A look through CIA’s declassified Bilderberg files

By Emma Best, February 27, 2017

CREST records show Agency kept close tabs on Bilderberg meetings and attendees over the decades
The annual Bilderberg Conference is shrouded in nearly as much mystery as CIA itself, with a number of conspiracy theories that seeing these meetings of the elite as where the strings of the world are pulled. To get an idea of how intelligence agencies view the Bilderberg meetings, I reviewed the references in the CREST archive. While there weren’t many references, they were enlightening.
The earliest declassified reference in CIA files to the Bilderberg conference actually comes shortly before the group’s first meeting. A formerly TOP SECRET description of a Deputies Meeting from May 21, 1954 shows that the conference was brought up in a meeting between CIA Director Allen Dulles and his deputies. Although the conference isn’t referred to by name, it lists several attendees of the inaugural Bilderberg meeting and mentions the general location. On May 29th, the Bilderberg conference began.

The reference to Paul Nitze’s attendance is notable, as Nitze would be later associated with the Agency when he was brought in as part of “Team B” to consult on some of CIA’s National Intelligence Estimates (NIEs). This reference to Nitze had curious timing, as was his coordination with Richard Bissell (who would go on to become a senior CIA officer). Until 1953, Paul Nitze had been the Director of Policy Planning for the State Department. In 1963, he would reenter government service as the Secretary of the Navy. At this point, however, Mr. Nitze had no overtly acknowledged relationship to the Agency. A bit of digging, however, showed that at the time, he was employed by and under contract with the Agency.
When the Agency was asked to comment about and provide context for this relationship, a spokesman for CIA declined, except to say that if I was “looking for info on the supposed contract, [I’d] need to file the FOIA request.” As it turned out, I already had. However, there was nothing “supposed” about the contract – CIA’s own declassified documentation shows a signed affidavit from Paul Nitze regarding his appointment to CIA, which required him to swear he wasn’t a fascist or communist, from the same day his contract began (January 21, 1954).

A series of letters from the Agency’s Director of Personnel and Deputy Assistant for Personnel also spell out the dates of his contract, while also noting that the original year and half long contract was extending for an additional year. In addition to briefly describing his contract with CIA, both of the letters from CIA explicitly refer to him as as contractor.

It’s currently unknown how much Nitze reported back about the Bilderberg conference, or in what capacity his contract had him serving the Agency.
The CIA Director’s interest in the Bilderberg Group wasn’t a one-time affair. Four years later, he was still keenly interested and being kept apprised of the Bildegroup Group’s activities. In May of 1958, he was written by one of the Joseph Johnson from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace – and the Bilderberg Steering Committee. Johnson wrote to Dulles to send him a copy of the summary of a discussion held by the Bilderberg Steering Committee, along with a brief note of where the summary fell short.

The following year, Johnson wrote back to Dulles about the Bilderberg group. Although his name is redacted, the signature isn’t and it matches the signature of Johnson’s previous letter. The subsequent reply was, like Johnson’s May 1958 letter about the Bilderberg Group, sent on the Carnegie Endowment’s letterhead. This time, Johnson’s note about the Bilderberg Group was limited to a post script which inquired about an invitation to attend the Bilderberg Meeting that had been sent to the CIA Director.

Four days later, Director Dulles wrote back to Johnson to confirm the other’s suspicions: the Director’s schedule would prevent him from being able to leave the country for the meeting. However, the Director noted that he hoped to be able to attend someday.

The Bilderberg Group doesn’t appear in CIA’s declassified files again until 1975, when a formerly SECRET compilation of CIA Staff Notes mentions the conference in an Unclassified paragraph. The paragraph notes that the conference is to be held in Turkey in April, will discuss inflation and that Prime Minister Thatcher had been invited. The document notes that the Bilderberg format would provide “main speakers” with ten minutes, while others would be limited to only five minutes in which to speak.

Seven years later, the Bilderberg Group was mentioned in conjunction with Ronald Reagan’s “Project Truth” initiative, which combined the efforts of the State Department, the International Communication Agency, the National Security Council and CIA.

The memo outlined a series of proposed efforts to support the President’s upcoming trip to Europe. Included in those suggestions was one for “appearances at overseas events; e.g. the May 13-16 Bilderberg Meeting in Norway.”

