Temples of Science

I can hardly think of a subject that needs and deserves an extraordinary essay as much as this one. In all my reading of late, no concept taps at the essence of occult development more than the idea of “scientific inquiry” transforming men into gods. And no time  seems more dangerously prophetic in attempting to fulfill that transition than the present.  But alas, this is not that essay and I am not that writer.  True to form, though, I can still take steps toward better elucidation.  The upside of all the reading and research going into my “books” is a swimming collection of quotes. I’m a quote junkie now. C’mon share the pain.

_______________________________________

“If the conquests useful for humanity touch your heart, if you are overwhelmed before the astonishing results of electric telegraphy, of the daguerrotype, of anesthesia, and of other wonderful discoveries, if you are jealous of the part your country may claim in the spreading of these marvelous things, take an interest I beg you, in those sacred places to which we give the expressive name of laboratories. Demand that they be multiplied and ornamented, for these are the temples of the future.” –Louis Pasteur (ref. Pierre Curie, p70, by Marie Curie, 1923)

 “Science Angel” in the crypt of Institut Pasteur

*

“..early in May 1912 Weizmann wrote to Judah Leon Magnes, outlining a new scheme. Weizmann had just read in the press that Mr. Nathan Straus, a German-born philanthropist now residing in New York, had established in Hadera (Palestine) a health station under the direction of Dr. Wilhelm Bruenn… Weizmann suggested the following: Why not combine the various projects into one big institute, ‘something like a small Pasteur Institute…Such an institute could fulfill two functions: a teaching institute and a research institute, and could develop into the nucleus of the great Jewish research centers of the future.’ …In short, such a project would consolidate all the small scientific enterprises in Palestine… Moreover, Baron Edmond de Rothschild was moving closer to Zionism…’but it is up to us to steer him in this direction’ [he wrote]… the baron was indeed prepared to cooperate with the Zionist movement…  Weizmann did not waste a minute…[H]e called on Leopold Landau, a gynecologist in Berlin..[and] relative of Paul Erhlich, one of Germany’s most eminent scientists… Weizmann met Erhlich in the latter’s laboratory on March 10, 1913..[and] won over an important new ally… Weizmann [then] returned to Manchester full of energy. His friends on the Continent and in England promised their full support and he felt that his moment had come. ‘The movement has begun to smack of gunpowder,’ he wrote [to his wife] Vera, ..’I feel that I don’t belong to Manchester at all. Everything here is temporary and alien… To my way of thinking, this is the one slogan that can evoke a response just now –the Hebrew University. Die Zionsuniversitat auf dem Berge Zion! The Third Temple!’ ” –(Weizmann biographer) Jehudah Reinharz, Chaim Weizmann, The Making of a Zionist Leader, pp 375-378

>>>Rothschild did not support a university at this time, but endorsed a research institute “like the Pasteur..or Rockefeller institutes”; Nathan Straus was a subject in an article I wrote in 2008 called The Ruination of Milk http://www.rocfern.com/jennlake/TheRuinationofMilk.html

  Weizmann Institute

*

“Emerson said that an institution is the lengthened shadow of one man, and the [Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research] did reflect Simon Flexner… Flexner made Rockefeller sharp, edgy, cold… The room most feared in the institute was Flexner’s office. He could be brutal there, and several prominent scientists were afraid of him… He sought attention for the institute from the press and credit from the scientific community. His own work created controversy… The result was a publicity machine. Highly respected investigators mocked the institute for, said one who himself spent time there, ‘frequent ballyhoo of unimportant stuff as the work of genius’… Flexner..wanted the institute to become a living thing… It was a place of excitement, of near holiness… Flexner, [Peyton] Rous said, made the institute ‘an organism, not an establishment.’ ” –(historical writer) John Barry, The Great Influenza, pp 75-78

“Science would be the magic wand waved over any project… In 1917, when advising his father to pump another fifty million dollars into the RIMR, Junior explained his preference for medicine: ‘This is a field in which there can be no controversy, so that I think the possibility of criticism as regards the use of the fund or its potential dangers would be almost nothing. There is no limit to the development of medical work.’ ” –(John D. Rockefeller biographer) Ron Chernow, Titan, p568

 Rockefeller Institute

*

“Our society, in which reigns an eager desire for riches and luxury, does not understand the value of science. It does not realize that science is a most precious part of its moral patrimony… Neither public powers nor private generosity actually accord to science and to scientists the support and the subsidies indispensable to fully effective work.” –Marie Curie, 1923

The oral history of radium/uranium dealer Boris Pregel, Manhattan Project supplier : “..The centralization was at the Institute Curie… It was also a kind of scientific monopoly. They did the whole thing…  they were the most important… In fact, the Institute of the Curies had tremendous quantities of radium all along… That’s why later also, when Joliot-Curie and Halban and Kowarski wanted to discuss the..application of atomic energy, they were received very well… [A] lot of the most important work was done in France, because of the establishment of the Institute”  http://www.aip.org/history/ohilist/4833.html

 Radium Institute, Paris

*

“The society of experts which I am imagining will embrace all eminent men of science… It will possess the sole up-to-date armaments and will be the repository of all new secrets in the art of war. There will therefore be no more war since resistence by the unscientific will be doomed to obvious failure. The society of experts will control propaganda and education. It will teach loyalty to the world government and make nationalism high treason. The government… will instill submissiveness into the great bulk of the population… It is possible that it may invent ingenious ways of concealing its own power, leaving the forms of democracy intact and allowing the plutocrats to imagine that they are cleverly controlling these forms. Gradually, however, as the plutocrats become stupid through laziness, they will lose their wealth; it will pass more and more into public ownership and be controlled by the government of experts. Thus whatever the outward forms may be, all real power will come to be concentrated in the hands of those who understand the art of scientific manipulation.” –Bertrand Russell, The Scientific Outlook, 1931

*

“The Public Health Law posits…that government has both the power and the duty to regulate private behavior in order to promote public health. The constitutional source of this authority is the police power which encompasses both directly coercive interventions and policies such as taxes and subsidies that shape behavior by altering the costs of certain choices.” –New England Journal of Medicine, 2003

*

“Judaism is not a creed: the Jewish God is simply a negation of superstition… It is also an attempt to base the moral law on fear,… regrettable…  Yet it seems to me that the strong moral tradition of the Jewish nation has to a large extent shaken itself free from this fear… Judaism is thus no transcendental religion… It seems to me, therefore, doubtful whether it can be called a religion in the accepted sense of the word, particularly as no ‘faith’ but the sanctification of life in a supra-personal sense is demanded of the Jew… [T]he Jewish tradition also contains something else …a sort of intoxicated joy and amazement at the beauty and grandeur of this world… This joy is the feeling from which true scientific research draws its spiritual sustenance… To tack this feeling to the idea of God seems mere childish absurdity… In its pure form, it is nowhere to be found, not even in Judaism where the pure doctrine is obscured by much worship of the letter. Yet Judaism seems to me one of its purest and most vigorous manifestations.  This applies particularly to the fundamental principle of the sanctification of life.”….. “The pursuit of knowledge for its own sake, an almost fanatical love of justice and the desire for personal independence –these are the features of the Jewish tradition which make me thank my stars that I belong to it… we shall continue not merely to survive as the oldest of living peoples, but by creative work to bring forth fruits which contribute.. as heretofore… We must be conscious of our alien race and draw the logical conclusions from it…” –Albert Einstein, Ideas and Opinions, p184-186, 1934

*

“Just as some people live by the sword, we shall live by science” –Chaim Weizmann, 1948

*

“[Jonas] Salk dreamed of organizing his own Institute for Experimental Medicine, and in May of 1957, he drew up what he called its “Magna Carta”. He gave it the loftiest of goals, not merely to cure disease but to address ‘the problems of humanity that are the most important of the day’…he imagined an alliance of like-minded colleagues who valued ‘the freedom, integrity, and independence of the individual’ at a scale that preserved ‘flexibility and freedom’ and rewarded ‘boldness and courage’. Unlike traditional research insitutes, this one would include humanists as well as scientists…Its senior members would be fellows for life, a self-governing body..with ‘unencumbered time for contemplation and for action’… Following the Rockefeller Institute’s example, Salk would build his institute…’A shot in the light’ Salk called it.”…”In December 1959, Salk and architect Louis Kahn began a unique partnership to design such a facility… The buildings soon gained international fame for their dramatic and innovative design…“the modern equivalent of a temple of Zeus beside the Aegean”…Deliberately elitist, the Salk Institute would free its half dozen or so fellows from grant-writing, teaching, and administrative distractions. As masters of their own laboratories, the fellows could set independent research agendas. Salk, directly inspired by the cloister of St. Francis of Assisi and by its carceri (cells), provided the fellows with individual studies, places for reflection connected to, and yet buffered from, the bustle of laboratory life.”  –quotes referenced at www.polioforever.wordpress.com/salk-institute

 Salk Institute

*

[On the creation of the Investigation of Human Ecology, a cover program for the CIA’s MKUltra]  “I am frightened about this one. If the scientists do what they have laid out for themselves, men will become manageable ants.” –Adolf Berle, personal diary, 1950s

*

“We have had the bomb on our minds since 1945. It was first our weaponry and then our diplomacy, and now it’s our economy. How can we suppose that something so monstrously powerful would not, after forty years, compose our identity? The great golem we have made against our enemies is our culture, our bomb culture –its logic, its faith, its vision.” –historian E.L. Doctorow, 1980s (ref.  preface, American Prometheus, Bird and Sherwin)

*

“I feel that at least several hundred scientists trained in the biomedical aspect of atomic energy –myself included– are candidates for Nuremburg-type trials for crimes against humanity for our gross negligence and irresponsibility. Now that we know the hazard of low-dose radiation, the crime is not experimentation –it’s murder.” –Dr. John Gofman, 1979; read more about fallout http://www.rocfern.com/jennlake/FalloutInYourGenes.html; www.polioforever.wordpress.com/fallout/

Atomic Power, No Contest

An undying historical controversy is being erected around the confabulous “Race for the Bomb” between the American and Nazi powers of World War II, proving that the weavers of civilization are not done with this story and may never be, in fact, for its life-altering import. It’s not enough that we were sufficiently hoaxed at the time. The continuing aim is to support the enduring sacred cows of racial hatred and human aggression; qualities that root deeply in the circumstances of September 11. We must become true believers in our own nihilistic blindness. The future depends on it, otherwise we would not submit to be changed and made fit for a Golden Age of peace and plenty. When the teachings of the future recall the lessons of the past, they will stand on the record.

                                 __________________________________________________

                                                                       For the record:

*

James B.Conant, Harvard president and Manhattan Project executive, wrote: [from the biography, James B. Conant, by James Hershberg, pp163-164]

“We must consider..what the time schedule of the enemy may be. It is quite possible that the Germans are a year ahead of us, or perhaps have even eighteen months head start… To my mind, it is this fear that the Germans may be near the goal which is the prime reason for an all out effort now on this gamble“

[biographer Hershberg] “Conant’s apprehensions reflected his awareness of both the prewar prowess of German physics and a steady stream of ambiguous yet alarming intelligence –circumstantial evidence, snippets of conversations with scientists in Europe who maintained contacts in Germany, worst-case analysis and extrapolation– indicating that  German atomic project might be on the verge of success. Six months earlier, in May [of 1942], he had guessed that the Germans were at most a year ahead. But then, over the summer, for example, prodded by Leo Szilard and other physicists at Chicago, Arthur Compton in great distress had passed [Vannevar] Bush and Conant allegedly “reliable” information that German physicists had successfully achieved a self-sustaining chain reaction, and warned of an imminent threat of a German atomic weapon, either a method for spreading radioactive fission products “in lethal quantities” or a bomb ready for use on Allied targets “in 1943, a year before our bombs are planned to be ready”. Compton urged Bush to step up “sabotage, air, and commando raids” to disrupt the German project, and to step up the pace of U.S. efforts. Cables shot back and forth between Washington and London, with Conant and the British atomic leaders trading rumors about the extent of German progress and showing special concern about the activities of Werner Heisenberg, the renowned physicist said to be heading nuclear efforts at the Kaiser Wilhelm institutes in Berlin-Dahlem.

But in fact, the warnings of a German lead were false, often the product of garbled second- and third-hand conversations embellished by fear: German physicists had indeed been conducting research for the Nazi regime on atomic energy, reporting their results to Albert Speer and other top civilian and military officials, but by the spring of 1942 authorities concluded that the possible military uses were too distant to suit immediate war priorities, and relegated atomic research to a backwater behind other secret weapons projects. Although the motives behind the German physicists’ assessments and ultimate failure remain disputed…by December 1942 the Nazi government had already turned away from a crash program to develop nuclear weapons and the race that so obsessed Conant was essentilly uncontested. Much later, after the war, Conant claimed that he was “never convinced that the Germans were anywhere near getting a bomb”, and spoke rather scornfully of “ghosts that were being seen by some of my scientific friends.”

But that was after-the-fact wisdom: he too, resorted to the argument that the Germans might get the bomb first in order to pressure recalcitrant contractors or scientists, and as he summarized his estimate of the situation to [Leslie] Groves, and then to Bush for transmission to Roosevelt, he certainly seemed to take the fear seriously.”

                                    _______________________________________________________

                                     _____________________________________________________

The Bomb story is usually told against the backdrop of WWII, portrayed as a flukish convergence of ripe scientific knowledge and the dire necessity of acting in a time of great moral danger ; an ingenious response to an accident of fate. But looking at its creators, the scientists who provided the “stream of ..intelligence” to the statesmen, proves a different sort of “inevitability”. We’re reminded today that “science is not the highest value in society”* but for a brief time in history it was, and spectacularly so.

    Niels Bohr, Leo Szilard, and Albert Einstein emerged from the center of this whirlwind as the proper ‘fathers’ of the Bomb who committed themselves to its production more than a decade before its ‘invention’ and use. Szilard even appears to have been willing to stage his own Manhattan Project failing the support of state-sponsorship, enlisting the fundraising acumen of Chaim Weizmann at the University of Manchester in 1936 for his “chain reaction committee”. State sponsorship, however, was a foregone conclusion. Bohr was to say that making the atom bomb would take turning a whole country into a factory. The United States was prepared, only the majority of its citizens and leaders were grossly unaware. The design of key elements of infrastructure essential to the project were tabled in the late 1920s and by 1933 the whole of the machinery began to turn for a nuclear future.

