Sheikh delivers jurisprudence ain’t based either Quran or Hadeeth but based on a secret decree issued by his employer (the autocrat). When an Astronomist unable to see stars at daylight he looks into the well? This is your argument

Sheikh delivers jurisprudence ain’t based either Quran or Hadeeth but based on a secret decree issued by his employer (the autocrat). When an Astronomist unable to see stars at daylight he looks into the well? This is your argument, a photo by quranix on Flickr.

Total Oman 2012 Imports from US $1,747.0 Exports to US $1,354.4
Total Oman 1992 Imports from US $257.4 Exports to US $185.9
Sheikh delivers jurisprudence ain’t based either Quran or Hadeeth but based on a secret decree issued by his employer (the autocrat). When an Astronomist unable to see stars at daylight he looks into the well? This is your argument – the rest of the evening is yours. Theorize it.
It’s another boring Review of Criteria Used by IRS to Identify 501(c)(4) Applications for Greater Scrutiny. The 207.9 minutes Dog and Pony show conduct by Max Baucus [pony], Orrin G. Hatch [dog], Mr. Steven Miller [the venom], J. Russell George [the clown] and Douglas Schulman [the Israeli who bonked IRS]. The scam is that since Schulman is Ashkenazi Jews. Republican Frugals advised him not show up at the IRS-Holocaust House Ways and Means Committee Chaired by Dave Camp lest the goood ol’ “DD” David Duke the Grand Wizard of Knights of Ku Klux Klan skew Schulman USDA-Subsidised-Fat- Kibbutz-rear on Kerosene Flame; lynch Schulman from his Hasidic Magein David Reeky Rectum on Fiery Cross. The goood ol! “DD” will Barbeque Schulman for free. Its “DD” Obsession to Relief USA from All-Time-Liability called the State of Israel and the CHOSEN ONES who murdered JESUS. Issa to Lois Lerner: Here Is Your Subpoena. So long! America.
Americans glued as zombies to FOXNEWS watching Assad committing genocide against elders, women and children and religiously polling to impeach Obama before he sends US Arm-Forces to save 23 million devastated Syrians. One hour Power of Moore tornado dwarfs Hiroshima bomb devastated Oklahoma is equivalent to 2 years stalemate in Syria that China, Russia & USA masterminded. Is my condolence in order and to whom? Probably myself.
Choowwah andere may share huta hein.
Assad & his father are Israel’s lapdogs for the past 50 years. Last week Assad enjoyed watching IAF jetfighters bomb his arms & chemical weapon depot and kill 50 of his best Alawites officers. Delhi is beasty desperate for Cheap Syrian, Iraqi & Iranian Hydrocarbons. Delhi is Pro-Assad as China & Russians from the beginning. Quarter of planet earth will never forget nor forgive Delhi stance in devastating 23 million Syrians. That’s UNINDIAN. I didn’t mean to lionize. I would worthy the worthless if I did. This ain’t new. Louis Mountbatten and Jawaharlal Nehru killed millions of Punjabis during rotten partition. I ain’t expecting an honest Indian precedent or commentary to this premise. To buy time for themselves and for Assad. Iran & Thugocracies around burn billions in media dark out, distortion. As a matter of fact they’re engaged in systematic propaganda to crow about Assad’s petty wins to demoralize McCain Germs supporters aboard. That’s ain’t working no mo. Rebels from around the world are traveling to Syria to share the ditches with FSA. They are ten times the Iranians, Hezbollah & Alawites warlords who’re defending Assad. They’re butchered as boars & their corpse are fed to dogs as we speak by McCain Germs. Back to Hezbollah reinforcements. If 40 Hezbollah militants yesterday killed then thousands must be killed of Assad’s Alawites & Iranian mercenaries in Qusaira. Assad stands no chance to conquer McCain germs that have nothing to lose but their lives. My advice for Assad to stay until all Iranians, Hezbollah & Alawites nuked. The countdown is if an unprivileged Sunni martyred 40 privileged Shiite killed. Shiite are majority then An-eye-for-twenty. Since al-Nusra Front vowed to liberate Iraq from Iran last month. It’s a Friday Ritual Showdown to kill Sunni praying crowds by Iraqi Police & Shiite Militiamen. Shiite-led Iraqi Government tag Sunni killings to al-Qaeda inspired groups who target Sunni Defectors. That’s too good to be true since Iraq is an Iranian-Bitch-State. Putin doled Assad missiles to finish him. Putin wanted him to devastate Israel. Putin wanted to settle old accounts with Jewish oligarchies that looted Russia treasuries and fled to Israel during Boris Yeltsin. Putin stoooopidly wanted to shake up the Zionist lobby at the Donuthole to push USA into Serious Syrian war not Facebook & Twitter. War always boost US economy and unify zombies. Putin knows that Assad’s days are numbered either by shot in the head or democratization. Putin is a loser; he lost Kaddafi 2 years ago.

Related articles

• ..Oops Oh my fault Emaratis ain’t allowed to think beyond Authority Twilight. UAE Annual divorce rate jumps to 80%. Congratulations. None of those Emarati Fukoku Kyohei Hikikomori talked about Monsanto Herbivore Misogyny which the main Reason for Divorce. (alakhtal.wordpress.com)
• Quit Monsanto Girls (alakhtal.wordpress.com)
• quit apologetic language. Iranian politician ain’t polite. Iran ain’t neighbor no mo it’s an enemy. Iran killing tens of thousands of Sunni elders, women & children in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Kurdistan, Baluchistan and Afghanistan. (alakhtal.wordpress.com)
• Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed said: “Our Iranian neighbors have a real problem in understanding and identifying way in which they deal with their neighbors” this is enough motives for Iran to develop advanced Falsepride against UAE. (alakhtal.wordpress.com)
• every Sunni Citizens of the 50 million GCC populations of TWO TRILLION DOLLARS economy is an illegible citizen of Bahrain and has the right for Bahraini Passport at sight and vote. Let see how Iran can Democratize Bahrain. (alakhtal.wordpress.com)
• To solve Bahrain problem that’s ain’t the language that Iran understands. Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed must stop diplomatic games and quit apologetic language. Iranian politician ain’t polite. Iran ain’t neighbor no mo it’s an enemy. (alakhtal.wordpress.com)
• Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed must inform Khamenei formally through UAE ambassador to Tehran that every Sunni Citizens of the 50 million GCC populations of TWO TRILLION DOLLARS economy is an illegible citizen of Bahrain and has the right for Bahraini Passport (alakhtal.wordpress.com)
• Syrian Rebel Stronghold Devastated By Hezbollah (huffingtonpost.com)
• Fierce Fighting Reveals Deeper Hezbollah Involvement in Syrian Civil War (cnsnews.com)

Who Controls the Economy?

Mestizo

via Who Controls the Economy?.

Who Controls America?

 

Who Controls the Economy?

Ben S. Bernanke(Ashkenazi Jew) – Chairman, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System

http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/bios/board/bernanke.htm

Janet L. Yellen(Ashkenazi Jew) – Vice Chairman, Board of Governors, Federal Reserve System

http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/bios/board/yellen.htm

William C. Dudley(Ashkenazi Jew) – President and Chief Executive Officer, Federal Reserve Bank of New York

http://www.federalreserve.gov/aboutthefed/bios/banks/pres02.htm

Lee C. Bollinger(Ashkenazi Jew) – Chairman, Board of Directors, Federal Reserve Bank of New York

http://www.newyorkfed.org/aboutthefed/orgchart/board/Bollinger.html

Timothy F. Geithner(Jewish spouse: Carole M. Sonnenfeld) – Secretary, United States Department of the Treasury

http://www.ustreas.gov/organization/bios/geithner-e.shtml

Neal S. Wolin(Ashkenazi Jew) – Deputy Secretary, United States Department of the Treasury

http://www.ustreas.gov/organization/bios/wolin-e.html

Gary F. Locke(Chinese) – Secretary, United States Department of Commerce

http://www.commerce.gov/about-commerce/commerce-leadership/secretary-gary-locke

Rebecca M. Blank(Ashkenazi Jew) – Acting Deputy Secretary, United States Department of Commerce

http://www.commerce.gov/about-commerce/commerce-leadership/acting-deputy-secretary

