70-years-chart-illustrates-the-dominance-by-the-cfr-trilaterals-bilderbergers

Your Own Mind is Your Most Important 

Freedom Resource 

This chart illustrates the dominance by – 

The Council on Foreign Relations, 

The Trilateral Commission 

and The Bilderberg 

- in the major decision making processes and institutions of the 

United States of America over the last seventy years. 

Members are identified by "C", "T", or "B". 

U. S. Presidents 

George Walker Bush - non-member 

William Jefferson Blythe Clinton - B,C,T 

George Herbert Walker Bush - C,T 

James Earl Carter - C,T 

Gerald R. Ford, Jr. - B,C 

Richard Milhous Nixon - C 

Dwight D. Eisenhower - C 

Herbert Clark Hoover - C 

U. S. Vice Presidents 

Richard B. Cheney - C,T 

George H. W. Bush - C,T 

Walter Mondale - C,T 

Nelson Rockefeller - 

CIA Directors 

George J. Tenet - C 

William O. Studerman - C 

John M. Duetch - B,C,T 

James Woolsey - C

Robert M. Gates - C 

William H. Webster - C 

William J. Casey - C 

Stansfield Turner - C 

George H.W. Bush - C 

William E. Colby - C 

James Schiesinger - C 

Richard Helms - C 

John A. McCone - C 

Allen W. Dulles - C 

Walter Bedell Smith - C 

Secretaries of Commerce 

Ronald H. Brown - C 

Juanita M. Kreps - C,T 

Elliot Lee Richardson - C,T 

Peter G. Peterson - C 

John Thomas Conner, Jr. - C 

Barbara Hackman Franklin - C 

Secretaries of Defense 

Donald Rumsfeld- B 

William S. Cohen - C,T 

William J. Perry - B,T 

Les Aspen - C 

Richard B. Cheney - C,T 

Frank C. Carlucci, III - C,T 

Casper W. Weinberger - C,T 

Harold Brown - C,T 

Donald H. Rumsfeld - C 

James R. Schlesinger - C 

Elliot L. Richardson - C,T 

Melvin R. Laird - T 

Robert S. McNamara - B,C,T 

Neil H. McElroy - C 

Charles E. Wilson - C 

George C. Marshall - C 

James V. Forrestal - C 

Chairmen Joint Chiefs of Staff 

John M. Shalicashvilli - C 

Colin L. Powell - B,C 

William J. Crowe, Jr. - C,T

John W. Vessey - C 

David C. Jones - C 

Maxwell D. Taylor - C 

Lyman Lemnitzer - C 

Chiefs of Staff - Air Force 

Ronald R. Fogleman - C 

Merrill A. McPeak - C 

John T. Chain, Jr. - C 

Lew Allen, Jr. - C 

Michael J. Dugan - C 

Charles A. Gabriel - C 

Larry D. Welch - C 

Chiefs of Staff - Army 

Dennis J. Reimer - C 

Gordon R. sullivan - C 

John A. Wickham, Jr. - C 

Edward C. Meyer - C 

Secretaries of Energy 

William b. Richardson - B,C 

James R. Schlesinger - C 

Charles W. Duncan, Jr. - C 

Directors of the FBI 

William H. Webster - C 

William D. Ruckelshaus - C,T 

Secretaries of 

Health & Human Services 

Donna E. Shalala - C,T 

Joseph A. Califano, Fr. - C 

Casper a. Weinberger - C,T 


Abraham A. Ribicoff - C 

Secretaries of HUD 

Henry G. Cisneros - C,T 

Carla a. Hills - C,T

James T. Lynn - C,T 

Secretary of Interior 

Bruce E. Babbitt - C,T 

Attorneys General 

Richard Thornburgh - C 

William P. Rogers - C 


Nicholas deB. Katzenbach - C 

Secretaries of Labor 

Elaine L. Chao - C 

Lynn Martin - C 

Secretaries of State 

Colin Powell - B,C 

Madeline Albright - C 

William B. Richardson - C 

Warren M. Christopher - C,T 

Lawrence S. Eagleburger - C,T 

George P. Schultz - C 

Alexander M. Haig, Jr. - C,T 

Edmund S. Muskie - C 

Cyrus R. Vance - C,T 

Henry A. Kissinger - B,C,T 

William P. Rogers - C 

Dean Rusk - B,C 

Christian A. Herter Jr. - B,C 

John Foster Dulles - C 

Dean G. Acheson - C 

George C. Marshall - C 

Edward R. Stettinius, Jr. - C 

Cordell Hull - C 

Henry L. Stimson - C 

Frank B. Kellogg- C 

Current U.S. Senators 

Evan Bayh (D) IN - B 

Hillory Rodham Clinton (D) NY - B 

Christopher J. Dodd (D) CT - C

Dianne Feinstein (D) CA - C,T 

Bob Graham (D) FL - C 

Chuck Hagel (R) NE - B 

John F. Kerry (D) MA - C 

Joseph I. Lieberman (D) CT - C 

John McCain (R) AZ - C 

John D. Rockefeller, IV (D) WV - C,T 

Paul Sarbanes (D) MD - C 

Charles Shcumer (D) NY - C 

Olympia J. Snowe (R) ME - C 

Robert G. Torricelli (D) NJ - C 

Current U.S. House Members 

Douglas K. Bereuter (R) NE - C 

Howard L. Berman (D) CA - C 

Sanford D. Bishop, Jr. (D) GA - C 

Norman D. Dicks (D) WA - C 

Barney Frank (D) MA - C 

Richard A. Gephardt (D) MO - C 

Amory Houghton, Jr. (R) NY - C 

Henry Hyde (R) IL - C 

Nancy Lee Johnson CT - C 

James T. Kolbe (R) AZ - C 

James A.S. Leach (R) IA - T 

John P. Lewis GA - C 

Robert T. Matsui (D) CA - C 

James A. McDermott (D) WA - C 

Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) DC - C 

Ed Pastor (D) AZ - C 

Thomas E. Petri (R) WI - C 

Charles B. Rangel (D) NY - T 

Carlos A. Romero-Burcelo (D)PR - C 

John M. Spratt, Jr. (D) SC - C 

Former U.S. Senators 

Lloyd Bentsen (D) - B 

David L. Boren (D) - C 

Rudy Boschwitz (D) - C 

Edward Brooke (R) - B 

William L Bradley (D) - C 

John H. Chafee (R) - B,C,T 

William S. Cohen (R) - C,T 

Dick Clark (D) IA - C 

Alan Cranston (D) CA - T

John C. culver (D) IA - C,T 

John C. Danforth (R) MO- T 

Fred R. Harris (D) OK - B 

Gary Hart (D) CO - C 

J. bennett Johnston (D) LA - B 

Charles McC. Mathias (D) MD - B,C 

George S. McGovern (D) SD - C 

George J. Mitchell (D) ME - C 

Daniel Moynihan (D) NY - C 

Sam Numm (D) GA - B 

Claiborne Pell (D) RI - C 

Charles H. Percy (R) IL - C 

Larry Pressler (R) SD - C 

Abraham Ribicoff CT - C 

Donald W. Riegle MI - B 

Charles S. Robb (D) VA - C,T 

Terry Sanford (D) NC - C 

Hugh Scott PA - B 

Adlai E. Stevenson, III (D) IL - B,C 

William V. Roth, Jr. (R) DE - C,T 

Timothy Wirth CO - C 

Harris L. Wofford PA - C 

Former House Members 

John B. Anderson IL - C 

Michael D. Barnes MD - C 

Anthoney C. Beilenson (D) CA - C 

Landrum R. Bolling MT - C 

John Brademas NY - B,C,T 

Thomas J. Campbell (R) CA - C 

Richard B. Cheney (R) WY - C 

William F. Clinger, Jr. (R) PA - C 

Barbara B. Conable (D) NY - T 

Mervyn M. Dymally CA - C 

Dante B. FGascell FL - C 

Geraldine A. Ferraro (D) NY - C 

Thomas S. Foley (D) WA - C,T 

Donald M. Frazer MN - T 

Sam Gejdenson (D) CT - C 

Newton L. Gingrich (R) GA - C 

William H. Gray, III LA - T 

Bill Green NY - C 

Lee H. Hamilton (D) IN - B,T 

Jane Lakes Harmon (D) CA - C 

Mel Levine CA - C

Dave K. McCurdy OK - C 

Susan K. Molinari (D) NY - C 

Jim Moody WI - C 

Donald M. Payne (D) NJ - C 

John Edward Porter (R) IL - C 

Ogden R. Reid - C 

William B. Richardson (D) NM - C 

Patricia Scott Schroeder (D) CO - C 

Charles Schumer (D) NY - C 

Peter Smith VT - C 

Stephen J. Solarz (D) NY - C 

Louis Stokes (D) OH - C 

Esteban Edward Torres (D) CA - C 

Robert G. Torricelli (D) NJ - C 

Vin Weber MN - C 

Charles W. Whalen, Jr. OH - C 

Howard Wolpe MI - C 

Federal judiciary 

Stephen G. Breyer 

Assoc Jus S.Ct - C 

Ruth Bader Ginsburg 


Sandra Day O'Connor 


Felix Frankfurter 

Fmr. Assoc. Jus S. Ct - C 

Charles E. Hughes 

Fmr. Assoc. Jus S. Ct - C 

Dudley Baldwin Bonsal 

Dist Ct Judge, NY - C 

Jose Alberto Cabranes 

Dist Ct Judge, CT - C 

William W. Schwarzer 

Dist Ct Judge, CA - C 

Laurence Hirsch Silberman 

Cir Ct Ap Judge, WA - C 

Barrijngton D. Parker 

Dist Ct Judge, - C 

Richard Clark Allison 

US Claims Tribunal Judge 

The Hague - C 

Stephen Myron Schwebel 

Int Ct Judge, The Hague - C 

Theodore Tannenwald, Jr.

Tax Ct. Sr. Judge - C 

Federal Reserve System 

Alan Greenspan 

Chairman Bd Gov - C,T 

Alice Mitchell Rivlin 

Vice Chmn Bd Gov - C,T 

Alan Stuart Blinder 

Vice Chairman - C 

Paul Adolph Volcker 

Chairman Bd (frmr) - B,C,T 

Eugend R. Black 

Chairman Bd Gov (frmr) - C 

Authur F. Burns 


William McC. Martin 


Thomas B. McCabe 


Eugene Meyer 


G. William Miller 


Ellen Victoria Futter 

Chairman FRB, NY - C 

Maurice R. Greenberg 

Dep. Chairman (frmr) 

FRB, NY - B,C,T 

William J. McDonough 

Pres FRB, NY - B,C 

Dorothy Meadow Sobol 

FRB, NY - C 

Willene A. Johnson 

Sr. Officer, FRB, NY - C 

Ernest T. Patrikis 

Dep. Gen Counsel, FRB, NY - C 

Harold W. Anderson 

Pres FRB, Kansas City (frmr) - C 

Robert Patrick Forrestal 

Pres FRB, Atlanta - C 

Warren Bruce Rudman 

Dep Chmn, FRB, Boston - C 

A. William Reynolds 

Chmn, FRB, Cleveland - C 

Margaret L. Greene

Dep Mgr. FRB, Foreign Ops - C 

Sam Y. Cross 

Mr. Fed Open Mkt Acct - C 

Export-Import Bank 

John D. Macomber 

President & Chairman - C 

Kenneth D. Brody 

President & Chairman - C 

Eugen K. Lawson 

1st VP, V. Chairman - C 

William Richard Cline 

Mem. Adv. Board (former) - C 

Rita Maria Rodriguez 

Director - C 

International Monetary Fund 

William Brown Dale 

Dep. Mng. Director, Geneva - C 

Helen B. Junz 

Spec. Trade Rep., Geneva - C 

Richard David Erb 

Dep Mng. Director, Wash - C 

The World Bank 

Jessica P. Einhorn 

Managing Director - C,T 

James David Wolfensohn 

President - B,C 

Robert Strange McNamara 

President (former) - B,C,T 

Raymond Vernon 

Visiting Professor (former) - B,C 

John M. Page, Jr. 

Chief Economist - C 

David A. Wirth 

Economist Assistant - C 

Barbara Herz 

Division Chief - C 

Ann O. Hamilton 

Director - C 

Int'l Bank of Reconstruction

& Develop. 

Lewis Thompson Preston, Pres - C 

Andrew M. Kamarck, Wash. Off. - C 

Bank of America 

(Bankamerica Corp) 

A.W. Clausen 

Chairman & CEO (frmr) - T 

Nicholas Burhs Binkley 

Chairman & CEO - C 

Rudolph A. Peterson 

Chairman Exec Comm - B,C 

George William Coombe, Jr. 

Exec VP (frmr) - C 

Ignazio E. Lozano, Jr. 

Director - C 

Bankers Trust Company 

Charles S. Sanford, Jr. 


George J. Vojta 


Donald L. Staheli 

Director - C 

Brown Brothers Harriman 

Robert Livingston Ireland, III 

General Partner - C 

Alexander Tonio Ercklemtz 

Partner - C 

Walter H. Brown 

Ltd. Partner - C 

Frank W. Hoch 

Ltd. Partner - C 

Chase Manhattan Bank 

David Rockefeller 

Chmn Int Adv Comm - C,T 

Walter Vincent Shipley 

Chairman & CEO - C,T 

Thomas O. Lebrecque

President & COO - C,T 

Robert Royal Douglas 

Vice Chairman (frmr) - C 

John Donald Wilson 

Sr. VP (frmr) - C 

John P. Lipsky 

Chief Economist - C 

Riorden Roett 

Director - C 

Marina Von N. Whitman 

Director - C,T 

Citigroup 

Walter Bigelow Wriston, 

former Chairman - B 

William Reginald Rhodes, 


Richard A. Freytag 

President & CEO - C 

Leslie Elizabeth Bains 

Managing Driector - C 

Federal nat'l Mortgage Assoc. 

(FNMA) 

Franklin Delano Raines, 


Commercial Banks 

Almalgamated Bank 

Jack Sheinkman, 

Chairman - B,C 

Banc Pop. de Pureto Rico 

Richard L. Carrion, 


Capital Trust 

Obeh Felix Aburdene, 

Managing Partner- C 

Citibank, NYC 

Mitchell W. Hedstrom, 

Vice President - C 

Contenental Bank Corp. 

Richard Leslie Huber, 

Vice Chairman

Esp. Santo Bank, FL 

Jackson B. Gilbert, 

2nd Chairman - C 

Federal Home Loan Bank, Boston 

Eli Shapiro, 

fmr Chairman - C 

Federal National Payables 

John Robert Petty, 

Chairman - C 

First Boston Corp. 

Maynard J. Toll, Jr, 

Managing Director - C 

CS First Boston 

Richard C. Holbrooke, 

Vice Chairman - B,C 

CS First Boston 

John M Hennessy, 

President & CEO - C 

First City Bankcorp, Hou 

Alfred R. Abboud, 

(frmr) Chairman & CEO - C 

1st Fidelity Bankcorp, NJ 

Anthoney P. Terracciano, 

Chairman, President, CEO - C 

Irving Bank Corp 

Joseph A. Rice, 

fmr Chairman & CEO - C 

J.P. Morgan & Co. 

Dennis Weatherstone, 


Greenpoint Financial Corp 

Thomas S. Johnson, 


Mfr & Traders Trust, Buffalo 

Robert G. Wilmers, 

President & CEO- C 

Mercantile Bankshares 

Henry Furlong Baldwin, 

Chairman - C 

Michilin Financial Corp 

Alexander M. Vagliano, 

Chairman - C 

Morgan Guarantee Trust 

Rimmer de Vries, 

Sr. Vice President - C 

National City Bankcorp

Frederick L. Deming, 

Director- C 

The Private Trust Co. 

Richard E. Beeman, 


National Leadership Bank 

Robert H. Knight, 

Director - C 

NationsBank Corp 

Hugh L. McColl, Jr., 

Chairman, Pres & CEO - C,T 

Offit Bank, NYC 

Morris Wolf Offit, 

President - C 

Republic Bank of NYC 

Leslie Elizabeth Bains, 

Executive Vice President - C 

Riggs Bank of Washington 

Joe Lewis Allbritton, 

Chairman - C 

USAA, San Antonio 

M. Straser Holcomb, 

Exec.Vice President - C 

College & University Presidents 

Bowdoin College 

Robert Hazard Edwards - C 

Brown University 

Vartan Gregorian - C 

Cal. State, Bakersfield 

Thomas Abel Arciniega - C 

Carlton College 

Stephen Richard Lewis, Jr. - C 

CUNY Grad School 

Joseph S. Murphy - C 

CUNY 

Bernard Warren Harlston - C 

Colby College 

William Reckling Cotter - C 

Colorado University 

Quigg Newton - C 

Columbia 

Michael Ira Sovern - C 

Connecticut College 

Claire Lynn Gaudiani - C

Cooper Union 

John Jay Iselin - C 

Cornell University 

Frank Harold Trevor Rhodes - C 

Drew University 

Thomas H. Kean - C 

Duke University 

Nannerl O. Keohane - C,T 

Emory University 

Thomas James Laney - C 

Fordham University 

Joseph Aloysius O'Hare - C 

George Washington University 

Stephen Joel Trachtenberg - C 

Georgetown University 

Gwendolyn Mikell - C 

Harvard University 

Lawrence Summers - C 

Harvard University 

Neil L. Rudenstine (frmr) - C 

Johns Hopkins University Center 

Strat & Int. Students 

David M. Abshire - C,T 

Johns Hopkins University 

Robert Bruce Zoellick - B,C,T 

Johns Hopkins University 

Steve Muller - C 

Lafayette College 

Robert Irvin Rotberg- C 

Lewis & Clark College 

James Albert Garner (frmr) - C 

Lincoln University 

Niara Sudarkasa - C 

Long Island University 

David Joel Steinberg - C 

Michigan State University 

Melville Peter McPherson - C 

MIT 

Julius Adams Strattan (frmr) - C 

MIT 

Jerome Bert Weisner (frmr) - C 

Mt. Holyoke College 

Elizabeth Topham Kennan - C 

Muhlenberg College 

Arthur Robert Taylor - C,T 

New York University

Lawrence Jay Oliva - C 

Northwestern University 

Henry S. Bienen - C 

Pamona College 

Peter William Stanley - C 

Princeton University 

Harold Tofler Shapiro - C 

Rockefeller University 

Frederick Seitz (frmr)- C 

Rockefeller University 

Torsten Nils Wiesel - C 

SMU 

August Kenneth Pye - C 

SW Medical School 

Claud Kern Wildenthal - C 

Spelman College 

Donald M. Stewart (frmr) - C 

Spelman College 

Johnetta Betsch Cole - C 

Stanford University 

Gerhard Casper - C 

Stanford University 

Richard Wall Lyman (frmr) - C 

Tufts University 

Leila Fawaz - C 

University California 

Paul Harold Boecker - C 

University Chicago 

Hanna Holbern Gray - C 

University Hawaii 

James Harlan Cleveland - B,C 

University Miami 

Edward Thaddeus Foote, II - C 

University Notre Dame 

Theodore Martin Hesburgh - B,C,T 

University Pennsylvania 

Martin Meyerson (frmr)- C 

University So California LA 

Steven Browning Sample - C 

University Tulsa 

Robert Herschel Donaldson - C 

University Wisconsin 

Katherine Culbert Lyall - C 

Virginia Comm University 

Eugene Paul Trani - C 

Washington University

William Henry Danforth - C 

Weaton College 

Dale Rogers Marshall – C 

Carroll Quigley, Professor of History at Georgetown University, stated, 

"The Council of Foreign Relations is the American Branch of a society 

which originated in England and believes national boundaries should be 

obliterated and one-world rule established." 

The Council on Foreign Relations and the New 

World Order 

By Charles Overbeck 

The Council on Foreign Relations, housed in the Harold Pratt 

House on East 68th Street in New York City, was founded in 

1921. In 1922, it began publishing a journal called Foreign 

Affairs. According to Foreign Affairs' web page 

(http://www.foreignaffairs.org), the CFR was founded when 

"...several of the American participants in the Paris Peace 

Conference decided that it was time for more private American 

Citizens to become familiar with the increasing international 

responsibilities and obligations of the United States." 

The first question that comes to mind is, who gave these people 

the authority to decide the responsibilities and obligations of the 

United States, if that power was not granted to them by the 

Constitution. Furthermore, the CFR's web page doesn't publicize 

the fact that it was originally conceived as part of a much larger 

network of power. 

According to the CFR's Handbook of 1936, several leading 

members of the delegations to the Paris Peace Conference met at 

the Hotel Majestic in Paris on May 30, 1919, "to discuss setting up 

an international group which would advise their respective 

governments on international affairs."

The Handbook goes on to say, "At a meeting on June 5, 1919, the 

planners decided it would be best to have separate organizations 

cooperating with each other. Consequently, they organized the 

Council on Foreign Relations, with headquarters in New York, 

and a sister organization, the Royal Institute of International 

Affairs, in London, also known as the Chatham House Study 

Group, to advise the British Government. A subsidiary 

organization, the Institute of Pacific Relations, was set up to deal 

exclusively with Far Eastern Affairs. Other organizations were set 

up in Paris and Hamburg..." 

The 3,000 seats of the CFR quickly filled with members of 

America's elite. Today, CFR members occupy key positions in 

government, the mass media, financial institutions, multinational 

corporations, the military, and the national security apparatus. 

Since its inception, the CFR has served as an intermediary 

between high finance, big oil, corporate elitists and the U.S. 

government. The executive branch changes hands between 

Republican and Democratic administrations, but cabinet seats are 

always held by CFR members. It has been said by political 

commentators on the left and on the right that if you want to know 

what U.S. foreign policy will be next year, you should read 

Foreign Affairs this year. 

The CFR's claim that "The Council has no affiliation with the U.S. 

government" is laughable. The justification for that statement is 

that funding comes from member dues, subscriptions to its 

Corporate Program, foundation grants, and so forth. All this really 

means is that the U.S. government does not exert any control over 

the CFR via the purse strings. 

In reality, CFR members are very tightly affiliated with the U.S. 

government. Since 1940, every U.S. secretary of state (except for 

Gov. James Byrnes of South Carolina, the sole exception) has 

been a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and/or its 

younger brother, the Trilateral Commission. Also since 1940, 

every secretary of war and every secretary of defense has been a 

CFR member. During most of its existence, the Central 

Intelligence Agency has been headed by CFR members, beginning 

with CFR founding member Allen Dulles. Virtually every key 

U.S. national security and foreign policy adviser has been a CFR 

member for the past seventy years. 

Almost all White House cabinet positions are occupied by CFR 

members. President Clinton, himself a member of the CFR, the

Trilateral Commission and the Bilderberg Group, employs almost 

one hundred CFR members in his administration. Presidents come 

and go, but the CFR's power--and agenda--always remains. 

Closed Circuit--the shroud of secrecy around the CFR 

On its web page, the CFR boasts that its magazine, Foreign 

Affairs, "is acclaimed for its analysis of recent international 

developments and for its forecasts of emerging trends." It's not 

much of a challenge to do so, though, when you play a part in 

determining what those emerging trends will be. 

This point is underscored a paragraph later on their web page: 

"Perhaps best known for the history-making "X" article by George 

Kennan, that defined Cold War containment policy, a recent 

Foreign Affairs article by Harvard's Samuel Huntington, "The 

Clash of Civilizations" has already helped define the post-Cold 

War debate." 

So are they predicting trends or creating them The answer is 

fairly obvious to anyone who has earnestly reflected on the matter. 

The CFR fancies itself to represent a diverse range cultural and 

political interests, but its members are predominantly wealthy 

males, and their policies reflect their elitist biases. 

The CFR attempts to maintain the charade of diversity via its Non- 

Attribution Rule, which allows members to engage in "a free, 

frank, and open exchange of ideas" without fear of having any of 

their statements attributed in public. The flip side of this, 

obviously, is a dark cloud of secrecy which envelopes the CFR's 

activities. 

CFR meetings are usually held in secret and are restricted to 

members and very select guests. All members are free to express 

themselves at meetings unrestrained, because the Non-Attribution 

Rule guarantees that "others will not attribute or characterize their 

statements in public media forums or knowingly transmit them to 

persons who will," according to the Council on Foreign Relations' 

1992 Annual Report. 

The report goes on to forbid any meeting participant "to publish a 

speaker's statement in attributed form in any newspaper; to repeat 

it on television or radio, or on a speaker's platform, or in a 

classroom; or to go beyond a memo of limited circulation." 

The end result is that the only information the public has on the 

CFR is the information they release for public consumption, which

should send up red flags for anyone who understands the immense 

effect that CFR directives have on America's foreign policy. The 

public knows what the CFR wants the public to know about the 

CFR, and nothing more. 

There is one hole in the fog of secrecy, however: a book entitled 

Tragedy and Hope, written by an "insider" named Dr. Carroll 

Quigley, mentor of Bill Clinton. 

Tragedy and Hope--a glimpse behind the scenes of global 

management. 

Dr. Quigley knew a lot about the behind-the-scenes work of global 

power because he was a part of that power network for most of his 

life. In his book, Tragedy and Hope, Quigley states: 

"I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it 

for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 

1960's, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no 

aversions to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, 

been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, 

both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies ... but in 

general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain 

unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to 

be known." 

The "Hope" in the title of Quigley's book represents the thousandyear 

reign of a collectivist one-world society which will be created 

when the "network" achieves its goal of world government. 

Quigley believed that the "network" is so powerful at this point 

that resistance by the common people is futile. Hence, those who 

resist the schemes of the globalist planners represent the 

"Tragedy." By Dr. Quigley's logic, there is no point in struggling 

against the noose around our necks, because resistance will merely 

guarantee strangulation. 

Dr. Quigley identified the "network" as the "international 

bankers," men who were "different from ordinary bankers in 

distinctive ways: they were cosmopolitan and international; they 

were close to governments and were particularly concerned with 

questions of government debts...; they were almost exclusively 

devoted to secrecy and the secret use of financial influence 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." 

The core of control, according to Dr. Quigley, resides in the 

financial dynasties of Europe and America who exercise political 

control through international financial combines. The primary 

tactic of control is lending money at high interest to governments 

and monarchs during times of crisis. An example of this is the 

current national debt in the U.S., which is at five trillion dollars 

right now. Every penny of it is owed to the Federal Reserve, a 

corporation comprised of thirteen private banks. 

According to Dr. Quigley, the Council on Foreign Relations is one 

of several front organizations set up by the network's inner circle 

to advance its schemes. The ultimate goal: a New World Order. 

The Council on Foreign Relations and the New World Order 

According to State Department Publication 2349, submitted by 

secretary of State and CFR member Edward Stettinius, a 

committee on "post-war problems" was set up before the end of 

1939 at the suggestion of the CFR. In other words, two years 

before the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, the CFR was planning 

how to order the world after the war ended. 

In 1946, the Rockefeller Foundation spent almost $140,000 to 

produce a history of how the United States entered World War II. 

This history was intended to counter "revisionist" historians who 

argued that the U.S. was "tricked" into the war by the Roosevelt 

Administration. The Rockefeller family has always taken a lead 

role in the CFR. 

In the 1960s, while American men and women were dying in the 

jungles of Vietnam and while the military/industrial complex was 

sucking trillions of dollars out of American taxpayers' wallets, the 

Rockefeller dynasty was financing Vietnamese oil refineries and 

aluminum plants. If there had ever been a formal declaration of 

war, the Rockefellers could be tried for treason. Instead, they 

reaped dividends. 

These are just a few of the abuses of power which demonstrate the 

results of the power elite's manipulations of our destiny as a 

society. If you've ever wondered why you don't hear about this 

network of power, just take a look at the CFR's membership roster 

(posted online in ParaScope). Many of the chief executives and 

newspeople at CBS, NBC/RCA, ABC, the Public Broadcast 

Service, the Associated Press, the New York Times, Time 

magazine, Newsweek, the Washington Post, and many other key

media outlets are CFR members. 

Even if these members of the media's elite had the inclination to 

report on what they saw and heard at CFR meetings, they are 

prevented from doing so by the Non-Attribution Rule. To put this 

in perspective: many of the people who are trusted to provide 

information about national and world politics are deliberately 

withholding crucial information from the public because of 

membership in a secretive globalist organization. 

This organization has taken it upon itself to participate in the 

manufacturing of a new vision for humanity, and dissidence will 

not be tolerated. If you believe the words of Carroll Quigley, all 

resistance is futile and doomed to failure. If you believe the 

rhetoric of internationalists in our own government, the current 

"trend towards isolationism" will result in a loss of American 

hegemony in the New World Order, leaving the United States a 

wrecked Third World wasteland. 

World government can come in time, piece by piece, arrived at 

through the full participation and consensus of the human beings 

who will be affected by the negotiations. But the idea of the 

world's elite determining what path that the common herd should 

follow is repulsive to the human spirit. The story of the CFR goes 

far deeper than this brief report, and is interlocked with several 

other international power groups. 

International power orgs depend on the masses remaining ignorant 

for their plans to come to fruition. It's up to you to do your own 

research and draw your own conclusion. But remember: there's a 

hell of a lot more to the story than Dan Rather will ever tell you. 

Educate yourself, or remain a passive consumer. The choice is 

entirely yours. 

The Council on Foreign Relations 

The Council on Foregin Relations was founded on July 29, 1921 in New York City by 

Col. Edward Madell House, chief adviser to President Woodrow Wilson in league with 

the same stockholders of The Federal Reserve. Through its membership, meetings, and 

studies, it has been called the most powerful agent of United States foreign policy outside 

the State Department.

The CFR is a serpentine network of international revolutionaries and fascist ideologues 

whose goal is to end American sovereignty and bring about a global, Marxist paradise. 

House, a socialist, wrote in his book, Philip Dru: Administrator, that he was working for 

"Socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx." He told of a "conspiracy" which would gain 

control of both political parties, and use them as instruments in the creation of a socialist 

world government. (John McManus, The Insiders, pg. 7.) 

The founders included many of those who had been at the signing of the Treaty of 

Versailles after World War I, including Colonel Edward House and Walter Lippmann. 

Finances for the CFR came from the same players that set up the Federal Reserve System 

in America: J.P. Morgan; John D. Rockefeller; Bernard Baruch; Paul Warburg; Otto 

Kahn; and Jacob Schiff. 

The roster of CFR members is thoroughly impressive - so are the power groups who have 

representatives in it. Its current membership, all 2905 of them, is like reading a "who's 

who" of the elite politicians, media, financiers, businessmen, and educators. From the 

CFR comes 90% of the people in the State Department and key positions in the Executive 

Branch. 

International banking organizations that currently have men in the CFR include Kuhn, 

Loeb & Co; Lazard Freres (directly affiliated with Rothschild); Dillon Read; Lehman 

Bros.; Goldman, Sachs; Chase Manhattan Bank; Morgan Guaranty Bank; Brown Bors. 

Harriman; First National City Bank; Chemical Bank & Trust; and Manufacturers 

Hanover Trust Bank. The CFR is totally interlocked with the major foundations 

(Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie) and the so-called think tanks (Rand, Hudson Institute, 

Brookings Institute). The left has been systematically infiltrating wealthy and powerful 

tax-free foundations and government agencies where taxpayers' funds would begin to 

pour out to support the liberal agenda at home and abroad. 

Bill Clinton: former president of the United States, also a member of David Rockefeller's 

Bilderberger group and was in 1992 the only State Governor listed in the membership 

role of the Trilateral Commission. 

Colin L. Powell United States Army (Ret.) 

Robert E. Rubin Co-Chairman; Director and Chairman of the Executive Committee, 

Citigroup, Inc. 

Madeleine K. Albright: former Secretary of State, a former Georgetown University 

professor, United Nations Ambassador. She is also a member of the Trilateral 

Commission. 

Christine Todd Whitman: former governor of New Jersey 

Warren Christopher: former Secetary of State; CFR Vice Chairman 

Robert Reich: former Secretary of Labor (also TC and Rhodes scholar) 

George Stephanopoulous: former Clinton Communications Director (also Rhodes 

scholar) 

Clifton Wharton: Deputy Secretary of State 

Peter Tarnoff: Under Secretary for Political Affairs (Current President of CFR - also TC)

Winston Lord: Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs; (past 

President of CFR - also TC) 

Vernon Jordan: Clinton transition boss (also TC) 

Lloyd Bentsen: former Secretary of Treasury 

Admiral William Crow, Jr.: Head of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (also TC) 

Anthony Lake: National Security Advisor 

Samuel Berger: Deputy National Security Advisor 

Les Aspin: Secretary of Defense 

Donna Shalala: Secretary of Health and Human Services. An influential member of the 

CFR and the Trilateral Commission, Shalala chaired the CFR committee which set the 

New World Order agenda for Africa. 

Strobe Talbott: Aid Coordinator to the commonwealth of Indepenent States (also TC) 

Bruce Babbitt: Secretary of Interior (also TC) 

Ron Brown: Secretary of Commerce 

James Woolsey: CIA Director (also Rhodes scholar) 

Roger Altman: Deputy Secretary of Treasury 

Henry Cisneros: Secretary of Housing and Urban Development (also TC) 

Robert Rubin: National Economic Council; Soviet Investment Expert 

Dr. Jocelyn Elders: former Surgeon General 

John Gibbons: White House Science Advisor 

Alice Rivlin: Deputy Budget Director. She is also a member of both the CFR and 

Trilateral Commission. 

Laura Tyson - Chairman of the Council of Economic Advisors is a former Berkeley 

professor and is a fan of Stalin's communist economy. 

Johnnetta Cole - Clinton transition coordinator for education, arts, labor and humanities. 

W. Bowman Cutter: National Economic Council Deputy Assistant (also Rhodes scholar). 

Nancy Soderberg: National Security Council Staff Director. 

Ira Magaziner: Senior Adviser for Policy Development (also Rhodes scholar). 

Bruce Reed: Domestic Policy Council Deputy Assistant (also Rhodes scholar). 

Mike Espy: Agriculture Secretary (also served on the Rhodes Scholarship Selection 

Committee). 

Representative Thomas Foley: Former Speaker of the House of Representatives (also TC) 

Henry S. Bienen President, Northwestern University 

Tom Brokaw NBC News 

Karen Elliott House: Former senior vice president of Dow Jones & Company and 

publisher of the Wall Street Journal. 

The CFR's Study No. 7, published November 25, 1959, openly declared its true purpose: 

"...building a New International Order [which] must be responsive to world aspirations 

for peace, [and] for social and economic change...an international order [code for world 

government]...including states labeling themselves as 'Socialist.'" One could safely say 

that a nutshell descriptor of the CFR is "to bring about a New World Order through the 

manipulation of U.S. foreign policy and relations and through international economic 

interdependence."

The CFR's Annual Report in 1974 says the project for the CFR in the '80's will be "The 

management of the International economy, global poverty, environment and the new 

"common"... the oceans, the seabeds, and space, and interstate violence, including arms 

control. What they are saying is "The management of your money, your land, your 

groceries, and your guns." 

In 1975, the Rockefeller Foundation Report discusses the "Interdependece" of the 

countries of the world on each other. That we are of one world and shall become a nation 

state world under one government. They also say, we must reach a zero state population 

growth. The Rockefeller Foundation stated that they have in excess of 747 million dollars 

to achieve this with. 

Obama: Trilateral Commission Endgame 

By Patrick Wood, Editor 

January 30, 2009 

[Ed. note: For clarity, members of the 

type.] 

Trilateral Commission appear in bold 

As previously noted in Pawns of the Global Elite, Barack Obama was groomed 

for the presidency by key members of the Trilateral Commission. Most notably, 

it was Zbigniew Brzezinski, co-founder of the Trilateral Commission with 

David Rockefeller in 1973, who was Obama's principal foreign policy advisor. 

The pre-election attention is reminiscent of Brzezinski's tutoring of Jimmy 

Carter prior to Carter's landslide election in 1976. 

For anyone who doubts the Commission's continuing influence on Obama, 

consider that he has already appointed no less than eleven members of the 

Commission to top-level and key positions in his Administration. 

According to official Trilateral Commission membership lists, there are only 87 

members from the United States (the other 337 members are from other 

regions). Thus, in less than two weeks since his inauguration, Obama's

appointments encompass more than 12% of Commission's entire U.S. 

membership. 

Is this a mere coincidence or is it a continuation of dominance over the 

Executive Branch since 1976 (For important background, read The Trilateral 

Commission: Usurping Sovereignty.) 

• Secretary of Treasury, Tim Geithner 

• Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice 

• National Security Advisor, Gen. James L. Jones 

• Deputy National Security Advisor, Thomas Donilon 

• Chairman, Economic Recovery Committee, Paul Volker 

• Director of National Intelligence, Admiral Dennis C. Blair 

• Assistant Secretary of State, Asia & Pacific, Kurt M. Campbell 

• Deputy Secretary of State, James Steinberg 

• State Department, Special Envoy, Richard Haass 

• State Department, Special Envoy, Dennis Ross 

• State Department, Special Envoy, Richard Holbrooke 

There are many other incidental links to the Trilateral Commission, for 

instance, 

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is married to Commission member William 

Jefferson Clinton. 

Geithner's informal group of advisors include E. Gerald Corrigan, Paul 

Volker, Alan Greenspan and Peter G. Peterson, among others. His first job 

after college was with Henry Kissinger at Kissinger Associates. 

Brent Scowcroft has been an unofficial advisor to Obama and was mentor to 

Defense Secretary Robert Gates. 

Robert Zoelick is currently president of the 

World Bank

Laurence Summers, White House Economic Advisor, was mentored by former 

Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin during the Clinton administration. 

There are many other such links, but these are enough for you to get the idea of 

what's going on here. 

Analyze the positions 

Notice that five of the Trilateral appointees involve the State Department, where 

foreign policy is created and implemented. Hillary Clinton is certainly in line 

with these policies because her husband, Bill Clinton, is also a member. 

What is more important than economic recovery Paul Volker is the answer. 

What is more important than national intelligence Gen. James Jones, Thomas 

Donilon and Adm. Dennis Blair hold the top three positions. 

What is more important than the Treasury and the saving of our financial 

system Timothy Geithner says he has the answers. 

The State Department is virtually dominated by Trilaterals: Kurt Campbell, 

James Steinberg, Richard Haass, Dennis Ross and Richard Holbrooke. 

This leaves Susan Rice, Ambassador to the United Nations. The U.N. is the 

chosen instrument for ultimate global governance. Rice will help to subvert the 

U.S. into the U.N. umbrella of vassal states. 

Conflict of interest 

Since 1973, the Commission has met regularly in plenary sessions to discuss 

policy position papers developed by its members. Policies are debated in order 

to achieve consensuses. Respective members return to their own countries to 

implement policies consistent with those consensuses. 

The original stated purpose of the Trilateral Commission was to create a "New 

International Economic Order." Its current statement has morphed into fostering 

a "closer cooperation among these core democratic industrialized areas of the 

world with shared leadership responsibilities in the wider international system." 

(See The Trilateral Commission web site)

U.S. Trilateral members implement policies determined by a majority of non- 

Americans that most often work against the best interests of the country. 

"How," you say 

Since the administration of Jimmy Carter, Trilaterals held these massively 

influential positions: 

• Six out of eight World Bank presidents, including the current appointee, Robert 

Zoelick 

• Eight out of ten U.S. Trade Representatives 

• President and/or Vice-President of every elected administration (except for 

Obama/Biden) 

• Seven out of twelve Secretaries of State 

• Nine out of twelve Secretaries of Defense 

Is this sinking in Are you grasping the enormity of it 

Endgame is at hand 

For the Trilateral crowd, the game is about over. The recent reemergence of 

original members Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Brent Scowcroft 

and Paul Volker serves to reinforce the conclusion that the New International 

Economic Order is near. 

The Trilateral Commission and its members have engineered the global 

economic, trade and financial system that is currently in a state of total chaos. 

Does that mean that they have lost Hardly. 

As I recently wrote in Chorus call for New World Order, they are using the 

crisis to destroy what remains of national Sovereignty, so that a New World 

Order can finally and permanently be put into place.

Conclusion 

The Obama presidency is a disingenuous fraud. He was elected by promising to 

bring change, yet from the start change was never envisioned. He was carefully 

groomed and financed by the Trilateral Commission and their friends. 

In short, Obama is merely the continuation of disastrous, non-American policies 

that have brought economic ruin upon us and the rest of the world. The Obama 

experience rivals that of Jimmy Carter, whose campaign slogan was "I will 

never lie to you." 

When the Democrat base finally realizes that it has been conned again (Bill 

Clinton and Al Gore were members), perhaps it will unleash a real political 

revolution that will oust Trilateral politicians, operatives and policies from the 

shores of our country. 

If the reader is a Democrat, be aware that many Republicans and conservatives 

are still licking their wounds after finally realizing that George Bush and Dick 

Cheney worked the same con on them for a disastrous eight years of the same 

policies! 

Obama and McCain: Pawns of the Global Elite 

By Patrick Wood, Editor 

August 5, 2008 

Will it matter if Obama or 

McCain are elected in 

November Hardly. 

election of Jimmy Carter. 

Both are rigidly backed by 

important members of the 

Trilateral Commission who 

hijacked the Executive Branch 

of the U.S. government 

starting in 1976 with the

In Obama’s case, Zbigniew Brzezinski (co-founder of the Commission in 1973) 

is emerging as his principal advisor on foreign policy. Ex-Fed Chairman Paul 

Volker has made a once-in-a-lifetime, glowing endorsement of Obama. 

Madelyn Albright is seen sitting next to Obama in several conferences. Shoot, 

even Jimmy Carter himself endorses Obama. All are top members of the 

Commission. 

John McCain is being supported by several Trilateral Commission giants 

including: Henry Kissinger, George Schultz, Lawrence Eagleburger and 

Alexander Haig. All of these are ex-Secretaries of State who issued a joint 

endorsement of McCain early-on in his campaign. 

And, unless Obama shoots both of his own feet (or…) before the general 

presidential election in November, he is most likely to be the next president of 

the United States. 

You would think that Americans would want to know who the “special 

interests” are that are embodied by this Trilateral Commission, and what they 

intend to do or not do with America. 

What is the Trilateral Commission 

The Trilateral Commission was founded by the persistent maneuvering of David 

Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski in 1973. Rockefeller was chairman of the 

ultra-powerful Chase Manhattan Bank, a director of many major multinational 

corporations and "endowment funds" and had long 

been a central figure in the Council on Foreign 

Relations ( CFR). Brzezinski, a brilliant 

prognosticator of one-world idealism, was a professor 

at Columbia University and the author of several 

books that have served as "policy guidelines" for the 

Trilateral Commission. 

Brzezinski served as the Commission's first executive 

director from its inception in 1973 until late 1976 when he was appointed by 

President Jimmy Carter as Assistant to the President for National Security 

Affairs. 

