Kissinger: Fox to Guard Chicken Coop (Dec 5, 2002)

logolittle.jpg (9114 bytes)

TiM GW Bulletin 2002/12-2

Dec 5, 200212/13/2002

“Regarding Henry”…

Fox to Guard Chicken Coop

The Kissinger Appointment to Head Bush's 9/11 Whitewash Commission: Like Putting Criminals in Charge of Prisons; Epilogue: Kissinger Quits!

The Kissinger Appointment to Head Bush's 9/11 Whitewash Commission: Like Putting Criminals in Charge of Prisons

PHOENIX, Dec 5 - “Whenever you want to bury a story, you try to get it out on or around major holidays,” opined recently a former corporate PR news-spinner, now a reporter with a major U.S. newspaper.

That’s exactly what President George W. Bush tried to do when he appointed Henry Kissinger to head up the 9/11 investigation. He chose to do announce it on Wednesday Nov. 27, as most Americans were more focused on their Thanksgiving turkeys rather than on political ones.

Well, the ploy didn’t work. Not his time. Not “Regarding Henry.” The Kissinger announcement was equivalent of appointing a fox to guard a chicken coop. Or of putting criminals in charge of prisons. Or like having Mike Tyson champion women’s rights.

It was just too controversial and too arrogant a a move to be overlooked even on the eve of a major U.S. holiday. An avalanche of pro and con calls, letters and comments that have appeared in the American media since that time attest to it.

“It is tempting to wonder if the choice of Mr. Kissinger is not a clever maneuver by the White House to contain an investigation it long opposed,” the New York Times asked in a Nov. 29 editorial.

But the Washington establishment scribes, such as William Safire, a New York Times columnist who had been critical of Kissinger in the past, quickly fell into line [Safire disliked Kissinger for personal reasons - “he caused the tapping of my (Safire’s) home phone when we both worked at the (Nixon) White House”].

“Kissinger has become a foreign-policy resource, capable of reassessing his earlier disdain for Wilsonian idealism,” Safire wrote in his Dec 2 column. “Does that qualify him for chief 9/11 inquisitor? If the main object is to find the sinners of commission, no; if to discover the sins of omission, probably; if to recommend strategic changes in our approach to the war on terror, certainly.”

“On top of that, he's equipped to fit the facts into a "conceptual framework" — his beloved cliché — to provide desperately needed guidance to the Homeland Security bureaucracy,” Safire said.

So “welcome back, Henry,” Safire cheerfully greeted his old foe’s appointment in conclusion of his column.

And what do we think of it? We think it is a travesty. The Kissinger appointment shows how brazenly arrogant and disrespectful our plutocratic President is of the American people’s quest for fair play and justice. By naming the penultimate elitist and New World Order insider to head up the 9/11 investigation, the only thing the President will have ensured is more scorn and disdain from the American people.

For, not only has “Henry the Terrible” openly peddled his Washington influence for cash treasure even to some of the world’s most unsavory characters; he is wanted for murder and other crimes in a number of countries around the world (see some examples below).

And that’s the most upstanding citizen the President could find whom Americans are supposed to trust to tell us the truth about who knew what and when in our government about the 9/11 attacks?

Oh, please… Mr. Pretzel Prez, our beloved Potus Potatus Primus (our Couch Potato-in-Chief). Must you add insult to injury? (insult - to our intelligence; injury - to our sense of justice). Don’t you think we already know most of the nauseating details “Regarding Henry?”

By way of a reminder, here are just some of the highlights from Kissinger’s unofficial, and often hidden, biography. They alone should have disqualified him from serving in any official capacity, except perhaps for serving time - perhaps in some rat-infested South American or Asian prison…

This near-octogenarian (born in Germany in 1923, emigrated to the U.S. in 1938), who later became renown for his anti-communism, served Soviet Union as a secret agent in his youth,” alleged Frank Capel in his book, “Henry Kissinger, Soviet Agent.”