                                                          Niels Bohr

                               Fathers of the Bomb http://pathtoliberty.co/fatherbomb.html

Niels Bohr was a scion of international Jewish bankers who was recognized as the founder of modern physics. An institute was founded for him at the University of Copenhagen c. 1920 by the patronage of the Carlsberg (brewery) and Rockefeller Foundations which became a great crossroads for physical science and philosophy.  In 1922, Bohr won the Nobel Prize and began a life’s mission to forge an “open” world.

   Bohr was nearly the sole source for the infamous “race for the bomb” intelligence and  privy to special knowledge about Werner Heisenberg and most all the scientists in the field.  During the war, Bohr traveled as a self-directed diplomat for the sharing of nuclear technology with the USSR and used his stature and persuasion to plan the international regulation of atomic weapons and energy.

   Bohr traveled back to the US in 1943 to join the Manhattan Project: “The official Los Alamos history reads, ‘..He came at the right moment… the innumerable small problems which confronted the physicists had led them [away] from fundamental problems of the bomb. Study of the fission process had been neglected, obstructing reliable predictions of important phenomena… Bohr’s interest gave rise to new activities.. which cleared up many questions left unanswered before.’ ” [p237, The Deadly Element, by Lennard Bickel, 1979]

                                                             Leo Szilard

Szilard (a.k.a Spitz or Szoldos) was born into an upperclass family of Jewish freemasons living in Hungary. In 1919, he went to study in Berlin and met Albert Einstein for the first time. Szilard and Einstein met again in 1921 Prague, where the two began a long and often “unusual” working relationship. There are no specific public documents to clarify whether Szilard and Einstein achieved a nuclear chain reaction in the 1920s, but there is the appearance of careful omissions and strong probabilities.

   Szilard was drafted in 1933 to administer the international rescuers ‘placement’ of scientists through the auspices of the British Academic Assistance Committee, which enabled approx. 2,000 academics to relocate before the war. In 1938, he came to the U.S. and took an assignment with the ‘reactor’ group that began at Columbia University and moved to Chicago’s “Metallurgical Lab”. The Met Lab became a center of foment for scientific control of the Manhattan Project. Szilard was known to have authored the “Einstein letters” which urged FDR to make the Bomb.

In the post-war, Szilard turned to molecular biology and politics. During the 50s, he helped to shape the Salk Institute and joined its fellowship until his death in 1964.

                                             Albert Einstein

Albert Einstein is dubiously considered the 20th century’s greatest mind. A remarkable feature of his personality was his native instinct to slavishly endow Thought as the highest value in life. In this respect, Einstein was distinctively anti-social, lacking a personal value for ‘socialization’. This required him to deal with social issues as problems of necessity; subjects which seem to have held deep fascination for him.

Embraced within the academic community of Jews and Zionists as he matured, Einstein became an official emissary for the World Zionist Organization, adopting and refining the Jewish value system as his own social outlook. In the arena of worldly politics for which he became a reluctant but high-profile spokesman, Einstein’s fidelity to Zionism remaind steadfast. He accurately discerned the pitfalls of geopolitical statehood for the Jews and maintained his famous ‘internationalism’ as a designated pacifist.

   For the record, Einstein’s contradictory role in world events has been papered over with ambiguity. He identified himself as belonging to a special class within his Jewish ‘nation’ (Zionist) but publicly opposed Israeli statehood on the grounds of the degenerative proscriptions of maintaining a recognizable country which he intuited as anathema and counter-productive to Jewish spirituality, his highest social value. In this manner, Einstein was fundamentally distanced from the Zionist objective to provide and protect a Jewish homeland.

                                                    

It’s imperative for us to appreciate and define the methods of  “distancing” as evidence of pre-planning.

                                                    _________________________________

In his 1991 book, The Samson Option, Seymour Hersh relates a very understated event concerning a recommendation from Albert Einstein to Chaim Weizmann, made while Einstein was teaching at Princeton (A.E. was in residence at the Institute of Advanced Study as of October 1933). Weizmann was looking for a director to run the Daniel Sieff Institute near Tel Aviv which was formally founded in 1934. Einstein recommended Ernst David Bergmann, future father of the Israeli bomb. At that time, writes Hersh, “Bergmann..didn’t get the job for reasons not known.” [footnote, p25]. The text describing Bergmann, however, suggests the reasons pertained to Bergmann’s presence on the faculty at Manchester University,  doing secret defense work for the British while double-timing them making explosives for the Hagannah beginning in 1936. The Zionists, within the decade, launched an “underground war” against the British and Arabs [i.e. bombing the King David Hotel]. Bergmann could hardly have advertized his real loyalties to the Hagannah as a guest “refugee” in England, arranged by Chaim Weizmann. Hersh reports, “Bergmann left England shortly after Germany invaded Poland in the fall of 1939. Weizmann had intervened once again and found him a job with old friends who owned a chemistry laboratory in Philadelphia. It didn’t work out, and another old friend from Germany, Herman Mark, came to his rescue: “He had no space. So we invited him to come to Brooklyn.” Mark had been driven out of Europe in 1938 and ended up doing research for a Canadian paper company in Ontario. By 1940 he was running a laboratory at the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn; two years later he became dean of faculty and turned the institute into a haven for Jewish refugees, including Chaim Weizmann. “The whole gang came to America” said Mark, who, when interviewed for [the Samson Option] was the sole survivor of that period.

With the defeat of Hitler, there was one final migration for Bergmann: to Palestine… Bergmann was Weizmann’s first choice to become director of the institute… Without Bergmann, insisted Herman Mark, there would have been no Israeli bomb: “He was in charge of every kind of nuclear activity in Israel. He was the man who completely understood it [nuclear fission], and then explained it to other people” [said Mark, continuing]..”We were both of the same opinion –that eventually Israel has to be in full cognizance and knowledge of what happens in nuclear physics. Look, a new type of chemical reaction was discovered at Los Alamos. Whether it’s desalination, a power plant, or a bomb makes no difference –it’s still fission.”[pp23-26]

   Neither Seymour Hersh nor his source,  Herman Mark, unsettle the official version of the Bomb’s beginnings. Statements more directly to the point of early development have been uttered by the scientists themselves, such as Edward Teller’s remark from his “Memoirs” about his work with Enrico Fermi in 1932. Teller alludes to the fact that Fermi’s failure to produce chain reaction was due to Fermi’s equations: Fermi “suspected…that he had opened the door to the transuranic elements…He had the right theory but the wrong experimental information. Had he guessed the right result, the hunt for chain reactions would have started sooner.”  http://www.rocfern.com/jennlake/FathersoftheBombPartIIIEnricoFermi.html

Teller edged closely to forbidden disclosures in his autobiography. In particular, he recounted his days as the director of the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory where he baldly claims to have authorized secret weapons work in contramand to a nuclear moratorium under the administration of John F. Kennedy. During this same time period, Herman Mark’s son, Hans Mark , was working with Teller at LLNL.

The Samson Option provides a footnote:

[p23] “Herman Mark was ninety-five years old when interviewed in 1990 at his son’s home in Austin, Texas. Hans Mark, then chancellor of the University of Texas, was himself no stranger to the world of intelligence and nuclear weapons. As Air Force secretary, he also wore what is known in the government as a “black hat”: he was the head of the executive committee, or Ex-com, of the National Reconnaisance Office (NRO), a most-secret unit that is responsible for the development, procurement, and targeting of America’s intelligence satellites. As a nuclear physicist, Hans Mark had worked for twelve years beginning in 1955 for the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory in California, one of America’s main nuclear weapons facilities. For four of those years he served as a division leader in experimental physics.”

Herman Mark is the “father of polymer science”, and was a longtime employee of I.G.Farben.

http://www.chemie.de/lexikon/e/Herman_Francis_Mark/

________________________________________

Before World War I, the I.G. Farben consortium was known to Americans as the “Big Six”, known for its chemical trade in coal-tar (aniline) derivatives. Howard Ambruster, author of “Treason’s Peace: German Dyes and American Dupes” insisted that Farben “is and must be recognized as a cabalistic organization which.. operates a far-flung and highly efficient espionnage machine –the ultimate purpose being world conquest– and a world super-state directed by Farben.”

   I.G. Farben and Rockefeller’s Standard Oil struck a major business deal in 1925 to share the proceeds of a new oil hydrogenation process, a deal that was formalized in 1927. Ambruster added, “The list of American corporations involved in the Farben pattern reads like a roster of big business, high finance, and bi-partisan politics in the United States.” He wrote, “..it was apparent that better methods must be devised to disguise the American fronts to which titles to new patents and processes might be safely transferred.”

   Farben was consolidated in 1926 by the Warburgs, and the German chemical business which had been fractured during WWI, regained its American affiliates as a multiplex of drug, dye, and chemical entities:

“When World War II began, Farben was not in such complete control of the coal-tar dye industry in the U.S. as its predecessors had been in 1914, but in 1939 Farben’s American drug and dyetstuff affiliates were much more powerful than those ‘Big Six’ agents who had so effectively prevented the establishment of our munitions industry prior to the first World War”…”Farben had crept back through side doors and cellar windows and seized a good half”…”The Oil Industry came next on Farben’s agenda.. [where]new developments..promised to be among the most important munitions of the next war..”

Treason’s Peace http://www.archive.org/stream/treasonspeaceger00ambrrich/treasonspeaceger00ambrrich_djvu.txt

The Standard-Farben/Rockefeller-Warburg conglomerate created by the 1927 alliance became the most powerful industrial cartel in world history. In keeping with Rockefeller policy to establish a concensus-forming “hegemonic bloc”, the uppermost strata of policymakers were energetically aligning the combined purposes of the greater organization, succinctly described in my previous post [Molecular Vision: Rockefeller Science] as the global control of biological destiny.

   The most telling forecast of this epic merger echoes from the person of Colonel Edward Mandell House, who reputedly said to Woodrow Wilson in 1913:

“Very soon, every American will be required to register [his] biological property in a national system designed to keep track of the people… By such methodology, we can compel people to submit to our agenda… Every American will be forced to register or suffer being able to work and earn a living. They will be our chattel and we will hold the security interest over them forever by operation of the law merchant… They will be stripped of their rights and given a commercial value… and they will be none the wiser, for not one man in a million could ever figure our plans.” [note here that for the next two decades Eugenics was at its zenith, openly advocated until public awareness and disfavor altered the practices]

   The Rockefeller–Warburg merger then in effect, in 1913, brought about the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank. The Rockefeller Foundation received its Congressional charter in the same year. The 1913 Rockefeller charter is perhaps the strongest signal from history that ‘private sector’ fascist forces were henceforth in charge of America’s civil affairs. Significant institutional partnerships evolved with the U.S. government in the fields of medicine, public health, education and finance and all of these bore enormous “military interest” prior to WWI, the Great War. These were the ‘legal’ channels of operation, however, there were wholly illicit operations underway that depended upon the RF’s international scope of cooperation and the ‘legal’ premises of other nations.

                                                   

Albert Einstein, in an interview to the Niewe Rotterdamsche Courant, July 1921 [sourced from pp3-6 of Einstein’s compilation “Ideas and Opinions”, Crown Publishers, NY]:

“My First Impressions of the USA —

..What first strikes the visitor with amazement is the superiority of this country in matters of technology and organization… Everything is designed to save human labor. Labor is expensive, because the country is sparsely populated in comparison with its natural resources. The high price of labor was the stimulus which evoked the marvelous development of technical devices and methods of work. The opposite extreme is illustrated by over-populated China or India, where the low price of labor has stood in the way of the development of machinery. Europe is halfway between the two. Once the machine is sufficiently highly developed it becomes cheaper in the end than the cheapest labor. Let the Fascists in Europe.. take heed of this. However, the anxious care with which the United States keep out foreign goods by means of prohibitive tariffs certainly contrasts oddly with the general picture… it is not absolutely certain that every question admits of  rational answer.

…The American lives even more for his goals, for the future, than the European. Life for him is always becoming, never being. In this respect he is even further removed from the Russian and the Asiatic than the European is… [albeit] he is less of an individualist than the European –that is, from the psychological, not the economic, point of view.

More emphasis is laid on the “we” than the “I”… there is much more uniformity both in outlook on life and in moral and esthetic ideas among Americans than among Europeans. This fact is chiefly responsible for America’s economic superiority over Europe. Cooperation and the division of labor develop more easily and with less friction..whether in the factory or the university or in private charity. This social sense may be partly due to the English tradition.

In apparent contradiction to this stands the fact that the activities of the State are relatively restricted as compared with those in Europe. The European is surprised to find the telegraph, the telephone, the railways, and the schools predominantly in private hands. The more social attitude of the individual, which I mentioned just now, makes this possible here. Another consequence of this attitude is that the extremely unequal distribution of property leads to no intolerable hardships. The social conscience of the well-to-do is much more highly developed… public opinion, that all-powerful force, imperiously demands it…[h]ence the most important cultural functions can be left to private enterprise and the part played by government in this country is, comparatively, a very restricted one.

The prestige of government has undoubtedly been lowered considerably by the Prohibition law. For nothing is more destructive of respect for the government and law of the land than passing laws which cannot be enforced. It is an open secret that the dangerous increase in crime in this country is closely connected with this.

There is also another way in which Prohibition, in my opinion, undermines the authority of the government. The public house is a place which gives people the opportunity to exchange views and ideas on public affairs. As far as I can see, such an opportunity is lacking in this country, the result being that the Press, which is mostly controlled by vested interests, has an excessive influence on public opinion.”

