Talk:David Rockefeller

From Wikiquote
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the David Rockefeller page.

what is the source of the quote about sovernty?

—This unsigned comment is by (talkcontribs) .

This may be trivial, but it's ironic to see the New York Times incorrectly print "60's" instead of "'60s" as it usually would. Maybe the fact that the writer was from Newsweek explains this. I noticed the link--the quote was reproduced precisely with the errors retained.

—This unsigned comment is by (talkcontribs) .


According to the article “Behind The Bias” (W. N. Grigg, The New American, February 10, 2003, p. 4), “Excerpts from Rockefeller’s opening address were leaked to two independent French publications. They then came to the attention of Hilaire du Berrier, an international correspondent living in Monaco, who published them in his newsletter, HduB Reports.”

According to various internet sources, the French publications were Minute, 19 June 1991, and Lectures Françaises, July/August 1991 and it was the HduB Reports of September, 1991 which republished the quote.

I haven't been able to verify any of this myself. Here are links to the periodicals, in case anybody in France wants to go to the bibliothèque. I'm not absolute sure that this Minute is the correct one.

The quote as it appears in English must have been a translation from the French sources, since "auto-determination" would be an extremely rare word for a native English speaker. Of course, there may have been an English original translated into French, but it sounds like a satire, especially this sentence: “The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”

KHirsch 18:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Minute changed name several times and there are different ISSN's for the different names. For the period January 1991 - January 1993 (which includes the issue of interest) it was called La France or Minute - La France, with ISSN 1156-4007. And the here's the catalog record at the Bibliothèque Nationale, just in case someone wants to go scan the article. —KHirsch 04:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The quote is deleted. This conversation has gone on long enough--in a year no one has found a single reliable source. In conspiracy theorist nonsense. Sailingfanblues 03:29, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The purported quote has been restored as "Disputed" — I believe it can be characterized as either sarcasm, satire or fraud, but would not remove the challenge of substantiating what seems to be a widely circulated statement to anyone who is inclined to try to do so. I was going to further try to source a few dubious quotes on the page but have been called away, and might not get back to this for a few hours. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 16:20, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you can get a reliable source within the next day or two it can stay, but otherwise it should be taken out. Also, based on one quick google search the author you are citing is the author of such books at "Trillion Dollar Lie- the Holocaust: The Lies of the "Death Camps," the Deliberate Lies of the "Numbers." the Myth of the Six Million Swindle." Not exactly a reliable source! Sailingfanblues 21:10, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
As with many other spurious or dubious quotes on other pages the primary quote in question should definitely remain here, in order to effectively debunk it within a "Disputed" or "Misattributed" section, though there is probably not as yet enough evidence to label it clearly "Misattributed" as I am much inclined to do. Neither you nor I have or should have dictatorial authority to choose what people find notable and choose to quote, but each of us and everyone else should be free to provide what evidence we can for the proper attributions of any apparently notable statements. I would like to point out that I am restoring material such as has long been posted here by others, and that I myself did not cite these books, that I actually have no personal interest in the promoting the defamatory implications of some of these statements, and in fact find those who do promote them generally contemptible in many ways — but I also definitely find those who would censor them and remove them, based upon pretensions to any form of absolutely authoritative judgment, similarly objectionable.
I am sure that there are many worthy and admirable quotes of Rockefeller which I or someone else might eventually add, but I do not believe mere removal of statements meant to be defamatory are appropriate — especially when they seem favorites of the more persistent of conspiracy theorists, and believe that it is far more appropriate to actively debunk them. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 01:12, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I understand your logic. How about adding 'conspiracy theorist' or 'fringe' before the name of the quoted author as per his books that would seem to be accurate.Sailingfanblues 06:30, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That of course would be explicitely endorsing a specific point of view about an author rather than providing clear facts about any purported quote such an person might provide. To the extent any statements can be verified or debunked by presentations of facts they should be, but without too much injection of our own opinions, such as can be properly relegated to discussion pages. ~ Kalki (talk · contributions) 23:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree. Saying you cannot refer to an author as a conspiracy theorist when he demonstrably is one because it expresses a point of view is akin to saying one cannot say the sky is blue because it is a point of view. This is carrying subject neutrality to an illogical degree that borders on ludicrous. The only source for this alleged quote comes from the author of numerous conspiracy oriented books and tracts. And a man who has also written several works denying the Holocaust. The quote does not meet the standards for inclusion on Wikipedia. However if the object is to leave it boxed as a "Disputed" quote in order to expose it as the almost certain fraud that it is, then we should be very clear about the background of the closest thing we have to a source for it. I am not proposing that we call him names. But I cannot imagine how anyone could object to adding to the the text that M. Hatonn is a Holocaust denier and the author of a number of conspiracy oriented works. Ad Orientem (talk) 04:54, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi everyone. I'm currently in France and i'd like to check the newspapers "Minute" and "Lectures Françaises", to see if Rockefeller's quote is acurate. Do I have to scan this article and send it to you ? Here is my e-mail :

Quote "about" Rockefeller[edit]

It is true that the quote Not armies, not nations, have advanced the race; but here and there, in the course of ages, an individual has stood up and cast his shadow over the world. by E. H. Chapin was not written with Rockefeller in mind. So, despite the explanation given in the article, it is questionable whether it should appear in the "Quotes about Rockefeller" section at all. Any thoughts? ~ Daniel Tomé (talk) 13:47, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can agree it is questionable. It might be more appropriate to extend the mention of the quote used with reference to the one using it, but I personally do not own the book, and if people do wish it removed to this section of the talk page, until such measures might be taken, I think there cannot be strong objections.
  • Not armies, not nations, have advanced the race; but here and there, in the course of ages, an individual has stood up and cast his shadow over the world.
    • A quotation from 19th-century clergyman Edwin H. Chapin (1814 -1880) selected by Carla Hills, former U.S. Trade Representative, to demonstrate Rockefeller's many contributions to 'causes that benefit us all', at a Panel Discussion on his Memoirs in 2002, as quoted in The "Proud Internationalist": The Globalist Vision of David Rockefeller (2006) by Will Banyan, p. 66
I have placed it above, as it presently appears, in case it is removed, and anyone is interested in eventually doing further extension or citation of the remarks by Clara Hills or Will Banyan. ~ Kalki·· 16:21, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GLARING omissions[edit]

  • " We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order. " ~ David Rockefeller, 1994
  • " Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history. " ~ David Rockefeller

How are these two gems absent? Either he said them or he didn't. There's no shortage of memes, but I want cited proof. ~ JasonCarswell (talk) 01:23, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"global transformation": a few books attribute this to the the UN ambassadors' dinner in September 1994, where DR received a medal from the UN Business Council. Unfortunately for these authors, video of his remarks are available from CSPAN [1] and he says nothing at all about "needing a crisis."
"Chinese Revolution": The sentences are authentic, from a guest article in the New York Times, August 10, 1973 [2], but putting them together characterizes the article in a misleading way. DR acknowledged material progress for people living under the CPC government while also expressing skepticism about what he was allowed to see and making several criticisms. It is the kind of article that one can write if one visits a country with the goal of learning about it, rather than lecturing about it at a distance with red-scare tract in hand. 19:09, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
CCP government* – Ilovemydoodle (talk) 19:14, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]