“An anti-Communist who infiltrated Polish Communist Intelligence and rose to the equivalent rank of general, has now named Henry Kissinger as a Soviet agent, recruited into a special group known as ODRA while he was a sergeant in the U.S. Armed Forces in Germany during World War II,” Capel wrote (see Joel Skousen’s World Affairs Brief, Nov 29, 2002).

More recent revelations indicate that Kissinger was actually assigned by the OSS to infiltrate Communist ranks and serve the US as a double agent. He performed this role during the FDR administration under the auspices of double agents such as Alger Hiss, Mr. Sousen notes.

Whether Kissinger was a Soviet or a double agent in WW II, he emerged as an ardent anti-Communist following his BA, MA and PhD degrees at Harvard (in 1950, 1952 and 1954 respectively). Thereafter he served as Study Director, Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy, for the Council of Foreign Relations from 1955 to 1956; Director of the Special Studies Project for the Rockefeller Brothers Fund from 1956 to 1958; and Director of the Harvard Defense Studies Program from 1958 to 1971.

It was during this period that Kissinger made a name for himself as an advocate of a “limited” nuclear war. Here’s an excerpt about it from a TiM Bulletin Apr. 2, 1999, published at the height of NATO’s war on Serbia:

A TiM reader, commenting about the above Kissinger interview, said that in 1958, Kissinger authored a book on nuclear policy, in which there is a chapter devoted to "limited nuclear war." Kissinger lauded the efficiency and ethics of such a war without total destruction, or "all out exchanges."

This "masterpiece" shot Kissinger into the high esteem of CFR/TLC (and Bilderbergers), our correspondent says, and included everything wonderful about nuclear war, stopping short of recommending the doomsday device.

"Did Stanley Kubrick used Dr. Kissinger's book for the Dr. Strangelove story?" this TiM reader wondered. "We'll never know; Kubrick died a few weeks ago. After all, politics, war, death, reengineering of nations and economics go hand in hand like koi fish in the zen pond."

As is the case with many New World Order globalists, Kissinger seems also afflicted with Russophobia. Not in public, of course. But a TiM reader from Brussels with good European Union connections had this to say about some of his private remarks made in Brussels on the eve of NATO’s war on Serbia:

“One of my acquaintance was sitting next to Henry Kissinger at a meeting of "big finance" heads. Kissinger, thinking that he was only surrounded by his peers, told that "it is in the interest of all to keep a couple of wars going on in Russia".

So much for the "Partnership for Peace" farce! Of course, I've been saying for years that that's a euphemism for a new "Drang Nach Osten." But it's good to have Ol' Henry confirm it.

Yet despite his professed anti-communism, Kissinger had no problems courting Red China even during the murderous Mao regime. In fact, he is credited for having laid the ground for Richard Nixon’s first visit to China in 1972. And even since leaving his government posts, Kissinger has been acting as a lobbyist for Red China.

What about the Tiananmen Square massacre? Just as the then sitting President, George Bush (Sr), Kissinger looked the other way after the Chinese government mowed down thousands of pro-democracy demonstrators at Beijing’s main square.

In fact, since the June 4, 1989 massacre, western multinationals have rewarded the Chinese communists with nearly half a trillion dollars in direct foreign investments - the biggest capital inflow of any country in the world except for the U.S. (see “China: The Real Cold War Winner”, Feb. 2002). The U.S. trade deficit with China also surged from $6 billion in 1989, to nearly $84 billion in 2000. The U.S.-China trade rose from $17.8 billion in 1989, to $116.4 billion in 2000 (see China-U.S. Trade Issues, a Congressional Research Service report).

Furthermore, this alleged anti-communist was also willing to trade Taiwanese independence and American jobs for cheap Red China labor. He his bosses allowed the Beijing communists to replace Taiwan in the U.N. He remained silent about the U.S. prisoners of war not being released by Vietnam after the official end of hostilities. And Kissinger lobbied for China’s admission to the World Trade Organization.