The initial Commission membership was approximately three hundred, with 

roughly one hundred each from Europe, Japan and North America. Membership 

was also roughly divided between academics, politicians and corporate

magnates; these included international bankers, leaders of prominent labor 

unions and corporate directors of media giants. 

The word commission was puzzling since it is usually associated with 

instrumentalities set up by governments. It seemed out of place with a so-called 

private group unless we could determine that it really was an arm of a 

government - an unseen government, different from the visible government in 

Washington. European and Japanese involvement indicated a world government 

rather than a national government. We hoped that the concept of a sub-rosa 

world government was just wishful thinking on the part of the Trilateral 

Commissioners. The facts, however, lined up quite pessimistically. 

If the Council on Foreign Relations could be said to be a spawning ground for 

the concepts of one-world idealism, then the Trilateral Commission was the 

"task force" assembled to assault the beachheads. Already the Commission had 

placed its members in the top posts the U.S. had to offer. 

Jimmy Carter: The first Trilateral president 

President James Earl Carter, the country politician who promised, "I will never 

lie to you," was chosen to join the 

Commission by Brzezinski in 1973. It 

was Brzezinski, in fact, who first 

identified Carter as presidential timber, 

and subsequently educated him in 

economics, foreign policy, and the insand-outs 

of world politics. Upon Carter's 

election, Brzezinski was appointed 

assistant to the president for national 

security matters. Commonly, he was 

called the head of the National Security Council because he answered only to 

the president - some said Brzezinski held the second most powerful position in 

the U.S. 

Carter's running mate, Walter Mondale, was also a member of the Commission. 

(If you are trying to calculate the odds of three virtually unknown men, out of 

over sixty Commissioners from the U.S., capturing the three most powerful 

positions in the land, don't bother. Your calculations will be meaningless.) 

On January 7, 1977 Time Magazine, whose editor-in-chief, Hedley Donovan 

was a powerful Trilateral, named President Carter "Man of the Year." The

sixteen-page article in that issue not only failed to mention Carter's connection 

with the Commission but also stated the following: 

“As he searched for Cabinet appointees, Carter seemed 

at times hesitant and frustrated disconcertingly out of 

character. His lack of ties to Washington and the Party 

Establishment - qualities that helped raise him to the 

White House - carry potential dangers. He does not know 

the Federal Government or the pressures it creates. He 

does not really know the politicians whom he will need to 

help him run the country.” 

Was this portrait of Carter as a political innocent simply inaccurate or was it 

deliberately misleading By December 25, 1976 - two weeks before the Time 

article appeared - Carter had already chosen his cabinet. Three of his cabinet 

members – Cyrus Vance, Michael Blumenthal, and Harold Brown - were 

Trilateral Commissioners; and the other non-Commission members were not 

unsympathetic to Commission objectives and operations. In addition, Carter had 

appointed another fourteen Trilateral Commissioners to top government posts, 

including: 

• C. Fred Bergsten (Under Secretary of Treasury) 

• James Schlesinger (Secretary of Energy) 

• Elliot Richardson (Delegate to Law of the Sea) 

• Leonard Woodcock (Chief envoy to China) 

• Andrew Young (Ambassador to the United Nations). 

As of 25 December 1976, therefore, there were nineteen Trilaterals, including 

Carter and Mondale, holding tremendous political power. These presidential 

appointees represented almost one-third of the Trilateral Commission members 

from the United States. The odds of that happening “by chance” are beyond 

calculation! 

Realities of the New World Order 

In 1972, Brzezinski's wrote that "nation-state as a 

fundamental unit of man's organized life has ceased to be the 

principal creative force: International banks and 

multinational corporations are acting and planning in terms 

that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-

state." 

The late Senator Barry Goldwater (R-AZ) was one of a very few people who 

understood what Brzezinski was alluding to, when he issued a clear and precise 

warning in his 1979 book, With No Apologies: 

“The Trilateral Commission is international and is intended to be the vehicle 

for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by 

seizing control of the political government of the United States. The Trilateral 

Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control and 

consolidate the four centers of power – political, monetary, intellectual and 

ecclesiastical.” 

Trilateral Entrenchment: 1980-2008 

Every Administration since Carter has had top-level Trilateral Commission 

representation through the President or Vice-President, or both! George H.W. 

Bush, Bill Clinton, Al Gore and Dick Cheney are all members. 

In turn, these have appointed their Trilateral cronies to top positions in their 

Administrations. 

For instance, six out of seven World Bank presidents have been members of 

the Commission. Eight out of ten USTR’s (U.S. Trade Representative) have 

been members. 

Secretaries of State include Henry Kissinger, Cyrus Vance, Alexander Haig, 

George Schultz, Lawrence Eagleburger, Warren Christopher and Madeleine 

Albright. Yep, all members of the Trilateral Commission. 

Follow the money, follow the power 

You decide which is scarier: Obama and Brzezinski or 

McCain and Henry Kissinger 

Either way, Americans will continue to lose… 

Every major crisis we face today is directly attributable 

to policies put forth and executed by members of this 

Trilateral Commission: Banking/lending/mortgage

crisis, energy/gas price crisis, food/shortage/price crisis. 

In addition, in the last fifteen to twenty years we have lost of millions of prime 

manufacturing jobs to China, India and Mexico. Our prime assets are being 

purchased by sovereign wealth funds and foreign investors. Our currency has all 

but been destroyed throughout the world. 

Remember Brzezinski's vision that "international banks and multinational 

corporations are acting and planning in terms that are far in advance of the 

political concepts of the nation-state" 

Well, that’s been true enough. But, for all their acting and planning at the 

expense of our own prosperity and Sovereignty, who wants or needs more of 

the same under Obama or McCain With friends like this, who needs enemies 

For several Presidential elections now, this writer has voted according to the 

philosophy of voting for the “lesser of two evils.” Never again! 

A vote for either Obama or McCain is a vote for the complete destruction of 

America! 

The Trilateral Commission: Usurping Sovereignty 

By Patrick Wood 

[Editor’s note: For ease of reading, all members of the 

Commission appear in bold type] 

Trilateral 

“President Reagan ultimately came to understand Trilateral’s value and invited the 

entire membership to a reception at the White House in April 1984” 

— David Rockefeller, Memoirs, 2002 1 

According to each issue of the official Trilateral Commission quarterly magazine 

Trialogue:

The Trilateral Commission was formed in 1973 by private citizens of 

Western Europe, Japan and North America to foster closer cooperation 

among these three regions on common problems. It seeks to improve public 

understanding of such problems, to support proposals for handling them 

jointly, and to nurture habits and practices of working together among 

these regions.” 2 

Further, Trialogue and other official writings made clear their stated goal of 

creating a “New International Economic Order.” President George H.W. Bush 

later talked openly about creating a “New World Order”, which has since 

become a synonymous phrase. 

This paper attempts to tell the rest of the story, according to official and 

unofficial Commission sources and other available documents. 

The Trilateral Commission was founded by the persistent maneuvering of 

David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski. Rockefeller was chairman of the 

ultra-powerful Chase Manhattan Bank, a director of many major multinational 

corporations and "endowment funds" and had long been a central figure in the 

Council on Foreign Relations ( CFR). Brzezinski, a brilliant prognosticator of 

one-world idealism, was a professor at Columbia University and the author of 

several books that have served as "policy guidelines" for the Trilateral 

Commission. Brzezinski served as the Commission's first executive director 

from its inception in 1973 until late 1976 when he was appointed by President 

Jimmy Carter as Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. 

The initial Commission membership was approximately three hundred, with 

roughly one hundred each from Europe, Japan and North America. Membership 

was also roughly divided between academics, politicians and corporate 

magnates; these included international bankers, leaders of prominent labor 

unions and corporate directors of media giants. 

The word commission was puzzling since it is usually associated with 

instrumentalities set up by governments. It seemed out of place with a so-called 

private group unless we could determine that it really was an arm of a 

government - an unseen government, different from the visible government in 

Washington. European and Japanese involvement indicated a world government 

rather than a national government. We hoped that the concept of a sub-rosa 

world government was just wishful thinking on the part of the Trilateral 

Commissioners. The facts, however, lined up quite pessimistically. 

If the Council on Foreign Relations could be said to be a spawning ground for 

the concepts of one-world idealism, then the Trilateral Commission was the

"task force" assembled to assault the beachheads. Already the Commission had 

placed its members in the top posts the U.S. had to offer. 

President James Earl Carter, the 

country politician who promised, "I will 

never lie to you," was chosen to join the 

Commission by Brzezinski in 1973. It 

was Brzezinski, in fact, who first 

identified Carter as presidential timber, 

and subsequently educated him in 

economics, foreign policy, and the insand-outs 

of world politics. Upon 

Carter's election, Brzezinski was appointed assistant to the president for 

national security matters. Commonly, he was called the head of the National 

Security Council because he answered only to the president - some said 

Brzezinski held the second most powerful position in the U.S. 

Carter's running mate, Walter Mondale, was also a member of the 

Commission. (If you are trying to calculate the odds of three virtually unknown 

men, out of over sixty Commissioners from the U.S., capturing the three most 

powerful positions in the land, don't bother. Your calculations will be 

meaningless.) 

On January 7, 1977 Time Magazine, whose editor-in-chief, Hedley Donovan 

was a powerful Trilateral, named President Carter "Man of the Year." The 

sixteen-page article in that issue not only failed to mention Carter's connection 

with the Commission but also stated the following: 

“As he searched for Cabinet appointees, Carter seemed at times hesitant and 

frustrated disconcertingly out of character. His lack of ties to Washington and 

the Party Establishment - qualities that helped raise him to the White House - 

carry potential dangers. He does not know the Federal Government or the 

pressures it creates. He does not really know the politicians whom he will need 

to help him run the country.” 3 

Is this portrait of Carter as a political innocent simply inaccurate or is it 

deliberately misleading By December 25, 1976 - two weeks before the Time 

article appeared - Carter had already chosen his cabinet. Three of his cabinet 

members – Cyrus Vance, Michael Blumenthal, and Harold Brown - were 

Trilateral Commissioners; and the other non-Commission members were not 

unsympathetic to Commission objectives and operations. In addition, Carter 

had appointed another fourteen Trilateral Commissioners to top government 

posts, including:

o 

o 

o 

o 

o 

C. Fred Bergsten (Under Secretary of Treasury) 

James Schlesinger (Secretary of Energy) 

Elliot Richardson (Delegate to Law of the Sea) 

Leonard Woodcock (Chief envoy to China) 

Andrew Young (Ambassador to the United Nations) 

As of 25 December 1976, therefore, there were nineteen Trilaterals, including 

Carter and Mondale, holding tremendous political power. These presidential 

appointees represented almost one-third of the Trilateral Commission members 

from the United States. The odds of that happening “by chance” are beyond 

calculation! 

Nevertheless, was there even the slightest evidence to indicate anything other 

than collusion Hardly! Zbigniew Brzezinski spelled out the qualifications of a 

1976 presidential winner in 1973: 

“The Democratic candidate in 1976 will have to emphasize work, the family, 

religion and, increasingly, patriotism...The new conservatism will clearly not go 

back to laissez faire. It will be a philosophical conservatism. It will be a kind of 

conservative statism or managerism. There will be conservative values but a 

reliance on a great deal of co-determination between state and the 

corporations.” 4 

On 23 May 1976 journalist Leslie H. Gelb wrote in the not-so-conservative New 

York Times, "(Brzezinski) was the first guy in the Community to pay attention 

to Carter, to take him seriously. He spent time with Carter, talked to him, sent 

him books and articles, educated him." 5 Richard Gardner (also of Columbia 

University) joined into the "educational" task, and as Gelb noted, between the 

two of them they had Carter virtually to themselves. Gelb continued: "While 

the Community as a whole was looking elsewhere, to Senators Kennedy and 

Mondale...it paid off. Brzezinski, with Gardner, is now the leading man on 

Carter's foreign policy task force." 6 

Although Richard Gardner was of considerable academic influence, it should 

be clear that Brzezinski was the "guiding light" of foreign policy in the Carter 

administration. Along with Commissioner Vance and a host of other 

Commissioners in the State Department, Brzezinski had more than continued 

the policies of befriending our enemies and alienating our friends. Since early 

1977 we had witnessed a massive push to attain "normalized" relations with 

Communist China, Cuba, the USSR, Eastern European nations, Angola, etc.

Conversely, we had withdrawn at least some support from Nationalist China, 

South Africa, Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia), etc. It was not just a trend - it 

was an epidemic. Thus, if it could be said that Brzezinski had, at least in part, 

contributed to current U.S. foreign and domestic policy, then we should briefly 

analyze exactly what he was espousing. 

Needed: A More Just and Equitable World Order 

The Trilateral Commission held their annual plenary meeting in Tokyo, Japan, 

in January 1977. Carter and Brzezinski obviously could not attend as they 

were still in the process of reorganizing the White House. They did, however, 

address personal letters to the meeting, which were reprinted in Trialogue, the 

official magazine of the Commission: 

“It gives me special pleasure to send greetings to all of you gathering for the 

Trilateral Commission meeting in Tokyo. I have warm memories of our meeting 

in Tokyo some eighteen months ago, and am sorry I cannot be with you now. 

“My active service on the Commission since its inception in 1973 has been a 

splendid experience for me, and it provided me with excellent opportunities to 

come to know leaders in our three regions. 

“As I emphasized in my campaign, a strong partnership among us is of the 

greatest importance. We share economic, political and security concerns that 

make it logical we should seek ever-increasing cooperation and understanding. 

And this cooperation is essential not only for our three regions, but in the global 

search for a more just and equitable world order (emphasis added). I hope to 

see you on the occasion of your next meeting in Washington, and I look forward 

to receiving reports on your work in Tokyo. 

“Jimmy Carter” 7 

Brzezinski's letter, in a similar vein, follows: 

“The Trilateral Commission has meant a great deal to me over the last few 

years. It has been the stimulus for intellectual creativity and a source of 

personal satisfaction. I have formed close ties with new friends and colleagues 

in all three regions, ties which I value highly and which I am sure will continue.

“I remain convinced that, on the larger architectural issues of today, 

collaboration among our regions is of the utmost necessity. This collaboration 

must be dedicated to the fashioning of a more just and equitable world order 

(emphasis added). This will require a prolonged process, but I think we can 

look forward with confidence and take some pride in the contribution which the 

Commission is making. 

“Zbigniew Brzezinski” 8 

The key phrase in both letters was "more just and equitable world order." Did 

this emphasis indicate that something was wrong with our present world order, 

that is, with national structures Yes, according to Brzezinski, and since the 

present "framework" was inadequate to handle world problems, it must be done 

away with and supplanted with a world government. 

In September 1974 Brzezinski was asked in an interview by the Brazilian 

newspaper Vega. "How would you define this new world order" Brzezinski 

answered: 

“When I speak of the present international system I am referring to relations in 

specific fields, most of all among the Atlantic countries; commercial, military, 

mutual security relations, involving the international monetary fund, NATO etc. 

We need to change the international system for a global system in which new, 

active and creative forces recently developed - should be integrated. This 

system needs to include Japan. Brazil, the oil producing countries, and even the 

USSR, to the extent which the Soviet Union is willing to participate in a global 

system.” 9 

When asked if Congress would have an expanded or diminished role in the new 

system, Brzezinski declared "...the reality of our times is that a modern society 

such as the U.S. needs a central coordinating and renovating organ which 

cannot be made up of six hundred people." 10 

Brzezinski developed background for the need for a new system in his book 

Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technetronic Era (1969). He wrote 

that mankind has moved through three great stages of evolution, and was in the 

middle of the fourth and final stage. The first stage he described as "religious," 

combining a heavenly "universalism provided by the acceptance of the idea that 

man's destiny is essentially in God's hands" with an earthly "narrowness derived 

from massive ignorance, illiteracy, and a vision confined to the immediate 

environment."

The second stage was nationalism, stressing Christian equality before the law, 

which "marked another giant step in the progressive redefinition of man's nature 

and place in our world." The third stage was Marxism, which, said Brzezinski, 

"represents a further vital and creative stage in the maturing of man's universal 

vision." The fourth and final stage was Brzezinski's Technetronic Era, or the 

ideal of rational humanism on a global scale - the result of American- 

Communist evolutionary transformations. 11 

In considering our structure of governance, Brzezinski stated: 

“Tension is unavoidable as man strives to assimilate the new into the 

framework of the old. For a time the established framework resiliently 

integrates the new by adapting it in a more familiar shape. But at some point 

the old framework becomes overloaded. The newer input can no longer be 

redefined into traditional forms, and eventually it asserts itself with compelling 

force. Today, though, the old framework of international politics - with their 

spheres of influence, military alliances between nation-states, the fiction of 

Sovereignty, doctrinal conflicts arising from nineteenth century crises - is 

clearly no longer compatible with reality.” 12 

One of the most important "frameworks" in the world, and especially to 

Americans, was the United States Constitution. It was this document that 

outlined the most prosperous nation in the history of the world. Was our 

sovereignty really "fiction" Was the U.S. vision no longer compatible with 

reality Brzezinski further stated: 

“The approaching two-hundredth anniversary of the Declaration of 

Independence could justify the call for a national constitutional convention to 

reexamine the nation's formal institutional framework. Either 1976 or 1989 - 

the two- hundredth an anniversary of the Constitution - could serve as a 

suitable target date culminating a national dialogue on the relevance of existing 

arrangements... Realism, however, forces us to recognize that the necessary 

political innovation will not come from direct constitutional reform, desirable 

as that would be. The needed change is more likely to develop incrementally 

and less overtly...in keeping with the American tradition of blurring distinctions 

between public and private institution.” 13 

In Brzezinski's Technetronic Era then, the "nation-state as a fundamental unit 

of man's organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force: 

International banks and multinational corporations are acting and planning in 

terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of the nation-state." 14

Brzezinski’s philosophy clearly pointed forward to Richard Gardner’s Hard 

Road to World Order that appeared in Foreign Affairs in 1974, where Gardner 

stated, 

"In short, the 'house of world order' would have to be built from the bottom up 

rather than from the top down. It will look like a great 'booming, buzzing 

confusion,' to use William James' famous description of reality, but an end run 

around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much 

more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.” 15 

That former approach which had produced few successes during the 1950’s and 

1960’s was being traded for a velvet sledge-hammer: It would make little noise, 

but would still drive the spikes of globalization deep into the hearts of many 

different countries around the world, including the United States. Indeed, the 

Trilateral Commission was the chosen vehicle that finally got the necessary 

traction to actually create their New World Order. 

Understanding the philosophy of the Trilateral Commission was and is the only 

way we can reconcile the myriad of apparent contradictions in the information 

filtered through to us in the national press. For instance, how was it that the 

Marxist regime in Angola derived the great bulk of its foreign exchange from 

the offshore oil operations of Gulf Oil Corporation Why did Andrew Young 

insist that "Communism has never been a threat to Blacks in Africa" Why did 

the U.S. funnel billions in technological aid to the Soviet Union and Communist 

China Why did the U.S. apparently help its enemies while chastising its 

friends 

A similar and perplexing question is asked by millions of Americans today: 

Why do we spend trillions on the “War on Terror” around the world and yet 

ignore the Mexican/U.S. border and the tens of thousands of illegal aliens who 

freely enter the U.S. each and every month 

These questions, and hundreds of others like them, cannot be explained in any 

other way: the U.S. Executive Branch (and related agencies) was not anti- 

Marxist or anti-Communist - it was and is, in fact, pro- Marxist. Those ideals 

which led to the heinous abuses of Hitler, Lenin, Stalin, and Mussolini were 

now being accepted as necessary inevitabilities by our elected and appointed 

leaders. 

This hardly suggests the Great American Dream. It is very doubtful that 

Americans would agree with Brzezinski or the Trilateral Commission. It is the

American public who is paying the price, suffering the consequences, but not 

understanding the true nature of the situation. 

This nature however, was not unknown or unknowable. Senator 

Barry Goldwater (R-AZ) issued a clear and precise warning in 

his 1979 book, With No Apologies: 

“The Trilateral Commission is international and is intended to 

be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking 

interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States. The 

Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize control 

and consolidate the four centers of power – political, monetary, intellectual and 

ecclesiastical.” 16 

Unfortunately, few heard and even fewer understood. 

Follow the Money, Follow the Power 

What was the economic nature of the driving force within the Trilateral 

Commission It was the giant multinational corporations - those with Trilateral 

representation - which consistently benefited from Trilateral policy and actions. 

Polished academics such as Brzezinski, Gardner, Allison, McCracken, 

Henry Owen etc., served only to give "philosophical" justification to the 

exploitation of the world. 

Don't underestimate their power or the distance they had already come by 1976. 

Their economic base was already established. Giants like Coca-Cola, IBM, 

CBS, Caterpillar Tractor, Bank of America, Chase Manhattan Bank, Deere & 

Company, Exxon, and others virtually dwarf whatever remains of American 

businesses. The market value of IBM's stock alone, for instance, was greater 

than the value of all the stocks on the American Stock Exchange. Chase 

Manhattan Bank had some fifty thousand branches or correspondent banks 

throughout the world. What reached our eyes and ears was highly regulated by 

CBS, the New York Times, Time magazine, etc. 

The most important thing of all is to remember that the political coup de grace 

preceded the economic coup de grace. The domination of the Executive Branch 

of the U.S. government provided all the necessary political leverage needed to 

skew U.S. and global economic policies to their own benefit.

By 1977, the Trilateral Commission had notably become expert at using crises 

(and creating them in some instances) to manage countries toward the New 

World Order; yet, they found menacing backlashes from those very crises. 

In the end, the biggest crisis of all was that of the American way of life. 

Americans never counted on such powerful and influential groups working 

against the Constitution and freedom, either inadvertently or purposefully, and 

even now, the principles that helped to build this great country are all but 

reduced to the sound of meaningless babblings. 

Trilateral Entrenchment: 1980-2007 

From left: Peter Sutherland, Sadako Ogata, 

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Paul Volcker, David 

Rockefeller. (25th Anniversary, New York, 

Dec. 1, 1998. Source: Trilateral Commission) 

It would have been damaging enough if the 

Trilateral domination of the Carter administration 

was merely a one-time anomaly; but it was not! 

Subsequent presidential elections brought George H.W. Bush (under Reagan), 

William Jefferson Clinton, Albert Gore and Richard Cheney (under G. W. 

Bush) to power. 

Thus, every Administration since Carter has had top-level Trilateral 

Commission representation through the President or Vice-president, or both! 

It is important to note that Trilateral domination has transcended political 

parties: they dominated both the Republican and Democrat parties with equal 

aplomb. 

In addition, the Administration before Carter was very friendly and useful to 

Trilateral doctrine as well: President Gerald Ford took the reins after President 

Richard Nixon resigned, and then appointed Nelson Rockefeller as his Vice 

President. Neither Ford nor Rockefeller were members of the Trilateral 

Commission, but Nelson was David Rockefeller’s brother and that says 

enough. According to Nelson Rockefeller’s memoirs, he originally introduced 

then-governor Jimmy Carter to David and Brzezinski.

How has the Trilateral Commission effected their goal of creating a New World 

Order or a New International Economic Order They seated their own members 

at the top of the institutions of global trade, global banking and foreign policy. 

For instance, the World Bank is one of the most critical mechanisms in the 

engine of globalization. 17 Since the founding of the Trilateral Commission in 

1973, there have been only seven World Bank presidents, all of whom were 

appointed by the President. Of these seven, six were pulled from the ranks of 

the Trilateral Commission! 

o Robert McNamara (1968-1981) 

o A.W. Clausen (1981-1986) 

o Barber Conable (1986-1991) 

o Lewis Preston (1991-1995) 

o James Wolfenson (1995-2005) 

o Paul Wolfowitz (2005-2007) 

o 

Robert Zoellick (2007-present) 

Another good evidence of domination is the position of U.S. Trade 

Representative ( USTR), which is critically involved in negotiating the many 

international trade treaties and agreements that have been necessary to create the 

New International Economic Order. Since 1977, there have been ten USTR’s 

appointed by the President. Eight have been members of the Trilateral 

Commission! 

o Robert S. Strauss (1977-1979) 

o Reubin O'D. Askew (1979-1981) 

o William E. Brock III (1981-1985) 

o Clayton K. Yeutter (1985-1989) 

o Carla A. Hills (1989-1993) 

o Mickey Kantor (1993-1997) 

o Charlene Barshefsky (1997-2001) 

o Robert Zoellick (2001-2005) 

o Rob Portman (2005-2006)

o 

Susan Schwab (2006-present) 

This is not to say that Clayton Yeuter and Rob Portman were not friendly to 

Trilateral goals, because they clearly were. 

The Secretary of State cabinet position has seen its share of Trilaterals as well: 

Henry Kissinger (Nixon, Ford), Cyrus Vance (Carter), Alexander Haig 

(Reagan), George Shultz (Reagan), Lawrence Eagleburger (G.H.W. Bush), 

Warren Christopher (Clinton) and Madeleine Albright (Clinton) There were 

some Acting Secretaries of State that are also noteworthy: Philip Habib 

(Carter), Michael Armacost (G.H.W. Bush), Arnold Kantor (Clinton), 

Richard Cooper (Clinton). 

Lastly, it should be noted that the Federal Reserve has likewise been dominated 

by Trilaterals: Arthur Burns (1970-1978), Paul Volker (1979-1987), Alan 

Greenspan (1987-2006). While the Federal Reserve is a privately-owned 

corporation, the President “chooses” the Chairman to a perpetual appointment. 

The current Fed Chairman, Ben Bernanke, is not a member of the Trilateral 

Commission, but he clearly is following the same globalist policies as his 

predecessors. 

The point raised here is that Trilateral domination over the U.S. Executive 

Branch has not only continued and but has been strengthened from 1976 to the 

present. The pattern has been deliberate and persistent: Appoint members of the 

Trilateral Commission to critical positions of power so that they can carry out 

Trilateral policies. 

The question is and has always been, do these policies originate in consensus 

meetings of the Trilateral Commission where two-thirds of the members are not 

U.S. citizens The answer is all too obvious. 

Trilateral-friendly defenders attempt to sweep criticism aside by suggesting that 

membership in the Trilateral Commission is incidental, and that it only 

demonstrates the otherwise high quality of appointees. Are we to believe that in 

a country of 300 million people only these 100 or so are qualified to hold such 

critical positions Again, the answer is all too obvious. 

Where Does the Council on Foreign Relations Fit 

While virtually all Trilateral Commission members from North America have 

also been members of the CFR, the reverse is certainly not true. It is easy to

over-criticize the CFR because most of its members seem to fill the balance of 

government positions not already filled by Trilaterals. 

The power structure of the Council is seen in the makeup of its board of 

directors: No less than 44 percent (12 out of 27) are members of the 

Commission! If director participation reflected only the general membership of 

the CFR, then only 3-4 percent of the board would be Trilaterals. 18 

Further, the president of the CFR is Richard N. Haass, a very prominent 

Trilateral member who also served as Director of Policy Planning for the U.S. 

Department of State from 2001-2003. 

Trilateral influence can easily be seen in policy papers produced by the CFR in support of 

Trilateral goals. 

For instance, the 2005 CFR task force report on the Future of North America 

was perhaps the major Trilateral policy statement on the intended creation of the 

North American Union. Vice-chair of the task force was Dr. Robert A. Pastor, 

who has emerged as the “Father of the North American Union” and has been 

directly involved in Trilateral operations since the 1970’s. While the CFR 

claimed that the task force was “independent,” careful inspection of those 

appointed reveal that three Trilaterals were carefully chosen to oversee the 

Trilateral position, one each from Mexico, Canada and the United States: Luis 

Rubio, Wendy K. Dobson and Carla A. Hills, respectively. 19 Hills has been 

widely hailed as the principal architect of the North American Free Trade 

Agreement ( NAFTA) that was negotiated under President George H.W. 

Bush in 1992. 

The bottom line is that the Council on Foreign Relations, thoroughly dominated 

by Trilaterals, serves the interests of the Trilateral Commission, not the other 

way around! 

Trilateral Globalization in Europe 

The content of this paper thus far suggests ties 

between the Trilateral Commission and the 

United States. This is not intended to mean that 

Trilaterals are not active in other countries as 

well. Recalling the early years of the 

Commission, David Rockefeller wrote in 1998, 

“Back in the early Seventies, the hope for a

more united EUROPE was already full-blown – thanks in many ways to the 

individual energies previously spent by so many of the Trilateral Commission’s 

earliest members.” [Capitals in original] 20 

Thus, since 1973 and in parallel with their U.S. Hegemony, the European 

members of the Trilateral Commission were busy creating the European Union. 

In fact, the EU's Constitution was authored by Commission member Valéry 

Giscard d'Estaing in 2002-2003, when he was President of the Convention on 

the Future of Europe. [For more on the EU, see European Union: Dictatorship 

Rising and The Globalization Strategy: America and Europe in the Crucible] 

The steps that led to the creation of the European Union are unsurprisingly 

similar to the steps being taken to create the North American Union today. As 

with the EU, lies, deceit and confusion are the principal tools used to keep an 

unsuspecting citizenry in the dark while they forge ahead without mandate, 

accountability or oversight. [See The Globalization Strategy: America and 

Europe in the Crucible and Toward a North American Union] 

Conclusion 

It is clear that the Executive Branch of the U.S. was literally hijacked in 1976 by 

members of the Trilateral Commission, upon the election of President Jimmy 

Carter and Vice-President Walter Mondale. This near-absolute domination, 

especially in the areas of trade, banking, economics and foreign policy, has 

continued unchallenged and unabated to the present. 

Windfall profits have accrued to interests associated with the Trilateral 

Commission, but 

the effect of their “New International Economic Order” on the U.S. has been 

nothing less than devastating. (See America Plundered by the Global Elite for a 

more detailed analysis) 

The philosophical underpinnings of the Trilateral Commission are pro-Marxist 

and pro-socialist. They are solidly set against the concept of the nation-state and 

in particular, the Constitution of the United States. Thus, national sovereignty 

must be diminished and then abolished altogether in order to make way for the 

New World Order that will be governed by an unelected global elite with their 

self-created legal framework. 

If you are having negative sentiment against Trilateral-style globalization, you 

are not alone. A 2007 Financial Times/Harris poll revealed that less than 20

percent of people in six industrialized countries (including the U.S.) believe that 

globalization is good for their country while over 50 percent are outright 

negative towards it. 21 (See Global Backlash Against Globalization) While 

citizens around the world are feeling the pain of globalization, few understand 

why it is happening and hence, they have no effective strategy to counter it. 

The American public has never, ever conceived that such forces would align 

themselves so successfully against freedom and Liberty. Yet, the evidence is 

clear: Steerage of America has long since fallen into the hands of an actively 

hostile enemy that intends to remove all vestiges of the very things that made us 

the greatest nation in the history of mankind. 

Endnotes 

1. Rockefeller, David, Memoirs (Random House, 2002), p.418 

2. Trialogue, Trilateral Commission (1973) 

3. Time Magazine, Jimmy Carter: Man of the Year, January 7, 1977 

4. Sutton & Wood, Trilaterals Over Washington (1979), p. 7 

5. New York Times, Jimmy Carter, Leslie Gelb, May 23, 1976 

6. ibid. 

7. Trialogue, Looking Back…And Forward, Trilateral Commission, 1976 

8. ibid. 

9. Sutton & Wood, Trilaterals Over Washington (1979), p. 4 

10. ibid. p. 5 

11. Brzezinski, Zbigniew, Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technetronic 

Era (New York: Viking Press, 1973), p. 246. 

12. ibid. 

13. ibid. 

14. ibid. 

15. Gardner, Richard, The Hard Road to World Order, (Foreign Affairs, 1974) p. 558 

16. Goldwater, Barry, With No Apologies, (Morrow, 1979), p. 280 

17. Global Banking: The World Bank, Patrick Wood, The August Review

18. Board of Directors, Council on Foreign Relations website 

19. Building a North American Community, Council on Foreign Relations, 2005 

20. Rockefeller, David, In the Beginning…” The Trilateral Commission at 25, 1998, 

p.11 

21. FT/Harris poll on Globalization, FT.com website 

The Bilderberg 

"Blackout"The press corps' noncoverage of that 

weekend conference in Chantilly, Va. 

By Jack ShaferPosted Monday, June 9, 2008, at 8:32 PM ET 

About this time each year, the Bilderberg group convenes a weekend conference in a 

hotel or resort somewhere in North America or Europe in which 120 or so billionaires, 

bankers, politicians, industrialists, scholars, government officials, influentials from labor 

and education, and journalists assemble to discuss world affairs in private. 

This year, the 56 th Bilderberg meeting took place over the weekend at the Westfields 

Marriott in Chantilly, Va., seven miles from Washington Dulles International Airport. As 

in previous years, Bilderberg critics are berating the mainstream press for observing a 

"blackout" of a group they believe directs a secret, shadow government. 

The critics claim that Bilderberg grooms future American presidents and future British 

prime ministers, pointing to Bill Clinton's attendance in 1991 and Tony Blair's in 1993. 

Time magazine reported in 2004 that John Edwards impressed attendees at the Bilderberg 

session in Italy, after which John Kerry asked him to join his presidential ticket. 

According to the 1980 book Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning 

for World Management, President Dwight D. Eisenhower was enthusiastic about sending 

staffers to Bilderberg, President John F. Kennedy drew heavily from Bilderberg alumni— 

Dean Rusk, George W. Ball, George McGhee, Walter Rostow, Arthur Dean, and Paul

Nitze—to staff his administration, and many Carter administration officials had attended 

the retreat. 

According to a list published by one critic, the attendees of Bilderberg 2008 include 

Henry Kissinger, Ben S. Bernanke, David Rockefeller, Vin Weber, Henry Kravis, Robert 

B. Zoellick, Donald Graham, Vernon Jordan, Charlie Rose, and their equals from Europe. 

Protestors staked out the elite at the hotel's entrance and recorded "surveillance" videos 

inside and outside the minimum-security facility before the event commenced. 

About this much the Bilderberg critics are right: The mainstream media ignored 

Bilderberg 2008. According to Nexis, Wonkette and Raw Story noted the event and the 

critics' objections on the Web. A simple Web search produces Bilderberg detractors Alex 

Jones and Jim Tucker sounding their alarms. 

And about this, too, the Bilderberg critics are right: The meeting of 120 prominent world 

figures probably constitutes some kind of news. Yet to be fair to the mainstream press, 

it's tough to report from a private gathering locked down tight by professional security. 

Bilderberg organizers expect participants to keep the weekend's discussions off-therecord, 

stating in a press release this year that "the privacy of the meetings has no purpose 

other than to allow participants to speak their minds openly and freely." Bilderberg isn't 

the only international group that asks participants to zip their lips. The United Kingdom's 

Chatham House enshrined such a rule back in 1927, and similar requirements apply at 

some Council on Foreign Relations and Aspen Strategy Group meetings, just to name a 

few. Private groups meet in almost every town in the world for confidential chats. It's the 

way of the world. Bilderberger gab does occasionally leak, as with John Edwards' 2004 

talk, but the poshes and powerful generally zip their lips. 

What do you suppose would result if, say, the Washington Post had assigned a reporter to 

Chantilly's luminary jamboree The Associated Press sent a reporter to cover the 1978 

Bilderberger session in Princeton, N.J., but all he filed was a scene piece describing "men 

in gray suits and sunglasses" chasing him away from the "off limits" grounds of the 

Henry Chauncey Conference Center. From that dispatch (by Steve Hindy): 

Kissinger casually strolled around a small manmade pond Saturday, coming within a few 

feet of the road leading into the complex.

He circled the pond twice, first with a gray-haired pipe-smoking man and then with a 

younger man. Kissinger appeared grave and attentive while the men talked of things like 

"range limitations." 

Kissinger looked annoyed and declined comment when approached by a reporter. 

One of two Secret Service agents trailing the former secretary nodded sympathetically 

saying, "You've got to give it your best shot." 

And yet the "mainstream press" can hardly be accused of blacking out Bilderberg. The 

New York Times has mentioned Bilderberg a couple dozen times since 1981, according to 

Nexis, including in a 2004 piece titled "A Secret Conference Thought To Rule the 

Word." Other pieces in the Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, and the Boston Globe 

refer to the group. Just last month, Anne-Marie Slaughter mentioned the Bilderbergers in 

her Post review of a new book, Superclass: The Global Power Elite and the World They 

Are Making. 

Of course, Bilderberg critics don't want to read mentions in the press. They want to see 

confirmation of their theories that the group operates in a sinister, behind-the-scenes 

fashion to exploit the powerless and throttle liberty. 

How, exactly, are reporters supposed to do that when the critics rarely provide falsifiable 

evidence of Bilderberg malevolence Would a shadow government, should it exist, really 

convene annually at a hotel to hash out the world's fate Would it really issue a press 

release about its latest meeting Would it routinely assume the security risks of inviting 

new blood in (Couldn't the notorious Bilderberger Conrad Black negotiate his way out 

of prison by exposing the group Or is Bilderberg so powerful that it controls the federal 

prison system, too) It largely limits its attendees to North Americans and Europeans. 

Are the Japanese, Indians, Chinese, Brazilians, Australians, South Koreans, and 

Singaporean so timid that they stand aside and let the Bilderbergers have their way with 

the world without making a peep 

That's not to say the critics' inquiries never produce anything of value. I enjoy reading the 

documentary material they dig up and can only encourage them to dig deeper. Just last 

month, Barack Obama tapped a prominent Bilderberger, James A. Johnson, to vet 

possible vice presidential candidates. Johnson provided similar veep vetting for the

Democratic Party in 2004—which, as noted above, resulted in the selection of a 

Bilderberg attendee. The AP also reports that Johnson helped Walter Mondale pick a 

veep nominee in 1984. 

Who is Jim Johnson He's the former head of Fannie Mae, a power on Wall Street, and a 

regular Bilderberg attendee. As recently as 2006, Johnson has been the treasurer of the 

nonprofit American Friends of Bilderberg Inc., according to the group's Form 990 on file 

at Guidestar.org. According to the fractured jargon of the filing, American Friends of 

Bilderberg is in the business of "Organizing & sponsoring conferences which study & 

discuss significant problems of the Western Alliance. Collaborating on the Bilderberg 

meetings held in Europe & North America." The group spent $112,533 in 2006. 

Still, the fact that an active Democratic supporter has performed return duty as a veep 

vetter stops several stations short of arriving at a shadow government. It does, however, 

indicate that Johnson's political influence may be underscrutinized by the press and that 

his career is deserving of extra study and attention. A May 24 Wall Street Journal story, 

"Power Broker Helps Obama Search for Running Mate," does just that. Although it 

makes no mention of Johnson's Bilderberg connection, it drops a gentle dig that 

associates Johnson's Fannie Mae service with the home-loan crisis. 

Without a doubt, Bilderberg ends up stimulating speculations that it's a nefarious 

organization. In an earlier generation, some theorists regarded the Council on Foreign 

Relations as a similar shadow government for its furtive ways. But as the CFR opened up 

in recent decades, holding many sessions on the record, it has become as threatening as 

the World Economic Forum at Davos. 

Maybe there's a lesson in there for the Bilderbergers. Letting the press in for a closer look 

at what goes on would go a long way to reduce the shouting while preserving the group's 

right to think out loud. Or maybe all the heavy security and skulking about is a deliberate 

marketing ploy by Bilderberg to differentiate its yacht cruise from the ocean voyage that 

is Davos.

List of Bilderberg attendees is a list of prominent persons who have 

attended one or more conferences organized by the Bilderberg Group. The 

list is currently organized by category. It is not a complete list and it includes 

both living and deceased people. Where known, the year(s) they attended are 

denoted in brackets. 

Royalty 

• Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands [1] 

• Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands [2] 

Politics 

United States 

• George W. Ball [3] (1954-1992), former U.S. diplomat 

• John Edwards [4][5] 

• Gerald Ford [6] 

• Bill Clinton [7] (1991), former US President, 1993 - 2001 

• Jon Corzine (1995 - 1997 [1] , 1999, 2003, 2004), former US Senator, current 

Governor of New Jersey 

• Richard N. Haass (1991, 2003, 2004 [8] ), president, Council on Foreign Relations 

• Lee H. Hamilton (1997 [1] ), former US Congressman 

• Christian Herter [9] (1961, 1963, 1964, 1966), former Secretary of State 

• Joseph E. Johnson [10] (1954), former President, Carnegie Endowment for 

International Peace. 