The final declassified reference comes from a 1984 memo distributed to people inside CIA noted that the Director (presumably for the US Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, which produced the memo) would be giving a speech at the Asilomar Conference in California, and that the speech would draw “on the previously distributed Bilderberg speech and other materials.” A copy of the speech for the Asilomar Conference was included in the memo, but it’s unclear which portions drew from the Bilderberg speech.

While these documents merely hint at the Agency’s interest in, and possible involvement with, the Bilderberg Group, they remain one of the clearest insights yet into the interactions between the two. You can read one of the cited memos below.

Pedophiles Encouraged To Purchase Child Robots For Sex

Pedophiles being encouraged to purchase child sex robots to fulfil their sexual desires

By Sean Adl-Tabatabai

Pedophiles are being encouraged to purchase disturbing child sex robots imported from Japan in order to fulfil their sexual desires.
According to experts, the lifelike child androids are designed for child rapists to have intercourse with, in order to deter them from harming real children.
Independent.co.uk reports: Experts have warned that the compliant robots, built only to service their owners, could encourage objectification, abuse, rape and paedophilia.
Inanimate child sex dolls had already been manufactured and exported from Japan by a self-confessed paedophile, Prof Sharkey revealed.
They were not illegal in the US, but a consignment of the dolls had been seized in Canada, which has strict laws on representing children as sex objects.
Experts have now called for the UK and other countries to ban such child sex robots from being imported.
One sex robot, Roxxxy Gold, made by the US company TrueCompanion, came with a choice of personalities including shy and reserved “Frigid Farrah” and adventurous “Wild Wendy”.
A robot pre-programmed to resist sexual advances was effectively a rape victim, said Prof Sharkey.
“Some say it’s better to rape a robot than a person, but others think it would encourage rape,” he added.
Prof Sharkey wanted to see the government take pre-emptive action to stop paedophile sex robots entering the UK.
“I would say there should be an import ban on those,” he said.


Sweden on the Brink of CIVIL WAR, National Police Chief: “HELP US, HELP US!”

By Nicolai Sennels, June 25, 2017

Sweden is being torn to pieces by Muslim immigrants and refugees. Law enforcement is crying out for help, and it is only a question of time before the country will need military intervention from abroad in order to avoid a humanitarian catastrophe.
A leaked report concludes that the number of lawless areas (commonly referred to as “no-go zones”) in Sweden now totals 61. That is up from 55 in just one year’s time. This increase includes not only the total number, but also the geographical size of these areas.
Sweden’s National Police Commissioner, Dan Eliasson, spoke on national television and pleaded for assistance: “Help us, help us!,” he said, while warning that Swedish police forces no longer can uphold the law and therefore must ask all good powers in the country to support them.
A research expert regarding destabilized countries and 2011 recipient of Sweden’s Order of the Seraphim medal, Johan Patrik Engellau, has been working with organizations such as the UN and others that operate in crisis areas. He warns:
“I’m afraid it is the end for the well-organized, decent and egalitarian Sweden we have known up to now. Personally, I would not be surprised if a form of civil war occurs. In some places, the civil war has probably already begun.”
10News recently reported how the Swedish state has lost large areas to armed, religious groups best described as Islamist militias. Police chief Lars Alversjø says that, “There is lawlessness in parts of Stockholm (Sweden’s capital) now.” He also observed how, “The legal system, which is a pillar in every democratic society, is collapsing in Sweden.” Per Magnus Ranstorp, a researcher into terrorism and radicalization at the Swedish National Defense College, notes: “In the worst areas, extremists have taken over. The whole sense of justice and peace are threatened by the fact that the police is breaking down and it’s only getting worse. Sweden is in a disastrous situation.”
The Swedish Security Service (Säkerhetspolisen – abbreviated as Säpo), recently warned that the country is crawling with “thousands of Islamists” sharing Islamic State’s ideology. In many places, public servants (i.e., non-Islamic authorities) require police escort or protection.
In related news: Sweden Changing: 150,000 Women Undergo FGM, Authorities Admit Large Areas UNDER ISLAMIST RULE
The word that Swedish authorities and media use for the country’s “no-go zones” is utenforskap. The word means something like “excluded area.” In these areas, Swedish law has been replaced with a mixture of the law of the jungle and the Islamic legal code, sharia. Armed Muslim gangs and Islamic radicals are simply carving out big pieces of Sweden for themselves. The only reason why it has not evolved into large-scale armed conflicts — in this formerly peaceful and safe country — probably relates to how Sweden’s feminist-liberal government is not putting up any real resistance against the Islamists.
Even if the Swedish feminist government chose to fight back tomorrow, Sweden has nothing close to the paramilitary capacity needed to reverse this situation. That 80 percent of the country’s law enforcement officers are considering quitting their jobs is a clear sign of a police force that is completely demoralized. The military in this traditionally pacifist country is cut down to almost nothing, and there is no money to fix it.
As Johan Patrik Engellau puts it: “The government does not seem to understand that it has lost control. There is a point where you can no longer stop a situation’s development. I do not know if Sweden has reached this point when it comes to [the consequences of] immigration, but I fear we are drawing close. If we right here and now take and clear and powerful action – including stopping immigration and the political promotion of multiculturalism – we might with some difficulty be able to save Sweden.”
The fact remains that Sweden’s political elite is nowhere near taking such decisive action, as it has not even started to openly speak out about these problems.
Therefore Sweden will very soon need help from abroad. Police chief Dan Eliasson’s prayer for help only included potential partners inside Sweden, but very soon the international community will have to intervene if a humanitarian catastrophe is to be avoided.