Hilda L. Solis(Mestizo) – Secretary, United States Department of Labor

http://www.dol.gov/_sec/welcome.htm

Seth D. Harris(Ashkenazi Jew) – Deputy Secretary, United States Department of Labor

http://www.dol.gov/_sec/aboutosec/bio-harris.htm

Steven Chu(Chinese) – Secretary, United States Department of Energy

http://www.energy.gov/organization/dr_steven_chu.htm

Daniel B. Poneman(Ashkenazi Jew) – Deputy Secretary, United States Department of Energy

http://www.energy.gov/organization/daniel_poneman.htm

Gene B. Sperling(Ashkenazi Jew) – Director, National Economic Council

http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/nec/director

Alan B. Krueger(Ashkenazi Jew) – Chairman, Council of Economic Advisers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_B._Krueger

Jacob J. Lew(Ashkenazi Jew) – Director, Office of Management and Budget (OMB)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/organization_office

Paul A. Volcker(Ashkenazi Jew) – Chairman, Economic Recovery Advisory Board

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/ObamaAnnouncesEconomicAdvisoryBoard

Ron Bloom(Ashkenazi Jew) – Senior Counselor for Manufacturing Policy to the President

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/President-Obama-Names-Ron-Bloom-Senior-Counselor-for-Manufacturing-Policy

Steven L. Rattner(Ashkenazi Jew) – Director, Presidential Task Force on the Automotive Industry

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/President-Obama-Announces-Key-Administration-Posts

Jared Bernstein(Ashkenazi Jew) – Chief Economist and Economic Policy Adviser to the Vice President

http://change.gov/newsroom/entry/vice_president_elect_biden_announces_chief_economist

Fred P. Hochberg(Ashkenazi Jew homosexual) – Chairman and President, Export-Import Bank of the United States

http://www.exim.gov/about/leadership/fred_hochberg_bio.cfm

Ronald Kirk(Negro) – U.S. Trade Representative, Office of the United States Trade Representative

http://www.ustr.gov/about-us/biographies-key-officials/united-states-trade-representative-ron-kirk

Douglas H. Shulman(Ashkenazi Jew) – Commissioner, Internal Revenue Service (IRS)

http://www.irs.gov/irs/article/0,,id=98192,00.html

David A. Lebryk(White European) – Commissioner, Financial Management Service (FMS)

http://www.fms.treas.gov/aboutfms/lebryk_bio.html

Van Zeck(White European) – Commissioner, Bureau of the Public Debt

http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/whoweare/people.htm

Debbie Matz(Ashkenazi Jew) – Chairman, National Credit Union Administration (NCUA)

http://www.ncua.gov/GenInfo/Members/Matz/Matz.aspx#

Martin J. Gruenberg(Ashkenazi Jew) – Acting Chairman, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC)

http://www.fdic.gov/about/learn/board/board.html

John E. Bowman(Ashkenazi Jew) – Director, Office of Thrift Supervision (OTS)

http://www.ots.treas.gov/?p=ActingDirector

John Walsh(White European) – Acting Comptroller, Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC)

http://www.occ.treas.gov/about/leadership/biographies/bio-john-walsh.html

Edward DeMarco(White European) – Acting Director, Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA)

http://fhfa.gov/Default.aspx?Page=67

Donna J. Gambrell(Negro) – Director, Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (CDFI)

http://www.cdfifund.gov/who_we_are/director/bio_dgambrell.asp

Karen G. Mills(Ashkenazi Jew) – Administrator, Small Business Administration (SBA)

http://www.sba.gov/aboutsba/administrator/index.html

Michael J. Astrue(Ashkenazi Jew) – Commissioner, Social Security Administration (SSA)

http://www.socialsecurity.gov/pressoffice/factsheets/astrue.htm

Jon D. Leibowitz(Ashkenazi Jew) – Chairman, Federal Trade Commission (FTC)

http://www.ftc.gov/commissioners/leibowitz/index.shtml

Gary G. Gensler(Ashkenazi Jew) – Chairman, Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)

http://www.cftc.gov/aboutthecftc/commissioners/ggensler.html

Mary L. Schapiro(Ashkenazi Jew) – Chairman, Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

http://sec.gov/about/commissioner/schapiro.htm

Daniel L. Goelzer(Ashkenazi Jew) – Acting Chairman, Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB)

http://pcaobus.org/About/Board/Pages/DanielLGoelzer.aspx

Kenneth R. Feinberg(Ashkenazi Jew) – Special Master for Executive Compensation, U.S. Treasury Department

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124416737421887739.html

Neil M. Barofsky(Ashkenazi Jew) – Special Inspector General, Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)

http://www.sigtarp.gov/about_ig.shtml

Adam J. Szubin(Ashkenazi Jew) – Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)

http://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/Pages/szubin-e.aspx

Eric Hampl(Ashkenazi Jew) – Director, Treasury Executive Office of Asset Forfeiture (TEOAF)
(no picture available)

James H. Freis, Jr.(Ashkenazi Jew) – Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN)

http://www.fincen.gov/about_fincen/pdf/bio_director.pdf

Edmund C. Moy(Chinese) – Director, United States Mint

http://www.usmint.gov/about_the_mint/?action=directors_office

Larry R. Felix(Mulatto) – Director, Bureau of Engraving and Printing

http://www.moneyfactory.gov/aboutthebep/officeofthedirector.html

Douglas W. Elmendorf(Ashkenazi Jew) – Director, Congressional Budget Office (CBO)

http://www.cbo.gov/aboutcbo/organization/od.htm

Gene L. Dodaro(White European) – Comptroller General, United States Government Accountability Office (GAO)

http://www.gao.gov/cghome/gdbiog.html

Daniel K. “Dan” Inouye(Japanese) – Chairman, United States Senate Committee on Appropriations

http://appropriations.senate.gov/about-chairman.cfm

Timothy P. “Tim” Johnson(White European) – Chairman, United States Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

http://banking.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=CommitteeInformation.Home

Max S. Baucus(White European) – Chairman, United States Senate Committee on Finance

http://finance.senate.gov/about

Mary L. Landrieu(White European) – Chairman, United States Senate Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship

http://sbc.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?p=Chair

Harold D. “Hal” Rogers(White European) – Chairman, United States House Committee on Appropriations

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hal_Rogers

Frederick S. “Fred” Upton(White European) – Chairman, United States House Committee on Energy and Commerce

http://energycommerce.house.gov/about/about_chair.shtml

Henry A. Waxman(Ashkenazi Jew) – Ranking Member, United States House Committee on Energy and Commerce

http://democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/index.php?q=page/ranking-member-henry-waxman

Spencer T. Bachus III(White European) – Chairman, United States House Committee on Financial Services

http://financialservices.house.gov/singlepages.aspx?NewsID=397

Barney Frank(Ashkenazi Jew homosexual) – Ranking Member, United States House Committee on Financial Services

http://financialservices.house.gov/singlepages.aspx?NewsID=397

Samuel B. “Sam” Graves, Jr.(White European) – Chairman, United States House Committee on Small Business

http://republicans.smallbusiness.house.gov/About/Chair.htm

David L. “Dave” Camp(White European) – Chairman, United States House Committee on Ways and Means

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/About/Chairman.htm

Sander M. “Sandy” Levin(Ashkenazi Jew) – Ranking Member, United States House Committee on Ways and Means

http://waysandmeans.house.gov/About/Members.htm


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sander_Levin

Robert B. Zoellick(Ashkenazi Jew) – President, The World Bank

http://go.worldbank.org/IHDUWCAI20

Dominique Strauss-Kahn(Ashkenazi Jew) – Managing Director, International Monetary Fund (IMF)

http://www.imf.org/external/np/omd/bios/dsk.htm

John Lipsky(Ashkenazi Jew) – First Deputy Managing Director, International Monetary Fund (IMF)

http://www.imf.org/external/np/omd/bios/jl.htm

Summary:
Of the sixty(60) senior officials of the U.S. Government economic, financial, and monetary institutions, thirty-nine(39) are Jews or have Jewish spouses. This is a numerical representation of 65%. Jews are approximately 2% of the U.S. population.* Therefore Jews are over-represented among the senior officials of the U.S. Government economic, financial, and monetary institutions by a factor of 32.5 times(3,250 percent).

* Jewish Population of the United States by State:

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/US-Israel/usjewpop.html

Share this:

• Digg
• Share on Tumblr
• inShare2
• Press This
• Email
• Print

Like this:

1. Jews DO NOT control the banks. Repeat: Jews DO NOT control the banks. – Page 2 – Stormfront Says:

   January 2, 2011 at 12:45 pm[...] Jews DO NOT control the banks. Repeat: Jews DO NOT control the banks. Who Controls the Economy? Who Controls the Treasury Department? Who Controls the Federal Reserve System? (Part [...]

   Reply
2. Flanders Says:

   March 5, 2011 at 3:32 amHere is a link you may want, Z.O.G.

   Interlocking Directors – “…this is just a small sampling of how intertwined the elite are. How tight and cohesive a group they form. Don’t delude yourself it is US vs them.”

   
   http://www.truthinourtime.com/2011/03/interlocking-directors.html
   

   Reply
3. Flanders Says:

   March 24, 2011 at 1:09 am“Why Are the Media Ignoring Plans By George Soros to Remake the Entire Global Economy?” Access here:

   
   http://incogman.net/03/2011/the-jews-big-dumb-golem-attacks-libya/comment-page-2/#comment-99245
   

   Reply
4. Wheres your hope and change now Says:

   April 12, 2011 at 2:47 amThe Jews created the Cheka in Bolshevik Russia, after they took it over in 1917.

   Look for them to do the same in America with the Department of Homeland Security.

   Their main function was to murder Christians and Muslims under the guise of “Atheism”. But the Judaism was left alone.

   Reply
5. Franklin Ryckaert Says:

   April 19, 2011 at 7:43 amWhat strikes the eye is that so many of the Jews in this series do not look Jewish at all, some only slightly so; only a few look “typically Jewish”. There must have been a lot of admixture in their history in Europe, or is there a selection process going on here: the most European looking types make it to the top? As for the “moral expression” on their faces, some look really criminal others quite innocent. This is true for both Jews and Gentiles. The face of Robert Zoelick however(one of the masterminds of 9/11) with it’s almost satanic grin is really scary!

   Reply
   • Z.O.G. Says:

     April 19, 2011 at 4:33 pm

     There must have been a lot of admixture in their history in Europe, or is there a selection process going on here: the most European looking types make it to the top?

     It’s both. Also note that most of the Jews on these lists have blue eyes, and many of them have blonde hair. This fact should shock most people familiar with the Jewish phenotype. It certainly shocked me when I was making the lists.

     Reply
     • Franklin Ryckaert Says:

       April 20, 2011 at 2:30 amI think it is in the human sphere what is called “mimicry” in biology (both with animals and plants), all for the sake of parasitism. Some Jewish families seem to have engaged in it deliberately. Since Jewish identity is inherited only via the mother this leaves opportunities to “mix while staying the same”. For example a rich Jew lets his daughter marry an impoverished nobleman. Their children inherit their father’s title and (partially) his good looks, while still being Jews(this happened often in England). Or a rich Jew marries a poor but good looking gentile girl. His children are not Jewish but he lets his sons marry Jewish women, who’s children are thus again Jews, but now “genetically enriched” with precious gentile genes. Repeat this process for a few generations and you get perfectly European and good looking persons who still feel and act as Jews. Jews are thus not only economical but also genetic parasites.
     • Z.O.G. Says:

       April 20, 2011 at 12:38 pmYou are exactly right, Franklin. This is how Jews engage in gene theft and slightly interbreed with their host population.
6. 61% of americans believe economy will never recover – Stormfront Says:

   June 5, 2011 at 12:13 am[...] [...]

   Reply
7. Raise The Debt Ceiling or WE’RE All GOING TO DIE | INCOG MAN Says:

   July 15, 2011 at 2:37 pm[...] see the whole system is run by Jews from the top down and we know for a fact who’s the controlling management in the economy, international banking and corporate media. Hell, everyone and his brother [...]

   Reply
8. Raise The Debt Ceiling or WE’RE ALL GOING TO DIE « BAD SQUAD Says:

   July 16, 2011 at 4:58 pm[...] first place! You can see the whole system is run by Jews from the top down; they are the majority controlling management of our economy, international banking and big corporate media. Hell, everyone and his brother [...]

   Reply
9. aa Says:

   November 2, 2011 at 2:31 amonly 2 people do not look evil!!

   Reply
10. Who controls the economy? | Henrik Palmgren’s Journal Says:

    February 27, 2012 at 7:08 pm[...] Who Controls the Economy? This entry was posted in Uncategorized by Henrik. Bookmark the permalink. [...]

    Reply
11. Maurice Says:

    March 1, 2012 at 2:51 amThis is the Jewish input into my country’s economy, politics, human rights and law. The worst of the worst is former Chief Judge Spigelman. They call him Australian Adolf Hitler. If you finish in his court you are the same as survivors’ of tsunami; left with nothing. No family, home, jobs..This man would take everything you have and if you complain he would go after you until you commit suicide. And many did just that. Follow links included and you’ll see

    
    http://t.co/HHhX0oo
    
    
    http://t.co/25TedxE
    
    
    http://t.co/jc5rk9f
    
    
    http://t.co/sRg5qlrcbcc
    
    
    http://www.natvan.com/adv/2005/12-24-05.html
    
    
    http://t.co/qC4A2VW
    

    I do believe that Americans knows about this problem but like Australia, they lost control over their own country.

    Reply
12. matricalietuvoje Says:

    March 18, 2012 at 3:41 amReal power structure

    Reply
13. Andrew M. Patterson Says:

    March 19, 2012 at 1:12 amIt remains to be seen what is behind the selection of these people. Are they serving the people of America, the incumbent, Israel, or a secret society? The more one digs into history the more skeletions crop up. Jews have always been respected so much. The stories of Jonah and the big fish, Noah and his ark, Joshua and Jerico, moses and parting the Red Sea, more fantastic than Greek mythology and the Christian Churches of Europe saying that the foods of the New World, tomatoes, potatoes, corn, pumplin, peppers, vanilla. chocolate, etc. were Satanic because they weren’t mentioned in the Old Testament or Bible. And the famous calculations that the earth was only some 5,000 years old buy tracing the lineage back to Adam are all part of respect for Jews. There seems to be some suspicion that is growing. I wonder why.

    Reply
14. Danny Says:

    June 4, 2012 at 5:42 pmIm trying to get in touch with the creator of this blog to work alongside me in a project aimed at exposing just this kind of control. If you read this can you email me at theravens@gmx.com and just put thezog in title so I know it is you.

    Thanks and great work

    Reply
15. Batman Says:

    August 16, 2012 at 5:58 amDo you have all of this in a PDF format? Just in case it gets shutdown.

    Reply
    • Z.O.G. Says:

      August 16, 2012 at 10:03 amNo, I don’t.

      Reply

• Banking/Finance

  • Who Controls the Economy?
  • Who Controls Wall Street? (Part 2)
  • Who Controls Wall Street? (Part 1)
  • Who Controls Goldman Sachs?
  • Who Controls American International Group?
  • Who Controls the Treasury Department?
  • Who Controls the Federal Reserve System? (Part 1)
  • Who Controls the Federal Reserve System? (Part 2)

• Mass Media

  • Who Controls Big Media?
  • Who Controls Hollywood?
  • Who Controls Television?
  • Who Controls Music?
  • Who Controls Radio?
  • Who Controls Advertising?
  • Who Controls the News? (Part 1)
  • Who Controls the News? (Part 2)

• Government/Politics

  • Who Controls the White House?
  • Who Controls the Senate?
  • Who Controls the Congress?
  • Who Controls the Supreme Court?
  • Who Controls the State Department?
  • Who Controls the Justice Department?
  • Who Controls the Defense Department?
  • Who Controls the Treasury Department?

• Social Engineering

  • Who Controls the Ivy League?
  • Who Controls the Think Tanks?
  • Who Controls Professional Sports?
  • Who Controls the Anti-Defamation League?
  • Who Controls the Southern Poverty Law Center?
  • Who Controls the American Civil Liberties Union?
  • Who is Behind Gun Control?
  • Who is Behind the Climate Change Hoax?

• “New World Order”

  • Who Controls the Group of Thirty?
  • Who Controls the Bilderberg Group?
  • Who Controls the Trilateral Commission?
  • Who Controls the Council on Foreign Relations? (Part 1)
  • Who Controls the Council on Foreign Relations? (Part 2)

Theme: Simpla by Phu. Blog at WordPress.com.