_

 

No period in U.S. history appears as socially subversive as Prohibition –in the west, massive fortunes were newly created, ‘old’ colonial trade routes reopened, alcoholism increased dramatically and a staggering criminal counterculture was legitimized. The story of the  immigrant Canadian Bronfman family is a case-in-point, shedding light on a multitude of  “English traditions” that were serviced in those years. On the face of it, the Rockefellers were staunchly allied to the Temperance unions. The U.S. Treasury Dept. became an overtly armed faction of the government while administering, at the same time, the U.S. Public Health Service. More about Prohibition will be linked here, but it suffices to note that Prohibition engendered unprecedented policing by the State,  militarizing civilian infrastructure under deeply polarized conditions which seeded practices of corruption and noncompliance throughout the country, even in small towns and farming regions where ‘alcohol’ was needed for truck and tractor fuel.

Across the Atlantic, WWI’s ruined European economies set a course to rebuild on the new scientific technologies enabled by chemistry and physics. Many of the same pipelines and methods developed by bootleggers for intercontinental transport were exploited for the transfer of technology, making strange bedfellows and enduring relationships among ‘legitimate’ public figures and the underworld.

                                     _____________________________________________

“The Infancy of Particle Accelerators” was a post-WWI phenomenon in Europe led by electrical engineers such as Norway’s Rolf Wideroe who left his testimony about a variety of high-energy experiments going on in the early 1920s. Wideroe remarked on “ray transformers” in Berlin and his encounters in Germany with Leo Szilard and other scientists who struggled in the climate of extreme monetary inflation; “while one U.S.-dollar had been equivalent of 192 marks in January 1922, by the end of 1923 it was about 4,200,000 marks!” http://www-library.desy.de/elbooks/wideroe/WiE-CONT.htm

Scientists and technical students in Germany hung out the ‘for sale’ sign, desperate for sponsorship by industry and eager to accept any form of back-channel funding. Professor Max Born and his friend Einstein, for example, became the out-of-pocket beneficiaries of the American banker Henry Goldman, though this arrangement and many others were quiet assurances that their projects were well protected. The atmosphere, however, forecast that it was up to the world’s monied interests to ‘save science’, as the British founders of the 1933 rescue organization, the AAC, would later say.

   Particle accelerators, which were x-ray machines in principle, allowed experimental physics to advance quickly in the realm of high-energy research. Ernest O. Lawrence, who based his “cyclotron” invention on the previous work of Wideroe, was set up at the University of California Berkeley in 1928 with grants from the Rockefeller-controlled American Chemical Society with the express task of making radiopharmaceuticals. By design, Americans were counted upon to innovate and industrialize the processes of nuclear development. The situation demanded that avenues of exchange be opened for training young scientists and bringing nuclear technology into the United States, all the while quashing homegrown advances. Ironically, Ernest Lawrence did not receive an elite physicist’s education but instead was indoctrinated through the Bohemian Club.

   The Rockefeller Foundation established its International Education Board in 1928 to provide scholarships for the particular purpose of nuclear-chemical training. Abraham Flexner, Rockefeller’s career director of education, frankly recounted in his paper legacy that the Foundation was buying its own science and that the IEB was “not an education board”. Flexner himself personally arranged funds for “Nazi” eugenicists (Emil Aberhalden and Heinrich Poll) and physicists, such as Max Born.

   Born was a teacher of teachers in Gottingen, Einstein’s close lifelong friend, and the supervisor of  ‘atomic spy’ Klaus Fuchs in Scotland. Flexner’s role in preparing the U.S. to become a bomb factory was in the founding of Princeton’s Institute of Advanced Study and the organization of medical facilities that contributed basic experimental research to the Manhattan Project. Medical reseach was Rockefeller’s strong suit, highly organized in the decade before WWI.

http://citizen2009.wordpress.com/the-flexners/

   The most critical preparation for the United States to build the Bomb was the cooperative effort with government to provide the electricity to power the huge facilities like DuPont’s Hanford plutonium plant, Oak Ridge Tennessee’s gaseous diffusion operation, and the desert laboratories and testing grounds. Once these plans were secure, the destiny of America unfolded on schedule.

                                         _____________________________________________

Canadian Niagra Power Company — principal owners Rothschild, Morgan, and Astor– supplier to Toronto Electric Light Co.was turned over for refurbishment and nationalization in 1927-28.

_

Hoover Dam: proposed by Herbert Hoover, as the new Sec. of Commerce,  in 1921. “Hoover Dam legislation..occupied the attention of Congress from 1922-28” [from the papers of William C. Mullendore]. The charter passed in 1928 and dam construction began in 1931.

http://www.answers.com/topic/hoover-dam

_

Grand Coulee Dam: Columbia River, Washington. Grand Coulee is the largest hydroelectric dam in the world. Operated by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, construction began in 1933.

http://www.usbr.gov/pn/grandcoulee

_

Tennessee Valley Authority: chartered in May of 1933, overseen by a board of governors. TVA governor David Lilienthal became the first chief of the Atomic Energy Commission.

http://www.answers.com/topic/tennessee-valley-authority

“Less than three months after its creation in 1933, TVA began construction of its multipurpose dam system. High dams were built on tributary rivers… Low dams were built on the Tennessee and Clinch Rivers… In the early 1940’s a massive construction effort was undertaken to build 10 hydroelectric dams to provide electricity needed for the war effort. Electricity was needed to make aluminum for warplanes and by the Manhattan Project in Oak Ridge.” http://sitemason.vanderbilt.edu/files/kw26ek/Kathryn%20Jackson%20Lecture%20Notes%20April%2011.pdf

“The largest Tennessee ’eminant domain’ takeover..was the TVA Reclamation Project, which ended up acquiring more than a million acres [1.3 million]…50,000 folks were displaced…the entire TVA..Project totaled nearly 70 dams.” http://nashville.about.com/od/governmentpolitics/a/tntvaemindomain.htm

“..the first dam TVA built..is named for Senator George Norris of Nebraska, author of the legislation that created TVA.. The town of Norris..was sold to private owners in 1948 ” http://www.tva.gov/sites/norris.htm

TVA’s power director, Julius A. Krug, advanced during WWII to become the chairman of the War Production Board. http://www.etsu.edu/cass/Archives/Collections/afindaid/a233.html ; and TVA’s influential Governor, David Lilienthal, became the first chief of the Atomic Energy Commission.

_

Herbert Hoover, London-based mining engineer and executive, represented the concerted interests of the Rothschilds and Rockefellers in politics. His famed mining career began in the goldfields of western Australia (‘Sons of Gwalia’ gold mine) in 1897 where he also co-founded the Zinc Corporation (Rio-Tinto-Zinc Ltd) in 1905: http://adb.anu.edu.au/biography/hoover-herbert-clark-6729

     Hoover’s career in government began during WWI with an appointment as chief of the Belgian Relief Commission, known as the “food regulator of the world”, Hoover’s role expanded to head the (later) U.S. Food Administration. His close associate on this project was the young Kuhn, Loeb & Co. banker Lewis L. Strauss who simultaneously directed a Rothschild hospital in New York (as of 1917 to 1925), later received an officer’s commission in Naval intelligence (rising to Rear Admiral by WWII, helped create the Office of Naval Research) and also became chief of the Atomic Energy Commission from 1953-58 after a stint as personal Rockefeller family financier. http://polioforever.wordpress.com/lewis-l-strauss/

*

Hoover was the first ‘scientist’ president of the U.S., serving 1929 to 1933.

Hoover’s official positions in the U.S. Government: http://www.hoover.archives.gov/info/awards.html

In 1931 Bertrand Russell published a statement that “civilization cannot afford to leave administrative control in the hands of those who have no firsthand knowledge of science… Scientific workers must accept responsibility for the control of the forces which have been released by their work. Without their help, efficient administration and a high degree of statesmanship are virtually impossible… In the international sphere [scientific] advisory committees of experts have since the war [WWI] exerted a remarkable influence even when devoid of all legislative authority… the scientific expert can already exert an effective influence when normal administrative effort has failed… [W]elcome signs..now recognized by scientific workers themselves.

…The society of experts which I am imagining will embrace all eminent men of science… It will possess the sole up-to-date armaments, and will be the repository of all new secrets in the art of war. There will therefore be no more war…” [The Scientific Outlook; chapter, The Society of Experts]

http://www.wiseupjournal.com/?p=389

“The Hoover Myth, the picture of the great engineer…was built up by one of the most skillful propaganda machines in the history of American politics”…”[L]ittle of the man himself was known. Long periods of his life were utterly blank…His business career and operations were carefully guarded and elaborately obscured.” …”his course on government regulations of utilities has been..devious…concerning the need for control of public utilities..”

www.monmouth.com/~colonel/hoover.html

In the London business world “Hoover [had] the favorable attention of the Rothschilds who made him director of their firm Rio Tinto. Chairman was Lord Milner, who founded the Round Tables which later became the Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA) and its subsidiary, the Council on Foreign Relations.”

   “In 1916, the promoters of WWI were dismayed when Germany insisted she could not continue in the war because of shortages of food and money”… Warburgs arranged money transfers but “food presented a more difficult problem. It was finally decided to ship it directly to Belgium as ‘relief for the starving Belgians’. The supplies could then be shipped over Rothschild railway lines into Germany. As director for this ‘relief’ operation, the Rothschilds chose Herbert Hoover. His partner in the Belgian Relief Commission was Emile Francqui, chosen by Baron Lambert, head of the Belgian Rothschild family.”

www.modernhistoryproject.org/mhp/ArticleDisplay.php?Article=WorldCh07-3

                                                     

Writer Nicholas Faith, author of The Bronfmans [2006], includes a footnote on page 123:

“The Bronfmans’ only encounter with a Nazi had been in the early 1930s when they met von Ribbentrop, later Hitler’s foreign minister but then selling champagne..on behalf of his father-in-law. According to Saidye [Samuel Bronfman’s wife] their host assured them that when Adolf Hitler came to power they would find that his attacks on the Jews were meant purely for show and would not be carried out in practice.”

Nicholas Faith apparently, included this significant footnote –the only mention of a Nazi anything in the relevant time period, from the 1930s-50s– based on his confidence that readers would supply an orthodox historical context. Huge by implication, however, the subject is avoided to an extent that seems phobic in light of this information. Other Jewish history sources add less overtly to a body of statements that indicate a decade or more of foreknowledge to an impending ‘genocide’:  the Jewish American Hall of Fame, for example, notes that Henrietta Szold, founder of Hadassah, “in 1933, at age 73,..embarked on a major new project rescuing Jewish children from the oncoming Holocaust.”[emphasis added]  www.amuseum.org/jah/virtour/page14.html

*

There is no delicate way to say that without a Holocaust there would have been no race for the Bomb, both of which can now be seen as filled with fictions;  they were necessary counterweights to bring the Bomb into existence. The undoing of one threatens the undoing of the other. I consider it an exceptional intrigue that the  “discredited”  British historian David Irving has been poised as an authority on both subjects!

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/David_Irving

Irving’s confirmation of the race for an atomic bomb is evident on his website, praising the book “The Virus House” which was drawn primarily on personal interviews and secret papers supplied by atomic physicist Samuel Goudsmit who co-led the USA’s “ALSOS” mission to capture and quarantine Germany’s nuclear scientists at the end of WWII. Irving writes: “My publisher..was eager to publish what I had already assembled.. but I convinced him to let me follow my hunch, that the bulk of the 1943-1945 ALSOS investigation were in the archives of the Atomic Energy Commission at Oak Ridge Tennessee… [my] suppositions proved correct. I stayed for several days as Goudsmit’s guest at Brookhaven Physics Laboratory on Long Island..”. Goudsmit had supplied many of these official documents and he had changed his story a number of times over the years which goes unmentioned by Irving. Originally, Goudsmit held that the Germans were nowhere close to constructing a bomb –a claim that he later reported was made under “pressure”.

 http://www.fpp.co.uk/books/VirusHouse/index.html

Once again, in a familiar pattern of promoting disinformation, Irving’s scholarship supporting the German atomic bomb project  appears like the preplacement of a “taint” on his work, and suggests he may be colluding to bring out “Holocaust denial” in a way that is ultimately desirable to the world’s controllers who wish to purvey the dangerous rising of Neo-nazism. Irving’s theses seem additionally like an advertisement of priorities; the Bomb Race stays intact, and the Jewish Holocaust (much too ingrained to ‘downgrade’ )  is demonstrated by Irving’s example as unlawful to “revise”. Looks like a win-win for guess who? Is David Irving a dupe or a collaborator?

 There is much more to say about the role of Samuel Goudsmit.

*

…”The story of the bomb begins at the turn of the century. Up through the mid-1920s, physical chemists came to know that both nuclear fusion and a nuclear-fission chain-reaction were possible. It started with chemist Dmitri Mendeleyov’s development of his Periodic Law, continued with the related discoveries of the Curies and their student, the Russian scientific genius Vladimir Vernadsky, the discoveries of Chicago’s William Draper Harkins and of Britain’s Ernest Rutherford…

   “Harkins replicated crucial evidence of stellar thermonuclear fusion in a Wilson chamber in 1915. Rutherford also assembled data (which he was later pressured to suppress) which bore on the matter of fission. During the period 1925-27, Vernadsky established the radiology laboratory in Russia and proposed a mission of developing nuclear fission as a principal source of industrial power… the feasibility of a nuclear-fission chain-reaction was well-known in relevant circles prior to 1938.

   “Nonetheless, the participants in the Solvay Conferences maintained a curious, hysterical denial…”http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/larbomb.htm

The Solvay conferences were founded in 1911 Belgium to foster the collaboration of physical-chemists.  http://www.enotes.com/topic/Solvay_Conference

Max Planck, Walther Nernst, Frederick Lindemann (Lord Cherwell) and Ernest Solvay established the first meet at the Hotel Metropole in Brussels.

*

In more contemporary terms, Seymour Hersh described the ‘denial’ phenomenon simply in his indictment of the US government for aiding and abetting the nuclear proliferation that gave Israel the Bomb: “It was as if the White House believed there really were two atoms, one of which was peaceful.” [p132, The Samson Option].

   This ultimate dichotomy of political expression in nuclear issues is the root of “crazymaking” which deprives us all of a sane world to live in, and we are forced to act out the neurotic schisms of those who reached ahead to claim ‘star power’ for themselves. But the desire is an ancient one, cultivated and perpetuated in the Mystery schools that accompany the destiny of Knowing. The Solvay conferences and special institutes replaced the Mysteries.