In short, serving globalists’ interests and accumulating personal wealth mattered more to him than ideology and patriotism.

Sound familiar? Do the names such as Bush, Rockefeller and Clinton conjure up similar images?

You can also add to the list Lou Gerstner (former IBM CEO) and Katherine Graham (the Washington Post publisher) - the only other guests at the gala Clinton White House dinner given for the Chinese President in October 1997 who are members of all three major globalist organizations (CFR, Trilateral Commission and Bilderbergers Group). In fact, Mrs. Graham was David Rockefeller’s dinner date (see the “China Wing of the New World Order”, Jan. 1998). And IBM’s Lou Gerstner has just been named chairman of Carlyle Group, a private defense contractor that has been closely linked both to Bush family and bin Laden families (see Item 4 - “Bushwhacked…” - Oct 3, 2001).

In a November 1993 article titled "Plutocracy Is Alive and Well in America," I quoted something Milosevic said to me during our first meeting at his office in Belgrade in January 1990. Here's an excerpt (see “Stitching Together the New World Order Flag,” November 1999):

"I remember meeting (David) Rockefeller as well as (Larry) Eagleburger (the former U.S. Secretary of State) at a gala party to mark the opening of our New York branch," this former Belgrade banker told me nearly four years ago (i.e., in Jan/90). "And even though Eagleburger was an important government official, while Rockefeller was 'only' a businessman, I noticed that Eagleburger called Rockefeller 'Sir,' while Rockefeller called Eagleburger 'Larry.'" […]

"It takes one to know one," goes the old saw. Maybe the power-thirsty Communist banker, who bullied his way into Serbian presidency, figured out who really runs the American plutocracy masquerading as democracy - the men and women from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and the Trilateral Commission (TLC)." […]

If Milosevic had figured all this out (in the 1980s), it could help explain why he treated the U.S. government representatives, like Warren Zimmermann, the former U.S. ambassador to Yugoslavia, for example, or Lawrence Eagleburger, the former Secretary of State, with such disdain. Unlike most Americans, Milosevic may have realized that he was dealing with mere minions, not with men of power," I said in that November 1993 article.

Ultimately, Milosevic (TiM Ed.: like Saddam) committed the worst sin for a would-be poster boy. He bit the hand that fed him. This communist apparatchik demonstrated the strategic vision of an ant when he gambled on the backing of the Soviet Union against the U.S.-led NWO. As the USSR bit the dust in 1991, the former poster boy’s posterior was left bare for punishment. Which came in the form of U.N. sanctions, the Bosnian and Kosovo wars, and finally, the imprisonment and trial for genocide at the U.N. Tribunal at the Hague.

So what does that have to do with Kissinger? Well, at the time they were opening the doors within the U.S. establishment circles for Milosevic, both Eagleburger (former Bush Sr.’s Secretary of State) and Brent Scowcroft (former Bush Sr.’s National Security Adviser) were working for Kissinger Associates, as you can see from the “Courting Saddam” segment (next).

It is widely known that Saddam Hussein was regarded as an important American asset in the 1980s. That’s when his war against Iran, then the chief U.S. adversary in Central Asia, made him a strategic ally. What is less well known is the role Kissinger Associates played in supporting Saddam. Our government looked the other way even when he used the internationally banned mustard gas against the Kurds and the Iranians. But there is more…

Here’s an excerpt from a May 1991 letter, for example, written to President Bush (Sr.) by Henry Gonzalez, in which the then Banking Committee chairman expresses his concerns about the role Henry Kissinger and Kissinger Associates had in facilitating over $4 billion in unreported loans to the government of Iraq between 1985 and 1990:

DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: The House Banking Committee is conducting an investigation into over $4 billion in unreported loans the former employees of the Atlanta branch of Banca Nazionale del Lavoro (BNL) provided to the government of Iraq between 1985 and 1990. The Committee's investigation has uncovered the fact that Henry Kissinger was on the International Advisory Board of BNL during that same time period and that BNL was a client of Kissinger Associates.

