AuthorTopic: Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World in Our Time by Carrol Quigley  (Read 18630 times)

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
New World Order: The Founding Fathers
« Reply #15 on: April 28, 2015, 12:47:36 AM »
Not that Diners don't already know this, but a lot of great detail in this article.

RE

New World Order: The Founding Fathers

By Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor
Global Research, April 26, 2015
Region: Europe
Theme: Culture, Society & History

This article was first published in July 2013

Rich and powerful elites have long dreamed of world control. The ambitious Romans, Attila the Hun, great Muslim leaders of Medieval Spain, the Mughals of India all exercised immense influence over different parts of the globe in set periods of recognised ascendancy.

Sometimes tribal, sometimes national, sometimes religious, often dynastic, their success defined epochs, but was never effectively global until the twentieth century. At that point, with the future of the British Empire under threat from other aspiring nations, in particular Germany , a momentous decision was taken by a group of powerful and determined men, that direct action had to be taken to assert their control, and that of the British race, over the entire civilised world. It has grown from that tiny select cabal into a monster that may already be beyond control.

    “One wintry afternoon in February 1891, three men were engaged in earnest conversation in London. From that conversation were to flow consequences of the greatest importance for the British Empire and to the world as a whole.”

So begins Professor Carroll Quigley’s book The Anglo American Establishment.  It may read like a John Le Carre thriller, but this was no spy fiction. The three staunch British Imperialists who met in London that day, Cecil Rhodes, William Stead and Lord Esher, were soon joined by Lords Rothschild, Salisbury, Rosebery and Milner, men whose financial, political, and administrative powers set them apart. Some of these names may not be familiar to you, but that is a mark of the absolute success of this group. From the outset they insisted on secrecy, operated in secret and ensured that their influence was airbrushed from history. They believed that white men of Anglo-Saxon descent rightly sat at the top of the racial hierarchy and they fully understood the impending threat from a burgeoning Germany whose modern, expanding economy had begun to challenge British hegemony on the world stage.

The above named elites drew up a plan for a secret society that aimed to renew the bond between Great Britain and the United States [1] and bring all habitable portions of the world under their influence and control. The U.S. had grown rapidly in self-esteem, wealth and opportunity since the declaration of independence in 1776, but Anglo-American connections remained strong and would embroil her in the long-term plan for one world government. The meeting in 1891 was, in effect, the birth of the New World Order cabal.

Great financiers frequently used their fortunes to influence questions of peace and war and control politics for profit. Cecil Rhodes was different. He was determined to use his vast fortune not simply to generate ever-increasing profit, but to realise his dream, a dream he shared with his co-conspirators. Rhodes turned the profit objective on its head and sought to amass great wealth into his secret society in order to achieve political ends, to buy governments and politicians, buy public opinion and the means to influence it. [2] He intended that his wealth should be used to grasp control of the world, secretly. Secrecy was the cornerstone. No one outside the favoured few knew of the group’s existence. They have since been referred to obliquely in speeches and books as “The Money Power”, “The Hidden Power” or “the men behind the curtain”. All of these labels are pertinent, but we have called them, collectively, the Secret Elite.

Carroll Quigley revealed that Secret Elite influence on education was chiefly visible at the exclusive English private schools, Eton and Harrow, and at Oxford University , especially All Souls and Balliol Colleges . [3] This immensely rich and powerful group was given intellectual approval and inspiration by the philosophy of John Ruskin, professor of fine arts at Oxford.  He spoke to the Oxford undergraduates as members of the privileged ruling class, telling them that they possessed a magnificent tradition of education, rule of law and freedom. He championed all that was finest in the public service ethic, duty and self-discipline, and believed that English ruling class tradition should be spread to the masses across the empire. [4]

But behind such well-serving words lay a philosophy strongly opposed to the emancipation of woman, had no time for democracy and supported the “just” war.[5] Ruskin advocated that control of the state should be placed in the hands of a small ruling class. Social order was to be built upon the authority of superiors, imposing upon their inferiors an absolute, unquestioning obedience. He was repelled by the notion of levelling between the classes and by the disintegration of the “rightful” authority of the ruling class. [6]Ruskin’s philosophy was music to the ears of the elitists. It gave their lust for global power the blessing of academic approval. What they did, they would claim, was not for them, but for mankind. They would rise to power on the spurious justification that the world would consequently be a better place for humanity.

Inspired by Ruskin, Cecil Rhodes and his accomplices created the secret society with an inner core of trusted associates called “The Society of the Elect”, who unquestionably knew that they were members of an exclusive cabal devoted to taking and holding power on a world-wide basis. [7] A second outer ring, larger and quite fluid in its membership, was named “The Association of Helpers”. At this level members might not have known that they were an integral part of, or inadvertently being used by, a secret society. Many on the outer edges of the group, idealists and honest individuals, may never have been aware that the real decisions were made by a ruthless clique about whom they had no knowledge. [8]

The man who exposed the secret society, Carroll Quigley (1910 – 1977), was the highly esteemed professor of history at the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University , and a lecturer at Princeton and Harvard.  He revealed that the organisation was able to “conceal its existence quite successfully, and many of its most influential members… are unknown even to close students of British History”. [9] Quigley’s greatest contribution to our understanding of modern history came with his books, The Anglo-American Establishment and Tragedy and Hope, A History of the World in Our Time. The former was written in 1949 but only released after his death. His disclosures placed him in such potential danger from an Establishment backlash that it was never published in his lifetime. In a 1974 radio broadcast, Quigley warned the interviewer, Rudy Maxa of the Washington Post, “You better be discreet. You have to protect my future as well as your own.” [10]

Quigley had received assistance of a “personal nature” from individuals close to what he called the “Group”, but “for obvious reasons” he could not reveal their names. [11] He made it clear that evidence about them was not hard to find “if you know where to look,”[12] and it has to be asked why generations of historians have failed to pursue his trail. Though sworn to secrecy, Professor Quigley revealed in the radio interview that Sir Alfred Zimmern, the British historian and political scientist, had confirmed the names of the main protagonists within the secret society. Without a shadow of doubt, Zimmern himself was a close associate of those at the centre of real power in Britain. He knew most of the key figures personally and was himself a member of the inner core of the secret society for twelve years between 1910 and 1922. [13]

The enigma of Professor Quigley’s work lies in his statement that while the secret cabal had brought many of the things he held dear close to disaster, he generally agreed with its goals and aims. [14] Were these merely words of self-preservation? Be mindful of his warning to Rudy Maxa as late as 1974. Quigley clearly felt that these revelations placed him in danger. Unknown persons removed his major work, Tragedy and Hope, from the bookstore shelves in America , and it was withdrawn from sale without any justification soon after its release. The book’s original plates were unaccountably destroyed by Quigley’s publisher, the Macmillan Company, who, for the next six years “lied, lied, lied” to him and deliberately misled him into believing that it would be reprinted. [15] Why? What pressures obliged a major publishing house to take such extreme action? Quigley stated categorically that powerful people had suppressed the book because it exposed matters that they did not want known. The reader has to understand that we are discussing individuals whose power, influence and control were unrivalled.

From the very start, each of the initial conspirators brought valuable qualities and connections to the society. Cecil Rhodes was Prime Minister of the Cape Colony and master and commander of a vast area of Southern Africa which some were already beginning to call Rhodesia . His wealth had been underwritten by brutal native suppression [16] and the global mining interests of the House of Rothschild, [17] to whom he was answerable. William Stead was the most prominent journalist of his day and a voice to which ordinary people listened. Lord Esher represented the interests of the monarchy from Queen Victoria ’s final years, through the exuberant excesses of King Edward VII, to the more sedate but pliable King George V. His influence was immense because he operated between monarchs, the aristocracy and leading political figures. He chaired important secret committees, was responsible for appointments to the Cabinet, the senior ranks of the diplomatic corps and voiced strong personal opinion on top army posts. [18] Esher exerted a power behind the throne far in excess of his constitutional position. His role of powerbroker on behalf of the Secret Elite was without equal. Indeed Professor Quigley dubbed him, “the greatest wire puller of the period.” [19]

Another name that pervaded all that was powerful and influential during this period was that of the Rothschild dynasty, and Quigley placed Lord Nathaniel (Natty) Rothschild within the very core of the secret organization. [20] Rothschild was all-powerful in British and world banking and virtually untouchable.

    “The House of Rothschild was immensely more powerful than any financial empire that had ever preceded it.  It commanded vast wealth. It was international. It was independent.  Royal governments were nervous of it because they could not control it.  Popular movements hated it because it was not answerable to the people.  Constitutionalists resented it because its influence was exercised behind the scenes – secretly.” [21]

Taken together, the principal players, Rhodes, Stead, Esher, Rothschild and Milner represented a new force that was emerging inside British politics, but powerful old traditional aristocratic families that had long dominated Westminster , often in cahoots with the reigning monarch, were also deeply involved, and none more so than the Cecil family. Robert Arthur Talbot Gascoyne-Cecil, the patriarchal 3rd Marquis of Salisbury, ruled the Conservative Party at the latter end of the nineteenth century. He served as prime minister three times for a total of fourteen years, between 1885 and 1902 (longer than anyone else in recent history). When he retired as prime minister in July 1902, he handed over the reins of government to his sister’s son, Arthur Balfour. Lord Salisbury had four siblings, five sons and three daughters who were all linked and interlinked by marriage to individuals in the upper echelons of the English ruling class. Important government positions were given to relations, friends and wealthy supporters who proved their gratitude by ensuring that his views became policy in government, civil service and diplomatic circles. This extended ‘Cecil-Bloc’ was intricately linked to “The Society of the Elect” and Secret Elite ambitions throughout the first half of the twentieth century. [22]

Another member of the inner core, Lord Alfred Milner, offers cause for greater scrutiny because he has been virtually airbrushed from the history of the period. Alfred Milner was a self-made man and remarkably successful civil servant who became a key figure within the Secret Elite and absolutely powerful within the ranks of these privileged individuals. He and Rhodes had been contemporaries at Oxford University , and were inextricably connected through events in South Africa . Rhodes recognised in him the kind of steel that was required to pursue the dream of world domination, “I support Milner absolutely without reserve. If he says peace, I say peace; if he says war, I say war. Whatever happens, I say ditto to Milner.” [23] Milner grew in time to be the most able of them all, to enjoy the privilege of patronage and power, a man to whom others turned for leadership and direction.

When governor general and high commissioner of South Africa , Milner deliberately caused the Boer War in order to grab the Transvaal’s gold and use the economic resources of South Africa to extend and perpetuate Secret Elite control. He had the grace to confess in a letter to Lord Roberts, Commander in Chief in South Africa, that

    “I precipitated the crisis, which was inevitable, before it was too late.  It is not very agreeable, and in many eyes, not very creditable piece of business to have been largely instrumental in bringing about a big war.” [24]

This was no immodest boast. Alfred Milner’s matter-of-fact explanation displayed the cold objectivity that drove the Secret Elite cause. War was unfortunate, but necessary. It had to be. They were not afraid of war.

The Secret Elite’s war against the Dutch settlers began in October 1899 and ended with the signing of the Treaty of Vereeniging on 31 May 1902. The Boer Republics were annexed to the British Empire . The Transvaal ’s gold was finally in the hands of the Secret Elite at a cost of some 70,000 dead on the battlefields, plus 32,000 dead in British concentration camps, including more than 20,000 children of Dutch descent. Some thirty thousand Boer farms were burned to the ground, livestock slaughtered, and the women and children put in British concentration camps. In the camps, the families of men fighting for the Boer army were punished by being put on half the already meagre rations with no meat whatsoever. [25] W. T. Stead, former member of the inner core of the Secret Elite who had resigned in disgust over the Boer War, was overcome by the evidence presented to him. He wrote,

    “Every one of these children who died as a result of the halving of their rations, thereby exerting pressure onto their family still on the battle-field, was purposefully murdered. The system of half rations stands exposed, stark and unashamedly as a cold-blooded deed of state policy employed with the purpose of ensuring the surrender of men whom we were not able to defeat on the field.” [26]

20,000 children dying in British concentration camps were of little consequence to Milner. He was so driven that he ignored the weight of opposition ranged against him. He warned his friend, Richard Haldane: “If we are to build up anything in South Africa , we must disregard, and absolutely disregard, the screamers.” [27] It takes a very strong man to disregard the screamers, to ignore moral indignation, to put the cause before humanitarian concerns. Some frontline politicians find it all but impossible to stand against a torrent of public outrage, but those behind the curtain in the secret corridors of power can easily ignore ‘sentimentality’.

Milner’s period of stewardship in South Africa had a very important consequence. He administered the defeated Transvaal and Orange Free State as occupied territories, and recruited into the upper layers of his civil service a band of young men from well-to-do, upper-class, frequently titled families who became known as “Milner’s Kindergarten.” [28] They replaced the government and administration of the Boer republics, and worked prodigiously to rebuild the broken country. [29] The Kindergarten comprised new blood; young educated men – mostly Oxford graduates, with a deep sense of duty, loyalty to the Empire and capable of populating the next generation of the secret society. [30] In the period 1909-1913 the Kindergarten set up semi-secret groups, known as Round Table Groups, in the United States and the chief British dependencies.

Take Canada as an example. Numerous Canadian Round Table groups were established from 1909.  Lionel Curtis and Philip Kerr of the Secret Elite’s inner core [31] went on a four-month trip to Canada in the company of William Marris from the “Association of Helpers.” The object of the trip was to lay the foundations for Round Table groups, to reinforce the values of the British Empire and prepare them for a war against Germany. They carried a letter from Alfred Milner to his old friend Arthur J. Glazebrook asking him to help establish the groups. Glazebrook became one of the most devoted and loyal friends of the Secret Elite’s mission, and so successfully completed the task that for twenty years he was head of the groups throughout Canada . Vincent Massey, a Balliol College , Oxford graduate and lecturer in modern history at Toronto University, was another important operative for the Secret Elite in Canada . He would go on to hold senior cabinet and diplomatic posts and became governor of the prestigious private school, Upper Canada College , and the University of Toronto . [32] Sir Edward Peacock, housemaster at Upper Canada College , and Edward Rogers Wood, a prominent financier and businessman, were likewise very close to the Canadian branch of the Milner group. [33] Other members of the Secret Elite connected to Canada were, Sir George Parkin, Percy Corbett, Sir Joseph Flavelle and George P. de T. Glazebrook. [34] The latter was the son of Milner’s old friend Arthur Glazebrook.  He too had studied at Balliol College , Oxford and went on to teach history at the University of Toronto.

The Round Table Groups in Canada , as elsewhere, were merely different names for “The Association of Helpers” and only part of the secret society, since the real power still lay with “The Society of the Elect”. This all-powerful inner-core would bring in new members from the outer ring as was deemed necessary. [35] The alliance of powerful investment bankers, politicians, diplomats and press barons shared the same unwritten purpose, the destruction of German imperial power and the confirmation of Anglo-Saxon domination of the world.

Money was never a problem for the Secret Elite. As we have seen, Natty Rothschild, the richest man in the world, was directly involved from the beginning, but the ‘Money-Power’ extended well beyond that single source. The Rand multi-millionaires, Sir Abe Bailey and Alfred Beit were members of the inner core [36] and always willing to finance Secret Elite proposals, fund their propaganda groups, and back Milner.  Sir Ernest Cassel, an investment banker and one of the wealthiest men in pre-war Europe , was likewise involved.  Cassel , a close friend of King Edward VII, acted as go-between for the British government and provided personal funds for Lord Esher. [37]

Other great financiers and bankers, centred in the City, the financial and banking district of London, shared the vision of a single world power based on English ruling class values. The world had entered an era of financial capitalism where these wealthy international investment bankers were able to dominate both industry and government if they had the concerted will to do so. [38] This “Money Power” seeped into the British Establishment and joined the aristocratic landowning families who had ruled Britain for centuries.  Together, they lay at the heart of the Secret Elite.

In his “Confession of Faith”, Cecil Rhodes had written of bringing the whole uncivilized world under British rule, and the “recovery” of the United States to make the “Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire,” [39] by which he meant a white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant America working in tandem with like minds in England. Clearly the United States could not be “recovered” by force of arms, so Rhodes dream was expanded to include the wealthy elites in the U.S. who shared a similar mind-set.

Rhodes suffered from heart and lung problems and was aware that his projected life span was limited. He wrote several wills to ensure that his fortune would be used to pursue his dream. Part of his strategy was to gift scholarship places at his alma mater, Oxford University , in the belief that exposure to British culture, philosophy and education would strengthen the best young minds from the colonies and, most importantly, the United States . Rhodes scholarships favoured American students, with two allocated for each of the fifty States and Territories, but only sixty places for the entire British Empire .  The “best talents” from the “best families” in the US were to be nurtured at Oxford , spiritual home of the Secret Elite, and imbued with an appreciation of “Englishness” and “retention of the unity of the Empire.” [40] Professor Quigley revealed that “the scholarships were merely a façade to conceal the secret society, or, more accurately, they were to be one of the instruments by which the members of the secret society could carry out his [ Rhodes ] purpose.”  [41]

The Secret Elite appreciated America ’s vast potential, and adjusted the concept of British Race supremacy to Anglo-Saxon supremacy. Rhodes ’s dream had only to be slightly modified. The world was to be united through the English-speaking nations in a federal structure based around Britain . [42] Alfred Milner became the undisputed leader of the secret society when Cecil Rhodes died in 1902. Like Rhodes , he believed that the goal should be pursued by a secret political and economic elite influencing “journalistic, educational and propaganda agencies” behind the scenes. [43]

The flow of money into the United States during the nineteenth century advanced industrial development to the immense benefit of the millionaires it created, Rockefeller, Carnegie, Morgan, Vanderbilt and their associates. The Rothschilds represented British interests, either directly through front companies or indirectly, through agencies they controlled. Railroads, steel, shipbuilding, construction, oil and finance blossomed in an oft-cut throat environment, though that was more apparent than real. These small groups of massively rich individuals on both sides of the Atlantic knew each other well, and the Secret Elite in London initiated a very select and secretive dining club, The Pilgrims, that brought them together on a regular basis.

On 11 July 1902, an inaugural meeting was held at the Carlton Hotel [44] of what became known as the London Chapter of The Pilgrims Society, with a select membership limited by individual scrutiny to 500. Ostensibly, the society was created to “promote goodwill, good friendship and everlasting peace” [45] between Britain and the United States , but its highly secretive and exclusive membership leaves little doubt as to its real purpose. This was the pool of wealth and talent that the Secret Elite drew together to promote its agenda in the years preceding the First World War. Behind an image of the Pilgrim Fathers, the persecuted pioneers of Christian values, this elite cabal advocated the idea that “Englishmen and Americans would promote international friendship through their pilgrimages to and fro across the Atlantic ”. [46] It presented itself as a spontaneous movement to promote democracy across the world [47] and doubtless many of the members believed that, but The Pilgrims included a select collective of the wealthiest figures in both Britain and the United States who were deeply involved with the Secret Elite.  They shared Rhodes ’ dream and wanted to be party to it.

The New York branch of The Pilgrims was launched at the Waldorf-Astoria on 13 January 1903, [48] and comprised the most important bankers, politicians and lawyers on the Eastern Seaboard. They established a tradition of close interaction with British and American ambassadors. [49] The ambassadorial connections with The Pilgrims would prove absolutely crucial in linking the Foreign Secretary in London and the Secretary of State in Washington to the Secret Elite and its agenda for war. A number of the American Pilgrims also had close links with the New York branch of the Secret Elite’s Round Table.

In Britain , at least eighteen members of the Secret Elite, including Lords Rothschild, Curzon, Northcliffe, Esher and Balfour attended Pilgrims dinners, though the regularity of their attendance is difficult to establish. Such is the perennial problem with secretive groups. We know something about the guests invited to dinner, but not what was discussed between courses. [50] In New York , members included both the Rockefeller and Morgan dynasties and many men in senior government posts. Initially, membership was likewise limited to 500. [51] The power-elite in America was New York centred, carried great influence in domestic and international politics, and was heavily indulgent of Yale, Harvard and Princeton Universities . They conducted an American version of what Carroll Quigley termed the Secret Elite’s triple-front-penetration of politics, the press and education. [52] The Pilgrims Society brought together American money and British aristocracy, royalty, government ministers and top diplomats. It was indeed a special relationship.

Of all the American banking establishments, none was more Anglo-centric than the J. P. Morgan bank, itself deeply involved with The Pilgrims. An American, George Peabody, established the bank in London in 1835. In 1854 he took on a partner, Junius Morgan, (father of J. P. Morgan) and the bank was renamed Peabody , Morgan & Co. When Peabody ’s retired in 1864 it became the J. S. Morgan bank.

The Rothschilds had developed a close relationship with Peabody and Morgan, and following a crash in 1857 saved the bank by organizing a huge bailout by the Bank of England. Although American by birth, the Morgan family wore their affinity to England like a badge of honour. Despite stinging criticism from Thomas Jefferson that Junius’s father-in-law, the Rev John Pierpont, was “under the influence of the whore of England ,” [53] Junius sent his son to the English High School in Boston . J. P. Morgan spent much of his younger years absorbing English traditions, and was an ardent anglophile and admirer of the British Empire.

In 1899 J. P. Morgan travelled to England to attend an international Bankers Convention and returned to America as the representative of Rothschild interests in the United States . [54] It was the perfect front. Morgan, who posed as an upright Protestant guardian of capitalism, who could trace his family roots to pre-Revolutionary times, acted for the Rothschilds and shielded their American profits from the poison of anti-Semitism. In 1895 the Rothschilds had secretly replenished the US gold reserves through J.P. Morgan, and raised him to the premier league of international banking. [55] In turn, his gratitude was extended to another Rothschild favourite and leading figure in the Secret Elite, Alfred Milner. In 1901, Morgan offered Milner a then massive income of $100,000 per annum to become a partner in the London branch [56] but Milner was not to be distracted from the vital business of the Boer War. J. P. Morgan was an Empire loyalist at the heart of the American Establishment.