Skip to toolbar

• WordPress.com
• Who Controls America…
• Following

• Obaid
• New Post

Log Out

Related articles

• Researchers Feud Over Jewish Genes (blogs.forward.com)
• Top Israeli scientist says Ashkenazi Jews came from Khazaria, not Palestine | Darkmoon (ramyabdeljabbar.wordpress.com)
• Did YU’s Harry Ostrer Cook The Genetic Books To Support False Findings Of Ashkenazi Jews Origins? (failedmessiah.typepad.com)
• Our community must not ignore its genetic heritage (thejc.com)
• ‘Not all BRAC1/2 mutations result in breast cancer’ (thehindu.com)
• Microsoft Shows Off Xbox Console – Wall Street Journal (stream.wsj.com)
• Man kills himself at Notre Dame Cathedral – CNN (cnn.com)
• Jodi Arias asks jury to spare her life for the sake of her family – San Jose Mercury News (mercurynews.com)
• Health’s Jake Duzsik on the Doors’ Ray Manzarek – Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)
• Oklahoma Gov. Fallin: ‘We will rebuild’ – USA Today – USA TODAY (usatoday.com)

The Revenge of Wen Jiabao Communist Party will likely execute a once-in-a-decade leadership transition in which President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen hand over to a new team led by current Vice President Xi Jinping. The majority of leaders will retire from the elite Politburo Standing Committee, and the turnover will extend down through lower tiers of the Communist Party, the government, and the military. Wen hopes his words influence who gets key posts, what ideological course they will set, and how history records his own career. Wen Jiabao and Bo Xilai have long stood out from their colleagues for their striking capacities to communicate and project their individual personalities and ideologies beyond the otherwise monochromatic party machine. The two most popular members of the Politburo, they are also the most polarizing within China’s political elite. They have much in common, including a belief that the Communist Party consensus that has prevailed for three decades — “opening and reform” coupled with uncompromising political control — is crumbling under the weight of inequality, corruption, and mistrust. But the backgrounds, personalities, and political prescriptions of these two crusaders could not be more different. Bo has deployed his prodigious charisma and political skills to attack the status quo in favor of a more powerful role for the state. He displayed an extraordinary capacity to mobilize political and financial resources during his four and a half year tenure as the head of the Yangtze River megalopolis of Chongqing. He transfixed the nation by smashing the city’s mafia — together with uncooperative officials, lawyers, and entrepreneurs — and rebuilding a state-centered city economy while shamelessly draping himself in the symbolism of Mao Zedong. He sent out a wave of revolutionary nostalgia that led to Mao quotes sent as text messages, government workers corralled to sing “red songs,” and old patriotic programming overwhelming Chongqing TV. From his leftist or “statist” perch, Bo has been challenging the “opening and reform” side of the political consensus that Deng Xiaoping secured three decades ago. Wen Jiabao, meanwhile, who plays the role of a learned, emphatic, and upright Confucian prime minister, has been challenging the other half of Deng consensus — absolute political control — from the liberal right. He has continuously articulated the need to limit government power through rule of law, justice, and democratization. To do this, he has drawn on the symbolic legacies of the purged reformist leaders he served in the 1980s, particularly Hu Yaobang, whose name he recently helped to “rehabilitate” in official discourse. As every Communist Party leader knows, those who want a stake in the country’s future must first fight for control of its past. Meanwhile, the New York Times reports on how Bo’s ouster is playing out among different factions of the Communist Party as the leadership prepares for a transition of power later this year: …The ouster of Bo Xilai, the populist icon formerly in charge of the southwestern megacity of Chongqing, has spurred weeks of frenzied internal politicking and a rare dissenting vote within the Politburo Standing Committee, according to interviews with publishers, academics and analysts tied to the Communist Party’s upper echelons or its powerful families. They say that the outward calm is tenuous and was achieved only after China’s leadership team of Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao appealed to party elders for support and yielded important posts in Chongqing to representatives of other influential political blocs. “They want everyone to believe that the top level has no problem — that there’s no split and no struggle,” said Jin Zhong, publisher of the influential China-watching magazine Open, in Hong Kong. “But this is a false impression.” According to people briefed by central party officials, Mr. Bo is being confined to his house in Beijing, watched by the Central Guard Bureau, a unit of the People’s Liberation Army under control of the party’s General Office. He faces a disciplinary investigation over a range of allegations of corruption and abuse of power, these people say. His wife, a noted lawyer, is under more formal detention in connection with some of those allegations. Now be cool and read the Media Horse Manure, Ain’t Fuckn’ Delicious I was there. I warned you! If Premier Wen Jiabao is “China’s best actor,” as his critics allege, he saved his finest performance for last. After three hours of eloquent and emotional answers in his final news conference at the National People’s Congress annual meeting this month, Wen uttered his public political masterstroke, reopening debate on one of the most tumultuous events in the Chinese Communist Party’s history and hammering the final nail in the coffin of his great rival, the now-deposed Chongqing Communist Party boss Bo Xilai. And in striking down Bo, Wen got his revenge on a family that had opposed him and his mentor countless times in the past. Responding to a gently phrased question about Chongqing, Wen foreshadowed Bo’s political execution, a seismic leadership rupture announced the following day that continues to convulse China’s political landscape to an extent not seen since 1989. But the addendum that followed might be even more significant. Indirectly, but unmistakably, Wen defined Bo as man who wanted to repudiate China’s decades-long effort to reform its economy, open to the world, and allow its citizens to experience modernity. He framed the struggle over Bo’s legacy as a choice between urgent political reforms and “such historical tragedies as the Cultural Revolution,” culminating a 30-year battle for two radically different versions of China, of which Bo Xilai and Wen Jiabao are the ideological heirs. In Wen’s world, bringing down Bo is the first step in a battle between China’s Maoist past and a more democratic future as personified by his beloved mentor, 1980s Communist Party chief Hu Yaobang. His words blew open the facade of party unity that had held since the massacres of Tiananmen Square. This October, the Communist Party will likely execute a once-in-a-decade leadership transition in which President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen hand over to a new team led by current Vice President Xi Jinping. The majority of leaders will retire from the elite Politburo Standing Committee, and the turnover will extend down through lower tiers of the Communist Party, the government, and the military. Wen hopes his words influence who gets key posts, what ideological course they will set, and how history records his own career. Wen Jiabao and Bo Xilai have long stood out from their colleagues for their striking capacities to communicate and project their individual personalities and ideologies beyond the otherwise monochromatic party machine. The two most popular members of the Politburo, they are also the most polarizing within China’s political elite. They have much in common, including a belief that the Communist Party consensus that has prevailed for three decades — “opening and reform” coupled with uncompromising political control — is crumbling under the weight of inequality, corruption, and mistrust. But the backgrounds, personalities, and political prescriptions of these two crusaders could not be more different. Bo has deployed his prodigious charisma and political skills to attack the status quo in favor of a more powerful role for the state. He displayed an extraordinary capacity to mobilize political and financial resources during his four and a half year tenure as the head of the Yangtze River megalopolis of Chongqing. He transfixed the nation by smashing the city’s mafia — together with uncooperative officials, lawyers, and entrepreneurs — and rebuilding a state-centered city economy while shamelessly draping himself in the symbolism of Mao Zedong. He sent out a wave of revolutionary nostalgia that led to Mao quotes sent as text messages, government workers corralled to sing “red songs,” and old patriotic programming overwhelming Chongqing TV. From his leftist or “statist” perch, Bo has been challenging the “opening and reform” side of the political consensus that Deng Xiaoping secured three decades ago. Wen Jiabao, meanwhile, who plays the role of a learned, emphatic, and upright Confucian prime minister, has been challenging the other half of Deng consensus — absolute political control — from the liberal right. He has continuously articulated the need to limit government power through rule of law, justice, and democratization. To do this, he has drawn on the symbolic legacies of the purged reformist leaders he served in the 1980s, particularly Hu Yaobang, whose name he recently helped to “rehabilitate” in official discourse. As every Communist Party leader knows, those who want a stake in the country’s future must first fight for control of its past. Until last month Bo appeared to hold the cards, with his networks of princelings — the children of high cadres — and the gravitational force of his “Chongqing Model” pulling the nation toward him, while Wen’s efforts had produced few practical results. Bo earned his reputation as a rising star until Feb. 6 when his police chief and right-hand man, Wang Lijun, drove to an appointment at the local British consulate to shake his official minders and then veered off and fled for his life down the highway into the U.S. Consulate in Chengdu. He carried with him allegations of sordid tales of Bo family criminal behavior including in relation to the death of British businessman Neil Heywood, according to Western government officials. In Beijing’s eyes, this was the highest-level known attempted defection in 40 years, and it occurred on Bo’s watch. Wang “betrayed the country and went over to the enemy,” said President Hu Jintao, according to a Chinese intelligence official. Wen, the son of a lowly teacher, saw his family constantly criticized and attacked during the Cultural Revolution, and rose to power by impressing a series of revolutionary veterans. Bo, in contrast, was born to rule. The son of revolutionary leader Bo Yibo, he studied at the nation’s most prestigious middle school, Beijing No. 4. Bo had not yet turned 17 when a rift between the princeling children and those with “bad class backgrounds” erupted into class warfare. In June 1966, in the early months of the Cultural Revolution, one of Bo’s school mates invented the rhyming ditty that became the anthem for the princelings that led the early Red Guard movement: “The father’s a hero, the son’s a brave lad; the father’s a reactionary, the son’s a bastard.” The student red guards at Beijing No. 4 turned an old eating hall into a gruesome incarceration chamber for the teachers and other reactionaries they captured. They painted the popular slogan “Long live the red terror” on the wall, in human blood. Within months, however, Mao directed his Cultural Revolution toward his comrades-in-arms and unleashed a coterie of lesser-born red guards against the old “royalist” ones. Bo Xilai spent six years in a prison cell. His father, Bo Yibo, was tortured. Red Guards abducted Bo’s mother in Guangzhou and murdered her, or she committed suicide; if any records exist, they remain sealed. Since former leader Deng Xiaoping’s 1981 “Resolution on History,” the Cultural Resolution has officially been a “catastrophe,” but the Communist Party never explained what happened. It was left as little more than a name, signifying bad but unknown things. By raising the specter of the Cultural Revolution, Wen Jiabao has opened a crack in the vault of Communist Party history: that great black box that conceals the struggles, brutality, partial truths and outright fabrications upon which China has built its economic and social transformation. Beneath his carefully