Rockefeller authored his autobiography “Memoirs” wherein, on page 405," Mr. Rockefeller writes: “For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as "internationalists" and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it."



I have his book. The wiki is reliable in this, and if you paid more attention to Alex Jones, you would have known all about this many years ago.


Context context context!

Did he say, "Some people have even uncovered that we are part of a secret cabal...?"
He was sarcastically making light of a paranoid, imaginary misunderstanding of global politics and economics, exemplifying how ridiculous the idea sounded...

[Malkuth]

Once again, that's one person's interprtation of what was meant. You did not write the book, you can't know exactly what he meant.

Try this one... I'm sure someone will find a way to spin it to make it sound benign.


The Council on Foreign Relations co-sponsors an assembly Rethinking America's Security: Beyond Cold War to New World Order which is attended by 65 prestigious members of government, labor, academia, the media, military, and the professions from nine countries. Later, several of the conference participants joined some 100 other world leaders for another closed door meeting of the Bilderberg Society in Baden Baden, Germany. The Bilderbergers also exert considerable clout in determining the foreign policies of their respective governments. While at that meeting, David Rockefeller [co-founder (with Zbigniew Brzezinski) of the Trilateral Commission] said in a speech:

'We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination [read as 'democracy'] practiced in past centuries."

--June 5, 1991, Bilderberger meeting in Baden Baden, Germany (a meeting also attended by then-Governor Bill Clinton)

http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/globalism/rockefeller.htm

This quote apparently was also reported in the french media for a short time before it was quashed. I've found that it was also supposedly reported by Hilaire duBerrier in his HDub Reports, transcripts of which I have not been able to locate.

[garethdjb]

Once again, that's one person's interprtation of what was meant. You did not write the book, you can't know exactly what he meant.

Try this one... I'm sure someone will find a way to spin it to make it sound benign.


The Council on Foreign Relations co-sponsors an assembly Rethinking America's Security: Beyond Cold War to New World Order which is attended by 65 prestigious members of government, labor, academia, the media, military, and the professions from nine countries. Later, several of the conference participants joined some 100 other world leaders for another closed door meeting of the Bilderberg Society in Baden Baden, Germany. The Bilderbergers also exert considerable clout in determining the foreign policies of their respective governments. While at that meeting, David Rockefeller [co-founder (with Zbigniew Brzezinski) of the Trilateral Commission] said in a speech:

'We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination [read as 'democracy'] practiced in past centuries."

--June 5, 1991, Bilderberger meeting in Baden Baden, Germany (a meeting also attended by then-Governor Bill Clinton)

http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/globalism/rockefeller.htm

This quote apparently was also reported in the french media for a short time before it was quashed. I've found that it was also supposedly reported by Hilaire duBerrier in his HDub Reports, transcripts of which I have not been able to locate.

The source for this quote leads to a page by Dennis Cuddy. Presumably he must have been present when the speech was given. Why then does he not appear on any of the lists of Bilderberg attendees for 1991 (not even the 'augmented' ones)?

[Malkuth]

The source for this quote leads to a page by Dennis Cuddy. Presumably he must have been present when the speech was given. Why then does he not appear on any of the lists of Bilderberg attendees for 1991 (not even the 'augmented' ones)?

As far as I can tell, Cuddy got his information either from du Berrier, or from the same place as du Berrier, who apparently got it from one of two french independant media sources, who apparently got it leaked from someone in the Bilderberg meeting. Whether that someone was an official member or a kitchen staff at the hotel, I do not know.

from http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4803877&mesg_id=4818989

'The way in which Rockefeller's remarks were made public ironically illustrates the power elite's chokehold on the mass media. Excerpts from Rockefeller's opening address were leaked to two independent French publications. They then came to the attention of Hilaire du Berrier, an international correspondent living in Monaco, who published them in his newsletter, HduB Reports. As he relayed Rockefeller's breathtakingly brazen admissions to his readers, du Berrier knowingly commented that he would "lay odds that not a word of Mr. Rockefeller's speech will be reported in America." As far as the major media are concerned, du Berrier's prediction came true. '

I'm still looking for the names of the french sources and copies of du Berrier's reports.

[garethdjb]

This from the link you just provided

"It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during these years," continued Rockefeller. "But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government which will never again know war but only peace and prosperity for the whole of humanity."

This quote appears to be different from the previous one.

[Malkuth]

This quote appears to be different from the previous one.

It appears to be an extended, not a different one. My assumption is that the first one was partial. This is one reason I'm looking for the root.

ETA: Another rockefeller gem

“We are on the verge of a global transformation.
All we need is the right major crisis…”
- David Rockefeller,
Club of Rome executive member
http://www.nowpublic.com/environment/global-green-agenda

Fuller version is ...
"We are on the verge of a Global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
-- David Rockefeller to the United Nations Business Council on September 23, 1994
http://www.nowandfutures.com/quotes.html

[stilicho]

"We are on the verge of a Global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
-- David Rockefeller to the United Nations Business Council on September 23, 1994
http://www.nowandfutures.com/quotes.html (http://www.nowandfutures.com/quotes.html)

What's this? Your first quote is placed in its context so you run off to find another one to fit your presumption.