Mr. Scowcroft's and Mr. Eagleburger's actions seem out of step at a time when the U.S. should be leading a worldwide effort to limit arms proliferation. The positions held by these men are of the utmost importance to the national security of the United States. Persons filling such important positions must be independent from past associations which could cloud their judgement.

I trust you will consider the issues I have raised in this letter and, if necessary, take appropriate action to ensure that potential conflicts are eliminated.

Furthermore, in his subsequent speech before Congress (see H2694, Apr. 28, 1992), Rep. Gonzalez alleged that Kissinger had “deliberately misled the public.” In other words, that the former Secretary of State lied. Here’s an excerpt from the House transcript:

Until recently, Mr. Kissinger was a member of the BNL's international advisory board and during the height of the BNL-Atlanta scandal BNL was a paying client of Kissinger Associates.

While Henry Kissinger was a paid member of the BNL's advisory board for international policy between 1985 and June 1991, he received at least $10,000 for attending each meeting of the BNL advisory board. Mr. Kissinger met each year with the president of BNL when the latter visited the United States to attend the annual IMF conference in Washington, DC.

Other BNL advisory board members included David Rockefeller, the chairman of the Rockefeller Group and a director of Chase Manhattan Bank, Pierre Trudeau, the former Prime Minister of Canada, Lord Thornycroft, the former British Minister of Defense, and other politically well-connected international notables.

After my April 25, 1991, floor statement on Mr. Kissinger, he told the Financial Times newspaper that he had resigned from the BNL advisory board a week before the BNL indictment in February 1991 because `he did not want to answer questions about such incidents.'

Two weeks ago, the prominent TV show, `60 Minutes,' revealed that Kissinger had not resigned from the BNL advisory board in February 1991, as he had told the Financial Times. In fact, `60 Minutes' reported that Mr. Kissinger served on BNL's advisory board until his contract expired in the summer of 1991, more than 4 months after the date he had previously reported.

Mr. Kissinger was not the only Kissinger Associates employee that dealt with BNL. Mr. Brent Scowcroft, the vice chairman and Mr. Lawrence Eagleburger, the president of Kissinger Associates also had relationships with BNL.

And what was the strategic significance of illicit BNL loans? Here’s what Rep. Gonzalez said:

The $4 billion plus in BNL loans to Iraq between 1985 and 1990 were crucial to Iraqi efforts to feed its people and to build weapons of mass destruction. In addition, the BNL loans were crucial to Reagan and Bush administration efforts to assist Saddam Hussein.

In other words, the Bush the Son now wants to wage war against Saddam over the very weapons of mass destruction that Bush the Father and Kissinger et. al. gave Saddam. Illicitly!

That’s the Bush’s New World Order’s essence. “First you build them up, then you knock them down,” as we’ve pointed out many times before. “Perpetual commerce through perpetual war,” we’ve said should be its motto, not “world peace through world trade,” as the NWO leaders sometimes allege.

And now, Bush the Son wants the American public not only to buy his ludicrous war, but also swallow Kissinger, evidently a proven liar, as the chief custodian of the 9/11 truth? Hm…

Furthermore, as Christopher Hitchens points out in his Nov. 27 article “9/11 Investigation,” posted at the APFN web site, Kissinger has tried to hide the truth before by misappropriate and hiding some public records. Here’s an excerpt:

Kissinger appropriated the records of his time at the State Department and took them on a truck to the Rockefeller family estate in New York. He has since been successfully sued for the return of much of this public property, but meanwhile he produced, for profit, three volumes of memoirs that purported to give a full account of his tenure. In several crucial instances, such as his rendering of U.S. diplomacy with China over Vietnam, with apartheid South Africa over Angola, and with Indonesia over the invasion of East Timor (to cite only some of the most conspicuous), declassified documents have since shown him to be a bald-faced liar.