• Henry Kissinger [8] (1957, 1964, 1966, 1971, 1973, 1974, 1977-2008), Secretary of 

State, 1973 - 1977 

• Gerard LeBlond (2008, 2009 [1] ), former President of the Edward-Laurent 

Foundation 

• Sam Nunn (1996, 1997 [1] ), former US Senator 

• Rick Perry [11] (2007), Current Governor of Texas 

• Kathleen Sebelius [12] , Health and Human Services secretary 

• Timothy Geithner [13] , Treasury Secretary 

• Lawrence Summers [14] , Director of the National Economic Council

• Paul Volcker [15] , Chair of the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board 

United Kingdom 

• Ed Balls (2006), [16] former Economic Secretary to the Treasury and advisor to 

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and is currently Secretary of State for 

Children, Schools and Families (2007-present) 

• Peter Mandelson (1999 [17] ) Business Secretary (2008-present) 

• Tony Blair (1993), [7] former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom [18] 

• Peter Carington, 6th Baron Carrington (Steering Committee member) [19] , former 

Foreign Secretary 

• Kenneth Clarke (1993, 1998 [20] , 2006 [21] , 2007 [22] & 2008 [23] ), former Chancellor 

of the Exchequer and Shadow Secretary of State for Business, Enterprise and 

Regulatory Reform (2008-Present) 

• Denis Healey (founder and Steering Committee member) [19] , former Chancellor 

of the Exchequer 

• George Osborne (2006 [24] , 2007 [25] & 2008 [26] ) Shadow Chancellor of the 

Exchequer (2004-Present) 

• Eric Roll (1964, 1966, 1967, 1973-1975, 1977-1999) (Bilderberg Steering 

Committee), [27] Department of Economic Affairs, 1964, later Bilderberg Group 

Chairman 

• Edward Heath,(deceased) former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom [28] 

Belgium 

Spain 

• Paul-Henri Spaak Former Prime Minister [29] (1963) 

• Juan Carlos I of Spain ,King of Spain [30] 

Portugal 

• Francisco Pinto Balsemão (1981, 1983-1985, 1987-2008) , [31] former Prime 

Minister of Portugal, 1981 - 1983 and CEO of Impresa media group 

• Jorge Braga Macedo (1991-2008), [31] former Finance Minister of Portugal, 1991 - 

1993; Professor of Economics and Director of the Center for Globalization and 

Governance in New University of Lisbon

Finland 

• Eero Heinäluoma (2006) [32] , former Chairman of the Finnish Social Democratic 

Party and he was the Minister of Finance of Finland between 2005 and 2007 

• Jyrki Katainen (2007,2009) [33] , 

[34] chairman of Finnish National Coalition Party (Kokoomus) and the current 

Minister of Finance of Finland 

• Sauli Niinistö (1997) [1] , former Minister of Finance (Finland), Speaker of 

Parliament 

• Matti Vanhanen (2009) [35] Prime Minister (Finland) chairman of (Suomen 

Keskusta) 

Iceland 

• Bjarni Benediktsson, former Prime Minister of Iceland ( 1963-1970) attended 

Bilderberg meeting in 1965 and 1970 [36] 

• Geir Haarde, former Prime Minister of Iceland (2006-2009) [37] 

• Geir Hallgrímsson, former Prime Minister Of Iceland (1974-1978) [38] 

Germany 

• Guido Westerwelle (2007) [39] , Chairman of the Free Democratic Party of 

Germany and Leader of the Opposition in the Bundestag 

• Helmut Schmidt, West German Chancellor [40] 

EU Commissioners 

European Union Commissioners who have attended include: 

• Ritt Bjerregaard (1991, 1995), Lord Mayor of Copenhagen and former European 

Commissioner for Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection [18] 

• Frederik Bolkestein (1996, 2003), [41] former European Commissioner 

• Hans van den Broek (1986, 1988, 1991, 1995), [18] former European 

Commissioner 

• Pascal Lamy (2003) [41]

• Peter Mandelson (1999 [42] ) 

• Mario Monti (1983-1994, 1996, 1999, 2003 [41] ) ,former and/or present member of 

the Bilderberg Steering Committee [18] 

UN, WTO, NATO and other International Organizations 

• George Robertson, Baron Robertson of Port Ellen [18] (1998), former Secretary 

General of NATO 

• Lyman Lemnitzer [43] Former Nato Commander 

Military 

• Colin Gubbins [44] (1955, 1957, 1958, 1963, 1964, 1966), head of the British SOE 

Financial institutions 

• William J McDonough (1997 [1] ), former President, Federal Reserve Bank of New 

York 

• Gordon Richardson [45] (1966, 1975) former Governor of the Bank of England 

• Paul Volcker (1982, 1983, 1986, 1987, 1988, 1992, 1997 [1] ), former Chairman of 

the Federal Reserve 

Major corporations 

• Percy Barnevik (1992-1996, 1997, [1] 2001), former CEO of ASEA 

• Lord Browne of Madingley (1995, 1997, [1] 2004), Chief Executive BP 

• H. J. Heinz II [10] (1954), CEO of H. J. Heinz Company 

• Jorma Ollila (1997 [1] , 2005, 2008), Chairman of Royal Dutch Shell and Nokia 

Corporation 

• Jürgen E. Schrempp (1994-1996, 1997 [1] , 1998, 1999, 2001-2005, 2006, 2007), 

former CEO of DaimlerChrysler 

• Peter Sutherland (1989-1996, 1997 [1] , 2005), former Chairman of BP 

• Martin Taylor [1] (1993-1996, 1997), former CEO, Barclays 

• Louis V. Gerstner, Jr. [46] IBM Chairman 

University, institute and other academic 

Media 

• C. Fred Bergsten (1971, 1974, 1984, 1997 [1] ), President, Peterson Institute 

• Lord Black of Crossharbour (1981, 1983, 1985-1996, 1997) [1] ,Telegraph 

Chairman and convicted of fraud.

• George Stephanopoulos (1996, 1997 [1] ), former staff member of the Clinton 

administration, now ABC News's Chief Washington Correspondent 

Journalists 

• Will Hutton [7] (1997) 

Barack O’Bilderberg: Picking the President 

by Andrew G. Marshall 

A Background to Bilderberg 

Sunday, June 8, 2008, marked the last day of this year’s annual Bilderberg meeting, 

which took place in Chantilly, Virginia. The American Friends of Bilderberg, an 

American Bilderberg front group, which organizes the American participant list for the 

annual Bilderberg conference, issued a rare press release this year. It stated that, "The 

Conference will deal mainly with a nuclear free world, cyber terrorism, Africa, Russia, 

finance, protectionism, US-EU relations, Afghanistan and Pakistan, Islam and Iran. 

Approximately 140 participants will attend."1 

Bilderberg, which has been meeting annually since 1954, is a highly secretive 

international think tank and some say, policy-forming group made up of representatives 

from North America and Western Europe and was founded by Joseph Retinger, Prince 

Bernhard of the Netherlands and Belgian Prime Minister Paul Van Zeeland. The 

Bilderberg Steering Committee, made up of around 30 people, (with no official list 

available), "decided that it would invite 100 of the most powerful people in Europe and 

North America every year to meet behind closed doors at a different five-star resort. The 

group stresses secrecy: What's said at a Bilderberg conference stays at a Bilderberg 

conference."2 

Usually, the Bilderberg Conference is held in Europe for three years in a row, with the 

fourth year holding a meeting in North America. However, the previous North American 

conference was held in 2006 in Ottawa. So why did they break tradition to hold the 

conference in North America this year Speculation abounds around a discussion of a 

possible attack on Iran, the American-centered global financial crisis, as well as the 

current US Presidential elections.

First Meeting of the Bilderberg in 1954 

Bilderberg has long been an important forum for up-and-coming politicians of Western 

nations to be introduced to the global financial elite; the heads of the major multinational 

corporations, international banks, world financial institutions, global governing bodies, 

think tanks, and powerful individuals of the likes of David Rockefeller and various 

European monarchs, including Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, daughter of founding 

member, Prince Bernhard, as well as Queen Sofia and King Juan Carlos of Spain. 

According to The Globe and Mail, such Canadian Prime Ministers have, in the past, 

(often before becoming Prime Minister), attended a Bilderberg Conference as a guest, 

including Pierre Trudeau, Jean Chretien, Paul Martin and Stephen Harper.3 Tony Blair 

attended Bilderberg before becoming Prime Minister,4 as did the current British Prime 

Minister, Gordon Brown, who also recently called for the establishment of a "new world 

order."5 

Interestingly, as the Washington Post reported, Vernon E. Jordon, a high-powered 

American executive, who sits on several corporate boards, including American Express, 

Xerox, J.C. Penney, Dow Jones, and Sara Lee, to name a few, also happens to be a very 

close friend of former President Bill Clinton. However, "it was Jordan who first 

introduced then-Gov. Clinton to world leaders at their annual Bilderberg gathering in 

Germany in 1991. Plenty of governors try to make that scene; only Clinton got taken 

seriously at that meeting, because Vernon Jordan said he was okay."6 Clinton 

subsequently became President. 

Barack and Bilderberg 

Recently, there has been much discussion about Barack Obama having possibly attended 

the recent Bilderberg conference in Virginia. This speculation arose when Barack Obama 

and Hillary Clinton sneaked off for a secretive meeting while in Virginia. As the AP

eported, "Reporters traveling with Obama sensed something might be happening 

between the pair when they arrived at Dulles International Airport after an event in 

Northern Virginia and Obama was not aboard the airplane. Asked at the time about the 

Illinois senator's whereabouts, [Obama spokesman Robert] Gibbs smiled and declined to 

comment."7 

The press that had been traveling with Obama were not made aware of the secretive 

meeting until the plane that they assumed Obama would be present on was moving down 

the runway, prompting many angry questions from the press towards Obama’s 

spokesman, Robert Gibbs. One reported asked Gibbs, "Why were we not told about this 

meeting until we were on the plane, the doors were shut and the plane was about to taxi 

to take off" to which he responded, "Senator Obama had a desire to do some meetings, 

others had a desire to meet with him tonight in a private way and that is what we are 

doing." This preceded another question, "Is there more than one meeting, is there more 

than one person with whom he is meeting" Gibbs simply replied, "I am not going to get 

into all the details of the meeting." He again later repeated that, "There was a desire to do 

some meetings tonight, he was interested in doing them, others were interested in doing 

them, and to do them in a way that was private."8 

On Friday, June 6, it was reported that Bilderberg tracker, Jim Tucker, "called Obama’s 

office today to ask if he had attended Bilderberg. A campaign spokeswoman refused to 

discuss the matter but would not deny that Obama had attended Bilderberg."9 

Bilderberg to Pick Obama’s Vice President 

As the Financial Times reported in May of this year, Barack Obama appointed James A. 

Johnson, the former CEO of Fannie Mae, "to head a secret committee to produce a 

shortlist for his vice-presidential running mate." A short list was discussed by the article, 

which listed, other than Hillary Clinton, "Jim Webb, the former secretary of the navy, 

Vietnam veteran and senator for Virginia; Tim Kaine, the governor of Virginia; John 

Edwards, the former vice-presidential candidate in 2004; Ted Strickland, the governor of 

Ohio; and Kathleen Sebelius, the governor of Kansas." Other potential nominees include 

"Sam Nunn, the former chairman of the Senate armed services committee; and Wesley 

Clark, the former head of Nato in Europe."10 

James A. Johnson, the man Obama asked to pick his running mate, played the same role 

for John Kerry back in 2004, and he selected John Edwards. As the New York Times 

reported, "Several people pointed to the secretive and exclusive Bilderberg conference of 

some 120 people that this year drew the likes of Henry A. Kissinger, Melinda Gates and 

Richard A. Perle to Stresa, Italy, in early June, as helping [Edwards] win Mr. Kerry's 

heart. Mr. Edwards spoke so well in a debate on American politics with the Republican 

Ralph Reed that participants broke Bilderberg rules to clap before the end of the session." 

The Times further reported, "His performance at Bilderberg was important,'' said a friend 

of Mr. Kerry who was there. ''He reported back directly to Kerry. There were other 

reports on his performance. Whether they reported directly or indirectly, I have no doubt 

the word got back to Mr. Kerry about how well he did."11

James A. Johnson, Vice Chairman of Perseus, a merchant banking firm, is also a director 

of Goldman Sachs, Forestar Real Estate Group, Inc., KB Home, Target Corporation and 

UnitedHealth Group Inc., is also a member of the American Friends of Bilderberg, the 

Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission and is an honorary trustee of the 

Brookings Institution.12 It is likely that Obama’s running mate will be chosen by 

Johnson at this years Bilderberg Conference. 

Notable among this year’s Bilderberg guests are Kansas Governor, Kathleen Sebelius, 

who the Financial Times reported was on Johnson’s short list of nominees. In fact, 

Sebelius is the only person mentioned as a possible running mate in the Financial Times 

article that was officially listed on the Bilderberg list of attendees.13 Could this be a sign 

that she may be the chosen one Time will tell. However, another Democratic politician 

present at the meeting was Tom Daschle, so perhaps he is working his way back into 

politics. 

Don’t Forget McCain 

Just because Obama’s popularity dwarfs that of McCain’s, is not reason enough to ignore 

the other candidate. After all, the elite never ignore both candidates, and in fact, ensure 

they have them both neatly packed in their back pockets. Among the guests at the 

Bilderberg meeting this year, included Republican Governor of South Carolina, Mark 

Sanford, as well as Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice,14 which would be a smart 

political pick for McCain, going up against the first black presidential candidate. 

McCain has also received endorsements from former Secretaries of State, Henry 

Kissinger, General Alexander Haig, Lawrence Eagleburger and George P. Shultz.15 

These are not men without influence, as Henry Kissinger and George Shultz were also 

present at this years meeting.16 Also interesting to note is that George P. Shultz 

"associated himself with the Bush presidency early on, introducing the Texas governor to 

Condoleezza Rice at the Hoover Institution in 1998." Could Condi be in the process of 

being groomed for higher office, or is she simply at the meeting for foreign policy 

discussions 

Also important to note, is that McCain had a fundraiser in London held for him, which 

was hosted "by kind permission of Lord Rothschild OM GBE [Order of Merit and the 

Knight Grand Cross of the British Empire] and the Hon Nathaniel Rothschild." As the 

Washington Post reported, "Tickets to the invitation-only event cost $1,000 to $2,300."18 

The Post later reported, "Aides refused to talk about the fundraiser, or to say how much 

money was raised, and McCain dashed through the rain away from reporters after 

emerging. One guest said there were about 100 people at the luncheon. If they all gave 

the maximum, the event would have raised about $230,000 for the campaign."19 

NOTES 

1 Press Release, Bilderberg Announces 2008 Conference. Yahoo Finance: June 5, 2008: 

http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/080605/20080605006246.html.v=1 

2 CBC News Online, Informal forum or global conspiracy CBC News: June 13, 2006:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/bilderberg-group/ 

3 Alexander Panetta, Secretive, powerful Bilderberg group meets near Ottawa. The 

Globe and Mail: June 8, 2006: 

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060608.wbilder0608/BNStory 

/National/home 

4 WND, Bilderbergers set to meet in D.C. World Net Daily: June 4, 2008: 

http://www.wnd.com/index.phpfa=PAGE.view&pageId=66198\ 

5Steve Watson, So Who Is Gordon Brown Infowars.net: May 17, 2007: 

http://www.infowars.net/articles/may2007/170507_Gordon_Brown.htm 

6 Marc Fisher, Jordan Is Comfortable With Power. And With Himself. The Washington 

Post: January 27, 1998: 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/jordan012798.htm 

7 AP, Obama and Clinton meet, discuss uniting Democrats. The Associated Press: June 

6, 2008: 

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5g-qGLDs-gAnZiUXD2NU51ry3j3dwD914B1O00 

8 Steve Watson, Press Let Rip At Obama Spokesman Over Exclusion From Secret 

Meeting. Infowars.net: June 6, 2008: 

http://infowars.net/articles/june2008/060608Exclusion.htm 

9 Paul Joseph Watson, Obama’s Office Won’t Deny Senator Attended Bilderberg. Prison 

Planet: June 6, 2008: 

http://www.infowars.com/p=2572 

10 Edward Luce, Running mate speculation gathers pace. The Financial Times: May 23, 

2008: 

http://us.ft.com/ftgateway/superpage.ftnews_id=fto052320080508021175&page=2 

11 Jodi Wilgoren, THE 2004 ELECTION: THE PROCESS. New York Times: July 7, 

2004: 

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.htmlres=9F0CE0D9143BF934A35754C0A9629C 

8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=2 

12 Goldman Sachs, About Us: Board of Directors: James A. Jonhson. 

http://www2.goldmansachs.com/our-firm/about-us/leadership/board-ofdirectors.html#JamesA.Johnson 

13 AFP, BILDERBERG 2008 ATTENDEE LIST. American Free Press: 2008: 

http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bilderberg_list_2008.html 


http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bilderberg_list_2008.html

15 Klaus Marre, McCain gets support from former secretaries of state. The Hill: April 

10, 2007: 

http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/mccain-gets-support-from-former-secretaries-of-state- 

2007-04-10.html 


http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/bilderberg_list_2008.html 

17 Daniel Henninger, Father of the Bush Doctrine. The Wall Street Journal: April 29, 

2006: 

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.htmlid=110008308 

18 Matthew Mosk, Senator's Supporters Are Invited to Lunch With a Lord. The 

Washington Post: March 15, 2008: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpdyn/content/article/2008/03/14/AR2008031403897.html 

19 Michael D. Sheer, Americans Dash Through Rain to McCain's London Fundraiser. 

The Washington Post: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thetrail/2008/03/20/americans_dash_through_rain_to.html 

Andrew G. Marshall contributed to breaking the Climate Change consensus in 

a celebrated 2006 article entitled Global Warming A Convenient Lie, in which he 

challenged the findings underlying Al Gore's documentary. According to Marshall, 'as 

soon as people start to state that “the debate is over”, beware, because the fundamental 

basis of all sciences is that debate is never over'. Andrew Marshall has also written on 

the militarization of Central Africa, national security issues and the process of 

integration of North America. He is also a contributor to GeopoliticalMonitor.com 

He is currently a researcher at the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG) in 

Montreal and is studying political science and history at Simon Fraser University, British 

Columbia. 

Google joins Bilderberg because of this information: 

[This is part of the NAU. NAFTA SuperHighway]...that doesn't exist :) --- 

American Rail - NAFTA Superhighway Grid System 

This proposal offers dramatic improvements in highway safety and public health, as well 

as much reduced highway maintenance and construction costs. It will also significantly 

reduce energy use, greenhouse gas emissions, traffic jams, and shipping costs while 

providing significant short- and long-term economic stimulus. If fully implemented, it

could get as many as 83 percent of all long-haul trucks off our nation's highways by 

2030, reduce carbon emissions by 39 percent and oil consumption by 15 percent. Call it 

the "Back on Tracks" project. 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/14055955/American-Rail-NAFTA-Superhighway-Grid-System 

The report is from the group calling itself – 

Google’s CEO & Chairman Eric Schmidt sits on “New America” board of Directors 

This “rail” system is part of the North American Community/Union to ship cheap goods 

into North America via China. “The Route”.

LIFE WITH BIG BROTHER 

Google joins Bilderberg cabal 

Rich, powerful meet secretly in Greece 

Posted: May 17, 2009 

WASHINGTON – The latest meeting of the secretive, half-century-old Bilderberg Group 

concluded yesterday outside of Athens with a few arrests, but little news. 

Demonstrators from the political left and right shouted outside the Astir Palace hotel 

letting some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in the world know they weren't 

entirely welcome. 

A photographer for the London Guardian was briefly taken into custody while police 

insisted he delete pictures he took outside the hotel, which was closed to the public 

during the three-day meeting. 

A police officer told the Associated Press the resort was being protected by hundreds of 

police, navy commandos, coast guard speedboats and two F-16 fighter planes. The officer 

spoke on condition of anonymity, in keeping with his department's regulations. 

Attendees this year reportedly included U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner; Larry 

Summers, the director of the U.S. National Economic Council; Richard Holbrooke, the 

Obama administration's special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan; World Bank 

President Robert Zoellick; European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet and 

European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso. 

Bilderberg attendance is by invitation only. And if you want an invitation, you'd better be 

extremely rich or extremely powerful. 

New invitees reportedly include the nouveau riche Google Chief Executive Officer Eric 

Schmidt. Henry Kissinger, a lynchpin of continuity with other secretive internationalist 

groups including the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission, is a 

regular attendee, as is Wall Street Journal Editor Paul Gigot. 

Former British cabinet minister, Lord Denis Healey, one of the founders of the group, 

explained the purpose of the group to Jon Ronson of the Guardian: "Those of us in 

Bilderberg felt we couldn't go on forever fighting one another for nothing and killing 

people and rendering millions homeless. So we felt that a single community throughout 

the world would be a good thing." 

Meanwhile, Daniel Estulin, author of "The True Story of the Bilderberg Group," 

said before the confab the main topic of the agenda for this meeting was the 

world economy. He said his sources inside the group told him the movers and 

shakers would be discussing two options – "either a prolonged, agonizing 

depression that dooms the world to decades of stagnation, decline, and poverty 

... or an intense-but-shorter depression that paves the way for a new sustainable 

economic world order, with less sovereignty but more efficiency."

As WND has reported, The Bilderberg Group meets at luxury hotels and resorts 

throughout the world. Last year's conference was held at the Westfields Marriott 

in Chantilly, Va. WND made an effort to gain entry, but was denied. Every four 

years the conference is held in the U.S. or Canada. The group has an office 

located in Leiden, South Holland, Netherlands. 

The highly secretive meeting is off limits to press, but past reports from sources 

that have managed to penetrate the high-security meetings have stated that the 

meetings emphasize a globalist agenda and dismiss national sovereignty as 

regressive. 

The BBC declared it to be one of the most influential organizations in the world. 

"It's officially described as a private gathering," BBC reported, "but with a guest 

list including the heads of European and American corporations, political 

leaders and a few intellectuals, it's one of the most influential organizations on 

the planet." 

Attendees of the Bilderberg conference are not allowed to speak a word of what 

is discussed in the meeting outside of the group. The group has no website and 

no minutes are kept of the meetings to ensure secrecy. 

Last year, however, the Bilderberg Group made a press release available listing 

topics of discussion and providing a general overview of the gathering. 

"Approximately 140 participants will attend, of whom about two-thirds come 

from Europe and the balance from North America," the release stated. "About 

one-third is from government and politics, and two-thirds are from finance, 

industry, labor, education and communications. The meeting is private in order 

to encourage frank and open discussion." 

This year's event was the 57th annual gathering of the Bilderberg Group, which 

began meeting in 1954. A scheduled meeting in 1976 was canceled, but if added 

to the tally, leads some to count this year's gathering as the 58th.

Our man at Bilderberg: Let's salt the slug in 2010 

Publicity is pure poison to the world's global power elite. So we should all turn up to its 

next annual meeting with a few more tubs of the stuff, writes Charlie Skelton 

Ten years ago, when Jon Ronson dared to report on Bilderberg, he found himself "chased 

by mysterious men in dark glasses through Portugal". He was scared for his safety. 

"When I phoned the British embassy and asked them to explain to the powerful secret 

society that had set their goons on me that I was essentially a humorous journalist out of 

my depth, I wasn't being funny. I was being genuinely desperate," he wrote. I know 

exactly how he feels. 

Only out of sheer desperation did I try to arrest one of the goons following me and then 

follow my flimsy leads up the Greek police ladder, finally catching one of the goons wethanded 

in the lavatory of the department of government security. And only then did I 

know the extent of Bilderberg's paranoia: they had set the state police on me. 

So who is the paranoid one Me, hiding in stairwells, watching the pavement behind me 

in shop windows, staying in the open for safety Or Bilderberg, with its two F-16s, 

circling helicopters, machine guns, navy commandos and policy of repeatedly detaining 

and harassing a handful of journalists Who's the nutter Me or Baron Mandelson Me or 

Paul Volker, the head of Obama's economic advisory board Me or the president of 

Coca-Cola 

It makes me want to spit, the absurdity of it: the cost, not just in Greek tax euros, but on 

my peace of mind, of having (conservatively) a dozen Jack Bauers assigned to tailing me. 

I hope the operation at least had a cool name: Operation Catastrophic Overreaction, 

perhaps. 

So, yes, Bilderberg's paranoia is half to blame. But there is another reason why Ronson 

was hounded round Portugal, why I was chased round Greece, and why on Sunday the 

Romanian journalist Paul Dorneanu was strip-searched by goons in Vouliagmeni, held 

for four hours and forced to purge his camera of images (for the crime of trying to film 

the delegates leaving). And it is this: they can harass and detain us only because so few of 

us are there. 

Just now, I searched for "Bilderberg" on Reuters. I did the same on AP. And this is what I 

turned up:

Publicity is pure salt to the giant slug of Bilderberg. So I suggest next year we 

turn up with a few more tubs. If the mainstream press refuses to give proper 

coverage to this massive annual event, then interested citizens will have to: a 

people's media. Find the biggest lens you can and join us for Bilderberg 2010. 

No idea where it's going to be, but there's usually a few days' notice. 

We'll have a barbecue selling bilderburgers (with extra lies), and we will set up 

our own press centre near the cordon. Get some lanyards. Email me at 

bilderberg2010@yahoo.co.uk and we'll start prepping. 

Meanwhile, petition newspapers to send a correspondent. Petition your MP to 

ask a question in parliament. This happened a few days ago in Holland. Citing 

an article by Paul Joseph Watson on prisonplanet.com, a Dutch MP asked in 

parliament about the involvement of the prime minister, the minister for 

European affairs and Queen Beatrix, asking them to make public any items that 

were on the agenda, and whether the ratification of the Lisbon treaty was 

discussed. 

I've got a couple of questions I would like to ask Peter Mandelson, mainly about 

the freedom of the press and what he thinks about a Guardian journalist being 

detained, shoved and intimidated by the Greek state police on his behalf. 

Mandelson's office has confirmed his attendance at this year's meeting: "Yes, 

Lord Mandelson attended Bilberberg. He found it a valuable conference."

Oh, good. Maybe he stole a bathrobe. Peter has been a busy baron these last few 

days: all that beach volleyball and global strategising, then straight back to 

address the Google Zeitgeist conference on Monday, where he talked about "the 

need for regulation" of the internet. "There are worries about the impact of the 

internet on our society," he said. I bet he is worried; but not half as worried as I 

am about "the need for regulation". 

But these worries are small potatoes compared with the biggest concern 

Bilderberg 09 has given me. My experience over the last several days in Greece 

has granted me a single, diamond-hard opinion. Meaning I now have two: that 

John McEnroe is the greatest sportsman of all time; and that we must fight, 

fight, fight, now – right now, this second, with every cubic inch of our souls – to 

stop identity cards. 

I can tell you right now that the argument "If I've done nothing wrong, why 

would I worry about showing who I am" is hogwash. Worse than that, it's 

horse hockey. It's all about the power to ask, the obligation to show, the 

justification of one's existence, the power of the asker over the subservience of 

the asked. (Did you know that most Greek police don't wear a number This is 

an obligation that goes one way.) 

I have learned this from the random searches, detentions, angry security goon 

proddings and thumped police desks without number that I've had to suffer on 

account of Bilderberg: I have spent the week living in a nightmare possible 

future and many different terrible pasts. I have had the very tiniest glimpse into 

a world of spot checks and unchecked security powers. And it has left me 

shaken. It has left me, literally, bruised. 

I can tell you this from personal experience: the onus upon the individual to 

carry with them some external proof of their identity is transformative of his or 

her status as a human being. The identity card turns you from a free citizen into 

a suspect. It is a spanner with which to beat the individual around the head. It is 

the end of everything. And how much easier to put all that information inside a 

microchip so you don't have to carry around that pesky card all the time. How 

much more efficient! 

Listen. I don't care if you don't love liberty. For the love of yourself: fight 

identity cards. Don't let them happen. STOP IDENTITY CARDS. Stop identity 

cards. And while you're about it: stop identity cards. And that's all I have to say, 

you will be delighted to know, about Bilderberg 2009. Oh, except for a giant 

word of thanks to everyone who has written supportive or interested comments 

on these blogposts (let's meet up for a proper debrief!) And one little correction: 

for the record, Kenneth Clarke's office has said he was "in his constituency" at

the weekend, not at the Astir Palace doing sambuca shots with the CEO of 

Airbus. Just in case he remembers differently when asked again. 

Investigative Author, Daniel Estulin Exposes Bilderberg 

Group Plans 

International best-selling investigative author Daniel Estulin has received 

from his sources the 73-page Bilderberg Group meeting wrap-up for 

participants. 

that there exist big risks to a recovery still reeling from financial turmoil, making it very 

difficult to assess developments. 

the banks themselves don’t know the answer to when (the bottom will be hit). 

(Vocus/PRWEB ) May 22, 2009 — International best-selling investigative 

author Daniel Estulin has received from his sources the 73-page Bilderberg 

Group meeting wrap-up for participants. In the report no one is identified by 

name, only as an American or European, or by a description of the speaker’s 

position, i.e. member of the IMF. There appears to be some disagreement about 

who was in attendance at this year’s secretive conclave held at a 5-star resort in 

Greece. According to sources in Greece and the Bilderberg Netherlands 

“office,” US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and US General David 

Petraeus were at this year’s gathering. Both men have denied this, according to 

a conversation held with a Washington, DC reporter, who stated that Mr. 

Geithner was attending a private function and General Petraeus was at Central 

Command. 

Using a purported participant list, a “smear” 

campaign has seemingly been launched against 

Estulin. On a French “left-wing” website 

(www.bellaciao.org/fr/), and then posted in English 

on a populist forum in the US 

(http://forum.prisonplanet.com), it is claimed that 

Estulin was a known participant in this year’s 

conference. “Hardly,” said Estulin, who laughed at 

the prospect, saying that the Group has tried many 

things to keep him from reporting on its activities, but 

had never asked him to attend. Estulin did his

eporting this year from Spain, knowing from years of coverage that the location 

in Greece physically precluded any photographing of the participants. His book 

on the shadowy clique, ”The True Story of the Bilderberg Group” broke through 

the barrier that the Group even existed with help from numerous photographs 

exposing the elite that were taken by Estulin from 600-800 meters. The book 

has been translated into 48 languages and sold millions of copies worldwide. 

Estulin’s reportage of the annual meetings has led to many correct predictions 

of world events, including the timing of the 2003 Iraqi War, the rise and fall of 

oil prices, as well as the current economic calamity and housing mess. 

There have been many posts floating around the Internet claiming to be actual 

participant lists. Daniel has a copy of an official list, and has confirmed much of 

it through photo identification by staff at the hotel, a gentleman responsible for 

group bookings there, and the Bilderberg executive secretary in the Netherlands, 

who confirmed assisting Mr. Geithner with arrangements for the meeting. 

A confirmed list of the US delegation is available at www.bilderbergbook.com 

According to Estulin’s reading of the report, it looks as if there are serious 

disagreements within the group. The hardliners are for dramatic decline and a 

severe, short-term depression, but there are those who think that things have 

gone too far and that the fallout from the global economic cataclysm cannot be 

accurately calculated if Henry Kissinger’s model is chosen. Among them is 

Richard Holbrooke. What is unknown at this point: if Holbrooke’s point of view 

is, in fact, Obama’s. 

Estulin says that the consensus dealt a blow to those in the group who were 

hoping for economic revival, agreeing that the recession will be deeper, and the 

road to recovery longer and harder, than the happy talk coming from world 

leaders. The terms used were ”relatively slow and protracted.” Estulin says pay 

attention to the press dailies: you will see quite a bit of these two terms in the 

weeks and months to come. 

Estulin notes that some of those who attended the annual conference will give 

another, more moderate view, stating that ”the economy requires a period of 

healing and that it will take time.” While this helps create a dialectic in the press 

from two Bilderberg camps, both will pay heed to the idea of ”great uncertainty 

over the outlook.” According to Estulin, over the next several months the 

Bilderbergers will purposely refuse to commit to any specifics, simply pointing 

out “that there exist big risks to a recovery still reeling from financial turmoil, 

making it very difficult to assess developments.”

Estulin reports that some leading European bankers faced with the specter of 

their own financial mortality are extremely concerned, calling this high wire act 

“unsustainable,” and saying that US budget and trade deficits could result in the 

demise of the dollar. Recent fears about their own survival have not been 

quelled because, as one Bilderberg attendee pointed out, “the banks themselves 

don’t know the answer to when (the bottom will be hit).” According to the 

group’s report, however, all agreed that the level of capital needed for the 

American banks may be considerably higher than the US government suggested 

through their recent stress tests. 

Estulin says that someone from the IMF pointed out that its own study on 

historical recessions suggests that the US is only a third of the way through this 

current one; therefore economies expecting to recover with resurgence in 

demand from the US will have a long wait. As another individual pointed out, 

“Equity losses in 2008 were worse than those of 1929.” This individual then 

added, “The next phase of the economic decline will also be worse than the 

’30s, mostly because the US economy carries about $20 trillion of excess debt. 

Until that debt is eliminated, the idea of a healthy boom is a mirage.” 

Estulin reports that according to a World Bank representative at the meeting, 

government officials around the world have proposed more than sixty new trade 

restrictions since the beginning of the financial crisis, which some attendees 

found distressing, as governments, in a downward spiraling economy embrace 

protectionist policies to try and protect employment and generate internal 

economic activity. 

George Ball, back in 1968 at a Bilderberg conference in Canada, presented an 

outline of the advantages of a neo-colonial world economic order based on the 

concept of a world company. According to Ball, the first and most important 

thing that had to be eliminated was the ”archaic political structure of the nation 

state.” 

According to Estulin, for Bilderberg, the very structure of the nation state and 

the idea of the commonwealth represent the main obstacles to the creation of a 

neo-colonial world empire. 

This is the first of a series of reports based upon Daniel Estulin’s readings of the 

2009 Bilderberg Group wrap-up document. Subsequent reports will be available 

at www.bilderbergbook.com and other Internet sites.

FLASHBACK: 

The SPOTLIGHT December 13, 1999 

The CFR, Trilateral Commission, Bilderberger Connection 

This is a list of members of the New World Order and their affiliation. 

FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS 

FEDERAL JUDICIARY 

UNITED STATES CONGRESS 

NEWSPAPER PUBLISHERS 

ELECTRONIC MEDIA 

TELEVISION 

MAGAZINES 

NEWSPAPERS 

PRINT MEDIA 

COLLEGE & UNIVERSITY PRESIDENTS 

UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS 

CLINTON ADMINISTRATION 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF US 

AMBASSADORS 

OTHER 

STATE GOVERNORS 

FORMER GOVERNORS 

LABOR UNION LEADERS 

FOUNDATIONS 

INDUSTRY 

TO ORDER HARD COPIES OF THIS SPECIAL SUPPLEMENT ( small print, $2 for 

one 

copy; $4 for 6 copies; 40 or more copies are just 30 cents each) send 

payment to: 

The SPOTLIGHT, 300 Independence Ave. SE, Washington, D.C. 20003 

For a larger format version of this centerfold, Write: 

Fund to Restore an Educated Electorate, P.O. Box 33339. Kerrville, Texas 

78029 

"The Council on Foreign Relations is the American branch of a society 

which organized in England and believes national boundaries should be 

obliterated and one world rule established." ....Sen. Barry Goldwater 

Council on Foreign Relations 

The Harold Pratt House 

58 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10021

Tel. 212-734-0400 

"The Trilateral Commission is international and is intended to be the 

vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking 

interests by seizing control of the political government of the U.S." 

...Sen. Barry Goldwater. 

The Trilateral Commission 

345 E. 46th Street, New York, NY 10017 

Tel. 212-661-1180 

The Bilderberg is a quasi-secret consortium of international elite who 

meet annually to plan world economic and political policies. The 

Bilderberg has no membership per se. Those identified with "B" in this 

chart have attended past Bilderberg meetings. 

Bilderberg 

(No permanent address) 

FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS 

World Bank 

James D. Wolfensohn, Chmn. 

B 

John M. Page, Jr., Ch. Econ. Mid East, No Africa B 

Jessica P. Einhorm, Vice Pres. & Treasurer CFR/TC 

Robert Strange McNamara, former President CFR/TC/B 

Raymond Vernon, former visiting prof. CFR 

Bank of Reconstruction & Development 

Andre W.G. Newburg, General Counsel, Euro. 

CFR 

Bank of America 

George W. Coombe, former Exec. VP 

CFR 

Rudolph A. Peterson, Chmn, Exec. Comm. San Diego CFR 

Nicholas B. Binkley, Chmn. & CEO, San Diego CFR 

Melville P. McPherson, Grp. Exec. VP, San Diego CFR 

Andrew F. Brimmer, Dir. 

CFR 

Ignacio E. Lozano, Jr., Dir. 

CFR 

Walter E. Massey, Dir. 

CFR 

Julia Chang Bloch, Grp. Exec. VP, San Francisco CFR 

Bank of New York

John Carter Bacot, chmn. & CEO 

Ralph E. Gomory, Dir. 

Martha T. Muse, Dir. 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Bankers Trust Co, NYC 

George J. Vojta, Vice Chmn. 

Jon M. Huntsman, Dir. 

Vernon E. Jordan, Jr., Dir. 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Brown Brothers Harriman Co. 

Alexander Tornio Ercklentz, Partner 

Frank w. Hoch, Partner 

CFR 

CFR 

Chase Manhattan Bank 

Walter Vincent Shipley, Chmn, & CEO CFR 

Thomas G. Labrecque, Pres. Y COO 

CFR 

Robert Royal Douglass, former Vice Chmn. CFR 

David Rockefeller, Chmn., Intnl. Adv. Comm. CFR/TC/B 

Marshall N. Carter, Sr.VP, Chase Manhattan Corp. CFR 

Henry B. Schacht, Dir. 

CFR 

Chemical Bank 

Thomas G. Labrecque, Chmn.& CEO CFR/TC 

John Roy Price, Jr., Director, Gov. Affairs CFR 

Charles W. Duncan, Jr., Dir. 

CFR 

Helene L. Kaplan, Dir. 

CFR 

J. Bruce Llewellyn, Dir. CFR 

Marina vN. Whitman, Dir. 

CFR 

Citicorp, NYC 

William Reginald Rhodes, Vice Chmn. 

Rozanne L. Ridgway, Dir. 

Franklin A. Thomas, Dir 

CFR 

CFR/TC 

CFR 

Commercial Banks 

Jack Sheinkman, Chmn. Amalgamated Bank CFR/B 

Richard L. Carrion, Chmn, CEO, 

Banco Popular de Puerto Rico 

CFR 

Odeh Felix Aburdene, Mng. Ptnr.,Capital Trust Boston CFR 

Mitchell W. Hedstrom, VP, Citibank, NYC CFR

Richard Leslie Huber, V. Chmn, Continental Bank Corp CFR 

Jackson B. Gilbert, 2nd Chmn.,Espirito Santo Bank, FLCFR 

Eli Shapiro, former Chmn., Fed. Hm.Ln. Bank Boston CFR 

John Robert Petty, Chmn., Fed. Nat'l. Payables CFR 

Maynard J. Toll, Jr.,Mng Dir.,First Boston Corp.,NYC CFR 

Richard C. Holbrooke, V. Chmn., CS First Boston CFR/B 

David C. Mulford, V.Chmn.,CSFirst Boston,Inc.,London CFR 

John M. Hennessy, Pres. & CEO, CS First Boston Inc. CFR 

Alfred R. Abboud, 

former Chmn. & CEO, First city Bankcorp, Hou. CFR 

Anthony P. Terracciano, 

Ch., Pr., CEO 1st Fideli. Bankcorp, NJ CFR 

Joseph A. Rice, fmr. Chmn. & CEO, Irving Bank Corp. CFR 

Dennis Weatherstone, Chmn. & CEO, J.P. Morgan & Co. CFR 

Thomas S. Johnson, Chmn. CEO, Greenpoint Fin. Corp. CFR 

Robert G. Wilmers, 

Pres & CEO, Mfr & Trdrs Trust, Buffalo CFR 

Henry Furlong Baldwin, Chmn., Mercantile Bankshares CFR 

Alexander M. Vagliano, Chmn.,Mchlilin Financial Corp CFR 

Rimmer de Vries, Sr. VP, Morgan Guarantee Trust CFR 

Frederick L. Deming, Director, National City Bankcorp. B 

Richard E. Beeman, Chmn. CEO, The Private Trust Co. CFR 

Robert H. Knight, Director, Nat'l. Leadership Bank CFR 

Hugh L. McColl, Jr., Ch.,Pres.&CEO, NationsBank Corp TC 

Morris Wolf Offit, Pres., Offit Bank, NYC CFR 

Leslie Elizabeth Bains, Exec.VP,Republic Bank of NYC CFR 

Joe Lewis Albritton, Chmn., Riggs Bank of Washington CFR 

M. Straser Holcomb, Exec. VP, USAA, San Antonio CFR 

New York Stock Exchange 

John J. Phelan, Jr., fmr Chmn. & CEO 

William H. Donaldson, Chmn. & CEO 

Paul A. Allaire, Dir 

Clifton R. Wharton, Jr., Dir. 

Investment Bankers 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Vincent A. Mai, Pres. & CEO, AEA Investors, Inc CFR 

Frank G. Zarb, Pres., Chmn., American Express Co. CFR 

Kenneth I. Chenault, V Chmn., Bear Sterns & Co. CFR 

Denis A. Bovin, Vice Chmn., Bear Sterns & Co. CFR 

Paul Hallingby, Jr., 

Mng. Sr. Dir. Emer, Bear Sterns & Co. CFR 

James T. Hill, Gen. Ptnr, Blackstone Group CFR 

David A. Stockman, Gen. Partner, Blackstone Group CFR

Thomas C. Theobald, Ptnr, Blair Capital Mgmt. CFR 

Paul f. Anderson, Sr. VP, Booz, Allen, Hamilton CFR 

Rudy E. Boschwitz, Dir., Chicago Mercantile CFR 

Lucy Wilson Benson, Dir Dreyfus Fund CFR 

Stephen J. Friedman, Exec. VP, Equitable Life CFR/TC/B 

Charles R. Frank, Jr., VP & Dir., GE Capital Corp CFR 

Arthur G. Altschul, Chmn emer., Gen Am Investors CFR 

Thomas Eugene Lovejoy, 

former Chmn., Manhattan Life Ins. Co. CFR 

Winthrop H. Smith, Jr., 

Ex. VP & Chrmn. Merrill Lynch Intnl CFR 

John Gaines Heimann, 

Chmn., Merrill Lynch Global Fin. Inst. CFR 

Charles F. Luce, 

former Spec. Counsel, Metropolitan Life Ins. Co CFR 

J. A. Bohn, Jr. President, Moody's Investors Service CFR 

Richard B. Fisher, Chmn., Morgan Stanley Group TC 

Evan G. Galbraith, Sr. Advisor, Morgan Stanley Group CFR 

Donald B. Marron, CEO, Paine Webber Inc. CFR 

Albert H. Gordon, Adv. Dir., Paine Webber Inc. CFR 

Robert Carswell, Chmn. Private Export Funding Co. CFR 

Robert C. Winters, 

Chmn. & CEO emer, Prudential Insurance Co. TC 

Lawrence C. McQuade, V Chmn., Prudential Mutual Fund CFR 

Nancy Hays Teeters, 

Dir. & Trustee, Prudential Mutual Fund CFR 

Patrick Owen Burns, Sr. VP, Prudential Securities CFR 

David Rockefeller, Jr., Chmn., Rockefeller Fin. Serv.CFR 

Alice Victor, Exec. Asst., Rockefeller Fin. Serv. B 

John H. Gutfreund, 

former Chmn., CEO, Salomon Brothers CDR/TC 

Charles F. Barber, fmr. Dir., Salomon Brothers Corp. CFR 

George Soros, Pres. Soros Fund Mgmt. CFR/B 

Kenneth J. Bailkin, Dir. Travelers Group CFR 

Christopher W. Brody, 

Mng. Dir. E.M. Warburg, Pincus & Co. CFR 

Paul A. Volcker, Chmn., B.T. Wolfensohn CFR/TC/B 

Thomas Corcoran Barry, Pres., Zephyr Mgmt. CFR 

Dillon, Read & Co. 

John Peter Birkelund, Chmn. & CEO 

John Henry F. Haskell, Jr., Mng. Dir. 

Peter M. Flanigan, Director 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Federal National Mortgage Assoc. (FNMA)

Lawrence M. Small COO 

Franklin Delano Raines, Vice Chmn. 

Robert B. Zoelick, Ex. VP, Gen. Couns. 

CFR 

CFR 

CFT/TC/B 

Goldman Sachs & Co. 

Jon S. Coizine, Chmn, CEO 

B 

Robert J. Hurst, Gen. Partner 

CFR 

John L.Weinberg, Sr., Chmn. 

CFR 

Stephen Friedman, Co-Chmn. 

