24-10-2011, 11:23 PM
Dear Joel,
Almost real time! No hurry,Joel, will be checking email when I can. Don't know why the list would only refer to Chr. when all his friends used "Hans", Crozier included. One note for all concerned: I severely doubt that the Cercle ever produced any written documents - not the way to run a confidential network ; everything Crozier says (and tradecraft demands) would point away from written records. Langemann's retelling of (Hans) von Stauffenberg's verbal reports are the most accurate we have. Roth's 1989 minutes are quoting from documents we do not have - potential for disinformation, as German journalism was heavily infiltrated by the East (MfS) at the time. See:
Top Secret, Number 1/89 (Postfach 270324, 5000 Köln 1, West Germany). On Top Secret, see the USIA's assessment at http://intellit.muskingum.edu/russia_fol...ct_09b.htm
I will check email asap, but am initially suspicious of any written records from the Cercle itself - never seen any before. If needs be, we'll forward them to Crozier for comment with your permission ...
In any case, the Cercle is far from the central forum (and there is none; it is a network, the Cercle is merely one of the nodes): so not losing ourselves in the details, YES, both you and I aimed right: the "Paneuropean Right" or the "Vatican-Paneuropa" axis is the one to follow (but dump the 'Synarchism' stuff, pardon me). Yes, it had the influence we thought it did. Yes, the only symbol possible to summarize it is Charlemagne's signature:
one thousand three hundred years later but still relevant, hence the inclusion on the title page. The only reason I do not rename to your designation "Vatican-Paneuropa" (which has a nice ring to it) is that my "Paneuropean Right" includes other foreign political and intelligence networks (Protestant movements; BND, MI6, BVD) than the straight Opus Dei/Vatican>SDECE/Dubois-Violet axis, of which CIOC is well worth investigating, but this is only one side of the big picture. It also excludes major issues like the UK's accession to the EU, smoothed via CEDI, but beyond Catholic networking.
Hope this helps, and hope that you will pursue the tip on Close and Sanchez Bella being in the right place at the right time ...
Almost real time! No hurry,Joel, will be checking email when I can. Don't know why the list would only refer to Chr. when all his friends used "Hans", Crozier included. One note for all concerned: I severely doubt that the Cercle ever produced any written documents - not the way to run a confidential network ; everything Crozier says (and tradecraft demands) would point away from written records. Langemann's retelling of (Hans) von Stauffenberg's verbal reports are the most accurate we have. Roth's 1989 minutes are quoting from documents we do not have - potential for disinformation, as German journalism was heavily infiltrated by the East (MfS) at the time. See:
Top Secret, Number 1/89 (Postfach 270324, 5000 Köln 1, West Germany). On Top Secret, see the USIA's assessment at http://intellit.muskingum.edu/russia_fol...ct_09b.htm
I will check email asap, but am initially suspicious of any written records from the Cercle itself - never seen any before. If needs be, we'll forward them to Crozier for comment with your permission ...
In any case, the Cercle is far from the central forum (and there is none; it is a network, the Cercle is merely one of the nodes): so not losing ourselves in the details, YES, both you and I aimed right: the "Paneuropean Right" or the "Vatican-Paneuropa" axis is the one to follow (but dump the 'Synarchism' stuff, pardon me). Yes, it had the influence we thought it did. Yes, the only symbol possible to summarize it is Charlemagne's signature:
one thousand three hundred years later but still relevant, hence the inclusion on the title page. The only reason I do not rename to your designation "Vatican-Paneuropa" (which has a nice ring to it) is that my "Paneuropean Right" includes other foreign political and intelligence networks (Protestant movements; BND, MI6, BVD) than the straight Opus Dei/Vatican>SDECE/Dubois-Violet axis, of which CIOC is well worth investigating, but this is only one side of the big picture. It also excludes major issues like the UK's accession to the EU, smoothed via CEDI, but beyond Catholic networking.
Hope this helps, and hope that you will pursue the tip on Close and Sanchez Bella being in the right place at the right time ...