“Does he deserve a third try at presenting a truthful record after being caught twice as a fabricator? And on such a grave matter as this?,” Mr. Hitchens asks.

[TiM Ed.: FYI - American Patriot Friends Network a/k/a American Patriot Fax Network was founded Feb. 21, 1993. It started with faxing daily reports from the Weaver-Harris trials. “We are not anti-government, we are anti-corrupt-government,” the APFN site claims. “Patriot is one who loves God, Family and Country.”]

Hitchens also questions the Kissinger and Bush family ties to the Saudi royal and bin Laden families, just as we did back in 2001, in the aftermath of the 9/11 events (see Item 4 - “Bushwhacked…” - Oct 3, 2001):

Given the strong ties between himself (Kissinger), his partners Lawrence Eagleburger and Brent Scowcroft, and the oil oligarchies of the Gulf, it must be time for at least a full disclosure of his interests in the region. This thought does not seem to have occurred to the president or to the other friends of Prince Bandar and Prince Bandar's wife, who helped in the evacuation of the Bin Laden family from American soil, without an interrogation, in the week after Sept. 11.

And then there is the infamous Chilean connection… and Kissinger’s role in the removal from power in 1973 of that country’s elected socialist president Salvador Allende (continuing to quote from Mr. Hitchens article):

On Memorial Day 2001, Kissinger was visited by the police in the Ritz Hotel in Paris and handed a warrant, issued by Judge Roger LeLoire, requesting his testimony in the matter of disappeared French citizens in Pinochet's Chile. Kissinger chose to leave town rather than appear at the Palais de Justice as requested. He has since been summoned as a witness by senior magistrates in Chile and Argentina who are investigating the international terrorist network that went under the name "Operation Condor" and that conducted assassinations, kidnappings, and bombings in several countries.

The most spectacular such incident occurred in rush-hour traffic in downtown Washington, D.C., in September 1976, killing a senior Chilean dissident and his American companion. Until recently, this was the worst incident of externally sponsored criminal violence conducted on American soil. The order for the attack was given by Gen. Augusto Pinochet, who has been vigorously defended from prosecution by Henry Kissinger.

Kissinger is also charged with murder and unwelcome in some countries around the world because of his sinister roles in the past (continuing to quote Mr. Hitchens):

Moreover, on Sept. 10, 2001, a civil suit was filed in a Washington, D.C., federal court, charging Kissinger with murder. The suit, brought by the survivors of Gen. Rene Schneider of Chile, asserts that Kissinger gave the order for the elimination of this constitutional officer of a democratic country because he refused to endorse plans for a military coup. Every single document in the prosecution case is a U.S.-government declassified paper. And the target of this devastating lawsuit is being invited to review the shortcomings of the "intelligence community"?

In late 2001, the Brazilian government canceled an invitation for Kissinger to speak in Sao Paulo because it could no longer guarantee his immunity. Earlier this year, a London court agreed to hear an application for Kissinger's imprisonment on war crimes charges while he was briefly in the United Kingdom.

It is known that there are many countries to which he cannot travel at all, and it is also known that he takes legal advice before traveling anywhere.

“Does the Bush administration feel proud of appointing a man who is wanted in so many places, and wanted furthermore for his association with terrorism and crimes against humanity?” Mr. Hitchens asks. “Or does it hope to limit the scope of the inquiry to those areas where Kissinger has clients?”

Just who his clients are is a part of the Henry mystique. But such a secrecy may be short-lived, now that Henry has reentered public life. As the New York Times editors suggested on Nov. 29:

Mr. Kissinger must start by severing all ties to Kissinger Associates, the lucrative consulting business he has built up during the past two decades. As a consultant, Mr. Kissinger offered not just his own foreign policy expertise, but his famously easy access to the powerful and well connected.

