Home Uncategorized A Vial of Bull Semen (Kissinger Eulogizes Rockefeller)

A Vial of Bull Semen (Kissinger Eulogizes Rockefeller)

14

 chapel
Bullfighter Enrique Ponce prays in the chapel before ‘work’

by Mary W Maxwell

The Washington Post must think we have all passed through the portal of the surreal, judging by its having printed, without comment, Kissinger’s panegyric on Rockefeller.

I will present it all here without the slightest interruption, and follow it with a Commentary.

Obituary for David Rockefeller (1915-2017) by Henry Kissinger (b 1923), former Secretary of State (1973-1977), in The Washington Post,  March 30, 2017.

In an egalitarian society such as America, the inheritance of great wealth presents a complex challenge.

In an aristocratic world, status provides an automatic legitimacy. But in the United States, great wealth can produce ambivalence. The line between personal advancement and the pursuit of high principle can grow elusive.

For David Rockefeller, who died this month at age 101, that line did not exist. He saw his life as an obligation to enable the consequential issues of our time to be pursued by the most talented and committed men and women, for the sake of our society and the peace of the world.

David devoted his long life to identifying the able, forming them into a study or action group, and then supplying the means, often by a combination of financial contributions and assistance in fundraising efforts — a task in which his tenacity often overcame the challenge presented by a Rockefeller raising money.

Most frequently, he joined the efforts he was creating, but I can remember no occasion on which he took the floor for personal commentary. Amid prevalent self-absorption, he pursued a staggering range of important objectives with unobtrusive humility.

Character and integrity were the sources of David’s inspiration. We met 60 years ago as part of a study group at the Council on Foreign Relations, among the first such efforts to discipline the ominous aspects of nuclear technology by moral and political purposes.

Shortly afterward, he encouraged a discussion group, which later was developed into what is now known as the Bilder-berg Group, an annual meeting of European and American leaders to explore their challenges and common purposes.

A decade later, David called on me, at the time secretary of state, to inform me that, in the view of some of the colleagues he had brought with him, the scope of U.S. foreign policy needed broadening. A truly global study to include Asia was required for that challenge.

His associates, in fact, included Jimmy Carter, Walter Mondale and Zbigniew Brzezinski; in other words, a government in exile waiting to replace the administration in which I served. But David’s combination of dedication and innocence was such that the thought never took hold. Instead, I became a founding member of the Trilateral Commission, which thrives to this day.

I have described David’s activities in the political world, which also included the Americas Society, International House, the Dartmouth Conference, the International Executive Service Corps, the Emergency Committee on American Trade and the Business Group for Latin America, because it was what I could personally observe.

In fact, David’s impact was far more embracing. He was a dedicated supporter (and collector) of art and a mentor of medical science. He participated in the leadership of the Museum of Modern Art and of Rockefeller University, dedicated to medical science.

As a universal benefactor, David was received around the world like a head of government. On one occasion, in the late 1980s, I accompanied him to the Soviet Union for a visit to Mikhail Gorbachev to discuss nuclear issues. David had invited former French president Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, former Japanese prime minister Yasuhiro Nakasone and me to produce a document on dealing with nuclear proliferation.

Only David would have been capable of bringing about that combination of participants or, for that matter, conceiving the idea. The only hitch turned out to be that David had brought a gift with him for Gorbachev. His wife, Peggy, had suggested that he deliver a vial of bull semen to the Soviet leader to enhance Russian livestock.

The nuclear discussion paled before the impossibility of convincing the staggered customs officials to grant permission to store a gift for which they could discover no applicable regulation.

Service was one facet of David’s life. Devotion to his family was its equal. In 1979, when the Shah of Iran was being exiled, some close friends appealed to David to help find refuge for a ruler who had demonstrated his friendship with America in various international crises. David regretfully refused because of his obligation to Chase Bank.

Such was their sense of family that his brother Nelson took David’s place. Three weeks later, Nelson died. And without comment or another request, David assumed the task and helped the Shah find refuge, first in Mexico, then in Panama, regardless of the commercial impact of the decision.

