G. Edward Griffin - The Fearful Master - PDF Archive

in November of 1957. This group discussed the "deplorable" free and public discussion
among scientists of questions which are controversial. They declared: "The publicizing of
disagreements and contradictions among scientists, for example, about polio vaccine, or
the cancer-producing effects of tobacco" has contributed to public mistrust of scientists
and has caused science to lose "the infallibility with which it was credited in the nineteenth
century." 7
What kind of information would United Nations officials decide is "accurate, objective and
comprehensive?" Conor Cruise O'Brien gave us a hint when he wrote:
. . . I referred [UN] headquarters to statements which I had indeed made
during the fighting [in Katanga], but in the latter days of it, when it had
already been impressed on me, by the telegrams from Leopoldville, that
talk about ending the secession was frowned on. These statements
were naturally more guarded and nuancé than my first statements. . . . I
also referred them to an interview I had given Keith Kyle, for the BBC.
Khiary [UN official], who was in Elisabethville at the time, asked whether
it was an "orthodox" interview. . . . And smiled the smile of a man who
knows that all official versions are, have been from the beginning of
time, and will forever be, worded to deceive the enemy and appease the
clamor of the ignorant. 8
And, if there is any lingering doubt as to what the United Nations has in mind when it says
it may impose "penalties, liabilities and restrictions" on the right to transmit information,
ponder the following news item that appeared in the New York Times during the United
Nations December 1961 attack on Katanga:
Asked why a UN jet attacked the post office in Elisabethville with
rockets yesterday, General McKeown replied that the air strike had
been ordered because the building had been used to transmit anti-
United Nations propaganda.
If it were not so tragically serious, the following extracts taken from a recent issue of the
United Nations Review would certainly be good for a laugh:
A United Nations Regional Human Rights Seminar was held in
Canberra from April 29 to May 13. Several speakers termed wiretapping
a "dirty business," and the seminar agreed that it was a serious
infringement on human rights-- in particular, the right to privacy.
Indiscriminate and uncontrolled wire-tapping was unanimously
condemned [apparently discriminate and controlled wire-tapping is not
objectionable]. . . . Wire-tapping for criminal investigations should be
permitted only by law, and only to combat particularly heinous crimes
committed so clandestinely that such a practice was absolutely
necessary. . . .
A majority at the seminar agreed that national compulsory fingerprinting
of all citizens did not infringe any human rights. . . . The seminar view
was that human rights could not be violated when action was taken for
the good of all. 9 [Italics added.]