Moreover, Kissinger will be required to disclose who his clients are, according to a legal opinion just issued by the Congressional Research Service, the research arm of Congress. Here’s an excerpt about it from today’s (Dec 5) Financial Times (of London) news story:

The opinion, presented on Wednesday night to the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee headed by Senator Joseph Lieberman, says that government ethics rules would require Mr Kissinger to disclose any client who, over the past two years, had paid him more than $5,000 for consulting work…

The White House has said the job as inquiry chairman would be a part-time post, which would therefore not require Mr Kissinger to disclose publicly his clients or suspend his consulting work. But the CRS opinion, which was requested by Democratic staff of the committee who worked on the legislation establishing the commission, interprets that exception very narrowly. It says that any commissioner who works more than 60 days a year on the inquiry would be required to make a full financial disclosure of all assets, income and liabilities, as well as listing their clients over the past two years. The disclosures would then be made public.

In addition, the CRS opinion says that the US constitution prohibits any commissioner from receiving payments from a foreign government, including state-owned companies, while serving on the commission.

Perhaps more than anything else we have heard or seen so far about the Kissinger 9/11 commission, the disclosure of his client list may be the first real step in the truth-seeking direction. But knowing Henry’s traditional disdain for public disclosure and his preference for backroom wheeling and dealing, we won’t be holding our breath for his list to see the light of day any time soon. Especially with the Bush White House opposing such a revelation.

After all, aren’t we still also waiting to find out more about Dick Cheney’s meetings with Enron’s and other energy officials, even though these records have been subpoenaed long ago?

As if our Pretzel Prez’s picking Kissinger to head up the 9/11 investigation was not bad enough, the Democrats’ top choice on the commission is also a proven member of the NWO “globalist elite.” Even the establishment New York Times agreed with that assessment in its Nov 29 editorial:

Democratic Congressional leaders picked one of their brethren, former Senator George Mitchell, to serve as vice chairman. Like Mr. Kissinger, Mr. Mitchell has great experience and an understanding of how the world works -- and is not known for rocking established institutions.

Mitchell’s latest “claim to fame” was his role in Ireland’s Good Friday “peace process.” Just how well he did there can best be summarized by the term Prof. J.P. Maher of Chicago coined to describe it. This American of Irish descent called it a “piss process” - well before that became obvious to the public at large (see TiM Bulletin S99-106, Day 79, June 10, 1999).

In the end, perhaps the strongest argument we’ve heard in favor of the Kissinger appointment is that “it takes a thief to catch a thief.” Perhaps. But what if the would-be thief-catcher is also bought? What if his mission is to obfuscate rather than discover the truth? And what if his “counterpart’s” (Mitchell’s) role is to whitewash while pretending to oppose?

With the increasing concentration of power in the hands of an ever smaller number of New World Order people, one cannot help but recall what Juvenal (a.d. 60-130) wondered about a similar situation some 21 centuries ago: "Quis custodiet ipses custodes?" ("Who will guard the guards?")…

Or as a cynic once told us, “the only honest politician is the one who stays bought.”

Well, staying bought is a “redeeming” trait that one can indeed associate with the likes of Kissinger and Mitchell. These two foxes have stayed loyal to their globalist masters through the years and decades. Which is why they’ve been picked to guard the 9/11 chicken coop.

The Kissinger commission will probably be an exercise in whitewashing. Calling it by any other name will dupe only Evian Americans (read the word backward). J

As for the truth about who knew what and when… if these two do their job “right,” our grandchildren may still be debating that, just as we are still debating the JFK assassination. That may be the only permanent legacy of the Kissinger-Mitchell Whitewash Commission.

PHOENIX, Dec 13 - Eight days after we published the above editorial, and one day after he assured the 9/11 victims' families he did not have any conflicts of interest, Henry Kissinger abruptly quit the post of the 9/11 investigative commission chairman. Here are two reports about it - from the Washington Post (AP) and the New York Times: