Chapter Five

EXCERPTS:

     There may, of course, be an even more sinister reason for the Red China gambit.  It is the reason which underlies so much of the frenetic surface activity of the Shadow Government: control of the world's energy resources.

As Congressman John Rarick reported in July 1971:

"Also early in April, reports were leaked concerning rich oil discoveries in the Asian Pacific area, including areas claimed by Red China.  Mentioned among the oil exploration companies were those represented at the hush-hush Bilderberger meeting.  Then in June, we were advised that chase Manhattan Bank was ready to invest $6 million in oil exploration and predicted $250 billion in Free World investment in the Asian Pacific area up to 1980."

     Later in the year, newspapers reported that a "fantastic exploration race" was underway in the Far East.

THE RED CHINA GAMBIT

     Sixteen years ago Henry A. Kissinger was as worried about the rulers of Red China as any other American boy. He wrote at the time:

"The prospect that China by 1978 might have the nuclear capability of the Soviet Union in 1960 is terrifying.  Many of the notions of nuclear deterrence may not apply with respect to a country which has shown so callous a disregard of human life."

     A callous disregard for human life?  If any group has ever merited such a label, it is the Communist leaders of mainland china, who butchered between 30 and 60 million of their own people to consolidate their power!  But twelve years late, how things have changed.

"We accept now. . . in the light. . . of improvement in relations with the People's Republic of China, that we could pay this price of foregoing the additional protection that the President requested in his original statement",

Henry cooed in 1972.  And he added,

"The idea of a third nuclear country attacking the United States is a rather remote possibility".

     The rulers of Red China had not changed one iota in the past twelve years.  But Henry had swiveled 180 degrees.  What did it mean?

     On July 1, 1971, Special Assistant for National Security Affairs, Henry Kissinger and party, left Andrews Air Force Base near Washington aboard a huge, almost windowless, KC-135, the military version of the Boeing 707.  Henry was joined by Harold Saunders, one of his deputies; John Holdridge, a member of his staff specializing in Far Eastern affairs; Winston Lord, a special assistant; Richard Smyser, a foreign service officer and expert on Southeast Asia; and two Secret Service agents.  

     (A few months earlier, Smyser had made headlines of another sort, when he was the host of a rather unusual affair in Washington.  Ties were optional at Smyser's soiree, but trousers were not.  Men were not allowed to wear any pants at his party.  One guest went so far as to arrive at the "trouserless orgy", as one commentator called it, dressed in drawers made from an American flag.  Smyser made him feel right at home.)

     Their ostensible destination, at least as far as Washington press releases were concerned, was South Vietnam and several other Far Eastern countries.  But the ten-day "fact-finding" trip had a far more sinister purpose. 

     The Kissinger party "vanished" during the stopover in Pakistan.  It was said that Kissinger had become "slightly indisposed" and had gone to a remote hill station 60 miles north of Rawalpindi "to recuperate".

     Instead, on July 9, the Kissinger party secretly flew another 2,300 miles, from Pakistan to Peking, and began a precedent-setting 49-hour visit with the leaders of Communist China -- the first official-level contacts with the mainland since it had been seized by the Communists 22 years before.

     It was the first in a series of nine trips by Henry Kissinger to Red China.  It was certainly his most spectacular diplomatic coup thus far.  It unquestionably signaled a major change in the course of American foreign policy.

     The Peking gambit set the stage for the visit by President Richard Nixon.  It anticipated other Kissinger trips, and also laid the groundwork for a visit by President Gerald Ford.  It began the alleged "thaw" in American-Red Chinese relations, which was paralleled by the abandonment of the Republic of China and the ouster of that World War II ally, a founder of the United Nations, from that world boy.

     Kissinger's secret, surprise visit established the foundation for trade relations between the U.S. and Peking and, perhaps most important of all, it provided an immeasurable amount of face throughout the Orient for the Red Chinese leaders.

     Everything about the opening to Red China was done in secret.  We have yet to be informed how the opening came about, what deals were made during the lengthy chats between Henry Kissinger and the Red Chinese leaders (and later between the two American Presidents and their Red Chinese hosts), or what the ultimate price of this "opening" will be.  The "opening" began in secret, with clandestine conferences, and the secrecy continues even now.

     Kissinger clearly sees his role in the Red China opening as one of the hallmarks of his White House career, an act so momentous that he would ignore the American debacle in Vietnam, which ended in total disaster for the United States, as an unimportant footnote in comparison to the rapprochement with Red China.

     In twelve years, Kissinger's public utterances had flip-flopped from concern about callous leaders with nuclear weapons to saccharin eulogies of mass murderers Mao Tse-tung and Chou En-lai.

     The willingness, even eagerness, of American leaders to hop into bed with a regime whose history of human brutality, mass executions, mass murder, and imposition of terror has no par in modern human history, was one of the most shameful events of a shame-filled decade.

     Curiously enough, it has recently been reported that Richard Nixon's first major directive to his first major appointment concerned precisely such a development.  We are now told that within his first twelve days in office, Nixon told Kissinger to draw up plans for a way to achieve a Peking-Washington rapprochement.  But where did the idea really originate?

     Depending on who is doing the counting, the most conservative estimates are that Communist Chinese leaders carried out the deliberate murders of from 34 million to 64 million helpless victims during the takeover of the mainland, the subsequent purges, and the "great cultural revolution" of the 1960s. Alongside such astronomical totals, even the figures of Nazi atrocities pale in comparison. (Figures are from "The Human Cost of Communism", a report of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee.)

{NOTE: Because the media has been -- for the large part -- controlled by the Communist/Zionist/Bolshevik regime since even before the turn of the last century, the so-called "Nazi atrocities" appear to have been more fabrication than fact. Reports from U.S. soldiers - including commissioned officers who were held prisoners-of-war in the German work camps; the International Red Cross; reports from Journalists (the few that made it into U.S. newspapers); and many others, together seem to tell the same story: There were no atrocities.  The many Jews who were incarcerated also happened to be Communist infiltrators, attempting to sabotage the German war effort. It occurred to me several years after discovering these facts that our first and biggest clue should have been the way that Adolph Hitler has been endlessly vilified.  The same media that is comparing Sadam Hussein with Adolph Hitler today has been silent about the atrocities committed by the Communist Chinese and "Uncle Joe" Stalin.  Think about it. - JP - transcriber}

     As far back as November 1959, Nelson Rockefeller, then governor of New York, was telling students in a University of Oregon speech that the United States should establish "intimate" relations with Red China.

     Of course, the pro-Red China lobby had been actively campaigning for years for just such an "opening".  Its academicians, in large part based at Harvard, were especially eager to embrace Mao. In fact, a group of such professors from Harvard and MIT prepared a memorandum in the fall of 1968 outlining the steps to be taken to achieve "peace" with Communist China.  The memorandum was addressed to "President-Elect Nixon", and it was delivered by -- have you guessed it? -- Henry A. Kissinger!  The memorandum cast a long shadow of coming events:

. . . Suggesting you [Nixon] should seriously explore the possibility of arranging confidential, perhaps even deniable, conversations between Chinese Communist leaders and someone in whom you have confidence.  It may be that the Chinese will refuse to receive such an emissary.  The effort should nonetheless be made to signal a revised American attitude.  Bring China, both Vietnams and other divided nations into the United Nations.  Seed an early opportunity to modify America's trade embargo against China.

     And, certainly it is significant that shortly before the Kissinger-Nixon Administration began courting Red China like a love-starved Casanova, David Rockefeller held a press conference in Hong Kong and called for opening up trade with Communist China.  Later, Mao and company would appoint the Rockefellers' Chase Manhattan Bank as Red China's official representative for Chinese-American trade.

     In brief, all the signs point not to a Nixon initiative to China, but to a Nixon response to an initiative already planned and prepared by the Shadow Government, and implemented by the Insiders' number one agent in the White House, Henry A. Kissinger.

     Asians in particular have made much of the fact that in all of the hullabaloo over an opening to Peking, not a single signal was flashed from China seeking such a new relationship.  Not a single major Red Chinese dignitary came kowtowing to Washington, to genuflect at the feet of American power brokers.  It was all the other way around.  In the game of "face", the Chinese Communists won every round.

     The fact is that a carefully orchestrated propaganda drive to build up Peking and downgrade Taiwan was already well underway.  The publicity blitz would be underscored by lavish receptions for Presidents Nixon and Ford in the Great Hall of the People, elaborately staged tableaux of presidential families visiting cheerful communes, and banquet tables piled high with Chinese cuisine.

     By now, rehabilitation of the "Old China Hands" -- men like John Stewart Service, John Paton Davies, John Carter Vincent, Oliver Edmund Clubb, and other pro-Communist policy molders of the World War II era who had done so much for Mao Tse-tung, Ho Chi-minh, and Chou En-lai -- was almost complete.  The Peking butchers were henceforth to be regarded as moderate, responsible leaders of a nation which no longer could be considered as an aggressor.

     Recent history regarding Korea and Vietnam and other unpleasant facts, such as the brutal invasion and annexation of Tibet, were conveniently dumped into the Orwellian memory hole.  Washington went all-out to create an image of a changing China taking its place in the world community.  The director, producer, and choreographer for the whole phony skit was of course Henry Kissinger.

     Not everyone was buying the new scenario.  A notable exception was FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover, whose sudden death in the midst of the contrived euphoria over the embrace of Red China was convenient to say the least.

     Kissinger's friendly biographer, Charles Ashman, relates the following:

"For a long time Kissinger kept out of the dispute over whether Hoover should be forcibly retired. . .

Then J. Edgar goofed -- and badly -- when Nixon was about to announce his projected trip to Red China.  It was a venture dear to the heart of Kissinger, the theoretician and advance man.  He had waited more than three years to reactivate the plan he had privately given Governor Nelson Rockefeller for reopening the door to China. . .

Hoover was not among the handful of top officials consulted when plans for the President's visit to China were brewing. . .

It was hardly surprising. . .  that during a routine appearance before a Congressional committee, Hoover routinely warned the lawmakers, "the United States is Communist China's No. 1 enemy.  The most potent threat to our national security is Red China." ZAP!  Kissinger was furious."

     Kissinger quietly arranged for the FBI Director's comments not to be published, for, he said, "budgetary" reasons.  Sure.  But the FBI Director released them to the Veterans of Foreign Wars.  The result was a scathing article which warned that Red Chinese spies, under the guise of trade and cultural missions, would flood the nation.  Hoover died in the spring of 1972, but, as Ashman puts it, "his days were probably numbered" by then anyway.

     In the same year, the White House suppressed a documentary film made by the U.S. Information Agency (which can hardly be described as a right-wing anti-Communist group).  The movie, "Man from a Missing Land", portrayed the Red Chinese takeover of Tibet, culminating in the flight of the Dalai Lama, Tibet's spiritual leader.  The Dalai Lama said that the Red Chinese had broken every promise they had ever made regarding Tibetan autonomy.

     But by this time, Kissinger was proclaiming that his new friends had always been "true to their word", so history had to be doctored to support him.  The taxpayers never saw the film -- although they had paid nearly $100,000 for it.

     By 1975, Henry's determination to permit nothing to embarrass the Red Chinese had become an absolute phobia.  Even Liberal columnist Jack Anderson reported:

Secretary of State Henry Kissinger is so sensitive over the special relationship he has nurtured with the Chinese Communists that he personally makes all decisions on Chinese matters, no matter how trivial they may be.

     One of the trivial matters in which Kissinger took a direct hand was his effort to play down the Republic of China's participation in the American Bicentennial.  The Kissinger order, reported Anderson, was "to keep the Nationalists {Taiwan} as invisible as possible".