    In the western “duality” traditions, nurtured since medieval times, we can literally see the parallel of symbolism between “splitting the atom” and splitting humanity carved in full relief on the facade of Notre Dame de Paris. There in the center of the front face, in the Portal of the Last Judgement, are the two figures “Justice” and the “Devil” –blindfolded Justice holds out the scale from which the earth dangles and the Devil beside her lays his hand upon the scale, controlling the balance of the world. The two figures bisect a row of ‘humanity’; the Justice half bowed in the reading of books and the Devil’s half bound in chains held by demons. In this image, then, Justice appears to deliver her half to the control of the demon force, the force of the world. It’s as if they believed there really were two gods, one of which was peaceful. hmm…. Don’t the carvings in Notre Dame sound like the quote above by Wilson’s advisor, Col.E.M. House: “…They will be our chattel and we will hold the security interest over them forever by operation of the law merchant“. ??

As Einstein said, “it is not absolutely certain that every question admits of rational answer” but it was certain that the power unleashed by atomic weapons would force the creation of world government:

…”resistence by the unscientific will be doomed to obvious failure. The society of experts will control propaganda and education. It will teach loyalty to the world government and make nationalism high treason… It is possible that it may invent ingenious ways of concealing its own power, leaving the forms of democracy intact… whatever the outward forms may be. all real power will come to be concentrated in the hands of those who understand the art of scientific manipulation.” [B. Russell, The Scientific Outlook, 1931]

*

                        ___________________________________________________________

                            _______________________________________________________

*

Captain Archibald H.M. Ramsay wrote, in The Nameless War:

“If the new-found knowledge of Hitler’s anxiety to preserve the British Empire has come as a surprise recently to many people in [Britain], it must surely have come as a real shock to them to learn that President Roosevelt, on the other hand, was its inveterate enemy; that he was not only a pro-communist of Jewish origin, but that before he brought America into the war he made it clear that he wished to break up the British Empire…

   Mr. Churchill, the self-styled ‘constant architect of the Jews’ future’ now found himself playing second fiddle to an even more trusted architect…  Karl Marx had denounced the Empire long ago, and in the year 1941, it was only foolish opponents of Judaism and Marxism, like Herr Hitler, who were anxious to stand by that Empire because they recognized it as a bulwark of Christian civilisation.

  …I was fully aware that among the agencies both here [in Britain] and abroad which had been actively engaged in promoting bad feeling between Great Britain and Germany, organised Jewry, for obvious reasons, had played a leading part. I knew the U.S.A. to be the headquarters of Jewry, and therefore the real, though not apparent, centre of their activities.

  …the question arises: whom, and which interests did President Roosevelt not betray. To this query I can only see one answer, namely, those people and their interests who planned from the start the use of United States arsenals and Forces to prosecute a war which would annihilate a Europe which had freed itself from Jewish gold and revolutionary control: people who planned to dissolve the British Empire to this end; and to enable the Soviets to ‘bestride Europe like a colossus’ in other words, International Jewry.”

www.iamthewitness.com/books/Archibald.Maule.Ramsay/The.Nameless.War.pdf

British patriot and parliamentarian Ramsay, who documented the infiltration of Jewish hegemony into the English hierarchy from the time of Cromwell, was arrested and held at Brixton Prison from 1940 to 1944.
*

Not by chance, the synchronized ascendancy of FDR and Hitler (1933-1945) brought us into the Nuclear Age following the “Miracle Year” of 1932 in physics.  Both leaders embarked on massive “recovery” campaigns of industry and socialization, and likewise  later appear sequestered from the essential progress in physics. In 1936, FDR was assured by Albert Einstein that atomic weapons were “probably impossible” or at least, many decades distant. In three years time (1939), the urgent “letter from Einstein”, penned by Leo Szilard and delivered by Alexander Sachs, insistently pressured for making the Bomb. To this end, the British dispatched a stream of facilitators, scientists and spokesmen who represented the MAUD committee that had proven the feasibility of the weapons. Inappropriate ‘aliens’ under the British flag worked on the project from Canada. It was another chance-less move in the “saving of science” orchestrated by the British.

    The most influential of the 1933 rescue organizations, the U.K.’s  Academic Assistance Council, was founded by the two physicists, Ernest Rutherford and Leo Szilard, and a London School of Economics governor, Lord Beveridge. Szilard, who obtained his AAC position shortly after the Reichstag fire, was brought into London by Frederick Lindemann (the later Lord Cherwell who established the Claredon physics lab at Oxford) and economist Ludwig von Mises. In conjunction with well-endowed relocation organizations and innumerable exigent rescue operations, competent bomb-makers were fanned out to the receiving industrial nations. In the U.S., not merely technical experts, but a “fully articulated” Jewish culture was imported by the exodus –chemists, biologists, engineers, social and political scientists, doctors, lawyers, artists and musicians– forewarned for the arrival of a “million Jews”. The relocation of tens of thousands of academics at this time appears irrefutable, yet no cohesive accounting has been documented. True to the words of Bertrand Russell, America now had its “society of experts”.

   Not by chance, Harvard’s most influential Zionist, Felix Frankfurter, spent the 1933-34 academic year at Oxford as a visiting professor –he was able to visit Palestine and Egypt several times as well. Frankfurter kept an active ‘friendship’ going with Niels Bohr, even during the Manhattan Project years when the chiefs of the project were aware that Frankfurter was getting inside information, yet they failed to either sequester Bohr or bring Frankfurter to account (for spying, many believe), who by then was a Supreme Court Justice (appt in January 1939) http://oasis.lib.harvard.edu/oasis/deliver/~law00106

*

BOHR and HEISENBERG

What the wartime establishment knew about the race for the bomb came almost exclusively from the word of Niels Bohr as he joined the Manhattan Project along with his son Aage in 1943. Bohr had previously spread the news in January of 1939 that chain-reaction had been accomplished, embarking on a US lecture tour that included Harvard and Columbia Universities before returning to Copenhagen. Bohr’s “closest colleague”, Werner Heisenberg, was also in the US in June/July of 1939 visiting Samuel Goudsmit at the University of Michigan who reputedly tried to influence Heisenberg to stay.

[from “Popularization and People (1911-1962)” by Niels Bohr and Finn Aaserud]

“Bohr’s relationship with Heisenberg was special, both personally and scientifically. This comes to expression in particular in Bohr’s New Years greeting to his younger colleague towards the end of 1928: ‘Rarely have I felt myself in more sincere harmony with any other human being, and I still rejoice when I think back on our walks and discussions“. [p116]

   As the memoir explains, Heisenberg was Bohr’s assistant in Copenhagen in the mid-1920s after the departure of Bohr’s longtime helper Hendrik Kramers: “Heisenberg took over his positions..”. Kramers later became the Chairman of the Science Committee for the U.N. Atomic Energy Commission.

http://books.google.com/books?id=dpb1Ga … el&f=false

*

TELLER and HEISENBERG

[from Edward Teller’s Memoirs, 2001]

“I do not believe –and there is no evidence that suggests it– that Heisenberg actively pursued research on an atomic bomb [p230] …It is inconceivable to me that Heisenberg would ever have pursued such a purpose. He loved his country, but he hated the Nazis… In 1936, Heisenberg was even attacked in an official Nazi publication as being ‘a white Jew’ and ‘Jewish in character…

   Yet, Heisenberg, still in disfavor and therefore at great personal risk, in 1942 tried to save the parents of Samuel Goudsmit (a Dutch colleague) from deportation to the concentration camps. In 1944, Heisenberg again bravely intervened when the Nazis were about to dismantle Niels Bohr’s Institute and ship the instruments to Germany. Carl Friedrich [von Weizacker], who was very close to Heisenberg, once told me that ‘Heisenberg died without regrets’. To me, that statement makes it clear that Heisenberg never worked for the Nazis in the real sense.

   This story is a different account from the one that Niels Bohr, Heisenberg’s mentor and closest colleague, carried to Los Alamos in 1943. Bohr claimed that Heisenberg visited him in Copenhagen after Denmark had been occupied by the Nazis. Bohr said that Heisenberg had told him that he was working on the bomb for Hitler and considered that a good thing to do. Bohr never moderated or modified his statement.

   Most scientists at Los Alamos and elsewhere in the Western world accepted Bohr’s simple story without question. But I was deeply troubled by it…  I could not imagine that… why, when Heisenberg knew that he himself was under suspicion and that Bohr was in open opposition to the Nazis, did he go to confide in his old friend and mentor? [p232]

   Bohr’s influence in the postwar world did not stop with the damage to Heisenberg’s reputation. Bohr loved paradoxes… Before the end of the war, Bohr had succeeded in telling both Roosevelt and Churchill his ideas about the path the development of nuclear energy should take: ‘Nuclear energy has made war impossible. Work on nuclear energy must be conducted on an international basis and we should begin by sharing all of our knowledge with the Soviets.’ ” [p233]

*

GOUDSMIT and HEISENBERG

A 1953 article in The New Yorker described Heisenberg as an “old friend” to Samuel Goudsmit. Linus Pauling was also a good friend, and all of these men were beneficiaries of Rockefeller funding. [see “Molecular Vision: Rockefeller Science” for more about Pauling and Caltech]. www.newyorker.com/archive/1953/11/07/1953_11_07_047_TNY_CARDS_000240392

 Goudsmit’s turnabout regarding Heisenberg’s role in the German bomb race came after Heisenberg’s death. By that time, Goudsmit had attained the most prestigious positions that a physicist in the US could achieve: he was science chairman of the Brookhaven National Lab and editor-in-chief of the American Physical Society’s journal. The crux of Goudsmit’s revisions suggested that he harbored a personal resentment of Heisenberg for failing to “save” his parents from the Holocaust, but genealogical records indicate that his mother, at least, Marianne Gompers Goudsmit, died in 1939.

   Samuel Abraham Goudsmit received his doctorate in Holland at the University of Leiden in 1927 and within months took a professorship in the USA at the University of Michigan. According to one of his closest graduate students and colleagues, Robert F. Bacher, “Goudsmit had an extraordinary knowledge of what went on… he knew every physicist in the world… [P]eople who were there [at U Michigan] from 1927 to ’30 included Niels Bohr, Paul Ehrenfest, Enrico Fermi, Oppenheimer.. and many others.” www.oralhistories.library.caltech.edu/93/01/OH_Bacher_R.pdf Of these times in academe, Bacher said “everything was changing like mad in physics. In fact, physics in the United States, one could say, went from being sort of third [rate] through being second [rate] to being as good as anyplace over a period of about ten or fifteen years. By the mid-thirties, the physics in the United States was very good.”[oral history, page 10]

   Heisenberg “was a frequent visitor at the Ann Arbor, Michigan summer schools on theoretical physics. During the last of these [June-Aug, 1939] his colleagues in the United States [and Goudsmit in particular] attempted to convince Heisenberg to remain in the U.S. but he refused. Soon after Heisenberg returned to Germany, Hitler unleashed his forces into Poland, touching off World War II.” http://www.aip.org/history/heisenberg/p10.htm

The physicists who gathered in Michigan all seemed to know what was in the offing. A note about their last days together before the outbreak of war is included in the well-aired ‘debate’ between Jeremy Bernstein and Thomas Powers who have a standing argument about how much Heisenberg and his cohorts knew about atomic weaponry:

“An amusing story related by Powers:

… In a letter written to me a few years back the Italian physicist Ugo Fano described a party at the Ann Arbor, Michigan, home of Samuel Goudsmit, scientific director of the Alsos mission, in late August 1939. There two Nobel Prize–winning physicists, Werner Heisenberg, soon to return to Germany, and Enrico Fermi, a refugee from Mussolini’s Italy, were both honored guests. “At that party,” Fano writes, “[Edoardo] Amaldi drew me aside to point out its humor: ‘See Fermi, see Heisenberg, sitting in that corner. Everyone in this room expects a big war and the two of them to lead fission work on opposite sides, but nobody says!'” (Letter of September 18, 1993) Within a month Heisenberg had in effect been drafted to do theoretical work on bomb physics and he soon wrote two papers which were the basis of further German research during the war.” http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2009/08/heisenberg-uncertainty.html

   Physicist Edoardo Amaldi, on Fermi’s Italian team until they split up in 1938, said “Goudsmit used to come to Rome almost every year. Goudsmit and Uhlenbeck were both great friends of Fermi”. http://www.aip.org/history/ohlist/4485.html .

   NYU physicist Benjamin Bederson wrote that “at some point during the war [Goudsmit] was placed in charge of the [M.I.T.] Radiation Laboratory document room; that turned into a very important assignment… The “RLE reports” became a primary source for the huge amount of technical information acquired during the war that proved invaluable to American physics..after the war. Towards the end of the war, his career took an unusual and dramatic turn when he was made scientific chief of Alsos… The Alsos mission was to learn of Nazi scientific accomplishments..and, most importantly, of the Nazi progress towards developing nuclear weapons.

   “In fact, Werner Heisenberg actually stayed in Goudsmit’s house on occasion and they had become good personal friends. Thus the choice of Sam for [the Alsos] assignment was a wise one, although he himself claimed not to know how or why he had been selected.” www.prl.aps.org/edannounce/PhysRevLett.101.010002

*

Moe Berg and Alsos

   “By the fall of 1944..intelligence [was]..reasonably confident that Heisenberg was in Hechingen. On December 8, there was word from Bern that Heisenberg was going to give a lecture in Zurich, one in a series arranged by Paul Scherrer. As a result, Morris Berg arrived at the ETH lecture hall on December 18 carrying a gun. His assignment was to listen carefully to Heisenberg..and if he became convinced that the Germans were close to an atomic bomb, Berg was to shoot him while he was still in the auditorium. [p50]. The idea of depriving Heisenberg of his life or liberty was not new. In 1942 refugee scientists Hans Bethe and VictorWeisskopf had proposed kidnapping him, but [Leslie] Groves and [Robert] Furman did not [look] for the right man for the job until 1944… Bringing a gun into a lecture hall and shooting someone was considerably easier. And so, Berg sat..and listened as Heisenberg lectured on..S-matrix theory… Berg’s gun stayed in his pocket.Soon Berg had a second chance… But Hesienberg’s comments [at a dinner party] that the war was lost gave Berg..less of a motive to kill him, even if he had the means and a golden opportunity.” [p51, Spying on the Bomb, by Jeffrey T. Richelson]

polioforever>>> Richelson details the Alsos report from France, recieved a month prior, that Joliet-Curie told them the occupying German scientists who used his lab had no knowledge of making an atomic weapon.