It was uplifting to observe David’s pride in his children and their reciprocal care for him. When he retired from business two decades ago, there was some concern in the family that he might become depressed. Self-pity was not a quality of David’s, nor was imposing his needs on others.

Instead, in the last part of his life, he arranged trips to every part of the globe, often accompanied by a grandchild, to look into his many projects, to discover new challenges and to indulge his love of sailing.

David would often mention departed friends with whom he had shared part of his life. They would merge in his recital as if still part of a continuing, never-ending effort. Now, as he joins their number, he will be in our mind as a permanent part of our life, and to our country he will remain a reminder that our ultimate legacy will be service and values, not personal ambitions. [Emphasis added]

COMMENTARY

Let’s talk about Henry’s criminality. Henry is a major criminal, possibly responsible for millions of deaths. He needs to be indicted, arrested, and tried.

There is no reason for anyone to hang back on arresting him. But since that is physically risky – he might have umpteen mercenaries –you could at least start by indicting him. Once an indictment is issued, it becomes the duty of law enforcement to snag him.

David Rockefeller, also, is responsible for much human suffering – even just the suffering that comes about by indebtedness, but also that caused by the suppression of many medical cures that were available pre-1920. For his part in war-creation, see Michael Rivero’s “All Wars are Bankers’ Wars.”

In the obituary, Henry waxes sentimental about David’s humane values. This needs to be a serious part of our consideration of our predicament. As stated above, Henry must be indicted. David should have been indicted but people were in awe of him. (No one is in awe of Henry, and he was hated in the State Department and elsewhere.)

The kind words laid on David by Henry need to be seen for what they really are – total lies intended to confuse people. We truly are confused, as it is natural to look up to persons of high rank. It’s almost impossible to “take them on.”

My message is, as usual: use the law. Mathematically we can see how the numbers stack up. The system today makes almost everyone feel it’s in his/her best interest to shut up and not chase after Criminal Kissinger.

Even people whose profession is Law now side with the powerful and ridicule any person who would say “Let’s investigate Henry.”

All of this blockage in our thinking is emotional. It puts paid to our rich heritage of reasoning and working out ways to overcome the ravages of dictators. So stupid!

Just change your attitude and we’ll be all set. In Australia, join the move to free Martin Bryant from his chains and tell who really massacred 35 people on April 28, 1996. I know who did it and so do you. Once we get past our silence issue whole new vistas will open up. I am sure of it, sure of it.

— Mary W Maxwell is sure of it

 

Photo credit: Daniel Ochoa de Ortiz, AP
SHARE

14 COMMENTS

  1. I hope nobody thinks I made up the title of this article. It’s from the text:
    “The only hitch turned out to be that David had brought a gift with him for Gorbachev. His wife, Peggy, had suggested that he deliver a vial of bull semen to the Soviet leader to enhance Russian livestock.”

    i told you they were farmers. (Nelson farmed most of South America and didn’t even get a backache.)

  2. It may well be natural to look up to those of higher rank but as humans we have a unique ability to suppress impulses that don’t serve any constructive purpose.

  3. For all his words of praise for a fellow Fascist, Kissinger has stated nothing of meaning, value or human significance to David Rockefeller’s life, just a hollow rendition of meaningless phrase.

    I’m sure that Kissinger will get the same kind of hollow and meaningless eulogy, such is the state of deception today.

  4. I’m sure Lucifer is very proud of David Rockefeller. David Rockefeller could have done much good in the world, but he chose the other team. I do believe these people are 100% committed to an agenda and they don’t believe it’s evil. (I would disagree.) In one sense he was brilliant, but as is the case with all of these people, higher wisdom is completely absent.

    I wonder if Mr. Rockefeller ever did any real farming — the kind where you physically work hard, get your hands dirty, and sweat. I can’t picture that. Can you imagine him driving a tractor, repairing a tractor, mending a fence with a hammer and nails, or digging a hole? It seems he liked to think of himself as a farmer, but I can only see him as a business tycoon who liked to pretend at farming while actually trying to destroy the natural world.

C'mon Leave a Reply, Debate and Add to the Discussion