A second powerful bank on Wall Street, Kuhn, Loeb & Co., also served as a Rothschild front. Jacob Schiff, a German who ran the bank, came from a family close to the Rothschilds.[57] He had been born in the house his parents shared with the Rothschilds in the Jewish quarter of Frankfurt . [58] Schiff was an experienced European banker whose career straddled both continents, with contacts in New York , London , Hamburg and Frankfurt . His long-standing friend, Edward Cassel of the Secret Elite, was appointed Kuhn, Loeb’s agent in London . Schiff even dined with King Edward on the strength of Cassel ’s close friendship with the King. [59] Jacob Schiff had married Solomon Loeb’s daughter and, backed by Rothschild gold, quickly gained overall control of the Kuhn, Loeb Bank. [60] Schiff in turn brought a young German banker, Paul Warburg, over to New York to help him run the bank. Paul and his brother Max had served part of their banking apprenticeships with Natty Rothschild in London .  Like the Peabody-Morgan bank in London , the Warburg family bank in Hamburg had been saved by a very large injection of Rothschild money, and undoubtedly acted as a Rothschild front thereafter.

On the surface there were periods of blistering competition between the investment banking houses and international oil goliaths J. D. Rockefeller and the Rothschilds, but by the turn of the century they adopted a more subtle relationship that avoided real competition. A decade earlier, Baron Alphonse de Rothschild had accepted Rockefeller’s invitation to meet in New York behind the closed doors of Standard Oil’s headquarters on Broadway. Standard’s chief spokesman, John D Archbold [61] reported that they had quickly reached a tentative agreement, and thought it desirable on both sides that the matter was kept confidential. Clearly both understood the advantage of monopolistic collusion. It was a trend they eventually developed to their own advantage. By the early years of the twentieth century much of the assumed rivalry between major stakeholders in banking, industry and commerce was a convenient façade, though they would have the world believe otherwise.

Consider please this convenient façade. Official Rothschild biographers maintain that the dynasty’s interests in America were limited, and that the American Civil War led to “a permanent decline in the Rothschild’s transatlantic influence”. [62] All our evidence points in the opposite direction. Their associates, agents and front companies permeated American finance and industry. Their influence was literally everywhere. J. P. Morgan, the acknowledged chieftain of the Anglo-American financial establishment was the main conduit for British capital [63]and a personal friend of the Rothschilds. Jacob Schiff of Kuhn, Loeb, another close friend of the Rothschild family, worked hand-in-glove with Rockefeller in oil, railroad and banking enterprises. Jacob Schiff the Pilgrim was both a Rothschild agent and a trusted associate of J. D. Rockefeller the Pilgrim. Morgan, Schiff and Rockefeller, the three leading players on Wall Street, had settled into a cosy cartel behind which the House of Rothschild remained hidden, but retained immense influence and power.  Control of capital and credit was increasingly concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer men until the rival banking groups ceased to operate in genuine competition. [64]

This trans-Atlantic financial collusion underpinned the Anglo-American bond on which the Secret Elite built their dream of world domination. Political control moved hand in glove with the Money-Power. One of the problems the Secret Elite had to contend with was democracy, even the very limited choice that British and American democracy had to offer. Professor Quigley observed that Alfred Milner, and apparently most members of the Secret Elite, believed that “democracy was not an unmixed good, or even a good, and far inferior to the rule of the best…” [65] They, of course, believed themselves  “the best” and their morality did not exclude the use of warfare to carry out what they deemed to be their civilising mission; a new world order based on ruling class values in which they would be first amongst men.

In Britain , faced with an electorate that frequently changed allegiance from the Conservative party to the Liberal party and back again, the Secret Elite selected reliable and trusted men to hold high office in both parties. Conservative Prime Minister Arthur Balfour, a member of the inner circle of the Secret Elite, [66] and Foreign Secretary Lord Lansdowne began the transformation of British Foreign policy towards war with Germany in the sure knowledge that senior Liberals would continue that policy if and when the people voted for change. Herbert Henry Asquith, Richard Haldane and Sir Edward Grey were Milner’s chosen senior men in the Liberal Party and “objects of his special attention”. [67] Their remit was to ensure that an incoming Liberal government maintained a seamless foreign policy that served the grand plan. Their Secret Elite connections were impeccable. Together, with their good friend Arthur Balfour, they were intimately involved with the inner circles of the cabal. Their duty was to the King, the Empire, to Milner’s dream, to Rhode’s legacy. They confronted the same problems, analysed the same alternatives and agreed the same solution. Germany had to go.

The senior Liberals, Asquith, Grey and Haldane, conspired to undermine the anti-war Liberal Party leader Campbell-Bannerman from within and were supported by both the Conservative party leaders and King Edward VII, himself a key figure inside the Secret Elite. Every major step taken by the British Foreign Office from 1902 onwards was dictated by the overall objective to destroy Germany . Treaties with Japan , the Entente Cordiale with France and all of its secret clauses, the secret conventions agreed between King Edward and the Russian Czar had that single purpose. Simply put, the large field armies of France and Russia were needed to crush Germany .

In the United States , and indeed in France , political power was guaranteed by financial incentives and the appointment of suitable candidates, in other words through bribery and corruption. Senator Nelson Aldrich of Rhode Island was chosen by the Secret Elite to be the voice of “sound economics” in the Senate. A wealthy businessman and father-in-law of J.D.Rockefeller Jr., Aldrich was known as “Morgan’s floor broker in the Senate.” [68] Shameless in his excesses, he used public office to feather his own very large nest. Public service was to him little more than a cash cow through which he built a ninety-nine roomed chateau and sailed a two hundred foot yacht. [69] Over a two-year period the Money-Power worked steadily on their chosen Senator to turn him into an “expert” on banking systems.  Congress appointed a National Monetary Commission in 1908 with Aldrich as Chairman to review U.S. banking. Its members toured Europe , supposedly collecting data on various banking systems. Aldrich’s final report, however, was not the product of any European study tour, but of a collective conspiracy.

In November 1910, five bankers representing Morgan, Rockefeller and Kuhn Loeb interests, met in total secrecy with Senator Aldrich and the Assistant Secretary to the U.S. Treasury on Jekyll Island , an exclusive playground of the mega-rich off the coast of Georgia . Of the seven conspirators, five, Senator Aldrich, Henry Davison, Benjamin Strong, Frank Vanderlip and Paul Warburg, were members of The Pilgrims. [70] Their objective was to formulate a Central Banking Bill that would be presented to Congress as if it was the brainchild of Aldrich’s Monetary Commission.

The proposed “Federal Reserve System” was to be owned entirely by private banks, though its name implied that it was a government institution. Individuals from the American banking dynasties, including Morgan, Warburg, Schiff and Rockefeller, would hold the shares. It was to be a central bank of issue that would have a monopoly of all the money and credit of the people of the United States . It would control the interest rate and the volume of money in circulation. The Federal Reserve System constructed on Jekyll Island had powers that King Midas could never have contemplated. The objective was to establish a franchise to create money out of nothing for the purpose of lending, get the taxpayer to pick up any losses, and convince Congress that the aim was to protect the public. [71]

The Aldrich proposals never went to a vote. President Taft refused to support the Bill on the grounds that it would not impose sufficient government control over the banks. The Money Power decided that Taft had to go. Their support in the 1912 Presidential election swung behind the little known Woodrow Wilson. The speed with which Wilson was bounced from his post at Princeton University in 1910, to Governor of New Jersey in 1911, then Democratic Party nominee for the Presidency in 1912 made him the Solomon Grundy of U S politics.

Not only did the Secret Elite put their man in the White House, they also gave him a minder, Edward Mandell House. Woodrow Wilson was President of the United States but this shadowy figure stood by his side, controlling his every move. House, an Anglophile who had been part educated in England , was credited with swinging the 1912 Democratic Convention in Baltimore behind Wilson . [72] He became Woodrow Wilson’s constant companion from that point onwards, with his own suite of rooms in the White House. He was also in direct, sometimes daily contact with J. P. Morgan Jr, Jacob Schiff, Paul Warburg, and Democrat Senators who sponsored the Federal Reserve Bill. [73] Mandell House guided the President in every aspect of foreign and domestic policy, chose his Cabinet and formulated the first policies of his new Administration. [74] He was the prime intermediary between the President and his Wall Street backers. [75] The Anglo-centric Money Power had complete control of the White House and finally established its central bank in time for the Secret Elite’s war.

Ponder the significance of this coincidence. Provided with huge sums of Secret Elite money rerouted via St Petersburg , French politicians, newspapers and journalists were effectively corrupted to elect the Revanchistwarmonger candidate Raymond Poincare to the Presidency of France. By February 1913, two major powers, The United States and France, had new Presidents who were elected to office through the machinations of the Secret Elite. They had positioned key players in the governments of Britain , France , and the United States and exerted immense influence over the foreign ministry in Russia .  Politics, money and power were the pillars on which the Anglo-Saxon elite would destroy Germany and take control of the world.

All that was left to concoct was a reason for war. The Kaiser’s refusal to be drawn into direct confrontation with France and Britain over crises in Morocco in 1905 and 1911 demanded a rethink. Public hysteria in Britain about spies was developed into a cottage industry, with barely literate novels and wild articles in Northcliffe’s papers portraying Germany as a dangerous warmongering nation of Huns preparing to pounce on an unsuspecting and ill-prepared Britain . Similarly in France , through blatant bribery and corruption, both the press and the Revanchistesin French politics fomented anti-German sentiment. But Germany remained stubbornly unwilling to become involved a European war.

From 1912 onwards the Secret Elite looked to the Balkans to provide the excuse for war. Alexander Isvolsky, their top Russian agent, had been strategically moved to Paris , from which vantage point he directed the Balkan agitation. The mix of ethnic diversity, religious animosities, political intrigue and raw nationalism was deliberately provoked into two brutal Balkan wars which in themselves could have brought about a pan-European war, but the Kaiser refused to take the bait.

Something more dramatic, more sensational, was needed. The notion propagated by many historians that world war was ‘inevitable’ or that the world ‘slid’ into war is crass. Chance was not involved. It required a complex set of manipulated events engineered by determined men to set the fuse. What remained was a spark to ignite that fuse.  It came with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir-apparent to the Austrian Empire, in Sarajevo on 28 June 1914. Millions of words have been written to describe the events in Sarajevo that day, but none have ever revealed the trail of complicity that led from the gunmen back to the Secret Elite in London . Be certain of one thing. It was not the man who fired the bullet that caused a world war.

Thus war engulfed the known world to a degree that had no precedent. Histories have been written to explain away the reasons why, histories that favoured the victors and twisted the truth to blame Germany . How history has been manipulated, how evidence has been removed, burned, shredded or otherwise denied to genuine researchers remains a crime against truth, against humanity.  The received history of the First World War is a deliberately concocted lie.  Not the sacrifice, the heroism, the horrendous waste of life or the misery that followed.  No, these were very real, but the truth of how it all began and how it was unnecessarily and deliberately prolonged beyond 1915 has been successfully covered up for a century.

Professor Quigley stated,

    “No country that values its safety should allow what the Milner group accomplished – that is, that a small number of men would be able to wield such power in administration and politics, should be given almost complete control over the publication of documents relating to their actions, should be able to exercise such influence over the avenues of information that create public opinion, and should be able to monopolize so completely the writing and the teaching of the history of their own period.” [76]

Never were truer words uttered in dire warning. These Founding Fathers, the Secret Elite, began with Rhodes’ secret society and expanded across the Atlantic , always away from the public eye. They were deniers of democracy, men who always pursued their own malevolent agenda, who used this very process to advance their power. What they achieved in causing the First World War was but the first step in their long term drive to a new world order.

Gerry Docherty is a former head teacher.  Jim Macgregor was a family doctor. They took early retirement and worked full time together for the past five years researching and writing Hidden History, The Secret Origins of the First World War - described at the Edinburgh International Book Festival as a “fascinating and incendiary book”. It reveals how historical accounts of the war’s origins have been falsified to conceal the guilt of the secret cabal of rich and powerful men (described in this article) and explains their manipulations and deceptions. Perhaps it will suffer the same fate as Carroll Quigley’s work, for there are many with cause to wish it suppressed. If you have an open mind and seek answers that have not been forthcoming, if you are prepared to dig further into a hugely important aspect of history, we invite you to read it.

For details visit the authors’ blogsite at firstworldwarhiddenhistory.wordpress.com.
Hidden History, The Secret Origins of the First World War by Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor is available at leading bookshops and can also be purchased on the internet at Amazon, Alibris, etc.

Notes:

[1] W.T. Stead, The Last Will and Testament of Cecil John Rhodes, p. 62.

[2] Stead, The Last Will and Testament, p. 55.

[3] Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, p. 6.

[4] Carroll Quigley, Tragedy &Hope, pp.130-31.

[5] Joan Veon, The United Nations Global Straightjacket, p. 68.

[6] J. A. Hobson, John Ruskin, Social Reformer, p. 187.

[7] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 3.

[8] Edward Griffin, The Creature from Jekyll Island , p. 272.

[9] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, pp. 4-5.

[10] Interview can be heard at
www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeuF8rYgJPk


[11] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. x

[12] Ibid.

[13]
www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeuF8rYgJPk


[14] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. xi

[15]
www.youtube.com/watch?v=JeuF8rYgJPk


[16] Neil Parsons, A New History of Southern Africa , pp. 179–181.

[17] Niall Ferguson, The House of Rothschild, The World’s Banker, p. 363.

[18] James Lees-Milne, The Enigmatic Edwardian, pp. 162-8.

[19] Quigley, Tragedy & Hope, p. 216.

[20] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 311.

[21] Derek Wilson, Rothschild: The Wealth and Power of a Dynasty, pp. 98-99.

[22] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, pp. 16-17.

[23] Stead, Last Will and Testament, p.108.

[24] Thomas Pakenham, The Boer War, p.115.

[25] Emily Hobhouse, The Brunt of War and Where it Fell, p. 174.

[26] W.T. Stead, cited in Hennie Barnard, The Concentration Camps 1899–

1902 at www.boer.co.za/boerwar/hellkamp.htm

[27] Pakenham, The Boer War, p. 483

[28] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 7.

[29] Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, p. 138.

[30] William Nimocks, Milner’s Young Men p. 21

[31] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p.312.

[32] Ibid., p. 7

[33] Ibid., pp. 86-7.

[34] Ibid., p.314.

[35] Ibid., p. 4.

[36] Ibid., p. 312.

[37] Quigley, Tragedy & Hope, p. 216.

[38] Ibid., pp. 60-61.

[39] Stead, Last Will and Testament, p. 59.

 www.publicintelligence.net/the-last-will-and-testament-of-cecil-john-rhodes-1902/

[40] Ibid. p. 34.

[41] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 33.

[42] Ibid., p.49

[43] Ibid.

[44] Anne Pimlot Baker, The Pilgrims of Great Britain , p. 12.

[45] New York Times, 3 March 1903.

[46] Baker, Pilgrims of Great Britain, p.13.

[47] E.C. Knuth, The Empire of The City, p.64

[48] Baker, The Pilgrims of the United States , p.3.

[49] Baker, Pilgrims of Great Britain, p.16.

[50] While it is possible to list all of those in whose honour these dinners were      organised, the individual members who attended remains a secret.

[51] Baker, Pilgrims of the United States , p .9.

[52] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 15.

[53] Webster G Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, George Bush; the Unauthorized    Biography, p.136.

[54] W.G.Carr, Pawns in the Game, p. 60.

[55] G. Edward Griffin, interview

        www.://educate-yourself.org/cn/gedwardgriffininterview02apr04.shtml

[56] Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, p. 951.

[57] Ron Chernow, The Warburgs, pp. 46-8.

[58] Stephen Birmingham, Our Crowd, p. 175.

[59] Chernow, The Warburgs, p. 51.

[60] Carr, Pawns in the Game, p. 61.

[61] Initially an outspoken critic of Standard Oil, Archbold was recruited by Rockefeller to a directorship of the company, where he later served as vice president and then president until its ‘demise ’ in 1911.

[62] Ferguson , House of Rothschild, p. 117.

[63] Chernow, Titan, The Life of John D Rockefeller Sr., p. 390.

[64] Edward Griffin, The Creature from Jekyll Island , p. 436.

[65] Quigley, Anglo American Establishment, p. 134.

[66] Ibid., p. 312.

[67] Terence H. O’Brien, Milner, p. 187.

[68] Gary Allen, None Dare Call it Conspiracy, Chapter 3, p8.

[69] Chernow, Titan, p. 352.

[70] Organisation for the Study of Globalisation and Covert Politics,

https://wikispooks.com/ISGP/organisations/Pilgrims_Society02.htm

[71] Griffin , Creature from Jekyll Island , p. 23.

[72] Ibid., p. 240.

[73] Ibid., p. 458.

[74] George Sylvester Viereck, The Strangest Friendship in History: Woodrow Wilson and Colonel House, p. 4.

[75] Ibid., pp. 35-7.

[76] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 197.
- See more at: http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-world-order-the-founding-fathers/5445255#sthash.sDfO7otp.dpuf
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
New World Order: The Founding Fathers
« Reply #16 on: October 06, 2015, 11:21:07 PM »
New World Order: The Founding Fathers

By Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor
Global Research, October 05, 2015
26 April 2015
Region: Europe
Theme: Culture, Society & History

This article was first published in July 2013

Rich and powerful elites have long dreamed of world control. The ambitious Romans, Attila the Hun, great Muslim leaders of Medieval Spain, the Mughals of India all exercised immense influence over different parts of the globe in set periods of recognised ascendancy.

Sometimes tribal, sometimes national, sometimes religious, often dynastic, their success defined epochs, but was never effectively global until the twentieth century. At that point, with the future of the British Empire under threat from other aspiring nations, in particular Germany , a momentous decision was taken by a group of powerful and determined men, that direct action had to be taken to assert their control, and that of the British race, over the entire civilised world. It has grown from that tiny select cabal into a monster that may already be beyond control.

    “One wintry afternoon in February 1891, three men were engaged in earnest conversation in London. From that conversation were to flow consequences of the greatest importance for the British Empire and to the world as a whole.”

So begins Professor Carroll Quigley’s book The Anglo American Establishment.  It may read like a John Le Carre thriller, but this was no spy fiction. The three staunch British Imperialists who met in London that day, Cecil Rhodes, William Stead and Lord Esher, were soon joined by Lords Rothschild, Salisbury, Rosebery and Milner, men whose financial, political, and administrative powers set them apart. Some of these names may not be familiar to you, but that is a mark of the absolute success of this group. From the outset they insisted on secrecy, operated in secret and ensured that their influence was airbrushed from history. They believed that white men of Anglo-Saxon descent rightly sat at the top of the racial hierarchy and they fully understood the impending threat from a burgeoning Germany whose modern, expanding economy had begun to challenge British hegemony on the world stage.

The above named elites drew up a plan for a secret society that aimed to renew the bond between Great Britain and the United States [1] and bring all habitable portions of the world under their influence and control. The U.S. had grown rapidly in self-esteem, wealth and opportunity since the declaration of independence in 1776, but Anglo-American connections remained strong and would embroil her in the long-term plan for one world government. The meeting in 1891 was, in effect, the birth of the New World Order cabal.

Great financiers frequently used their fortunes to influence questions of peace and war and control politics for profit. Cecil Rhodes was different. He was determined to use his vast fortune not simply to generate ever-increasing profit, but to realise his dream, a dream he shared with his co-conspirators. Rhodes turned the profit objective on its head and sought to amass great wealth into his secret society in order to achieve political ends, to buy governments and politicians, buy public opinion and the means to influence it. [2] He intended that his wealth should be used to grasp control of the world, secretly. Secrecy was the cornerstone. No one outside the favoured few knew of the group’s existence. They have since been referred to obliquely in speeches and books as “The Money Power”, “The Hidden Power” or “the men behind the curtain”. All of these labels are pertinent, but we have called them, collectively, the Secret Elite.

Carroll Quigley revealed that Secret Elite influence on education was chiefly visible at the exclusive English private schools, Eton and Harrow, and at Oxford University , especially All Souls and Balliol Colleges . [3] This immensely rich and powerful group was given intellectual approval and inspiration by the philosophy of John Ruskin, professor of fine arts at Oxford.  He spoke to the Oxford undergraduates as members of the privileged ruling class, telling them that they possessed a magnificent tradition of education, rule of law and freedom. He championed all that was finest in the public service ethic, duty and self-discipline, and believed that English ruling class tradition should be spread to the masses across the empire. [4]

But behind such well-serving words lay a philosophy strongly opposed to the emancipation of woman, had no time for democracy and supported the “just” war.[5] Ruskin advocated that control of the state should be placed in the hands of a small ruling class. Social order was to be built upon the authority of superiors, imposing upon their inferiors an absolute, unquestioning obedience. He was repelled by the notion of levelling between the classes and by the disintegration of the “rightful” authority of the ruling class. [6]Ruskin’s philosophy was music to the ears of the elitists. It gave their lust for global power the blessing of academic approval. What they did, they would claim, was not for them, but for mankind. They would rise to power on the spurious justification that the world would consequently be a better place for humanity.

Inspired by Ruskin, Cecil Rhodes and his accomplices created the secret society with an inner core of trusted associates called “The Society of the Elect”, who unquestionably knew that they were members of an exclusive cabal devoted to taking and holding power on a world-wide basis. [7] A second outer ring, larger and quite fluid in its membership, was named “The Association of Helpers”. At this level members might not have known that they were an integral part of, or inadvertently being used by, a secret society. Many on the outer edges of the group, idealists and honest individuals, may never have been aware that the real decisions were made by a ruthless clique about whom they had no knowledge. [8]

The man who exposed the secret society, Carroll Quigley (1910 – 1977), was the highly esteemed professor of history at the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University , and a lecturer at Princeton and Harvard.  He revealed that the organisation was able to “conceal its existence quite successfully, and many of its most influential members… are unknown even to close students of British History”. [9] Quigley’s greatest contribution to our understanding of modern history came with his books, The Anglo-American Establishment and Tragedy and Hope, A History of the World in Our Time. The former was written in 1949 but only released after his death. His disclosures placed him in such potential danger from an Establishment backlash that it was never published in his lifetime. In a 1974 radio broadcast, Quigley warned the interviewer, Rudy Maxa of the Washington Post, “You better be discreet. You have to protect my future as well as your own.” [10]

How to purchase Hidden History: The secret origins of the First World War by Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor Quigley had received assistance of a “personal nature” from individuals close to what he called the “Group”, but “for obvious reasons” he could not reveal their names. [11] He made it clear that evidence about them was not hard to find “if you know where to look,”[12] and it has to be asked why generations of historians have failed to pursue his trail. Though sworn to secrecy, Professor Quigley revealed in the radio interview that Sir Alfred Zimmern, the British historian and political scientist, had confirmed the names of the main protagonists within the secret society. Without a shadow of doubt, Zimmern himself was a close associate of those at the centre of real power in Britain. He knew most of the key figures personally and was himself a member of the inner core of the secret society for twelve years between 1910 and 1922. [13]

The enigma of Professor Quigley’s work lies in his statement that while the secret cabal had brought many of the things he held dear close to disaster, he generally agreed with its goals and aims. [14] Were these merely words of self-preservation? Be mindful of his warning to Rudy Maxa as late as 1974. Quigley clearly felt that these revelations placed him in danger. Unknown persons removed his major work, Tragedy and Hope, from the bookstore shelves in America , and it was withdrawn from sale without any justification soon after its release. The book’s original plates were unaccountably destroyed by Quigley’s publisher, the Macmillan Company, who, for the next six years “lied, lied, lied” to him and deliberately misled him into believing that it would be reprinted. [15] Why? What pressures obliged a major publishing house to take such extreme action? Quigley stated categorically that powerful people had suppressed the book because it exposed matters that they did not want known. The reader has to understand that we are discussing individuals whose power, influence and control were unrivalled.