   “Alsos had conclusive proof that the feared German program was actually, in Goudsmit’s words, ‘small-time stuff’. The program clearly had not moved beyond preliminary research, had not produced a chain eaction, and had not discovered an effective means of enriching uranium.” [p59]…[Ten] captured scientists were moved to an estate in the English countryside, Farm Hall, and…microphones would record the astonishment, even disbelief, of Heisenberg and others when they first learned in early August [1945] that the United States and Britain had succeeded in..build[ing] an atomic bomb.”[p61, Spying on the Bomb] http://polioforever.wordpress.com/nelson-a-rockefeller/

*

“There is a little anecdote about Dr. Sam Goudsmit that I would like to tell. As the war was winding down in Europe, the scientists here decided that they would like to know what, if anything, was going on in Germany in th microwave area. They knew, if anything at all was going on, that Heisenberg would have to be involved. This mission, I believe, was under the aegis of the OSRD. They, plus the military, set out to find Heisenberg. They finally found him in a little laboratory tucked away somewhere out of the way. Dr. Goudsmit was to meet with him. Their friendship dated back to Sam’s early days in Germany. As Sam told the story, the military went in ahead of him. Sam thought the military was looking at him a little suspiciously, and he found out why when he got to Heisenberg. There on Heisenberg’s desk was a picture of Heisenberg and Sam with their arms linked.”
http://www.ieeeghn.org/wiki/index.php/Oral-History:Catherine_Scott#Transcriptions_and_Documents

 *

FLUORIDE

The pretentions of the scientists, however,  do not hide the activity of early preparations or camouflage the scope of their participation.  In the book “Spying On The Bomb”, author Jeffrey T. Richelson includes a footnote on page 34 taken from a memo concerning detection of the enemy’s atomic activity by monitoring industrial fluoride use. Met Lab physicist Philip Morrison wrote in his memo that “the fundamental special material in the whole process, besides the metal, is probably fluorine. Even metal production depends on fluorine at one step, and almost all separation methods known require the use of uranium hexafluoride”. Memo dated March 16, 1944.

   There is little print given to fluoride history prior to WWII. Even Christopher Bryson’s new classic on the subject,”The Fluoride Deception”, neglects the interwar years but fluorine chemistry registered national interest in the mid-1920s when fluoridation experiments began being widely carried out:

In 1895, Andrew W. Mellon founded ALCOA, and in 1913, created the Mellon Institute of Industrial Research at the University of Pittsburgh, to protect company interests from fluorine emission and other lawsuits. In 1921 he was appointed Secretary of the Treasury, with the U.S. Public Health Service (USPHS) under his control.”

[in 1902, the USPHS was created from the Marine Hospital Service]

…” Funded by Ethyl Corporation, General Electric and DuPont in 1930, the Kettering Laboratory at the University of Cincinnati was organized under the direction of Dr. Robert Kehoe. Kehoe’s laboratory was set up for contract research on chemical hazards in the fluoride industry and for protection against litigation and government restrictions.  …As medical director of the Ethyl Corporation, consultant to the Atomic Energy Commission and the Division of Occupational Medicine of the USPHS, Dr. Kehoe was committed to the suppression of industrial fluoride dangers. By 1931, most of Kettering Laboratory’s facilities were devoted to the study of fluorides.”

http://polioforever.wordpress.com/fluoride/

The U.S. Public Health Service, which operates only military hospitals, was greatly expanded in 1930 on a wave of new construction. Andrew Mellon fulfilled his oversight of the Treasury in 1932 (physics ‘miracle year’).  Much later, in the postwar , the Mellon-endowed University of Pittsburgh hosted another key operation in the atomic program– the production of Salk polio vaccine.

*

Nuel Pharr Davis (Lawrence and Oppenheimer) wrote in 1968, “By 1949 bomb development at Los Alamos had reached a stage that is still classified and perhaps in some aspects still truly secret.” The Russians tested their first nuke in August of ’49, something not predicted to happen for many years more. Davis, describing the Congressmen who received the details of the USSR’s bomb in secret meetings, added “the news if true confirmed what they had known all along: Security should have been given tighter control over scientists.” [p294]

Molecular Vision: Rockefeller Science

“During the 1930s a new biology came into being that by the late 1950s was to endow scientists with unprecendented power over life. These three decades culminated in…the cognitive foundations for genetic engineering. Scientists could now[by the ’50s] manipulate genes on the most fundamental level and attempt to control the course of biological and social evolution; they laid claim to “the secret of life”. …As has been well documented, the Rockefeller Foundation served as the principal patron of molecular biology from the 1930s to the 1950s; Caltech [was] a primary site for implementing the Foundation’s project“…

 

>>These are the opening words in a book by Dr. Lily E. Kay called “The Molecular Vision of Life ; Caltech, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the Rise of the New Biology“, published in 1993 by Oxford University Press. Lily Kay’s book, her first of only two, is scarce and expensive. A used hardcover will cost you $300. Kay passed away in 2000 at age 53 and I wonder if her book is now appreciating like a piece of art. One suspects she was a consummate insider participating in the abstraction of scientific history. She wrote that the Rockefeller-created field of molecular biology was the incarnation of redirected eugenics which was “animated by a potent conjunction of Protestant values and technocratic visions” [p10] making clear that its purpose was “to control biological destiny” [p17]. To prove her point naming giants in the field with Protestant bona fides, still with great subtlety, however, like a code running through the text, Lily Kay coaxes a truer sense of ‘values’ from her subject than she perhaps intended. Her Protestants are tainted, weak, ‘old school’ and “not religious” (a “not religious” Protestant is no Protestant at all) and these leading personalities were beholden to their advisors and collaborators. Much in the way that Kay wrote “Scientists could now manipulate genes…they laid claim to ‘the secret of life'”, it was the scientists who were Lily Kay’s heroes. They were the creators and they made it all possible by devotedly navigating their special ideas through the turbulence of rough political times. The Molecular Vision’s retrospective abruptly ends for its readers in 1955, the year that polio vaccine set a precedent in public medicine.  

You may guess that the social and biological destiny of mankind was at hand.

 

 http://www.questia.com/library/book/the-molecular-vision-of-life-caltech-the-rockefeller-foundation-and-the-rise-of-the-new-biology-by-lily-e-kay

 

“They intended to create a new science of life [p6]…The new biology not only reflected the particular bias of its principal architects –physicist Max Mason and mathematician Warren Weaver– but the more general bias of a technocratic elite who had dominated American culture during the 1920s…

Conceived during the late 1920s, the new agenda was articulated in terms of the contemporary technocratic discourse of human engineering… the new biology (originally named “psychobiology”) was erected on the bedrock of the physical sciences in order to rigorously explain and eventually control the fundamental mechanisms governing human behavior”[p8]

 

“A concerted physicochemical attack on the gene was initiated at the moment in history when it became unacceptable to advocate social control based on crude eugenic principles…

Time was seldom a deterrent for the visionaries of the Rockefeller Foundation..[which] had been the main force behind the development of the social sciences in America..[p9]

Programmatic statements, reports, and memoranda from the various Rockefeller divisions attest that on social and ideological levels there was no fundamental separation of purpose between the heads of corporations and the leadership of the Foundation.” [p10]

>> The Rockefeller method of building a science establishment depended upon creating a “hegemonic bloc” in the period between 1913, when the RF received a Congressional charter, and 1933, when the program goals were “fully articulated”. Despite what Kay called “echoes of minor dissent” [p28], we are told that “these voices of dissent..did not represent the majority of academic scientists who kept knocking on the foundations’ gates… The efforts of this group came to fruition after World War I“.  I’ve posted a sketch of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research (RIMR) at www.polioforever.wordpress.com/rockefeller-institute/  . “Fruition” entailed the significant marriage of the RIMR to the U.S. military, accomplished during the Spanish Flu of 1918-1919 when the epidemiologic investigation centered in New York City. The RIMR, under the leadership of Simon Flexner,  earned its stripes as a flagship institution in the 1916 polio epidemic which spread widely across the states claiming 27,000 victims. One third of them, 9,000 cases, were reported in NYC. At that time, and for the next several decades, Simon Flexner and the RIMR were the principal researchers of polio. Polio is only superficially addressed in “The Molecular Vision”, appearing briefly as another pressing dilemna by mid-century, but in the wider context of Rockefeller science, it stands out like a red thread on a blue field. Its causes are acute radiation and chemical poisoning.

Look to the link for a list of RIMR staff presidents. See if you can find a Protestant. This was Rockefeller’s primary pool of “advisors and collaborators”. 

 

“A cursory glance at Caltech during the 1930-1950s reveals that the Institute nutured some of the most important ‘founding fathers’ of American molecular biology [a]ll supported by the Rockefeller Foundation [p12]… Caltech, of course, was not the sole center for the new biology… A survey of the Foundation’s annual reports from 1930 to 1955 reveals that the Foundation supported molecular biology projects in scores of elite institutions but invested the largest sums in six… In accord with its long-standing policy of supporting the strong –“making the peaks higher”– the University of Chicago, Caltech, Stanford, Columbia, Harvard, and the University of Wisconsin most consistently received grants [p13]…

…the Foundation’s support of Chicago equaled that of Caltech [p14]… Chicago’s genetics [research] had a strong focus on populations..[with biology] under the leadership of Paul Weiss…[and] by the late 1920s, Caltech formed the hub of America’s scientific establishment” [p15]

 

“[T]he Rockefeller Foundation’s “Science of Man” agenda.. linked the particular forms of social control sought by that agenda with the specific kinds of control supplied by the new biology… Greatly influenced by Jacques Loeb’s project, which had adopted the engineering standpoint toward the control of life, the Rockefeller Foundation officers and their scientific advisors sought to develop a mechanistic biology as the central element of a new science of man whose goal was social engineering… The life sciences aimed to map the pathways in the molecular labyrinth of the human soma and psyche in order to control biological destiny.” [p17]

“Not all branches of science were equally relevant to the pressing problem of social control, however. During the 1920s, under the leadership of Wickliffe Rose, the [RF] International Educational Board directed its resources to the physical sciences –grants for the rehabilitation of European research centers and travel fellowships for chemists, physicists, and mathematicians. Guided in part by Frederick Soddy’s fear of premature use of nuclear fission, [Raymond] Fosdick [future RF president] prophesied doom if the physical sciences proceeded unchecked and the savage was left unrestrained.

…Fosdick’s judgement that overinvestment in the physical sciences merely accelerated the pace of runaway technology and that underinvestment in the human sciences amplified the atavistic social response became the guiding principle in the Foundation’s singular commitment to support the human sciences durng the 1930s.” [p33]

 

>>Was the “fear of premature use of nuclear fission” a problem in the late1920s? Kay is suggestively framing around a hole in history. What else could be as imperative and demanding a driver for a “pressing problem of social control”? Is this a veiled way of discerning early and secretive achievements in nuclear power? It’s rarely brought to our attention that perceived boons to medicine like X-rays were also the first nuclear weapons, “biological” in application and essence.  The achievement of fission led to radiopharmaceuticals in the late 1920s, but did it also lead to controllable “chain reaction”? No new technology was required for this advance. Edward Teller wrote in his Memoirs that Enrico Fermi could have produced chain reaction in 1932, when Teller worked with him, if his theoretical equations had only been right.

 >>It was unequivocally in the name of medicine that nuclear proliferation erupted across the developing world.

 

“Fosdick did not underestimate the opposing forces, however…He had no “illusions as to the speed or ease with which mankind can alter its way of life. There is no royal road to the millenium, no short cut to the Promised Land.” [p36]

>>Raymond Fosdick and his brother Harry Emerson Fosdick both represent what Lily Kay called the “Calvinist ethos”. These brothers were descriptive of “extreme evangelism”. Harry Fosdick was hired by John D. Rockefeller Jr. as the pastor of  the Riverside Church, founded by Rockefellers in Morningside Heights, NY, and opened in October 1930. Publicist Ivy Lee was hired to create a direct mailer promoting “The New Knowledge and the Christian Faith”. Ecumenism and Zionismwere central to the doctrine of the Rockefeller religion.

 

>>The conservative funding policies of the RF for New Biology were couched in terms of ‘stimulus’; money that kept programs afloat while their administrators sought ‘matching funds’ (an idea credited to Julius Rosenwald) and local business support. In the case of Caltech, Lily Kay recounts how the strategic witholding of RF funds prompted an energetic campaign among CIT leadership to creatively solicit support from a wide community of philanthropists and agribusiness. Caltech’s survival required the cooperative financial input of California agribusinesses seeking industry advantages but as Kay points out on page 214, “Caltech’s biology was never intended to play a service role to California’s agribusiness.” The PR spin was delivered in future terms as promises of medical advance for “the welfare of mankind throughout the world” [p219] and the solving of the “problems of medicine“. In the post-WWII era the problems were polio and cancer. The National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis became a generous benefactor to the immunochemistry project at Caltech.

