Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Norman Dodd on Carnegie Foundation ... and Chico's mischief 
Author Message
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm
Posts: 1400
Reply with quote
Post Norman Dodd on Carnegie Foundation ... and Chico's mischief
http://www.realityzone.com/hiddenagenda2.html

beginExcerpt
I went back to Washington and I selected a member of my staff who had been a practicing attorney in Washington. She was on my staff to see to it that I didn't break any congressional procedures or rules, in addition to which she was unsympathetic to the purpose of the investigation. She was level-headed and a very reasonably brilliant, capable lady. Her attitude toward the investigation was: What could possibly be wrong with foundations? They do so much good.

Well, in the face of that sincere conviction of Katherine's I went out of my way not to prejudice her in any way, but I did explain to her that she couldn't possibly cover 50 years of written minutes in two weeks, so she would have to do what we call spot reading. I blocked out certain periods of time to concentrate on, and off she went to New York. She came back at the end of two weeks with the following on dictaphone tapes:
We are now at the year 1908, which was the year that the Carnegie Foundation began operations. In that year, the trustees, meeting for the first time, raised a specific question, which they discussed throughout the balance of the year in a very learned fashion. The question is: “Is there any means known more effective than war, assuming you wish to alter the life of an entire people?” And they conclude that no more effective means than war to that end is known to humanity.
So then, in 1909, they raised the second question and discussed it, namely: “How do we involve the United States in a war?”
Well, I doubt at that time if there was any subject more removed from the thinking of most of the people of this country than its involvement in a war. There were intermittent shows in the Balkans, but I doubt very much if many people even knew where the Balkans were. Then, finally, they answered that question as follows: “We must control the State Department.” That very naturally raises the question of how do we do that? And they answer it by saying: “We must take over and control the diplomatic machinery of this country.” And, finally, they resolve to aim at that as an objective.
Then time passes, and we are eventually in a war, which would be World War I. At that time they record on their minutes a shocking report in which they dispatched to President Wilson a telegram, cautioning him to see that the war does not end too quickly.
end


The above transcript extracted from dictaphone tapes that Dodd's assistant, Katherine Casey, who was predisposed against finding fault with the foundations who "do so much good" but nonetheless discovers fault ... clearly establishes the existence of 1908 and 1909 meetings of the Carnegie Foundation (not yet officially called Carnegie Endowment For International Peace).

The fact that Chico is attempting to protect the criminal Rothschild Zionist banksters and industrialists, by finding technical reasons to dismiss Norman Dodd's documented findings of high treasonous crimes against the American Republic back in 1908 and 1909, e.g. before the colluding perpetrators morphed their unofficial recognition as Carnegie Foundation to the official identity one year later, in 1910, of Carnegie Endowment For International Peace ... merely increases the preponderance against Chico of being a fifth column Zionist pretending not to be a Zionist.


Pax

ps: Sorry, Chico. Respect for the truth eventually means outing those that stand in contempt of it.

ps2: Consider yourself being outed ... or outed ... it doesn't really matter at this point.

_________________
Flight that sends into the clouds brings wings to rest upon the boughs. Then further down to the liquid lawn, to serve as sentries for the gliding swan. Curve, a perfect turning of the line between here and Heaven, with extensions into infinitum.


Mon Oct 05, 2015 4:47 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 10300
Reply with quote
Post Re: Norman Dodd on Carnegie Foundation ... and Chico's misch
Quote:
Andrew Carnegie, like other leading internationalists of his day, believed that war could be eliminated by stronger international laws and organizations. "I am drawn more to this cause than to any," he wrote in 1907. Carnegie's single largest commitment in this field was his creation of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

On his seventy-fifth birthday, November 25, 1910, Andrew Carnegie announced the establishment of the Endowment with a gift of $10 million. In his deed of gift, presented in Washington on December 14, 1910, Carnegie charged trustees to use the fund to "hasten the abolition of international war, the foulest blot upon our civilization", and he gave his trustees "the widest discretion as to the measures and policy they shall from time to time adopt" in carrying out the purpose of the fund. -- source

Carnegie seemed to be all about how to prevent wars, not start them. Maybe he was a lying sociopath, just pretending to be against war, but actually promoting them. That might help support Dodd's claims concerning the minutes, which run counter to Carnegie's public posturing. But I am not suggesting here that Carnegie is a sociopath, as I know little about him at the moment.

So before the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace is founded, you are saying it already existed as the Carnegie Foundation. And it appears there are records that might support this at Cornell University.

UncleZook wrote:
The above transcript extracted from dictaphone tapes that Dodd's assistant, Katherine Casey, who was predisposed against finding fault with the foundations who "do so much good" but nonetheless discovers fault ... clearly establishes the existence of 1908 and 1909 meetings of the Carnegie Foundation (not yet officially called Carnegie Endowment For International Peace).

Howard Dodd says there were no transcripts of the dictaphone tapes.

Quote:
ED GRIFFIN: This is the story that emerged from the minutes of the Carnegie Endowment?

NORMAN DODD: That's right. It was official to that extent.

ED GRIFFIN: Katherine Casey brought all of these back in the form of dictated notes from a verbatim reading of the minutes?

NORMAN DODD: On dictaphone belts.

ED GRIFFIN: Are those in existence today?

NORMAN DODD: I don't know. If they are, they're somewhere in the Archives under the control of the Congress, House of Representatives.

ED GRIFFIN: How many people actually heard those, or were they typed up, a transcript made of them?

NORMAN DODD: No.

ED GRIFFIN: How many people actually heard those recordings?

NORMAN DODD: Oh, three maybe. Myself, my top assistant, and Katherine. I might tell you, this experience, as far as its impact on Katherine Casey was concerned, was she never was able to return to her law practice. If it hadn't been for Carol Reece's ability to tuck her away into a job in the Federal Trade Commission, I don't know what would have happened to Katherine. Ultimately, she lost her mind as a result of it. It was a terrible shock. It's a very rough experience to encounter proof of these kinds. -- source

Katherine Casey lost her mind as a result of these minutes?! She was a practicing attorney in Washington D.C. who Dodd describes as "level-headed and a very reasonably brilliant, capable lady." But Carnegie people talking treason against the United States on the record (pretty foolish for such smart people) caused this capable attorney to lose her mind. That's hard to swallow.

With Katherine, the only person who claimed to see the minutes, losing her mind, now there are only two people left who heard the dictaphone belts, which were never transcribed. It might be worth a trip to Cornell University to check it out, Zook. That's in Ithaca, NY, not too far from you, isn't it? Perhaps the actual minutes themselves are there. But, so far, there's no mention of the rise of Hitler or World War II being pre-planned in those minutes, as you claim, as far as we can tell, right? Or can you produce such evidence?

Quote:
The fact that Chico is attempting to protect the criminal Rothschild Zionist banksters and industrialists ... merely increases the preponderance against Chico of being a fifth column Zionist pretending not to be a Zionist.

:lol: :lol: Oh, is that what this is about? You are just fishing for ways to discredit Chico? After claiming umpteen times that I have no credibility whatsoever? That doesn't make any sense. If I have no credibility, what's to discredit? And now you claim I am a Zionist pretending not to be a Zionist. Me, a Zionist, exposing the Holocaust Hoax and the vilification of Hitler; exposing the atrocities perpetrated by the Zionist-led Allies in World War II; exposing the fake, kangaroo court trial at Nuremberg; exposing the global monetary scam of the Zionist banksters; and worst of all, exposing the deviant psychology inherent in the Zionist sociopathic mind. That doesn't make sense either.

Really, Zook, you should get a grip on yourself. You aren't another victim of these cursed minutes are you, losing your mind?

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Mon Oct 05, 2015 6:22 am
Profile
User avatar

Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 5:11 pm
Posts: 1400
Reply with quote
Post Re: Norman Dodd on Carnegie Foundation ... and Chico's misch
Quote:
Howard Dodd says there were no transcripts of the dictaphone tapes.


I stand corrected. There was no transcript of the dictaphone tapes (at least, that Dodd is aware of). The transcript I was referring to is actually from the interview with Dodd that Griffin conducted.