TC 

Henry H. Fowler, Ltd. Partner, former Chmn. CFR 

E. Gerald Corrigan, former Chmn. CFR/TC/B 

Robert D. Hormats, Vice Chmn. 

CFR/TC 

Lawrence J. Brainard, VP 

CFR 

Lazard Freres 

James T. Lynn, Sr. Advisor 

CFR 

Steve L. Rattner, Head Comm.GP. 

CFR 

W. Michael Blumenthal, Sr. Advisor CFR 

Lehman Bros. 

Howard L. Clark, V Chmn. 

Theodore Roosevelt, IV, Mng. Dir. 

Philip Caldwell, Sr. Mng. Dir. 

James R. Schleslinger, Sr. Advisor 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

FEDERAL JUDICIARY 

Sandra Day O'Connor, Asso. Justice, U.S. Sup. Court CFR 

Steven G. Breyer, Asso. Justice, U.S. Sup. Court CFR 

Ruth Bader Ginsburg, ASSo. Justice, U.S. Sup. Court CFR 

Laurence H. Silberman, U.S. App. Ct., D.C. Circuit CFR 

Jose Alberto Cabranes, 2nd Federal Circuit, New York CFR 

William W. Schwarzdr, U.S. District Court, Calif. CFR 

Dudley Baldwin Bonsal, U.S. District Court, New York CFR 

INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE, THE HAGUE 

Steven Myron Schwebel, Judge Arbitor CFR 

Richard Clark Allison, 

Judge, Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal CFR 

Charles Nelson Brower, Counsel & Advocate CFR 

John Reese Stevenson, Judge emer., Court of Arbit CFR

UNITED STATES CONGRESS 

United States Senators 

John H. Chafee (R), RI CFR/TC/B 

Christopher J. Dodd (D), CT CFR 

Dianne Feinstein (D), CA TC 

Bob Graham (F), FL CFR 

John F. Kerry (D), MA CFR 

Joseph I. Lieberman (D), CT CFR 

John McCain (R), AZ CFR 

Daniel Moynihan (D), NY CFR 

Charles S. Robb (D), VA CFR/TC 

John D. Rockefeller, IV (D), WV CFR/TC 

William V. Roth, Jr. (R), DE CFR/TC 

Olympia J. Snowe (R), ME CFR 

Robert G. Torricelli, (D), NJ CFR 

Chris Dodd (D), CT B 

Chuck Hagel (R), NE TC/B 

FORMER SENATORS 

Lloyd Bentsen (D), TX B 

William L. Bradley (D), NJ CFR 

William s. Cohen (R), ME CFR/TC 

Dick Clark (D), IA CFR 

J. Bennett Johnston (D), LA B 

George J. Mitchell (D), ME CFR 

Sam Nunn (D), GA B 

Edward Brooke (R), MA B 

Rudy Boschqitz (R), MN CFR 

Gary Hart (D), CO B 

Claiborne Pell (D), RI CFR 

Charles H. Percy (R), IL CFR 

Larry Pressler (R), SD CFR 

Terry Sanford (D), NC CFR 

Fred R. Harris (D), OK B 

David L. Boren (D), OK CFR 

Hugh Scott (R), PA B 

Adlai E. Stevenson, III (D), IL CFR/B 

Harris L. Wofford (D), PA CFR 

George s. McGovern (D), SD CFR 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

Douglas K. Bereuter (R), NE CFR 

Howard L. Berman (D), CA CFR

Sanford D. Bishop, Jr. (D), GA 

CFR 

Thomas J. Campbell (R), CA CFR 

Norman D. Dicks (D), WA CFR 

Barney Frank (D), MA CFR 

Sam Gejdenson (D), CT CFR 

Richard A. Gephardt (D), MO CFR 

Lee H. Hamilton (D), IN TC/B 

Jane Lakes Harmon (D), CA CFR 

Amory Houghton, Jr. (R), NY CFR 

James T. Kolbe (R), AZ CFR 

James A.S. Leach (R), IA TC 

Robert T. Matshi (D), CA CFR 

James A. McDermott (D), WA CFR 

Eleanor Holmes Norton (D), DC CFR 

Ed Pastor (D), AZ CFR 

Donald M. Payne (D), NJ CFR 

Thomas e. Petri (R), WI CFR 

John Edward Porter (R), IL CFR 

Charles B. Rangel (D), NY TC 

Carlos A. Romero-Burcelo (D), PR 

CFR 

Charles Schumer (D), NY CFR 

John M. Spratt, Jr. (D), SC CFR 

Louis Stokes (D), OH CFR 

Esteban Edward Torres (D), CA CFR 

FORMER REPRESENTATIVES 

Anthony C. Beilenson (D), CA CFR 

Richard B. Cheney (R), WY CFR 

William F. Clinger, Jr. (R), PA 

CFR 

Mervyn M. Dymally (D), CA CFR 

Dante B. Fascell (D), FL CFR 

Newton L. Gingrich (R), GA CFR 

John B. Anderson (R), IL CFR 

Bill Green (R), NY CFR 

William B. Richardson (D), NM CFR 

Charles E. Whalen, Jr. OH CFR 

Peter Smith VT CFR 

Robert B. Torricelli (D), NJ CFR 

Thomas s. Foley (D), WA CFR/TC 

Vin Weber (R), MN CFR 

NEWSPAPER PUBLISHERS 

Claude E. Erbsen, VP, Dir World Services, AP 

Hugh D.S. Greenway, Boston Globe 

CFR 

CFR

Richard A. Nenneman, fmr. Ed-in-Ch., CS Monitor CFR 

David Kruidenier, former Chmn., Cowles Media Co. CFR 

Stephen R. Graubard, Daedalus 

CFR 

James M. Landers, Dallas Morning News, Wash. Bur CFR 

Joe H. Stroud, Detroit Free Press 

CFR 

Antonio L. Ferre, El Nueva Dia 

CFR 

Bernard Krisher, Asia Wired 

CFR 

Don C. Shoemaker, Columnist, Knight Ridder News CFR 

Robert H. Estabrook, Lakeville Journal CFR 

Robert J. White, Minneapolis Star Tribune CFR 

Stephen G. Smith, National Journal CFR 

Robert M. McKinney, New Mexican, Inc. CFR 

Michael J. O'Neill, New York Daily News CFR 

Barbara Singer Thomas, News International CFR 

Gerald L. Warren, San Diego Union Tribune CFR 

Georgie Anne Geyer, Universal Syndicate CFR 

James B. Reston, Vineyard Gazette 

B 

ELECTRONIC MEDIA 

Daniel L. Schorr, Sr. Analyst, Nat Pub. Radio CFR 

Joan Ganz Cooney, 

Chmn. Exec Comm, Children's TV Workshop CFR 

David V.B Britt, Pres., CEO, Children's TV Workshop CFR 

June Victoria Cross, Producer, Frontline WGBH-TV CFR 

Bill D. Moyers, 

Exec. Dir Public Affairs TV, fmr. Dir. CFR B 

Joseph J. Collins, Chmn., CEO, Am. TV & Comm. CFR 

Lucy Wilson Benson, Dir., Comsat Corp. CFR 

Elizabeth Drew, Monitor Radio 

CFR 

TELEVISION 

ABC 

Thomas S. Murphey, Ch.CEO 

Nicholas F. Brady, Dir. 

CFR 

David Brinkley 

CFR 

L. Diane Sawyer CFR 

Barbara Walters 

CFR 

Garrick Utley 

CFR 

Joseph C. Harsch 

CFR/B 

CFR 

CBS 

Laurence A. Tisch, Chmn. 

CFR

Dan Rather 

Stephen F. Cohen 

Edward R. Bradley 

Marvin Kalb 

Marshall R. Loeb 

Lesley R. Stahl 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

B 

CNN 

Wyatt T Johnson, Jr., Pres. 

Rowland Evans, Jr. 

Bernard Kalb 

Jesse L. Jackson, Sr. 

William Schneider 

Frank Sesno 

Ellen H. Hume 

CFR/TC 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

NBC 

Jane Cahill Pfeiffer, fmr Chmn. 

Herbert S. Schlosser, fmr Pres. 

Tom Brokaw 

Bill D. Moyers 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

PBS 

Sharon P. Rockefeller, CEO, WETA 

Lester Martin Crystal 

Jim C. Leher 

Michael D. Mosettig 

Stanley Karnow 

Charlayne Hunter-Gault 

MAGAZINES 

New Yorker Magazine 

Hendrick Hertzberg, Exc. Ed. 

Jane Kramer, Author 

Newsday, Inc. 

Steven L. Isenberg, former Publ. 

James M. Klurfeld, Ed., Ed. Pg. 

Newsweek Magazine 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

B

Katharine Graham, Dir 

Richard M. Smith, Prs., Ed'n'Ch 

Maynard M. Parker, Editor 

Meg Greenfield, Columnist 

Joe Klein, Columnist 

CFR/TC/B 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Time, Inc. 

Ralph P. Davidson, Chmn. 

Henry A. Grunwald, fmr EdC. 

CFR 

CFR/B 

Time Magazine 

Walter S. Isaacson, Mng. Editor 

CFR 

John F. Stacks, Sep. Mng. Ed. 

CFR 

Henry Muller, Editorial Dir. 

CFR 

L. Bruce van Voorst, Sr. Corres. CFR 

Time Warner, Inc. 

Gerald Levin, Chmn. & CEO 

Jason D. McManus, former Ed-in-Ch. 

Carla Hills, Dir 

CFR 

David Tlearns, Dir. 

CFR 

TC 

CFR 

U.S. News & World Report 

Mortimer B. Zuckerman, EIC 

Joseph Fromm, fmr. Asst. Ed. 

David R. Gergen, Ed. At Large 

CFR/B 

CFR 

CFR/B 

NEWSPAPERS 

Los Angeles Times 

David Laventhol, fmr Pub CEO 

CFR 

C. Shelbey Coffey, III, Ed VP CFR 

Frank del Olmo, Dep. Ed. 

CFR 

Anthony Day, formr Sr. Corres. 

CFR 

Jack Nelson, Wash. Bur. Ch. 

CFR 

Robin Wright, Wash. Corres. 

CFR 

New York Times 

Jack Rosenthal, Mng. Ed. 

CFR

Karl E. Meyer, Editorial Bd. 

Mitchel R. Levitas, Sr. Ed. 

John B. Oakes, fmr. Sr. Ed. 

Flora Lewis, Sr. Columnist 

A.M. Rosenthal, Wash. Bur. 

Thomas L. Friedman, Col. 

Richard Bernstein, Book Critic 

Richard L. Gelb. Dir. 

Louis V. Gerstner, Jr., Dir 

George B. Munroe, Dir. 

Donald M. Stewart, Dir 

Cyrus R. Vance, Dir 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR/TC 

CFR 

CFR 

B 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Times Mirror Co. 

Robert f. Erburu, Ch, CEO 

Curtis A. Hessler, Exec. VP 

Robert C. Toth, Sr. Assoc. 

David Abram Laventhol, Ed.Lg. 

CFR/TC 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Wall Street Journal 

Robert L. Bartley, VP 

Frederick s. Kempe, WSJ Eur 

Paul E. Steiger, Mng. Ed. 

Daniel P. Henninger, Dep. Ed. 

Paul Gigot, Wash. Colmn. 

Russell H. Fifield, Contr. Asia 

John Train, Writer 

CFR/B 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

B 

CFR 

CFR 

Washington Post 

Katharine Graham 

James E. Burke, Dir 

Ralph E. Gomery, Dir 

Robert G. Kaiser, Mag. Ed. 

Michael Getler, Asst. Mng. Ed. 

Meg Greenfield, Ed. Page Ed. 

Stephen S. Rosenfeld, Dp. Ed. 

Jimmie L. Hoagland, Asso. Ed. 

Caryle Marie Murphy, Fm. Cor. 

Charles Krauthammer, Col 

Walter H. Pincus, Nat'l Rpter 

Don Oberdorfer, Writer 

Karen DeYoung 

Chalmers McG. Roberts. Col. 

CFR/TC/B 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR

PRINT MEDIA 

Robert Emmett Tyrrell, Jr., 

Ed-in-Ch., American Spectator 

CFR 

Thomas M. Powers, Steerforth Press CFR 

Mortimer b. Zuckerman, Pres. Chmn., Atlantic Monthly CFR 

James McK. Fallows, Wash. DC. Ed., Atlantic Monthly CFR 

William Kristol, Weekly Stadard 

B 

Kermit I. Lansner, Contr. New Republic CFR 

Lewis H. Lapham, Editor, Harpers magazine CFR 

Amaud deBorchgrave, fmr, Ed-in-Ch., Washington Times CFR 

William F. Buckley, Jr., 

Fdr., Pres, & Ed-in-Ch.,National Review CFR/B 

Peter W. Rodman, Sr. Ed., National Review CFR 

Bruce Stokes, National Journal 

CFR 

Leon Wieseltier. New Republic magazine CFR 

Irving Kristol, Public Interest magazine CFR 

Warren M. Hoge, New York Times, London Bur. CFR 

Morton Kondracke, Roll Call 

CFR 

Gerald Piel, fmr. Chamn., Scientific America, Inc. CFR/B 

Edward J. Klein, Vanity Fair & Parade magazines CFR 

Anne Karalekas, 

Gen. Mgr., D.C. Sidewalk, Microsoft Corp. CFR 

Lewis McA. Branscomb, Trustee, Natl. Geographic Soc. CFR 

COLLEGE & UNIVERSITY PRESIDENTS 

Robert H. Edwards, Bowdoin College CFR 

Vartan Gregorian, Brown University CFR 

Tomas Abel Arciniega, Cal. State, Bakersfield CFR 

Stephen R. Lewis, Jr., Carleton College CFR 

William R. Cotter, Colby College 

CFR 

George Rupp, Columbia University 

CFR 

Claire Lynn Gaaudiani, Connecticut College CFR 

John Jay Iselin, Cooper Union 

CFR 

Nanneri O. Keohane, Duke University CFR/TC 

Rev. Joseph A. O'Hara, Fordham University CFR 

Stephen J. Trachtenberg, Geo. Washington University CFR 

Neil L. Rudenstine, Harvard University CFR 

Niara Sudarkasa, Lincoln University, PA CFR 

David Joel Steinberg, Long Island Univ., Brooklyn CFR 

M.Peter McPherson, Mich. St.U. 

CFR 

Arthur R. Taylor, Muhlenberg College CFR 

Jonathan F. Fanton, New School for Soc. Res. CFR 

Lawrence Jay Oliva, New York University CFR 

John Bradamas, Pres. emer., NYU CFR/TC

S. Frederick Starr, Oberlin College CFR/TC 

Peter W. Stanley, Pomona College 

CFR 

William G. Bowen, Princeton Universtiy CFR 

Alice S. Ilchman, Sarah Lawrence College CFR 

Claud Kern Wildenthal, Southwestern Med. Sch. U. Tex.CFR 

Gerhard Casper, Stanford University CFR 

Lt. Gen. Paul E. Stein, Supt., USAF Academy CFR 

Adm. Charles R. Larson, Supt., USN Academy CFR 

Lt. Gen. Daniel W. Christman, Pres. US Military Acmy.CFR 

Chang-Lin Tien, University of Cal, Berkeley CFR 

Edward T. Foote, II, University of Miami CFR 

Steven B. Sample, University of southern Cal., LA CFR 

Robert H. Donaldson, Univ. of Tulsa CFR 

Katharine C. Lyall, University of Wisconsin CFR 

Eugene P. Trani, Virginia Commonwealth CFR 

William H. Danforth, Washington Univ., St Louis CFR 

UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS 

George Stephanopoulos, Vis. Prof. Columbia CFR 

Casimir A. Yost, Dir. Prof., Georgetown University CFR/B 

Donald F. McHenry, Res. Prof., Georgetown Univ. CFR/B 

Graham Allixon, Prof. Of Gov., Harvard University CFR/TC 

Harold Brown, Chmn. Fm. Pol. Inst. Johns Hopkins CFR/TC 

Zbigniew Brzezinski, Prof. Johns Hopkins CFR/TC 

Robert G. Livingston, Sr. Fel., Johns Hopkins CFR 

Gerald L. Curtis, Prof. Pol. Sci., Columbia Univ. CFR/TC 

Martin S. Feldstein, Prof. Econ., Harvard Univ. CFR/TC 

Kenneth W. Dam, Prof. Fm Law, Univ. Chicago Law B 

Hanna Holborn Gray, Prof. Hist., Univ. of Chicago CFR 

Joseph S. Nye, Jr. Prof. Intntl Affrs., Harvard U.CFR/TC 

Robert D. Putnam, Prof. Politics, Harvard Univ. CFR/TC 

Henry Rosovsky, Prof. Harvard University CFR/TC 

Ezra F. Vogel, Prof. Soc. Sci., Harvard University B 

John M. Deutch, Prof. Chem., MIT CFR/TC 

Lester C. Thorow, Prof & Dean, MIT 

TC 

George P. Shultz, Hon. Fellow, Stanford University TC 

Paul A. Volcker, fmr Prof. Intnl Econ., Princeton CFR/TC 

Barbara Denning Finberg, Radcliffe College CFR 

Steve Scott Bell, Ball State 

CFR 

Steven F. Cohen, Princeton Univ. 

CFR 

Irving R. Levine, Dean, Intnl. Studies, Lynn Univ. CFR 

Hedrick L. Smith, Felloe, Johns Hopkins CFR 

William M.LeoGrande, Prof., American University CFR 

Paul Wolfowitz, Dean, Nitze Sch.Adv.Intnl. Studies CFR/B

CLINTON ADMINISTRATION 

William Clinton, President 

CFR/TC/B 

National Health care Task force (unofficial, non-government) 

Hillary Rodham Clinton, "Chair-Person" (attended Bilderberg 

Meeting at Pinelsle Resort near Atlanta on 13-14 June 1997) 

National Security Council 

Samuel R. Berger, National Security Advisor 

Madeleine K. Albright, Secretary of State 

William S. Cohen, Secretary of Defense 

CFR/B 

CFR/TC 

CFR/TC 

White House Staff 

Sylvia M. Mathews, Asst.to Pres.,Dep.Chf of Staff CFR 

John H. Gibbons, Asst. to Pres.Dept.Chief of Staff CFR 

Sidney Blumenthal, Asst. to Pres. 

CFR 

Thomas Bernard Ross, Dep.Press Sec. Foreign Affairs CFR 

National security council Staff 

Gordon M. Adams, Assoc,Dir.Natl.Sec. & Int'l Affairs CFR 

James B. steinberg, Dep. Asst. 

CFR 

Office Of National Drug Control Policy 

Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey, Director 

CFR 

Office of the Vice President 

Elaine Ciulla Kamarck, Sr. Policy Advisor 

CFR 

Department Of Treasury 

Lawrence Summers, Secretary of the Treasury CFR 

J. Benjamin H. Nye, Exec. Secretary CFR 

Timithy Gaither, 

Dep. Asst. Sec., Int'l Monetary & Jin. Policy CFR 

Edward S. Knight, gen. Counsel 

CFR 

Neal S. Wolin, Dep. General counsel CFR 

Department of Energy

Bill Richardson, Secretary of energy 

CFR/B 

Department of Commerce 

Jan H. Kalicki, Counselor, Int'l Trade CFR 

Gerald A. Pollack, Assoc. Dir. International Econom. CFR 

John J. carey, Assoc. Dep. Und. Secretary CFR 

Department of Health & Human services 

Donna E. Shalala, Secretary 

Christine G. Williams, Dir. Health Info 

CFR/TC 

CFR 

Department of Housing & Human Services 

Margaret Sullivan, Chief of Staff 

CFR 

Department of Justice 

Jamie S. Gorlick, Dep. Attorney General CFR 

Doris M. Meissner, Cmmissnr, Imm. & Nat'l. Service CFR 

David T. Margolis, Assoc. Dep. Attorney General CFR 

Department of Transportation 

Adm. Robert E. Kramek, U.S. Coast Guard, Commandant CFR 

Office of Management and Budget 

Franklin D. Raines, Director 

CFR 

Gordon M. Adams, 

Assoc. Dir. Nat'l Security & Intnl Affairs CFR 

Council of Economic Advisors 

Jeffrey A. Frankel, Member 

CFR 

Environmental Protection Agency 

William A. Nitze, Asst. Adm. Int'l Activities 

CFR 

Federal Communications Commission 

Peter F. Cowhey, Chef, International Bureau 

CFR 

National Labor Relations Board

Robert E. Allen, Acting Inspector General 

CFR 

Corporation for national & Community Service 

Harris L. Wofford, Chief Executive Officer 

Thomas Ehrilich, Bd. Member 

CFR 

CFR 

U.S. Information Agency 

Joseph D. Duffy, Director 

CFR 

Bette Bao Lord, Member, Brasdcast Bd. CFR 

Albert J. Mora, Member, Broadcast Bd. CFR 

Carol Spiel Vogen, Member, Broadcast Bd. CFR 

Lewis Manilow, chmn. Adv. Comm. Public Policy CFR 

Library of Congress 

James H. Billington, Librarian, Chmn.Trust Fund Brd CFR 

Thomas s. Foley, Trust Fund Board 

CFR 

Lawrence Tisch, Trust Fund board 

CFR 

National Science Foundation 

John A. Armstrong, Board Member 

Frank H. T. Rhodes, Board Member 

Sanford d. Greenberg, Board Member 

Julia A. Moore, Dir. Leg. & Pub. Affairs 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Office of Science & Techmology 

John H. Gibbons, Director 

CFR 

Kerri-Ann Jones, Asst. Dir Nat'l & Int'l Affairs 

CFR 

U.S. Arms Control & Disarmament Agency 

John D. Holum, Director 

CFR 

Ralph Earle,II Dep. Dir 

CFR 

Michael Nacht, 

Asst. Dir., Stratigic and Eurasian Affairs CFR 

Mary Elizabeth Hoinkes, General Coundel CFR 

Lawrence Scheinman Asst. Dir., Non-proliferation CFR 

Thomas Graham, Jr., Spec. Rep. Non-Prolif. Treaty CFR 

U.S. Agency for International Development

Baron S. Williams, So. Africa 

CFR 

Department of Defense 

William S. Cohen, Secretary 

CFR/TC 

Togo D. West, Jr., Sec. Of the Army CFR 

Gen. Dennis J. Reimer, Chief of Staff, Army CFR 

Gen. Charles C. Krulak, Commandant, Marine Corp. CFR 

Adm. J.L. Johnson, Chief of Naval Operations CFR 

Gen Thomas S. Moorman, Jr. 

V. Chief of Staff, Air Force CFR 

Lt. Gen. John P. Jumper, 

USAF, Dep, Ch. Of Staff, Air & Sapce Ops. CFR 

Anita K. Jones, Director, Research & Engineering CFR 

Gen. Walter Kross, Air Mobility Command CFR 

V. Adm. Arthur K. Cebrowski, Dir.Space&Info Warfare CFR 

Judith A. Miller, 

Gen. Counsel & Dir. Def. Legal Services CFR 

Jan Lodal, Prin. Dep. Und. Sec., Defense Policy CFR 

Henry Allen Holmes, 

Asst. Sec. Spec. Ops/Low Intensity Conflict CFR 

Edward L. Warner, III, Asst.Sec.Strat. Req.&Assess. CFR 

Franklin C. Miller, 

Act. Asst. Sec., Int'l Secruity Policy CFR 

Sheri Wasserman Goodman, Dep.Und.Sec.,Envrn Security CFR 

Lt. Gen. Ervin Jerome Rokke, 

USAF, Pres. Natl. Def. Univ. 

CFR 

Andrew w. Marshall, Dir., Net Assessment CFR 

Walter Becker Slocombe, Under sec., Policy CFR 

Lt. Gen. Daniel W. Christman, Supt., West Point CFR 

Gen. Henry Viccellio, Jr., AF Material Command CFR 

Gen. David D. Bramlett, USA, Forces Command CFR 

Lt. Gen. Paul E. Stein, Commander, AF Academy CFR 

Adm. Frank Lee Bowman, USN, Dir. Naval Nuc. Prop. CFR 

Brig. Gen. David M. Mize, USMC, Dir. Reserve Affairs CFR 

Department of State 

Madeleine K. Albright, Secretary CFR/TC 

Strobe Talbot, Deputy Secretary CFR/TC 

Thomas R. Pickering, Under Secretary, Pol. Affairs. CFR 

Joan Edelman Spero, Und. Sec., Econ. & Ag Affairs CFR/TC 

David R. Andrews, Legal Advisor 

CFR 

Stanley O. Roth, 

Asst. Sec., East Asian & Pacific Affairs CFR 

James P. Rubin, Asst. Sec., Public Affairs CFR

George Moose, Asst. Sec., African Affairs CFR 

Tobi Trister Gati, Asst. Sec., intell. & Research CFR 

R. Nicholas Burns, Act. Asst. Sec., Public Affairs CFR 

William J. Burns, Spec. Asst. & Exec. Sec. CFR 

Stuart Eizenstat, Under Sec., Econ. & Ag. Affairs CFR 

Lynn E. Davis, 

Under Sec.,Arms Control & Int'l. Security Affairs CFR 

James B. Steinberg, Dir Policy Planning CFR/B 

Timothy Endicott Wirth, Und. Sec., Global Affairs CFR 

Princton N. Lyman, Asst. Sec., Int'l. Org. Affairs CFR 

Phillis E. Oakley, Asst. Sec.,Popul.Refl.&Migration CFR 

Karl f. Inderfurth, Asst. Sec. Co. Asian Affairs CFR 

John Shattuck, Asst. Sec., Cemoc., Hum. Rts. & Labor CFR 

Charles Kartman, Act Asst. Sec. East Asian & Pacific CFR 

Harriet C. Babbitt, Perm. Rep. To O.A.S. CFR 

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM 

Alan Greenspan, Chmn. Fed. Res. Bd. CFR 

Alice Rivilin, Vice Chmn. Fed. Res. Bd CFR 

John C. Whitehead, Chmn. FRB of New York CFR/B 

William J. McDonough, Pres.FRB of New York,V.Chmn CFR/B 

Michael K. Moskow, Pres. FRB of Chicago CFR 

John carter Bacot, dir. FRB of NY 

CFR 

Richard L. Gelb, Dir. FRB of NY 

CFR 

Edwin M. Truman, Staff Dir. Intntl. Finance CFR 

Peter R. Fisher, Mgr. System Open Market Acct. CFR 

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF US 

James A. Harmon, Chmn & Pres. 

Rita Maria Rodriquez, Director 

CFR 

CFR 

AMBASSADORS 

Jenonne R. Walker (Czech Republic) CFR 

Felix G. Rohatyn (France) CFR 

James R. Jones (Mexico) CFR/TC 

Frances D. Cook (Oman) CFR 

Sandra Vogelsgesang (Nepal) CFR 

William H. courtney (Georgia) CFR 

Mara C. Ginsberg (Morocco) CFR 

John f. Hicks, Sr. (Iritrea) CFR 

Christopher W.S. Ross (Syria) CFR 

William J. Crowe, Jr. (United Kingdom) CFR/TC 

Reginald Bartholomew (Italy) CFR

James A. Joseph (South Africa) CFR 

Robert A. Hunter (NATO) CFR 

Walter c. Carrington (Nigeria) CFR 

Richard N. Gardner (Spain) CFR/TC 

Gabriel Guerra-Mndragon (Chile) CFR 

Sharon P. Wilkinson (Burkina Faso) CFR 

William G. Miller (Ukraine) CFR 

Alfred H. Moses (Romania) CFR 

Nicholas A. Rey (Poland) CFR 

Frank G. Wisner (India) CFR 

Donald M. Blinker (Hungary) CFR 

Avis T. Bohlen (Bulgaria) CFR 

James T. Laney (Rep. of Korea) CFR 

United Nations Delegation 

John B. Ritchell, Vienna Office 

CFR 

OTHER 

U.S. International Development Cooperation Agency 

J. brian Atwood, Director CFR 

Thomas a. dine, Asst. Adm., Europe & New States 

William Rhodes, AID Guatamala 

CFR 

CFR 

African Development Foundation 

Ernest G. Green, Chairman 

Marion M. Dawson, Member 

John F. Hicks, Member 

George Moose, Member 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

U.S. International Trade Commission 

Marcia E. Miller, Chairman 

CFR 

Overseas Private Investment Corp. 

J. Brian Atwood, Chairman CFR 

Inter American Foundation 

Ann Brownell Sloane, Director 

CFR 

STATE GOVERNORS

Christine Todd whitman, NJ 

CFR 

FORMER GOVERNORS 

Michael S. Dukakis, MA 

James J. Florio, New Jersey 

Neil Goldschmidt, Oregon 

Charles S. Robb, Virginia 

John D. Rockefeller IV, WV 

Lawrence Douglas Wilder, VA 

CFR 

B 

TC 

CFR/TC 

CFR/TC 

B 

LABOR UNION LEADERS 

Jay Mazur, Intl. Ladies' Garment Workers CFR/TC 

Jack sheinkman, Pres. Emer. Textile Wrkrs. U. CFR/B 

Albert Shanker, Pres., Am. Federation of Teachers TC 

Glen e. Watts, 

Pres. emer, Communication Workers of America CFR/TC 

Joseph Lane Kirkland, former Pres., AFL-CIO CFR 

Thomas R. Donahue, former Pres. AFL-CIO CFR 

Lynn R. Williams, 

Int. Pres., United Steel Workers of America B 

John t. Joyce, Pres., Bricklayers & Allied Craft. CFR 

U.S. Institute For Peace 

Chester A. crocker, Chairman 

CFR 

Max M. Kampelman, Vice Chmn. 

CFR 

Richard H. Solomon, President 

CFR 

Harriet Hentiges, Exec. VP 

CFR 

David Little, Senior Scholar 

CFR 

Richard H. solomon, President 

CFR 

Harriet Hentges, Exec. VP 

CFR 

David Little, Senior Scholar 

CFR 

W. Scott Thompson, Dir. CFR 

Christopher Phillips, Dir. 

CFR 

Theodore M. Hesburgh, Dir. 

CFR 

FOUNDATIONS 

Ralph Edward Gomery, Pres., Alfred P. Sloan Fndtn. CFR 

Lucy Wilson benson, Dir., Alfred P. Sloan Fndtn. CFR 

Richard B. Cheney, Sr. Fellow. Am. Int. Inst. CFR 

Murray J. Gart, Am. Near East Ref. Aid CFR 

Alice Frey Emerson, Sr. 

Fellow, Andrew W. Millon Fndtn CFR

William G. Bowen, President, Andrew W. Mellon Fndtn CFR 

David T. McLauglin, Pres, CEO, Aspen Institute CFR 

Rozanne Ridgeway, Pres., Atlantic council CFR/TC 

Michael H. Armacost, Pres. Brooking Institution CFR/B 

David M. Abshire, Pres., Ctr Strat & Intnl studies CFR 

Amoud deBorchgrave, Sr. 

Adv., Ctr. Strat & Intnl studies CFR 

C. Fred Bergsten, Dir., Inst. Intnl. Econ. CFR 

Harold M. Williams, Pres. & CEO, J.Paul Getty Trust CFR 

Adele Smith Simmons, 

President, J.D. & C.T. MacArthur FD CFR 

Martin Feldstein, Pres., Nat. Bur. Econ. Res. CFR/TC/B 

Hugh B. Price, Pres, Natl Urban League CFR 

Lynn E. Davis, VP Rand Corp. 

CFR/TC 

Earl C. williams, fmr Chmn, Wolf Trap Foundation CFR 

Russell e. Train, fmr Chmn., World Wildlife Fund CFR 

Kathryn Scott Fuller, Pres.&CEO, Wrld Wildlife Fund CFR 

Carnegie Corp. of New York 

David A. Hamburg, President 

CFR 

Richard F. Celeste, Board Member 

CFR 

Helene L. Kaplan, Board Member 

CFR 

Richard Irwin Beattie, Board Member CFR 

Caryl Parker Haskins, Honorary Trustee CFR 

Patricia L. Rosenfield, Program Chairman CFR 

Yolanda Richardson, Program Officer CFR 

David Z. Robinson, Exec. Dir. Sci. Tech & Gov. CFR 

Ralph K. Davidson, Economic Cons. 

CFR 

Ford Foundation 

Franklin A. Thomas, President 

David Elliott Bell, Exec. VP 

Susan Vail Berresford, Exec VP & COO 

Rockefeller Brothers Foundation 

CFR 

CFR/B 

CFR 

Colin Goetze Campbell, President 

Russell A. Phillips, Jr., Exec. VP 

Stephen f. Starr, Director 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR/TC 

Rockefeller Foundation 

Peter Carl Goldmark, Jr., President 

Kenneth Prewitt, Sr VP 

CFR 

CFR

Alberta Bean Arthurs, Director 

Ralph K. Davidson, fmr Assoc. Dir. 

CFR 

CFR 

INDUSTRY 

Zoe E. Baird, Sr. VP, Gen Couns, Aetna Life Ins. CFR 

John Dennis Bonna, Dir. Alumax & Dir, Am Petro Inst. CFR 

Maurice r. Greenberg, Chmn, CEO, Am. Intl. Group CFR/TC 

Dwayne O. Andreas, Chmn. & CEO, ADM CFR/TC/B 

Samuel C. Butler, Dir Ashland, Inc. CFR 

James E. Robinson III, Dir., Bristol-Myers Squibb CFR 

Whitney MacMillan, Chmn, CEO, Cargill, Inc. TC 

Robert A. Charpie, Dir. Champion Int. CFR 

Donald N. Frey, Director, Clark Equipment Co. CFR 

Frank A. Godchaux,III, VP, Colgate-Palmolive Co. CFR 

Eugene R. McGrath, Pres. & CEO, Con. Edison Co. NY CFR 

James R. Houghton, Chmn. & CEO, Corning, Inc. CFR/TC 

Hans W. Becherer, Chmn. & CEO, Deere & Co. CFR 

Frank P. Popoff, Chmn. & CEO, Dow Chemical Co. CFR 

Andrew F. Brimmer, Dir., DuPont Co. CFR 

George M.C. Fisher, Chmn. & CEO, Eastman Kodak Co. CFR 

John E. Bryson, Chmn, CEO, Edison International CFR 

Randall L. Tobias, Chmn, CEO, Eli Lilly & Co. CFR 

Kimball Christopher Chen, Chmn, Energy & Trans. Grp. CFR 

Jack L. Goldsmith, III, Fmr. Chmn, & CEO, FD Stores CFR 

Paolo Fresno, Sr. VP, GE, London 

TC 

Donald H. Currie, CEO, General Instrument Corp. B 

Marina vonN. Whitman, BP, Grp Exec. GM CFR/TC 

Robert Carswell, Dir., Georgia Pacific CFR 

Richard B. Cheney, Chmn, Halliburton Co. CFR 

A. Robert Abboud, Dir. Inland Steel CFR 

John A. Georges, Chmn. & Ceo, International Paper TC 

Robert N. Wildon, Fice Chmn., Johnson & Johnson TC 

Henry Kissinger, Kissinger Assoc CFR/TC 

James A. Blackwell, VP & GM, Lockheed Aerospace CFR 

Norman R. Augustine, V. Chmn, Lockheed Martin CFR 

Norman R. Augustine, Chmn, CEO, Martin Marietta CFR 

Eli s. Jacobs, Chmn., Memorex-Telex CFR 

George B. Munroe, chmn. & CEO, Phelps Dodge Corp. CFR 

Augusta Snow Hart, Jr. fmr V. Chmn., Quaker Oats Co CFR 

M. Anthony burns, Chmn., Pres., CEO, Ryder, Inc. TC 

Louis V. Gersmer, Chmn. CDO, RJR Babisco TC 

John H. Bryan, Chmn, CEO, Sara Lee Corp. B 

Henry Wendt, Chmn., SmithKline Beecham TC 

Michael P. Schulhop, Pres, Sony Software CFR 

Mitzi Mallina Wertheim, VP, Systems Res. & App. CFR

Donald Blessing Rice, Pres. & COO, Teledyne, Inc. CFR 

Dana George Mead, COO, Tenneco, Inc. CFR 

Joseph T. Gorman, Chmn. & CEO, TRW, Inc. CFR/TC 

Hugh L. Carey, Exec. VP, W.R. Grace & Co. CFR 

Peter A. Georgescu, Pres, CEO., Young & Rubicam CFR 

AT&T 

Robert E. Allen, Chairman, CEO 

John E. Berndt, Pres., Int. Comm. Serv. 


CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Atlantic Richfield Co. 

Mike R. Chmn & Pres 

Howard L. Edwards, Corp. Secretary 

Robert O. Anderson, fmr Chmn. 

Hanna H. Gray, Dir 

Donald T. McLauglin, Dir. 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR/B 

CFR 

CFR 

Boeing Co. 

Lawrence W. Clarkson, Sr. Vice Pres. CFR 

Charles M. Pigott, Director 

CFR 

John E. Bryson, Dir. 

CFR 

Rozanne L. Ridgeway, Dir 

CFR/TC 

Chevron Corp. 

Carla Hills, Dir. 

Charles M. Pigott, Dir. 

CFR 

CFR 

Chrysler Corp. 

Robert E. Allen, Dir. 

Peter A. Magowan, Director 

Joseph A. Califano, Jr., 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Coca Cola Co. 

Donald R. Keough, Pres, COO 

TC 

Donald F. McHenry, Dir 

CFR/B 

James D. Robinson III, Dir. 

CFR 

Charles W. Doncan, Jr. Director 

CFR 

J. Bruce Llewellyn, Chairman, Bottling Co. Phila CFR

Cummins Engine Co. 


CFR 

Harold Brown, Dir. 

CFR/TC 

Hanna H. Gray, Dir. 

CFR 

Dana G. Mead, Dir. 

CFR 

J. Irwin Miller, Dir CFR 

Franklin A. Thomas, Dir. 

CFR 

Dow Jones & Co. 

Peter R. Kann, Chmn. & CEO 

Karen Elliott House, Int. VP 

Rand Araskog, Dir. 


CFR 

CFR 

CFR/TC 

CFR/TC/B 

Dupont Co. 

Andrew f. Brimmer, Director 

Edgar F. Bronfman, Director 

CFR 

CFR 

Exxon Corp. 

Lee R. Raymond, Chmn. & CEO 

Emilio G. Gerson, Exec. Vice Pres. 

Robert L. Wilhelm, Sr. VP & Dir. 

James R. Houghton, Dir. 

CFR/TC 

B 

CFR 

CFR 

Ford Motor Co. 

Alexander J. Trotman, Chmn. 

William E. Odom, chmn., Gp VP 

Clifton R. Wharton, Jr., Dir. 

B 

CFR 

General Electric Co. 

John F. Welch, Chmn. & CEO 

Menjamin W. Heineman, Jr., Sr. VP & Sec. 

CFR 

CFR 

IBM Corp 

Louis B. Gerstner, Jr., Chmn, CEO CFR/B 

G. Richard Thoman, CFO & Sr. VP CFR 

Harold Brown, Dir 

CFR 

Lucio A. Noto, Dir 

CFR

ITT Corp 

Rand B. Araskog, Chmn., Pres., CEO 

Edward S. Lynch, Treas., Europe 

Charles N. Goldman, VP, Gen. Couns., NYC 

CFR/TC 

CFR 

CFR 

Levi Strauss & Co. 

Robert D. Haas, Chmn & CEO 

Peter E. Haas, Director 

CFR/TC 

CFR 

Mobil Oil Corp. 

Lucio A. Noto, Chmn & CEO 

Richard A. Voell, fmr Chmn. 

Lewis McA. Branscomb, Director 

Charles A. Heinbold, Jr., Dir 

Helene L. Kaplan, Dir. 

CFR 

TC 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Pepsico, Inc. 

C. Wayne Calloway, Chmn. & CEO TC 

Robert e. Allen, Dir. 

CFR 

Franklin A. Thomas, Dir. 

CFR 

Phillips Petroleum Co. 

Cecil J. Silas, former Chmn, & CEO 

Norman R. Augustine, Dir 

David L. Boren, Dir 

Lawrence S. Eagleburger, Dir 

CFR/TC 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Proctor & Gamble Co. 

Edwin L. Artzi, Dir., former Chmn. & CEO CFR 

Richard B. Cheney, Dir. 

CFR 

Norman R. Augustine, Dir 

CFR 

Joseph T. Gorman, Dir. 

CFR 

Lynn M. Martin, Dir 

CFR 

John C. Sawhill, Dir. 

CFR 

Marina v N. Whitman, Dir. 

CFR/TC 

Tenneco, Inc. 

Dana George Mead, Chmn, CEO 

Clifton R. Wharton, Jr. Dir. 

CFR 

CFR

Texaco, Inc. 

Alfred C. DeCrane, Jr. former Chmn. & CEO 

John Bradamas, Director 

CFR/TC/B 

Thomas s. Murphey, Dir. 

CFR 

CFR 

Westinghouse Electric 

Frank C. Carlucci, Dir. 

David T. McLaughlin, Dir. 

Paula Stern, Dir. 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

Xerox Copr. 

Paul A. Alaire, Chmn, CEO 

B.R. Inman, Dir 


John D. Macomber, Dir. 

George J. Mitchell, Dir. 

N.J. Nicholas, Jr. Dir. 

Thomas c. Theobold, Dir. 

CFR/TC/B 

CFR 

CFR/TC/B 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

CFR 

from The CFR (in regards to the next article about Europe) 

"The New New World Order" 

Speaker: Daniel W. Drezner, Associate Professor of International Politics, Fletcher 

School of Law and Diplomacy 

Presider: Gideon Rose, Managing Editor, Foreign Affairs 

February 26, 2007 

Council on Foreign Relations 

http://www.cfr.org/publication/12719/the_new_new_world_order.html

• GIDEON ROSE: Hi there. Welcome, everybody. I'm Gideon Rose, managing 

editor of Foreign Affairs, and we're delighted to have you with us today to have a 

discussion with Dan Drezner, the author of an important new piece in the new issue of 

Foreign Affairs called "The New New World Order." 

• 

The -- if you were to think of a Venn Diagram between top political economists and 

prominent bloggers, there probably would be a very, very small population in that 

middle. But the chief in that overlap would be Dan Drezner, who is associate professor 

of international politics at Fletcher -- Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts. 

The author -- his latest book is called "All Politics is Global" coming out next month, I 

believe. 

DANIEL W. DREZNER: Yes. 

ROSE: And he has written a very interesting article for us on the new power alignments 

in the world and how the Bush administration is reacting to them. 

So what we're going to do is, we're going -- I'm going to talk with Dan for a little bit 

about them, and then we'll turn it over to you. And we'll run as long as the questions 

keep coming. 

So Dan, why don't you start by giving a brief precise of what you argue in the piece. 

DREZNER: Sure. Thanks, Gideon, and thanks once again to Foreign Affairs for 

printing the piece. 