     In 1971 Kissinger had declared:

"Our position is that the ultimate disposition, the ultimate relationship of Taiwan to the People's Republic of China, should be settled by direct negotiations between Taiwan and the People's Republic of China".

     Please notice that the Republic of China -- a free and independent nation -- had become Taiwan, the name of the island, and, historically, just one province of the mainland.  The demotion was a diplomatic rebuff clearly signaled to the rest of the world.

     Almost at once, there were leaks from Washington to the effect that the Red Chinese would not agree to the first Nixon trip until they received advance guarantees that the United States would reduce its military presence in the Republic of China.  Although such a "deal" was denied at the time -- after all, who in Washington could admit that the United States had grovelled to meet Red China's terms? -- even President Ford now admits that American military assistance to Free China is being drastically reduced.

     The shape of things to come was indicated in the so-called "Shanghai Communique", issued during the Nixon trip of 1972.  The communique stated that the United States recognizes that Taiwan is a part of China and "affirms the ultimate objective of the withdrawal of all U.S. forces and military installations from Taiwan".

     And remember that the island republic that was being so completely betrayed was not only of of our staunchest anti-Communist allies; our leaders were also helping subvert a nation which had achieved an economic miracle since World War II.  As Representative Philip M. Crane told his colleagues in the House of Representatives on December 11, 1975:

"A recent survey of family life in Taipei, the capital city, suggests a standard of living unknown on the Communist Chinese mainland and in most parts of Asia.  More than half the families live in their own homes, most of the rest live in apartments and only a handful live in government provided housing. . .

What makes these accomplishments most remarkable is the fact that the Republic of China has the highest population density in the world."

     While it is true that much of this was accomplished, or at least started, with the assistance of U.S. foreign aid, it is also true that Free China is one of the few nations on earth that has repaid the loans and grants  it received from this country.  This is reported about as often as the fact that the Soviet Union still owes us over $11 billion from World War II.

     When the lengthening shadow of Watergate finally forced his resignation, President Nixon made much of the fact that during his truncated tenure he had "unlocked the doors" between the United States and China.

     But Mme. Chiang Kai-shek, widow of the fabled leader whom the Americans had abandoned, put things in a better perspective. "The unlocking of the doors of the mainland would indeed be a very good thing were it true", she said.  "Unlocking the doors means free egress and ingress.  The pity of it all is that no compatriots of ours are permitted to leave the country and their enforced serfdom."

     In 1975, after a visit to Peking by President Gerald Ford, Kissinger could strongly hint that the next steps in re-establishing diplomatic relations with Peking would be for the United States to sever diplomatic ties with nationalist China and substantially reduce troop levels on Taiwan.

     Henry Bradsher put it just that directly in the Washington Star:

A blunt fact that was long obscured in circumlocutions and pious intentions has finally emerged into the open as a result of President Ford's trip to China:  The United States will simply have to break its written and moral commitments to the Chinese Nationalist regime and cast Taiwan adrift if it intends to have full-scale, normalized relations with the People's Republic of China.

     Two years earlier, Kissinger was confident enough of his position -- and the plans of his superiors --to assure his Red Chinese friends that U.S. friendship with the mainland would continue "whatever the Administration" in Washington.  After all, administrations come and go, but the Rockefellers endure.

     In 1973 Kissinger met for almost three hours with the ailing Mao Tse-tung.  As usual, whatever was discussed in the session, and whatever agreements were made, remained cloaked in secrecy.  But Peking officials said the talks "looked far into the future" and were of "great significance".

     Kissinger's 1975 preparatory trip was followed by what must have been the most anti-climactic visit in the entire series of American arrivals in the fabled Heavenly Kingdom.  So little was accomplished when Gerald Ford and entourage arrived in Peking, in fact, that there was not even a joint communique issued at the end of the mission.  The visit seemed even more unnecessary than the ones undertaken before.

     Oh sure, there were the usual sumptuous state banquets, there was lots of clapping in unison by Red chinese moppets, theatrical and gymnastic performances, visits to Chinese shrines, and Betty Ford even performed with a dance troupe.  But there was so little real news that White House press Secretary Ron Nessen scampered around, cautioning reporters not to assume that because nothing was happening, nothing was being accomplished.