From the very start, each of the initial conspirators brought valuable qualities and connections to the society. Cecil Rhodes was Prime Minister of the Cape Colony and master and commander of a vast area of Southern Africa which some were already beginning to call Rhodesia . His wealth had been underwritten by brutal native suppression [16] and the global mining interests of the House of Rothschild, [17] to whom he was answerable. William Stead was the most prominent journalist of his day and a voice to which ordinary people listened. Lord Esher represented the interests of the monarchy from Queen Victoria ’s final years, through the exuberant excesses of King Edward VII, to the more sedate but pliable King George V. His influence was immense because he operated between monarchs, the aristocracy and leading political figures. He chaired important secret committees, was responsible for appointments to the Cabinet, the senior ranks of the diplomatic corps and voiced strong personal opinion on top army posts. [18] Esher exerted a power behind the throne far in excess of his constitutional position. His role of powerbroker on behalf of the Secret Elite was without equal. Indeed Professor Quigley dubbed him, “the greatest wire puller of the period.” [19]

Another name that pervaded all that was powerful and influential during this period was that of the Rothschild dynasty, and Quigley placed Lord Nathaniel (Natty) Rothschild within the very core of the secret organization. [20] Rothschild was all-powerful in British and world banking and virtually untouchable.

    “The House of Rothschild was immensely more powerful than any financial empire that had ever preceded it.  It commanded vast wealth. It was international. It was independent.  Royal governments were nervous of it because they could not control it.  Popular movements hated it because it was not answerable to the people.  Constitutionalists resented it because its influence was exercised behind the scenes – secretly.” [21]

Taken together, the principal players, Rhodes, Stead, Esher, Rothschild and Milner represented a new force that was emerging inside British politics, but powerful old traditional aristocratic families that had long dominated Westminster , often in cahoots with the reigning monarch, were also deeply involved, and none more so than the Cecil family. Robert Arthur Talbot Gascoyne-Cecil, the patriarchal 3rd Marquis of Salisbury, ruled the Conservative Party at the latter end of the nineteenth century. He served as prime minister three times for a total of fourteen years, between 1885 and 1902 (longer than anyone else in recent history). When he retired as prime minister in July 1902, he handed over the reins of government to his sister’s son, Arthur Balfour. Lord Salisbury had four siblings, five sons and three daughters who were all linked and interlinked by marriage to individuals in the upper echelons of the English ruling class. Important government positions were given to relations, friends and wealthy supporters who proved their gratitude by ensuring that his views became policy in government, civil service and diplomatic circles. This extended ‘Cecil-Bloc’ was intricately linked to “The Society of the Elect” and Secret Elite ambitions throughout the first half of the twentieth century. [22]

Another member of the inner core, Lord Alfred Milner, offers cause for greater scrutiny because he has been virtually airbrushed from the history of the period. Alfred Milner was a self-made man and remarkably successful civil servant who became a key figure within the Secret Elite and absolutely powerful within the ranks of these privileged individuals. He and Rhodes had been contemporaries at Oxford University , and were inextricably connected through events in South Africa . Rhodes recognised in him the kind of steel that was required to pursue the dream of world domination, “I support Milner absolutely without reserve. If he says peace, I say peace; if he says war, I say war. Whatever happens, I say ditto to Milner.” [23] Milner grew in time to be the most able of them all, to enjoy the privilege of patronage and power, a man to whom others turned for leadership and direction.

When governor general and high commissioner of South Africa , Milner deliberately caused the Boer War in order to grab the Transvaal’s gold and use the economic resources of South Africa to extend and perpetuate Secret Elite control. He had the grace to confess in a letter to Lord Roberts, Commander in Chief in South Africa, that

    “I precipitated the crisis, which was inevitable, before it was too late.  It is not very agreeable, and in many eyes, not very creditable piece of business to have been largely instrumental in bringing about a big war.” [24]

This was no immodest boast. Alfred Milner’s matter-of-fact explanation displayed the cold objectivity that drove the Secret Elite cause. War was unfortunate, but necessary. It had to be. They were not afraid of war.

The Secret Elite’s war against the Dutch settlers began in October 1899 and ended with the signing of the Treaty of Vereeniging on 31 May 1902. The Boer Republics were annexed to the British Empire . The Transvaal ’s gold was finally in the hands of the Secret Elite at a cost of some 70,000 dead on the battlefields, plus 32,000 dead in British concentration camps, including more than 20,000 children of Dutch descent. Some thirty thousand Boer farms were burned to the ground, livestock slaughtered, and the women and children put in British concentration camps. In the camps, the families of men fighting for the Boer army were punished by being put on half the already meagre rations with no meat whatsoever. [25] W. T. Stead, former member of the inner core of the Secret Elite who had resigned in disgust over the Boer War, was overcome by the evidence presented to him. He wrote,

    “Every one of these children who died as a result of the halving of their rations, thereby exerting pressure onto their family still on the battle-field, was purposefully murdered. The system of half rations stands exposed, stark and unashamedly as a cold-blooded deed of state policy employed with the purpose of ensuring the surrender of men whom we were not able to defeat on the field.” [26]

20,000 children dying in British concentration camps were of little consequence to Milner. He was so driven that he ignored the weight of opposition ranged against him. He warned his friend, Richard Haldane: “If we are to build up anything in South Africa , we must disregard, and absolutely disregard, the screamers.” [27] It takes a very strong man to disregard the screamers, to ignore moral indignation, to put the cause before humanitarian concerns. Some frontline politicians find it all but impossible to stand against a torrent of public outrage, but those behind the curtain in the secret corridors of power can easily ignore ‘sentimentality’.

Milner’s period of stewardship in South Africa had a very important consequence. He administered the defeated Transvaal and Orange Free State as occupied territories, and recruited into the upper layers of his civil service a band of young men from well-to-do, upper-class, frequently titled families who became known as “Milner’s Kindergarten.” [28] They replaced the government and administration of the Boer republics, and worked prodigiously to rebuild the broken country. [29] The Kindergarten comprised new blood; young educated men – mostly Oxford graduates, with a deep sense of duty, loyalty to the Empire and capable of populating the next generation of the secret society. [30] In the period 1909-1913 the Kindergarten set up semi-secret groups, known as Round Table Groups, in the United States and the chief British dependencies.

Take Canada as an example. Numerous Canadian Round Table groups were established from 1909.  Lionel Curtis and Philip Kerr of the Secret Elite’s inner core [31] went on a four-month trip to Canada in the company of William Marris from the “Association of Helpers.” The object of the trip was to lay the foundations for Round Table groups, to reinforce the values of the British Empire and prepare them for a war against Germany. They carried a letter from Alfred Milner to his old friend Arthur J. Glazebrook asking him to help establish the groups. Glazebrook became one of the most devoted and loyal friends of the Secret Elite’s mission, and so successfully completed the task that for twenty years he was head of the groups throughout Canada . Vincent Massey, a Balliol College , Oxford graduate and lecturer in modern history at Toronto University, was another important operative for the Secret Elite in Canada . He would go on to hold senior cabinet and diplomatic posts and became governor of the prestigious private school, Upper Canada College , and the University of Toronto . [32] Sir Edward Peacock, housemaster at Upper Canada College , and Edward Rogers Wood, a prominent financier and businessman, were likewise very close to the Canadian branch of the Milner group. [33] Other members of the Secret Elite connected to Canada were, Sir George Parkin, Percy Corbett, Sir Joseph Flavelle and George P. de T. Glazebrook. [34] The latter was the son of Milner’s old friend Arthur Glazebrook.  He too had studied at Balliol College , Oxford and went on to teach history at the University of Toronto.

The Round Table Groups in Canada , as elsewhere, were merely different names for “The Association of Helpers” and only part of the secret society, since the real power still lay with “The Society of the Elect”. This all-powerful inner-core would bring in new members from the outer ring as was deemed necessary. [35] The alliance of powerful investment bankers, politicians, diplomats and press barons shared the same unwritten purpose, the destruction of German imperial power and the confirmation of Anglo-Saxon domination of the world.

Money was never a problem for the Secret Elite. As we have seen, Natty Rothschild, the richest man in the world, was directly involved from the beginning, but the ‘Money-Power’ extended well beyond that single source. The Rand multi-millionaires, Sir Abe Bailey and Alfred Beit were members of the inner core [36] and always willing to finance Secret Elite proposals, fund their propaganda groups, and back Milner.  Sir Ernest Cassel, an investment banker and one of the wealthiest men in pre-war Europe , was likewise involved.  Cassel , a close friend of King Edward VII, acted as go-between for the British government and provided personal funds for Lord Esher. [37]

Other great financiers and bankers, centred in the City, the financial and banking district of London, shared the vision of a single world power based on English ruling class values. The world had entered an era of financial capitalism where these wealthy international investment bankers were able to dominate both industry and government if they had the concerted will to do so. [38] This “Money Power” seeped into the British Establishment and joined the aristocratic landowning families who had ruled Britain for centuries.  Together, they lay at the heart of the Secret Elite.

In his “Confession of Faith”, Cecil Rhodes had written of bringing the whole uncivilized world under British rule, and the “recovery” of the United States to make the “Anglo-Saxon race but one Empire,” [39] by which he meant a white, Anglo-Saxon, Protestant America working in tandem with like minds in England. Clearly the United States could not be “recovered” by force of arms, so Rhodes dream was expanded to include the wealthy elites in the U.S. who shared a similar mind-set.

Rhodes suffered from heart and lung problems and was aware that his projected life span was limited. He wrote several wills to ensure that his fortune would be used to pursue his dream. Part of his strategy was to gift scholarship places at his alma mater, Oxford University , in the belief that exposure to British culture, philosophy and education would strengthen the best young minds from the colonies and, most importantly, the United States . Rhodes scholarships favoured American students, with two allocated for each of the fifty States and Territories, but only sixty places for the entire British Empire .  The “best talents” from the “best families” in the US were to be nurtured at Oxford , spiritual home of the Secret Elite, and imbued with an appreciation of “Englishness” and “retention of the unity of the Empire.” [40] Professor Quigley revealed that “the scholarships were merely a façade to conceal the secret society, or, more accurately, they were to be one of the instruments by which the members of the secret society could carry out his [ Rhodes ] purpose.”  [41]

The Secret Elite appreciated America ’s vast potential, and adjusted the concept of British Race supremacy to Anglo-Saxon supremacy. Rhodes ’s dream had only to be slightly modified. The world was to be united through the English-speaking nations in a federal structure based around Britain . [42] Alfred Milner became the undisputed leader of the secret society when Cecil Rhodes died in 1902. Like Rhodes , he believed that the goal should be pursued by a secret political and economic elite influencing “journalistic, educational and propaganda agencies” behind the scenes. [43]

The flow of money into the United States during the nineteenth century advanced industrial development to the immense benefit of the millionaires it created, Rockefeller, Carnegie, Morgan, Vanderbilt and their associates. The Rothschilds represented British interests, either directly through front companies or indirectly, through agencies they controlled. Railroads, steel, shipbuilding, construction, oil and finance blossomed in an oft-cut throat environment, though that was more apparent than real. These small groups of massively rich individuals on both sides of the Atlantic knew each other well, and the Secret Elite in London initiated a very select and secretive dining club, The Pilgrims, that brought them together on a regular basis.

On 11 July 1902, an inaugural meeting was held at the Carlton Hotel [44] of what became known as the London Chapter of The Pilgrims Society, with a select membership limited by individual scrutiny to 500. Ostensibly, the society was created to “promote goodwill, good friendship and everlasting peace” [45] between Britain and the United States , but its highly secretive and exclusive membership leaves little doubt as to its real purpose. This was the pool of wealth and talent that the Secret Elite drew together to promote its agenda in the years preceding the First World War. Behind an image of the Pilgrim Fathers, the persecuted pioneers of Christian values, this elite cabal advocated the idea that “Englishmen and Americans would promote international friendship through their pilgrimages to and fro across the Atlantic ”. [46] It presented itself as a spontaneous movement to promote democracy across the world [47] and doubtless many of the members believed that, but The Pilgrims included a select collective of the wealthiest figures in both Britain and the United States who were deeply involved with the Secret Elite.  They shared Rhodes ’ dream and wanted to be party to it.

The New York branch of The Pilgrims was launched at the Waldorf-Astoria on 13 January 1903, [48] and comprised the most important bankers, politicians and lawyers on the Eastern Seaboard. They established a tradition of close interaction with British and American ambassadors. [49] The ambassadorial connections with The Pilgrims would prove absolutely crucial in linking the Foreign Secretary in London and the Secretary of State in Washington to the Secret Elite and its agenda for war. A number of the American Pilgrims also had close links with the New York branch of the Secret Elite’s Round Table.

In Britain , at least eighteen members of the Secret Elite, including Lords Rothschild, Curzon, Northcliffe, Esher and Balfour attended Pilgrims dinners, though the regularity of their attendance is difficult to establish. Such is the perennial problem with secretive groups. We know something about the guests invited to dinner, but not what was discussed between courses. [50] In New York , members included both the Rockefeller and Morgan dynasties and many men in senior government posts. Initially, membership was likewise limited to 500. [51] The power-elite in America was New York centred, carried great influence in domestic and international politics, and was heavily indulgent of Yale, Harvard and Princeton Universities . They conducted an American version of what Carroll Quigley termed the Secret Elite’s triple-front-penetration of politics, the press and education. [52] The Pilgrims Society brought together American money and British aristocracy, royalty, government ministers and top diplomats. It was indeed a special relationship.

Of all the American banking establishments, none was more Anglo-centric than the J. P. Morgan bank, itself deeply involved with The Pilgrims. An American, George Peabody, established the bank in London in 1835. In 1854 he took on a partner, Junius Morgan, (father of J. P. Morgan) and the bank was renamed Peabody , Morgan & Co. When Peabody ’s retired in 1864 it became the J. S. Morgan bank.

The Rothschilds had developed a close relationship with Peabody and Morgan, and following a crash in 1857 saved the bank by organizing a huge bailout by the Bank of England. Although American by birth, the Morgan family wore their affinity to England like a badge of honour. Despite stinging criticism from Thomas Jefferson that Junius’s father-in-law, the Rev John Pierpont, was “under the influence of the whore of England ,” [53] Junius sent his son to the English High School in Boston . J. P. Morgan spent much of his younger years absorbing English traditions, and was an ardent anglophile and admirer of the British Empire.

In 1899 J. P. Morgan travelled to England to attend an international Bankers Convention and returned to America as the representative of Rothschild interests in the United States . [54] It was the perfect front. Morgan, who posed as an upright Protestant guardian of capitalism, who could trace his family roots to pre-Revolutionary times, acted for the Rothschilds and shielded their American profits from the poison of anti-Semitism. In 1895 the Rothschilds had secretly replenished the US gold reserves through J.P. Morgan, and raised him to the premier league of international banking. [55] In turn, his gratitude was extended to another Rothschild favourite and leading figure in the Secret Elite, Alfred Milner. In 1901, Morgan offered Milner a then massive income of $100,000 per annum to become a partner in the London branch [56] but Milner was not to be distracted from the vital business of the Boer War. J. P. Morgan was an Empire loyalist at the heart of the American Establishment.

A second powerful bank on Wall Street, Kuhn, Loeb & Co., also served as a Rothschild front. Jacob Schiff, a German who ran the bank, came from a family close to the Rothschilds.[57] He had been born in the house his parents shared with the Rothschilds in the Jewish quarter of Frankfurt . [58] Schiff was an experienced European banker whose career straddled both continents, with contacts in New York , London , Hamburg and Frankfurt . His long-standing friend, Edward Cassel of the Secret Elite, was appointed Kuhn, Loeb’s agent in London . Schiff even dined with King Edward on the strength of Cassel ’s close friendship with the King. [59] Jacob Schiff had married Solomon Loeb’s daughter and, backed by Rothschild gold, quickly gained overall control of the Kuhn, Loeb Bank. [60] Schiff in turn brought a young German banker, Paul Warburg, over to New York to help him run the bank. Paul and his brother Max had served part of their banking apprenticeships with Natty Rothschild in London .  Like the Peabody-Morgan bank in London , the Warburg family bank in Hamburg had been saved by a very large injection of Rothschild money, and undoubtedly acted as a Rothschild front thereafter.

On the surface there were periods of blistering competition between the investment banking houses and international oil goliaths J. D. Rockefeller and the Rothschilds, but by the turn of the century they adopted a more subtle relationship that avoided real competition. A decade earlier, Baron Alphonse de Rothschild had accepted Rockefeller’s invitation to meet in New York behind the closed doors of Standard Oil’s headquarters on Broadway. Standard’s chief spokesman, John D Archbold [61] reported that they had quickly reached a tentative agreement, and thought it desirable on both sides that the matter was kept confidential. Clearly both understood the advantage of monopolistic collusion. It was a trend they eventually developed to their own advantage. By the early years of the twentieth century much of the assumed rivalry between major stakeholders in banking, industry and commerce was a convenient façade, though they would have the world believe otherwise.

Consider please this convenient façade. Official Rothschild biographers maintain that the dynasty’s interests in America were limited, and that the American Civil War led to “a permanent decline in the Rothschild’s transatlantic influence”. [62] All our evidence points in the opposite direction. Their associates, agents and front companies permeated American finance and industry. Their influence was literally everywhere. J. P. Morgan, the acknowledged chieftain of the Anglo-American financial establishment was the main conduit for British capital [63]and a personal friend of the Rothschilds. Jacob Schiff of Kuhn, Loeb, another close friend of the Rothschild family, worked hand-in-glove with Rockefeller in oil, railroad and banking enterprises. Jacob Schiff the Pilgrim was both a Rothschild agent and a trusted associate of J. D. Rockefeller the Pilgrim. Morgan, Schiff and Rockefeller, the three leading players on Wall Street, had settled into a cosy cartel behind which the House of Rothschild remained hidden, but retained immense influence and power.  Control of capital and credit was increasingly concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer men until the rival banking groups ceased to operate in genuine competition. [64]

This trans-Atlantic financial collusion underpinned the Anglo-American bond on which the Secret Elite built their dream of world domination. Political control moved hand in glove with the Money-Power. One of the problems the Secret Elite had to contend with was democracy, even the very limited choice that British and American democracy had to offer. Professor Quigley observed that Alfred Milner, and apparently most members of the Secret Elite, believed that “democracy was not an unmixed good, or even a good, and far inferior to the rule of the best…” [65] They, of course, believed themselves  “the best” and their morality did not exclude the use of warfare to carry out what they deemed to be their civilising mission; a new world order based on ruling class values in which they would be first amongst men.

In Britain , faced with an electorate that frequently changed allegiance from the Conservative party to the Liberal party and back again, the Secret Elite selected reliable and trusted men to hold high office in both parties. Conservative Prime Minister Arthur Balfour, a member of the inner circle of the Secret Elite, [66] and Foreign Secretary Lord Lansdowne began the transformation of British Foreign policy towards war with Germany in the sure knowledge that senior Liberals would continue that policy if and when the people voted for change. Herbert Henry Asquith, Richard Haldane and Sir Edward Grey were Milner’s chosen senior men in the Liberal Party and “objects of his special attention”. [67] Their remit was to ensure that an incoming Liberal government maintained a seamless foreign policy that served the grand plan. Their Secret Elite connections were impeccable. Together, with their good friend Arthur Balfour, they were intimately involved with the inner circles of the cabal. Their duty was to the King, the Empire, to Milner’s dream, to Rhode’s legacy. They confronted the same problems, analysed the same alternatives and agreed the same solution. Germany had to go.

The senior Liberals, Asquith, Grey and Haldane, conspired to undermine the anti-war Liberal Party leader Campbell-Bannerman from within and were supported by both the Conservative party leaders and King Edward VII, himself a key figure inside the Secret Elite. Every major step taken by the British Foreign Office from 1902 onwards was dictated by the overall objective to destroy Germany . Treaties with Japan , the Entente Cordiale with France and all of its secret clauses, the secret conventions agreed between King Edward and the Russian Czar had that single purpose. Simply put, the large field armies of France and Russia were needed to crush Germany .

In the United States , and indeed in France , political power was guaranteed by financial incentives and the appointment of suitable candidates, in other words through bribery and corruption. Senator Nelson Aldrich of Rhode Island was chosen by the Secret Elite to be the voice of “sound economics” in the Senate. A wealthy businessman and father-in-law of J.D.Rockefeller Jr., Aldrich was known as “Morgan’s floor broker in the Senate.” [68] Shameless in his excesses, he used public office to feather his own very large nest. Public service was to him little more than a cash cow through which he built a ninety-nine roomed chateau and sailed a two hundred foot yacht. [69] Over a two-year period the Money-Power worked steadily on their chosen Senator to turn him into an “expert” on banking systems.  Congress appointed a National Monetary Commission in 1908 with Aldrich as Chairman to review U.S. banking. Its members toured Europe , supposedly collecting data on various banking systems. Aldrich’s final report, however, was not the product of any European study tour, but of a collective conspiracy.

In November 1910, five bankers representing Morgan, Rockefeller and Kuhn Loeb interests, met in total secrecy with Senator Aldrich and the Assistant Secretary to the U.S. Treasury on Jekyll Island , an exclusive playground of the mega-rich off the coast of Georgia . Of the seven conspirators, five, Senator Aldrich, Henry Davison, Benjamin Strong, Frank Vanderlip and Paul Warburg, were members of The Pilgrims. [70] Their objective was to formulate a Central Banking Bill that would be presented to Congress as if it was the brainchild of Aldrich’s Monetary Commission.