layered comments is a profound challenge to the uncompromising manner in which the Chinese Communist Party has always gone about its business. And to grasp what the Cultural Revolution means to Wen Jiabao requires taking a journey through the life of his mentor, the 1980s reformist leader Hu Yaobang who ran the Communist Party in its most vibrant era. Hu Yaobang was struck down from his job at the helm of the Communist Youth League on Aug. 13, 1966, five days before Chairman Mao presided over the first mass rally of the Cultural Revolution. Detained for six weeks, Red Guards beat and abused him and forced him to stand for hours with a huge wooden placard hanging from his neck and his arms wrenched behind his back. Six weeks later, as they retired for their national holidays, they called Hu’s eighteen year-old son Hu Dehua to pick him up. “I cried when I saw his appearance,” Hu Dehua told me. “He told me ‘don’t be such a good-for-nothing, let’s go home, it doesn’t matter.’” Hu Yaobang was already back at work when Mao died, in 1976, and the Communist Party united behind the idea of moving on from the Cultural Revolution but lacked any further road map. Appointed head of the powerful Organization Department, Hu led a crusade to “seek truths from facts” — for ideology to yield to reality — and to rehabilitate fallen comrades. Deng, who by 1980 had secured his position as paramount leader, elevated Hu to general secretary of the Communist Party. By the early 1980s the Communist Party was rapidly retreating from everyday social life. As the economy grew, Chinese people began to enjoy a degree of personal freedoms, but the essential norms of internal party politics remained unchanged. At crucial junctures there were no enforceable rules, no independent arbiters, only power. In 1985, while most elders had been appointing each other or each other’s children to important positions, Hu Yaobang recruited Wen Jiabao, the teacher’s son, to run his Central Office — a position akin to cabinet secretary. The following year Hu Yaobang’s elder son, Hu Deping, spoke in terms uncannily similar to Wen Jiabao’s of two weeks ago. “The Cultural Revolution was a tragedy,” he said to the then propaganda minister, at a time when his father was at the height of his power. “It will not appear again in the same form, but a cultural revolution once or even twice removed cannot be ruled out from once again recurring.” Perhaps he had an inkling of what was coming. By 1986 the tensions between an increasingly market-oriented economy and more liberal social environment began to clash with Communist Party elders’ demand for absolute political control. Hu Yaobang tried to limit corruption among the elders’ children, studiously ignored conservative ideological campaigns, and tolerated student protests. By the end of that year the elders had had enough. Then, as during the Cultural Revolution, and as remains the case today, no rules governed Hu Yaobang’s downfall; just a group of backstage power brokers who judged that he had gone too far. In January 1987, 21 years after his purging in the Cultural Revolution, party elders subjected Hu to a torrid five-day criticism and humiliation session called a “Democratic Party Life meeting.” The harshest of Hu’s critics was Bo Xilai’s father. Hu Dehua, the youngest son, lives at home with his wife in the same large but rundown courtyard home, just west of Beijing’s closed-off leadership district Zhongnanhai, where he has lived nearly all of his life. His recollections about what the Cultural Revolution meant to his family and his father, Hu Yaobang, informs the story that Wen Jiabao is telling today. Hu Dehua tells how his father was pained, but not surprised, when Communist Party elders used his own political demise to drive an “anti-bourgeois liberalization” campaign across China. Party apparatchiks instructed Hu Dehua to show his ideological opposition to his own father’s political platform, but he refused. “It was the same as 1966. If someone was said to be ‘liberalized’, then everyone would line up to criticize them,” Hu Dehua said. “The country was turning back at a time when it should be have been democratizing and transitioning to rule of law.” Hu Dehua told his father how pessimistic he felt about his country’s future. Hu Yaobang agreed that the methods and ideologies of the 1987 anti-liberalization movement came straight from the Cultural Revolution. But he told his son to gain some historical perspective, and reminded him that Chinese people were not joining in the elite power games as they had 20 years before. He called the anti-liberalization campaign a “medium-sized cultural revolution” and warned that a small cultural revolution would no doubt follow, Hu Dehua told me. As society developed, Hu Yaobang told his son, the middle and little cultural revolutions would gradually fade from history’s stage. It is fortunate, perhaps, that Hu Yaobang could not see how his death in April 1989 triggered an outpouring of public grief at Tiananmen Square, as Chinese students held him up his honesty and humanity in contrast to their perception of other leaders of the time. The protests morphed into a mass demonstration for liberalization and democratization and against growing corruption among children of the political elite. Wen Jiabao remained in charge of the Communist Party Central Office, now working for Hu Yaobang’s increasingly reformist successor, Zhao Ziyang. A famous photo shows Wen standing behind Zhao’s shoulder as his boss declared the haunting words “I’ve come too late” to students who refused to leave the square. Shortly afterward, Deng and the party elders ordered in the tanks, triggering another Cultural Revolution-style convulsion and adding a new bloody file to the Communist Party’s vault of history. Bo Yibo moved to have Wen purged, according to a source whose father was a minister at the time, but other elders were impressed with how Wen shifted his loyalty from Zhao (who spent the rest of his life under house arrest) and supported martial law. Wen played by the rules of a ruthless system, his family — especially his wife and son — leveraged his official status for their own business interests, while his career progression resumed. Hu Yaobang was largely airbrushed from official history after his purge in 1987. But because he did not publicly challenge the Communist Party, he maintained his legacy and his supporters, including all of the current and likely future party chiefs and premiers: Hu Jintao, Wen Jiabao, Xi Jinping, and Li Keqiang. All four regularly visit the Hu family home during Spring Festival. But only Wen Jiabao has publicly honored his mentor’s legacy. Two years ago, on the 21st anniversary of Hu Yaobang’s death, Wen penned an essay in the People’s Daily that was remarkable in a nation whose leaders rarely give any public hint of their personal lives. “What he taught me in those years is engraved on my heart,” wrote Wen. Of the four top leaders who regularly pay homage to Hu Yaobang’s old home, Wen Jiabao has the warmest connection with Hu Yaobang’s widow and four children. Hu taught his children to resist the idea, wired into the Communist Party psyche, that they had any particular hereditary right to high office. Nevertheless the eldest son, Hu Deping, rose to vice minister rank in the United Front Department. And last year he used his princeling heritage and networks to organize and say things that would have banished lesser-born men to jail. He published a book about his father, with a forward written by Wen. He organized a series of closed-door seminars for leading intellectuals and other princeling children of reformist leaders to try and build a consensus for reform. The first and most low-key seminar, in July, ignited what became a raging public debate about Bo Xilai’s “Chongqing Model” versus its possible antidote, the more liberal “Guangdong Model.” The second, in August, celebrated the 35th anniversary of the arrest of Mao’s radical “Gang of Four,” which slammed the door shut on the Cultural Revolution just weeks after Mao’s death in August 1976. The third, in September, explored the 30th anniversary of the 1981 Resolution on History, which had confirmed the Cultural Revolution as a catastrophe that must never occur again. It was at the September gathering that Hu Deping set down the themes that Wen later referred to in his press conference, and published his comments on a website dedicated to chronicling the life and times of his father: “The bottom line is making sure to adopt the attitude of criticizing and fundamentally denouncing the Cultural Revolution … In recent years, for whatever reason, there seems to be a ‘revival’ of something like advocating the Cultural Revolution. Some people cherish it; some do not believe in the Cultural Revolution but nevertheless exploit it and play it up. I think we must guard this bottom line!” The subtext, only barely concealed, was that Bo Xilai must be stopped from dragging Communist Party back toward its most radical, lawless past. How, one could be forgiven for asking, could Bo grasp for power by praising a movement that killed his own mother? Hu Deping honed in on the need to forge mechanisms to institutionalize the power games between party leaders. He told his princeling and intellectual friends in the seminar audience that the remnants of feudal aristocracy — old fashioned despotic power — might again emerge as the party had said it had during the Cultural Revolution. He foreshadowed the ructions that are now taking place: “If we really want to carry out democratization of inner-party political life, the cost is going to be enormous. Do we have the courage to accept that cost? If we do it now, there is a cost certainly. Do we dare to bear the cost? Is now the right time? I cannot say for sure. However, I think it might create some ‘chaos’ in some localities, some temporary ‘chaos’, and some localized ‘chaos’. We should be prepared.” Hu Deping has been stepping forward, with some reluctance, to draw on his father’s legacy to help shape China’s future. He is a member of the standing committee of one of China’s two representative-style bodies and mixes with senior leaders. He discussed the Cultural Revolution with both President Hu Jintao and his expected successor, Xi Jinping, not long before Wen Jiabao’s news conference and Bo Xilai’s demise, according to a source familiar with those conversations. China’s politically engaged population is watching the battle now under way within the Politburo to frame the downfall of Bo Xilai and set the lessons that will shape China’s future. “So far we cannot identify whether Wen Jiabao is representing himself or representing a group,” says a recently retired minister-level official, who had confidently predicted Bo’s sacking to me 10 days before it happened. “Maybe it’s 80 percent himself and 20 percent the group. We still have to watch.” It remains far from clear whether the Communist Party’s webs of patronage and knots of financial and bureaucratic interests can be reformed. But with China’s leftist movement decapitated by the purge of Bo Xilai, and Bo’s critics now talking about his reign of “red terror” after daily revelations of political and physical brutality under his command, Wen has begun to win over some of his many detractors. “In the past I did not have a fully positive view of Wen Jiabao, because he said a lot of things but didn’t deliver,” says a leading media figure with lifelong connections to China’s leadership circle. “Now I realize just to be able to say it, that’s important. To speak up, let the whole world know that he could not achieve anything because he was strangled by the system.” Hu Yaobang’s most faithful protégé, who carried his funeral casket to its final resting place, is building on the groundwork laid by Hu and his children ostensibly to prevent a return of the Cultural Revolution. Wen Jiabao is defending the party line set by Deng Xiaoping’s 1981 historical resolution against attack from the left. Between the lines, however, he is challenging the Communist Party’s 30-year consensus from the liberal right. Hu Dehua, the youngest son, spelled out the gulf between these positions in a rare Chinese media interview one month ago: “The difference between my father and Deng is this: Deng wanted to save the party; my father wanted to save the people, the ordinary people.” Wen Jiabao sees Bo’s downfall as a pivotal opportunity to pin his reformist colors high while the Communist Party is too divided to rein him in. He is reaching out to the Chinese public because the party is losing its monopoly on truth and internal roads to reform have long been blocked. Ironically, he is doing so by leading the public purging of a victim who has no hope of transparent justice, because the party to which he has devoted his life has never known any other way.