 

“Gone was the rhetoric of biological improvements of the race… Gone also was Caltech’s connection to the old eugenics. With the death of E.S. Gosney in 1942, the trustees of the Human Betterment Foundation (including Millikan and a few Caltech trustees) agreed that the Foundation’s interests would be best served by transferring its activities to Caltech. In October 1943 an agreement was drawn up dissolving the Human Betterment Foundation as such and turning over its assets to the Institute. The Institute, in turn, agreed to use these resources “and the proceeds thereof to establish the Gosney Research Fund, the income from which will be devoted in perpetuity to the promotion of research into the biological bases of human qualities…”. Linguistically watered down from its eugenic potency, the Gosney Fund would support postdoctoral fellowships in “those branches of biological science basic to our understanding of human welfare.” The New York Times too refurbished its prose. The announcement emphasized the medical connection: “$700,000 to Trace Polio and Cancer –Rockefeller Grant is Made for California Institute Research in Molecular Biology”. [pp238-239]

 

In May 1946, physicist Lee DuBridge, protege of former RF president Max Mason, took the presidency of Caltech:

 “DuBridge had built up the ‘Rad Lab’ [at M.I.T.] into the largest single-purpose scientific research plan in history, larger even than the atomic bomb project.” [p235]

 “The Berkeley cyclotron project, financed by the Rockefeller Foundation, was diverted during the war years from its putative medical applications to the production of fissionable material… However, they [the RF] would have preferred to distance themselves from the dubious honor bestowed by Ernest O. Lawrence who unwittingly boasted that “if it hadn’t been for the RF, there would have been no atomic bomb.” [p219]

                                                          ______________________________

The Molecular Vision of Life is an insightful book for demonstrating the modus operandi of RF funding policies; conservative, witholding, nurturing, and rewardingly lavish when pleasing, what Lily Kay describes as “mixed”. Like a sociologist interpreting the mechanisms and benefits of Tough Love, Kay points to the collective negotiating endeavors of the scientists to earn their allowances from strict and demanding parents. There was, unspokenly, no reason to expect they would not be bankrolled in the end. Her exemplary choice of Linus Pauling (a flambuoyantly grandiose, nonreligious Protestant) who was harnessed and quartered at Caltech, is emblematic of not only the Rockefeller Foundation style of grooming, but is telling on herself as a visible process of concensus shaping in the creation of history, what I’d prefer to call “distory” for its characteristic distortion and negligence. Kay, no doubt, was keen to master a facility for presentation and reap lavish rewards herself. Interesting, isn’t it, that a daughter of Polish concentration camp survivors who migrated to Israel and then to the United States would posthumously attain the iconic status of the greatest science historian of her generation with so little to show for it? Somebody at the Wikipedia made this up: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lily_E._Kay 

Her statements are powerful, however; the methods sound genuine. Perhaps she was balancing on a razor’s edge. I know nothing about her or the cancer that caused her death, except that she seemed eager and pleased by the spotlight, so much like the Protestants in her book. 

                                             ___________________________________

                      __________________________________________________________ 

According to Charles E. Carlson who is exposing the roots of Christian Zionism, the Oxford University Press created a New York office expressly for selling bibles, in particular the Scofield Bible which was issued c. 1908.

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

“The North American branch was established in 1896 at 91 Fifth Avenue in New York City to facilitate the sale of Oxford Bibles in the United States. Subsequently, it took over marketing of all books of its parent from Macmillan. This office grew in sales between 1928 and 1936, eventually becoming one of the leading University Presses in the United States. It is focused on scholarly and reference books, Bibles, and college and medical textbooks. In the 1990s, this office moved from 200 Madison Avenue (a building it shared with Putnam Publishing) to 198 Madison Avenue, which was the former B. Altman Company headquarters.”

                                              ___________________________________

Caltech, or C.I.T., was founded in 1891 as “Throop Polytechnic University”. Pasadena’s Mount Wilson Observatory, est. 1904, was enfolded by its founder George Ellery Hale (U. Chicago) who joined the Board of Trustees. In 1921, the school was renamed the California Institute of Technology. The biology department was organized under the direction of Thomas Hunt Morgan in 1928. That same year, an endowment by Daniel Guggenheim established the Guggenheim Aeronautical Laboratory (or GALCIT) which contracted Hungarian Theodore von Karman as its director. Caltech and von Karman went on to create the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) which came under co-management with NASA.

“The focus of scientific research at the Institute under Millikan during the 1930s ranged from Drosophila genetics and the biochemistry of vitamins in biology, to the theory of turbulence and airplane wing design in aeronautics; from cancer therapy with radiation and the radioactivity of the light elements in nuclear physics, to soil erosion and the transmission of water from the Colorado River to Los Angeles in engineering; from the application of quantum mechanics to molecular structure in chemistry, to the introduction of the magnitude scale in seismology. An educational institution in name only during the war, Caltech had a war arsenal that included rockets, proximity fuses, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and $80 million in federal funds for war-related research and development.” http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/articles/goodstein/

                                               __________________________________

Creation of the Atom Bomb in the mid-20th century followed a forecast made in 1875 when  the Englishman Samuel Tolver Preston, scientist and theologian, published the equation that later became the foundation of Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity (1905). Many researchers speculate that Einstein was a fraud for laying (or accepting) a personal claim on the hard work and genius of his predecessors and peers which included his first wife. His complicity in military research has been veiled to support his public stance as a pacifist. Einstein’s zionism is downplayed by his mainstream biographers but there is no evidence that he was not idealogically complete and commited to the World Zionist cause. In 1921, Einstein made his first trip to the United States with Chaim Weizmann, president of the WZO, to promote the Jewish interests in Palestine and the building of Hebrew University. A legacy of that visit was the formation of a zionist “Physicians Committee” in New York.

   Einstein established a special relationship with Caltech between 1931 and 1933, prior to his permanent U.S. residency in Princeton, New Jersey, at the Institute for Advanced Study (IAS). The IAS was founded by Abraham Flexner and funded by the Bambergers in 1930. Co-incident with IAS’s founding was the construction of Rockefeller Center in NYC. The small town of Princeton was also home to Rockefeller’s Department of Animal Pathology (DAP). DAP infamously developed a human-swine bacterial mutant in 1937, intentionally infecting a herd at one of its experimental (open air) farms that may be the first genuine occurrance of “swine flu” involving human genes.

   Abraham Flexner was the younger brother of Simon Flexner, longtime director of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research(RIMR) in Manhattan and also Bernard Flexner who was well known as a leading American Zionist. Abraham Flexner presided over Rockefeller’s General Education Board and helped to co-found premier American medical colleges, such as the University of Rochester (essential to the Manhattan Project) and Vanderbilt medical schools.  He is widely known as the creator of the “Flexner Report” in 1910,  a medical school survey that was used to establish accreditation requirements thereafter. Abraham Flexner counted RF trustees Julius Rosenwald and son Lessing J. Rosenwald among his few lifelong associates, as is commonly found between the “associates”  in the Rockefeller/Carnegie foundation network. Julius Rosenwald specifically reserved a grant-making endowment in 1933 for “cultural” Jewish refugee academics who relocated to the U.S. when the 1933 headlines read “Jews Declare War on Germany”. The Rosenwald Fund was disseminated by the “Emergency Committee In Aid of Displaced Jewish Scholars”. Bernard Flexner was a top officer in this prominent organization, however, it was only one among hundreds of “rescue” operations, notable for its selectivity. A larger relocation effort was launched by the British Academic Assistance Council which was sponsored by governors of the London School of Economics, aided by physicist Leo Szilard (Einstein’s friend) and Churchill’s war counselor, Lord Cherwell, the physicist Frederick Lindemann (founder of Clarendon Lab, Oxford). For new readers, this is a taste of Rockefeller’s web-like infrastructure. The cooperation, hegemony, and concensus platform of the RF was in itself a compartment of a larger global network.

Albert Einstein, incidentally, makes a first appearance in Seymour Hersh’s The Samson Option in a footnote on page 25: “According to Shimon Peres, Weizmann approached Albert Einstein, then teaching at Princeton, and asked him to recommend one of his students to run the [Daniel Sieff] institute. Einstein instead suggested [Ernst] Bergmann, who didn’t get the job [at that time] for reasons not known.” On the following page Hersh writes, from an interview with Herman Mark, “Without Bergmann..there would have been no Israeli bomb:…He was the man who completely understood it [nuclear fission]”. Hersh further adds, on page 44, “Herman Mark explained years later why Ben-Gurion had picked the right man: ‘Bergman was one of the few scientists who saw the lamp and knew how to make a light bulb’…in 1979, Shimon Peres eulogized Bergmann..as one of the seven founders of the State of Israel.” It may have gone unnoticed by The Samson Option readers that Hersh introduced Bergmann’s connection to Einstein buried in a footnote. Einstein, who originally “picked the right man”, surely, knew well of Bergmann’s capacity to build a nuclear arsenal for Israel. Between 1934 and 1936, Einstein’s “patent” partner, Leo Szilard, submitted a nuclear reactor design to the British Admiralty, requiring controlled fission and an earlier-than-advertized apprehension of nuclear power. The significant hole in history that is being skirted by all sources cited here, is that “nuclear options” were secretly tabled many years before the public was allowed to know, obtaining the announcements in the heat of WWII and the “race for the bomb” in which Einstein played a tremendously influential role.

Warren Weaver, who is named above as an ‘architect’ of the RF molecular biology program, became the Chairman of the Salk Institute after his retirement from active service as an RF division president. Popular books that trace the history of Jonas Salk never fail to remark upon the “anti-Semitism” of the Rockefeller Institute (RIMR) where Salk aspired to work in research after his MD residency at Mount Sinai Hospital. Salk was rejected (we can say “distanced”) for better “grooming” but was nevertheless taken well in hand. Salk’s mentor, Thomas Francis Jr., was personally close to the Rockefeller family. Together, Francis and Salk developed flu vaccine for the military under the auspices of the Army Epidemiological Board (AEB or AFEB) during WWII. The war-time AEB was dominated by Rockefeller alumni.

 It was Rockefeller that came to Salk, by appearances, in the late 1950s, providing the bedrock of Salk Institute staff and oversight. www.polioforever.wordpress.com/salk-institute/   

                                              ___________________________________

Rockefeller Foundation officers and trustees, 1913-1930 http://www.brocku.ca/MeadProject/Timeline/Rockefeller_Trustees.html

                                              ___________________________________

Lily Kay’s first printed words, under Acknowledgements read, “My interest in molecular biology, the science and its history, go back a decade and a half, to my days at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California. This inspiring intellectual and physical space..initiated a search for answers beyond the scope of the laboratory. …A Smithsonian Fellowship contributed to this project… A grant from the National Science Foundation has aided the writing, and an Andrew W. Mellon Foundation Fellowship provided an exposure to the wealth of manuscript sources..at the American Philosophical Society Library… I am indebted to the Rockefeller Archive Center for their research grants...”

                                              ___________________________________

From 1991 through 2001, much of what was learned about the use of anthrax as a bioweapon was investigated by Salk Institute fellows. 

                                             ___________________________________

One does not need to be a scientist to intuitively understand the potential of  “upward causation”; the molecular equivalent of the “butterfly effect” which posits that even the minutest ‘force’ of a change-agent can be magnified as it transmits a local effect “upward” into a greater sphere of complexity and force. Upward causation in biology is still not well understood according to Kay who wrote, “..the question of how much we can learn about life by examining its building blocks has not been resolved. Mechanisms of upward causation have been remarkably effective for a finite range of biological phenomena but have not effectively explained some of the primary characteristics of life.” [p17]. From the pen of a true-believer, Kay is telling us that Science must be allowed to progress. Kay’s patrons had narrowed their Vision in the past, choosing from the “multiplicity of biological realities..that could have been singled out and promoted by the Rockefeller Foundation during the 1930s.”  But this does not square with the multiplicity of Rockefeller realities. The primary characteristics of life were never to be found in petri dishes or between the sheets of one-inch-square glass. “Theoretical biology” was not to be indulged in on the Rockefeller dime.

On this, at least, the message is discernibly clear: “..a molecular vision of life…is embedded in the matrix that linked the particular forms of social control sought by that agenda with the specific kinds of control supplied by the new biology.”

For more on how the Rockefeller Foundation implemented its “fully articulated” program and staffed its institutions in 1933, and onward, read https://jenniferlake.wordpress.com/2009/07/30/the-displaced-scholars/

American Anthrax

For years, the 2001 Anthrax Attack has begged another explanation of how it was connected to 9-11. That it is connected, designed to widen and personalize the terror of September 11th, is little doubted among researchers, however, as an ‘unwitnessed’ crime with a confusing backlog of scientific opinions to sort through, a reasonable scenario has remained elusive.

   To the citizen journalists who have tasked the evidence of September 11th, adhering to the knowable facts and pioneering avenues of communication to present those facts, I am in debt. Thankyou.

   I created an online notebook to help sort and arrange anthrax-related information: www.thirdring.wordpress.com –a work-in-progress to seek as full an understanding of what really happened as possible. But, indeed, the core story of the ridiculously named ‘Amerithrax’ investigation has emerged. Webster Tarpley suggested that the anthrax attack could turn out to be “the Achilles Heel of 9-11”. Perhaps he’s right. One can hope.

   Many illusions about the biological nature of anthrax were made to stick in the public mind. New York Times medical correspondent, Lawrence Altman, MD, played up a “new normal” learned from the attack by the science community where a previously held notion about thousands of spores needed to initiate an infection no longer applied. Independent Ed Lake gave a lot of attention to a notion that the anthrax victims were ‘older’ and therefore had impaired immune function making them susceptible. The scientists argued about whether or not the powdery poison had been ‘weaponized’ –a term of use ill-defined and liberally salted over official statements until it remained the psyche’s last taste.  And mostly, the media coverage focused on a strawman debate seeking the perpetrators as either Al Qaeda/Iraqi operatives or a lone ‘nut case’ American scientist. The ploy of delays and division was quickly papered over as the US rushed to war in Afghanistan, passed the Patriot Act, and plunged the public into a dire circus of continuing Acts of Terror. Over the years, even the remembrance of the Anthrax Attack slipped into obscurity. Another key down the Memory Hole.

   The death of Bruce E. Ivins, a suicide by Tylenol while under FBI surveillance in July 2008, refreshed the interest of 9-11 researchers who had made much progress identifying the real perpetrators of September 11th. It is only one more step to uncover the connection to the Anthrax Attack. All the necessary information is logged in the mainstream news archives, ready to be ‘fitted’ into the puzzle of how ISRAEL DID 9/11.