US, Japan Deploy JASSM Missiles To Strike North Korea

US Japan deploy missiles towards North Korea

By Sean Adl-Tabatabai

The US and Japan have deployed Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles (JASSMs) towards North Korea in readiness to strike Pyongyang. 
US F-16s and Japanese F-35s were sent to South Korea on Thursday in order to receive long-range missile ready to strike the North Korean regime.
Businessinsider.com reports: The US Air Force in South Korea recently increased the range and strength of its aircraft with 10 Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missiles, or JASSMs, that can hit Pyongyang with 2,000 pounds of explosives from almost 200 miles away, according to Yonhap News and other South Korean media reports.
The JASSM allows US F-16s to safely strike nuclear infrastructure and targets deep into North Korea from secure locations near Seoul.
The munition isn’t the only signal that the US is ramping up its response to North Korea.
A defense official told Yonhap that US military leaders were considering “making public a live-fire drill involving the JASSM in case North Korea carries out another strategic provocation, such as a sixth nuclear test.”
Lockheed Martin, the JASSM’s manufacturer, is working on an even longer-range variant of the missilethat should be able to accurately strike targets over six hundred miles away.
Meanwhile, Japanese F-35s are expected to field the Joint Strike Missile (JSM), developed primarily by Norway’s Kongsberg Defence Systems, according to the South China Morning Post. The JSM has an extremely stealthy profile, high precision, and can fly just a few yards above the ground to deliver its 500-pound warhead before ever being detected.
“The JSM has a tremendous capability and Japan has never previously had anything like this,” said Lance Gatling, a defence analyst and president of Tokyo-based Nexial Research Inc told the South China Morning Post.
“This weapon, combined with the F-35, will permit Japan to get much closer to targets with a high degree of stealth,” he added.
The JSM can sit inside the F-35 and fly almost 200 miles before hitting a moving target, meaning an F-35 could take out a North Korean mobile missile launcher without even getting close to the country.
This update to the firepower of US and Japanese jets comes after a series of North Korean missile tests that could spell out danger in the very near future. North Korea recently tested a rocket engine that could be used to power a missile with sufficient range to hit the US mainland. In the past, rocket engine tests like these have been closely followed by testing of actual missiles.