The Revenge of Wen Jiabao

 

Communist Party will likely execute a once-in-a-decade leadership transition in which President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen hand over to a new team led by current Vice President Xi Jinping. The majority of leaders will retire from the elite Politburo Standing Committee, and the turnover will extend down through lower tiers of the Communist Party, the government, and the military. Wen hopes his words influence who gets key posts, what ideological course they will set, and how history records his own career.

Wen Jiabao and Bo Xilai have long stood out from their colleagues for their striking capacities to communicate and project their individual personalities and ideologies beyond the otherwise monochromatic party machine. The two most popular members of the Politburo, they are also the most polarizing within China’s political elite. They have much in common, including a belief that the Communist Party consensus that has prevailed for three decades — “opening and reform” coupled with uncompromising political control — is crumbling under the weight of inequality, corruption, and mistrust. But the backgrounds, personalities, and political prescriptions of these two crusaders could not be more different.

Bo has deployed his prodigious charisma and political skills to attack the status quo in favor of a more powerful role for the state. He displayed an extraordinary capacity to mobilize political and financial resources during his four and a half year tenure as the head of the Yangtze River megalopolis of Chongqing. He transfixed the nation by smashing the city’s mafia — together with uncooperative officials, lawyers, and entrepreneurs — and rebuilding a state-centered city economy while shamelessly draping himself in the symbolism of Mao Zedong. He sent out a wave of revolutionary nostalgia that led to Mao quotes sent as text messages, government workers corralled to sing “red songs,” and old patriotic programming overwhelming Chongqing TV.

From his leftist or “statist” perch, Bo has been challenging the “opening and reform” side of the political consensus that Deng Xiaoping secured three decades ago. Wen Jiabao, meanwhile, who plays the role of a learned, emphatic, and upright Confucian prime minister, has been challenging the other half of Deng consensus — absolute political control — from the liberal right. He has continuously articulated the need to limit government power through rule of law, justice, and democratization. To do this, he has drawn on the symbolic legacies of the purged reformist leaders he served in the 1980s, particularly Hu Yaobang, whose name he recently helped to “rehabilitate” in official discourse. As every Communist Party leader knows, those who want a stake in the country’s future must first fight for control of its past.

Meanwhile, the New York Times reports on how Bo’s ouster is playing out among different factions of the Communist Party as the leadership prepares for a transition of power later this year:

…The ouster of Bo Xilai, the populist icon formerly in charge of the southwestern megacity of Chongqing, has spurred weeks of frenzied internal politicking and a rare dissenting vote within the Politburo Standing Committee, according to interviews with publishers, academics and analysts tied to the Communist Party’s upper echelons or its powerful families.

They say that the outward calm is tenuous and was achieved only after China’s leadership team of Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao appealed to party elders for support and yielded important posts in Chongqing to representatives of other influential political blocs.

“They want everyone to believe that the top level has no problem — that there’s no split and no struggle,” said Jin Zhong, publisher of the influential China-watching magazine Open, in Hong Kong. “But this is a false impression.”

According to people briefed by central party officials, Mr. Bo is being confined to his house in Beijing, watched by the Central Guard Bureau, a unit of the People’s Liberation Army under control of the party’s General Office. He faces a disciplinary investigation over a range of allegations of corruption and abuse of power, these people say. His wife, a noted lawyer, is under more formal detention in connection with some of those allegations.

Now be cool and read the Media Horse Manure, Ain’t Fuckn’ Delicious I was there. I warned you!