The only mention of this quotation is from conspiracy sites. The referenced work is something called the Business Council for the United Nations Briefing. What is this? Where did you find it?

I looked at the publications from the BCUN here: ( http://www.unausa.org/publications ) There is no mention of a BCUN Briefing which would seem from its issue names to be a quarterly publication. It can't be their actual quarterly, The Interdependent, because they're only on Volume 6 and that quote is presumably from a 1995 publication.

Please find the original text of David Rockefeller's complete speech from which you culled that quotation, along with the source and any other information about it.

[Thunder]

It appears to be an extended, not a different one. My assumption is that the first one was partial. This is one reason I'm looking for the root.

ETA: Another rockefeller gem

“We are on the verge of a global transformation.
All we need is the right major crisis…”
- David Rockefeller,
Club of Rome executive member
http://www.nowpublic.com/environment/global-green-agenda

Fuller version is ...
"We are on the verge of a Global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."
-- David Rockefeller to the United Nations Business Council on September 23, 1994
http://www.nowandfutures.com/quotes.html

in my humble opinion, these quotes are lies.

[stilicho]

in my humble opinion, these quotes are lies.

I agree. But let Malkuth supply the original full speeches if he can. Almost all that's missing from those quotes is something about 'goyim' and they'd be straight out of the Protocols.

[INRM]

Well, I am not 100% sure if those quotes are true, however if they are true, it is needless to say pretty horrible

[Thunder]

Well, I am not 100% sure if those quotes are true, however if they are true, it is needless to say pretty horrible

They are not true....so don't worry.

[CurtC]

Well, I am not 100% sure if those quotes are true, however if they are true, it is needless to say pretty horrible

... and if INRM really said that all Jews need to die a slow, painful death, that too would be pretty horrible.

[INRM]

CurtC,

Agreed, but I never said that and I don't believe that.


INRM

[CurtC]

CurtC,

Agreed, but I never said that and I don't believe that.

Bingo.

[INRM]

CurtC,

Still, has the statements that Rockefeller said ever been *conclusively* debunked?

[CurtC]

INRM, it will be debunked right after someone debunks your statement that all Jews should die a slow, painful death.

[elbe]

CurtC,

Still, has the statements that Rockefeller said ever been *conclusively* debunked?

How does one conclusively debunk that someone has ever said a particular sentence in their entire life? I certainly don't remember every stupid thing I've ever said. Hell, I don't remember every stupid thing I've said today.

[INRM]

CurtC,

I can tell you I didn't say that. However, I can do this because I am alive. Rockefeller is dead.

And there's a reason a person may confess to all sorts of things in their memoirs. A person who had huge ambitions might just feel free to admit to things -- grandiose individuals love to brag. Not to mention people write their memoirs when they are old and retired and about to die. If you're about to die what do you have to lose in confessing?


INRM

[thought_fugitive]

I can tell you I didn't say that. However, I can do this because I am alive. Rockefeller is dead.



No he's not! (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Rockefeller) Have you tried dialing 411?

[INRM]

thought_fugitive,

Sorry about that. I figured he'd be dead by now... regardless he is extremely old

[dudalb]

I agree. But let Malkuth supply the original full speeches if he can. Almost all that's missing from those quotes is something about 'goyim' and they'd be straight out of the Protocols.

And I got a feeling that ain't a coincidence.

[The Platypus]

A man stating his vision, wishes and wants for the future of the planet, does not mean he is in control of the world.

[thought_fugitive]

thought_fugitive,

Sorry about that. I figured he'd be dead by now... regardless he is extremely old

There's no reason to apologize. If you really want to know, look around! Read his Memoirs, listen to some of his speeches, do whatever it takes to decide on your own whether or not there's something to worry about. Here's a good place to start:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/David_Rockefeller

You'll see on there quotes from an interview he had with a complete lunatic from a conspiracy website. If you don't think you can accept or dismiss whether he made those quotes, it'd surely be possible for you to take action and find out. :D

[Dog Town]

many others in what you all call the 'troof' movement...

For the record: It's the TWOOF! For obvious reasons!

[garethdjb]

There's no reason to apologize. If you really want to know, look around! Read his Memoirs, listen to some of his speeches, do whatever it takes to decide on your own whether or not there's something to worry about. Here's a good place to start:

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/David_Rockefeller

You'll see on there quotes from an interview he had with a complete lunatic from a conspiracy website. If you don't think you can accept or dismiss whether he made those quotes, it'd surely be possible for you to take action and find out. :D

Interesting that wikiquote places his alleged speech mentioning the Washington Post etc at a Trilateral Commission meeting rather than the Bilderberg, as was stated earlier in this thread.