                                                                                _________

A dramatist would find a treasure trove of character-rich elements in the story of post-9/11 anthrax — but where are the books, the documentaries, the multi-page glossies? How is it that no polished alternative media journalist has taken up this quintessentially American tale so rife with the tensions of life in the United States? It is not an uninteresting story, in fact, it speaks loudly about what is best and what is worst in us; from the ‘highest’ to the ‘lowest’, dilemnas both old and new, the narrative unfolds like pure Americana. “Amerithrax”. I felt a surge of shame for my country on hearing this name. It sounds like one more stupid, unwanted commodity invented by cheap salesmen with counterfeit baggage. And maybe that’s the point. If somebody knocked on your door, selling some storyline about “Amerithrax”, would you want it?

 

 But like an unanswered invitation bidding to “drop by anytime”, the real anthrax story hangs suspended –waiting for what? An official inquest? Another independent investigation by Congress? Should we take it as an ominous sign that once the Feds get back into the act, some new trauma to obliterate the truth might occur? Most of us, it seems, have forgotten about anthrax, at least to the point of no longer caring. Who now thinks about caution when handling their mail? Maybe it’s better to let the story simmer up from the bottom.  Unlike other arrangements that led to the spectacular crashes of September 11th, the anthrax incidents lacked the courage of folklore. An overstimulated-to-exhaustion public was only too content to swallow the pap being dished. A ‘crazy’ did it –sure– some guy with a privately mental axe to grind saw a chance and took it. We were lucky. Only five people died. The anthrax deaths just stopped, and the Pile at Ground Zero was still smoldering…

                                                                                _________

Before the 1950s, anthrax was a sporadic problem on the open range and in the confined spaces of woolen mill workrooms. World War II-era penicillin was effectively applied for the few cutaneous cases that cropped up from time to time but interest in the disease remained largely limited to veterinarians and ranchers. So it seemed. The secrets of covert germ warfare were still safe among Cold War denizens who operated under the veil of patriotic duty and stewardship. Whatever it was they were hatching in their labs, well, it had to be good, right? We were the Good Guys!

The enemies of Goodness were shattered, and though a terrible war had ended with the most brutal technology ever witnessed, a nervous world seeking to right itself in the aftermath was eager to support ‘Atoms for Peace’ and medicine for the masses. When the polio vaccine finally triumphed as the victory it was erected to be, no microbe would long outlast the genius of science. It was around then that anthrax became a military problem.

   Inhalation of infectious anthrax was extremely rare. It’s not clear if or how many cases were recorded before the war, but as of 1948, the official casebook begain to document one after another, and then another. In 1957, in the midst of an Army vaccine experiment, an ‘unexpected’ outbreak erupted among textile workers in Manchester, New Hampshire. It has completely slipped the written account that the U.S. was experiencing peak atmospheric fallout from the Nevada Test Site precisely when this outbreak occurred. Radioactive clouds from Operation Plumbob streamed relentlessly over central New England in that late summer, for what turned out to be the dirtiest and most controversial series of Atom-bomb tests ever carried out. (By now, I’m used to the thought that these things are never simple). If the Army released anthrax at the mill to test its vaccine, as some investigators have accused, they did so knowingly under conditions of nuclear war– a prime military obsession to discover the combined effects of radiological and biological weapons. We can only guess. On the record, the Arms Textile Mill outbreak remained America’s only anthrax epidemic…among humans, blamed on a contaminated lot of Iraqi goat hair.

After the deaths of four workers, the mill was shuttered and off-limits for any purpose until a failed decontamination in 1971 led to the building being razed, buried, and paved over into a parking lot. The following year, an international biological and chemical weapons treaty engaged 144 national signatories. Israel did not sign on.

 

Anthrax ‘bombs’ were live-tested by the British in 1945 as Gruinard Island was made uninhabitable to 1990, but the onus of testing an anthrax bioweapon fell to the Soviets in 1979 in a release described years later as ‘accidental’. Early in April of 1979, a cloud of manufactured spores oozed from a smokestack for hours, falling over the region’s farms where locals were known to engage in a lively blackmarket of mutton. Strangely enough, five days before in the United States, Three Mile Island endured a partial meltdown, similarly accidental, releasing an untold quatitiy of radiation.  Thirteen years passed. Chernobyl exploded. Glasnost erupted and the Soviet system disintegrated.

    A team of American scientists, headed by Salk Institute Fellows, visited the Sverdlovsk surrounds in 1992 to collect saved autopsy samples, medical records, and whatever eyewitness accounts were available. One of their members, Alexis Shelokov, spoke perfect Russian.  Sverdlovsk had once been called Yekaterinburg and was the Soviets mighty industrial center situated in the Ural mountains. When the Bolsheviks took over near the end of WWI, the ill-fated Czar Nicholas Romanov and his family were taken to a hideaway there and executed. As if to erase this blot on Russia’s history, Yekaterinburg was also paved over; renamed Sverdlovsk and constructed into an economic powerhouse, Boris Yeltsin designated it as the “emergency capital” where functions of government were implemented prior to the dissolution of the USSR.

Knowledge gained from the Yekaterinburg anthrax was the principal source of information about the inhaled human disease, and the scientists who examined the event became the world experts and chief spokespersons when the crazed Anthrax Mailer launched his venomous attack in 2001. 

                                                                                  _________

The Army’s anthrax problem centered around a vaccine that few outside the military would learn about for several years after the first Iraqi invasion and the mysterious appearance of Gulf War Syndrome. Sometime during the mid-90s the maker of the vaccine, Michigan Biological Products Institute that held the only license to provide it to the DoD, came under the scrutiny of FDA enforcers who were compelled to issue a notice to MBPI to clean up its production facility or face a mandatory closure. Unable to solve its problems, renovations and closure finally happened in 1997 and it was then that a brand new company formed by foreign nationals stepped in to buy out MBPI and transfer the defense contracts to itself. Borrowing heavily from the state of Michigan, with unheard of leniency regarding its contracts, the official deal went down in the fall of 1998, but curiously it appears that BioPort was created three years earlier, according to independent journalist Alex Constantine. A German-born Lebanese businessman who worked for Citigroup in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, and two former Israel Defense Forces officers claim to the founding of BioPort in June of 1995.

                                                                                  _________

Three months earlier, in March of ’95, an extremist cult in Japan, grabbed world headlines by setting off a SARIN gas chemical attack in the Tokyo subway. A dozen people died and thousands, it is said, suffered harm, with hundreds enduring permanent injury. Only later, because of the ‘low-grade’ sarin release, was it learned that AUM SHINRIKYO ‘yoga club’ had attempted an anthrax attack back in 1993. This bizarre event failed to infect anyone according to the CDC, who negotiated with the Japanese authorities to obtain a sample in November of 1999 –a sample that sat on a shelf unanalyzed for almost two years. Interest in the type of anthrax cultured by AUM SHINRIKYO looked to be nil until October of 2001. The CDC enlisted the help of Dr. Paul Keim who had also been rushed a spinal fluid sample from the first inhalation victim in Florida two days before he died. As it turned out, the cult’s anthrax was a different strain; a widely available veterinary vaccine culture, called the ‘Stern’ strain, made by the Colorado Serum Company. In a very peculiar twist of Aum Shinrikyo’s story, this ‘anti-Semitic doomsday cult’  that preached a coming global takeover by an elite cabal of Jewish internatonal bankers, Freemasons, and British royals, changed its name to the Hebrew “Aleph”, announced in February of 2000.

AUM SHINRIKYO’s leader, who called himself ‘Asahara’, had been a talkative defendent after his arrest in May of 1996, but over the next two years, his condition and behavior degraded to the point of speechlessness. Witnesses claimed that his courtroom presence alternated between ‘dozing’ and ‘incoherent babbling’, disruptive to the point of needing removal from the court. The same month that the CDC secured its bioterror-anthrax sample, November 1999, Japanese journalists and trial observers said that Asahara quit speaking and would not even verbalize to his lawyers in private. The cult’s second-in-command who had been cleared of all charges, described as an idealogical charismatic, was let go;  free to leave the country where he soon migrated to the cult’s most active chapter in Russia to lead a transformed ‘Aleph’ in a spiritual revival.

Perhaps it is significant that Aum Shinrikyo was created  as a yoga meditation group in 1984, the same year another “yoga club” of sorts under the leadership of Bagwan Shree Rajneesh incited followers to perpetrate an act of bioterror by contaminating Oregon salad bars with salmonella…

In the United States, the Rajneeshies stand guilty of famously pulling off the only successful act of bioterror…that is, at least, until 2001. No one can say it was for lack of trying.

                                                                             __________

Anthrax hoaxes through the mail generated the majority of terror threats from the moment the Washington D.C. headquarters of B’nai B’rith advertised the receipt of a bogus package containing a broken lab dish labeled “bacillus anthracis”, not quite properly spelled. Every major news outlet carried the April 1997 story. A reported ‘surge’ of anthrax threat mail escalated in October of 1998 and peaked the next year when the Monterrey terrorism database logged 82 of a total 104 ‘events’ as anthrax. One of them was “an attempted acquisition”. Over the course of those two years, ‘dozens’ of anthrax-related evacuations and prophylactic decontaminations, which included the dispensing of antibiotics, plagued the Los Angeles area alone. Surely, the true count is unknown, as evil “anthrax” stole its way into the collective consciousness.

Meanwhile, official proponents of preparedness were concocting scenarios and bioterrorism drills to test the readiness of government agencies for anthrax, even smallpox, which no one had yet advertized as a physical threat outside of government speculators. One of the programs of long duration, called Project Bachus, was especially designed to imitate the actions of ‘low-tech’ terrorists determiined to cultivate anthrax in secret homemade labs. “What could they actually make? How would they get their supplies? Could they avoid detection?” These were some of the questions that management hoped to have answered.

   Months before 9-11, as the retrospectives detail, high-profile celebrity newscasters began receiving hoax letters at their offices –so many, in fact, that no one bothered to keep reporting them. Sean Hannity told the press after infectious cases emerged and several victims were dead, that his particular threat letters were identical to the powder-bearing missives that scored on their intended targets.

                                                                                 ________

FBI investigators surmised that seven letters had been sent; five originals mailed on Sept. 18, destined for the news media, and two more marked for Washington on October 9. All of them were purportedly mailed from a street box in Princeton, across the busy thoroughfare in the center of town facing Rockefeller College. In a presumed route of travel in the postal system, these letters whisked through a series of automated sorting machines where they were separated for dispatch at the Hamilton New Jersey distribution center. Two of the recovered letters headed for New York. The later two were bound for Washington. (Sounds like the 9-11 planes, doesn’t it?).

   However, the Postal Service forensics lab stood at variance with this theory. On October 24, the day after two postal workers at the Brentwood Rd (Wash, D.C.) were dead of inhalation anthrax, the USPS lab expert announced that the best information revealed that only three possible letters could have been sent through the mail.

   Holes appeared in the main theme: where were the postal worker infection cases in the “middle”? None were acknowledged in New York City or Florida, despite the “late recognition” that contaminated mail was spreading a lethal disease, loosed by processing machines that hurled airborne spores onto the nearest surfaces. Beyond the morbid trail of contamination, anomalous “traces” were found in the wastebaskets of Kansas City stamp center employees. Ever since the news of the dangerous ‘Daschle’ letter that was opened in the Senator’s office, routed through the Brentwood USPS, the Kansas City supervisor had ordered that ‘Brentwood’ mail be isolated and shrink-wrapped. Not a single piece of the isolated Brentwood mail produced a spore.

 

The Palm Beach Florida health department assured the postal workers there that they were at no risk and only “medically insignificant” amounts of anthrax had been found at six post offices. Antibiotics were offered as voluntary, and many people chose not to take them. No subsequent infections developed. In all, there were only three “positives” in Florida and they were restricted to the three colleagues who worked at the National Enquirer’s headquarters in Boca Raton: Bob Stevens, who died on October 5; Ernie Blanco, who was hospitalized with pneumonia on the same day that Bob was too ill to continue his vacation trip in North Carolina (Oct.1); and Stephanie Dailey, who kept her office in the company mailroom, the defintive “Ground Zero” of the anthrax attacks, and never felt sick for one day throughout the whole ordeal in spite of using her hotly-contaminated office for two weeks before the building was shut down. 

                                                                                 _________

Are you with me? –dear reader– by now you’ve noticed that we took the fork in the road! A shortcut is straight ahead though a map and compass are at your disposal, but I can say from here we’re settng our feet on the central Murder Mystery of American Anthrax. I want to tell you what I think and how the evidence adds up so far:

   No anthrax-laden letters need to have passed through the postal system. Dozens, perhaps, and dozens more envelopes at each tainted locale with very small amounts of ‘medically insignificant’ anthrax could have been batched by antibiotic-taking conspirators; mailed and addressed locally, even routed back among the conspirators themselves, leaving spores behind to collect over several days and establish a ‘positive’ route of contamination. Before there was an outbreak, no one would ever suspect. When the time came for the ‘hit’, planted threat letters bearing fake postmarks were carefully delivered to their intended recipients.

   Most of the victims, tragically, would not have been random and haphazardly ‘in the way’; rather they were selected for the convenience of their roles in fabricating the larger plot which was based on the illusion that “Somebody is trying to kill the American people” as Ari Fleischer announced in a press conference. Each one of the inhalation victims had something unique about them that gave value to the illusion; in exploitable ways for propaganda and in subtle ways that erases the doubt of ‘chance’ exposure. The perpetrators didn’t merely move among us. They knew us.

   A commentator stated that the anthrax attacks were the work of “a very intelligent mind” –with so much intelligence, one must assume, from the workings of the postal system, to microbiology, to the jurisdictional disputes and limitations of investigating agencies, and on down to the habits of institutions and individuals, that this ‘mind’ was adroitly able to mobilize itself with politically astute precision and maximize the results of September 11th. What will you believe?