UN chemical weapons team in Syria complains of political pressure

Syrian residents of Khan Sheikhun hold placards and pictures on 7 April during protest condemning suspected chemical weapons attack on their town that killed at least 86 people (AFP)
United Nations chemical weapons panel is expected to present findings on their use in Syria by October
A joint United Nations-Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons panel is facing heavy political pressure as it prepares to present its findings on the sarin gas attack in the Syrian town of Khan Sheikhun, the head of the investigation said on Thursday.
After meeting behind closed doors with the UN Security Council, Edmond Mulet complained of a “highly-politicised environment” in which unidentified “interested parties” were seeking to influence the panel.
“We do receive, unfortunately, direct and indirect messages all the time from many sides telling us how to do our work,” Mulet said.
“Some of these messages are very clear in saying that if we don’t do our work according to them… then they will not accept the conclusions of our work,” he added.
Mulet did not name the countries, but diplomats have said Russia has been active in pressuring the Joint Investigative Mechanism (JIM).
“The messages are coming from everywhere,” Mulet added, suggesting that Western powers were also in frequent contact with the panel.
The panel is due to present its findings in October.
During his meeting with council members, Mulet said he had appealed to them to “please let us do our work” and pledged that the investigators would be impartial, objective and independent.
The Security Council established the JIM in 2015 to investigate cases of suspected chemical weapons use in Syria and apportion blame for the attacks.
In previous reports, the JIM already determined that Syrian government forces were responsible for chlorine attacks on three villages in 2014 and 2015, and that the Islamic State (IS) group used mustard gas in 2015.
But Syria-ally Russia has publicly questioned the work of the inquiry and said the findings cannot be used to take UN action and that the Syrian government should investigate the accusations.
OPCW confirms sarin use
The Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) last week presented a report from its fact-finding mission that confirmed sarin was used as a chemical weapon in the 4 April attack in Khan Sheikhun.
But it did not specify who carried out the attack that killed at least 86 people, including many children, and shocked the world.
The United States, France and Britain blame President Bashar al-Assad’s forces, but Syria has denied any involvement and Russia has suggested that a chemical depot may have been hit inadvertently.
Mulet said the JIM will present its findings to the council in mid-October, focusing on the Khan Sheikhun attack and another incident involving mustard gas in September last year in Um Hosh, in Aleppo province.
The United States launched a retaliatory cruise missile strike days after the onslaught in Khan Sheikhun, targeting a Syrian airbase from where it said the chemical weapons attack was launched.
After Russia urged international investigators to visit the Shayrat airbase, Mulet said the panel was open to such a mission, but would first demand information from Syria on the flight plans at the time of the attack and the commanders in charge.
The JIM will also investigate at least six other cases of chemical weapons use in Syria, Mulet said.


Commentary: Immediate withdrawal is only wise move for India

BEIJING, July 7 (Xinhua) — After a three-week stand-off with China on Chinese territory, India should immediately pull back its trespassing troops.
The face-off was caused by Indian border guards who crossed the border at the Sikkim section into Chinese territory and obstructed routine road construction in the Doklam area of China’s Tibet Autonomous Region.
In contrast to previous confrontations, the current border dispute is at a long-demarcated section of the China-India border, where no incidents had occurred over the past years.
India has tried to justify its incursion in the name of protecting Bhutan, arguing that Doklam is Bhutanese territory.
However, according to the Convention between Great Britain and China Relating to Sikkim and Tibet (1890), Doklam undoubtedly belongs to China. The agreement was inherited by India after its independence and has been repeatedly confirmed in writing by successive governments of the former British colony.
Documents between the Chinese and Indian governments show former Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru confirmed several times, on behalf of the Indian government, that the Sikkim-Tibet border was defined by the 1890 convention.
It is a basic principle of international law that binding treaties must be executed in good faith.
India’s sudden disregard of the 1890 convention runs counter to the ongoing position of the Indian government. It has breached the basic norms of the UN Charter and international laws and will pose a significant threat to bilateral relations.
By creating disputes in Doklam, India seeks to obstruct border negotiations between China and Bhutan, and follow its own ulterior motives in the area.
The claim can not hold water. Doklam has long been under the effective jurisdiction of China. Both Bhutan and China have a basic consensus on the functional conditions and demarcation of their border region.
Moreover, India has no right to interfere in China-Bhutan boundary issues, nor is it entitled to make territorial claims on behalf of Bhutan.
India’s current actions have not only encroached on China’s territorial sovereignty, but also impaired the independence of Bhutan, one of the world’s smallest countries, which is closely allied with India.
India has also argued that Chinese construction would represent a “significant change of status quo with serious security implications for India” in a statement by its Ministry of External Affairs. That argument is unconvincing.
Chinese construction is being conducted within its own territory. It is India that has broken the status quo by trespassing onto Chinese soil. It is not acceptable to any sovereign country that India has crossed a demarcated border into another country on the grounds of its “security concerns.”
Indian troops should immediately withdraw to the Indian side of the border as a precondition for any meaningful dialogue between the two countries.
It is clear that if the “Chinese Dragon” and the “Indian Elephant” co-exist harmoniously and achieve peaceful, cooperative development, it will benefit not only their combined 2.7 billion people, but also those living beyond their borders.
Otherwise, a spiral of bilateral rivalry would definitely result in a slow down in their growth.