     Part of the problem, of course, may have been that the Red chinese hierarchy had only a passing interest in the interim American President -- a man whom they may already have decided was only a figurehead anyway.

     Associated Press reported that Mao gave his biggest welcome to Kissinger, not Ford.  The Chinese leader noticeably and vigorously pumped the beaming Kissinger's hand for at least half a minute when the Americans arrived.  Later, when he said goodbye, Mao again shook Kissinger's hand longer than Ford's.  Such apparently minor matters may be ignored by most Americans, but you can be sure that foreign leaders -- especially in the Orient -- know exactly what such demonstrations mean. And so does Herr Kissinger!

     so what, really, does it all mean?  It is obvious that Kissinger has forgotten his 1961 assessment that "China is lost to the cause of freedom" and that "everywhere Communism presses aggressively on its peripheries". (Or at least he would like others to forget those remarks.)

     What has happened?  Did the men he described in 1961 as "callous fanatics" change?  Or did he?

     Certainly, the American people have a right to know just what is being gained by the Red China gambit.  We have been told it is essential to world peace, that it represents a thawing in dangerous relations.  We have been told it is good for business -- ignoring the fact that the small island of Taiwan out-exports the primitive and backward mainland economy by a ration of a thousand to one.

     Finally, we are told that we simply can't afford not to strive for better relations with leaders who rule somewhere between 700 and 800 million human beings.  While the same pundits and policy makers who tell us we must open the doors to Red China also insist we quarantine Rhodesia as a threat to world peace.  What hypocrisy!

     While Red china has been conducting a "smiling-face diplomacy" that is quite comfortable with Henry Kissinger's own vision of a Grand Design which will see the slow merger of the United States into a world government, the Peking masters have also been actively preparing to reach for our throats.

     In The Necessity for Choice, published in 1961, Herr Henry wondered worriedly "whether we can stand idly by while this peril (Chinese nuclear capacity) develops, simply trusting that a more humane group of leaders will replace the incumbents".  Of course, no "more humane group" arose.  but by 1972, Kissinger was trusting the incumbents not to mount a nuclear attack which the United States, thanks to his own policies, would be all but powerless to prevent.

     While Henry Kissinger publicly pooh-poohs any military threat from Red China, the Communists there have been mounting a nuclear arsenal and also developing what is already the third largest navy in the world.  According to the Institute for Strategic Studies in London, the Red Chinese already deploy more than a thousand vessels, including 60 submarines and 600 aircraft, and more are being built all the time.

     By 1975 Red china had exploded 16 nuclear bombs ranging in strength from twenty kilotons to three megatons.  At a secluded test range in occupied Tibet, the Chinese have been preparing for the launching of their first intercontinental ballistic missile.  Events have strongly indicated that while the Peking hierarchy was "vigorously pumping" the hand of Henry Kissinger, and providing our Presidents with heaping plates of chow mein, the country has been engaged in a crash program to increase the quality and quantity of their offensive weapons.

     Authors Phyllis Schlafly and Chester Ward (in Kissinger on the Couch) accuse the Secretary of State of knowingly misleading Congress regarding Red Chinese nuclear capabilities.

     During a SALT 1 briefing, for example, Kissinger said, "our estimate of the Chinese nuclear capability is still approximately what it was at the time that Safeguard was developed -- implying that in the years 1969 to 1972, the Red chinese were at a stand-still in nuclear weapons development.  But back in February 1970, Defense Secretary Melvin Laird acknowledged that the Chinese were already able to test an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). And he added that he expected them to have an ICBM operational capacity "in the next several years".

     By February 17, 1972, Laird was reporting:

The growth of Chinese nuclear strike capability has been remarkable given the short time it has been in existence and the formidable obstacles that had to be overcome. . .

There is some evidence that the Chinese are engaged in the deployment of solid fuel missiles. . .