The proposed “Federal Reserve System” was to be owned entirely by private banks, though its name implied that it was a government institution. Individuals from the American banking dynasties, including Morgan, Warburg, Schiff and Rockefeller, would hold the shares. It was to be a central bank of issue that would have a monopoly of all the money and credit of the people of the United States . It would control the interest rate and the volume of money in circulation. The Federal Reserve System constructed on Jekyll Island had powers that King Midas could never have contemplated. The objective was to establish a franchise to create money out of nothing for the purpose of lending, get the taxpayer to pick up any losses, and convince Congress that the aim was to protect the public. [71]

The Aldrich proposals never went to a vote. President Taft refused to support the Bill on the grounds that it would not impose sufficient government control over the banks. The Money Power decided that Taft had to go. Their support in the 1912 Presidential election swung behind the little known Woodrow Wilson. The speed with which Wilson was bounced from his post at Princeton University in 1910, to Governor of New Jersey in 1911, then Democratic Party nominee for the Presidency in 1912 made him the Solomon Grundy of U S politics.

Not only did the Secret Elite put their man in the White House, they also gave him a minder, Edward Mandell House. Woodrow Wilson was President of the United States but this shadowy figure stood by his side, controlling his every move. House, an Anglophile who had been part educated in England , was credited with swinging the 1912 Democratic Convention in Baltimore behind Wilson . [72] He became Woodrow Wilson’s constant companion from that point onwards, with his own suite of rooms in the White House. He was also in direct, sometimes daily contact with J. P. Morgan Jr, Jacob Schiff, Paul Warburg, and Democrat Senators who sponsored the Federal Reserve Bill. [73] Mandell House guided the President in every aspect of foreign and domestic policy, chose his Cabinet and formulated the first policies of his new Administration. [74] He was the prime intermediary between the President and his Wall Street backers. [75] The Anglo-centric Money Power had complete control of the White House and finally established its central bank in time for the Secret Elite’s war.

Ponder the significance of this coincidence. Provided with huge sums of Secret Elite money rerouted via St Petersburg , French politicians, newspapers and journalists were effectively corrupted to elect the Revanchistwarmonger candidate Raymond Poincare to the Presidency of France. By February 1913, two major powers, The United States and France, had new Presidents who were elected to office through the machinations of the Secret Elite. They had positioned key players in the governments of Britain , France , and the United States and exerted immense influence over the foreign ministry in Russia .  Politics, money and power were the pillars on which the Anglo-Saxon elite would destroy Germany and take control of the world.

All that was left to concoct was a reason for war. The Kaiser’s refusal to be drawn into direct confrontation with France and Britain over crises in Morocco in 1905 and 1911 demanded a rethink. Public hysteria in Britain about spies was developed into a cottage industry, with barely literate novels and wild articles in Northcliffe’s papers portraying Germany as a dangerous warmongering nation of Huns preparing to pounce on an unsuspecting and ill-prepared Britain . Similarly in France , through blatant bribery and corruption, both the press and the Revanchistesin French politics fomented anti-German sentiment. But Germany remained stubbornly unwilling to become involved a European war.

From 1912 onwards the Secret Elite looked to the Balkans to provide the excuse for war. Alexander Isvolsky, their top Russian agent, had been strategically moved to Paris , from which vantage point he directed the Balkan agitation. The mix of ethnic diversity, religious animosities, political intrigue and raw nationalism was deliberately provoked into two brutal Balkan wars which in themselves could have brought about a pan-European war, but the Kaiser refused to take the bait.

Something more dramatic, more sensational, was needed. The notion propagated by many historians that world war was ‘inevitable’ or that the world ‘slid’ into war is crass. Chance was not involved. It required a complex set of manipulated events engineered by determined men to set the fuse. What remained was a spark to ignite that fuse.  It came with the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, heir-apparent to the Austrian Empire, in Sarajevo on 28 June 1914. Millions of words have been written to describe the events in Sarajevo that day, but none have ever revealed the trail of complicity that led from the gunmen back to the Secret Elite in London . Be certain of one thing. It was not the man who fired the bullet that caused a world war.

Thus war engulfed the known world to a degree that had no precedent. Histories have been written to explain away the reasons why, histories that favoured the victors and twisted the truth to blame Germany . How history has been manipulated, how evidence has been removed, burned, shredded or otherwise denied to genuine researchers remains a crime against truth, against humanity.  The received history of the First World War is a deliberately concocted lie.  Not the sacrifice, the heroism, the horrendous waste of life or the misery that followed.  No, these were very real, but the truth of how it all began and how it was unnecessarily and deliberately prolonged beyond 1915 has been successfully covered up for a century.

Professor Quigley stated,

    “No country that values its safety should allow what the Milner group accomplished – that is, that a small number of men would be able to wield such power in administration and politics, should be given almost complete control over the publication of documents relating to their actions, should be able to exercise such influence over the avenues of information that create public opinion, and should be able to monopolize so completely the writing and the teaching of the history of their own period.” [76]

Never were truer words uttered in dire warning. These Founding Fathers, the Secret Elite, began with Rhodes’ secret society and expanded across the Atlantic , always away from the public eye. They were deniers of democracy, men who always pursued their own malevolent agenda, who used this very process to advance their power. What they achieved in causing the First World War was but the first step in their long term drive to a new world order.

Gerry Docherty is a former head teacher.  Jim Macgregor was a family doctor. They took early retirement and worked full time together for the past five years researching and writing Hidden History, The Secret Origins of the First World War - described at the Edinburgh International Book Festival as a “fascinating and incendiary book”. It reveals how historical accounts of the war’s origins have been falsified to conceal the guilt of the secret cabal of rich and powerful men (described in this article) and explains their manipulations and deceptions. Perhaps it will suffer the same fate as Carroll Quigley’s work, for there are many with cause to wish it suppressed. If you have an open mind and seek answers that have not been forthcoming, if you are prepared to dig further into a hugely important aspect of history, we invite you to read it.

For details visit the authors’ blogsite at firstworldwarhiddenhistory.wordpress.com.
Hidden History, The Secret Origins of the First World War by Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor is available at leading bookshops and can also be purchased on the internet at Amazon, Alibris, etc.

Notes:

[1] W.T. Stead, The Last Will and Testament of Cecil John Rhodes, p. 62.

[2] Stead, The Last Will and Testament, p. 55.

[3] Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment, p. 6.

[4] Carroll Quigley, Tragedy &Hope, pp.130-31.

[5] Joan Veon, The United Nations Global Straightjacket, p. 68.

[6] J. A. Hobson, John Ruskin, Social Reformer, p. 187.

[7] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 3.

[8] Edward Griffin, The Creature from Jekyll Island , p. 272.

[9] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, pp. 4-5.

[10] Interview can be heard at
! No longer available


[11] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. x

[12] Ibid.

[13]
! No longer available


[14] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. xi

[15]
! No longer available


[16] Neil Parsons, A New History of Southern Africa , pp. 179–181.

[17] Niall Ferguson, The House of Rothschild, The World’s Banker, p. 363.

[18] James Lees-Milne, The Enigmatic Edwardian, pp. 162-8.

[19] Quigley, Tragedy & Hope, p. 216.

[20] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 311.

[21] Derek Wilson, Rothschild: The Wealth and Power of a Dynasty, pp. 98-99.

[22] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, pp. 16-17.

[23] Stead, Last Will and Testament, p.108.

[24] Thomas Pakenham, The Boer War, p.115.

[25] Emily Hobhouse, The Brunt of War and Where it Fell, p. 174.

[26] W.T. Stead, cited in Hennie Barnard, The Concentration Camps 1899–

1902 at www.boer.co.za/boerwar/hellkamp.htm

[27] Pakenham, The Boer War, p. 483

[28] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 7.

[29] Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, p. 138.

[30] William Nimocks, Milner’s Young Men p. 21

[31] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p.312.

[32] Ibid., p. 7

[33] Ibid., pp. 86-7.

[34] Ibid., p.314.

[35] Ibid., p. 4.

[36] Ibid., p. 312.

[37] Quigley, Tragedy & Hope, p. 216.

[38] Ibid., pp. 60-61.

[39] Stead, Last Will and Testament, p. 59.

 www.publicintelligence.net/the-last-will-and-testament-of-cecil-john-rhodes-1902/

[40] Ibid. p. 34.

[41] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 33.

[42] Ibid., p.49

[43] Ibid.

[44] Anne Pimlot Baker, The Pilgrims of Great Britain , p. 12.

[45] New York Times, 3 March 1903.

[46] Baker, Pilgrims of Great Britain, p.13.

[47] E.C. Knuth, The Empire of The City, p.64

[48] Baker, The Pilgrims of the United States , p.3.

[49] Baker, Pilgrims of Great Britain, p.16.

[50] While it is possible to list all of those in whose honour these dinners were      organised, the individual members who attended remains a secret.

[51] Baker, Pilgrims of the United States , p .9.

[52] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 15.

[53] Webster G Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, George Bush; the Unauthorized    Biography, p.136.

[54] W.G.Carr, Pawns in the Game, p. 60.

[55] G. Edward Griffin, interview

        www.://educate-yourself.org/cn/gedwardgriffininterview02apr04.shtml

[56] Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, p. 951.

[57] Ron Chernow, The Warburgs, pp. 46-8.

[58] Stephen Birmingham, Our Crowd, p. 175.

[59] Chernow, The Warburgs, p. 51.

[60] Carr, Pawns in the Game, p. 61.

[61] Initially an outspoken critic of Standard Oil, Archbold was recruited by Rockefeller to a directorship of the company, where he later served as vice president and then president until its ‘demise ’ in 1911.

[62] Ferguson , House of Rothschild, p. 117.

[63] Chernow, Titan, The Life of John D Rockefeller Sr., p. 390.

[64] Edward Griffin, The Creature from Jekyll Island , p. 436.

[65] Quigley, Anglo American Establishment, p. 134.

[66] Ibid., p. 312.

[67] Terence H. O’Brien, Milner, p. 187.

[68] Gary Allen, None Dare Call it Conspiracy, Chapter 3, p8.

[69] Chernow, Titan, p. 352.

[70] Organisation for the Study of Globalisation and Covert Politics,

https://wikispooks.com/ISGP/organisations/Pilgrims_Society02.htm

[71] Griffin , Creature from Jekyll Island , p. 23.

[72] Ibid., p. 240.

[73] Ibid., p. 458.

[74] George Sylvester Viereck, The Strangest Friendship in History: Woodrow Wilson and Colonel House, p. 4.

[75] Ibid., pp. 35-7.

[76] Quigley, Anglo-American Establishment, p. 197.
Copyright © Gerry Docherty and Jim Macgregor, Global Research, 2015
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
Yes, There is an Imperialist Ruling Class
« Reply #17 on: October 09, 2015, 02:56:43 AM »
http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/10/06/yes-there-is-an-imperialist-ruling-class/

Yes, There is an Imperialist Ruling Class


Contemporary history is neither a series of random occurrences nor the predetermined plaything of a small cabal of super-empowered conspirators. The truth is somewhere in-between. A sizeable cadre of class- and system-conscious deep-state and imperial planners from the heights of concentrated private and governmental power join together to shape the outlines of much of recent history. Along with professional class “experts” agreeable to their basic aims, they do so in accord with their shared interests in the endless upward accumulation of wealth and power. They serve the profits system that is still headquartered primarily in the United States even as it develops ever more and varied outposts across a globalizing world.

They exercise vastly disproportionate influence on the course of events and policy largely behind the scenes, in the darkly deceptive name of democracy. But it isn’t about conspiracy. The planners in question are numerous. Their names, activities, and backgrounds and the record of their influence are all open to investigation by those with the time, skill, energy, and willingness to make the connections.

It’s about class power and the unelected and interrelated dictatorships of money, wealth, and empire that rule beneath and beyond the pretense of popular governance. (“We must make our choice,” the U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis wrote in 1941: “We may have democracy, or we may have wealth concentrated in the hands of the few, but we cannot have both.”) It’s about capitalism and its evil twin imperialism, with strong doses of racism, patriarchy, nationalism, police-statism, and eco-cide thrown in. It’s about what Karl Marx called “the bourgeoisie’s…need of a constantly expanding market …over the whole surface of the globe.” “Capital,” the German left Marxist Rosa Luxemburg once observed, “needs the means of production and the labor power of the whole world for untrammeled accumulation.”

Nowhere is the planning and influence of the ruling class of the world’s and history’s most powerful capitalist state, the United States, more evident than in the Council of Foreign Relations (CFR). There are hundreds of institutions and organizations in which elite planning and networking occurs both at home and abroad. But, as the left historian Shoup shows in his indispensable new book Wall Street’s Think Tank: The Council of Foreign Relations and the Empire of Neoliberal Geopolitics, 1976-2014 (Monthly Review Press, 2015), no such group remotely approximates the CFR in scale, reach, and influence when it comes to articulating the national and global class interests of the U.S. capitalist elite and a growing transnational capitalist ruling class. With an individual membership of 5000 (boasting an average household worth of $1.4 million), a top Fortune 500 corporate membership of 170, a staff over 330, a budget of $60 million, and assets of $490 million, the Council is “the largest and most powerful of all U.S. private think tanks that presume to discuss and decide the future of humanity in largely secret meetings behind closed doors in the upper-class neighborhoods of New York and Washington. During the last four decades,” Shoup observes, “the CFR has not only successfully continued its central position as the most important private organization in the United States, one with no real peer in the country. It has succeeded in expanding its key role, and remains at the center of the small plutocracy that runs the United States and much of the world.”

Consistent with that description, CFR members have long played prominent roles in the U.S. executive branch. Some among the many examples (what follows is a small sample) include President Jimmy Carter’s secretary of treasury (Michael Blumenthal), national security adviser (Zbigniew Brzezinski), secretary of state (Cyrus Vance), and arms control director (Paul Warnke), vice president (Walter Mondale), secretary of defense (Harold Brown), and CIA director (Stansfield Turner); President Ronald Reagan’s secretaries of state (Alexander Haig and George Schultz), national security advisers (Colin Powell and Frank Carlucci), secretary of treasury (Donald Regan), secretaries of defense (Casper Weinberger and Frank Carlucci) and CIA directors (William Casey and William Weber); ten of CFR member George H.W. Bush’s eleven top foreign policymakers; fifteen of CFR member Bill Clinton’s top seventeen foreign policymakers along with two of three of Clinton’s treasury secretaries; fourteen of George W. Bush’s top foreign policy officials; twelve of Obama’s top foreign policy positions along with CFR members in five of his domestic policy cabinet positions.

The CFR possesses an unrivalled and vast domestic network of overlapping membership and directors with other leading “nonprofit” think-tanks and policy groups (Brookings, Carnegie, the Wilson Center, the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, the Peterson Institute for International Economics, the RAND Corporation. and many more), other private policy groups (including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Council, and the Business Roundtable), leading lobbying firms, top Fortune 500 corporations, top private equity and other non-bank investment firms, the top for-profit strategic political risk and advisory corporations (including Kissinger Associates and the Albirght-Stonebridge Group), leading universities (Harvard and Yale above all), major foundations (led especially by the Rockefeller Foundation), and top corporate media including numerous key connections with the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post.

The CFR’s Studies Program generated more than 180 books between 1987 and 2014 and just less than 1800 academic journal articles between 1993 and 2014. The CFR’s regular monthly journal Foreign Affairs is the single most influential of all print media publications among government policymakers. CFR Fellows regularly publish Opinion-Editorials and appear in broadcast media to advance the CFR’s neoliberal (see note 1 below for Shoup’s useful definition of “neoliberalism”) and imperial agenda. The organization holds nearly a thousand meetings a year, mainly in New York and Washington but also in numerous other large cities across the U.S. And CFR leaders engage in countless informal consultations and briefings with U.S. and foreign government leaders at home and abroad.

Consistent with the emergence over the past four decades of a “small but increasingly integrated transnational capitalist class….in some respects a worldwide ruling class” (Shoup), the CFR has since the 1970s developed a large number of international networks with wealthy and powerful “superclass” individuals and groups around the world. Relevant institutions here include its British counterpart and sister group The Royal Institute of International Affairs, the elite European Bilderberg Group, the heavily corporate-permeated Trilateral Commission (combining U.S., European, and Japanese elites who joined together to combat the “excess of democracy” in the early 1970s), the G30 (the Group of Thirty, a private gathering of top private and public financial authorities from across the U.S., Europe, and Asia), the CFR’s International Advisory Board (headed by super-wealthy capitalists from across the world), and a global CFR “Council of Councils” bringing together the top neoliberal think-tanks from the world’s richest 20 nations.

No societal stratum has been more prominently and influentially represented in the CFR than the top section of the U.S. capitalist class, Shoup shows. With one possible partial exception, all of the organization’s top ten leaders over the last four and a half decades have come from the capitalist elite “and especially represent the financial sector known as Wall Street.” Examples include CFR chairs David Rockefeller (heir to the greatest family fortune in history, head of Chase Manhattan Bank, and CFR chair from 1970 to 1985), Peter Peterson (the billionaire co-founder of the private equity Blackstone Group and CFR chair from 1985 to 2007), and current CFR chair Robert Rubin (former CEO of Goldman Sachs and Citigroup, Bill Clinton’s treasury secretary, adviser to top Obama administration economic policymakers, and CFR co-chair since 2007).

The capitalist, Wall Street-oriented nature of the CFR is something the body does not like to advertise about itself. One of its longtime Senior Fellows and top intellectuals, Michael Mandelbaum readily acknowledged ten years ago that “a relatively small foreign policy elite…sets the general course of [U.S.] foreign policy….with little or no input from the wider public.” But, Shoup notes, “what [Mandelbaum] refers to as an ‘elite’ is actually a capitalist ruling class led by his own organization, the CFR.”

“There are only a relatively few important domestic institutions not connected or [at least] minimally tied to the Council,” Shoup notes, “and those are generally on the far-right side of the political spectrum.” The most prominent example is “the Koch Brothers economic and political empire,” which does not share the CFR’s faith in “a powerful state” – one that provides the capitalist elite with “government protection, intervention, and largess.” The CFR has little interest in association with any institutions and actors “that are at least a little left of center, such as most of today’s labor movement…considered irrelevant by the Council.”

To be clear, the CFR’s ideal “powerful state” is capitalist-neoliberal and imperial. It is one in which what the left sociologist Pierre Bourdieu called “the right hand of the state” (the parts of government that work to redistribute wealth and power yet further upward, fight wars, and discipline the working and lower class majority) is far more potent and well-funded than “the left hand of the state”: the parts of government, won by past popular movements, that protect and advance the interests of workers, the poor, and the common good. The CFR’s recent and deceptively named “Renewing America Initiative” for “restoring U.S. global power at home” advocates federal debt reduction not through progressive taxation or cutting back the giant Pentagon budget (a massive subsidy to high-tech corporations that accounts for 54% of U.S. federal discretionary spending) but through major rollbacks of so-called entitlements like Social Security and Medicare (Shoup explains that both programs “are actually not gifts but the earned savings from the millions of workers, held in trust by the federal government”). It calls for tying immigration policy more directly to “the market needs of corporations,” for the rollback of public sector union membership and power, and for increased domestic and eco-cidal oil and gas drilling (including hydraulic fracturing) and strip mining. All of this is contrary to majority public U.S. opinion.

In his influential 2013 book Foreign Policy Begins at Home: The Case for Putting America’s House in Order, CFR President Richard Haass (a director of a leading global investment management firm, Fortress Management) called for a significant extension of the U.S. retirement age. He looked forward to a time “when people [who] turn sixty…will still be ‘facing as many as ten to twenty years of work.’” Like most CFR officials and many of the organization’s members, Haass, a privatization advocate, doesn’t have to work another day in his life if he doesn’t want to.

It is all very consistent with the argument of CFR member and Harvard professor Samuel P. Huntington’s argument in 1975 book The Crisis of Democracy: Report on the Governability of Democracies to the Trilateral Commission. Acknowledging candidly that capitalism is opposed to popular governance, Huntington argued that the U.S. was suffering from an “excess of democracy” and a “democratic distemper” resulting from disorderly citizen upsurges during the 1960s. To calm this dangerous overindulgence of popular sovereignty, Huntington recommended, among other things, a weakening of government expenditures and regulations and an expansion of private “free market” capitalism’s role. As Shoup notes, “The bluntness of Huntington’s and direct advocacy of the neoliberal[1] gospel violated a taboo among the powerful of U.S. society, namely that the rhetoric of the United States as a wonderful and exceptionally democratic society should never be openly challenged.”

Who will save us from the calamitous relevance of the CFR? The CFR’s fingerprints, Shoup shows, are all over domestic U.S. and global history since the 1970s, Shoup shows. The drastic upward concentration of wealth and power that has taken place both within and beyond the U.S. (the top U.S. 1 % currently possesses more wealth than the nation’s bottom 90%) over the last four decades traces directly to the neoliberal – extreme capitalist (post-Keynesian, “post-Fordist,” and even “Millennial” capitalism in the language of top class- and system-conscious CFR intellectuals like Yale’s Walter Russell Mead[2]) – world view and policies that CFR directors and experts have powerfully and relentlessly advanced in accord with the organization’s corporate and financial essence over the last four decades. The monumental, mass-murderous, and globally significant U.S. destruction of Iraq – the most important and disastrous U.S. foreign policy action since “the Vietnam war” (the U.S. war on Southeast Asia) – was carried out in accord with the CFR’s openly imperial and neoliberal calls for Washington to seize control of Iraq’s vast oil resources (understood by top CFR experts as a critical weapon of hegemonic geopolitical leverage in the world capitalist economic and military system) and turn Iraq into a “free market paradise.”[3]

Undeterred by Washington’s criminal failures in Iraq, the CFR relentlessly pushes forward the imperial, US-led expansion of “the empire of neoliberal geopolitics.” It advances the expansion of NATO, investor rights “free trade” measures (the arch-corporatist-globalist Trans Pacific Partnership [TPP] and Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership [TTIP]), a growing and dangerous military rivalry with China in the western Pacific, the drive to incorporate Ukraine and other former Soviet states into Western capitalism (helping stoke a potentially deadly conflict with Russia), the destruction of Syria, the protection of key imperial partner Israel, the terrorization and militarization of the vast darker-skinned “developing world” through the far-flung deployment of jihad-fueling Special Operations Forces and drone strikes (among numerous other murderous and racist U.S.-imperial means), the spread of dispossession-inducing forms of genetically engineered agriculture, and the advocacy of destructive neoliberal social policies in the vast and deeply impoverished global South.

Meanwhile, the scourge of anthropogenic climate change emerges as the leading threat to human survival and a decent future with no serious acknowledgement or opposition from the CFR, consistent with its fierce neoliberal opposition to any serious restrictions on capital. As Shoup notes, “The facts of the global ecological crisis are ones that a capitalist-class organization like the CFR do not want to face: to save the planet and its existing life-forms, fossil-fuel mining and burning has to be severely restricted by government fiat. This conclusion goes against the entire neoliberal free-market monopoly finance capitalist world order that the CFR has sponsored.”

The at once capitalist and imperialist commitments of the CFR trump the basic material requirements of human and survival, making it an existential imperative for humanity to undertake a popular-democratic revolution to bring into being “nation states controlled by the people” instead of plutocracies run by capitalist “deep states” made up in the U.S. by the CFR and its many power elite partner groups. It’s popular, participatory and democratic eco-socialism or barbarism if we’re lucky – or extinction, it appears.

Notes

1 By Shoup’s analysis the former dominant Western capitalist paradigm of Keynesianism has “been replaced” over the last four decades “by the doctrinal cluster of ideas called ‘neoliberalism,’ formally dedicated to the free movement of capital and goods worldwide (free markets) and multinational and transnational corporate globalization, promoted and enforced by state power. This is capital’s default position, the direction that the system always pushes toward, taking into account the level of class struggle from below. Besides being an economic prescription, the corporate liberation project of neoliberalism also represents an ideological attack on the ideas of collective property (socialism), national development (national liberation), and social solidarity (trade unionism and community). Instead, individualism is exalted.” In the “Keynesian scheme” and “system” that the Western capitalist elite briefly and contingently accepted to a significant degree in the middle third of the last century, “unions for workers were accepted with the ‘class compromise’; state-imposed regulations restrained some actions of capital; taxes on corporations and the wealthy were relatively high; state planning, industrial policy, and state ownership existed in many cases; and there was some attempt at achieving full employment and a level of social welfare of rank-and-file citizens through varied forms of social welfare.”  Shoup, Wall Street’s Think Tank, 163-164.

2 In his 2004 book Power, Terror, Peace, and War: America’s Grand Strategy in a World at Risk, Mead, the CFR’s Henry A. Kissinger Senior Fellow in U.S. Foreign Policy “discusses the transition from what he calls the ‘Fordist’ era of capitalist development dominant from the 1910s to the 1970s to our current era of what he calls ‘Millennial Capitalism,’ almost entirely avoiding the more useful and accurate terms ‘Keynesianism’ and ‘neoliberalism.’ The term ‘Fordism,’ as used by Mead, is simply the policy of certain capitalists, one of the first being Henry Ford, to pay their mass production workers enough to purchase the goods they, the workers, produce. Mead does not mention the intense and costly class struggles that workers engaged in over many decades to achieve even some level of unionization and the resulting higher wages, better working conditions, and benefits in a given industry. He simply presents it as a given that eventually some capitalists accepted unions, resulting in a more administered, regulated, and stable socioeconomic system, characterized by some state planning, a level of class compromise and less income equality…Mead points out that Fordism/Keynesianism ‘has gradually been yielding to …a new more vigorous form of capitalism’ which is now being invented and explored…what he calls ‘Millennial Capitalism.’” Shoup, Wall Street’s Think Tank, 193. (Amongst themselves, ruling and professional class “elites” are not entirely averse to communicating in significantly class- and system-conscious ways about capitalism as they understand it.)

3 For the CFR’s neoliberal, war-mongering, and petro-imperialist geo-political thinking in support of the calamitous, arch-criminal, and mass-murderous occupation and destruction of Iraq, see the following essays cited and quoted by Shoup: CFR President Richard Haass, “What to Do With American Primacy,” Foreign Affairs (Sept-Oct. 1999); Fouad Ajami, “The Sentry’s Solitude,” Foreign Affairs (November-December 2001); CFR Senior Fellow Kenneth Pollack, “Next Stop Baghdad?,” Foreign Affairs (March-April 2002); Sebastian Mallaby, “The Reluctant Imperialist: Terrorism, Failed States, and the Case for American Empire,” Foreign Affairs (March-April, 2002); Donald Rumsfeld, “Transforming the Military,” Foreign Affairs (May-June 2002); Elliot Cohen, “A Tale of Two Secretaries,” Foreign Affairs (May-June 2002); CFR Senior Fellow Michael Mandelbaum, “U.S. Most Plan Post-Hussein Iraq,” Newsday, August 1, 2002; Kenneth Pollack, The Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq (New York: A Council of Foreign Relations Book, Random House, 2002); Pollack, “Securing the Gulf,” Foreign Affairs (July-August 2003, published under the heading “It’s the Oil, Stupid”). I recall reading the essays listed above before and after George W, Bush’s invasion and being struck by how openly imperial and oil-focused (petro-imperial) the CFR’s intra-elite discussion was – all quite contrary to the official American Exceptionalist doctrine holding that the U.S. never behaves in imperial ways. (Empire, too, is not a taboo topic amongst leading power elite planners.) Top CFR thinker Michael Mandelbaum (a leading Iraq invasion advocate), however, explains that “if America is a Goliath, it is a benign one”: a benevolent empire that acts out of a noble and selfless desire to make the world, a better, safer, and more democratic place. See Michael Mandelbaum, The Case for Goliath: How America Acts as the World’s Government in the 21st Century (2005). The millions of Iraqis killed, murdered, and displaced by compassionate Uncle Sam in this century (and in the last one) do not match the thesis – along with much else.

Paul Street’s latest book is They Rule: The 1% v. Democracy (Paradigm, 2014)
Copyright © Paul Street, Counterpunch, 2015
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 17502
    • View Profile
Re: Yes, There is an Imperialist Ruling Class
« Reply #18 on: October 09, 2015, 06:58:17 AM »
Good piece.
« Last Edit: October 09, 2015, 06:59:52 AM by Eddie »
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
Re: Yes, There is an Imperialist Ruling Class
« Reply #19 on: October 09, 2015, 10:31:28 AM »
Good piece.

Sadly, even though this is no longer any kind of BIG SECRET, there isn't much you can do about it.

RE
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
One Bank to Rule Them All: The Bank for International Settlements
« Reply #20 on: October 10, 2015, 08:48:05 AM »
One Bank to Rule Them All: The Bank for International Settlements

By Devon Douglas-Bowers
Global Research, October 09, 2015
Theme: Global Economy

Please note that this article is being published as a three-part series on Occupy.com.

The Bank for International Settlements (BIS) is an organization that is shrouded in mystery, mainly due to the fact that the majority of people don’t even know of its existence. According to the BIS itself, the main purpose of the Bank is to “to promote the cooperation of central banks and to provide additional facilities for international financial operations” and “act as trustee or agent in regard to international financial settlements entrusted to it under agreements of the parties concern.”[1] This means that the BIS is to have the central banks work with one another to facilitate international operations and to oversee any international financial settlements.

The Bank has a Board of Directors, which “may have up to 21 members, including six ex officio directors, comprising the central bank Governors of Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom and the United States. Each ex officio member may appoint another member of the same nationality. Nine Governors of other member central banks may be elected to the Board.”[2] BIS also has a management wing in the form of a General and Deputy General Manager, both of whom are responsible to the board and supported by Executive, Finance, and Compliance and Operational Risk Committees.[3]

However, its purpose has changed and evolved over the decades, however, it has always been a club for central bankers, yet in many ways it can aid some countries more than others.

The origins of the BIS lie in the United States, specifically New York City. The individuals involved were international bankers who, despite past differences, “worked together to establish a world financial order that would incorporate the federal principle of the American central banking system.”[4] Specifically among them were people such as “Owen D. Young, J. Pierpont Morgan, Thomas W. Lamont, S. Parker Gilbert, Gates W. McGarrah, and Jackson Reynolds, who, in conjunction with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, sought to extend the principle of central bank cooperation to the international sphere.”[5]Before delving any further into the creation of the Bank, it is necessary to examine some of the more notable of these individuals to better understand why they would be involved in the creation of an international bank.

Owen D. Young was already in good with the US government as he, “with the cooperation of the American government and the support of GE, organized and became chairman of the board of the Radio Corporation of America” and “in subsequent years he engineered a series of agreements with foreign companies that divided the world into radio zones and facilitated worldwide wireless communication”[6] Young had a strong belief that global radio service and broadcasting were important for the advancement of civilization. In 1922, Young became chairman of General Electric, and along with GE President Gerard Swope, “urged closer business-government cooperation and corporate self-regulation under government supervision.”[7]

During the 1920s, Young became involved in international diplomacy as the foreign affairs spokesman for the Democratic Party. At the behest of then-Secretary of State, Charles Evan Hughes, Young and Charles Dawes, a banker, were recommended to the Allied Reparations Commission in order to deal with the breakdown in Germany’s reparations payments following the First World War.The Commission resulted in the Dawes Plan which allowed for “Germany’s annual reparation payments would be reduced, increasing over time as its economy improved; the full amount to be paid, however, was left undetermined. Economic policy making in Berlin would be reorganized under foreign supervision and a new currency, the Reichsmark, adopted.”[8] Young viewed improving the world financial structure as important to “the very survival of capitalism” and furthermore he “sought rather the ‘economic integration’ of the world which would prepare the way for ‘political integration’ and lasting peace.”[9]

John Piermont Morgan, Jr. was already ensconced in the world of international banking, having inherited the JP Morgan Company from his father. During World War One, the House of Morgan worked hand-in-hand with the British and French governments, engaging in a number of tasks such as floating loans for the two countries, handling foreign exchange operations, and advising officials of each respective country.[10]

Both these individuals were heavily involved in politics and banking therefore had a personal interest in the creation of a global bank. It should be noted, this fits into the US government’s own policies as they wanted to “[keep] aloof from the political entanglements in Europe while safeguarding vital American interests by means of unofficial observers or participants.”[11] The Federal Reserve also was interested in the creation of the BIS as it would “[promote] both the ascendancy of New York City in world banking and the reconstruction of a stable and prosperous Europe able to absorb American exports.”[12]

This idea of an international bank didn’t occur in a vacuum. The creation of the bank “was inextricably tied to the problem of German reparations in the context of Germany’s overall debt burden during the 1920s.”[13] A slowdown in international lending to Germany began in 1928 as markets became extremely worried about the internal politics of the Weimar Republic. Due to the breakup of a center coalition government and the Social Democrats needing support from right-wing parties, the political situation began to fall apart with “government stability [being] threatened whenever budget debates exposed the basic social divide of unemployment insurance and increased industrial taxation on the one hand versus spending austerity and tax cuts on the other.”[14] The budget problems came on the heels of the Reparations Committee having determined that Germany’s total reparations came to $33 billion, which was twice the size of the country’s total economy in 1925. As long as foreign capital kept coming into Germany, things were fine, however as was aforementioned, that situation changed in 1928.

Between February 1929 and January 1930, negotiations were made to reschedule Germany’s reparations payments. “These negotiations were initiated by central bankers and private actors, who were the first to link problems in the capital market with the need to reorganize Germany’s financial obligations.”[15] Thus, it should be no surprise that many of the main individuals involved in the creation of the BIS were central bankers or engaged in international affairs/finance to some extent.

The idea for an international bank had already been explored to some extent by people such as John Mayard Keynes[16], however the idea truly took off during the Young Conference in 1929 when the Allies were attempting to deal with Germany’s reparations debts for World War One. Belgian delegate Emile Franqui bought up the possibility of having a settlement organization to administer the reparations agreement and the very next day, Hjalmar Schacht, president of the Reichsbank and chief German representative at the conference, presented a proposal to establish such an organization to as a direct financier of global economic development and trade. The bank would act as a lender to the German central bank in case the Germany currency weakened and the government found itself unable to make the reparations payment. In addition, it would give steps for how to proceed in the case of German default as if “Germany did not resume payments within two years, the BIS would propose revisions collectively for the creditor governments (which would only go into effect with their approval)” and “the bank was responsible for surveillance and informing the creditor countries about economic and financial conditions in Germany.”[17]

While the US State Department was concerned with having a settlement as State Department “economic adviser Arthur N. Young observed, ‘a final reparations settlement’ would ‘promote both political and economic stability in Europe, and thus tend to be of advantage to the United States,” the US government as a whole didn’t want any type of linkage between reparations and war debts due to the fact that because each of the Allied nations was demanding reparations from Germany large enough to cover the debts it owed to the US, having such a linkage would mean that “Germany’s refusal or inability to pay that amount would put Washington in the position of having to agree to a debt reduction or bear the opprobrium and suffer the consequences of opening the door to financial chaos.”[18] However, several other countries had their own interests as well in the creation of the BIS.The French Prime Minister, Raymond Poincare, promised the French public that the reparations would cover the country’s debts to both the US and Britain as well as cover the war damages. France was also interested in reaching an agreement on German debts as they were developing trade interdependence with the Germans and stability was needed.[19]

The British wanted to use the BIS as a means to ensure that the Germans would pay on their debts as scheduled. The Bank of England itself supported the creation of the BIS “because of its potential role in stabilizing the position of the pound in the international monetary system. Britain’s relatively small gold reserves made it difficult to defend the pound without international monetary cooperation and the willingness of smaller powers to hold foreign exchange as reserves instead of gold.”[20]At the meeting in Baden, Germany in October 1929 to draw up the final plans for the BIS saw the heavy presence of US finance in the form of Melvin Traylor of the First National Bank of Chicago and Federick Reynolds of the First National Bank of New York. There, the two nominated Gates W. McGarrah, chairman of the board of the New York Reserve Bank for the officer of President. Later, his assistant, “Leon Fraser, a legal counselor at Gilbert’s reparations office, the Young conference, and Baden,”[21] would become president of the Bank in 1935. When the Bank of England expressed anger and that the European public wouldn’t find American domination of the Bank acceptable, they were effectively told that if they wanted American participation in the BIS it would have to be on American terms. However, they did agree to appoint Pierre Quesnay of the Bank of France as the general manager of the BIS. The Bank was officially founded on May 17, 1930.

The role of the BIS quickly changed as with the onset of the Great Depression, it was unable to “play the role of lender of last resort, notwithstanding noteworthy attempts at organizing support credits for both the Austrian and German central banks in 1931” and due to the Depression, the issue of reparations was off the table due to Germany’s inability to pay. The problem was further compounded when countries such as Britain and the US began to devalue their currencies (i.e. print more money) and the BIS attempted numerous times to end the exchange rate instability by restoring the gold standard, “the BIS had little choice but to limit itself to undertaking banking transactions for the account of central banks and providing a forum for central bank governors to help them maintain contact.”[22] During the Second World War, all operations were suspended for the duration of the conflict, yet the situation became rather dicey for the Bank once the guns stopped firing.

Immediately after World War Two, the global economic landscape had massively changed and thus a new system was needed, In July 1944 over 700 delegates from the Allied nation met in Mount Washington Hotel in Bretton Woods, NH for the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference which “agreed on the creation of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and an International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (BRD), which became part of the World Bank,”[23] where the IMF would pay attention to exchange rates and lend reserve currencies to nations in debt. A new global currency exchange system was created in where all currencies were linked to the US dollar and in exchange the US agreed to fix the price of gold at $35/ounce.

All of this meant that there would be no need for currency warfare or manipulation. This proved a threat to the BIS as if the IMF was to be the center of this new global financial order, what need would there be for the BIS? Wilhelm Keilhau, a member of the Norwegian delegation, even went so far as to propose a notion to eliminate the BIS. However, the Bank was to continue as several other European nations noted its importance to the financial matters of the European continent and soon the move to eliminate the Bank was rescinded.Matters were stable until the 1960s and ‘70s as while the Bretton Woods system of “free currency convertibility at fixed exchange rates” coincided with a massive increase of international trade and economic growth, cracks began to show as the British currency was weak and, more importantly, the gold parity on the US dollar was straining due to “an insufficient supply of gold and from the weakening of the US balance of payments.”[24] However, the Bretton Woods system collapsed on August 1971; however the system of ‘managed floating’ was created in its place which allowed for flexibility of exchange rates within certain parameters.

Later in the 1970s, the situation became all the more dire due to the creation of OPEC and the subsequent rise in oil prices and the Herstatt Bank failure.The Herstatt Bank was central in processing foreign exchange orders (people exchange currencies, such as trading in dollars for yen) and when German regulators withdrew the bank’s license forcing the bank to close up shop on June 26, 1974. Meanwhile, “it was still morning in New York, where Herstatt’s counterparties were expecting to receive dollars in exchange for Deutsche marks they had delivered”[25] and when Hersttat’s clearing bank Chase Manhattan refused to fulfill the orders by freezing the Herstatt account, it caused a chain of defaults. It was this problem that led to the creation, in conjunction with the G-10 countries and Switzerland, of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision in which the goal was to set the global standard for bank regulation and to provide a forum for bank supervisory matters.

Yet, this newly created stability was short-lived as in the 1980s and ‘90s saw serious economic problems involving Latin America and Asia.

Oil prices quadrupled in November 1973, leading to stagflation, an increase in balance of payment imbalances, and major shocks in international banking. The Euro-currency markets were growing as they began to be utilized by OPEC countries more and more as the oil-producing nations invested in European money markets, greatly increasing the money European banks had and thus could lend. Thus, the European Coal and Steel Community began loaning money to developing nations at a faster and faster peace and while this was largely beneficial to the world economy at the start, “it also implied that the international banking system was faced with an increase in country risk,”[26] as many of the countries that were being loaned to were getting more and more into debt. This concerned then-BIS Economic Advisor Alexandre Lamfalussy who warned of a threat of a crisis and was specifically focused on credit, saying in a 1976 speech that from” ‘[looking at]… the continuous growth of credits, the spread of risks to a large number of countries, and the change in the nature of credits – I draw the conclusion that the problem of risks has become a very urgent one.”[27]

While real interest rates (the difference between yearly interest rates on savings and inflation rates) were negative in the 1970s, meaning that borrowers lost a percentage of every dollar they loaned, allowed for an increase in credit, it quickly came to a halt in 1979 as the US Federal Reserve tightened US monetary policy which led to an increase in debts which many Latin American countries were unable to pay off.

The BIS was worried about debt that matured in less than a year as by early 1982, such debt would amount to half of Mexico’s and Argentina’s debt respectively. On August 12, 1982, Mexico alerted the US that its financial reserves were exhausted. This prompted the BIS to work to get financial assistance to Mexico in the form of loans, as the Mexican government negotiated with the IMF. Specifically, the BIS “offered a US$ 925 million loan, backed by the G10 central banks and the Bank of Spain” and both the US Federal Reserve and Treasury “matched this with an equal amount, so that a total of US$ 1.85 billion was made available for an initial period of three months.”[28] While there were some last-minute problems, Mexico eventually accepted the loan and made a promise to pay it back, “[consisting] of a gold pledge by the Bank of Mexico and advance claims on future revenues of the Mexican state oil company Pemex.”[29] The first loan was paid out on August 30, 1982.

However, the loans were tied to the Mexican government enacting austerity measures.[30] This had serious effects as the cutback in public spending “set back many development programs, including poverty alleviation programs”[31] and the overall economic effects harmed “especially the lower and middle classes. For Mexican workers, real wages in 1986 were at virtually the same level they had been at in 1967; for many, a generation of economic progress had been wiped out by the ‘lost decade’ of the 1980s.”[32]

In the late 1990s in Asia, a new crisis would emerge. There were extremely robust GDP rates in the Asian markets, ranging from “more than 5 percent in Thailand to 8 percent in Indonesia. This achievement continued a pattern existing since the early 1980s. Rapid growth was fueled by high rates.”[33] However, the growth began to slow down in 1996, which “[reflected] slower growth of demand in the region’s principal export markets, a slowdown in the global electronics industry, and competition from Mainland China.”[34] This slowdown led to an increase in deficit rates, especially with Thailand, whose deficits grew eight percent of GDP. In an attempt to prevent fluctuations in the Thai currency, the baht, the government tied the value of the baht to a basket of foreign currencies, heavily leaning on the US dollar. However, because the dollar was gaining strength, the strength of the baht also grew, making the export of goods more difficult.

Thailand, as well as Indonesia, the Philippines, and Malaysia devalued their currencies 25 to 33 percent in the middle of 1997 and when Taiwan began to devalue its currency, it led to a speculative currency attack on Hong Kong the in which people sold off their Hong Kong dollars, expecting them to fall in value. This caused the Hong Kong stock market to crash in October 1997 while at the same time the South Korean won was weakening in value. From there the crisis grew to global proportions and spread to a number of countries such as Russia and Jakarta.

Thailand as well as South Korea and Indonesia went so far as to request assistance from the IMF, which the IMF granted of course, but only in exchange for brutal austerity measures. Much of this led to violence and even deaths in Indonesia and protests in South Korea.[35]

What is most interesting about the crisis is how the leaders of some of the affected countries spoke about it. Dr. Mahathir Bin Mohamad, the former Prime Minister of Malaysia, said in a speech on September 26, 2008 that “in 1997-98 American hedge funds destroyed the economies of poor countries by manipulating their national currencies.” It should be noted that this isn’t a simply ‘blame America’ attitude as Dr. Mohamad is “recognized as an authority on the role of hedge funds in financial crises, given his experience managing the Asian currency crisis as it engulfed his nation.”[36] The Reserve Bank of Australia “produced two reports in 1999 on the potentially destructive role of highly leveraged institutions such as hedge funds.” The reports claimed that “hedge funds contributed to the instability of its exchange rate in 1998, and it describe how hedge funds can have a destabilizing impact on not only the currencies of emerging economies but also on currencies such as the Australian dollar which has the eighth largest global trading volume.”[37]

In a paper written in early 1999 after the crisis ended, William R. White, then-Economic Adviser and Head of the Monetary and Economic Department at the Bank for International Settlements, wrote that “Many Asian-Pacific authorities (including representatives from Australia, Hong Kong and Malaysia) feel strongly that hedge funds set out systematically to destabilize their currencies and their financial markets. However, other evidence is less compelling in support of this hypothesis and, even if accepted, would not necessarily lead to the conclusion that such funds should be regulated.”[38]

So he is not only denying the evidence that not only have Dr. Mohamad produced, but also the Reserve Bank of Australia produced, but effectively saying that even if he did accept the information, so what?However, years later, in a turn of the ironic, White had warned of the global crisis as he and his team had been paying attention to the growing US real estate bubble and they “criticized the increasingly impenetrable securitization business, vehemently pointed out the perils of risky loans and provided evidence of the lack of credibility of the rating agencies.”[39] He started warning people back in 2003, “[imploring] central bankers to rethink their strategies, noting that instability in the financial markets had triggered inflation, the ‘villain’ in the global economy.”[40] White retired from the BIS on June 30, 2008 with his advice having been ignored.

This was due to the fact that the Federal Reserve was attempting to “artificially prop up those markets [of bad debt and worthless assets] and keep those assets trading at prices far in excess of their actual market value”[41] which led to them providing “$16 trillion to domestic and foreign banks in the form of secret loans and bought mortgage-backed securities that were in reality, completely and totally worthless”[42] as well as the fact that many of the people on the board of directors at the Federal Reserve also had connections to corporations that received bailout money.

Even still, after the financial crisis seemed to be over, the BIS was sounding the alarm about debt, in June 2010 the organization “delivered a stern message to central banks and governments that keeping interest rates low for too long, or failing to act quickly to cut budget deficits, could sow the seeds for the next crisis.”[43] Earlier that year, the organization was warning of a sovereign debt crisis and noted that “Drastic austerity measures will be needed to head off a compound interest spiral, if it is not already too late for some.”[44] It seems that from the austerity measures that have been enacted in Europe and the US, the call has been heeded. The question is this: how much devastation will this have and will it result in a ‘lost generation’ such as in 1980s Mexico?

Devon DB is a 23 year old independent writer and researcher and is the Politics/Government Department Chair of the Hampton Institute. He can be contacted at devondb[at]mail[dot]com.

Notes

1: Roger Auboin, The Bank for International Settlements, 1930-1955, Princeton University, https://www.princeton.edu/~ies/IES_Essays/E22.pdf2: Bank for International Settlements, Board of Directors,http://www.bis.org/about/board.htm3: Bank for International Settlements, Management of the BIS,http://w
ww.bis.org/about/officials.htm4: Frank Costigliola, “The Other Side of Isolationism: The Establishment of the First World Bank, 1929-1930,” The Journal of American History 59:3 (1972), pg 602

5: Ibid, pg 603

6: Steven Schoenherr Home Page, Owen D. Young,http://www.sunnycv.com/steve/ar/dd5/young.html7: Ibid

8: US State Department, The Dawes Plan, the Young Plan, German Reparations, and Inter-allied War Debts, https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/dawes9: Costigliola, pg 605

10: Martin Horn, “A Private Bank At War: J.P. Morgan & Co. and France, 1914-1918,” Business History Review 74:1 (2000), pg 86

11: Costigliola, pg 603

12: Ibid

13: Beth A. Simmons, “Why Innovate? Founding the Bank for International Settlements,” World Politics 45:3 (1993), pg 370

14: Simmons, pg 375

15: Simmons, pg 377

16: J. Keith Horsefield, International Monetary Fund 1945-1965 Twenty Years of International Monetary Cooperation, vol. 1 Chronicle (Washington D.C.: International Monetary Fund, 1986)

17: Simmons, pg 383

18: Costigliola, pg 610

19: Simmons, pgs 384-385

20: Simmons, pg 389

21: Costigliola, pg 616

22: Bank for International Settlements, BIS Archive Guide,http://www.bis.org/about/arch_guide.pdf

23: Adam Lebor, Tower of Basel (New York: Public Affairs, 2013) pg 87

24: Bank for International Settlements, BIS Archive Guide,http://www.bis.org/about/arch_guide.pdf

25: Gregana Koleva, “Icon of Systemic Risk Haunts Industry Decades After Demise,” American Banker, http://www.americanbanker.com/bankthink/bankhaus-herstatt-icon-of-systemic-risk-1039312-1.html (June 23, 2011)

26: Piet Clement, Ivo Maes, “The BIS and the Latin American Debt Crisis of the 1980s,” National Bank of Belgium, Working Paper 247, December 2013, pg 3

27: Ibid, pg 4

28: Ibid, pg 17

29: Ibid

30: Paul Lewis, “Mexico to Receive $1.85 Billion In Loans,” New York Times, August 31, 1982 (http://www.nytimes.com/1982/08/31/business/mexico-to-receive-1.85-billion-in-loans.html)

31: Bhuvan Bhatnagar, Aubrey C. Williams, eds. Participatory Development and the World Bank: Potential Directions for Change, http://www-wds.worldbank.org/external/default/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1999/10/21/000178830_98101903552081/Rendered/PDF/multi_page.pdf (October 31, 1992), pg 103

32: Robert M. Buffington, Don M. Coerver, Suzanne B. Pasztor, Mexico Today: An Encyclopedia of Contemporary History and Culture (Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2004), pg 137

33: Barry Eichengreen, Understanding Asia’s Financial Crisis, Saint John’s University, https://www.csbsju.edu/Documents/Clemens%20Lecture/lecture/Book98.pdf (November 2, 1998)34: Ibid

35: PBS, Timeline of the Crash, http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/crash/etc/cron.html36: Stephen J. Brown, “The Role of Hedge Funds in Financial Crisis,” The EconoMonitor, October 20, 2008 (http://www.economonitor.com/blog/2008/10/the-role-of-hedge-funds-in-financial-crisis/)

37: Hedge Funds, Hedge Funds Studies, http://www.fundshedge.co.uk/hedgefundsreports.htm

38: Bank For International Settlements, Mr. White discusses the Asian crisis and the Bank for International Settlements, http://www.bis.org/review/r990331a.pdf

39: Beat Balzi, Michaela Schiessl, “The Man Nobody Wanted To Hear: Global Banking Economist Warned Of Coming Crisis,” Der Spiegel, July 8, 2009 (http://www.spiegel.de/international/business/the-man-nobody-wanted-to-hear-global-banking-economist-warned-of-coming-crisis-a-635051.html)

40: Ibid

41: John Wallace, “The Financial Crisis and the Federal Reserve,” News Blaze, September 27, 2008 (http://newsblaze.com/story/20080927140845tsop.nb/topstory.html)

42: Bernie Sanders, The Fed Audit, http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/the-fed-audit (July 21, 2011)

43: Brian Blackstone, “International Finance: BIS Warns Countries About Risks of Debt,” Wall Street Journal, June 29, 2010

44: Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, “Sovereign Debt Crisis At ‘Boiling Point,’ Warns Bank for International Settlements,” The Telegraph, April 8, 2010 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/7564748/Sovereign-debt-crisis-at-boiling-point-warns-Bank-for-International-Settlements.html)
Copyright © Devon Douglas-Bowers, Global Research, 2015
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
The Devil’s Chessboard
« Reply #21 on: October 26, 2015, 10:30:11 PM »
The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-devils-chessboard-allen-dulles-the-cia-and-the-rise-of-americas-secret-government/5484565

This is a bold and profoundly important book, not only for the portrait of the evil spymaster Allen Dulles, but even more so for its examination of the legacy he spawned – the creation of a cabal hidden behind the public  face of  the United States  government  that  secretly  runs  the country  today  on behalf  of wealthy elites.

The psychopathic Allen Dulles was the enforcer for this group, called “the power elite” by C. Wright Mills in the 1950s.  In recent years, especially since September 11, 2001, as its power has expanded, it has been given different names – the deep state, the national security state, deep politics,etc. – but that has not diminished its power one jot.  Like a patient who goes to a doctor seeking a label for vague yet disturbing symptoms, people may feel relief from the naming, but the dis-ease continues until the root cause is eliminated.  Aye, there’s the rub!

Dulles is dead, but the structure he created lives on and flourishes under new operatives.Because of his intrepid examination of these forces, David Talbot can expect to be ignored and attacked by disinformation specialists  of various stripes,  who will  use specious reasoning,  lies,  and any small weaknesses in his style or sourcing to dismiss the essential truths of his well-documented and beautifully written thesis.   First  ignore,  and if  that  doesn’t  work,  then attack,  is  the modus operandi  of  these propagandists who populate the mainstream media,  the people Dulles had in his pocket and whom Talbot excoriates throughout the book.

When an author has the guts to accuse America’s longest-reigning CIA Director of “a reign of treason,” hecan expect blowback from media and academic spokesmen of the deep-state.

Talbot is a gifted writer whose narrative style quickly engrosses the reader. Two chapters into The Devil’s Chessboard, one can’t help being nauseated by his account of Allen Dulles’s blood-chilling betrayal of large numbers of European Jews targeted by Hitler.  “Dulles,” Talbot writes, “was more in step with many Nazi leaders than he was with President Roosevelt.”

Together with his brother John Foster Dulles, who would become Secretary of State under Eisenhower,  Allen Dulles had long-standing business  ties to German industrial giants such as I G Farben (manufacturers of Zyklon B used in the gas chambers) and Krupp steel.  Their law firm, Sullivan and Cromwell, “was at the center of an intricate network of banks,investment  firms,  and  industrial  conglomerates  that  rebuilt  Germany  after  World  War  I.”   Slow  to publicly break with Hitler and his allies, the Dulles brothers, especially Allen, reserved a place in his hear and a place at the table for his Nazi friends.  When he was recruited into the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in 1941 and slipped into neutral Switzerland in late 1942, he was there not so much to support Roosevelt’s  war efforts as to protect  the interests of his law firm’s German clients.   In doing so, he betrayed personal friends and anonymous Jews to Hitler’s killers in a heartless manner hard to fathom.

Whenever Dulles had a chance to publicize the plight of the Jews, he buried the reports.  For example,when a German cable reported that 120,000 Hungarian Jews, including children, were to be taken for work in the “labor services” – a euphemism for a trip to Auschwitz – “Dulles’s communiques to OSS headquarters  used the same banal  language as  the Nazis,  referring  blandly  to  the ‘conscription’  of Hungary’s Jews.”  While noting that academic researchers decades later remain hesitant to condemn Dulles for this, Talbot will have none of it.  It is for good reason that he entitles his book  The  Devil’s Chessboard.  He thinks Dulles was satanic.

In  addition to his chilling indifference to the slaughter of the Jews, Dulles worked overtime to undermine FDR’s adamant insistence that he would accept nothing less than an “unconditional surrender” and that Nazi war criminals would face justice.  Dulles worked his wiles at saving many Nazi war criminals and returning  them  to  power  in  post-war  West-Germany.   Among  them  was  Reinhard  Gehlen,  Hitler’s notorious chief of intelligence.  In a talk to the Council of Foreign Relations on December 3, 1945, as the first Nuremburg trial was underway, he told the meeting, “Most men of the caliber required to [run thenew Germany]  suffer  a  political  taint.

We have already found out that  you can’t  run the railroads without taking in some [Nazi] party members.”  Couching this in anti-Soviet rhetoric for an audience of like-minded power brokers, many of whom were no doubt as ant-Semitic as he was, Dulles made sure it happened.  He worked hard to save the neck of Himmler’s former chief of staff and commander of the security forces in Italy, SS general Karl Wolff.  Called the “Bureaucrat of Death,” this killer was one of many Dulles  saved  under  his  separate  peace pact,  Operation Sunrise,  a  traitorous circumvention of Roosevelt’s insistence on justice.  SS colonel Eugen Dollman was another.  In this operation, he worked closely with James Jesus Angleton, the future CIA head of counterintelligence who saw Dulles as his maestro.  Working together they helped many notorious Nazi war criminals escape to the United States,Latin America, and other countries via the “Nazi ratlines.”

In Part II of the book, Talbot buttresses these historical and well-sourced facts with a detour into Dulles’s personal life and relationships.  It is not a reassuring portrait.  We learn that his wife Clover and one of his  mistresses,  Mary Bancroft,  called him “the Shark.” (Bancroft was the best  friend of Ruth Paine’s mother-in-law; it was at Ruth Paine’s house that Marina and Lee Harvey Oswald lived at the time of JFK’s assassination. More on the Paine’s below.)

Bancroft refers to “those cold blue eyes of his” and his“peculiar mirthless laugh.”  Carl Jung, who treated both women, said Dulles was “quite a tough nut.”Talbot notes that there was “an impenetrable blankness that made him hard to read.”  This description approximates Jung’s take on Hitler that Talbot juxtaposes on the same page – that Hitler seemed like “a mask, like a robot, or a mask of a robot.”  Mary Bancroft recalled that the emotionally dead Dulles’s favorite word was “useful.”  People were only good to him if they were useful.  His daughter Joan told Talbot that her  father was “clearly not interested in us.”   A grinning Dulles once told Mary that his feigned bonhomie, his avuncular demeanor, and trusting attitude toward people were an act. He said, “I like to watch the little mice sniffing at the cheese just before they venture into the little trap. I like to see their expressions when it snaps shut, breaking their little necks.”

After  his  WW II  work assisting Nazis,  Dulles  turned his  attention to stirring the cauldron in  Eastern Europe.  This time he betrayed many thousands to Stalin’s thugs in a make-believe plot called Operation Splinter Factor that was meant to panic Stalin. It  achieved its goal and once again the victims were “useful”  to  him.

His  ideological  obsession in  countering the Soviet  Union in the Cold War knew no bounds. Talbot reports that private citizen Dulles funded espionage activities with treasure looted from Jewish families; that he set up, together with Frank Wisner and others, his own espionage unit deep within the State Department – the Office of Policy Coordination; that he was instrumental in the rise of Richard Nixon to political prominence.  Throughout the late 1940s and early 1950s he was hard at work constructing the infrastructure of the CIA and a powerful secret government that would outlast him.

Once he finagled his way into the position of CIA Director under Eisenhower, “the CIA would become avast kingdom, the most powerful and least supervised agency in government …. More in keeping with an expanding empire than with a vibrant democracy.”

Talbot closely chronicles the rise of Senator Joseph McCarthy, the bullying Red hunter, and Dulles’s dirty battles with him.  Secret dossiers, sexual blackmail,every trick imaginable – these were the methods Dulles used in his winning battle with McCarthy.  This victory gave him cachet with Washington liberals, who celebrated Dulles’s CIA as a safe place for the liberal intelligentsia.  This was a fateful turn of events; “it established a dangerous precedent,” Talbot notes, for Dulles now had a freer hand to grow the CIA and expand its secret powers with liberal support against the “real” communist threat, not the hyped up sort McCarthy stood for.

“In truth,” he writes,  “the CIA became an effective killing machine under Dulles.”  Assassination had always been one of his favorite methods, and now it had found an institutional home.  Today its home is also in the Obama White House, a development well-documented, and a sign of Dulles’s expanded and enduring influence.

Talbot has two excellent sections on what Dulles felt were two of his greatest successes: the CIA led 1953coup in Iran and the 1954 coup in Guatemala, both of which ousted democratically elected leaders and installed  dictators  for  the  benefit  of  multinational  corporations’  foreign  investments.  Hundreds  of thousands of innocent people were eventually killed and tortured as a result, and we are dealing with the consequences today.

Throughout his narrative Talbot mentions many of Dulles’s protégés who will figure prominently in future events, including assassinations of American and foreign leaders: Howard Hunt, James Angleton, David Atlee Philips, Richard Helms, William Harvey, David Morales, to name but a few. As one reads through his excellent chronicle of the CIA’s coups, its MKULTRA mind control project, its cultural engineering that captivated artists and intellectuals, one can’t help feeling that Dulles’s machinations are leading to adefining culmination.

Enter Senator John F. Kennedy and an explosive speech he delivered on the Senate floor on July 2, 1957. Talbot correctly notes this speech’s significance when he writes, “Breaking from the Cold War orthodoxy that prevailed in the Democratic as well as Republican parties, JFK suggested that Soviet expansionism was not the only enemy of world freedom; so, too, were the forces of western imperialism that crushed the legitimate aspirations of people throughout the Third World.”

This speech set the stage for the CIA’s future war with Kennedy that ended in his assassination on November22, 1963. JFK was challenging the entire worldview of the Eisenhower / Dulles / Republican/ Democratic establishment. He had crossed the Rubicon.  Talbot updates it aptly:

    “Even today, no nationally prominent leader in the United States today would dare question the imperialistic policies that have led our country into one military nightmare after another.”

If one could imagine a leader doing so, and that politician was then elected president, what would be his fate?  Talbot’s implication is sobering, and a reader can’t help thinking of those prominent leaders who dared to question   imperialist agenda –JFK, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, and Robert Kennedy.  Former CIA analyst Raymond McGovern has suggested that American presidents since Kennedy are acutely aware of the message sent from the streets of Dallas.

In the last section of the book Talbot covers a lot of familiar territory regarding the Bay of Pigs, Dulles’s firing by Kennedy, and Kennedy’s assassination.  He accurately claims that the Bay of Pigs was a setup of Kennedy by Dulles that “was meant to fail” so as to force Kennedy to launch a full-scale invasion of Cuba.

    “The  wily  CIA  chief  set  a  trap  for  Kennedy,  allowing  the  president  to  believe  that  his  ‘immaculate invasion’ could succeed, even though Dulles knew that only U.S. soldiers and planes could ensure that.”

What  he  doesn’t  mention,  but  would  buttress  his  argument  further,  is  that  classified  documents uncovered in 2000 revealed that the CIA had discovered that the Soviets had learned of the date of the invasion more than a week in advance, had informed Castro, but never told Kennedy. This treasonous with holding was not lost on Kennedy who knew that “Dulles had lied to his face in the Oval Office about the chances for the operation’s success.”   When JFK refused the bait and courageously avoided the trap Dulles had set for him – “to break his little neck” – Dulles and his followers were enraged.  “That little Kennedy … he thought he was a god,” Dulles let slip in 1965 on a stroll with the writer Willie Morris.

Talbot’s section on the attempted coup d’état against French President Charles de Gaulle is terrific. This CIA backed event, launched in the same month as the Bay of Pigs, was also clearly meant to embarrass Kennedy and to send the message that it was the CIA, not Kennedy, who was in charge.  The July 1962assassination  attempt  on  de  Gaulle  emphasized  the  message:  those  who  dare  to  recognize  the independence of Third World countries, as JFK had proposed in 1957 and de Gaulle was in the process of doing with Algeria, would be eliminated.

Talbot convincingly shows that although he was out as CIA Director, Dulles was still very much in power,avidly conferring and plotting with his CIA acolytes, his moles in the Kennedy administration, and hismilitary  allies  led  by  the Joint  Chief’s  chairman Lemnitzer,  who hated  Kennedy.

    “Like  the Time-Life building in Manhattan, Dulles’s brick house on Q Street was a boiling center of anti-Kennedy opposition.The actively ‘retired’ spymaster maintained a busy appointments calendar, meeting not only with CIA old boys like Frank Wisner and Charles Cabell [the brother of the mayor of Dallas on the day Kennedy was murdered], but with a steady stream of top-rank, active- duty agency officials such as Angleton, Helms,Cord Meyer, and Desmond Fitzgerald.  More surprisingly, Dulles also conferred with mid-level officials and operational officers such as Howard Hunt, James Hunt (a key deputy of Angleton, and no relation toHoward), and Thomas Karamessines (Helm’s right-hand man).”

In October 1963 Dulles gave a speech ridiculing the Kennedy administration’s “yearning to be loved” by the rest of the world.  His best-selling book,  The Craft of Intelligence, also appeared that fall and was sycophantically praised by his media allies at The New York Times and Washington Post, papers that would give their seal of approval to the Warren Commission report that Dulles would control and which has been called the Dulles Commission.  Talbot correctly notes throughout the book that Dulles always had the backing of the powerful mainstream media such as The New York Times, The Washington Post,Time-Life, etc.  Their owners and executives were a key part of his network of friends and insiders who worked in tandem to support their mutual interests at home and abroad.

He has a revelatory section on Dulles’s retreat on the weekend of JFK’s assassination to the top-secret“Farm,” a CIA command facility, officially known as Camp Peary.  From Friday, November 22, the day of the assassination, through Sunday, the 24th, the day Ruby shot Oswald, Dulles hunkered down at this training center for assassins, as described by former CIA agents Philip Agee and Victor Marchetti. It was also a “black site” where extreme interrogation methods were used on suspected enemies. What he was doing there is unknown, though highly suspicious.

The weakest part of Talbot’s final  section, where he marshals plenty of circumstantial evidence that strongly suggests but doesn’t prove Dulles’s part in the assassination, is his analysis of Ruth and Michael Paine.  Talbot interviewed them in their retirement community and came away a bit starry-eyed.  Ruth Paine was the Dallas housewife who had befriended Marina Oswald and taken her – and Lee Harvey on weekends – to live with her.  She was the key witness for the Warren Commission.  It was at her home where incriminating evidence against Oswald was found.  The Paine’s connection to the CIA, Dulles’ network,  and other  CIA operations,  confirmed by excellent  researchers in great  detail,  escapes him,although he does note their connection to Mary Bancroft, Dulles’s former mistress.  Of the Paines he writes,  “In  their  immaculate  innocence,  the Paines  played  right  into  the hands  of  those who were manipulating Oswald.”  I’m afraid Talbot is the innocent here.  The Paines are very important figures in the assassination and seeing them clearly would add to his powerful thesis. Perhaps he was tired at this point in his pursuit of the satanic Dulles.

He does raise three interesting issues in his last hundred or so pages. (I  should note that  The Devil’sChessboard is a very long – 661 pages – and heavily documented book.)  They are: the aforementionedaccount of Dulles at “the Farm,” the connections to the attempted coup and assassination against deGaulle,  and the very real  possibility  of  CIA operative William Harvey being involved in the killing ofKennedy.  Otherwise, there is not much new about the assassination, though he does do an excellent jobof  marshalling  the  available  recent  research  on  the  subject  and  sprinkling  his  text  with  intriguingsuggestions.

One of the most interesting new details he offers is from a book by de Gaulle’s information minister Alain Peyrefitte, C’etait de Gaulle,  which was never translated into English.  In it the French president, just home from JFK’s funeral, confides to Peyrefitte that he knew that the CIA was behind the assassination.“What happened to Kennedy is what nearly happened to me.  His story is the same as mine …. The security forces were in cahoots with the extremists …. But you’ll see.  All of them together will observe the law of silence.  They will close ranks.  They’ll do everything to stifle any scandal.  They will throw Noah’s cloak over these shameful deeds.  In order not to lose face in front of the whole world.  In order to not risk unleashing riots in the United States.  In order to preserve the union and to avoid a new civilwar.  In order to not ask themselves questions.  They don’t want to know.  They don’t want to find out.They won’t allow themselves to find out.”