My carelessness does not change the content of Dodd's investigation.

Nor does your carelessness in misreporting Norman Dodd's name as being Howard Dodd ... change the fact that Griffin interviewed a man called Norman Dodd.

Trivial errors are forgivable once pointed out and the corrections are made.

Significant errors like giving the benefit of doubt to an oligarch (e.g. Andrew Carnegie) who made his fortune on the rails of the Rothschild conspiracy with associates like JP Morgan ... and not extending benefit of doubt to an investigator like Dodd who was merely performing his office duties ... are less forgivable if at all.

I don't know too much about Andrew Carnegie, only that he hung out with bad people at the top of the Rothschild industrialist pyramid. JP Morgan was an associate, for example. By contrast, Norman Dodd seems like the genuine article just by watching the interview with Griffin.

So question begs, why is Chico quick to dismiss claims against Carnegie? Equally, to dismiss Dodd altogether?


Pax

_________________
Flight that sends into the clouds brings wings to rest upon the boughs. Then further down to the liquid lawn, to serve as sentries for the gliding swan. Curve, a perfect turning of the line between here and Heaven, with extensions into infinitum.


Mon Oct 05, 2015 6:54 am
Profile
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Tue May 03, 2011 6:06 pm
Posts: 10300
Reply with quote
Post Re: Norman Dodd on Carnegie Foundation ... and Chico's misch
UncleZook wrote:
My carelessness does not change the content of Dodd's investigation.

No one is arguing that.

UncleZook wrote:
Nor does your carelessness in misreporting Norman Dodd's name as being Howard Dodd ... change the fact that Griffin interviewed a man called Norman Dodd.

No one is arguing that either. I'm terrible with remembering names. I have no idea where "Howard" came from, but it was just a trivial error I didn't catch.

UncleZook wrote:
Significant errors like giving the benefit of doubt to an oligarch (e.g. Andrew Carnegie) who made his fortune on the rails of the Rothschild conspiracy with associates like JP Morgan ... and not extending benefit of doubt to an investigator like Dodd who was merely performing his office duties ... are less forgivable if at all.

So you are pre-judging Carnegie, finding him "guilty by association" because he is associated with wealth and with wealthy men like Morgan. Pre-judging is also known as prejudice, and it is the same mistake you make with Hitler because he had some association with Zionists, perhaps for reasons you do not properly consider.

You were associated with Bill Ryan, as a moderator in training at his forum. Are you a sociopath because you associated with Ryan? No. That does not mean you are not a sociopath, but it does mean that your association with sociopaths is not a sufficient reason for concluding that you too are a sociopath.

I am associated with UncleZook on this forum because of our many discussions. Does that mean that I too am a sociopath? No, it does not. It also doesn't eliminate the possibility that I could be one. Essentially what we learn from this is that "guilt by association" is a nearly worthless method of reasoning, one that you use all the time, with very flawed results.

UncleZook wrote:
I don't know too much about Andrew Carnegie, only that he hung out with bad people at the top of the Rothschild industrialist pyramid. JP Morgan was an associate, for example. By contrast, Norman Dodd seems like the genuine article just by watching the interview with Griffin.

So you are prejudiced in the opposite sense as well, judging Dodd as genuine because he is associated with Griffen, who you have associated with something else that you think is genuine. This is truly defective reasoning on your part, Zook.

UncleZook wrote:
So question begs, why is Chico quick to dismiss claims against Carnegie? Equally, to dismiss Dodd altogether?

I haven't dismissed anything. I have provided evidence that your claim that World War II and the rise of Hitler was pre-planned in 1909 according to the minutes of the Carnegie Foundation is a false claim. You have waved these minutes in our faces on numerous occasions to support your arguments when they do nothing of the sort. So either you are an idiot, or you are deliberately misrepresenting the facts in order to deceive us. Or perhaps you can give us another plausible explanation?

_________________
It's not that we can't handle the truth. It's that they can't handle us if we know the truth.


Mon Oct 05, 2015 9:57 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 4 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by STSoftware.