The precise is pretty simple. If you take a look at any sort of measure of power out there, 

it's quite obvious that China and India are becoming much more powerful. And 

projections in the future, although the future can always change, but the projections are 

they will become, you know, among the top five states in terms of economic size or what 

have you within the next 15 years, 15 to 20 years. 

The problem we've got is that most of the really important international institutions that 

were set up were set up between 1945 and 1955, and China and India were not nearly as 

powerful back then. This gives rise to an interesting problem, which is how do you cut in 

rising states to international institutions that have already been set up, that privileged 

states that are on the decline, such as many that are potentially in the European Union. 

You would not think that the Bush administration would be well suited for handling this 

problem, since the administration -- you know, first impressions are lasting impressions, 

and the impression of this administration has been it's a belligerent, unilateralist foreign 

policy course of action. And yet the funny thing is that if you take a look at what the 

U.S. has done over the past five years or so, they've taken several steps to try to cut 

in the Chinese and the Indians into international regimes that the U.S. had set up 

with the idea that if we can cut them in, they might actually in the end want what we 

want and support what we want.

The piece then reviews a variety of ways in which we've done this in the IMF, in the 

non-proliferation regime, both bilaterally and multilaterally, and on the whole gives 

the administration, you know, a decent grade in terms of doing this. Now certain 

things have handicapped it. 

One is the fact that it's easy to paint this administration as unilateralist and belligerent, 

and as a result, there are ways in which, even if it's doing things for the right reasons, it 

might be accused by some states of doing things for the wrong reasons. So therefore, this 

creates a lot of suspicion. 

The second problem which was going to be inevitable to this enterprise is that if 

you're trying to cut in rising powers, sort of by the nature of power you're 

undercutting states that are falling, and the states in this case are the members of 

the European Union. And while they see the handwriting on the wall as well, you 

know, it's not like France and Great Britain are going to be giving up their U.N. Security 

Council seats any time soon. 

So as a result, the administration on the one hand faces a thankless task, because trying to 

rewrite the rules of global governance are not easy. But at the same time, I'm arguing 

that if they don't do it, if China and India aren't made to feel like they are responsible, you 

know, great power members of the existing world order, they're going to go out and 

create institutions of their own, and the institutions that they create might not necessarily 

be ones that the United States would like to see. 

ROSE: So let's start back for a second with the idea that the Bush administration 

actually sees this new world order and thinks of it in terms of a multilateral, 

institutional approach -- that runs counter to most people's view of the Bush 

administration, so talk a little bit about that. Is the view that the conventional view 

of the Bush administration that's devoted to unilateralism and not caring about 

world order and -- or caring only about primacy if it does think of world order, is 

that wrong or is this occupying a place alongside it How does this -- how does the 

picture you're talking about coexist with the one that other people see 

DREZNER: I would not say that that perception is wrong as much as it is 

incomplete. Obviously -- you know, particularly if you looked at the first term, you 

know, it would be hard to say that the United States, you know, did not act in a 

unilateral manner. And certainly the invasion of Iraq has -- you know, is the sort of 

apotheosis of this. 

The problem is that does obscure a second component of the Bush administration's 

grand strategy. And they were clear about this in 2002 as well as in the 2006 

reformulation, which is the U.S. sees itself at a moment in time where it actually has 

somewhat decent relations with the -- most of the other great powers out there, and 

if it can therefore form, you know, what's the great power concert to try to, you 

know, sort of regulate world politics, it will do so.

Part of this also is the way I think that the Bush administration -- it's an extreme version 

of this, but it's the way Americans view, I would argue, multilateralism as opposed to, 

let's say, the Europeans, which is the Europeans see multilateralism as an end in itself. 

It's a desirable thing to have, and the process of multilateralism smoothed out world 

politics, whereas I think for Americans -- and again, the Bush administration is an 

extreme version of this, but I think it was true of the Clinton administration as well - 

- multilateralism is a means to an end. It's a way in which you try to achieve your 

policy ends, and if the multilateral institutions are seen as effective, then you will pursue 

that course of action. If they're not seen as effective, then you might see them pursue 

alternative courses of action. 

So to some extent what's going on -- it's consistent with the Bush administration's view, 

because they want certain multilateral institutions to work. And for those multilateral 

institutions to work, they've got to correspond at least somewhat roughly to the 

distribution of power out there, which means cutting China and India in. 

ROSE: Okay. 

And give us an example of the institutions in particular that and -- what's the evidence for 

the pieces you're talking about 

DREZNER: I think one example would be the IMF, where, you know, with -- during the 

'90s, when the Clinton administration was dealing with the Asian financial crisis, the 

perception of the IMF was that it was high-handed, that it was an agent of the United 

States, it -- you know, the reform, the sort of structural adjustment programs they 

recommended along the Pacific Rim bred a lot of resentment in some quarters, whereas, 

you know, 10 years later, the Bush administration actively supported a move to give 

China greater -- a greater quota, a greater sort of representation within the IMF, and is 

going to push for I think further reforms to try to give large -- you know, what you would 

consider advanced developing countries like China and India greater weight in terms of 

within that organization. 

I think another example of this -- and this also gets to some of the trickiness in trying to 

do this -- is the nonproliferation regime, where the United States signed a bilateral -- the 

civilian nuclear cooperation deal with India, which was, I think, just sort of a reflection of 

the facts of life, which is India was never going to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty as a 

non-nuclear member. By engaging in this, the administration is basically acknowledging 

that fact but saying, you know, we can still cooperate. 

ROSE: China and India strike me as somewhat different, primarily because of the 

political context. India, as you note, is being groomed as a sort of regional pillar and 

democratic ally and liberalizing their economy and developing a global trade partnership, 

as well as being a nice stable, liberal democracy. And so can you imagine that fitting in 

with the United States and Europe in the sort-of advanced industrial democracy camp.

But China, rising even faster, and taking part in the global economy, still is not a player 

in the democratic -- in the political sphere, and might even be, because of that – 

DREZNER: A negative player, yeah. 

ROSE: A negative player, exactly. 

So how will that differ Are these -- how does the administration -- and as you say, one 

of the reasons for bringing India on and grooming it for this partnership is as a possible 

counterweight to China, and so forth. So how does that play out I mean you talk about 

them as the two, you know, new Asian powers. But one would seem to be able to be fit 

into the existing civilizational alliance, in some sense, or the democratic political 

community of democracies, and so forth, and the other would not. How is that going to 

play out 

DREZNER: I would say a couple of things. First of all, on India I would highly 

recommend another article in this issue of Foreign Affairs that Ashutosh Varshney wrote, 

which would be worth looking at in terms of India's domestic situation. 

But with regard to India and China, it's worth noting that the institutions that I'm talking 

about bringing these states on to don't have democratic foundations in the sense of they're 

primarily dealing with either issues of global security or global economics. And on those 

two issues there's a lot more that China and India agree on than disagree. 

There's no question that you're not going to see Chinese membership in NATO or any 

sort of similar sort of democratic club. And I think, you know, down the road that's 

going to play a role in terms of U.S. foreign policy. And there's no question that the U.S., 

in part, is trying to bring India in as a counterweight to China, and all three countries 

know this. 

But at the same time, the U.S. can't ignore China. You know, its economic weight is 

becoming too big now. And that's partly what's going on. The administration is trying to 

get out in front of this, but they're also reacting to what's happening in the real world. 

China is simply too big to ignore now. So on issues where there is going to be some 

commonality of interest, where there is going to be an interest in maintaining global 

stability, yeah, the Chinese can be counted on to act in a responsible manner. And 

indeed, you know, some of the studies I cited in the article -- Ian Johnson at Harvard and 

Robert Lawrence -- have noticed that when China joins both security and economic 

institutions, they wind up becoming sort of status quo powers, states that wind up 

articulating policies that are very consistent with what the United States wants. 

ROSE: Back in the -- you know, during the middle part of the century, in the third 

quarter of the 20th century, you had the development of institutions like the 

Trilateral Commission, which formally enshrined a sort of America, Europe and 

Japan, this tripartite condominium, in certain respects, relationship.

Do you expect to see not just India and China brought into universal institutions, but do 

you expect to see any sort of institutions directly and specifically engaging them, as 

individual countries, in a way that we brought Japan into something like the Trilateral 

Commission 

DREZNER: Well, I mean, the Trilateral Commission's a nongovernmental body, 

which -- it raises an interesting question, which is whether you're going to see – 

ROSE: Reflecting the sort of elite views of this kind of notion that Japan was now a 

partner. 

DREZNER: Yeah. I mean, I think you're seeing it already. I mean, you saw it in the 

Davos forum this year, where the theme was, you know, developing countries and the 

sort of diffusion of power, where I think India, you know, had a, you know, large 

representation at the Davos Economic Forum. 

So yeah, I think you're going to see moves at the elite level, and that would actually make 

a fair amount of sense. 

ROSE: And things like the Strategic Economic Dialogue and so forth and – 

DREZNER: And bilaterally, I mean, the U.S. has launched ambitious dialogues with 

both China and India. 

The interesting question in the future, I think, is going to be whether there's continued 

political support for doing that at -- let's say after 2008, after the 2008 election. My 

suspicion is, regardless of who's elected president, eventually they're going to come to the 

same conclusion, but there might be some stumbling around in the first six months. 

ROSE: Okay. Go forward. Where do you see this all trending in the next 10 to 20 

years 

DREZNER: In the next 10 to 20 years, it's going to be interesting. I think the 

fundamental question is going to be whether, you know, the sort of shift that the Bush 

administration has started and presumably will be continued by whoever wins in 2008 is 

going to be successful both in bringing China and India into these institutions and also, 

you know, roughly speaking, getting them to want the same things that we want. 

I mean, the big $64,000 question is China's regime and, as you said, whether or not 

China's regime maintains the current outlook -- the current regime type that it's got or 

whether there's going to be some instability. 

That said, I think the biggest problem you're going to have is trying to get countries on 

the wane -- namely, the European Union -- to agree to arrangements that give these 

countries greater -- you know, give these rising states greater power.

And then the next question's going to be, are there any other countries out there besides 

China and India You know, is Brazil going to demand a piece of the pie Is South 

Africa To what extent are you going to see -- I think the really fundamentally 

interesting question is, are you going to have cleavages based on development, where 

you've got China, India -- and you see this already in the WTO, where China, India and 

Brazil do hold sort of similar policy positions. But in the future, that might not 

necessarily be the case as some countries acquire more middle-income status. 

ROSE: One country that doesn't figure in analysis in any of the various camps is Russia. 

DREZNER: Yes. That's true, because I didn't talk about energy. You know, I mean, 

beyond that, the fact is -- is that, you know, in the long term, as you say, 15, 20, 30 years 

from now, you know, the line is, "Demography is destiny," and in that case, Russia 

doesn't look terribly good. Its demographic future is not a terribly promising one. It's the 

same reason I didn't mention Japan, either. Both of those countries demographically are 

not moving in a direction that indicates long-term economic growth. 

ROSE: Got it. 

Okay. Thank you very much, Dan. And at this point, why don't we turn it over to our 

questioners and fire away. 

OPERATOR: If you'd like to ask a question, please press the star key, followed by the 1 

key, on your touch-tone phone now. Questions will be taken in the order in which they 

are received. If at any time you'd like to remove yourself from the questioning queue, 

press star-2. 

(Pause.) 

ROSE: Okay. Well, while we're waiting for some more questions to be generated, Dan, 

are there any other thoughts that you have and that you've been led from this or -- in the 

writing of it, did you come across new ways of thinking about it that you hadn't 

expected 

DREZNER: Well, as I said, the whole enterprise is interesting, because I'm basically -- 

I'll be interested about the reaction it gets. Because making the argument that the Bush 

administration is pursuing a very subtle form of multilateralism is not the common 

perception of what the -- how the administration behaves. So that's been interesting, just 

trying to make that argument for others. 

And then the other -- I think the more interesting question in the future is going to be, to 

what extent does -- to what extent is the administration doing this because it's consciously 

doing it, as opposed to sort of seeing the handwriting on the wall And I think that's 

going to affect what happens in 2008, as well, which is even if you have, let's say, a 

Democratic party candidate who, you know, has adopted, let's say, a tough protectionist 

line on China or India -- what they wind up doing once they actually take power.

ROSE: Do you see different attitudes in different sectors or bureaucracies of the U.S. 

government 

DREZNER: Yes. There's not question about that. I mean, part of it -- you know, part of 

what's going on and why this has sort of been more and more salient feature of the second 

term rather than the first term is, you know, the neocons are on the wane. 

Neoconservatives were not necessarily big enthusiasts of cutting deals with China on a 

whole variety of topics, and it's not like they're big fans of multilateral institutions to 

begin with. 

So there's no question that as you had Condi Rice, you know, go from NSC to State, and 

as you have Henry Paulson take over as Treasury Secretary, certainly you've got some 

heavyweights in the administration that actually have an interest in pursuing this policy, 

whereas in the first term, you know, maybe you had Colin Powell. But even Powell was 

so marginalized -- and so unwilling to travel, I might add -- that he didn't have enough of 

a profile to be able to do anything. 

ROSE: And what do you see in terms of the implications of this for the institutions 

themselves Are you going to see, because of the kinds of areas of cooperation or 

because of the memberships that you're talking about and the functional differentiation 

or, you know, specialization in terms of the issues they deal with -- are certain global or 

multilateral institutions going to become more important and others less important over 

time because they can adapt more or less easily or are needed more or less to deal with 

the new power structures 

DREZNER: I mean, I don't doubt that's the case. You know, the institutions that are 

somewhat more nimble in terms of adjusting and bringing in -- I mean, there's a paradox 

here, which is that the institutions that are more nimble, that are better able to bring in 

rising powers, might be less well-respected. I mean, part of the reason -- you know, one 

of the questions is, what's in it for China and India and for rising powers to get 

membership into these organizations, to get more influence, if they're being asked to 

change their views somewhat And the answer is that they get respect; they get 

recognition. And that's not a small thing if you're a rising power. One of the things you 

want as a rising power is the recognition by others that you are, you know, on the rise and 

should be granted respect there. 

I think, you know, as I said in the article, it's clear that the economic institutions are the 

ones that are making the adjustment quickest. I think the institution that in the future 

that's going to be the really interesting one to see how it reacts to this is NATO, because 

NATO obviously can't include these organizations. It's got a more regional focus. But 

NATO has been the linchpin through which, you know, the United States and Europe 

have managed to cooperate. And what's going to be interesting down the road is to what 

extent NATO is still considered a relevant player.

I think in the economic realm, the parallel would be the OECD, which is a club of 

advanced industrialized states. And it's going to be a long time before either India or 

China are considered advanced enough to join. And until now, the OECD was 

considered not only the rich man's club, but also the club of states that basically ran the 

economic sphere of the world. And I'm not sure that's going to be the case anymore. 

ROSE: Interesting. So with the rise of China and India as extraordinarily powerful and 

liberalizing lesser-developed states or developing states, you will break the link between 

economic power and development in some sense that you've had. 

DREZNER: Right. Well, I mean, it's because China and India are so large -- and this is 

actually the thing I touched on in the book that's coming out, which is what's fascinating 

about China and India -- and this is really going to be a first -- that China and India in 

terms of their overall economic size in terms of GDP are going to get to the U.S. level or, 

you know, get to great-power status long before their per capita incomes reach anything 

approximating middle-income status. And that's the fundamentally interesting thing. 

They're going to have states that, you know, in terms of aggregate economic size are as 

powerful or approaching the U.S. size, and yet their preferences are going to be 

dramatically different because they're just still going to be fundamentally poor countries. 

ROSE: That's very interesting, especially because when you think about it in historical 

terms, they won't be economically undeveloped in historic -- compared to where previous 

great powers were when they became great powers, but in the contemporary context, they 

will. 

DREZNER: (Inaudible word) -- terms, yeah. I mean they won't be as rich. And look, I 

mean, one area where this is clearly going to come up is going to be in global warming, 

which is the extent to which China and India are going to be asked to adopt measures to 

reduce greenhouse gas emissions. I mean, even if the U.S. -- if the U.S. ever changes its 

position, the position is going to be, "Well, China and India need to change too." And 

their response is going to be, "Well, why did the U.S. and the other advanced states get a 

free pass for the previous century" And it's going to be an interesting debate. 

ROSE: Let me ask one last question if we don't have any from the floor, which is, people 

have talked about this often in terms of U.S. power and U.S. hegemony, and there's been 

a sense, as you say in the piece, that power is a zero-sum game, so that India and China's 

rise are coming at the expense of Europe's position and so forth. But one interesting 

question is, will that come at the expense of the U.S. position Or will the U.S. be able, 

by tweaking the membership of the club in various of these institutions, be able to sort of 

not so much divide and conquer as, by manipulating its role as the chief arbiter of who 

gets in and who has what kind of thing and who gets its favor and its alliance, will the 

U.S. role necessarily diminish and U.S. power necessarily fall back towards the middle as 

these new ones rise

DREZNER: I mean, that's a possibility, there's no question about that. I mean, you 

know, it's easy to point to the decline of Europe, but this might potentially lead to at least 

some relative decline i the United States. 

I'm a little more optimistic about the U.S., just because first of all, the demographic 

profile of the United States is much healthier than Europe in terms of sort of, you know, 

birth rates and the extent to which you've got an active labor force supporting a retiring -- 

supporting pensioners. That's one thing. And the second reason is that our fundamental 

advantage is that our labor markets are much more flexible and also we're more receptive 

to immigration. 

So as a result, I mean, the U.S. might -- you know, it's not going to ever grow again at 10 

percent a year, you know, the growth rates that you see in India and China. That said, 

because it's starting from a larger base, it doesn't necessarily have to, and because of its 

technological lead. It's going to be a longer -- it's going to be a couple decades, I think, 

before you need to talk about whether or not the U.S. is going to actually be eclipsed by 

any of these countries. 

And the other fact is -- and this is important -- is that although China and India are rising, 

you know, there are a lot of reasons why they might -- both states might encounter 

serious amounts of political instability along the way, whereas the U.S. political system, 

even in the polarizing era we are now, is considered much more stable. 

ROSE: So it's less the rise of multilateralism or the decline of the U.S. as it is the U.S. 

changing its dance partners or increasing the size of its harem. 

DREZNER: Yeah, I would say it's more expanding the option -- expanding its dance 

partner options. You know, as I said in the piece, it's not that -- the United States needs 

the European Union, needs the EU members because on a whole variety of issues we 

actually agree more with Europe than we agree with other countries. But there are other 

issues, particularly on economic growth, where we're much more simpatico with China 

and India than we are with the European Union. So this -- if this is done well, if this is 

done adroitly, the U.S. can sort of pick and choose who its great power allies will be 

given the issue at hand. 

QUESTIONER: So Robin being joined by Bat Girl. 

DREZNER: Yeah, there you go. 

ROSE: And on that note, do we have anymore questions from the floor 

OPERATOR: A question comes from Garrett Mitchell from the Mitchell Report. 

QUESTIONER: Hi, Dr. Drezner 

DREZNER: Yes.

QUESTIONER: First of all, I want to say that I think the piece is excellent, and I 

really appreciate this conversation. I want to ask a couple of questions about this 

calculus or potential calculus. Let me just start with a simple one and add a 

couple to it. 

If -- I'm interested if you took the sort of current line-up of players and said, all 

right, everybody on this side of the line is for the concept that some sort of reform 

or restructuring of these current institutions needs to take place to recognize that 

the world order in 2006 is different from the one in 1946. And all those who are 

either, you know, against that or reluctant to do that stand on the other side. 

I'm interested -- it's sort of like shirts and skins. I'm interested to know, you 

know, in addition to us and obviously China and India and presumably Brazil, et 

cetera, who else is on the side that favors the reform and reorganization in the 

manner that you talk about And who are the powers that are against it 

A related question is, I was struck by something you said near the end of your 

article when you said developing countries on the periphery of the global 

economy can be expected to back Europe in resisting U.S.-led reform efforts, and 

that struck me as slightly counterintuitive. And I wonder if you could just say a 

little bit more about that and explain that. 

And then, I guess, the third question that it leads to for me is: If you were sitting 

down with the national security team of the next administration, whichever -- 

wherever that comes from, and you were laying this out, what do you think some 

of the strategic steps that you'd be recommending to them might look like to move 

in the direction of this reform and reorganization 

DREZNER: Okay. Very good questions. I think I can answer your first two in one 

swoop, which is who -- you know, who is on what side, the shirts and skins. 

I mean, to some extent I would argue it corresponds just down to brute interest; which 

countries are growing at very, very high rates and which countries are not You know, 

the U.S. and China and India, and to a lesser extent Brazil and South Africa and South 

Korea -- you know, countries that are foreseen as -- perceived as being on the rise, 

particularly economically, would fall under that one category. 

And then, on the other hand, you've got countries in the developing world that are not 

growing by nearly as fast a rate, namely in Africa and Latin America. These countries 

also have relatively long standing colonial ties or ex-colonial ties with members of the 

European Union. So it's not shocking that you'd see, you know, a similar kind of alliance 

between those two groups, which is why I argued that -- when I said countries on 

periphery, I was primarily referring to Africa on this. Those states have very low growth 

rates on the whole, you know, with the exception of South Africa and Botswana.

And as a result, you know, in a world where, let's say, the IMF judges things based on 

economic size, they don't have a lot of influence to begin with. The last thing they want 

to see is things corresponding to economic growth even more, where they lose out even 

relatively speaking to China and India. 

In terms of sitting down with the `08 group, you know, with whoever comes in `08, what 

my advice would be -- I would probably give two pieces of advice. 

The first would be if you're going to engage in U.N. -- the first is to engage in U.N. 

Security Council reform, which is namely cut India in and potentially Brazil, and keep it 

at those two. I'm not necessarily sure you want to do any more, which of course is going 

to make it fantastically difficult. 

But I -- the Security Council seriously worries me in the future, where it's this situation 

where Britain and France both have vetoes and yet India doesn't. That strikes me as 

increasingly it's going to look more and more anachronistic. And for the U.N. to retain 

any kind of influence, I think you're going to need to see the buy-in of large developing 

countries. 

The other thing I think is going to be to have some more flexibility in terms of potentially 

the U.S. creating new organizations as a -- you know, because new organizations -- you 

know, you don't have to deal bureaucratic inertia and you don't have to deal with the 

past. There might be some issues such as, let's say, the environment or trade where it 

might be appropriate to create new, more flexible groupings and clubs that actually bring 

in rising powers as well as our existing allies. 

OPERATOR: All right. Once again, if you'd like to ask a question, you can press the 

star key followed by the one key on your touch-tone phone now. 

There are currently no more questions. 

ROSE: Okay. Well, this -- we all have busy schedules, and Dan, I want to thank you for 

your time and recommend his piece and the rest of the issue to all of you, and we'll see 

you -- or speak to you at our next call sometime down the road. 

Thank you very much for participating. 

DREZNER: Thank you. 

END OF INTERVIEW

http://www.cfr.org/project/1411/asia_and_the_world_roundtable_series.html 

• March 2009—Present 

Asia and the World Roundtable Series 

Director: Evan A. Feigenbaum, Senior Fellow for East, Central, and South Asia 

The Asia and the World Roundtable Series examines the global implications of the 

rise of Asian power. For a thousand years, Asia was the engine of the global 

economy, a locus of science and innovation, a center of ideas and intellectual 

ferment, and the nexus of global power. After a long hiatus, Asia's major powers 

have now reemerged on the global stage, but their interaction with one another, and 

with the United States, on important issues and challenges is unsettled and 

evolving. Speakers and participants analyze the reemergence of China and India as 

global players, the changing role of Japan on the international stage, and efforts to 

reshape the international architecture to accommodate the rise of China and India, 

in particular. Sessions also consider the ways in which greater involvement in the 

world, not just their immediate neighborhood, is changing the strategic, economic, 

and political calculations of major countries in East, Central, and South Asia. 

Meetings look at the tensions, opportunities, and constraints that will determine 

whether and how the United States can forge partnerships with major Asian powers 

on issues of global scope. Other sessions may examine timely issues that arise in 

Central Asia, such as connections to the international oil and gas market, 

international institutions, and the global economy. 

[undated article below] 

The reader should bear in mind that, although this article explains the 

"U.S./British Connection", England has been under economic and 

political control of the Rothschild money trust for centuries. 

Without that understanding, the subject of the US/British connection serves to create 

confusion as to WHO or WHAT is behind those individuals, groups, societies, etc. which, 

- while not well known to the general population - are somewhat more visible. 

A clue is given in the statement: "The money to found the CFR came in part from J.P. 

Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Bernard Baruch, Otto Kahn, Jacob Schiff and Paul 

Warburg".

This article was found at: www.biblebelievers.org.au/ and expands on the CFR's 

beginnings as excerpted from Quigley's book Tragedy and Hope . 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2488794/1966-Carroll-Quigley-Tragedy-and-Hope-A- 

History-of-the-World-in-Our-Time 

============================================================ 

An Introduction to the "Little Sister" of The Royal Institute of International 

Affairs: The U.S. Council on Foreign Relations 

By Eric Samuelson, J.D. 

janeric@concentric.net 

"Since its founding... the CFR has been the preeminent intermediary 

between the world of high finance, big oil, corporate elitism, and the U.S. 

government. Its members slide smoothly into cabinet-level jobs in 

Republican and Democratic administrations. The policies promulgated in 

its quarterly journal, Foreign Affairs, become U.S. government policy." -- 

Jonathan Vankin (1) 

"As a teenager, I heard John Kennedy's summons to citizenship. And then, 

as a student, I heard that call clarified by a professor I had named Carroll 

Quigley." -- Democratic Presidential Nominee Bill Clinton 

When Bill Clinton delivered his acceptance speech at the Democratic 

convention, on July 16, 1992, Carroll Quigley's name was not exactly a 

household word. (2) Quigley, Dean of The School of Foreign Service at 

Georgetown University, had graduated magna cum from Harvard. He made 

Ripley's "Believe It or Not" for being Harvard's youngest person to receive a 

Ph.D. After teaching at Harvard and Princeton, he went to Georgetown where 

for 28 consecutive years alumni selected him as their most influential professor. 

Clinton, Quigley's student, went on to become a Rhodes Scholar, a CFR 

member, a Trilateral Commission member and a Bilderberger participant. He 

joined the Council on Foreign Relations in 1989, attended a Bilderberg meeting 

in 1991 and was a current member of the Trilateral Commission at the time of 

his nomination. (3) Clinton, before the American public, openly acknowledged 

his Georgetown mentor and clued his followers from the convention podium. 

He then went on in November to defeat former CFR/Trilateralist/Skull and 

Bones member President George H.W. Bush.

The shadowy political and even "foreign" beginnings of the Council on Foreign 

Relations have long been intentionally obscured. For more than three decades 

the CFR received no notice by authors, the general public or serious researchers. 

When mentioned, it is almost always in articles detailing how many of the 

appointees of a given administration, as usual, have a "CFR connection". (4) 

Santa Barbara sociologist G. William Domhoff wrote in 1978 that the CFR had 

been the subject of only two "academic studies." This, he said, provided "an 

impressive commentary in itself on how little social scientists know about 

policy-making in the United States." (5) A lack of academic commentary has also 

been paralleled by little coverage in the media or press. It was not until some 37 

years after the creation of the CFR that a mainstream magazine article was 

published in Harper's by Joseph Kraft in July 1958 entitled: "School for 

Statesmen." (6) 

A major clue was given by Georgetown University Professor Carroll Quigley in 

an interview. Quigley, in his best Boston accent, dismissed the Radical-Right 

interpretation as 'garbage'. But he then added: 'To be perfectly blunt, you 

could find yourself in trouble dealing with this subject." He explained that 

his career as a lecturer in the government institution circuit was all but ruined 

because of the twenty or so pages he had written about the existence of Round 

Table Groups. As we will see, the CFR was, indeed, a British Round Table 

creation. This is one of the most important hidden secrets of the NYC-based 

CFR. 

The story of the British connection to the Council on Foreign Relations may be 

traced back to George Peabody, J.P. Morgan, Andrew Carnegie, Nicholas M. 

Butler and Col. Edward House -- all who may be described a British loyalists. A 

Secret Society was established by Cecil Rhodes in connection with Rothschild, 

Morgan, Carnegie, and Rockefeller. A small highly secret group called the 

Round Table directed operations. (7) 

The story begins at least when George Peabody moved to London and took up 

English residence in 1837 -- the same year Queen Victoria ascended the throne. 

He joined with other merchant bankers who traded in dry goods in "high 

finance." This consisted of exclusive service to "governments, large companies 

and rich individuals." (8) Soon after his arrival in London, Peabody was 

summoned by Baron Nathan Mayer Rothschild. Rothschild offered to pay all 

his entertainment bills. Hence, the famous Peabody July 4th dinners were 

bought and paid for by funds from the Rothschilds. (9) In 1837, Peabody was 

warned, in advance, by his British friends of their decision "to withdraw credits 

from the worldwide markets and thereby depress commercial values; so he was 

fully liquid and ready to pounce on the American properties rendered bargains 

by the British move." (10) In the crash of 1837 Peabody made a fortune

purchasing depressed property in America. (11) In 1854 the American 

Ambassador to London, James Buchanan, stormed out of the room when 

George Peabody toasted Queen Victoria before President Pierce. (12) Peabody 

"was the founder of the Morgan financial empire." (13) In 1859 Junius Morgan 

assumed control of George Peabody and Company. He traded Union bonds. The 

Civil War was "a bonanza for German-Jewish bankers on Wall Street, who 

raised loans from the numerous Union sympathizers in Germany." (14) Peabody's 

American agent was the Boston firm of Beebe, Morgan and Company -- headed 

by Junius Morgan. (15) When J. Pierpont Morgan was in Vienna, his father wrote 

that Alexander Duncan had an opening in Duncan, Sherman & Company -- a 

bank affiliated with George Peabody in London. Pierpont "soon was acting as 

George Peabody & Company's American representative. (16) 

Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919), in 1872, was paid a $150,000 commission for 

placing $6 million of bonds of a Pennsylvania branch road in Europe. He made 

another $75,000 on a second trip. While in England in 1873, on one of his 

frequent trips to Great Britain, he met Henry Bessemer and saw the Bessemer 

process of making steel. He then organized Carnegie, McCandless & Company 

with a capital of $700,000 and built a new steel plant named the Edgar 

Thompson Steel Works (to flatter the president of the Pennsylvania Railroad to 

get generous rebates). (17) 

In the original edition of Andrew Carnegie's 1893 book, Triumphant 

Democracy, he stated: "Time may dispel many pleasing illusions and destroy 

many noble dreams but it will never shake my belief that the wound caused by 

the wholly unlooked for and undesired separation of the Mother from her child 

is not to bleed forever. Let men say what they will, therefore I say, that surely as 

the sun in the heavens once shone upon Britain and America united, so surely is 

it one morning to rise, shine upon, and greet again the United States, the British 

American Union." (18) In 1948 a bio of Carnegie ended: "There is bound to be 

universal peace, he believed, through the final interlocking of the national 

interests throughout the world. At first a coalition of America and England -- a 

union of the English-speaking race. Then a United States of Europe. And finally 

a unification of the entire human race." (19) Carnegie was a vice president and 

generous financial supporter of the Anti-Imperialist League from its formation 

in 1898 until his death. His profits went from almost $3.5 million in 1887 to $40 

million in 1900. (20) He consolidated his holdings into Carnegie Steel Co. in 

1899. On December 12, 1900 an informal parliament of "all the biggest men of 

New York" was held as a dinner party to the president of the Carnegie Steel 

Company -- "Smiling Charlie" Schwab. After an all night session, some weeks 

later, Morgan sent Schwab to Carnegie: "Go and find his price." The resulting 

price of $492,000,000, dubbed a "stupendous ransom," was paid to Carnegie 

with $300,000,000 in bonds and preferred stock. (21) Carnegie's assets were 

actually worth only $80 million but Morgan merged other corporations to create 

U.S. Steel Company controlling 65% of U.S. steelmaking capacity. (22) At the

end of his steel career, in 1901, he turned over his Carnegie Steel to J.P. Morgan 

who merged it with three other steel giants (the Tennessee Coal and Iron 

Company, the Illinois Steel Company and Colorado Fuel and Iron) to form the 

U.S. Steel Corporation -- the first billion dollar corporation in America. (23) 

Andrew Carnegie financed three temples of peace: Central America Court of 

Justice, the Pan American Union and the Palace of Peace at the Hague (which 

cost $1.5 million to construct in 1903). (24) He was also a member of the 

Philippine Independence Committee (1904) and a vice president of the Filipino 

Progress Association (1905-1907). In 1905 Carnegie gave $10 million to 

provide pensions for retired college professors. Those who gathered at 

Carnegie's mansion on November 15, 1905, included Charles W. Eliot 

(Harvard), Woodrow Wilson (Princeton), Arthur Hadley (Yale) and David Star 

Jordan (Stanford) .(25) 

The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was set up in 1910. The initial 

direction of the fund was given by Carnegie to Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler 

(1862-1947). Butler got excited about the peril of the Allies in World War I and 

decided that the best way to establish peace was to help get the United States 

into the War. (26) Butler was President of Columbia University (1901-1945), 

helped establish the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and served as 

its President (1925-1945). Norman Dodd, research director for the Reece 

Committee, was invited to examine the warehoused records of the Carnegie 

Endowment for International Peace. The minutes, inspected by a Dodd 

researcher, revealed that in 1910 the Carnegie trustees asked: "Is there any way 

known to man more effective than war, to so alter the life of an entire people" 

The trustees ultimately decided that war was the most effective way to change 

people. A year later the minutes showed that the trustees asked: "How do we 

involve the United States in a war" And they answered: "We must control the 

diplomatic machinery of the United States," by first gaining "control of the State 

Department." The trustees also sent a confidential message to President Wilson 

insisting that the war not end too quickly. Dodd also found that all high 

appointments in the State Department took place only after they had been 

cleared by the Council of Learned Societies (established by the Carnegie 

Endowment for International Peace). (27) The Church Peace Union was 

established at a meeting at the home of Andrew Carnegie in 1914 with an 

endowment of over $2 million. (28) Andrew Carnegie, J.P. Morgan and Otto 

Kahn backed the 1915 Anglo-French loan. (29) The 1915 loans were said by 

Morgan to be made for "trade" purposes. (30) 

The League of Free Nations was created in early 1918 (in 1920 it became the 

Foreign Policy Association). (31) The Foreign Policy Association "grew out of a 

meeting of nineteen writers, editors, educators, and such with a view to selling

Wilsonian policies and the League of Nations to the public." (32) The Foreign 

Policy Association, however, soon began to play "second fiddle" to the CFR. 

In June 1918, a "more discrete" club of New York "financiers and international 

lawyers" was formed headed by Elihu Root (an Andrew Carnegie lawyer). (33) 

The 108 members of the original Council on Foreign Relations were described 

by Whitney Shepardson as "high-ranking officers of banking, manufacturing, 

trading and finance companies, together with many lawyers." (34) International 

Bankers provided the money: "In Britain the organization was (initially) called 

the Institute for International Affairs (IIA) while in New York it operated as the 

Council for Foreign Relations (CFR). The finances for the group came from 

wealthy international bankers..." (35) The CFR was founded "by East Coast 

bankers, lawyers and academicians..." (36) By April 1919, however, the CFR 

"went dormant." (37) 

A Texan named House was a key individual before and during the Wilson 

administration. He helped establish the income tax, the Federal Reserve System, 

coined the phrase "league of nations," drafted the covenant for the League of 

Nations and presided over the creation of the Council on Foreign Relations 

(C.F.R.). 

Col. Edward M. House (the title came from a Texas Governor) inherited a 

fortune estimated at around $1.5 million. He was born in Houston, Texas -- the 

son of a wealthy planter and banker. (38) Originally the House ("Huis") family 

was Dutch. House's family had lived in England for 300 years before his father 

came to Texas. (39) Thomas William House came to Texas to fight under Sam 

Houston and was an American agent for London Banking interests "said by 

some to the House of Rothschild..." (40) Edward House attended school in 

England for several years as a young boy: "Much of his youth and adult life was 

spent in the British Isles, which he regularly visited." (41) The elder House said 

he wanted to raise his sons to "know and serve England." (42) House surrounded 

himself with prominent members of the Fabian Society. (43) Between 1892 and 

1902 he elected four Texas Governors. (44) 

In the winter of 1911-1912, House wrote Philip Dru: Administrator. House said 

he was working for "Socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx..." The book was a 

fictional plan for the conquest of America by gaining control of both the 

Republican and Democratic parties and using them to create a socialist world 

government. Central portions of the plan included a graduated federal income 

tax and a central bank. (45) The book also outlined an inheritance tax and 

suggested taking functions away from the states. (46) It suggested a conspiracy 

"insinuated into the primaries, in order that no candidate might be nominated 

whose views were not in accord with theirs." (47) House passed the book to his 

father-in-law in New York City -- Dr. Sidney E. Mezes. Mezes, who read and

approved the book, was Director of the College of the City of New York and 

former President of the University of Texas. House then sent the book to future 

Wilson cabinet member David F. Houston. Houston declared the work 

economically sound but said the fiction in it was so thin that he advised it be 

rewritten as a serious work. (48) 

After his November 1912 election, Woodrow Wilson, on vacation in Bermuda, 

read Philip Dru. (49) Arthur Howden Smith wrote: "In nine months the Wilson 

administration completely reorganized the financial structure in accordance with 

the conceptions outlined in 'Philip Dru.'" (50) From 1912-1914, Wilson's 

legislative program "was largely the program of House's book..." (51) The New 

York Times in January 1913 found the authorship of Philip Dru to still be a 

puzzle. (52) In 1915 House was still trying to conceal his connection as author of 

the book. (53) Among those who read the novel was Franklin Delano Roosevelt - 

- then Assistant Secretary of the Navy -- whose mother was then and always a 

close friend of Colonel House. (54) It was published by B.W. Huebsch -- "a 

favorite publisher of the Left and for many years a valued collaborator of 

American Fabian Socialist groups." (55) In 1917 a bookseller wrote regarding the 

House book: "As time goes on the interest in it becomes more intense, due to 

the fact that so many of the ideas expressed...have become laws of this 

Republic, and so many of his ideas have been discussed as becoming laws." He 

ended with the question: "Is Colonel E.M. House of Texas the author If not, 

who is" Seymour admitted: "Colonel House was, in truth, the author; to his 

other occupations he added that of novelist." (56) Both Franklin K. Lane and W. 

J. Bryan commented on the influence of Philip Dru on Wilson. (57) In 1918, 

Franklin K. Lane, Woodrow Wilson's Secretary of the Interior, stated in a 

private letter: "All that book has said should be, comes about...The President 

comes to Philip Dru, in the end." (58) House's book has been said to have 

outlined the next 40-50 years in code (DRU is also said to be the code for David 

Rex Universe). (59) 

Charles Seymour called Col. House "the unseen guardian angel of the (Federal 

Reserve) bill." (60) The banker J. Horace Harding held a dinner at which House 

"convinced the financial overlords that the Democratic donkey, with Wilson in 

the saddle, would not kick over the traces....The Schiffs, the Warburgs, the 

Kuhns, the Rockefellers, the Morgans put their faith in House..." (61) On 

November 17, 1913, Paul Warburg requested an interview, with House, to 

include Jacob Schiff and Cleveland Dodge. Dodge was grateful for a 

"substantial subscription for the Y.M.C.A. fund." Warburg did most of the 

talking. Schiff favored only four regional reserve banks. (62) Schiff said House 

was the Moses and they would be the Aarons: "He asked if I knew my Bible 

well enough for this to be clear to be. I told him I did." (63) Schiff then wrote to 

House on December 23, 1913: "I want to say a word of appreciation to you for 

the silent, but no doubt effective work you have done in the interest of currency 

legislation..." (64) After getting the Federal Reserve through, House then turned

to international affairs. (65) House "had powerful connections with international 

bankers in New York. He was influential...with great financial institutions 

represented by such people as Paul and Felix Warburg, Otto H. Kahn, Louis 

Marburg, Henry Morgenthau, Jacob and Mortimer Schiff and Herbert Lehman. 

House had equally powerful connections with bankers and politicians of 

Europe." (66) Jacob Schiff died on September 25, 1920. Of all the other living 

bankers named by Smoot, all, without an exception, were later founding 

members of the CFR in 1921. (67) The original 270-secret crowd that created the 

Federal Reserve System "were all in the original (CFR) membership." They 

included Jacob Schiff, Averell Harriman, Frank Vanderlip, Nelson Aldrich, 

Bernard Baruch, J.P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller. (68) 

Associates of J.P. Morgan and Company created an American parallel group to 

the Milner Group before the first World War. (69) The RIIA was an aboveground 

group: "During the Versailles Treaty talks after the war, Round Table 

members Lionel Curtis, Balfour, Milner, and others formed an above-ground 

group called the Royal Institute of International Affairs for the purpose of 

coordinating Anglo-American cooperative efforts. They decided also to form an 

American branch, but gave it a different name in order to secure its antecedents. 

Thus was born the Council on Foreign Relations, originally staffed by J.P. 

Morgan men and financed by Morgan money." (70) The two groups were 

established to prevent the American people from reacting with patriotic fury if it 

was discovered that the CFR was in fact a subsidiary of the British Round 

Table. (71) The man most responsible for creating subgroups of the Round Table 

was Lionel Curtis. He established local chapters of the Round Table called the 

Royal Institute of International Affairs: "In the United States, the Round Table 

'front group' was named the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)." (72) 

A savy observer has described the CFR's British front-role: "The interlock 

problem is conspicuous for another reason, one which has never been addressed 

by Congress. It seems that certain huge Yankee foundations, namely 

Rockefeller, Ford, and Carnegie, have been conscious instruments of covert 

U.S. foreign policy, with directors and officers who can only be described as 

agents of U.S. intelligence. According to Quigley, the roots for this can be 

traced to the establishment of an American branch of the British Royal Institute 

in 1921, which itself had grown out of the Rhodes Trust. The American branch, 

called the Council on Foreign Relations, was a largely a front for J. P. Morgan 

and Company." (73) 

The Council on Foreign Relations Handbook of 1936 stated: "On May 30, 1919, 

several leading members of the delegations to the Paris Peace Conference met at 

the Hotel Majestic in Paris to discuss setting up an international group which 

would advise their respective governments on international affairs. The U.S. 

was represented by Gen. Tasker H. Bliss (Chief of Staff, U.S. Army), Col.

Edward M. House, Whitney H. Shepardson, Dr. James T. Shotwell, and Prof. 