Thus the “unspeakable,” although an open secret, was born. But JFK’s assassination isn’t a mystery.  As Dr. Martin Schotz said twenty years ago, “Any citizen who is willing to look can see clearly who killed President Kennedy and why.”  The basic facts are long known that he was killed by a CIA led operation to eliminate him for his intention to end the Vietnam War, for his support of Third-World independence, for his  opposition to the military-corporate-industrial  complex,  and for  his  efforts to  end the Cold  War.Talbot knows all this.  He knows that JFK’s American University address of June 11, 1963 sealed his fate.He knows and says that Robert Kennedy was also killed as a result of a conspiracy, and he needed to be stopped before he became president and reopened the killing of his brother.  Talbot’s valiant effort to put  faces  on  the  conspirators  is  laudatory.  But  while  being  also  highly  suggestive,  it  may  not  be necessary.

The Devil’s Chessboard is a very important book. David Talbot has exposed the face of evil incarnate in Allen Dulles, the hit-man for the power elite.  He has documented the rise of the secret state that holds the ignorant in its grip today, is waging war around the globe, and spying on the American people.  He has warned us that evil often wears the mask of civility and high society.  Satan, he suggests, wears many masks, and he continues to move the pawns with a smile.

“Dead for nearly half a century,” he concludes,” Dulles’s shadow still darkens the land.”  And although he is  reticent to name today’s names who carry on his legacy,  and refers to them as “faceless security bureaucrats,” they do have faces, and names, as Allen Dulles did – so it’s  time to call them out and name them.  Otherwise we are playing Dulles’s mind-control games, and we will have to wait another fifty years to read a comparably excellent study showing future readers who Dulles’s clones are today.

Like  Arthur  Schlesinger,  Kennedy’s  craven  assistant,  who,  when  asked  to  watch  the  Zapruder  film’s infamous frame 313 kill shot, turned his head and walked away saying, “I can’t look and won’t look,” we will become accomplices by neglect in the ongoing hijacking of the country by the secret state.

David Talbot is a true patriot for giving us this extraordinary book.

Edward Curtin is Professor of Sociology at the Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, North Adams, MA
Copyright © Prof. Edward Curtin, Global Research, 2015
Save As Many As You Can

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 17502
    • View Profile
Re: Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World in Our Time by Carrol Quigley
« Reply #22 on: October 27, 2015, 08:29:48 AM »
I really have meant to pick this book up and peruse it. With J. Edgar Hoover and Allen Dulles running things, we're lucky we lived past age 5.
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline K-Dog

  • Global Moderator
  • Sous Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 3159
    • View Profile
    • K-Dog
Re: Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World in Our Time by Carrol Quigley
« Reply #23 on: October 27, 2015, 01:55:04 PM »
Fascinating read above about the Devils Chessboard.  The deep state is alive and well, monitoring and shaping public opinion with the same evil now that Dulles brought to the game board so many years ago.  I was appalled and outraged when I discovered the deep state for myself but now three years after the fact I've realized that while Dulles was evil America shares some blame for its complacency in allowing the deep state to continue operating.  We romanticize the intelligence services.  A new James Bond movie is set to debut and the popular view is that the deep state, despite faults, is good for the country.  The read above nails home the point that the deep state operates from a particular political point of view which panders to the powerful and which does not represent the best interest of America.  The deep state makes the FSoA what it is; a plutocracy masquerading as a democracy with powerful propaganda arms that hold Americans in a grip of ignorance and powerlessness.  All for the benefit of the bank accounts of a small minority the deep state drives us down the road to ruin and nobody seems to care.  I'm not sure which vexes me more now.  The evil of the deep state or the evil of America for allowing the deep state to continue to run the country.  Dulles still has an Airport named for him and I ask the question why?  There is no excuse.
Under ideal conditions of temperature and pressure the organism will grow without limit.

Offline Eddie

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 17502
    • View Profile
Re: Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World in Our Time by Carrol Quigley
« Reply #24 on: October 27, 2015, 02:34:08 PM »


This one is supposed to be good, too.
What makes the desert beautiful is that somewhere it hides a well.

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
The World Economic Forum – WEF – Financial Collapse or not Collapse?
« Reply #25 on: January 28, 2016, 04:46:32 PM »
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-world-economic-forum-wef-financial-collapse-or-not-collapse-that-is-the-question/5504236


The World Economic Forum – WEF – Financial Collapse or not Collapse – that is the Question
By Peter Koenig
Global Research, January 28, 2016


Impression of the making of the Annual Meeting 2011 of the World Economic Forum in Davos

Our men . . . have killed to exterminate men, women, children, prisoners and captives, active insurgents and suspected people from lads of 10 up… Our soldiers have pumped salt water into men to “make them talk,” and have taken prisoners people who held up their hands and peacefully surrendered, and an hour later. .. stood them on a bridge and shot them down one by one, to drop into the water below and float down, as examples to those who found their bullet-loaded corpses.: Philadelphia Ledger newspaper in 1901, from its Manila [Philippines] correspondent during the US war with Spain for the control of the Philippines (ICH)


The 45th World Economic Forum – WEF – was hosted again by Switzerland and took place from 20-23 January 2016 – again in Davos, an 11,000-soul remote but lush mountain resort in the south-eastern part of the Swiss Alps. The elite summit was attended by some 2,500 hi-flying politicians, corporate execs, celebrities, and so-called social network movers and shakers – most of them billionaires – accompanied by 500 journalists and some 600 staffers fully equipped with social media gear.

The Davos WEF happening is perhaps the most prominent and most visible one of a series of the globe’s elitist events – most of them secret, of the Bilderbergers, the Trilateral Commission, the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), the British Chatham House, to name just a few. Their memberships are overlapping and comprise the crème de la crème of the crop of the world elite.

They keep setting the standards for wars and conflicts, for who is to live and who is to die. They use highly civilized language in public, but their decisions behind closed doors eventually prompt such atrocities, as took place more than 100 years ago in the Philippines and later in Vietnam (see box), and were repeated since then all over the world umpteen times over, in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Palestine — and before during hundreds of years of European colonialism and plunder, torture and rape of Africa, Latin America and Asia, for resources and domination.

    The only place you and I disagree . . . is with regard to the bombing. You’re so goddamned concerned about the civilians, and I (in contrast) don’t give a damn. I don’t care.”. . . “I’d rather use the nuclear bomb. . . Does that bother you? I just want you to think big.” : Richard Nixon to Secretary of State Henry Kissinger on the Watergate tapes (ICH)

Human lives mean nothing to the ruling elite – which in Davos and elsewhere walk the talk of ‘political correctness’, about the world’s inequalities and its dangers. The more astute ones, even talk about social justice that would bring peace and stability. Words are cheap. They have of course no interest whatsoever in changing anything. Never had and never will. Their growing mountains of privileges are sacrosanct. The profits from wars and conflicts, from the weapon industry, are astronomical.

They talk about imminent climate change and its dangers, yet they fly into the Davos summit in hundreds of private jets, totally oblivious to the carbon footprint they paint in the sky.

A few days before the WEF event, Oxfam published a telling report, “Wealth: Having It All and Wanting More”, including some significant statistics. In 2015, 62 families owned US$ 1.76 trillion, more than the bottom half of the world’s population, 3.6 billion people. The wealth of the poorest half of the globe’s population has fallen by 41% since 2010, while the riches of the wealthiest 62 families has increased by half a trillion dollars. The gap is growing at breath-taking speed. According to a Credit Suisse report the world’s total wealth in 2015 was estimated at US$ 250 trillion. By 2016, with ongoing trends, 1% of population will own more wealth than 99% of the world’s populace; and the 1% (some 72 million people) would own more than half of the world’s wealth, meaning about US$ 130 trillion. The trend is alarming, pointing to an ever faster increase of social misery.

Now – given these growing inequalities, will the glaring injustice bring more social upheavals, protests, conflicts? Will it bring the World Order down? Will our corrupt system collapse or will it not – that is the question? – The question has to be asked for rhetoric and credibility’s sake. But be aware, nobody in power wants the system to collapse. As long as the powers that be – the Masters of the Universe, those behind the scene, those who pull the strings and send their emissaries of CEOs, politicians and celebrities to events like Davos; as long as this white collar murderous scum* (see box) is in place and ticking – and we the 99.99% look on in awe and fear, fear from invented terror, as long as we allow this injustice to prevail, the system will not collapse. They – the Masters of the Universe and their ambassador stooges – have us under their fingernails and can crush us at will. After all, they live from permanent conflicts and wars. As the Washington Post so honestly proclaims, wars are profitable. There is no soap in the world strong enough to cleanse their blood-stained hands.

    *White collar murderous scum – You may be shocked at my calling these smooth elitists assassins. Aren’t people who decide on wars, on invading countries, on sending drones to kill – leaders who direct torture camps around the globe, or who sit on top of financial institutions that starve entire segments of people to death, or deprive them of vital medical and social services, people who direct corporations that knowingly and willingly contaminate the environment and poison the waters of entire communities, making them sick and killing them – aren’t these people murderers by any definition of the term?

The perpetuation of these rotten WEF-type elite is precisely what drives inequality, what causes insecurity through widening rich-poor gaps, prompting wars, atrocities, endless chains of refugees, famine, misery, discrimination. These elite carry the stamp of poverty with which they brand the vast majority of the population like cattle. Their ultimate goal is to reduce the world population to some 500 million to 1 billion people to be used as their serfs. A reduced world population might allow an ever shrinking and ever richer elite to live longer in splendour and luxury with Planet Earth’s overexploited resources, what’s left of them. In the 1960s we, the western world, crossed the critical threshold of the resources balance. Today, the west with its steadily growing consumption and growth fetish, (ab)uses by a rate of about 4 times the generous resources Mother Earth provides.

The elite have seen the writing on the wall. In the 1950s Henry Kissinger was appointed as a Board Member of the CFR, a Rockefeller creation. He soon started propagating a reduction in world population. In 1974, Kissinger, then head of the US National Security Council, commissioned a classified 200-page study on “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests” which concluded proposing population-reduction programs using food as a weapon, i.e. food shortages would induce massive famine and death – genocide by famine  (http://www.larouchepub.com/other/1995/2249_kissinger_food.html). Genetically modified food by Monsanto is the direct result of Kissinger’s quest, “Control the oil, and you control nations. Control the food, and you control the people. Control money and you control the world.”

What does this have to do with the WEF? – Everything. The WEF is led by the invisible hands of the Masters of the Universe – the clandestine powers to which belong the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Morgan Stanleys and many of the military industrial complex and pharmaceutical leaders – and to which the criminal mind of Kissinger’s is a helpful advisor (Who Really Controls the World http://www.globalresearch.ca/who-really-controls-the-world/5445239). Forefathers of world history, including Mahatma Gandhi, Presidents Lincoln, Eisenhower, Kennedy, as well as British PM Winston Churchill have warned of the looming ascension of this occult power to the detriment of world peace.

They, the Masters of the Universe, pull the strings by sending their billionaire puppets to Davos to confuse the obedient listeners, spectators and serfs, i.e. the world at large, with wise and politically correct but totally hollow speech, “will there be more crises ahead?” – “Will the current World Order collapse?” – “Will it survive? “- “How will climate change affect our future?” And of course, “what will the markets do and say?” – The markets, the epitome of the Washington Consensus doctrine, will never be forgotten in this neoliberal, neo-fascist western world, whose creation and simultaneous destruction, we, the 99.99%, have not only tolerated but facilitated. The answers to these questions were as diverse and empty as were the questions themselves. However, there was one common theme permeating everything: Money rules the world.

Switzerland is the epicentre of neoliberalism in Europe; the archetype of what the western world calls democracy, where parliamentarians have the legal right to sit on several boards of directors of corporations and financial institutions representing in Parliament their corporate and financial interests rather than those of the people who elected them; a truly built-in lobby in the name of democracy, unique among OECD countries.  Who would be better placed than the Swiss to host again and again shamelessly this notorious Davos event for the super-super rich – politicians, corporate CEOs, celebrities and so-called social change-makers (who change of course absolutely nothing for the betterment of society), clogging Swiss airports with their fleet of private jets?

The Swiss government mobilized over 5,000 military police plus countless Police officers from around the country to protect this international nobility. Rooftop snipers in their winter gear looked like ISIS in white.

They provided airspace and highway protection above and around Davos. The total cost to Swiss tax-payers of protecting WEF attendees is not published, but must be astronomical.

The conference centres were fenced-off by steel barriers; all to defend the self-styled luminaries from imaginary ‘terror threats’ and protesters. If not in the news, because these illustrious and notorious personalities, including at least 40 heads of state, are not to be unnecessarily scared, lest they may not come – what a loss that would be!

Terror is seamlessly built-into today’s societies’ thought processes. Never mind, that those who pretend to defend the populace are the same that cause and create the terror, hence justifying militarization and eventually police states – soon inscribed in the Constitutions of Washington’s European vassals. France’s Hollande and his PM Mr. Valls, are asking the French Parliament to approve such legislation by declaring a permanent state of emergency; all justified by the January and November 2015 (false flag) attacks in Paris.

A few days after the sun set on WEF 2016, Europol, giving no foundation whatsoever, announces increasing ‘terror threats’ throughout Europe, justifying a rapid increase of militarization of Europe. People will ask for it, for fear – as they have been thoroughly brainwashed by the lie and propaganda and corrupted mainstream media. Their brains are waning, as rapidly as the police state is taking over.

Despite these measures to increase security for the rich, hedge fund managers are reportedly buying airstrips and farms in such remote areas as New Zealand, because they think they need a getaway. 

TeleSUR suggests that the WEF’s claim to make the world a better place is a joke. That might be an understatement considering who the WEF’s partners are. Nestlé, the Swiss food giant, whose CEO, Peter Brabeck, recently stated that considering water as a fundamental human right is “extreme”. Nestlé’s human rights and environmental abuses abound. They are accused of forced child labor on their cocoa plantations in the Ivory Coast. Nestlé’s water CEO, Tim Brown, has refused to stop bottling water in Sacramento, California, despite the extreme drought. While farmers were ordered to stop pumping water to irrigate their crops, Brown retorted, “If I could increase (bottling water) I would.”

Other disreputable WEF partners include Chevron which dumped allegedly over 16 billion gallons of oil and toxic waste in the pristine forests of Ecuador’s Amazon, affecting 30,000 indigenous residents, some with cancer and early death. They won a US$ 9.5 billion law suit for damages which Chevron never paid.

There is also Coca Cola with water conflicts throughout Latin America, including in a northern El Salvador municipality, where the beverage giant affects the lives of tens of thousands of residents with contaminated water they say poisons them and kills their animals. Elsewhere in Latin America, Coca Cola allegedly hires paramilitaries for intimidation, torture and murder of unionists in Colombia and Guatemala.

Social justice activist Susan George calls the Davos gang “predatory”, running the west’s major institutions. She sums the conference up as an organization of dirty partners, from polluting miners, to money-laundering banks and community-destroying corporations. Yet, the populace is made believe that the WEF is “committed to improving the state of the world.”

As long as the Masters of the Universe are in charge – and they have been for the last at least 150 years – there is no chance for a world of harmony and peace. They have decided the fate of the Middle East and the world – next Syria and eventually Iran must fall. The following targets are Russia, then China through Central Asia and the South China Sea. The well-paid WEF morons in Davos are ordered to deceive and confuse, time and again, as they have done throughout the 45 annual WEF summits – all adapted to the ‘current dangers and fears’. It is high time that we, The People, the 99.99% wake up and open our eyes to an uncomfortable reality

Peter Koenig is an economist and geopolitical analyst. He is also a former World Bank staff and worked extensively around the world in the fields of environment and water resources. He writes regularly for Global Research, ICH, RT, Sputnik, PressTV, CounterPunch, TeleSur, The Vineyard of The Saker Blog, and other internet sites. He is the author of Implosion – An Economic Thriller about War, Environmental Destruction and Corporate Greed – fiction based on facts and on 30 years of World Bank experience around the globe. He is also a co-author of The World Order and Revolution! – Essays from the Resistance.

The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Peter Koenig, Global Research, 2016
Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
Rockefellers Play With Fire: The Oil Scheme is Getting More Dangerous
« Reply #26 on: February 04, 2016, 05:17:06 PM »
I don't entirely buy these arguments, but they are interesting.

RE

http://www.greanvillepost.com/2016/02/04/115099/

Rockefellers Play With Fire: The Oil Scheme is Getting More Dangerous—
Author TGP STAFF Date February 4, 2016

WITNESSES TO HISTORY
CALEB MAUPIN



 

John D Rockefeller (right) was the quintessential robber baron. His devious tactics still work in the 21st century. CC BY-NC-ND by Boston Public Library

Oil has fallen below $30 per barrel. The decline in oil prices that alarmed the world when it began in 2014 has lasted much longer than expected. Natural gas, steel, copper, and other commodities are also seeing their prices fall. Economists are becoming alarmed as all the signs indicating some kind of pending recession are appearing.

US media would have us believe that the “Chinese Slowdown” is solely responsible for this looming escalation of the economic crisis. However, it is widely acknowledged that the low oil prices are quite costly for the global economy and that this prolonged, artificial deflation is getting more and more dangerous. The price drop is intentionally planned and being carried out for specific purposes. For very selfish reasons, the House of Rockefeller is playing with fire, and threatening to burn the entire global economy to the ground.

Securing the Power of Exxon-Mobil

The Rockfellers are one of the most powerful families in the United States, and have been for a long time. Their history can be traced back to the 19th century and the rise of a corporation called Standard Oil. Today, their power can be found in the world’s largest oil corporation, Exxon-Mobil. Exxon-Mobil, a direct descendant of John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil, is the fifth-largest corporation in the entire world.

The Rockefellers and their friends at the Council on Foreign Relations have determined that keeping oil prices low serves long-term US foreign policy objectives — i.e., keeping Wall Street at the center of the global economy.

Long ago, when the Rockefellers were rising to power, their favorite tactic for beating out their competitors was price manipulation. In the 1800s, the Rockefellers would lower their prices and flood the markets with cheap oil. Once their opponents went under, they would raise their prices back up, and make bigger profits than ever. This method for centralizing economic power was developed almost into a science by John D. Rockefeller and his minions. Eventually, Standard Oil was targeted by Theodore Roosevelt with his famous “trust-busting” reforms.

In more recent decades, the Rockefellers have distinguished themselves among the US power elite by being visibly political. The Council on Foreign Relations, the highly secretive think tank in which US foreign policy is discussed and established, is almost completely funded by Rockefeller and Ford Foundation money. Rockefeller money is behind the Asia Society, the Open Society Foundations, and many other key voices in US political discourse.

While the Rockefellers are among the richest people on earth, their wealth does not translate to conservative politics as some might naively assume. Since the end of the Second World War, the Rockefellers have been liberals. Inscriptions honoring the Rockefellers can be found inside Riverside Church, a New York City religious institution associated with anti-war and civil rights activism.

MSNBC, the US television network that promotes the liberal politics of Rachel Maddow and Chris Hayes, as well as the pro-Democratic Party comedy sketches of Saturday Night Live, broadcasts from inside Manhattan’s Rockefeller Center. The National Broadcasting Company (NBC) media conglomerate was created by General Electric, one of the biggest military contractors. GE is also part of the Rockefeller empire.

The Rockefeller family is known for promoting reproductive choice, as well as LGBTQ rights. They are closely linked to the Democratic Party. The land on which the United Nations headquarters was constructed was once the property of the Rockefeller family, given as a personal donation.

The powerful family’s ownership of Exxon-Mobil cannot be separated from their strategic political alliances. Barack Obama’s administration and the Democratic Party have been faithful economic and political servants of the Rockefeller dynasty. The money behind the primary opponents of the Democrats on the political stage comes from Exxon-Mobil’s primary competitor. MSNBC’s obsession with demonizing the “Koch Brothers” as the incarnation of modern political evil isn’t simply about politics. Behind the politics is a classic market rivalry between Exxon-Mobil and Koch Industries.

The Rockefeller-CIA Oil Scheme

Three countries which are major opponents of the United States on the geopolitical stage — Russia, Venezuela, and Iran — are also oil exporters and major competitors with US oil corporations. All three of these countries have independent economies centered around government-owned natural resources. Each of these countries are also suffering serious consequences from the oil-price drop.

In Venezuela, the right-wing opposition — funded by Rockefeller- and Ford Foundation-linked NGOs — won control of the parliament in the 2015 December elections. The Bolivarian movement, led by the United Socialist Party and Nicolas Maduro, rose to power by utilizing the oil proceeds to fund housing, education, medical care, and community-controlled media. The oil price drop has caused these forces tremendous problems, and weakened the social programs.

The economic problems created by US sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran were intensified by the oil-price drop. Difficult economic circumstances swayed Iranian public opinion, strengthening President Hassan Rouhani and the forces calling themselves the “reformist movement.” The oil-price drop was a significant factor in bringing about the P5+1 nuclear conclusion, in which two-thirds of Iran’s peaceful nuclear energy program was dismantled.

Russia has been forced to cut its domestic budget. The spending of government money made Vladimir Putin very popular. Government-owned oil and natural gas allowed Russia to reboot its economy following the disastrous period of the 1990s.

The Rockefellers and their friends at the Council on Foreign Relations have determined that keeping oil prices low serves long-term US foreign policy objectives — i.e., keeping Wall Street at the center of the global economy.

“The talking heads on MSNBC are working very hard to push the millions of Americans who now identify themselves as “socialists” away from militant labor activism, and toward campaigning for the Democratic Party.”

So, how is the oil-price drop being carried out? What is causing the prices to go down? Innovations in technology, such as hydraulic fracking and new drilling methods, have certainly played a role. However, the primary reason for the extreme drop has been the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The repressive, human-rights-violating Saudi monarchy continues to pour tens of millions of barrels of oil onto the international market every day. Despite losing billions of dollars and experiencing an escalating internal crisis, the Saudi regime continues to expand its oil production apparatus. Saudi Arabia executed 47 people on January 1, indicating that its internal problems are getting larger.

The reason for Saudi Arabia’s indulgence in self-destructive economic policies is merely obedience. Saudi oil is the de facto property of Wall Street. Saudi Arabia has the fourth-largest military budget of any country in the world, purchasing weapons almost exclusively from the United States. The Kingdom serves as a Middle Eastern extension of major US oil and military corporations. The Saudi regime is flooding the market, losing money, and wrecking their country, because the bosses at Exxon-Mobil, i.e., the Rockefeller family, are ordering it.