   

Map, compass, details, and conclusions to this essay are at www.thirdring.wordpress.com/  

Dr. Alan Sabrosky says it is “100% certain that 9-11 was a Mossad operation” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZci_o8nzQs

 

 

Ms. Rajiva, my reply

On March 1st, author/blogger Lila Rajiva, http://mindbodypolitic.com, posted a critical piece on a couple-or-three paragraphs I’d written about Baltimore publisher Agora Inc. Ms R. seems to have hung on every word, maximizing her “hit” ratio with verbal ammunition, although she does not give her readers an actual link or title citation to my article that she quotes, as one might expect a responsible journalist would do. To make up for her shortfall, the article in question is “The Debt-For-Nature Scheme” and was not designed as a hit-piece on Agora Inc. The Agora paragraphs are brief and general within the context of Debt-For-Nature. https://jenniferlake.wordpress.com/2009/10/10/the-debt-for-nature-scheme/

Who is Lila Rajiva? She is Agora Inc. founder Bill Bonner’s co-author of “Mobs, Messiahs and Markets”. She has a Wikipedia biography http://mindbodypolitic.com/about/ listed on her ‘about’ page (here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lila_Rajiva ) A native of India (one assumes from the bio), Rajiva did doctoral work in the US and resides in Baltimore (and Argentina as well?), and has authored 2 books: (quoting wiki) “The first book examines the place of Iraqi prisoner torture in U.S. culture and politics and is a study of propaganda; the second book details mass delusions and explains why they continually arise.”

I wonder why Ms. Rajiva has even bothered to critique me, small fish that I am. By taking the Agora material out of context and supposing me a ‘rookie’, is she making sport of a ‘soft’ target? or did she perceive an opportunity to weave ‘spin’ according to her credentials as a somewhat-authority in “propaganda” and “delusion”? I have no doubt that my regular readers have an interest in unwinding the ‘spin’ and getting down to fundamentals about real world problems and their causes. I also don’t doubt that Ms. Rajiva has similar interests, if she could just figure out which side of the fence she’s on, but that’s purely my wish. Maybe she knows exactly her position. As it stands, she straddles fact and fiction and moves the fence when it suits her.

In answer to Rajiva’s March 1 article (with update, 3/06/2010), http://mindbodypolitic.com/2010/03/01/more-agora/ the following is my reply:

Rajiva claims “while googling, I stumbled on some weird material by a blogger Jennifer Lake, who seems to have gotten some facts mixed up about libertarian newsletter publisher, Agora Inc. [I’ve since had time to read through her archives and many of her entries are overtly anti-semitic]”

The first thing LR wants to tell you before launching her critique is “weird” and “overtly anti-semitic”. The second hyperlink leads to 3 posts that quote from the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. I’ve referred to the Protocols myself as “hoax or not” they seem to be acted upon in the implementation of official policy. The quotes are supported by demonstration in the body of the blog. Is it “weird”? –ee-yeah!  We’ve all heard the maxim “fact is stranger than fiction” and in the world of advanced technology and medical science, which is a dominant theme in my blog, this is surreal weirdness. The objective existence of the Protocols makes it “fact” but only in demonstration can it be determined if it’s true, and I’ve found the principles of the Protocols underlying much ‘truth’ in the outcome of events. Apparently, as Ms. Rajiva will have it, that makes one an anti-semite.

   Anti-semitism is certainly an issue as a ‘weaponized’ charge and confessed “trick” that has been used to generate opposition to legitimate claims, criticisms, and dissent against Israeli or Jewish actions. In Ms. Rajiva’s blog post “Israel-Palestine Problem Exhibits Wound of PTSD”, she writes, “For Jews, the great trauma is, of course, the Holocaust itself, the systematic and ultimately incomprehensible slaughter of one-third of world Jewry“. http://mindbodypolitic.com/2010/03/04/israel-palestine-problem-exhibits-wound-of-ptsd/

Slaughter of one-third? Is that a “fact”? If I question the source and accuracy of her statement, I would be labeled ‘anti-semitic’ and a (worse) ‘Holocaust denier’, however I deny no one the legitimacy of their personal suffering. In fact, I agree with Lila that “they need therapy”. What’s interesting is that this hyperlink is the top of her critique, not related to the content of Agora or the article she is quoting from, which is never cited in the first place.

See this video about using the charge of “anti-semitism” as a “trick” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUGVPBO9_cA

As for “some facts mixed up” about Agora: how badly did I do?

“[Lake]“Agora Inc. was established as a publishing company in Washington D.C. in 1979 by its founders; William Bonner, Jim Dale Davidson, Porter Stansberry and Lord William Rees-Moog.

(Lila: I don’t believe Stansberry was involved in founding it…he might not even have been born would have been very young at the time; and it’s Rees-Mogg. Moog is the electronic synthesizer. Also, most people who’ve written on the subject don’t mention Rees-Mogg as a founder, except Lyndon Larouche. Besides Larouche, the person who harps on Rees-Mogg is a minor Internet spammer…”

—like I said, in context I was generalizing. Stansberry founded 2 or more later divisions of the various businesses under Agora’s umbrella. That makes him a founder, or ‘partner’ if you prefer, in the expanding establishment. He was not an original incorporator in 1979. If I erred, it was for being too brief and nonspecific but I’ll take a lesson. It was not my intention to belabor the Debt-for-Nature article. Instead, I offered a source link which details the original founders as Bill Bonner and James Dale Davidson. Rees-Mogg was included in my statement precisely because others identify him as a founder, one of whom LR describes as ” a credible left-oriented writer”. Good thing LR caught that “Moog” mix-up so nobody thinks I was referring to a synthesizer! It was probably a typo on my part and I’ve been criticized before for not correcting typos. Consider me ‘slapped’. I only used his name once, so who knows if it was a typo or not– I don’t even know. A lot of what follows this is apologist drivel, which Rajiva couches as “Not to defend Agora, but…” and proceeds to defend Agora.  LR confirms rather than refutes more of what I’ve written, such as disreputable stock promotion, government connections, charges of fraud, etc. and writes this about her own efforts at exposing Agora:

“.. I’ve been quite critical of Agora (within the limits of what you can say of a place where you once worked)”…”I posted a detailed criticism of Agora that I later took down to avoid claims of defamation”

We’ll have to take her word for it that such a publication existed and was as damaging as she suggests, though I do not find Ms. Rajiva a credible exposer under the circumstances. As she points out by way of another veiled hyperlink, noted as “other facts” concerning the murder of an Agora employee who may have found out inconvenient truths as his widow believes, knowing or exposing things about Agora could be hazardous. Much safer just to talk about how honest and forthright you’ve attempted to be.

The larger criticism in all this appears to be a “lack of evidence” charge. Since her readers probably don’t know that LR quoted every single word about Agora in the Debt-For-Nature article, and wasn’t simply highlighting the passages of some ‘tell-all’, it stands to reason that there just isn’t very much there. She says she’ll do some homework, but will she post it? Considering the off-putting nature of the “overtly anti-semitic” content on my blog, which begins and ends the article, LR had already censored herself with  “confirming my decision not to link the material” that was otherwise supportive (of something at variance with the sanitized Agora, one gathers?)…and so, in all, she has demonstrated the limits of her offering as just another disingenuous propagandist willing to protect and apologize for criminals.

The Host and the Parasite

“The Host and the Parasite”, presented by its author Greg Felton from Vancouver B.C. in February 2008

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1RxC1KDOg8&feature=related

“September 11…led to the passage of the USA Patriot Act and from there, people might argue, we went into a spiral toward the abyss of statism, torture, imperial overreach and all sorts of other things you can associate with undemocratic activity.”

 

“On October 3rd, 2001, 24 days after September 11th happened, the Department of Justice handed Congress a document; it was called the USA Patriot Act and Congress was told to pass it….here we have a congress being told to follow a dictate from the Executive….

…the Patriot Act was entered into the House on October 23 and signed by GWBush on October 26. For legislation, that is an absurdly fast scenario.

…that document did something very strange and very sad –it legislated the Republic out of existence, legally.”

 

“We have to explain why a Congress would commit political suicide. Why would Congress do this? My book takes the perspective that Congress was incapable of defending the Constitution, which..the Patriot Act utterly destroys.

…beginning with Ronald Reagan in 1980, and through a period of 25 years, the United States managed to mutate from a republic.. toward a police state and it did so because of events that came out of the Vietnam War”…

 

[part 2]”In 1967…Israel provoked a war in the Middle East and managed to seize control of the Suez….They occupied East Jerusalem, the Golan Heights, Suez, the West Bank, Gaza Strip –it is still an illegal occupation…

The Israel Lobby which came to prominence under Harry Truman in 1948 and owed its allegiance to the Democratic Party was considering supporting a Republican [after Carter, who supported a Palestinian treaty]…with the election of 1980, ..the Zionists and Neoconservatives came to power and their front man was Ronald Reagan.

Through the 1980s we have a transition..between the role of oil as the dominant influence and cause of US policy in the Mid-East and that of supporting Israel, to the detriment of oil and to the detriment of the United States.”

 

“Throughout the 1980s, Israel virtually ignored everything the US wanted to do…It had carte blanche to do what it wanted”…

 

“In 1991, Dick Cheney had acknowledged there was no threat of nuclear weapons from Saddam Hussein. Colin Powell said the same thing in 2000, so did Condoleeza Rice…that Iraq posed no threat to the US or Israel. [Then] the US policy flip-flopped 180 degrees”…

 

[part 3]” the only interested party involved in Iraq was Israel, for three reasons. Iraq has a lot of oil –Israel needs oil. Iraq has a lot of water; the Tigris and the Euphrates all within the ambit of what’s called the Zionist claim on Middle Eastern land, “from the Nile to the Euphrates”…

…it’s also the case that Saddam Hussein was one of the few Arab leaders courageous enough to stand up and defend the Palestinians against the repression and sadism of the Israeli state.

Israel wants complete military superiority over the region and so ‘we’ had a provocation to bomb Iraq.”

 

“The United States government, especially since Clinton, has been populated by people who owe more of an allegiance to Israel than to the United States itself. To this day there are people in the United States government who are citizens of Israel, and to have dual citizens form the policy really brings up questions of duplicity and treason…

…it makes more sense to believe that the United States Congress is not in control of itself. The people making policy would rather serve Israel than serve their own public…and if we’re ever going to have a discussion of what happened on September 11, ..we have to look at who benefitted from it.”

 

“The United States has been humiliated, abused, disgraced, internationally and domestically, as it moves to support Israel in whatever it does. And it is impossible to think that this has been done willingly…The only possible thing that we can conclude is that the United States has been under Israeli occupation, to all intents and purposes.

…The United States..has slowly and quite clearly allowed itself to be occupied and humiliated by a lobby that had as it’s primary interest the interest of another government…

   If you look at the people who run the United States…the interplay between them and the Israeli lobby is very very close, and it makes no sense for the United States to murder Arabs en mass…to repudiate its principles and to declare war on its own citizens. The only way we can make sense of this is that the people in Washington are serving another government…We have essentially a treasonous government.”

*

[part 4,5,6 are question/answer and very instructive]

For a listing of government employees:  http://fedupusa.wordpress.com/  –‘fed up usa’ kicks butt

 

                                                ____________________________________

Parasitism is a type of symbiotic relationship between organisms of different species where one organism, the parasite, benefits at the expense of the host.

In general, parasites are much smaller than their hosts, show a high degree of specialization for their mode of life, and reproduce more quickly and in greater numbers than their hosts. Classic examples of parasitism include interactions between vertebrate hosts and diverse animals such as tapeworms, flukes, the Plasmodium species, and fleas. Parasitism is differentiated from parasitoidism, a relationship in which the host is always killed by the parasite such as moths, butterflies, ants, flies and others.

The harm and benefit in parasitic interactions concern the biological fitness of the organisms involved. Parasites reduce host fitness in many ways, ranging from general or specialized pathology (such as castration), impairment of secondary sex characteristics, to the modification of host behaviour. Parasites increase their fitness by exploiting hosts for food, habitat and dispersal……….. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parasite

                                                _____________________________________________

The parasitic financial class: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sociopolitica/world_order/WorldOrder.htm

Americans spying for Israel –scientists selling secrets to the ‘Mossad’ http://original.antiwar.com/smith-grant/2009/12/02/the-israel-lobby-celebrates-espionage-in-new-york/

Protocol No. 10

Protocol No. 10

point 17
….we shall obtain the power of destroying little by little, step by step…compelled to introduce into the constitutions of States to prepare for the transition to an imperceptible abolition of every kind of constitution…

point 19
…IT IS INDISPENSIBLE TO TROUBLE IN ALL COUNTRIES THE PEOPLE’S RELATIONS WITH THEIR GOVERNMENTS SO AS TO UTTERLY EXHAUST HUMANITY WITH DISSENSION, HATRED, STRUGGLE, ENVY, AND EVEN BY THE USE OF TORTURE, BY STARVATION, BY THE INOCULATION OF DISEASES…

point 20
But if we give the nations of the world a breathing space, the moment we long for is hardly likely ever to arrive.

Protocol No. 5

 

Protocol No. 5, point 7

“THE PRINCIPLE OBJECT OF OUR DIRECTORATE CONSISTS IN THIS: TO DEBILITATE THE PUBLIC MIND…”

Protocol No. 3

 

Protocol No. 3, point 14

“The population…HAS RUSHED TO FIND A GUIDE, IT HAS NEVER HAD THE SENSE TO RETURN TO THE FORMER STATE…”

from Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion

Fabricating DNA Evidence

from the New York Times:

DNA Evidence Can Be Fabricated, Scientists Show

By ANDREW POLLACK

Published: August 17, 2009

Scientists in Israel have demonstrated that it is possible to fabricate DNA evidence, undermining the credibility of what has been considered the gold standard of proof in criminal cases.

Skip to next paragraph

RSS Feed

• Get Science News From The New York Times »

The scientists fabricated blood and saliva samples containing DNA from a person other than the donor of the blood and saliva. They also showed that if they had access to a DNA profile in a database, they could construct a sample of DNA to match that profile without obtaining any tissue from that person.

“You can just engineer a crime scene,” said Dan Frumkin, lead author of the paper, which has been published online by the journal Forensic Science International: Genetics. “Any biology undergraduate could perform this.”

Dr. Frumkin is a founder of Nucleix, a company based in Tel Aviv that has developed a test to distinguish real DNA samples from fake ones that it hopes to sell to forensics laboratories.

(read the rest of the story) http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/science/18dna.html?_r=2