Archibald Coolidge. Great Britain was unofficially represented by Lord Robert 

Cecil, Lionel Curtis, Lord Eustace Percy, and Harold Temperley." The May 30 th 

meeting was held at the billet of the British delegation and proposed an Anglo- 

American Institute of International Affairs -- one branch in London and one in 

New York. (74) The New York and London locations were appropriate since 

"nearly all of them were bankers and lawyers." (75) 

The British moved quickly to establish their branch. (76) The establishment of the 

American branch was much slower. When the American delegates got home 

their fellow citizens were "absorbed in isolationism and prohibition, throughly 

inhospitable to the ideas of the League of Nations." (77) 

So far no complete list of the fifty dinner guests has been located. It has been 

stated, however: "The twenty-one Americans, who, together with (their 29) 

British counterparts, founded in Paris The Institute of International Affairs, 

were a diverse group that included Col. Edward M. House, Herbert Hoover, 

Gen. Tasker Bliss, Christian Herter, and such scholars as Charles Seymour, later 

President of Yale, Professors Archibald Cary Coolidge of Harvard and James T. 

Shotwell of Columbia." (78) There were two camps. One was headed by the U.S. 

official negotiators Tasker H. Bliss and Edward House along with advisors 

Herbert Hoover and Thomas W. Lamont -- along with their aides. The other 

side was composed of the twelve scholars that had served the American 

delegation in an advisory capacity. (79) Most of the scholars were from Harvard, 

Yale and Columbia. (80) 

The returning Inquiry scholars lacked the funds to create the envisioned 

American Institute of International Affairs but offered diplomatic experience, 

expertise and high-level contacts: "The men of law and banking, by contrast, 

could tap untold resources of finance...This was the synergy that produced the 

modern Council..." (81) The money to found the CFR came in part from J.P. 

Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Bernard Baruch, Otto Kahn, Jacob Schiff 

and Paul Warburg. (82) 

Another source suggests that the original CFR itself had fund-raising problems: 

"They took the name of an organization already in existence. The original 

Council on Foreign Relations had been formed in New York in July, 1918, but 

in little more than a year had become inactive owing to an inability to raise the 

necessary funds. It was with 66 members of this original crowd that the 

peacemongers from Paris merged to form the organization we know today." (83) 

J.P. Morgan's personal attorney, John W. Davis (and later Republican 

presidential candidate), was the founding President of the CFR. Paul Carvath,

the first Vice-President of the CFR, also represented the J.P. Morgan interests. 

The council's first chairman was Morgan partner Russell Leffingwell. Morgan 

also had the loyalty of many professors due to his large academic endowments. 

(84) Paul Cravath was also the founder of the famous law firm of Cravath, 

Swaine & Moore. (85) 

In summary, the Federal Reserve System, the League of Nations and the 

Council on Foreign Relations had both common origins and creators. Last, but 

not least, the CFR was of British -- not U.S. origin. 

ENDNOTES: 

1. Conspiracies, Coverups and Crimes 70 (1992). 

2. NameBase NewsLine, No. 1, "Clinton, Quigley, and Conspiracy: What's 

Going on Here" (April-June 1993). 

3. NameBase NewsLine, No. 1, "Clinton, Quigley, and Conspiracy: What's 

Going on Here" (April-June 1993). 

4. A collection of the charts of F.R.E.E. (Fund To Restore An Educated 

Electorate, founded by Johnny Stewart of Waco), proves the dominance of the 

CFR from the Democratic Carter administration, to the Republican Reagan 

administration, to the Bush and also the Bill Clinton administrations. It truly 

does not matter which party happens to be in power-the CFR runs U.S. foreign 

policy regardless of the political party in power. In 1952 and 1956 CFR Adlai 

Stevenson challenged CFR Ike. In 1960 it was CFR Nixon or CFR JFK. In 1968 

it was a choice of CFR Nixon or CFR Humphrey. In 1972 the candidates were 

CFR Nixon and CFR McGovern. Gary Allen, The Rockefeller File 56 (1976). 

5. G. William Domhoff, The Powers That Be 64 (1978). 

6. An exception to the lack of CFR coverage came in the December 9, 1950 

issue of the Chicago Tribune where an editorial said of CFR members: "There 

is blood on them-the dried blood of the last war (WWII) and the fresh blood of 

the present one (Korean War)." Des Griffin, Fourth Reich of the Rich 129 

(1989). For a relatively early article, See Also: J. Anthony Lukas, "The Council 

on Foreign Relations - Is It a Club Seminar Presidium 'Invisible 

Government' New York Times Magazine (November 21, 1971). 

7. W. Cleon Skousen, The Naked Capitalist 50 (1970) 

.8. Ron Chernow, The House of Morgan 4 (1990). 

9. Eustace Mullins, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve 49 (1991). 

10. Anton Chaitkin, Treason in America 319 (1985). 


12. Ron Chernow, The House of Morgan 7 (1990). 


14. Ron Chernow, The House of Morgan 13 (1990). 


16. Cass Canfield, Outrageous Fortunes 68 (1981).

17. B.C. Forbes, Men Who Made America Great 42 (1917). 

18. Wickliffe B. Vennard, Sr., The Federal Reserve Hoax Exposed 121 (1973). 

19. Henry Thomas and Danna Lee Thomas, 50 Great Americans 241 

(Doubleday & Co.: N.Y. 1948). 

20. Robert Green McCloskey, American Conservatism In The Age of Enterprise 

146 (1951). 

21. Matthew Josephson, The Robber Barons 424-425 (1934).James B. Dill was 

the man who brought Andrew Carnegie and J.P. Morgan together for the 

purchase and sale of the Carnegie steel properties. 

22. James Trager, The People's Chronology 679 (1979). 

23. Thomas R. Dye and L. Harmon Zeigler, The Irony of Democracy 75 (4th 

Ed. 1978). 

24. William P. Hoar, Architects of Conspiracy 69 (1984). 

25. David Tyack & Larry Cuban, Tinkering Toward Utopia: a Century of 

Public School Reform 91 (1995). 

26. Rene A. Wormser, Foundations: Their Power and Influence 204 (1958). 

27. William T. Still, New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies 

154 (1990). 

28. C. Gregg Singer, The Unholy Alliance 39 (1975). Carnegie was very 

deferential to Elihu Root who on March 31, 1919, prepared his will witnessed 

by Silas W. Howland and Clinton Combes (both N.Y. lawyers). The Last Will 

and Testament 16 (RAF Books 1968). 

29. William P. Hoar, Architects of Conspiracy 70 (1984). 

30. Antony Sutton, Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution 53 (1974). 

31. Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry 5-7 (1996). 

32. Ferdinand Lundberg, The Rockefeller Syndrome 293 (1976). 

33. Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry 7 (1996). 


35. Michael Howard, The Occult Conspiracy 165 (1989). 

36. G. William Domhoff, The Powers That Be 64 (1978). 


38. Alan Stang, The Actor 2 (1968). 


40. Rose L. Martin, Fabian Freeway: High Road to Socialism in the U.S.A. 160 

(1966). 


(1966). 


(1966). House "habitually permitted Sir William Wiseman, head of the British 

Secret Service in the United States, to sit in his private office in New York and 

read the most secret documents of the American government. House's father and 

mother had both been English." Sigmund Freud and William C. Bullitt, Thomas 

Woodrow Wilson: A Psychological Study 160 (1966). 

43. G. Edward Griffin, Creature From Jekyll Island 239 (1994). 


45. John E. McManus, The Insiders 7 (1992).



48. Vol. I, The Intimate Papers of Colonel House 154 (Charles Seymour Ed. 

1926). 

49. Robert F. Rifkind, "The Colonel's Dream of Power," American Heritage 64 

(February 1959). 

50. Wickliffe B. Vennard, Sr., The Federal Reserve Hoax Exposed 37 (1973). 

51. Sigmund Freud and William C. Bullitt, Thomas Woodrow Wilson: A 

Psychological Study 152 (1966). 

52. Robert F. Rifkind, "The Colonel's Dream of Power," American Heritage 62 

(February 1959). 

53. Alexander L. George & Guliette L. George, Woodrow Wilson and Colonel 

House 131 (1964). 


(1966). 


(1966). 


1926). 

57. Rupert Norval Richardson, Colonel Edward M. House: The Texas Years 

1858-1912 264 (1964). 

58. Dan Smoot, The Invisible Government 44 (1962). 

59. Paul Stevens, "The Origin of the Federal Reserve Act," Vol. LXXXIV, No. 

401, American Mercury 10-11 (June 1957). In 1932, FDR, as the Democrat 

candidate, met Col. House at Magnolia, Massachusetts, as they were returning 

East from the Chicago Convention. Curtis B. Dall, F.D.R.: My Exploited 

Father-In-Law 109-110 (1968). It has also been said: "That Roosevelt's 

legislative program of the 1930's followed the Dru course is beyond dispute: 

The National Industrial Recovery Act, the Agricultural Act, the 'Wealth Tax 

Act,' the huge measures for relief, the social security program, and the fight to 

change the structure of the Supreme Court--these are of the essence of Philip 

Dru's philosophy, and in part follow his practices." Rupert Norval Richardson, 

Colonel Edward M. House: The Texas Years 1858-1912 264-265 (1964). 

60. G. Edward Griffin, Creature from Jekyll Island 459 (1994). 

61. Alan Stang, The Actor 16 (1968); George Sylvester Viereck, The Strangest 

Friendship in History 36-37 (1932). 


1926). 


1926). 


1926). 


1926). 

66. Dan Smoot, The Invisible Government 2 (1962). 

67. Paul Warburg, Henry Morgenthau and Jacob Schiff were also all 33 rd degree

Masons. 

68. Larry Abraham, Call It Conspiracy 93 (1985). 

69. Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment 260 (1981). 

70. Alan B. Jones, How The World Really Works 7 (1996). 

71. Larry Abraham, Call it Conspiracy 93 (1985). 

72. William Bramley, The Gods of Eden 362 (1990). 

73. Daniel Brandt, "Philanthropists at War," NameBase NewsLine, No. 15 

(October- December 1996). 

74. Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry (1996). 

75. Robert D. Schulzinger, The Wise Men of Foreign Affairs: The History of the 

Council on Foreign Relations 6 (1984). 

76. Leonard & Mark Silk, The American Establishment 186 (1980). 


78. Council on Foreign Relations-Annual Report: 1979-1980. 




82. A. Ralph Epperson, The Unseen Hand 197 (1985). 

83. Alan Stang, The Actor 43 (1968). See Also: Whitney H. Shepardson, Early 

History of the Council on Foreign Relations 1, 8-9 (1960). 

84. James Perloff, The Shadows of Power 38 (1988). 

85. Thomas R. Dye, Who's Running America 151 1983). 

NOTE CFR PUBLICATIONS: 

http://www.cfr.org/project/286/study_group_on_new_world_order.html 

• Study Group on New World Order 

Director: Michael Mandelbaum, Christian Herter Professor, Paul H. Nitze School of 

Advanced International Studies, The Johns Hopkins University 

• July 1, 2000 - June 30, 2004 

• The activities carried out under this study group during previous years have 

supported the development of the project director’s recently published book, The Ideas 

that Conquered the World: Peace, Democracy, and Free Markets in the Twenty-first 

Century. Throughout the Fall, the project director will promote his by holding Council 

meetings in New York, Washington, and across the country. Following this book

promotion, the project director will begin research on a new book, building on the 

first, related to America’s role in the world. 

• 

• The Ideas That Conquered the World 

Author:Michael Mandelbaum, Christian Herter Professor, Paul H. Nitze School of 

Advanced International Studies, The Johns Hopkins University 

• At the dawn of the twenty-first century, three ideas dominate the world: peace as 

the preferred basis for relations between countries, democracy as the optimal way 

to organize political life, and free markets as the indispensable vehicle for the 

creation of wealth. While not practiced everywhere, these ideas have—for the 

first time in history—no serious rivals as methods for organizing the world’s 

politics, economics, and international relations. 

[undated article below] 

This excerpt from Carroll Quigley's Tragedy and Hope was transcribed 

after we read and formatted for posting the article from the New York 

Times on 12-03-01, titled Calls for a New Push Into Iraq Gain Power in 

Washington. The Globalists become ever more emboldened as they lay 

their puppet minions and their plans in the faces of elected officials, both 

federal and state and no effort is made to reign in the "outsiders" - as that 

article labels them. 

Thus, we are once again reminded of the Protocols, better known as the 

Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. Whoever its author - having been first 

published in London in 1906 - we must notice a projected outcome and method 

that is clearly visible today. The description and mission of the 'outsider group', 

as described in the article mentioned above is articulated clearly in Protocol 

No.9 

"It is from us that the all-engulfing terror proceeds. 

We have in our service persons of all opinions, of all doctrines... demagogues, 

socialists, communists, and utopian dreamers of every kind.

We have harnessed them all to the task; each one of them on his own account is 

boring away at the last remnants of authority, is striving to overthrow all 

established form of order. 

By these acts all States are in torture; they exhort to tranquility, are ready 

to sacrifice everything for peace: but we will not give them peace until they 

openly acknowledge our international Super-Government, and with 

submissiveness." 

We notice with Carroll Quigley, either a subtle deceptiveness or naivete' when 

describing some of the named minions of the International Priesthood. He died 

soon after the publication of Tragedy and Hope. Read and take heed. -- Jackie - 

- 2-11-01 

TRAGEDY AND HOPE 

by: Carroll Quigley 

Excerpted from pp. 950 - 955 - detailing the establishment of the "New York 

branch of the ROYAL INSTITUTE OF INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS". . . the: 

COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS 

There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international 

Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right 

believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as 

the Round Table Group has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, of 

any other groups, and frequently does so. 

I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty 

years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers 

and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for 

much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. 

I have objected, but in the past and recently, to a few of its policies (notably 

to its belief that England was an Atlantic rather than a European Power and 

must be allied, or even federated, with the United States and must remain 

isolated from Europe), but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it 

wished to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough 

to be known.

The Round Table Groups have already been mentioned in this book several 

times, notably in connection with the formation of the British Commonwealth in 

chapter 4 and in the discussion of appeasement in chapter 12 ("the Cliveden 

Set"). 

At the risk of some repetition, the story will be summarized here, because the 

American branch of this oganization (sometimes called the "Eastern 

Establishment") has played a very significant role in the history of the United 

States in the last generation. 

The Round Table Groups were semi-secret discussion and lobbying groups 

organized by Lionel Curtis, Philip H. Kerr (Lord Lothian), and (Sir) William S. 

Marris in 1908-1911. This was done on behalf of Lord Milner, the dominant 

Trustee of the Rhodes Trust in the two decades 1905-1925. 

The original purpose of these groups was to seek to federate the Englishspeaking 

world along lines laid down by Cecil Rhodes (1853-1902) and 

William T. Stead, (1840-1912), and the money for the organizational work 

came originally from the Rhodes Trust. 

By 1915 Round Table groups existed in seven countries, including England, 

South Africa, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, and a rather loosely 

organized group in the United States (George Louis Beer, Walter Lippman, 

Frank Avdelotte, Whitney Shepardson, Thomas W. Lamont, Jerome D. Greene, 

Erwin D. Canham of the Christian Science Monitor, and others). 

The attitudes of the various groups were coordinated by frequent visits and 

discussions and by a well-informed and totally anonymous quarterly magazine, 

The Round Table, whose first issue, largely written by Philip Kerr, appeared in 

November 1910. 

The leaders of this group were: Milner, until his death in 1915, followed by 

Curtis (1872-1955), Robert H. (Lord) Brand -- brother-in-law of Lady Astor -- 

until his death in 1963, and now Adam D. Marris, son of Sir William and 

Brand's successor as managing director of Lazard Brothers bank. The original 

intention had been to have collegial leadership, but Milner was too secretive and 

headstrong to share the role. 

He did so only in the period 1913-1919 when he held regular meetings with 

some of his closest friends to coordinate their activities as a pressure group in 

the struggle with Wilhelmine Germany. This they called their "Ginger Group".

After Milner's death in 1925, the leadership was largely shared by the survivors 

of Milner's 'Kindergarten', that is, the group of young Oxford men whom he 

used as civil servants in his reconstruction of South Africa in 1901-1910. 

Brand was the last survivor of the "Kindergarten", since his death, the greatly 

reduced activities of the organization have been exercised largely through the 

Editorial Committee of The Round Table magazine under Adam Marris. 

Money for the widely ramified activities of this organization came originally 

from the associates and followers of Cecil Rhodes, chiefly from the Rhodes 

Trust itself, and from wealthy associates such as the Beit brothers, from Sir Abe 

Bailey, and (after 1915) from the Astor family. 

Since 1925 there have been substantial contributions from wealthy 

individuals and from foundations and firms associated with the international 

banking fraternity, especially the Carnegie United Kingdom Trust, and other 

organizations associated with J.P. Morgan, the Rockefeller and Whitney 

families, and the associates of Lazard Brothers and of Morgan, Grenfell, and 

Company. 

The chief backbone of this organization grew up along the already existing 

financial cooperation running from the Morgan Bank in New York to a group of 

international financiers in London led by Lazard Brothers. 

Milner himself in 1901 had refused a fabulous offer, worth up to 100,000 a 

year, to become one of the three partners of the Morgan Bank in London, in 

succession to the younger J.P. Morgan who moved from London to join his 

father in New York (eventually the vacancy went to E.C. Grenfell, so that the 

London affiliate of Morgan became known as Morgan, Grenfell, and Company). 

Instead, Milner became director of a number of public banks, chiefly the 

London Joint Stock Bank, corporate precursor of the Midland Bank. He 

became one of the greatest political and financial powers in England, with his 

disciples strategically placed throughout England in significant places, such as 

the editorship of The Times, the editorship of The Observer, the managing 

directorship of Lazard Brothers, various administrative posts, and even Cabinet 

positions. 

Ramifications were established in politics, high finance, Oxford and London 

universities, periodicals, the civil service, and tax exempt foundations.

At the end of the war of 1914, it became clear that the organization of this 

system had to be greatly extended. Once again the task was entrusted to Lionel 

Curtis who established, in England and each dominion, a front organization to 

the existing local Round Table Group. 

This front organization, called the royal Institute of International Affairs, had 

as its nucleus in each area the existing submerged Round Table Group. In New 

York it was known as the Council on Foreign Relations and was a front for 

J.P. Morgan and Company in association with the very small American 

Round Table Group. 

The American organizers were dominated by the large number of Morgan 

"experts", including Lamont and Beer, who had gone to the Paris Peace 

Conference and there became close friends with the similar group of English 

"experts" which had been recruited by the Milner group. 

In fact, the original plans for the Royal Institute of International Affairs and 

the Council on Foreign Relations were drawn up at Paris. 

The Council of the RIIA (which, by Curtis's energy came to be housed in 

Chatham House, across St. James's Square from the Astors, and was soon 

known by the name of the headquarters) and the board of the Council on 

Foreign Relations have carried ever since the marks of their origin. 

Until 1960 the council at Chatham House was dominated by the dwindling 

group of Milner's associates, while the paid staff members were largely the 

agents of Lionel Curtis. The Round Table for years (until 1960) was edited 

from the back door of Chatham House grounds in Ormond Yard, and its 

telephone came through the Chatham House switchboard. 

The New York branch was dominated by the associates of the Morgan Bank. 

For example, in 1928 the Council on Foreign relations had John W. Davis as 

president, Paul Cravath as vice-president, and a council of thirteen others, which 

included Owen D. Young, russell C. Leffingwell, Norman Davis, Allen Dulles, 

George W. Wickersham, Frank L. Polk, Whitney Shepardson, Isaiah Bowman, 

Stephen P. Duggan, and Otto Kahn. 

Throughout its history, the council has been associated with the American 

Round Tablers, such as Beer, Lippmann, Shepardson, and Jerome Greene.

The academic figures have been those linked to Morgan, such as James T. 

Shotwell, Charles Seymour, Joseph P. Chamberlain, Philip Jessup, Isaiah 

Bowman and, more recently, Philip Moseley, Grayson L. Kirk, and Henry W. 

Wriston. 

The Wall Street contracts with these were created originally from Morgan's 

influence in handling large academic endowments. In the case of the largest of 

these endowments, that at Harvard, the influence was usually exercised 

indirectly through "State Street", Boston, which, for much of the twentieth 

century, came through the Boston banker Thomas Nelson Perkins. 

Closely allied with this Morgan influence were a small group of Wall Street 

law firms, whose chief figures were Elihu Root, John W. Davis, Paul D. 

Cravath, Russell Leffingwell, the Dulles brothers and, more recently, Arthur H. 

Dean, Philip D. Reed, and John J. McCloy. Other nonlegal agents of Morgan 

included men like Owen D. Young and Norman H. Davis. 

On this basis, which was originally financial and goes back to George 

Peabody, there grew up in the twentieth century a power structure between 

London and New York which penetrated deeply into university life, the 

press, and the practice of foreign policy. 

In England the center was the Round Table Group, while in the United States 

it was J.P. Morgan and Company or its local branches in Boston, Philadelphia, 

and Cleveland. 

Some rather incidental examples of the operations of this structure are very 

revealing, just because they are incidental. For example, it set up in Princeton a 

reasonable copy of the Round Table Group's chief Oxford headquarters, All 

Souls College. 

This copy, called the Institute for Advanced Study, and best known, perhaps, 

as the refuge of Einstein, Oppenheimer, John von Neumann, and George F. 

Kennan, was organized by Abraham Flexner of the Carnegie Foundation and 

Rockefeller's General Education Board after he had experienced the delights of 

All Souls while serving as Rhodes Memorial Lecturer at Oxford. The plans 

were largely drawn by Tom Jones, one of the Round Table's most active 

intriguers and foundation administrators. 

The American branch of this "English Establishment" exerted much of its 

influence through five American newspapers (The New York Times, New York

Herald Tribune, Christian Science Monitor, the Washington Post, and the 

lamented Boston Evening Transcript ) 

In fact, the editor of the Christian Science Monitor was the chief American 

correspondent (anonymously) of The Round Table, and Lord Lothian, the 

original editor of The Round Table and later secretary of the Rhodes Trust 

(1925-1939) and ambassador to Washington, was a frequent writer in the 

Monitor. 

It might be mentioned that the existence of this Wall Street Anglo-American 

axis is quite obvious once it is pointed out. 

It is reflected in the fact that such Wall Street luminaries as John W. Davis, 

Lewis Douglas, Jock Whitney, and Douglas Dillon were appointed to be 

American ambassadors in London. 

This double international network in which the Round Table groups formed 

the semi-secret or secret nuclei of the Institutes of International Affairs was 

extended into a third network in 1935, organized by the same people for the 

same motives. 

Once again the mastermind was Lionel Curtis, and the earlier Round Table 

Groups and Institutes of International Affairs were used as nuclei for the new 

network. 

However, this new organization for Pacific affairs was extended to ten 

countries, while the Round Table Groups existed only in seven. The new 

additions, ultimately China, Japan, France, the Netherlands, and Soviet Russia, 

had Pacific councils set up from scratch. 

In Canada, australia, and New Zealand, Pacific councils, interlocked and 

dominated by the Institutes of International Affairs, were set up. 

In England, Chatham House served as the English center for both nets, while 

in the United States the two were parallel creations (not subordinate) of the Wall 

Street allies of the Morgan Bank. The financing came from the same 

international banking groups and their subsidiary commercial and industrial 

firms.

In England, Chatham House was financed for both networks by the 

contributions of Sir Abe Bailey, the Astor family, and additional funds largely 

acquired by the persuasive powers of Lionel Curtis. The financial difficulties of 

the IPR Councils in the British Dominions in the depression of 1929-1935 

resulted in a very revealing effort to save money, when the local Institute of 

International Affairs absorbed the local Pacific Council, both of which were, in 

a way, expensive and needless fronts for the local Round Table groups. 

The chief aims of this elaborate, semi-secret organization were largely 

commendable: to coordinate the international activities and outlooks of all the 

English-speaking world into one (which would largely, it is true, be that of the 

London group); to work to maintain the peace; to help backward, colonial, and 

underdeveloped areas to advance toward stability, law and order, and prosperity 

along lines somewhat similar to those taught at Oxford and the University of 

London (especially the School of Economics and the Schools of African and 

Oriental Studies). 

These organizations and their financial backers were in no sense reactionary 

or Fascistic persons, as Communist propaganda would like to depict them. 

Quite the contrary. 

They were gracious and cultured gentlemen of somewhat limited social 

experience who were much concerned with the freedom of expression of 

minorities and the rule of law for all, who constantly thought in terms of Anglo- 

American solidarity, of political partition and federation, and who were 

convinced that they could gracefully civilize the Boers of South Africa, the 

Irish, the Arabs, and the Hindus, and who are largely responsible for the 

partitions of Ireland, Palestine, and India, as well as the federations of South 

Africa, Central Africa, and the West Indies. 

Their desire to win over the opposition by cooperation worked with Smuts 

but failed with Hertzog, worked with Gandhi but failed with Menon, worked 

with Stresemann but failed with Hitler, and has shown little chance of working 

with any Soviet leader. If their failures now loom larger than their successes, 

this should not be allowed to conceal the high motives with which they 

attempted both. 

It was this group of people, whose wealth and influence so exceeded their 

experience and understanding, who provided much of the frame-work of 

influence which the Communist sympathizers and fellow travelers took over in 

the United States in the 1930's.

It must be recognized that the power that these energetic Left-wingers 

exercised was never their own power or Communist power but was ultimately 

the power of the international financial coterie, and, once the anger and 

suspicions of the American people were aroused, as they were by 1950, it was a 

fairly simple matter to get rid of the Red sympathizers. 

Before this could be done, however, a congressional committee, following 

backward to their source the threads which led from admitted Communists like 

Whittaker Chamber, through Alger Hiss, and the Carnegie Endowment to 

Thomas Lamont and the Morgan Bank, fell into the whole complicated network 

of the interlocking tax-exempt foundations. 

The Eighty-third Congress in July 1953 set up a Special Committee to 

investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations with Representative B. Carroll Reece of 

Tennessee, as chairman. It soon became clear that people of immense wealth 

would be unhappy if the investigation went too far and that the "most 

respected" newspapers in the country, closely allied with these men of 

wealth, would not get excited enough about any revelations to make the 

publicity worth while, in terms of votes or campaign contributions. 

An interesting report showing the Left-wing associations of the interlocking 

nexus of tax-exempt foundations was issued in 1954 rather quietly. Four years 

later, the Reece committee's general counsel, Rene A. Wormser wrote a 

shocked, but not shocking, book on the subject called Foundations: Their Power 

and Influence. 

One of the most interesting members of this Anglo-American power 

structure was Jerome D. Greene (1874-1959). Born in Japan of missionary 

parents, Greene graduated from Harvard's college and law school by 1899 and 

became secretary to Harvard's president and corporation in 1901-1910. This 

gave him contacts with Wall Street which made him general manager of the 

Rockefeller Institute (1910-1012), assistant to John d. Rockefeller in 

philanthropic work for two years, then trustee to the Rockefeller Institute, to the 

Rockefeller foundation, and to the Rockefeller General Education Board until 

1939. 

For fifteen years (1917-1932) he was with the Boston investment banking 

firm of Lee, Higginson, and Company, most of the period as its chief officer, as 

well as with its London branch. As executive secretary of the American section 

of the Allied Maritime Transport Council, stationed in London in 1918, he lived 

in Toynbee Hall, the world's first settlement house, which has been founded by 

Alfred Milner and his friends in 1984.

This brought him in contact with the Round Table Group in England, a 

contact which was strengthened in 1919 when he was secretary to the 

Reparations Commission at the Paris Peace Conference. Accordingly, on his 

return to the United States he was one of the early figures in the establishment 

of the Council on Foreign Relations, which served as the New York branch 

of Lionel Curtis's Institute of International Affairs. 

As an investment banker, Greene is chiefly remembered for his sales of 

millions of dollars of the fraudulent securities of the Swedish match king, Ivar 

Kreuger. That Greene offered these to the American investing public in good 

faith is evident from the fact that he put a substantial part of his own fortune in 

the same investments. As a consequence, Kreuger's suicide in Paris in April 

1932 left Greene with little money and no job. He wrote to Lionel Curtis, 

asking for help, and was given, for two years, a professorship of international 

relations at Aberystwyth, Wales. 

- End Excerpt - 

See also: 

Excerpts from pp 324 - 327 discussing the "powers of financial capitalism" 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/2488794/1966-Carroll-Quigley-Tragedy-and-Hope-A-History-of-the- 

World-in-Our-Time 

The Council on Foreign Relations and The New World 

Order 

By William Blase 

of The Courier 

For those who may be confused by the controversies surrounding the "New 

World Order", a One-World-Government, and American concern over giving 

the UN more power; those unaware of the issues involved; and those wishing 

more background, I offer the following.

Originally presented for an Honors Class, "Dilemmas of War and Peace," at 

New Mexico State University, the paper was ridiculed and characterized by Dr. 

Yosef Lapid, (an acknowledged and locally quoted "expert" on Terrorism and 

Middle Eastern affairs) as "paranoid... possibly a symptom of mental illness." 

You may judge for yourself. 

Citing source data is the "scientific method," but does not seem to apply to 

"Conspiracy Theories." A thousand sources may be quoted, yet will not 

convince the "skeptics," the "realists." It seems to me the "symptoms of mental 

illness" are on their side, if they refuse to look at evidence ("There are none so 

blind as those who WILL not see"); or perhaps something more sinister is at 

work, such as a knowledge of the truth, that does not want YOU to know. 

To be paranoid means to believe in delusions of danger and persecution. If the 

danger is real, and the evidence credible, then it cannot be delusional. To ignore 

the evidence, and hope that it CANNOT be true, is more an evidence of mental 

illness. 

The issue involves much more than a difference of philosophy, or political 

viewpoint. Growing up in the midst of the "Cold War," our generation were 

taught that those who attempted to abolish our national sovereignty and 

overthrow our Constitutional government were committing acts of treason. 

Please judge for yourself if the group discussed is guilty of such. 

If one group is effectively in control of national governments and multinational 

corporations; promotes world government through control of media, foundation 

grants, and education; and controls and guides the issues of the day; then they 

control most options available. The Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), and 

the financial powers behind it, have done all these things, and promote the 

"New World Order", as they have for over seventy years. 

The CFR is the promotional arm of the Ruling Elite in the United States of 

America. Most influential politicians, academics and media personalities are 

members, and it uses its influence to infiltrate the New World Order into 

American life. Its' "experts" write scholarly pieces to be used in decision 

making, the academics expound on the wisdom of a united world, and the media 

members disseminate the message. 

To understand how the most influential people in America came to be members 

of an organization working purposefully for the overthrow of the Constitution 

and American sovereignty, we have to go back at least to the early 1900's, 

though the story begins much earlier (depending on your viewpoint and beliefs).

That a ruling power elite does indeed control the U.S. government behind the 

scenes has been attested to by many americans in a position to know. Felix 

Frankfurter, Justice of the Supreme Court (1939-1962), said: "The real rulers in 

Washington are invisible and exercise power from behind the scenes." In a letter 

to an associate dated November 21, 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt wrote, 

"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in 

the large centers has owned the government ever since the days of Andrew 

Jackson." February 23, 1954, 

Senator William Jenner warned in a speech: "Outwardly we have a 

Constitutional government. We have operating within our government and 

political system, another body representing another form of government, a 

bureaucratic elite which believes our Constitution is outmoded." 

Baron M.A. Rothschild wrote, "Give me control over a nation's currency and I 

care not who makes its laws." 

All that is needed to effectively control a government is to have control over the 

nation's money: a central bank with a monopoly over the supply of money and 

credit. This had been done in Western Europe, with the creation of privately 

owned central banks such as the Bank of England. 

Georgetown professor Dr. Carroll Quigley (Bill Clinton's mentor while at 

Georgetown) wrote about the goals of the investment bankers who control 

central banks: "... nothing less than to create a world system of financial control 

in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the 

economy of the world as a whole... controlled in a feudalist fashion by the 

central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in 

frequent private meetings and conferences." 

The Bank of the United States (1816-36), an early attempt at an American 

central bank, was abolished by President Andrew Jackson, who believed that it 

threatened the nation. He wrote: "The bold effort the present bank had made to 

control the government, the distress it had wantonly produced...are but 

premonitions of the fate that awaits the American people should they be deluded 

into a perpetuation of this institution or the establishment of another like it." 

Thomas Jefferson wrote: "The Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly 

hostility existing against the principles and form of our Constitution...if the 

American people allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, 

first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will

grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their 

children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered." 

Does that not describe the situation in America today 

The U.S. managed to do without a central bank until early in this century, when, 

according to Congressman Charles Lindbergh, Sr., "The Money Trust caused 

the 1907 panic, and thereby forced Congress to create a National Monetary 

Commission." Headed by Senator Nelson Aldrich, father-in-law of John D. 

Rockefeller, Jr., the Commission recommended creation of a central bank. 

Though unconstitutional, as only "The Congress shall have Power...To coin 

Money, regulate the Value thereof..." (Article I, Section 8, U.S. Constitution) 

the Federal Reserve Act was passed in December 1913; ostensibly to stabilize 

the economy and prevent further panics, but as Lindberg warned Congress: 

"This act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth...the invisible government 

by the money power, proven to exist by the Money Trust investigation, will be 

legalized." The Great Depression and numerous recessions later, it is obvious 

the Federal Reserve produces inflation and federal debt whenever it desires, but 

not stability. 

Congressman Louis McFadden, House Committee on Banking and Currency 

Chairman (1920-31), stated: "When the Federal Reserve Act was passed, the 

people of these United States did not perceive that a world banking system was 

being set up here. A super-state controlled by international bankers and 

industrialists...acting together to enslave the world...Every effort has been made 

by the Fed to conceal its powers but the truth is--the Fed has usurped the 

government." 

Although called "Federal," the Federal Reserve system is privately owned by 

member banks, makes its own policies, and is not subject to oversight by 

Congress or the President. As the overseer and supplier of reserves, the Fed 

gave banks access to public funds, which enhanced their lending capacity. 

Peter Kershaw, in "Economic Solutions" lists the ten major shareholders of the 

Federal Reserve Bank System as: Rothschild: London and Berlin; Lazard Bros: 

Paris; Israel Seiff: Italy; Kuhn- Loeb Company: Germany; Warburg: Hamburg 

and Amsterdam; Lehman Bros: New York; Goldman and Sachs: New York; 

Rockefeller: New York. (That most, if not all of these families just happen to be 

Jewish, you may judge the significance of yourself). The balance of stock is 

owned by major commercial member banks.

According to Davvy [Devvy -Ed.] Kidd, "Why A Bankrupt America" The 

Federal Reserve pays the Bureau of Engraving & Printing approximately $23 

for each 1,000 notes printed. 10,000 $100 notes (one million dollars) would thus 

cost the Federal Reserve $230. They then secure a pledge of collateral equal to 

the face value from the U.S government. The collateral is our land, labor, and 

assets... collected by their agents, the IRS. By authorizing the Fed to regulate 

and create money (and thus inflation), Congress gave private banks power to 

create profits at will. 

As Lindberg put it: "The new law will create inflation whenever the trusts want 

inflation...they can unload the stocks on the people at high prices during the 

excitement and then bring on a panic and buy them back at low prices...the day 

of reckoning is only a few years removed." That day came in 1929, with the 

Stock Market crash and Great Depression. 

One of the most important powers given to the Fed was the right to buy and sell 

government securities, and provide loans to member banks so they might also 

purchase them. This provided another built-in mechanism for profit to the 

banks, if government debt was increased. All that was needed was a method to 

pay off the debt. This was accomplished through the passage of the income tax 

in 1913. 

A national income tax was declared unconstitutional in 1895 by the Supreme 

Court, so a constitutional amendment was proposed in Congress by none other 

than ...Senator Nelson Aldrich. As presented to the American people it seemed 

reasonable enough: income tax on only one percent of income under $20,000, 

with the assurance that it would never increase. 

Since it was graduated, the tax would "soak the rich", ...but the rich had other 

plans, already devising a method of protecting wealth. As described by Gary 

Allen in his 1976 book "The Rockefeller File," "By the time the (16th) 

Amendment had been approved by the states, the Rockefeller Foundation was in 

full operation...about the same time that Judge Kenesaw Landis was ordering 

the breakup of the Standard Oil monopoly...John D...not only avoided taxes by 

creating four great tax-exempt foundations; he used them as repositories for his 

'divested' interests...made his assets non-taxable so that they might be passed 

down through generations without...estate and gift taxes...Each year the 

Rockefellers can dump up to half their incomes into their pet foundations and 

deduct the "donations" from their income tax." 

Exchanging ownership for control of wealth, foundations are also a handy 

means for promoting interests that benefit the wealthy. Millions of foundation 

dollars have been "donated" to causes such as promoting the use of drugs, while

degrading preventive medicine. Since many drugs are made from coal tar 

derivatives, both oil companies and drug manufacturing concerns (many 

Rockefeller owned or controlled) are the main beneficiaries. 

With the means to loan enormous sums to the government (the Federal 

Reserve), a method to repay the debt (income tax), and an escape from taxation 

for the wealthy, (foundations), all that remained was an excuse to borrow 

money. By some happy "coincidence," in 1914 World War I began, and after 

American participation national debt rose from $1 billion to $25 billion. 

Woodrow Wilson was elected President in 1913, beating incumbent William 

Howard Taft, who had vowed to veto legislation establishing a central bank. To 

divide the Republican vote and elect the relatively unknown Wilson, J.P. 

Morgan and Co. poured money into the candidacy of Teddy Roosevelt and his 

Progressive Party. 

According to an eyewitness, Wilson was brought to Democratic Party 

headquarters in 1912 by Bernard Baruch, a wealthy banker. He received an 

"indoctrination course" from those he met, and in return agreed, if elected: to 

support the projected Federal Reserve and the income tax, and "listen" to advice 

in case of war in Europe and on the composition of his cabinet. 

Wilson's top advisor during his two terms was a man named Colonel Edward M. 

House. House's biographer, Charles Seymour, called him the "unseen guardian 

angel" of the Federal Reserve Act, helping to guide it through Congress. 

Another biographer wrote that House believed: "...the Constitution, product of 

eighteenth-century minds...was thoroughly outdated; that the country would be 

better off if the Constitution could be scrapped and rewritten..." House wrote a 

book entitled "Philip Dru: Administrator," published anonymously in 1912. The 

hero, Philip Dru, rules America and introduces radical changes, such as a 

graduated income tax, a central bank, and a "league of nations." 

World War I produced both a large national debt, and huge profits for those who 

had backed Wilson. Baruch was appointed head of the War Industries Board, 

where he exercised dictatorial power over the national economy. He and the 

Rockefellers were reported to have earned over $200 million during the war. 

Wilson backer Cleveland Dodge sold munitions to the allies, while J.P. Morgan 

loaned them hundreds of millions, with the protection of U.S. entry into the war. 

While profit was certainly a motive, the war was also useful to justify the notion 

of world government. William Hoar reveals in "Architechs of Conspiracy" that 

during the 1950s, government investigators examining the records of the

Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a longtime promoter of 

globalism, found that several years before the outbreak of World War I, the 

Carnegie trustees were planning to involve the U.S. in a general war, to set the 

stage for world government. 

The main obstacle was that Americans did not want any involvement in 

European wars. Some kind of incident, such as the explosion of the battleship 

Main, which provoked the Spanish - American war, would have to be provided 

as provocation. This occurred when the Lusitania, carrying 128 Americans on 

board, was sunk by a German submarine, and anti-German sentiment was 

aroused. When war was declared, U.S. propaganda portrayed all Germans as 

Huns and fanged serpents, and all Americans opposing the war as traitors. 

What was not revealed at the time, however, was that the Lusitania was 

transporting war munitions to England, making it a legitimate target for the 

Germans. Even so, they had taken out large ads in the New York papers, asking 

that Americans not take passage on the ship. 

The evidence seems to point to a deliberate plan to have the ship sunk by the 

Germans. Colin Simpson, author of "The Lusitania," wrote that Winston 

Churchill, head of the British Admiralty during the war, had ordered a report to 

predict the political impact if a passenger ship carrying Americans was sunk. 

German naval codes had been broken by the British, who knew approximately 

where all U-boats near the British Isles were located. 

According to Simpson, Commander Joseph Kenworthy, of British Naval 

Intelligence, stated: "The Lusitania was deliberately sent at considerably 

reduced speed into an area where a U-boat was known to be waiting...escorts 

withdrawn." Thus, even though Wilson had been reelected in 1916 with the 

slogan "He kept us out of war," America soon found itself fighting a European 

war. Actually, Colonel House had already negotiated a secret agreement with 

England, committing the U.S. to the conflict. It seems the American public had 

little say in the matter. 

With the end of the war and the Versailles Treaty, which required severe war 

reparations from Germany, the way was paved for a leader in Germany such as 

Hitler. Wilson brought to the Paris Peace Conference his famous "fourteen 

points," with point fourteen being a proposal for a "general association of 

nations," which was to be the first step towards the goal of One World 

Government-the League of Nations.

Wilson's official biographer, Ray Stannard Baker, revealed that the League was 

not Wilson's idea. "...not a single idea--in the Covenant of the League was 

original with the President." Colonel House was the author of the Covenant, and 

Wilson had merely rewritten it to conform to his own phraseology. 

The League of Nations was established, but it, and the plan for world 

government eventually failed because the U.S. Senate would not ratify the 

Versailles Treaty. 

Pat Robertson, in "The New World Order," states that Colonel House, along 

with other internationalists, realized that America would not join any scheme 

for world government without a change in public opinion. 

After a series of meetings, it was decided that an "Institute of International 

Affairs", with two branches, in the United States and England, would be 

formed. 

The British branch became known as the Royal Institute of International 

Affairs, with leadership provided by members of the Round Table. Begun in the 

late 1800's by Cecil Rhodes, the Round Table aimed to federate the English 

speaking peoples of the world, and bring it under their rule. 

The Council on Foreign Relations was incorporated as the American branch in 

New York on July 29, 1921. Founding members included Colonel House, and 

"...such potentates of international banking as J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, 

Paul Warberg, Otto Kahn, and Jacob Schiff...the same clique which had 

engineered the establishment of the Federal Reserve System," according to Gary 

Allen in the October 1972 issue of "AMERICAN OPINION." 

The founding president of the CFR was John W. Davis, J.P. Morgan's personal 

attorney, while the vice-president was Paul Cravath, also representing the 

Morgan interests. Professor Carroll Quigley characterized the CFR as "...a front 

group for J.P. Morgan and Company in association with the very small 

American Round Table Group." Over time Morgan influence was lost to the 

Rockefellers, who found that one world government fit their philosophy of 

business well. As John D. Rockefeller, Sr. had said: "Competition is a sin," and 

global monopoly fit their needs as they grew internationally. 

Antony Sutton, a research fellow for the Hoover Institution for War, 

Revolution, and Peace at Stanford University, wrote of this philosophy: "While 

monopoly control of industries was once the objective of J.P. Morgan and J.D.