Trump and the Koch Opposition

The oil-price drop does not only serve geopolitical ends. There is a domestic side to it as well. The invention of hydraulic fracking and the rise of domestic oil production in the United States have both brought all kinds of strength to Rockefeller’s competitors. The Koch Brothers emerged stronger than ever, along with a slew of smaller oil tycoons, who lack the kind of longstanding and entrenched influence wielded by the Rockefeller dynasty.

US Congress has lifted the 1973 oil export ban and these domestic competitors can now export on the international markets. It should be no surprise that the Keystone Pipeline, and “Drill, baby, drill!” have become rallying cries of Republican politics. “Drill, baby, drill!” means breaking the power of the Rockefellers and strengthening Koch Industries, along with a whole crew of nouveau riche grouped around them, wanting a bigger chunk of the oil profits.

The Rockefellers are hoping that the oil-price drop can not only defeat the emerging anti-capitalist bloc around the world, but also their domestic competitors. This strategy is working out as well. Houston, a political headquarters for the Koch insurgency, is having a housing crisis because of the oil-price drop. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal highlighted how a town in Montana called Williston, booming a few years ago with new oil, has also been devastated.


The Kochs are getting their filthy butt kicked (so far) by the Rockefeller strategy, which is also supported by the abominable Saudis. CC BY by DonkeyHotey

Now that the more ideologically right-wing Tea Party has run its course, the Koch Brothers have put up Donald Trump as their strongman against the Rockefeller establishment. As Trump preaches hate for immigrants and Muslims, beating his chest with a false “everyman” populism, he is attempting to build a political army. The hope is not so much to capture the presidency but to strong-arm the Ford Foundation and the Rockefeller think tanks away from their monopoly on setting policy. The reason Trump strays from the standard US foreign policy script, seeming friendlier to Russia and more critical of Saudi Arabia, is because he represents Wall Street opposition to Rockefeller dominance. Different strategies in relation to oil-exporting countries are not completely off-limits.

In addition to market rivalries, there has been a long history of tension between the CIA and the Pentagon. The CIA leadership is trained at places like Harvard and Yale, carefully studying the art of how to achieve long-term geopolitical goals. The military brass, on the other hand, is trained only in the hard science of blowing things up. Not surprisingly, the two groups frequently come into conflict with each other. The Rockefellers, with their Council on Foreign Relations and alliance with George Soros, have always been closer to the CIA and the Democrats. The military lines up consistently with the Republicans.

On the global stage, the Rockefellers hope to gradually cash-starve opponents of US power, while fomenting “color revolution”-style internal crises. On the other side of things, Donald Trump talks about “bombing the hell” out of Iraq, and his followers have much more enthusiasm for direct military attacks on defiant countries. The tense standoff surrounding the P5+1 nuclear deal was a manifestation of these strategic differences.

The Agony of Capitalist Crisis

As the Rockfellers and Obama Administration continue to wage economic war against Russia, Venezuela, and Iran — while at the same time trying to economically weaken Koch Industries and secure the power of the oil monopolies — the global economy is headed for catastrophe. The Saudis are obediently churning out oil, and prices in other sectors like natural gas are following close behind. Investor confidence is dropping and the expected panic is setting in.

As things spiral downward, Donald Trump and the Koch Brothers are attempting to utilize the ideological right wing. The obsessively pro-Israel, anti-Islamic and anti-immigrant sectors of the US working class, primarily found among the dispossessed whites of the south and rural areas, are seen as a potential political goon squad.

Meanwhile, the left is being politically re-shuffled as radical ideas reemerge in US discourse. Rockefeller money is deployed to control and direct the re-energized (but completely confused) US left. The Ford Foundation has staged entire conferences against police brutality, hoping to point “Black Lives Matter” away from a confrontation with the US political establishment. The talking heads on MSNBC are working very hard to push the millions of Americans who now identify themselves as “socialists” away from militant labor activism, and toward campaigning for the Democratic Party. The Rockefellers have given up on trying to suppress basic anti-capitalist sentiments, and instead are hoping to redefine socialism with classless phrases like “a government that works for everyone.”

The younger generation of Americans, who are statistically much more left-wing, are the target audience of the Rockefeller political machine. The goal is for the former chaos-loving residents of Zuccotti Park to become disciplined foot soldiers against the Kochs. The last thing that the owners of Exxon-Mobil want is an upsurge of militant street fighters. They don’t want the radicalism of the 1960s Revolutionary Youth Movement or the 1930s Young Communist League. They want obedient functionaries who study Saul Alinsky.

Behind all of this is an almost unresolvable economic problem. The computer revolution has made it cheaper and easier than ever to produce things, and now millions of people have no place in the world economy. The world market is full of commodities, cheaply produced by machines. These products cannot be purchased by the increasingly impoverished people of the world who no longer have a place at the assembly line.

In a crisis of mass migration, the people who the system no longer has a place for have fled from Africa, Latin America, the Middle East, and Southeast Asia. Within the United States and Western Europe, the standard of living is dropping and the next generation is adjusting to a low-wage economy.

With Russia and China as the linchpin, a new bloc of state-controlled, centrally planned economies has emerged, carving out an alternative in the world economy. Global events continue to reinforce the notion that western neoliberal capitalism is not the end of history.

The financial system, based on usury and exploitation, that has ruled the world for over 500 years, is in a long, deep crisis. Within the power structure, different factions are scrambling to save it, as alternatives to it are becoming more attractive to the dispossessed. Different strategies to defeat the rising global opposition are being utilized. Gradually, police state repression and militarism are beginning to replace the “democracy” and “human rights” western societies have often bragged about.

Everywhere the stakes are getting higher, and there is rising danger of greater catastrophe. The global stage of the 21st century is gearing up to unleash world-shaking surprises.


Caleb Maupin is an American journalist and political analyst. Tasnim News Agency described him as “a native of Ohio who has campaigned against war and the U.S. financial system.” He was involved in the Occupy Wall Street movement from its planning stages. His political activism began while attending Baldwin-Wallace College in Ohio. In 2010, he video recorded a confrontation between Collinwood High School students who walked out to protest teacher layoffs and the police. His video footage resulted in one of the students being acquitted in juvenile court. He was a figure within the Occupy Wall Street protests in New York City. Maupin writes on American foreign policy and other social issues. Maupin is featured as a Distinguished Collaborator with The Greanville Post.  READ MORE ABOUT CALEB MAUPIN HERE.
Save As Many As You Can

Offline agelbert

  • Global Moderator
  • Master Chef
  • *****
  • Posts: 11820
    • View Profile
    • Renewable Rervolution
Re: Tragedy & Hope: A History of the World in Our Time by Carrol Quigley
« Reply #27 on: February 04, 2016, 06:03:21 PM »
 :emthup: :icon_sunny:

Lower oil prices will certainly lead to mergers of oil big pigs with the small pigs crushed. But if they think that will give them a competitive edge, they do not get it.

Some quotes for a recent Amory Lovins article:

"Those who claimed low oil prices would crash renewables (other than biofuels) were wrong."

"Natural gas does compete with solar and windpower, and its price tends to move with oil’s, but cheaper gas doesn’t much affect renewable power either.  That’s because new wind and solar power often beat even the operating costs of the most efficient gas-fired power plants anyway, even without counting the market value of gas’s price volatility."

But here's the GIANT elephant in the energy room that has made mince meat out of oil demand predictions by the fossil fuelers:


"Over the past 40 years, Americans have saved 31 times as much energy as renewables added. Those cumulative savings are equivalent to 21 years’ current energy use. They’re simply invisible: you can’t see the energy you don’t use. But globally, it’s a bigger “supply” than oil, and inexorably, it’s going to get much, much bigger.

Oil companies worry about climate regulation, but they’re even more at risk from market competition. The oil that’ll be unburnable for climate reasons is probably less than the oil that’ll be unsellable because efficiency and renewables can do the same job cheaper. An oil business that sputters when oil’s at $90 a barrel, swoons at $50, and dies at $30 will not do well against the $25 cost of getting U.S. mobility—or anyone else’s, since the technologies are fungible—completely off oil by 2050. That cost, like the $18 per saved barrel to make U.S. automobiles uncompromised, attractive, cost-effective, and oil-free, is a 2010–11 analytic result; today’s costs are even lower and continue to fall.

In short, like whale oil in the 1850s, oil is becoming uncompetitive even at low prices before it became unavailable even at high prices."  :icon_mrgreen:

As Oil Prices Gyrate  , Underlying Trends Are Shifting To Oil's Disadvantage 


Leges         Sine    Moribus      Vanae   
Faith,
if it has not works, is dead, being alone.

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
Hillary Clinton, The Council on Foreign Relations and The Establishment
« Reply #28 on: February 25, 2016, 01:58:08 PM »
http://www.greanvillepost.com/2016/02/25/hillary-clinton-the-council-on-foreign-relations-and-the-establishment/

Hillary Clinton, The Council on Foreign Relations and The Establishment


horiz grey linetgplogo12313



Clinton framed the notion of “the establishment” as consisting solely of political bodies of elected officials. Sanders simply argued that a better indicator of belonging to the establishment is one’s power and influence within political circles.

As part of the “two for the price of one” that Bill Clinton promised during his rise to the Presidency, Hillary is forced to hide from her role in the creation of the neoliberal New Democrats, the dominant faction of the party. During their joint reign in the White House, the Clintons steered the party far to the right with their draconian criminal justice measures, assault on welfare, liberalization of trade, and deregulation of banking. Their cronies continue to staff the highest ranks of the party and the Obama administration.

Just good pals, eh? Both amply qualify as defendants before a Nuremberg-type tribunal.

Clinton, in a desperate piece of deflection, resorted to playing the gender card: “Senator Sanders is the only person who I think would characterize me, a woman running to be the first woman president, as exemplifying the establishment.” This fatuous identity politics is meant to distract from her decades-long tenure at the top of the political system and collusion with those who exercise control over it. Of course, as Bernie points out, Hillary most represents and enjoys the support of the Democratic faction of the political establishment.

“During their joint reign in the White House, the Clintons steered the party far to the right with their draconian criminal justice measures, assault on welfare, liberalization of trade, and deregulation of banking. Their cronies continue to staff the highest ranks of the party and the Obama administration…”

But framing the issue as simply a matter of party politics and the electoral system misses the point. Elected officials are merely the public face of the ruling establishment. The broader establishment is composed of the elite class that determines economic policy.

There is no building that says “Establishment” on the door, but there is a century-old institution made up of wealthy and influential representatives of business, Wall Street, corporate law, academia and government. It is a creation of the elite ruling class to ensure their control over shaping policy for their own benefit. Their decisions result in funneling money – and, hence, power – into the hands of a small percentage of capitalists who exercise control over the political process in a positive feedback loop.

In their book Imperial Brain Trust, Laurence Shoup and William Minter write that: “The Council on Foreign Relations is a key part of a network of people and institutions usually referred to by friendly observers as ‘the establishment.’ ” [1]

The Council was founded after World War I in response to growing domestic social tensions and labor unrest. Socialism was gaining in popularity among the American public in an economic environment marred by exploitative working conditions and skyrocketing inequality.

The Council’s mission was to carry out long-term planning for a national agenda. The agenda was meant to undermine a domestic-oriented program that would involve collective decision making to achieve self-sufficiency, and thereby reduce the country’s dependence on foreign resources, trade, and other governments.

Some of the many multinationals that subscribed to the CFR’s Corporation Service included General Motors, Exxon, Ford, Mobil, United States Steel, Texaco, First National City Bank and IBM. [2]

“The Council, dominated by corporate leaders, saw expansion of American trade, investment, and population as the solution to domestic problems. It thought in terms of preservation of the status quo at home, and this involved overseas expansion,” Shoup and Minter write. [3]

This imperialist agenda was achieved through manufacturing the consent of the masses (what they called “public enlightenment”), as well as developing foreign policies and ensuring government officials supported and executed these policies.

The Council has been remarkably successful in its mission. It has achieved a monopoly over foreign policy planning, and become thoroughly integrated with the government that carries out policy prescriptions. Entire administrations have drawn their foreign policy officials from the ranks of the Council. There is a steady two-way flow of personnel between the Council and government.

Chelsea’s main credential for her fame and establishment embrace are her marquee name and her parents deep connections. [CC BY-NC-ND by WBUR]

Both Bill and Chelsea are current members of the CFR. While Hillary herself is not a member, she is no doubt influenced by her immediate family’s ties to the Council. Additionally, she collaborated closely with the Council while she served as Secretary of State, as she made clear in a 2009 speech at the Council’s office in Washington:

“I am delighted to be here in these new headquarters. I have been often to, I guess, the mothership in New York City. But it’s good to have an outpost of the Council right here down the street from the State Department. We get a lot of advice from the Council, so this will mean I won’t have as hard a go to be told what we should be doing, and how we should think about the future.

“One of many people whose career was launched by his association with the Council was Henry Kissinger. In the late 1950s, he was appointed the director of a study group on nuclear weapons, in collaboration with several of the Council’s directors. The result was a book authored by Kissinger, Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy.Kissinger went on to serve as possibly the most influential foreign policy official in American history under Richard Nixon (and later Gerald Ford), as both Secretary of State and National Security Adviser. He helped carry out war crimes when he transmitted President Nixon’s order “anything that flies on anything that moves” to General Alexander Haig, directing a massive, secret bombing campaign of Cambodia hidden from Congress and the American public.

Kissinger’s rise to power was essentially a matter of brains for hire with a total absence of moral scruples. [CC BY-NC by darthdowney]

Kissinger’s tenure also saw him intimately involved with the military coup led by General Pinochet to overthrow and kill democratically-elected President Salvador Allende in Chile in 1973; the invasion by Indonesia of East Timor in 1975 and the subsequent genocide against the native East Timorese; the South African invasion of Angola in 1975 and attempted installation of a puppet ruler amenable to the apartheid regime; and the Dirty War in Argentina in which leftist opposition members were killed an disappeared.Rather than being subjected to prosecution, or even suffering a loss of prestige, Kissinger has seen his reputation rise in the decades following his genocidal actions.Clinton wrote that “Kissinger is a friend, and I relied on his counsel when I served as secretary of state.”  She noted that they share “a belief in the indispensability of continued American leadership in service of a just and liberal order.”Clinton’s abstract and idealistic rhetoric exemplifies the bipartisan, imperialist agenda formulated and propagated by the Council on Foreign Relations. The humanitarianism is a guise for the ruthless pursuit of United States political and economic hegemony across the world. The people who belong to this elite club have internalized the imperialist worldview that the U.S. is an “indispensable nation” that upholds “a just and liberal” world order, and use this belief to rationalize their Machiavellian exertions of power abroad.The American establishment that matters most is not limited to any one party, gender, or government organization. It is limited to people who are involved, directly or peripherally, in formulating and carrying out the plans of a tiny elite class – plans that ignore the 99 percent of the Americans in whose names they act, and the billions of people whose lives their decisions impact. There is no one whose social relationships and professional career typifies this more than Hillary Rodham Clinton.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Matt Peppe writes about politics, U.S. foreign policy and Latin America on his Just the Facts blog (http://mattpeppe.blogspot.com). His work has appeared in Counterpunch, Common Dreams, Truthout and many other outlets. You can follow him on twitter at peppematt.


 

References

[1] Shoup, Laurence H. and William Minter. Imperial Brain Trust: The Council on Foreign Relations & United States Foreign Policy. Lincoln, NE: Authors Choice Press, 1977/2004. (pg. 9)

[2] Ibid. (pg. 50)[3] Ibid. (pg. 23)

Save As Many As You Can

Offline RE

  • Administrator
  • Chief Cook & Bottlewasher
  • *****
  • Posts: 38585
    • View Profile
http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillary-clintons-intimate-relationship-with-the-rothschild-banking-dynasty-the-shadowy-network-of-super-elites/5542966

Hillary Clinton’s Intimate Relationship with the Rothschild Banking Dynasty, The Shadowy Network of Super-Elites
By Steven MacMillan
Global Research, August 29, 2016
Region: USA
Theme: Global Economy

It’s hard to think of a presidential candidate that has been at the heart of more scandals than Hillary Clinton. Each passing day seems to bring a new revelation which shines more light upon the corrupt and murky world that Clinton operates in. If Clinton is installed into the White House by the elite in the coming months, it will not only be the final death blow to the American Republic, but it will also drastically increase the probability that a major conflagration will occur between the global powers of the world in the near future.

Despite not being a big fan of Trump – due to the fact that I’m not convinced that he is an independent candidate, or that he is not a hawk himself – there is no doubt that Clinton will be a total abomination as President. In the majority of the mainstream media, there has been a clear propaganda campaign to demonise Trump at all costs, focusing the public’s attention on Trump’s antics rather than Clinton’s crimes. The real estate magnate is hardly a difficult person to ridicule, but considering the blatant crimes that Clinton has committed, she has practically been given a free pass by the mainstream media.

There is of course a very good reason why she has been given such a pass by the mainstream media: Clinton is the elite’s puppet of choice for President. Each passing day brings further confirmation of this fact, with her establishment backers including numerous Wall Street giants, the military-industrial complex, in addition to the likes of George Soros. On top of these interests, we can now comfortably add the infamous Rothschild banking dynasty to the list. As Zero Hedge reported in their August 21st article titled, Hillary Clinton Flies 20 Miles In Private Jet To Attend Rothschild Nantucket Fundraiser:

    As we reported a few days ago, Bill and Hillary Clinton spent Friday night in Martha’s Vineyard celebrating Bill’s 70th birthday (posted here).  We’re sure it was a grand affair, well worth the heat Obama had to take from Louisiana flood victims to attend. Turns out the following morning, Hillary, not one to be bothered with traditional peasant forms of travel, awoke and took her private jet just 20 miles over to Nantucket where the Rothschild’s will be hosting a fundraiser.  The event is open to all…well anyone who can afford the $100,000 per person price tag.

In reality, this recent fundraiser is just the latest illustration of the connections between Clinton and the Rothschild family. Buried among the tens-of-thousands of emails sent to and from Clinton’s private servers when she was Secretary of State, were a series of exchanges that reveal the very intimate relationship between Clinton and Lynn Forester de Rothschild (or Lady de Rothschild).

In one email sent to Clinton on the 23rd of September, 2010, Lady de Rothschild wrote:

    You are the best, and we remain your biggest fans. Sweet dreams and Godspeed with everything you are doing.

Another email sent from Lady de Rothschild to Clinton on April 9th, 2012, read:

    Hi Hillary, Trust all is well. I have done some thinking about the ideas we discussed at dinner a couple of months ago. I have some further thoughts that I would love to run by you. Any chance you are free in DC at any time from the 16-20 of May? Or, any time or place that works for you. Lots of Love, Lynn.

Lady de Rothschild wrote in an April, 2010 email (under the subject “miss you”) to Clinton that: “I would love to catch up,” and “I remain your loyal adoring pal.” Hillary responds by writing: “I would love to see you but your days overlap w Karzai’s visit so I will have to get that settled before I can confirm a time but let’s make it happen. So I’m copying Lona and Huma so we can start planning. Much love, H.”

Lady de Rothschild married into the banking dynasty back in 2000, after reportedly meeting the billionaire financier, Sir Evelyn de Rothschild, in 1998, at the annual Bilderberg conference – with the  matchmaker in all of this being none other than the war criminal and former US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger. A long-time fundraiser and supporter of Clinton, Lady de Rothschild is an influential friend to have, considering the power that has been vested in the banking dynasty for centuries.

Hillary is not the only politician who has a close relationship with the “puppet masters” however. In 2009, it was revealedthat the British politician and former European Commissioner for Trade, Peter Mandelson, who held the position of Business Secretary at the time, was running Britain for a brief period from a Rothschild estate in Corfu.

Rothschild: The Preeminent Banking Dynasty

Although the internet is awash with hyperbolic and speculative articles on the nature of the Rothschild family, there is no question they are one of the most influential, powerful and wealthiest dynasties in modern history. The Rothschild’s emerged as the preeminent banking dynasty in Europe in the latter period of the 18th century, and continued to expand and grow in successive generations. They understood that the most effective way to influence and control the political affairs of a country, was to create and manage the financial system of that country.  As the late Carroll Quigley – a historian, establishment insider and Professor at Georgetown University – wrote in his 1966 book, Tragedy and Hope:

    “In time [the merchant bankers of London] brought into their financial network the provincial banking centers, organized as commercial banks and savings banks, as well as insurance companies, to form all of these into a single financial system on an international scale which manipulated the quantity and flow of money so that they were able to influence, if not control, governments on one side and industries on the other. The men who did this, looking backward toward the period of dynastic monarchy in which they had their own roots, aspired to establish dynasties of international bankers and were at least as successful at this as were many of the dynastic political rulers” (1998 printing: p.51).

Quigley continues:

    The greatest of these dynasties, of course, were the descendents of Meyer Amschel Rothschild (1743-1812) of Frankfurt, whose male descendents, for at least two generations, generally married first cousins or even nieces. Rothschild’s five sons, established at branches in Vienna, London, Naples and Paris, as well as Frankfurt, cooperated together in ways which other international banking dynasties copied but rarely excelled (1998 printing: p.51).

Quigley then moves on to document some of the other “banking families” that shared similar traits to the Rothschild dynasty:

    The names of some of these banking families are familiar to all of us and should be more so. They include Baring, Lazard, Erlanger, Warburg, Schroder, Seligman, the Speyers, Mirabaud, Mallet, Fould, and above all, Rothschild and Morgan. [These banking families] remained different from ordinary bankers in distinctive ways: … (5) They were almost equally devoted to secrecy and the secret use of financial power in political life. These bankers came to be called “international bankers” and, more particularly, were known as “merchant bankers” in England, “private bankers” in France, and “investment bankers” in the United States  (1998 printing: p.52).

What the relationship between Clinton and Lady de Rothschild demonstrates is that the political class, the corporate class and the banking class, are all connected in a shadowy network of super-elites. Or in the words of the legendary American stand-up comedian, George Carlin: “It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it.”

Steven MacMillan is a freelance writer and editor of  The Analyst Report.
Save As Many As You Can

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
1 Replies
1503 Views
Last post June 26, 2012, 12:50:24 PM
by agelbert
1 Replies
508 Views
Last post April 12, 2016, 05:38:19 PM
by Eddie
0 Replies
338 Views
Last post August 30, 2017, 12:05:57 AM
by RE