If Premier Wen Jiabao is “China’s best actor,” as his critics allege, he saved his finest performance for last. After three hours of eloquent and emotional answers in his final news conference at the National People’s Congress annual meeting this month, Wen uttered his public political masterstroke, reopening debate on one of the most tumultuous events in the Chinese Communist Party’s history and hammering the final nail in the coffin of his great rival, the now-deposed Chongqing Communist Party boss Bo Xilai. And in striking down Bo, Wen got his revenge on a family that had opposed him and his mentor countless times in the past.

Responding to a gently phrased question about Chongqing, Wen foreshadowed Bo’s political execution, a seismic leadership rupture announced the following day that continues to convulse China’s political landscape to an extent not seen since 1989. But the addendum that followed might be even more significant. Indirectly, but unmistakably, Wen defined Bo as man who wanted to repudiate China’s decades-long effort to reform its economy, open to the world, and allow its citizens to experience modernity. He framed the struggle over Bo’s legacy as a choice between urgent political reforms and “such historical tragedies as the Cultural Revolution,” culminating a 30-year battle for two radically different versions of China, of which Bo Xilai and Wen Jiabao are the ideological heirs. In Wen’s world, bringing down Bo is the first step in a battle between China’s Maoist past and a more democratic future as personified by his beloved mentor, 1980s Communist Party chief Hu Yaobang. His words blew open the facade of party unity that had held since the massacres of Tiananmen Square.

This October, the Communist Party will likely execute a once-in-a-decade leadership transition in which President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen hand over to a new team led by current Vice President Xi Jinping. The majority of leaders will retire from the elite Politburo Standing Committee, and the turnover will extend down through lower tiers of the Communist Party, the government, and the military. Wen hopes his words influence who gets key posts, what ideological course they will set, and how history records his own career.

Wen Jiabao and Bo Xilai have long stood out from their colleagues for their striking capacities to communicate and project their individual personalities and ideologies beyond the otherwise monochromatic party machine. The two most popular members of the Politburo, they are also the most polarizing within China’s political elite. They have much in common, including a belief that the Communist Party consensus that has prevailed for three decades — “opening and reform” coupled with uncompromising political control — is crumbling under the weight of inequality, corruption, and mistrust. But the backgrounds, personalities, and political prescriptions of these two crusaders could not be more different.

Bo has deployed his prodigious charisma and political skills to attack the status quo in favor of a more powerful role for the state. He displayed an extraordinary capacity to mobilize political and financial resources during his four and a half year tenure as the head of the Yangtze River megalopolis of Chongqing. He transfixed the nation by smashing the city’s mafia — together with uncooperative officials, lawyers, and entrepreneurs — and rebuilding a state-centered city economy while shamelessly draping himself in the symbolism of Mao Zedong. He sent out a wave of revolutionary nostalgia that led to Mao quotes sent as text messages, government workers corralled to sing “red songs,” and old patriotic programming overwhelming Chongqing TV.

From his leftist or “statist” perch, Bo has been challenging the “opening and reform” side of the political consensus that Deng Xiaoping secured three decades ago. Wen Jiabao, meanwhile, who plays the role of a learned, emphatic, and upright Confucian prime minister, has been challenging the other half of Deng consensus — absolute political control — from the liberal right. He has continuously articulated the need to limit government power through rule of law, justice, and democratization. To do this, he has drawn on the symbolic legacies of the purged reformist leaders he served in the 1980s, particularly Hu Yaobang, whose name he recently helped to “rehabilitate” in official discourse. As every Communist Party leader knows, those who want a stake in the country’s future must first fight for control of its past.

Until last month Bo appeared to hold the cards, with his networks of princelings — the children of high cadres — and the gravitational force of his “Chongqing Model” pulling the nation toward him, while Wen’s efforts had produced few practical results. Bo earned his reputation as a rising star until Feb. 6 when his police chief and right-hand man, Wang Lijun, drove to an appointment at the local British consulate to shake his official minders and then veered off and fled for his life down the highway into the U.S. Consulate in Chengdu. He carried with him allegations of sordid tales of Bo family criminal behavior including in relation to the death of British businessman Neil Heywood, according to Western government officials. In Beijing’s eyes, this was the highest-level known attempted defection in 40 years, and it occurred on Bo’s watch. Wang “betrayed the country and went over to the enemy,” said President Hu Jintao, according to a Chinese intelligence official.

Wen, the son of a lowly teacher, saw his family constantly criticized and attacked during the Cultural Revolution, and rose to power by impressing a series of revolutionary veterans. Bo, in contrast, was born to rule. The son of revolutionary leader Bo Yibo, he studied at the nation’s most prestigious middle school, Beijing No. 4. Bo had not yet turned 17 when a rift between the princeling children and those with “bad class backgrounds” erupted into class warfare. In June 1966, in the early months of the Cultural Revolution, one of Bo’s school mates invented the rhyming ditty that became the anthem for the princelings that led the early Red Guard movement: “The father’s a hero, the son’s a brave lad; the father’s a reactionary, the son’s a bastard.”

The student red guards at Beijing No. 4 turned an old eating hall into a gruesome incarceration chamber for the teachers and other reactionaries they captured. They painted the popular slogan “Long live the red terror” on the wall, in human blood.

Within months, however, Mao directed his Cultural Revolution toward his comrades-in-arms and unleashed a coterie of lesser-born red guards against the old “royalist” ones. Bo Xilai spent six years in a prison cell. His father, Bo Yibo, was tortured. Red Guards abducted Bo’s mother in Guangzhou and murdered her, or she committed suicide; if any records exist, they remain sealed.

Since former leader Deng Xiaoping’s 1981 “Resolution on History,” the Cultural Resolution has officially been a “catastrophe,” but the Communist Party never explained what happened. It was left as little more than a name, signifying bad but unknown things. By raising the specter of the Cultural Revolution, Wen Jiabao has opened a crack in the vault of Communist Party history: that great black box that conceals the struggles, brutality, partial truths and outright fabrications upon which China has built its economic and social transformation. Beneath his carefully layered comments is a profound challenge to the uncompromising manner in which the Chinese Communist Party has always gone about its business. And to grasp what the Cultural Revolution means to Wen Jiabao requires taking a journey through the life of his mentor, the 1980s reformist leader Hu Yaobang who ran the Communist Party in its most vibrant era.

Hu Yaobang was struck down from his job at the helm of the Communist Youth League on Aug. 13, 1966, five days before Chairman Mao presided over the first mass rally of the Cultural Revolution. Detained for six weeks, Red Guards beat and abused him and forced him to stand for hours with a huge wooden placard hanging from his neck and his arms wrenched behind his back. Six weeks later, as they retired for their national holidays, they called Hu’s eighteen year-old son Hu Dehua to pick him up. “I cried when I saw his appearance,” Hu Dehua told me. “He told me ‘don’t be such a good-for-nothing, let’s go home, it doesn’t matter.’”

Hu Yaobang was already back at work when Mao died, in 1976, and the Communist Party united behind the idea of moving on from the Cultural Revolution but lacked any further road map. Appointed head of the powerful Organization Department, Hu led a crusade to “seek truths from facts” — for ideology to yield to reality — and to rehabilitate fallen comrades. Deng, who by 1980 had secured his position as paramount leader, elevated Hu to general secretary of the Communist Party.

By the early 1980s the Communist Party was rapidly retreating from everyday social life. As the economy grew, Chinese people began to enjoy a degree of personal freedoms, but the essential norms of internal party politics remained unchanged. At crucial junctures there were no enforceable rules, no independent arbiters, only power.

In 1985, while most elders had been appointing each other or each other’s children to important positions, Hu Yaobang recruited Wen Jiabao, the teacher’s son, to run his Central Office — a position akin to cabinet secretary. The following year Hu Yaobang’s elder son, Hu Deping, spoke in terms uncannily similar to Wen Jiabao’s of two weeks ago. “The Cultural Revolution was a tragedy,” he said to the then propaganda minister, at a time when his father was at the height of his power. “It will not appear again in the same form, but a cultural revolution once or even twice removed cannot be ruled out from once again recurring.”

Perhaps he had an inkling of what was coming. By 1986 the tensions between an increasingly market-oriented economy and more liberal social environment began to clash with Communist Party elders’ demand for absolute political control. Hu Yaobang tried to limit corruption among the elders’ children, studiously ignored conservative ideological campaigns, and tolerated student protests. By the end of that year the elders had had enough.