Rockefeller, by the late nineteenth century the inner sanctums of Wall Street 

understood the most efficient way to gain an unchallenged monopoly was to 'go 

political' and make society go to work for the monopolists-- under the name of 

the public good and the public interest." 

Frederick C. Howe revealed the strategy of using government in a 1906 book, 

"Confessions of a Monopolist": "These are the rules of big business...Get a 

monopoly; let society work for you; and remember that the best of all business 

is politics..." 

As corporations went international, national monopolies could no longer protect 

their interests. What was needed was a one world system of government 

controlled from behind the scenes. This had been the plan since the time of 

Colonel House, and to implement it, it was necessary to weaken the U.S. 

politically and economically. 

During the 1920's, America enjoyed a decade of prosperity, fueled by the easy 

availability of credit. Between 1923 and 1929 the Federal Reserve expanded the 

money supply by sixty-two percent. When the stock market crashed, many 

small investors were ruined, but not "insiders." In March of 1929 Paul Warburg 

issued a tip the Crash was coming, and the largest investors got out of the 

market, according to Allen and Abraham in "None Dare Call it Conspiracy." 

With their fortunes intact, they were able to buy companies for a fraction of 

their worth. Shares that had sold for a dollar might now cost a nickel, and the 

buying power, and wealth, of the rich increased enormously. 

Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking Committee declared: "It was 

not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence...The international 

bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they might 

emerge as rulers of us all." 

Curtis Dall, son-in-law of FDR and a syndicate manager for Lehman Brothers, 

an investment firm, was on the N.Y. Stock Exchange floor the day of the crash. 

In "FDR: My Exploited Father-In-Law," he states: "...it was the calculated 

'shearing' of the public by the World-Money powers triggered by the planned 

sudden shortage of call money in the New York Market." 

The Crash paved the way for the man Wall Street had groomed for the 

presidency, FDR. Portrayed as a "man of the little people", the reality was that

Roosevelt's family had been involved in New York banking since the eighteenth 

century. 

Frederic Delano, FDR's uncle, served on the original Federal Reserve Board. 

FDR attended Groton and Harvard, and in the 1920's worked on Wall Street, 

sitting on the board of directors of eleven different corporations. 

Dall wrote of his father-in-law: "...Most of his thoughts, his political 

'ammunition,'...were carefully manufactured for him in advance by the CFR- 

One World Money group. Brilliantly... he exploded that prepared 'ammunition' 

in the middle of an unsuspecting target, the American people--and thus paid off 

and retained his internationalist political support." 

Taking America off the gold standard in 1934, FDR opened the way to 

unrestrained money supply expansion, decades of inflation--and credit revenues 

for banks. Raising gold prices from $20 an ounce to $35, FDR and Treasury 

Secretary Henry Morgenthau, Jr. (son of a founding CFR member), gave 

international bankers huge profits. 

FDR's most remembered program, the New Deal, could only be financed 

through heavy borrowing. In effect, those who had caused the Depression 

loaned America the money to recover from it. Then, through the National 

Recovery Administration, proposed by Bernard Baruch in 1930, they were put 

in charge of regulating the economy. FDR appointed Baruch disciple Hugh 

Johnson to run the NRA, assisted by CFR member Gerard Swope. With broad 

powers to regulate wages, prices, and working conditions, it was, as Herbert 

Hoover wrote in his memoirs: "...pure fascism;...merely a remaking of 

Mussolini's 'corporate state'..." The Supreme Court eventually ruled the NRA 

unconstitutional. 

During the FDR years, the Council on Foreign Relations captured the political 

life of the U.S. Besides Treasury Secretary Morgenthau, other CFR members 

included Secretary of State Edward Stettinus, War Secretary Henry Stimson, 

and Assistant Secretary of State Sumner Welles. 

Since 1934 almost every United States Secretary of State has been a CFR 

member; and ALL Secretaries of War or Defense, from Henry L. Stimson 

through Richard Cheney. 

The CIA has been under CFR control almost continuously since its creation, 

starting with Allen Dulles, founding member of the CFR and brother of

Secretary of State under President Eisenhower, John Foster Dulles. Allen Dulles 

had been at the Paris Peace Conference, joined the CFR in 1926, and later 

became its president. 

John Foster Dulles had been one of Woodrow Wilson's young proteges at the 

Paris Peace Conference. A founding member of the CFR...he was an in-law of 

the Rockefellers, Chairman of the Board of the Rockefeller Foundation, and 

Board Chairman of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 

In 1940 FDR defeated internationalist Wendell Willkie, who wrote a book 

entitled "One World," and later became a CFR member. Congressman Usher 

Burdick protested at the time on the floor of the House that Willkie was being 

financed by J.P. Morgan and the New York utility bankers. Polls showed few 

Republicans favored him, yet the media portrayed him as THE Republican 

candidate. 

Since that time nearly ALL presidential candidates have been CFR members. 

President Truman, who was not a member, was advised by a group of "wise 

men," all six of whom were CFR members, according to Gary Allen. In 1952 

and 1956, CFR Adlai Stevenson challenged CFR Eisenhower. 

In 1960, CFR Kennedy (who was probably killed because he had the courage 

NOT to go along with all their plans) CFR Nixon. In 1964 the GOP stunned the 

Establishment by nominating its candidate over Nelson Rockefeller. 

Rockefeller and the CFR wing proceeded to picture Barry Goldwater as a 

dangerous radical. In 1968 CFR Nixon ran against CFR Humphrey. The 1972 

"contest" featured CFR Nixon vs. CFR McGovern. 

CFR candidates for president include George McGovern, Walter Mondale, 

Edmund Muskie, John Anderson, and Lloyd Bentsen. In 1976 we had Jimmy 

Carter, who is a member of the Trilateral Commission, created by David 

Rockefeller and CFR member Zbigniew Brezinski with the goal of economic 

linkage between Japan, Europe, and the United States, and: "...managing the 

world economy...a smooth and peaceful evolution of the global system." We 

have also had (though his name strangely disappears from the membership list 

in 1979) CFR director (1977-79) George Bush, and last but not least, CFR 

member Bill Clinton. 

They have all promoted the "New World Order," controlled by the United 

Nations. The problem is that "...the present United Nations organization is

actually the creation of the CFR and is housed on land in Manhattan donated to 

it by the family of current CFR chairman David Rockefeller," as Pat Robertson 

describes it. 

The original concept for the UN was the outcome of the Informal Agenda 

Group, formed in 1943 by Secretary of State Cordell Hull. All except Hull were 

CFR members, and Isaiah Bowman, a founding member of the CFR, originated 

the idea. 

The American delegation to the San Francisco meeting that drafted the charter 

of the United Nations in 1949 included CFR members Nelson Rockefeller, John 

Foster Dulles, John McCloy, and CFR members who were communist agents-- 

Harry Dexter White, Owen Lattimore, and the Secretary-General of the 

conference, Alger Hiss. In all, the Council sent forty-seven of its members in 

the United States delegation, effectively controlling the outcome. 

Since that time the CFR and its friends in the mass media (largely controlled by 

CFR members such as Katherine Graham of the "Washington Post" and Henry 

Luce of" Time, Life"), foundations, and political groups have lobbied 

consistently to grant the United Nations more authority and power. Bush and the 

Gulf War were but one of the latest calls for a "New World Order." 

Admiral Chester Ward, a member of the CFR for over a decade, became one of 

its harshest critics, revealing its inner workings in a 1975 book, "Kissinger ON 

THE COUCH." In it he states "The most powerful cliques in these elitist groups 

have one objective in common: they want to bring about the surrender of the 

sovereignty and national independence of the United States." 

Most members are one-world-government ideologists whose long- term goals 

were officially summed up in September 1961 State Department Document 

7277, adopted by the Nixon Administration: "...elimination of all armed forces 

and armaments except those needed to maintain internal order within states and 

to furnish the United Nations with peace forces...by the time it (UN global 

government) would be so strong no nation could challenge it." 

Within the CFR there exists a "much smaller group but more powerful...made 

up of Wall Street international bankers and their key agents. Primarily, they 

want the world banking monopoly from whatever power ends up in control of 

the global government ...This CFR faction is headed by the Rockefeller 

brothers," according to Ward.

What must be remembered is that this is not some lunatic- fringe group...these 

are members of one of the most powerful private organizations in the world: the 

people who determine and control American economic, social, political, and 

military policy. Members' influence and control extends to "leaders in academia, 

public service, business, and the media," according to the CFR 1993 "Annual 

Report." 

Their founding they describe as: "American Participants in the Paris Peace 

Conference decided that it was time for more private Americans to become 

familiar with the increasing responsibilities and obligations of the United 

States...there was a need for an organization able to provide for the continuous 

study of U.S. foreign police for the BENEFIT OF ITS MEMBERS (emphasis 

mine) and a wider audience of interested Americans." 

They sponsor hundreds of programs, where members "exchange views with 

American and foreign officials and policy experts... discuss foreign policy 

issues...consider international issues of concern to the business community" 

(Corporate business), and "...affiliated groups of community leaders throughout 

the United states...meet with decision makers." 

The CFR states that it is "host to many views, advocate of none," and it "has no 

affiliation with the U.S. government." No, no affiliation at all, if you don't 

count: "A Council member was elected president of the United States...Dozens 

of other Council colleagues were called to serve in cabinet and sub-cabinet 

positions," as they describe it in "Foreign Afairs," along with many members of 

Congress, the Supreme Court, the Joint Chiefs, the Federal Reserve, and many 

other Federal bureaucrats. 

They are not AFFILIATED with government, they ARE the government, in 

effect. 

One re-occurring view was stated in the 50th anniversary issue of "Foreign 

Affairs," the official publication of the CFR. In an article by Kingman Brewster, 

Jr. entitled "Reflections on Our National Purpose." Our purpose should be, 

according to him, to do away with our nationality, to "take some risks in order 

to invite others to pool their sovereignty with ours..." 

These "risks" include disarming to the point where we would be helpless against 

the "peace-keeping" forces of a global UN government. We should happily 

surrender our sovereignty to the world government in the interests of the "world 

community."

Today we have the spectacle of Spc. 4 Michael New, a U.S. soldier in Germany 

who refuses to wear the uniform of the UN, facing an "administrative 

discharge." He states rightly that he swore an oath to defend the U.S. 

Constitution, not the United Nations. Many other Americans have taken that 

same oath, such as myself, and believe it is our sworn duty still to defend the 

Constitution, since an oath sworn before God must be fulfilled. (Why else do we 

swear to tell the truth in our courts, or when taking public office) Is it a crime 

these days to actually BELIEVE in God and the oath that was taken 

Meanwhile, others who attempt to destroy the Constitution and our sovereignty 

are given honors and position...At least they are not hypocrites...only supremely 

arrogant. 

"In short, the 'house of world order' will have to be built from the bottom up 

rather than from the top down...An end run around national sovereignty, eroding 

it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old fashioned assault..." 

in the opinion of Richard N. Gardner, former deputy assistant Secretary of State 

in "Foreign Affairs," April 1974. 

James Warburg, son of CFR founder Paul Warburg, and a member of FDR's 

"brain trust," testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on 

February 17, 1950, "We shall have world government whether or not you like 

it--by conquest or consent." 

Is this an AMERICAN speaking, or a dangerous lunatic Who is this "We" who 

threatens to CONQUER us 

They are a group that actually has the power to do it, and is doing it every day, 

bit by bit. 

CFR Members in the mass media, education, and entertainment push their 

propaganda of "humanism" and world brotherhood. We should all live in peace 

under a world government, and forget about such selfish things as nationalities 

and patriotism. We can solve our own problems. We don't need God [God does 

not exist -Ed.], or morals, or values: it's all relative, anyway, right...Because if 

we actually had some moral character and values, we might be able to discern 

that these people are actually EVIL. 

The Bible says that the LOVE of money is the root of all evil (1 Tim. 6:10). 

These people are evil because they love money and power, and greed drives

them to do anything to achieve their goals. They have lost all morality and 

conscience, and believe such concepts, as well as our Constitution, "outdated". 

THAT is insanity--to have more wealth than can be spent, and still it is never 

enough. They have to control governments, start wars, conspire to rule the 

world; least [lest -Ed.] the "common people" wake up to how they have gained 

their wealth, take it away from them, and demand that they pay the price for 

their crimes. 

That is why they constantly pit us one against the other, with "Diversity," 

Affirmative Action, and other programs,...black against white, men against 

women, rural against urban, ranchers against environmentalists, and on and 

on...least [lest -Ed.] we look in their direction. 

We The People are held to a much higher standard. If we threaten the President 

or a public official, we are charged with a crime...yet the One-World-Gang can 

threaten the Constitution and the liberties of We The People, the sovereign 

rulers of this nation, and nothing is said or done. 

Perhaps they do not fear what Man can do to them... they believe they have 

arranged everything, and their power and wealth will prevail in this world. 

However, those among them who have sworn an oath before God to uphold and 

defend the Constitution: the President, members of Congress, and the military; 

may find one day that they do indeed have something to fear. 

Colonel House, the fallen angel, still has relatives controlling the CFR. Karen 

Elliot House is Chairman of the Membership Committee, and a member of the 

Nominating Committee, along with Jeane Kirkpatrick. David Rockefeller is 

now "Honorary Chairman of the Board", after serving as Chairman 1970-1985; 

and "Director Emeritus," after serving as a Director 1949-1985. Peter G. 

Peterson is Chairman, Admiral B. R. Inman is Vice Chairman, while Thomas 

Foley and Jeane Kirkpatrick are Directors serving on the Executive Committee. 

These "private citizens" have access to government officials and policy makers 

as often as they wish, yet the results of their meetings can only be given to other 

government officials, corporate officers, or law partners. Participants are 

forbidden to transmit an attributed statement to any public medium, such as 

newspapers or TV, where there is "risk that it will promptly be widely circulated 

or published," as the "Annual Report" puts it.

Should not OUR public officials be forbidden to meet in secret with private 

groups Public officials should only be allowed to discuss public business and 

policy in a public forum. The Public...remember US 

There is much more to say about this group and their plans for America. Gary 

Allen, in "The Rockefeller File," states that they are behind the many regional 

government plans, which would abolish city, county, and state lines, leaving us 

at the mercy of federal bureaucrats; and behind the push for "land use" controls. 

They want "federal control of everything. Since they intend to control the 

federal government..." 

There are also the many allegations of involvement in gun running, drug 

smuggling, prostitution and sex slaves; and the many mysterious assassinations 

and "suicides" of witnesses and others who get too close to the truth...but that is 

another story. 

REFERENCES 

• Bo Adelmann, 1986. "The Federal Reserve System." The New American, October 

17. 

• Gary Allen, 1976. "The Rockefeller File". Seal Beach, CA: '76 Press. 

• Gary Allen with Larry Abraham, 1972. "None Dare Call it Conspiracy." 

• Rossmoor, CA: Concord Press. 

• "Congressional Record," December 22, 1913, Vol. 51. 

• Phoebe and Kent Courtney, 1962. "America's Unelected Rulers, The Council on 

Foreign Relations." New Orleans: Conservative Society of America. 

• Curtis B. Dall, 1970. "FDR My Exploited Father-In-Law." Washington D.C.: 

Action Associates. 

• A. Ralph Epperson, 1985. "The Unseen Hand." Tucson, AZ: Publius Press. 

• "F.D.R.: His Personal Letters," 1950. New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce. 

• William P. Hoar, 1984. "Architects of Conspiracy." Belmont MA: Western 

Islands. 

• Herbert Hoover, 1952. "The Memoirs of Herbert Hoover, The Great Depression 

1929-1941." New York: Macmillan. 

• Frederick C. Howe, 1906. "Confessions of a Monopolist." Chicago: Public 

Publishing Co.

• Robert C. Johansen, 1980. "Models of World Order," in "Dilemmas of War and 

Peace." 

• Peter Kershaw, 1994. "Economic Solutions." 

• Devvy Kidd, 1995. "Why A Bankrupt America" Colorado: Project Liberty. 

• Ferdinand Lundberg, 1938. "America's 60 Families." New York: Vanguard. 

• Louis T. McFadden, 1934. "The Federal Reserve Corporation, remarks in 

Congress." Boston: Forum Publication Co. 

• James Perloff, 1988. "The Shadows of Power." Appleton, WI: Western Islands. 

• Carroll Quigley, 1966. "Tragedy and Hope." New York: Macmillan. 

• Pat Robertson, 1991. "The New World Order." Dallas: Word Publishing. 

• Charles Seymour, ed., 1926. "The Intimate Paper of Colonel House." Boston: 

Houghton Mifflin. 

• Colin Simpson, 1972. "The Lusitania." Boston: Little, Brown. 

• Arthur D. Howde Smith, 1940. "Mr House ob5 Texas." New York: Funk and 

Wagnalls. 

• Antony C. Sutton, 1975. "Wall Street and FDR." New Rochelle, New York: 

Arlington House. 

• George Sylvester Viereck, 1932. "The Strangest Friendship in History." New 

York: Liveright. 

This document may be freely distributed or quoted in any medium, provided 

credit is given to the author and The Courier. 

Rockefeller Associates 

By Richard Sanders, Editor, Press for Conversion!

The Rockefellers were heavy financial backers of the American Liberty 

League. 

John Davison Rockefeller (1839-1937), 

the world’s first billionaire, was 

America’s most generous philanthropist, 

fascist financier and Nazi collaborator. 

Although Rockefeller’s wealth was 

based largely on a near global control of 

oil refining, he also had large interests in 

other monoplies. As Anthony Sutton 

notes, Rockefeller 

“controlled the copper trust, the smelters 

trust and the gigantic tobacco trust, in 

addition to having influence in some 

Morgan properties such as the U.S. Steel 

Corporation as well as in hundreds of smaller industrial trusts, public service 

operations, railroads and banking institutions. National City Bank was the 

largest of the banks influenced by Standard Oil-Rockefeller, but financial 

control extended to the U.S. Trust Co. and Hanover National Bank [and] major 

life insurance companies – Equitable Life and Mutual of New York” (Wall 

Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, 1981). 

His incredible rags-to-riches success story owes 

much to what he learned from his father’s 

attitudes towards business and respect for the 

public good. Descended from hardworking 

German immigrants, his father William Avery 

Rockefeller was a travelling, snake oil salesman. 

“Big Bill” excelled as a quack doctor, or pitch 

man, conning the sick and desperate into buying 

expensive remedies that were either useless or 

downright dangerous. “He would be gone for 

months and come back with a great roll of 

money…. He would go to small towns and put 

up handbills advertising himself as ‘The 

Celebrated Dr. Levingston.’ He advertised to cure anything, but made a 

specialty of cancer and kidney troubles” (MacDonald, “Double Life,” New 

York World, February 2, 1908). But these were not “Doc’s” only crimes. He 

was indicted for rape, but was not arrested or tried. He fled the area with family 

and escaped neighbours who accused him of horse thieving, burglary, arson and 

counterfeiting. He had two wives, simultaneously, and was a bigamist for 34

years. He met his second wife in Norwich, Ontario, where he sold lumber in 

1853, calling himself William Levingston. 

William’s example provided ample life lessons to his sons about the business 

values of duplicity, deceit, and a blatant disregard for public health. John 

dropped out of high school in 1855 to take a business course. He worked as a 

bookkeeper and then teamed up with a friend to start a grain commission 

business. In 1863, the Civil War propelled him into the oil business. That year, 

he – like J.P. Morgan and other rising stars – paid $300 to avoid conscription. It 

was a small price for them, but unattainable for the thousands who would die. 

At first, he sold whiskey at inflated rates to Federal soldiers. Then, he invested 

his profits in oil refineries. The South had been supplying turpentine to the 

North for camphene-fueled lights. When the war cut off the North’s access to 

this fuel, kerosene from Pennsylvania oil quickly took over as the lamp fuel of 

choice and stimulated his oil business. 

In 1865, Rockefeller bought out his partners in the kerosene business for 

$72,500. In 1870, he and a few others, organized The Standard Oil Company, 

with capital of $1 million. He built his company by buying out competitors, 

price cutting and controlling secondary businesses related to pipelines, trains, 

oil terminals and barrel making. By 1880, his monopoly controlled the refining 

of 95% of America’s oil. In 1885, 70% of Standard Oil’s sales were overseas, 

largely to northern Europe and Russia. All of its properties were merged into the 

Standard Oil Trust with an initial capitalization of $70 million, and by 1900 

Rockefeller controlled about two-thirds of the entire world’s oil supply. He was 

also a director of the U.S. Steel Corp when it formed in 1901. 

In the 1880s, an oil boom was brewing in Tsarist Russia, around the Caspian 

Sea town of Baku. Robert Nobel, the son of Alfred Nobel (originator of 

Sweden’s peace prize and the inventor of dynamite), was soon competing with 

the Parisian Rothschilds for control of Central Asia oil treasure. Their exports 

threatened Rockefeller’s near global oil monopoly, especially when Marcus 

Samuel, future founder of Shell Oil, developed tankers to carry the Rothchild’s 

oil to Europe and Asia. In 1903, Rockefeller made a deal with the Tsarist 

government to lease and then buy the Baku oil fields. Besides selling vast 

quantities of American oil to pre-Soviet Russia, Rockefeller also had millions 

invested there. Thereafter, seeing an inevitable revolution looming on the 

horizon, Rockefeller also invested in anti-Tzarist forces to protect this branch of 

his empire. The Soviets did expropriate the Caspian oil fields from the Nobels 

and Rothschilds. Rockefeller’s National City Bank also lost assets, thanks to the 

revolution. Its lawyer, Joseph Proskauer, fought a legal battle to get 

Rockefeller’s money back. In 1926, Walter Teagle, the president of Standard 

Oil of New Jersey, successfully negotiated oil concessions in the Soviet Union.

By that time though, Standard Oil’s near global monopoly had been broken up. 

In 1911, the U.S. Supreme Court decided it was violating anti-trust laws and 

dissolved it into about three dozen companies. Many of these are now 

household names like Chevron (Standard Oil California), Amoco (Standard Oil 

Indiana), Mobil (Standard Oil New Jersey) and Exxon, previously called Esso 

(Standard Oil New Jersey). 

When the U.S. was debating whether to join WWI, a group of so-called “War 

Hawks,” calling themselves the National Security League, knew that this war 

would be a major boon to profits. This League of bankers and industrialists, 

including Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan, Coleman du Pont and H.H. Rodgers of 

Standard Oil, promoted increases in arms production and universal military 

training. By 1917, they had helped build war hysteria to a fever pitch. But not 

all Americans were on their side. The Woman’s Peace Party, many suffragists 

and others, strongly opposed America’s entry into WWI. However, the League 

was successful and the War Hawks’ profits skyrocketed. 

Soon after WWI and the Russian revolution, many among America’s wealthy 

elite felt threatened by rising radicalism, particularly among unions. In April 

1919, letter bombs, destined for John D. Rockefeller, J.P. Morgan and others, 

were supposedly discovered in the U.S. postal system. The media quickly 

stirred up a massive Red Scare by blaming unions, communists, anarchists and 

foreign agitators. John Spivak says: “Trade unions were openly disbelieving and 

denounced with anger the so-called discoveries as a deliberate frame-up to 

provide excuses for more raids against organized labour” (A Man in His Time, 

1967). This incident and others were used as pretexts for the Palmer Raids, 

during which the government rounded up more than ten thousand activists 

across the country.

Throughout the 1920s and 1930s, while the persecution of leftists continued, 

corporate leaders on the extreme right, continued their criminal rampages in 

pursuit of profit. Although Rockefeller’s many links to Nazism are too 

numerous to list here, a few examples are worth noting. In the 1920s, Exxon 

entered into partnerships with Germany’s top chemical cartel members, BASF 

and I.G. Farben. The Bank for International Settlements, which helped fund the 

Nazis before and during WWII, was created in 1930 by the world’s central 

banks, including the Federal Reserve Bank of NY. Its creation was inspired by 

the Nazi government and its bankers. Its first president was Gates McGarrah, a 

Rockefeller banker formerly of Chase National Bank and the “Fed.” 

In 1932, Chevron struck oil in Bahrain and was soon operating in Saudi Arabia. 

In 1933, when Hitler seized power, Standard Oil New Jersey supplied Germany 

with the patents it required for tetraethyl lead aviation fuel. In 1936, the 

company Schroder, Rockefeller Investment Bankers, included board directors 

linked to the Gestapo and several European, Nazi-linked banks. It’s lawyers 

were John Foster Dulles and Allan Dulles, leading Wall Street fascists who 

drummed up American investments in Germany and elsewhere. The Dulles law 

firm represented I.G. Farben and Fritz Thyssen. Thyssen was Hitler’s biggest 

German financier. The Dulles brothers later became Secretary of State and CIA 

Director, respectively. 

In 1937, John D. Rockefeller died, but his legacy of using oil money to grease 

the wheels of fascism continued. That year, as the Spanish Civil War raged, 

Texas Co. (later called Texaco) fueled Franco’s fascists. (In 1936, Texas Co. 

and Standard Oil California formed California Texas Oil (later Caltex) to 

combine Texas Co’s marketing network in the Middle East with Standard’s 

operations there.) Texas Co. also continued shipping oil to Germany during 

WWII. In 1938, Brown Brothers, Harriman, the Wall Street investment firm 

(with senior partners Prescott Bush and George Herbert Walker) was involved 

in funding the supply of leaded gas for the Nazi Luftwaffe. Chevron and Texas 

Co. created Aramco in 1939, to pump Saudi oil for the Nazi war machine. In 

1940, Texaco provided an office, in their Chrysler Building, for a Nazi 

intelligence officer, Dr. Gerhardt Westrick. Executives of Standard Oil’s 

German subsidiary were “Prominent figures of Himmler’s Circle of Friends of 

the Gestapo – its chief financiers – and close friends and colleagues of the 

Baron von Schroder” a leading Gesatpo officer and financier (Charles Higham, 

Trading with the Enemy). Just before WWII, the Rockefeller’s Chase Bank 

collaborated with the Nazi’s Schroder Bank to raise $25 million for Germany’s 

war economy. They also supplied the German government with names and 

background information on 10,000 fascist sympathizers in America. Throughout 

WWII, Rockefeller’s Chase Bank stayed open in Nazi-occupied Paris, providing 

services for Germany’s embassy and its businesses.

In 1943, Roosevelt’s government took control of Rockefeller’s Aramco. It also 

seized assets of the Union Banking Corp., which Harriman, Bush and Walker 

had built up by collaborating with Nazi companies that used slave labour. This 

money was later returned and it launched the Bushes in oil and politics. 

In 1953, after an elected upstart named Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh nationalized 

Iran’s oil business, a UK/U.S.-backed coup returned the Shah to power. CIA 

Director Allan Dulles and his brother, Secretary of State John Foster Dulles, 

were instrumental in this coup. Previously, Iran’s oil had been controlled by the 

Anglo-Persian Oil Co. (i.e., British Petroleum, BP) but after the U.S. role in this 

coup, U.S. companies got a 40% share and the top beneficiary was Standard Oil 

of New Jersey. 

The next year, the Dulles boys were at it again orchestrating a coup in 

Guatemala. This one ushered in decades of fascist military governments that 

killed hundreds of thousands of innocents. But, it brought great profits for 

Rockefeller’s United Fruit Co., in which the Dulles were invested. Allen had 

also been on its Board of Trustees. 

John D. Rockefeller would be happy to see the re-merging of his great 

monopoly. In 1988, Standard Oil merged with British Petroleum. Since then, 

other mergers have reunited many of his original oil companies. Exxon and 

Mobil reunited in 1999, to become the world’s top oil business. They made 

profits of $17.7 billion the next year. BP, merging with Amoco and Standard 

Oil Ohio, was number two that year and made profits of $12 billion. 

J.D. Rockefeller’s philanthropy has been much lauded. Even as a student, he 

reportedly gave donations to his Baptist church and to foreign Sunday schools. 

By 1900, he offered to buy a whole church for Baptist preacher Thomas Dixon, 

a former, southern politician who was then flogging his white supremacist 

gospel in New York. But from the pulpit, Dixon’s fiery tirades against 

“creeping negroidism” didn’t reach enough people, so he took up writing 

respectable, romantic novels about the KKK. He churned out two dozen books. 

The Clansman, his race-baiting best seller, extolled the Klan’s role in redeeming 

the South. In 1915, it was made into a movie, called The Birth of a Nation. 

Endorsed by President Wilson, the film helped revive this dreaded terrorist 

organization. 

Rockefeller’s great generosity was aimed largely at medical education, perhaps 

because of his father’s career and its peculiar contributions to medicine. 

J.D.Rockefeller, being a high school dropout, was not well-suited to his new 

role as godfather of the country’s centres for higher learning. His philanthropy 

was permeated with extremely racist views. In 1901, the Rockefeller Institute

for Medical Research was created. In 1902, the General Education Board (GEB) 

began four decades of tremendously controversial influence over American 

schools and universities. 

That same year, J.D. Rockefeller and 

Averell Harriman, a business partner of 

Prescott Bush and George Herbert 

Walker in Brown Brothers Harriman, 

gave $11 million to create the Cold 

Spring Harbor Laboratory. Built on 

Manhattan property owned by the Dulles 

brothers, it spawned America’s groundbreaking 

“eugenics” research and the 

world’s first “racial hygiene” laws. By 

1907, Rockefeller funding was heavily 

influencing America’s medical 

institutions. The Rockefeller Institute 

created the first genetics lab in 1909. The 

following year, the Eugenics Research 

Association and the Eugenics Records 

Office were founded near Cold Spring 

Harbor, New York, on land donated by 

the widow of Averell Harriman. In 1911, John Foster Dulles summed up 

eugenics, saying that by eliminating “the weakest members of the population” a 

purer race could be created. 

In 1928, Germany’s Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Eugenics, Anthropology and 

Human Heredity was created. Run by Ernst Rudin, Hitler’s foremost “racial 

hygienist,” the institute’s main financing came from Rockefeller. Ironically, by 

1936 an early psychiatrist at that institute, the half Jewish Dr. Franz Kallmann, 

had fled Nazism to America. According to Anton Chaitkin, Kallman’s 

experiments on 1,000 schizophrenics, published by the Freemasons, was used in 

1939 to justify the Nazi’s mass murder of “mental patients and various 

‘defective’ people.” Meanwhile, other Nazi doctors conducted incredibly cruel 

and vicious experiments on live, captive human subjects. Their body parts 

“were delivered to [Josef] Mengele, [Otmar] Verschuer and the other 

Rockefeller-linked contingent at the Wilhelm Institute.” 

References: 

Edward Jay Epstein, Agency of Fear: Opiates and Political Power in America, 

1977 

http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/epstein/aof2.html

John D. Rockefeller Page 

http://voteview.uh.edu/entrejdr.htm 

Albert I. Berger, "William Avery Rockefeller of ND: The Father of the Man 

Who Founded Standard Oil and his Remarkable Double Life," 

http://www.nd-humanities.org/html/rockefeller.html 

Destination New Jersey: Sharing With Standard 

http://www.pslc.ws/macrog/exp/rubber/synth/share.htm 

Antony Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution, 1981 

http://www.democracyunbound.com/wallstbolshevik.html 

Stephen Kinzer, "A Perilous New Contest for the Next Oil Prize," New York 

Times, Sept. 21, 1997 

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/azeroil.htm 

Elijah Zarwan, "Pipeline Politics," World Press Review, Nov.-Dec. 2001 

http://www.worldpress.org/specials/pp/front.htm 

Richard N. Draheim, Jr., "Oil and 'Socialism,'" The Dallas Libertarian, Feb 19, 

1998. 

http://www.lpdallas.org/features/draheim/dr980219.htm 

Philip Mattera, "The Return of Windfall Profits: An Overview of the Oil 

Industry," Corporate Research E-Letter, Mar. 2001. 

http://www.corp-research.org/mar01.htm 

Texaco History 

http://www.texaco.com/texaco/abouttexaco/history.htm 

Yagmur Kochumov, "Issues of International Law and Politics in the Caspian in 

the Context of the Turkrnenistan-Azerbaijan Discussion and Fuel Transport," 

Caspian Crossroads, Winter 1999. 

ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/usazerb/422.htm 

Caspian Projects II 

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/ops/war/2000/02/islam/365.htm

Eva Sion, "From 1911 to 9/11: The Institutions of Conspiracy," The Tablet. 

http://www.tabletnewspaper.com/politics/66_tftgk.htm 

Marcelo Bucheli, The History of the United Fruit Company 

http://www.stanford.edu/~mbucheli/bitter.html 

Daniel Yergin, The Prize: The Epic Quest for Oil, Money and Power, 1992. 

http://www.businessweek.com/chapter/yergin.htm 

Dixon, Thomas Jr.: 1864-1946, Writer 

http://docsouth.dsi.internet2.edu/dixonclan/about.html 

Wyn Craig Wade, The Fiery Cross, 1987 

World War I War Hawks and the Passing of the Nineteenth Amendment 

http://www.geocities.com/cyberpza007/ww1/WorldWar1WarHawks.html 

Dr. Len Horowitz, "The American Red Double-cross" 

http://www.tetrahedron.org/articles/apocalypse/red_double_cross.html 

Source: Press for Conversion! magazine, Issue # 53, "Facing the Corporate 

Roots of American Fascism," March 2004. Published by the Coalition to 

Oppose the Arms Trade. 

Order a Copy: Order a hard copy of this 54-page issue of Press for 

Conversion! on the fascist plot to overthrow President F.D.Roosevelt and the 

corporate leaders who planned and financed this failed coup.

Rockefeller: Internet is “Number One National 

Hazard” 

Kurt Nimmo 

Infowars 

March 23, 2009 

According to the great-grandson of John D. Rockefeller, nephew of banker David 

Rockefeller, and former Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller the 

internet represents a serious threat to national security. Rockefeller is not alone in this 

assessment. His belief that the internet is the “number one national hazard” to national 

security is shared by the former Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell and 

Obama’s current director Admiral Dennis C. Blair. 

“It really almost makes you ask the question would it have been better if we had never 

invented the internet,” Rockefeller mused during the confirmation hearing of Gary Locke 

(see video), Obama’s choice for Commerce Secretary. He then cites a dubious figure of 

three million cyber “attacks” launched against the Department of Defense every day. 

“Everybody is attacked, anybody can do it. People say, well it’s China and Russia, but 

there could be some kid in Latvia doing the same thing.” 

http://www.youtube.com/watchv=Ct9xzXUQLuY 

Jay Rockefeller’s comments reveal an astounding degree of ignorance – or if not 

ignorance, outright propaganda. Since the September 11, 2001, attacks the government 

has cranked up the fear quotient in regard to cyber attacks and so-called cyber terrorism, 

a virtually non-existent threat except in the minds security experts and politicians. In the 

years since the attacks, not one real instance of real cyberterrorism has been recorded. 

“Cyberattacks on critical components of the national infrastructure are not uncommon, 

but they have not been conducted by terrorists and have not sought to inflict the kind of 

damage that would qualify as cyberterrorism,” writes Gabriel Weimann, author of Terror 

on the Internet. “Nuclear weapons and other sensitive military systems, as well as the 

computer systems of the CIA and FBI, are ‘air-gapped,’ making them inaccessible to 

outside hackers. Systems in the private sector tend to be less well protected, but they are 

far from defenseless, and nightmarish tales of their vulnerability tend to be largely 

apocryphal.” 

“Psychological, political, and economic forces have combined to promote the fear of 

cyberterrorism,” Weimann continues. “From a psychological perspective, two of the

greatest fears of modern time are combined in the term ‘cyberterrorism.’ The fear of 

random, violent victimization blends well with the distrust and outright fear of computer 

technology.” 

“The sky is not falling, and cyber-weapons seem to be of limited value in attacking 

national power or intimidating citizens,” notes James Lewis of the Center for Strategic 

and International Studies. Such a threat is overblown, Lewis explains. He notes that “a 

brief review suggests that while many computer networks remain very vulnerable to 

attack, few critical infrastructures are equally vulnerable.” In other words, Rockefeller’s 

example of a kid in Latvia with a laptop posing a serious “hazard” to national security is 

little more than sensationalistic propaganda. 

So-called cyber terrorists are far less of a threat than government. China and Australia 

have recently imposed draconian censorship on internet freedom. Brazil, Denmark, 

Canada, Finland, Ireland , Italy, Israel, the United Kingdom, the United States, and many 

other countries also impose nominal censorship on internet freedom. Urgent calls to 

restrict the medium in various ways through legislation and government action have 

increased over the last few years (for more detail, see Internet Censorship: A 

Comparative Study). 

However, the real threat to internet freedom is currently posed by IT and ISP 

corporations, not the government. 

As Alex Jones explained last June, large corporate ISPs are now in the process of 

imposing bandwidth caps and routing traffic over their networks and blocking certain 

targeted websites. For instance, in 2005 AOL Time-Warner was caught blocking access 

to all of Jones’ flagship websites across the entire United States. Other instances of 

outright censorship include the UK ISP Tiscali blocking subscribers from reaching 

material on the 7/7 London bombings and Google’s continued and habitual censorship of 

9/11 material and Alex Jones’ films on the ever-popular YouTube. There are many other 

instances as well. (See Censoring the Internet: A Collection of Essential Links on 

Infowars.) 

Jay Rockefeller’s warning about virtually non-existent and largely absurd cyberterrorism 

reveals increasing government nervousness and apprehension about the medium as a 

whole, especially as the internet grows by leaps and bounds as an alternative news and 

activism medium. On numerous occasions over the last few years alternative websites 

have posted articles exposing government crime, articles the corporate media has largely 

ignored. During the Bush years, the internet served as a vital resource for information on 

everything from torture and the destruction of civil liberties to the invasions and

occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan, information the corporate media was often unable 

or unwilling to carry. 

For instance, earlier this month Infowars broke a story concerning the Missouri 

Information Analysis Center and its effort to profile Libertarians and Ron Paul supporters 

as terrorists. The story was subsequently picked up by the corporate media (although 

Alex Jones and Infowars did not receive attribution). 

As more corporate media outlets fail — as evinced by several high profile newspapers 

going out of business recently — and more people flock to the internet to get their news 

and information, the government will increasingly employ fear tactics designed to portray 

the medium as a refuge for terrorists, pedophiles, and other miscreants. 

It appears the Obama administration is attempting to micromanage this effort. Last week 

CNet “obtained a summary of a proposal from Senators Jay Rockefeller (D-W.V.) and 

Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) that would create an Office of the National Cybersecurity 

Advisor, part of the Executive Office of the President. That office would receive the 

power to disconnect, if it believes they’re at risk of a cyberattack, ‘critical’ computer 

networks from the Internet.” As well, the effort would put the White House National 

Cybersecurity Advisor in charge of coordinating cyber efforts within the intelligence 

community and within civilian agencies.

The Rockefeller File 

by Gary Allen 

Table of Contents 

1 - The Multi-Billion Dollar 

Myth 

2 - The Saintly Sinner 

3 - The Family That Preys 

Together 

4 - Profit x Philanthropy = 

Power 

5 - Yes, Virginia, There Is An 

Establishment 

6 - The Rockefeller Mediacracy 

7 - Surrender By Consent 

8 - Surrender By Conquest 

9 - Building The Big Red 

Machine 

10 - The People Planners 

11 - The Great Energy Swindle 

12 - The Eternal Power Behind 

The Throne

13 - Was Nixon Watergated 

Epilogue 

Print History: 

January 1976 250,000 printed 

February 1976 250,000 printed 

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number : 75-39136 

International Standard Book Number : 0-89245-001-0 

Congress of the United States 

House of Representatives 

Washington D.C. 20515 

Introduction 

Dear Reader:

The super rich in America enjoy power and prerogatives un-imaginable to most 

of us. Who can conceive of owning a private empire that includes 100 homes, 

2,500 servants, untold thousands of luxuries, and untold millions of dollars 

America has a royal family of finance that has known such riches for 

generations. It is, of course, the Rockefellers. 

But if the Rockefellers were content with their wealth, if their riches had 

satisfied their desires, this book would not have been written. And I would not 

be urging you to read it. Money alone is not enough to quench the thirst and 

lusts of the super-rich. Instead, many of them use their vast wealth, and the 

influence such riches give them, to achieve even more power. Power of a 

magnitude never dreamed of by the tyrants and despots of earlier ages. Power 

on a world wide scale. Power over people, not just products. 

The Rockefeller File is not fiction. It is a compact, powerful and frightening 

presentation of what may be the most important story of our lifetime, the drive 

of the Rockefellers and their allies to create a one-world government, 

combining super-capitalism and Communism under the same tent, all under 

their control. 

For more than one hundred years, since the days when John D. Rockefeller Sr. 

used every devious strategy he could devise to create a gigantic oil monopoly, 

enough books have been written about the Rockefellers to fill a library. I have 

read many of them. And to my knowledge, not one has dared reveal the most 

vital part of the Rockefeller story: that the Rockefellers and their allies have, for 

at least fifty years, been carefully following a plan to use their economic power 

to gain political control of first America, and then the rest of the world. 

Do I mean conspiracy Yes, I do. 

I am convinced there is such a plot, international in scope, generations old in 

planning, and incredibly evil in intent. You will find the truth-often surprising, 

sometimes unpleasant, always vital-in the pages that follow. Gary Allen has 

done a masterful job of combining the hundreds of scattered facts and hidden 

clues of the Rockefeller puzzle until one unmistakable pattern emerges. 

The picture that is revealed when The Rockefeller File is finally opened may 

shock you. In this book, you will learn why the Rockefellers follow the policies 

they do, what their goals are, where they intend to take America ... and why it is 

essential they be stopped.

I urge you to read The Rockefeller File and to encourage your friends to do the 

same. 

November 1975 

LAWRENCE P. Mc DONALD 

Member of Congress 

Dedication: to : Floyd Paxton - Freedom never had a truer champion - I never 

had a better friend. 

http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/gary_allen_rocker/ 

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

THIS FILE LEECHED FROM 'THE ANSWERS BBS' 

TEL: (03) 3808458 

WE SPECIALISE IN SUPPRESSED INFORMATION 

Excerpted from the book Murder by Injection by 

Eustace Mullins, chapter 10: 

by Eustace Mullins 

Many American conservatives believe as a matter of faith that the Rockefellers and the 

Council on Foreign Relations exercise absolute control over the government and the 

people of United States . This thesis can be accepted as a working formula if one remains 

conscious of the larger issues . Two writers for whom the present writer has great 

respect, Dr. Emanuel Josephson and Morris Bealle, insisted on focusing on the 

Rockefellers and excluding all other aspects of the World Order . This severely limited 

the effect of their otherwise ground breaking work on the Medical Monopoly.