The two Chinese space satellites launched during the last year and a half, the approximately one dozen nuclear tests since 1964, indicate a fairly high degree of sophistication in both missile and warhead development.

     One year later, the Defense secretary remarked about the even more "remarkable growth of China's nuclear strike capability in both missiles and bombers". Laird said that "The (Communist). . . Chinese are moving forward rapidly with their program to deploy liquid-fueled missiles and to develop an ICBM".

     If this is what Kissinger means by a standstill, we would hate to see how dangerous the Chinese Reds could become if they really tried!

     Nuclear bombs and intercontinental missiles are a potential threat against us.  There is an even more insidious weapon already in use.  Lurking behind the smiling diplomacy of the Red Chinese is one of the most vicious weapons ever devised for global conquest -- the deliberate pushing of opium, heroin, and other narcotics in the Free World.

     As early as 1960, Harry J. Anslinger, Chief of the U.S. Bureau of Narcotics, warned that more than five million acres of land in Red China were devoted exclusively to the intensive cultivation of the opium poppy.  In fact, Anslinger reported, the production of opium was an organized government monopoly in Red China.

     Red Chinese opium production has been variously estimated at 10,000 to 32,000 tons per year.  Opium and its derivatives are thus the single most important item for the Red Chinese, who net an estimated $5 billion a year from the diabolical business.  The use of narcotics as a weapon of warfare by the Red Chinese was thoroughly documented in Vietnam, where heroin was offered to American servicemen at a fraction of its value.  Now, the conquest of most of Southeast Asia by the Communists adds a whole new dimension to an already catastrophic situation.

     For generations, much illicit opium has come from the "Golden Triangle" of Burma, Laos, and Thailand, where whole provinces have been involved in poppy cultivation.  The Communist coup in Laos, and the possible absorption of Thailand, will provide massive new quantities of opium and derivatives to be pushed in the West.

     the thirteen and fourteen-year-old girls in New York city who turn to prostitution to finance their addiction, the muggers and purse snatchers and burglars in Chicago and Dallas and a thousand other cities with expensive habits, the promising students who have turned off forever, these too are part of the price we in the West are paying for Henry Kissinger's "smiling-face diplomacy" with the Red Chinese.

     There may, of course, be an even more sinister reason for the Red China gambit.  It is the reason which underlies so much of the frenetic surface activity of the Shadow Government: control of the world's energy resources.

     In April 1971, an elite group of international financiers, economists, and intellectuals called the Bilderbergers met in secret session at Woodstock, Vermont.  Among the items discussed by the participants (who included Henry Kissinger, David Rockefeller, and various oil company officials) was "the possibility of a change in the American role in the world and its consequences".

     As Congressman John Rarick reported in July 1971:

"Also early in April, reports were leaked concerning rich oil discoveries in the Asian Pacific area, including areas claimed by Red China.  Mentioned among the oil exploration companies were those represented at the hush-hush Bilderberger meeting.  Then in June, we were advised that chase Manhattan Bank was ready to invest $6 million in oil exploration and predicted $250 billion in Free World investment in the Asian Pacific area up to 1980."

     Later in the year, newspapers reported that a "fantastic exploration race" was underway in the Far East.

     "Within the year, that dramatic change in American foreign policy had occurred.  Within two years, the Los Angeles Times could report (on February 21, 1973): "Intensive surveys have indicated that oil fields that could almost equal all the rest of the world's known reserves almost certainly lie off China's shores. . .

The Chinese have been making inquiries of U.S. firms about the oil industry in general and deepwater drilling rigs in particular."

     Since only the United States possesses the technology to drill for oil in the 400 to 600-foot depths involved, the discoveries made detente virtually inevitable.  The pattern is clear:  The international oil cartel, dominated by Rockefeller interests, has, perhaps, the most to gain from Washington-Peking detente.  All other concerns -- ideological, strategic, geopolitical -- are subservient to that reality.  And Henry Kissinger is, first and foremost, a loyal servant of the House of Rockefeller.