Then, as during the Cultural Revolution, and as remains the case today, no rules governed Hu Yaobang’s downfall; just a group of backstage power brokers who judged that he had gone too far. In January 1987, 21 years after his purging in the Cultural Revolution, party elders subjected Hu to a torrid five-day criticism and humiliation session called a “Democratic Party Life meeting.” The harshest of Hu’s critics was Bo Xilai’s father.

Hu Dehua, the youngest son, lives at home with his wife in the same large but rundown courtyard home, just west of Beijing’s closed-off leadership district Zhongnanhai, where he has lived nearly all of his life. His recollections about what the Cultural Revolution meant to his family and his father, Hu Yaobang, informs the story that Wen Jiabao is telling today.

Hu Dehua tells how his father was pained, but not surprised, when Communist Party elders used his own political demise to drive an “anti-bourgeois liberalization” campaign across China. Party apparatchiks instructed Hu Dehua to show his ideological opposition to his own father’s political platform, but he refused.

“It was the same as 1966. If someone was said to be ‘liberalized’, then everyone would line up to criticize them,” Hu Dehua said. “The country was turning back at a time when it should be have been democratizing and transitioning to rule of law.”

Hu Dehua told his father how pessimistic he felt about his country’s future. Hu Yaobang agreed that the methods and ideologies of the 1987 anti-liberalization movement came straight from the Cultural Revolution. But he told his son to gain some historical perspective, and reminded him that Chinese people were not joining in the elite power games as they had 20 years before. He called the anti-liberalization campaign a “medium-sized cultural revolution” and warned that a small cultural revolution would no doubt follow, Hu Dehua told me. As society developed, Hu Yaobang told his son, the middle and little cultural revolutions would gradually fade from history’s stage.

It is fortunate, perhaps, that Hu Yaobang could not see how his death in April 1989 triggered an outpouring of public grief at Tiananmen Square, as Chinese students held him up his honesty and humanity in contrast to their perception of other leaders of the time. The protests morphed into a mass demonstration for liberalization and democratization and against growing corruption among children of the political elite.

Wen Jiabao remained in charge of the Communist Party Central Office, now working for Hu Yaobang’s increasingly reformist successor, Zhao Ziyang. A famous photo shows Wen standing behind Zhao’s shoulder as his boss declared the haunting words “I’ve come too late” to students who refused to leave the square. Shortly afterward, Deng and the party elders ordered in the tanks, triggering another Cultural Revolution-style convulsion and adding a new bloody file to the Communist Party’s vault of history. Bo Yibo moved to have Wen purged, according to a source whose father was a minister at the time, but other elders were impressed with how Wen shifted his loyalty from Zhao (who spent the rest of his life under house arrest) and supported martial law. Wen played by the rules of a ruthless system, his family — especially his wife and son — leveraged his official status for their own business interests, while his career progression resumed.

Hu Yaobang was largely airbrushed from official history after his purge in 1987. But because he did not publicly challenge the Communist Party, he maintained his legacy and his supporters, including all of the current and likely future party chiefs and premiers: Hu Jintao, Wen Jiabao, Xi Jinping, and Li Keqiang. All four regularly visit the Hu family home during Spring Festival. But only Wen Jiabao has publicly honored his mentor’s legacy.

Two years ago, on the 21st anniversary of Hu Yaobang’s death, Wen penned an essay in the People’s Daily that was remarkable in a nation whose leaders rarely give any public hint of their personal lives. “What he taught me in those years is engraved on my heart,” wrote Wen. Of the four top leaders who regularly pay homage to Hu Yaobang’s old home, Wen Jiabao has the warmest connection with Hu Yaobang’s widow and four children.

Hu taught his children to resist the idea, wired into the Communist Party psyche, that they had any particular hereditary right to high office. Nevertheless the eldest son, Hu Deping, rose to vice minister rank in the United Front Department. And last year he used his princeling heritage and networks to organize and say things that would have banished lesser-born men to jail. He published a book about his father, with a forward written by Wen. He organized a series of closed-door seminars for leading intellectuals and other princeling children of reformist leaders to try and build a consensus for reform.

The first and most low-key seminar, in July, ignited what became a raging public debate about Bo Xilai’s “Chongqing Model” versus its possible antidote, the more liberal “Guangdong Model.” The second, in August, celebrated the 35th anniversary of the arrest of Mao’s radical “Gang of Four,” which slammed the door shut on the Cultural Revolution just weeks after Mao’s death in August 1976. The third, in September, explored the 30th anniversary of the 1981 Resolution on History, which had confirmed the Cultural Revolution as a catastrophe that must never occur again.

It was at the September gathering that Hu Deping set down the themes that Wen later referred to in his press conference, and published his comments on a website dedicated to chronicling the life and times of his father: “The bottom line is making sure to adopt the attitude of criticizing and fundamentally denouncing the Cultural Revolution … In recent years, for whatever reason, there seems to be a ‘revival’ of something like advocating the Cultural Revolution. Some people cherish it; some do not believe in the Cultural Revolution but nevertheless exploit it and play it up. I think we must guard this bottom line!”

The subtext, only barely concealed, was that Bo Xilai must be stopped from dragging Communist Party back toward its most radical, lawless past. How, one could be forgiven for asking, could Bo grasp for power by praising a movement that killed his own mother?

Hu Deping honed in on the need to forge mechanisms to institutionalize the power games between party leaders. He told his princeling and intellectual friends in the seminar audience that the remnants of feudal aristocracy — old fashioned despotic power — might again emerge as the party had said it had during the Cultural Revolution. He foreshadowed the ructions that are now taking place:

“If we really want to carry out democratization of inner-party political life, the cost is going to be enormous. Do we have the courage to accept that cost? If we do it now, there is a cost certainly. Do we dare to bear the cost? Is now the right time? I cannot say for sure. However, I think it might create some ‘chaos’ in some localities, some temporary ‘chaos’, and some localized ‘chaos’. We should be prepared.”

Hu Deping has been stepping forward, with some reluctance, to draw on his father’s legacy to help shape China’s future. He is a member of the standing committee of one of China’s two representative-style bodies and mixes with senior leaders. He discussed the Cultural Revolution with both President Hu Jintao and his expected successor, Xi Jinping, not long before Wen Jiabao’s news conference and Bo Xilai’s demise, according to a source familiar with those conversations. China’s politically engaged population is watching the battle now under way within the Politburo to frame the downfall of Bo Xilai and set the lessons that will shape China’s future.

“So far we cannot identify whether Wen Jiabao is representing himself or representing a group,” says a recently retired minister-level official, who had confidently predicted Bo’s sacking to me 10 days before it happened. “Maybe it’s 80 percent himself and 20 percent the group. We still have to watch.”

It remains far from clear whether the Communist Party’s webs of patronage and knots of financial and bureaucratic interests can be reformed. But with China’s leftist movement decapitated by the purge of Bo Xilai, and Bo’s critics now talking about his reign of “red terror” after daily revelations of political and physical brutality under his command, Wen has begun to win over some of his many detractors.

“In the past I did not have a fully positive view of Wen Jiabao, because he said a lot of things but didn’t deliver,” says a leading media figure with lifelong connections to China’s leadership circle. “Now I realize just to be able to say it, that’s important. To speak up, let the whole world know that he could not achieve anything because he was strangled by the system.”

Hu Yaobang’s most faithful protégé, who carried his funeral casket to its final resting place, is building on the groundwork laid by Hu and his children ostensibly to prevent a return of the Cultural Revolution. Wen Jiabao is defending the party line set by Deng Xiaoping’s 1981 historical resolution against attack from the left. Between the lines, however, he is challenging the Communist Party’s 30-year consensus from the liberal right.

Hu Dehua, the youngest son, spelled out the gulf between these positions in a rare Chinese media interview one month ago: “The difference between my father and Deng is this: Deng wanted to save the party; my father wanted to save the people, the ordinary people.”

Wen Jiabao sees Bo’s downfall as a pivotal opportunity to pin his reformist colors high while the Communist Party is too divided to rein him in. He is reaching out to the Chinese public because the party is losing its monopoly on truth and internal roads to reform have long been blocked. Ironically, he is doing so by leading the public purging of a victim who has no hope of transparent justice, because the party to which he has devoted his life has never known any other way.