This writer advanced a contrary view in ``The World Order,'' fixing upon the Rothschild 

monetary power, which reached a point of world control by 1885, and its London policy 

group, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, as the policy makers for what has 

essentially been since 1900, re-established colonial government in the United States. The 

colonial, or occupation, government, functions primarily through the Council on Foreign 

Relations, but only as the subsidiary of RIIA and through the Rockefeller Foundation 

which controls government functions, the educational establishments, the media, the 

religions and the state legislatures. 

It is true that the American colonials have ``free elections,'' in which they have the 

absolute right to vote for one of two opposing candidates, both of whom have been 

handpicked and financed by the Rockefeller syndicate. This touching evidence of 

``democracy'' serves to convince most Americana that we are indeed a free people. We 

even have a cracked Liberty Bell in Philadelphia to prove it. American youth have been 

free since 1900 to be marched off to die in Hegelian wars in which both combatants 

received their instructions from the World Order. We are free to invest in a stock market 

in which the daily quantity, price and value of the monetary unit is manipulated and 

controlled by a Federal Reserve System which is answerable only to the Bank of 

England. It has maintained its vaunted `ìndependence'' from our government's control, 

but this is the only independence it has ever had. 

The realization that we do indeed live under the dictates of the ``Rockefeller Syndicate'' 

can well be the starting point of the long road back of a genuine struggle for American 

independence. In exposing ``the Rockefellers'' as agents of a foreign power, which is not 

merely a foreign power, but a genuine world government, we must realize that this is not 

merely a group dedicated to making money, but a group which is committed to 

maintaining the power of a colonial form of government over the American people. Thus 

the ancient calumny of John D. Rockefeller as a man obsessed by greed (a category in 

which he has plenty of company) obscures the act that from the day the Rothschilds 

began to finance his march towards a total oil monopoly in the United States from their 

coffers at the National City Bank of Cleveland, Rockefeller was never an independent 

power, nor does any department of the Rockefeller Syndicate operate as an independent 

power. We know that the Cosa Nostra, or Mafia, with which the Syndicate is closely 

allied, has somewhat autonomous power in the regions which have been assigned to that 

particular ``family'' by the national directors, but this always implies that that family 

remains under total control and answerable for everything which occurs in its territory. 

Similarly, the Rockefeller Syndicate operates under clearly defined spheres of influence. 

The ``charitable'' organizations, the business companies, and the policy groups, always 

meld into a working operation, nor can any department of the Syndicate strike out on its 

own or formulate an independent policy, no matter what may be its justification. 

The Rockefeller Syndicate operates under the control of the world financial structure, 

which means that on any given day, all of its assets could be rendered close to worthless 

by adroit financial manipulation. This is the final control, which ensures that no one can 

quit the organization. Not only would he be stripped of all assets, but he would be under 

contract for immediate assassination. Our Department of Justice is well aware that the

only ``terrorists'' operating in the United States are the agents of the World Order, but 

they prudently avoid any mention of this fact. 

The world financial structure, far from being an unknown or hidden organization, is 

actually well known and well defined. It consists of the major Swiss Banks; the 

survivors of the old Venetian-Genoese banking axis; the Big Five of the world grain 

trade; the British combine, centered in the Bank of England and its chartered merchant 

banks, functioning trough the Rothschilds and the Oppenheimers and having absolute 

control over their Canadian colony through the Royal Bank of Canada and the Bank of 

Montreal, their Canadian lieutenants being the Bronfmans, Belzbergs, and other financial 

operators; and the colonial banking structure in the United States, controlled by the Bank 

of England through the Federal Reserve System; the Boston Brahmin families who made 

their fortunes in the opium trade, including the Delanos and others and the Rockefeller 

Syndicate, consisting of the Kissinger network headquartered in the Rockefeller Bank, 

Chase Manhattan Bank, American Express, the present form of the old Rothschild 

representatives in the United States, which includes Kuhn, Loeb Company and Lehman 

Brothers. 

It is notable that the Rockefeller Syndicate is far down on the list of the world's financial 

structure. Why then is it of such importance Although it is not the crucial factor in 

financial decision in the Western Hemisphere, it is the actual working control mechanism 

of the American colony. The Rockefeller family themselves, like the Morgans, Schiffs 

and Warburgs, have faded into insignificance, but the mechanism created in their name 

roars along at full power, still maintaining all of he functions for which it was organized. 

Since he set up the Trilateral Commission, David Rockefeller has functioned as a sort of 

international courier for the World Order, principally concerned with delivering working 

instructions to the Communist bloc, either directly, in New York or by traveling to the 

area. Laurance Rockefeller is active in the operation of the Medical Monopoly, but his 

principal interests are in operating various vacation spas in tropical areas. They are the 

two survivors of the ``Fortunate Five,'' the five sons of John D. Rockefeller, Jr. and Abby 

Aldrich. John D. Rockefeller, Jr. died in an institution in Tucson, Arizona and was 

hastily cremated. John D. Rockefeller III died in a mysterious accident on a New York 

Parkway near his home. Nelson Rockefeller, named after his grandfather, died in the 

arms of a TV journalist; it was later revealed that he had also been in the arms of another 

TV journalist at the same time; the death was hushed up for many hours. It is generally 

believed hat he ran afoul of his Colombian drug connection, the disagreement hardly 

being trivial ; it involved several billion dollars in drug profits which had not been 

properly apportioned. Winthrop Rockefeller died an alcoholic in the arms of his black 

boy friend. He had been interviewed on television by Harry Reasoner to explain his 

hasty move from New York to Arkansas. Winthrop leered that his black boy friend, an 

Army sergeant who apparently taught him the mysteries of drill, refused to live in New 

York. To celebrate this alliance, Winthrop Rockefeller gave magnificently to Negro 

causes, including the Urban League building on East 48th Street in New York. A plaque 

on the second floor notes that it was his gift; it might well have stated ``From Hadrian to 

his Antinous''.

We do not wish to imply that the Rockefellers no longer have influence, but that the 

major policy dictates of the Rockefeller Syndicate are handed down by other capos, of 

whom they continue to be a visible force. Through the person of David Rockefeller, the 

family is sometimes called ``the first family of the Soviet Union.'' Only he and Dr. 

Armand Hammer, the moving force behind USTEC, have permanent permission to land 

their private planes at the Moscow Airport. Others would suffer the fate of KAL 007. 

Both the Rockefeller family fortune and the considerable portion set aside in the 

foundations of the Rockefeller Syndicate are effectively insulated against any type of 

government control . Fortune magazine noted August 4, 1986, that John D. Rockefeller, 

Jr. had created trusts in 1934 which now amounted to some $2.3 billion; another $200 

million had been set aside for the Abby Rockefeller branch. The five sons had trusts 

which in 1986 amount to $2.1 billion. These trusts had originally amounted to only $50 

million each, showing the increase in their assets as well as inflation during the ensuing 

half century . Fortune estimated the 1986 total Rockefeller wealth as $3.5 billion, of 

which $900 million was in securities and real estate. They owned 45% of the Time Life 

Building; Nelson Rockefeller's International Basic Economy Corporation had been sold 

to a British company in 1980. For years, the Rockefeller family had deliberately kept the 

rents low in its major holding, the Rockefeller Center, a $1.6 billion investment yielding 

an annual return of 1%. This was a convenient maneuver, for tax purposes. Rockefeller 

Center recently went public issuing stock which was sold to public buyers. The 

Rockefellers are rumored to be liquidating their investments in the New York area, and 

reinvesting in the West, particularly in the area around Phoenix, Arizona. It is possible 

that they know something we don't. 

However much of the Rockefeller wealth may be attributed to old John D.'s rapacity and 

ruthlessness, its origins are indubitably based in his initial financing from the National 

City Bank of Cleveland, which was identified in Congressional reports as one of the three 

Rothschild banks in the United States and by his later acceptance of the guidance of 

Jacob Schiff of Kuhn, Loeb & Company, who had been born in the Rothschild house in 

Frankfort and was now the principal Rothschild representative (but unknown as such to 

the public) in the United States. 

With the seed money from the National City Bank of Cleveland, old John D. Rockefeller 

soon laid claim to the title of ``the most ruthless American''. It is more than likely that it 

was this quality which persuaded the Rothschilds to back him . Rockefeller realized 

early in the game that the oil refinery business, which could offer great profits in a short 

time, also was at the mercy of uncontrolled competition. His solution was a simple one - 

crush all competition. The famous Rockefeller dedication to total monopoly was simply 

a business decision. Rockefeller embarked on a campaign of coercing all competing oil 

refineries out of business. He attacked on a number of fronts, which is also a lesson to all 

would be entrepreneurs. First, he would send a minion, not known to be working for 

Rockefeller, with an offer to buy the competing refinery for a low price, but offering 

cash. If the offer was refused, the competitor would then come under attack from a 

competing refinery which greatly undercut his price. He might also suffer a sudden strike 

at his refinery, which would force him to shut down. Control of labor through unions has 

always been a basic Rockefeller technique. Like the Soviet Union, they seldom have

labor trouble. If these techniques failed, Rockefeller would then be saddened by a 

reluctant decision to use violence; beating the rival workers as they went to and from 

their jobs, or burning or blowing up the competing refinery. 

These techniques convinced the Rothschilds that they had found their man. They sent 

their personal representative, Jacob Schiff, to Cleveland to help Rockefeller plan further 

expansion. At this time, the Rothschilds controlled 95% of all railroad mileage in the 

United States, through the J.P. Morgan Company and Kuhn Loeb & Company according 

to official Department of Commerce figures for the year 1895. J.P. Morgan mentions in 

his Who's Who listing that he controlled 50,000 miles of U.S. railways. Schiff worked 

out an elaborate rebate deal for Rockefeller, through a dummy corporation, South 

Improvement Company. These rebates ensured that no other oil company could survive 

in competition with the Rockefeller firm. The scheme was later exposed, but by that time 

Rockefeller had achieved a virtual monopoly of the oil business in the United States. The 

daughter of one of his victims, Ida Tarbell, whose father was ruined by Rockefeller's 

criminal operations, wrote the first major expose of the Standard Oil Trust. She was 

promptly denounced as a ``muckraker'' by the poseur, Theodore Roosevelt, who claimed 

to be a ``trust buster''. In fact, he ensured the dominance of the Standard Oil Trust and 

other giant trusts. 

During the next half century, John D. Rockefeller was routinely caricatured by socialist 

propagandists as the epitome of the ruthless capitalist. At the same time, he was the 

principal financier of the world Communist movement, through a firm called American 

International Company. Despite the fact that the House of Rothschild had already 

achieved world control, the sound and fury was directed exclusively against its two 

principal, representatives, John D. Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan. One of the few 

revelations of the actual state of affairs appeared in Truth magazine, December 16, 1912, 

which pointed out that ``Mr. Schiff is head of the great private banking house of Kuhn, 

Loeb & Company, which represents the Rothschild interests on this side of the Atlantic. 

He is described as a financial strategist and has been for years the financial minister of 

the great impersonal power known as Standard Oil.'' Note that this editor did not even 

mention the name of Rockefeller. 

Because of these concealed factors, it was a relatively simple matter for the American 

public to accept the ``fact'' that the Rockefellers were the preeminent power in this 

country. This myth was actually clothed in the apparel of power, the Rockefeller Oil 

Trust becoming the ``military-industrial complex'' which assumed political control of the 

nation; the Rockefeller Medical Monopoly attained control of the health care of the 

nation, and the Rockefeller Foundation, a web of affiliated tax exempt creations, 

effectively controlled the religious and educational life of the nation. The myth 

succeeded in its goal of camouflaging the hidden rulers, the Rothschilds. 

After the present writer had been exposing this charade for some twenty-five years, a new 

myth began to be noised about in American conservative circles, effectively propagated 

by active double agents. This myth found a host of eager believers, because it heralded a 

growing crack in the monolithic power which had been oppressing all the peoples of the 

world. This new ``revelation'' was that a struggle to the death for world power had 

developed between the Rockefellers and the Rothschilds. According to this startling

development, one faction or the other, depending on which agent you were listening to, 

had gained control of the Soviet Union and would use its power as the basis for achieving 

the overthrow of the other faction. The sudden death of several members of the 

Rockefeller family was cited as ``proof'' that such a struggle was taking place, although 

no Rothschild is known to have succumbed during this ``war''. This ignored the general 

understanding that Nelson Rockefeller had been `èliminated'' as the result of losing 

deposit slips for several billion dollars of drugs from the Colombian cartel, or that the 

other Rockefeller deaths showed no trace of a ``Rothschild connection''. 

Having maintained extensive files on this situation for several decades, the present writer 

could not believe anyone could be so misinformed as to think that ``the Rockefellers'' 

were now trying to seize power from the Rothschilds, at a time when the influence of 

members of the Rockefeller family was already in great decline, their family finances 

being handled by J. Richardson Dilworth, their legal affairs being handled by John J. 

McCloy, and other faithful retainers; none of these retainers would have been willing to 

engage in a genuine power struggle, as they were faceless managers who lived only for 

their weekly paycheck. They had no ambitions of their own. Nevertheless, many 

hopeful Americans grasped the will-o-the-wisp notion that the Rockefellers were now 

``good Americans'' who were willing to risk all to overthrow the Rothschilds. Amazingly 

enough, this pernicious story persisted for almost a decade before being relegated to the 

curiosities of history. 

Like J.P. Morgan, who had begun his commercial career by selling the U.S. Army some 

defective guns, the famous fall carbine affair, John D. Rockefeller also was a war 

profiteer during the Civil War ; he sold unstamped Harkness liquor to Federal troops at a 

high profit, gaining the initial capital to embark on his drive for monopoly. His interest 

in the oil business was a natural one; his father, William Rockefeller had been `ìn oil'' for 

years . William Rockefeller had become an oil entrepreneur after salt wells at Tarentum, 

near Pittsburgh, were discovered in 1842 to be flowing with oil. The owners of the wells, 

Samuel L. Kier, began to bottle the oil and sell it for medicinal purposes. One of his 

earliest wholesalers was William Rockefeller. The ``medicine'' was originally labeled 

``Kier's Magic Oil''. Rockefeller printed his own labels, using ``Rock Oil'' or ``Seneca 

Oil,'' Seneca being the name of a well known Indian tribe. Rockefeller achieved his 

greatest notoriety and his greatest profits by advertising himself as ``William Rockefeller, 

the Celebrated Cancer Specialist''. It is understandable that his grandsons would become 

the controlling power behind the scenes of the world's most famous cancer treatment 

center and would direct government funds and charitable contributions to those areas 

which only benefit the Medical Monopoly. William Rockefeller spared no claim in his 

flamboyant career. He guaranteed `Àll Cases of Cancer Cured Unless They Are Too Far 

Gone.'' Such were the healing powers that he attributed to his magic cancer cure that he 

vas able to retail it for $25 a bottle, a sum then equivalent to two months' wages. The 

``cure'' consisted of a few well known diuretics, which had been diluted by water. This 

carnival medicine show barker could hardly have envisioned that his descendants would 

control the greatest and the most profitable Medical Monopoly in recorded history .=20 

As an itinerant ``carnie,'' a traveling carnival peddler, William Rockefeller had chosen a 

career which interfered with developing a stable family life. His son John rarely saw

him, a circumstance which has inspired some psychological analysts a conjecture that the 

absence of a father figure or parental love may have contributed to John D. Rockefeller's 

subsequent development as a money mad tyrant who plotted to maim, poison and kill 

millions of his fellow American during almost century of his monopolistic operations and 

whose influence, reaching up from the grave, remains the most dire and malignant 

presence in American life. This may have been a contributing factor - however, it is also 

possible that he was totally evil. It is hardly arguable that he is probably the most Satanic 

figure in American history. 

It has long been a truism that you can find a horse thief or two in any prominent 

American family. In the Rockefeller family it was more than a truism. William seems to 

have faithfully followed the precepts of the Will of Canaan throughout his career, ``love 

robbery, love lechery.'' He fled from a number of indictments for horse stealing, finally 

disappearing altogether as William Rockefeller and re-emerging as Dr. William 

Levingston of Philadelphia, a name which he retained for the rest of his life. An 

investigative reporter at Joseph Pulitzer's New York World received a tip that was 

followed up. The World then disclosed that William Avery Rockefeller had died May 

11, 1906 in Freeport, Illinois, where he was interred in an unmarked grave as Dr. William 

Levingston. 

William Rockefeller's vocation as a medicine man greatly facilitated his preferred 

profession of horse thief. As one who planned to be in the next county by morning, it 

was a simple matter to tie a handsome stallion to the back of his wagon and head for the 

open road. It also played a large part in his vocation as a woman-chaser; he was 

described as being ``woman-mad''. He not only concluded several bigamous marriages, 

but he seems to have had uncontrolled passions. On June 28, 1849, he was indicted for 

raping a hired girl in Cayuga, New York; he later was found to be residing in Oswego, 

New York and was forced once again to decamp for parts unknown. He had no difficulty 

in financing his woman-chasing interests from the sale of his miraculous cancer cure and 

from another product, his ``Wonder Working Liniment,'' which he offered at only two 

dollars a bottle. It consisted of crude petroleum from which the lighter oils had been 

boiled away, leaving a heavy solution of paraffin, lube oil and tar, which comprised the 

``liniment.'' William Rockefeller's original miracle oil survived until quite recently as a 

concoction called Nujol, consisting principally of petroleum and peddled as a laxative. It 

was well known that Nujol was merely an advertising sobriquet meaning ``new oil,'' as 

opposed, apparently, to `òld oil''. Sold as an antidote to constipation, it robbed the body 

of fat-soluble vitamins, it being a well-established medical fact that mineral oil coated the 

intestine and prevented the absorption of many needed vitamins and other nutritional 

needs. Its makers added carotene as a sop to the health-conscious, but it was hardly 

worth the bother. Nujol was manufactured by a subsidiary of Standard Oil of New 

Jersey, called Stanco, whose only other product, manufactured on the same premises, was 

the famous insecticide, Flit. 

Nujol was hawked from the Senate Office Building in Washington for years during a 

more liberal interpretation of ``conflict of interest.'' In this case, it was hardly a conflict of 

interest, because the august peddler, Senator Royal S. Copeland, never had any interests 

other than serving the Rockefellers. He was a physician whom Rockefeller had

appointed as head of the New York State Department of Health and later financed his 

campaign for the Senate. Copeland's frank display of commercialism amazed even the 

most blasé Washington reporters. He devoted his Senate career to a daily program 

advertising Nujol. A microphone was set up in his Senate office each morning, the first 

order of business being the Nujol program, for which he was paid $75,000 a year, an 

enormous salary in the 1930s and more than the salary of the President of the United 

States. Senator Copeland's exploits earned him a number of nicknames on Capitol Hill. 

He was often called the Senator from the American Medical Association, because of his 

enthusiastic backing for any program launched by the AMA and Morris Fishbein. More 

realistically, he was usually referred to as ``the Senator from Standard Oil''. He could be 

counted on to promote any legislation devised for the greater profit of the Rockefeller 

monopoly. During congressional debate on the Food and Drug Act in 1938, he came 

under criticism from Congresswoman Leonor Sullivan, who charged that Senator 

Copeland, a physician who handled the bill on the Senate floor, frankly acknowledged 

during the debate that soap was exempted from the law, because the soap manufacturers, 

who were the nation's largest advertisers, would otherwise join with other big industries 

to fight the bill. Congresswoman Sullivan complained the ``Soap was officially declared 

in the law not to be a cosmetic . .. The hair dye manufacturers were given license to 

market known dangerous products, just so long as they placed a special warning on the 

label - but what woman in a beauty parlor ever sees the label on the bulk container in 

which hair dye is shipped '' 

Just as the elder Rockefeller had spent his life in the pursuit of his personal obsession, 

omen, so his son John was equally obsessed, being money-mad instead of women-mad, 

totally committed to the pursuit of ever-increasing wealth and power. However, the 

principal accomplishments of the Rockefeller drive for power, the rebate scheme for 

monopoly, the chartering of the foundations to gain power over American citizens, the 

creation of the central bank, the Federal Reserve System, the backing of the World 

Communist revolution and the creation of the Medical Monopoly, all came from the 

Rothschilds or from their European employees. We cannot find in the records of John D. 

Rockefeller that he originated any one of these programs. The concept of the tax exempt 

charitable foundation originated with the Rothschild minion, George Peabody, in 1865. 

The Peabody Educational Foundation later became the Rockefeller Foundation. It is 

unlikely that even the diabolical mind of John D. Rockefeller could have conceived of 

this devious twist. A social historian has described the major development of the late 

nineteenth century, when charitable foundations and world Communism became 

important movements, as one of the more interesting facets of history, perhaps equivalent 

to the discovery of the wheel. This new discovery was the concept developed by the rats, 

who after all have rather highly developed intelligences, that they could trap people by 

baiting traps with little bits of cheese. The history of mankind since then has been the 

rats catching humans in their traps. Socialism - indeed any government program - is 

simply the rat baiting the trap with a smidgen of cheese and catching himself a human. 

Congressman Wright Putman, chairman of the House Banking and Currency Committee, 

noted from the floor of Congress that the establishment of the Rockefeller Foundation 

effectively insulated Standard Oil from competition. The controlling stock had been 

removed from market manipulation or possible buy-outs by competitors. It also relieved

Standard Oil from most taxation, which then placed a tremendous added burden on 

individual American taxpayers. Although a Rockefeller relative by marriage, Senator 

Nelson Aldrich, Republican majority leader in the Senate, had pushed the General 

Education Board charter through Congress, the Rockefeller Foundation charter proved to 

be more difficult. Widespread criticism of Rockefeller's monopolistic practices was 

heard, and his effort to insulate his profits from taxation or takeover was seen for what it 

was. The charter was finally pushed through in 1913 (the significant Masonic numeral 

13 - 1913 was also the year the progressive income tax and of the enactment of the 

Federal Reserve Act). Senator Robert F. Wagner of New York, another senator from 

Standard Oil (there were quite a few), ramrodded the Congressional approval of the 

charter. The charter was then signed by John D. Rockefeller, John D. Rockefeller, Jr., 

Henry Pratt Judson, president of the Rockefeller established University of Chicago, 

Simon Flexner, director of the Rockefeller Institute, Starr Jameson, described in Who's 

Who as ``personal counsel to John D. Rockefeller in his benevolences,'' and Charles W. 

Eliot, president of Harvard University. 

The Rockefeller Oil Monopoly is now 125 years old, yet in 1911, the Supreme Court, 

bowing to public outrage, had ruled that it had to be broken up. The resulting companies 

proved to be no problem for the Rockefeller interests. The family retained a two per cent 

holding in each of the ``new'' companies, while the Rockefeller foundations took a three 

per cent stock holding in each company. This gave them a five per cent stock interest in 

each company ; a one per cent holding in a corporation is usually sufficient to maintain 

working control. 

The involvement of the Rockefellers in promoting the world Communist Revolution also 

developed from their business interests. There was never any commitment to the Marxist 

ideology; like anything else, it was there to be used. At the turn of the century Standard 

Oil was competing fiercely with Royal Dutch Shell for control of the lucrative European 

market. Congressional testimony revealed that Rockefeller had sent large sums to Lenin 

and Trotsky to instigate the Communist Revolution of 1905. His banker, Jacob Schiff, 

had previously financed the Japanese in their war against Russia and had sent a personal 

emissary, George Kennan to Russia to spend some twenty years in promoting 

revolutionary activity against the Czar. When the Czar abdicated, Trotsky was placed on 

a ship with three hundred Communist revolutionaries from the Lower East Side of New 

York. Rockefeller obtained a special passport for Trotsky from Woodrow Wilson and 

sent Lincoln Steffens with him to make sure he was returned safely to Russia. For 

traveling expenses, Rockefeller placed a purse containing $10,000 in Trotsky's pocket. 

On April 13, 1917, when the ship stopped in Halifax, Canadian Secret Service officers 

immediately arrested Trotsky and interned him in Nova Scotia. The case became an 

international cause celebre, as leading government officials from several nations 

frantically demanded Trotsky's release. The Secret Service had been tipped off that 

Trotsky was on his way to take Russia out of the war, freeing more German armies to 

attack Canadian troops on the Western Front. Prime Minister Lloyd George hurriedly 

cabled orders from London to the Canadian Secret Service to free Trotsky at once--they 

ignored him. Trotsky was finally freed by the intervention of one of Rockefeller's most 

faithful stooges, Canadian Minister Mackenzie King, who had long been a ``labor

specialist'' for the Rockefellers. King personally obtained Trotsky's release and sent him 

on his way as the emissary of the Rockefellers, commissioned to win the Bolshevik 

Revolution. Thus Dr. Armand Hammer, who loudly proclaims his influence in Russia as 

the friend of Lenin, has an insignificant claim compared to the role of the Rockefellers in 

backing world Communism. Although Communism, like other isms, had originated with 

Marx's association with the House of Rothschild, it enlisted the reverent support of John 

D. Rockefeller because he saw Communism for what it is, the ultimate monopoly, not 

only controlling the government, the monetary system and all property, but also a 

monopoly which, like the corporations it emulates, is self-perpetuating and eternal. It 

was the logical progression from his Standard Oil monopoly. 

An important step on the road to world monopoly was the most far-reaching corporation 

invented by the Rothschilds. This was the international drug and chemical cartel, I.G. 

Farben. Called `à state within a state,'' it was created in 1925 as Interessen Gemeinschaft 

Farbenindustrie Aktien gesellschaft, usually known as I.G. Farben, which simply meant 

``The Cartel''. It had originated in 1904, when the six major chemical companies in 

Germany began negotiations to form the ultimate cartel, merging Badische Anilin, Bayer, 

Agfa, Hoechst, Weiler-ter-Meer, and Greisheim-Electron. The guiding spirit, as well as 

the financing, came from the Rothschilds, who were represented by their German banker, 

Max Warburg, of M.M. Warburg Company, Hamburg. He later headed the German 

Secret Service during World War I and was personal financial adviser to the Kaiser. 

When the Kaiser was overthrown, after losing the war, Max Warburg was not exiled with 

him to Holland, instead he became the financial adviser to the new government. 

Monarchs may come and go, but the real power remains with the bankers. While 

representing Germany at the Paris Peace Conference, Max Warburg spent pleasant hours 

renewing family ties with his brother, Paul Warburg, who, after drafting the Federal 

Reserve Act at Jekyl Island, had headed the U.S. banking system during the war. He was 

in Paris as Woodwow Wilson's financial advisor. 

I.G. Farben soon had a net worth of six billion marks, controlling some five hundred 

firms. Its first president was Professor Carl Bosch. During the period of the Weimar 

Republic, I.G. officials, seeing the handwriting on the wall, began a close association 

with Adolf Hitler, supplying much needed funds and political influence. The success of 

the I.G. Farben cartel had aroused the interest of other industrialists. Henry Ford was 

favorably impressed and set up a German branch of Ford Motor Company. Forty per 

cent of the stock was purchased by I.G. Farben. I.G. Farben then established an 

American subsidiary, called American I.G., in cooperation with Standard Oil of New 

Jersey . Its directors included Walter Teagle, president of Standard Oil, Paul Warburg of 

Kuhn Loeb & Company and Edsel Ford, representing the Ford interests. John Foster 

Dulles, for the law firm, Sullivan and Cromwell, became the attorney for I.G., frequently 

traveling between New York and Berlin on cartel business. His law partner, Arthur 

Dean, is now director of the $40 million Teagle Foundation which was set up before 

Teagle's death. Like other fortunes it had become part of the network. Like John Foster 

Dulles, Arthur Dean has been a director of American Banknote for many years; this is the 

firm which supplies the paper for our dollar bills. Dean also has been an active behind 

the scenes government negotiator, serving as arms negotiator at disarmament 

conferences. Dean was also a director of Rockefeller's American Ag & Chem Company.

He was a director of American Solvay, American Metal and other firms. As attorney for 

the wealthy Hochschild family, who owned Climax Molybdenum and American Metal, 

Dean became director of their family foundation, the Hochschild Foundation. Dean is 

director emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations, the Asia Foundation, International 

House, Carnegie Foundation, and the Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. 

In 1930, Standard Oil announced that it had purchased an alcohol monopoly in Germany, 

a deal which had been set up by I.G. Farben. After Hitler came to power, John D. 

Rockefeller assigned his personal press agent, Ivy Lee, to Hitler to serve as a full-time 

adviser on the rearmament of Germany, a necessary step for setting up World War II. 

Standard Oil then built large refineries in Germany for the Nazis and continued to supply 

them with oil during World War II. In the 1930s Standard Oil was receiving in payment 

from Germany large shipments of musical instruments and ships which had been built in 

German yards. 

The dreaded Gestapo, the Nazi police force, was actually built from the worldwide 

intelligence network which I.G. Farben had maintained since its inception. Herman 

Schmitz, who had succeeded Carl Bosch as head of I.G., has been personal advisor to 

chancellor Brüning; when Hitler took over, Schmitz then became his most trusted secret 

counselor. So well concealed was the association that the press had orders never to 

photograph them together . Schmitz was named an honourary member of the Reichstag, 

while his assistant, Carl Krauch, became Göring's principal advisor in carrying out the 

Nazis' Four Year Plan. A business associate, Richard Krebs, later testified before the 

House Un-American Activities Committee, ``The I.G. Farbenindustrie, I know from 

personal experience, was already, in 1934, completely in the hands of the Gestapo.'' This 

was a misstatement; the I.G. Farben had merely allied itself with the Gestapo. 

In 1924 Krupp Industries was in serious financial difficulty; the firm was saved by a $10 

million cash loan from Hallgarten & Company and Goldman Sachs, two of Wall Street's 

best known firms. The planned re-armament of Germany was able to proceed only after 

Dillon Read floated $100 million of German bonds on Wall Street for that purpose. It 

was hardly surprising that at the conclusion of the Second World War, General William 

Draper was appointed Economic Czar of Germany, being named head of the Economic 

Division of the Allied Military Government. He was a partner of Dillon Read. 

In 1939 Frank Howard, a vice-president of Standard Oil visited Germany. He later 

testified, #147;We did our best to work out complete plans for a modus vivendi which 

would operate throughout the term of the war, whether we came in or not.'' At this time 

American I.G. had on its board of directors Charles Mitchell, president of the National 

City Bank, the Rockefeller bank, Carl Bosch, Paul Warburg, Herman Schmitz and 

Schmitz' nephew, Max Ilgner. 

Although his name is hardly known, Frank Howard was for many years a key figure in 

Standard Oil operations as director of its research and its international agreements. He 

also was chairman of the research committee at Sloan Kettering Institute during the 

1930s; his appointee at Sloan Kettering, Dusty Rhoads, headed the experimentation in the 

development of chemotherapy. During the Second World War Rhoads headed the 

Chemical Warfare Service in Washington at U.S. Army Headquarters. It was Frank

Howard who had persuaded both Alfred Sloan and Charles Kettering of General Motors 

in 1939 to give their fortunes to the Cancer Center, which then took on their names . A 

member of the wealthy Atherton family, Frank Howard (1891-1964) had married a 

second time, his second wife being a leading member of the British aristocracy, the 

Duchess of Leeds. The first Duke of Leeds was titled in 1694, Sir Thomas Osborne, who 

was one of the key conspirators in the overthrow of King James II and the seizure of the 

throne of England by William III in 1688. Osborne had made peace with Holland during 

the reign of King Charles II, and singlehandedly promoted the marriage of Mary, 

daughter of the Duke of York, to William of Orange in 1677. The Dictionary of National 

Biography notes that Osborne ``for five years managed the House of Commons by 

corruption and enriched himself.'' He was impeached by King Charles II for treasonous 

negotiations with King Louis XIV and imprisoned in the Tower of London from 1678 to 

1684. After his release, he again became active in the conspiracy to bring in William of 

Orange as King of England and secured the crucial province of York for him. William 

then created him Duke of Leeds. The placing of William on the throne of England made 

it possible for the conspirators to implement the crucial step in their plans, setting up the 

Bank of England in 1694. This enabled the Amsterdam bankers to gain control of the 

wealth of the British Empire. Osborne's biography also notes that he was later accused of 

Jacobite intrigues and was impeached for receiving a large bribe to procure the charter for 

the East India Company in 1695, but ``the proceedings were not concluded''. It was 

further noted that he ``left a large fortune''. 

The 11th Duke of Leeds was Minister to Washington from 1931 to 1935, Minister to the 

Holy See from 1936 to 1947, that is, throughout the Second World War. One branch of 

the family married into the Delano family, becoming relatives of Franklin Delano 

Roosevelt . A cousin, Viscount Chandos, was a prominent British official, serving in the 

War Cabinet under Churchill from 1942 to 1945, later becoming a director of the 

Rothschild firm, Alliance Assurance, and Imperial Chemical Industries. 

Frank Howard was the key official in maintaining relations between Standard Oil and 

I.G. Farben. He led in the development of synthetic rubber, which was crucial to 

Germany in the Second World War; he later wrote a book, ``Buna Rubber''. He also was 

the consultant to the drug firm, Rohm and Haas, representing the Rockefeller connection 

with that firm. In his later years, he resided in Paris, but continued to maintain his office 

at 30 Rockefeller Center, New York. 

Walter Teagle, the president of Standard Oil, owned 500,000 shares of American I.G., 

these shares later becoming the basis of the Teagle Foundation. Herman Metz, who was 

also a director of American I.G., was president of H.A. Metz Company, New York, a 

drug firm wholly owned by I.G. Farben of Germany. Francis Garvan, who had served as 

Alien Property Custodian during the First World War, knew many secrets of I.G. 

Farben's operations. He was prosecuted in 1929 to force him to remain silent. The action 

was brought by the Department of Justice through Attorney General Merton Lewis, the 

former counsel for Bosch Company. John Krim, former counsel for the German 

Embassy in the United States, testified that Senator John King had been on the payroll of 

the Hamburg American Line for three years at a salary of fifteen thousand dollars a year; 

he appointed Otto Kahn as treasurer of his election fund. Homer Cummings, who had

een Attorney General for six years, then became counsel for General Aniline and Film 

at a salary of $100,000 a year. During the Second World War, GAF was supposedly 

owned by a Swiss firm; it came under considerable suspicion as an `ènemy'' concern and 

was finally taken over by the United States government. John Foster Dulles had been 

director of GAF from 1927 to 1934; he was also a director of International Nickel, which 

was part of the network of I.G. Farben firms. Dulles was related to the Rockefeller 

family through the Avery connection. He was attorney for the organization of a new 

investment firm, set up by Avery Rockefeller, in 1936 which was called Schröder- 

Rockefeller Company. It combined operations of the Schröder Bank, Hitler's personal 

bank and the Rockefeller interests. Baron Kurt von Schröder was one of Hitler's closest 

confidantes, and a leading officer of the SS. He was head of the Keppler Associates, 

which funneled money to the SS for leading German Corporations. Keppler was the 

official in charge of Industrial Fats during Göring's Four Year Plan, which was launched 

in 1936. American I.G. changed its name to General Aniline and Film during the Second 

World War, but it was still wholly owned by I.G. Chemie of Switzerland, a subsidiary of 

I.G. Farben of Germany. It was headed by Gadow, brother-in-law of Herman Schmitz. 

I.G. Farben's international agreements directly affected the U.S. war effort, because they 

set limits on U.S. supplies of magnesium, synthetic rubber and, crucial medical supplies. 

The director of I.G. Farben's dyestuffs division, Baron George von Schnitzler, was 

related to the powerful von Rath family, the J.H. Stein Bankhaus which held Hitler's 

account and the von Mallinckrodt family, the founders of the drug firm in the United 

States. Like other I.G. officials, he had become an enthusiastic supporter of the Hitler 

regime. I.G. Farben gave four and a half million reichsmarks to the Nazi Party in 1933; 

by 1945, I.G. had given the Party 40 million reichsmarks, a sum which equaled all 

contributions by I.G. to all other recipients during that period. One scholar of the Nazi 

era, Anthony Sutton, has focussed heavily on German supporters of Hitler, while 

ignoring the crucial role played by the Bank of England and its Governor, Sir Montague 

Norman, in financing the Nazi regime. Sutton's position on this problem may have been 

influenced by the fact that he is British. In view of the outspoken statements from Adolf 

Hitler about Jewish influence in Germany, it would be difficult to explain the role of I.G. 

Farben in the Nazi era. Peter Hayes' definitive study of I.G. Farben shows that in 1933 it 

had ten Jews on its governing boards. We have previously pointed out that I.G., from its 

inception was a Rothschild concern, formulated by the House of Rothschild and 

implemented through its agents, Max Warburg in Germany and Standard Oil in=20 

Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands joined the SS during the early 1930s. He then joined 

the board of an I.G. subsidiary, Farben Bilder, from which he took the name of his 

postwar supersecret policy making group, the Bilderbergers. Farben executives played 

an important role in organizing the Circle of Friends for Heinrich Himmler, although it 

was initially known as Keppler's Circle of Friends, Keppler being the chairman of an I.G. 

subsidiary. His nephew, Fritz J. Kranefuss, was the personal assistant to Heinrich 

Himmler. Of the forty members of the Circle of Friends, which provided ample funds for 

Himmler, eight were executives of I.G. Farben or of its subsidiaries. 

Despite the incredible devastation of most German cities from World War II air 

bombings, the I.G. Farben building in Frankfort, one of the largest buildings there, 

miraculously survived intact. A large Rockefeller mansion in Frankfort also was left

untouched by the war, despite the saturation bombing. Frankfort was the birthplace of 

the Rothschild family. It was hardly coincidental that the postwar government of 

Germany, Allied Military Government, should set up its offices in the magnificent I.G. 

Farben building. This government was headed by General Lucius Clay, who later 

became a partner of Lehman Brothers bankers in New York. The Political Division was 

headed by Robert Murphy, who would preside at the Nüremberg Trials, where he was 

successful in glossing over the implication of I.G. Farben officials and Baron Kurt von 

Schröder. Schröder was held a short time in a detention camp and then set free to return 

to his banking business. The Economic Division was headed by Lewis Douglas, son of 

the founder of Memorial Cancer center in New York, president of Mutual Life and 

director of General Motors. Douglas was slated to become U.S. High Commissioner for 

Germany, but he agreed to step aside in favor of his brother-in-law, John J. McCloy. By 

an interesting circumstance, Douglas, McCloy and Chancellor Konrad Adenauer of 

Germany had all married sisters, the daughters of John Zinsser, a partner of J.P. Morgan 

Company. 

As the world's pre-eminent cartel, I.G. Farben and the drug companies which it controlled 

in the United States through the Rockefeller interests were responsible for many 

inexplicable developments in the production and distribution of drugs. From 1908 to 

1936 I.G. held back its discovery of sulfanilamide, which would become a potent weapon 

in the medical arsenal. In 1920, I.G. had signed working agreements with the important 

drug firms of Switzerland, Sandoz and Ciba-Geigy. In 1926, I.G. merged with Dynamit- 

Nobel, the German branch of the dynamite firm, while an English firm took over the 

English division. I.G. officials then began to negotiate with Standard Oil officials about 

the prospective manufacture of synthetic coal, which would present a serious threat to 

Standard Oil's monopoly. A compromise was reached with the establishment of 

American I.G., in which both firms would play an active role and share in the profits. 

Charles Higham's book, ``Trading with the Enemy,'' offers ample documentation of the 

Rockefeller activities during the Second World War. While Hitler's bombers were 

dropping tons of explosives on London, they were paying royalties on every gallon of 

gasoline they burned to Standard Oil, under existing patent agreements. After World 

War II, when Queen Elizabeth visited the United States, she stayed in only one private 

home during her visit, the Kentucky estate of William Irish, of Standard Oil. Nelson 

Rockefeller moved to Washington after our involvement in World War II, where 

Roosevelt named him Coordinator of Inter-American Affairs. Apparently his principal 

task was to coordinate the refueling of German ships in South America from Standard Oil 

tanks. He also used this office to obtain important South American concessions for his 

private firm, International Basic Economy Corporation, including a corner on the 

Colombian coffee market. He promptly upped the price, a move which enabled him to 

buy seven billion dollars worth of real estate in South America and also gave rise to the 

stereotype of the ``Yanqui imperialismo''. The attack on Vice President Nixon's 

automobile when he visited South America was explained by American officials as a 

direct result of the depredations of the Rockefellers, which caused widespread agitation 

against Americans in Latin America.

After World War II, twenty-four German executives were prosecuted by the victors, all 

of them connected with I.G. Farben, including eleven officers of I.G. Eight were 

acquitted, including Max Ilgner, nephew of Herman Schmitz. Schmitz received the most 

severe sentence, eight years. Ilgner actually received three years, but the time was 

credited against his time in jail waiting for trial, and he was immediately released. The 

Judge was C.G. Shake and the prosecuting attorney was Al Minskoff. 

The survival of I.G. Farben was headlined by the Wall Street Journal on May 3, 1988 - 

GERMANY BEATS WORLD IN CHEMICAL SALES. Reporter Thomas F. O'Boyle listed the 

world's top five chemical companies in 1987 as 1. BASF $25.8 billion dollars. 2. Bayer 

$23.6 billion dollars. 3. Hoechst $23.5 billion dollars. 4. ICI $20 billion dollars. 5. 

DuPont $17 billion dollars in chemical sales only. 

The first three companies are the firms resulting from the ``dismantling'' of I.G. Farben 

from 1945 to 1952 by the Allied Military Government, in a process suspiciously similar 

to the ``dismantling'' of the Standard Oil empire by court edict in 1911. The total sales 

computed in dollars of the three spin-offs of I.G. Farben, some $72 billion, dwarfs its 

nearest rivals, ICI and DuPont, who together amount to about half of the Farben empire's 

dollar sales in 1987. Hoechst bought Celanese corp. in 1987 for $2.72 billion. 

O'Boyle notes that ``The Big Three (Farben spin-offs) still behave like a cartel. Each 

dominates specific areas; head to head competition is limited. Critics suspect collusion. 

At the least, there's a cosiness that doesn't exist in the U.S. chemical industry." 

After the war, Americans were told they must support an `àltruistic'' plan to rebuild 

devastated Europe, to be called the Marshall Plan, after Chief of Staff George Marshall, 

who had been labeled on the floor of the Senate by Senator Joseph McCarthy as `à living 

lie''. The Marshall Plan proved to be merely another Rockefeller Plan to loot the 

American taxpayer. On December 13, 1948, Col. Robert McCormick, editor of the 

Chicago Tribune, personally denounced Esso's looting of the Marshall Plan in a signed 

editorial. The Marshall Plan had been rushed through Congress by a powerful and vocal 

group, headed by Winthrop Aldrich, president of the Chase Manhattan Bank and Nelson 

Rockefeller's brother-in-law, ably seconded by Nelson Rockefeller and William Clayton, 

the head of Anderson, Clayton Company. The Marshall Plan proved to be but one of a 

number of lucrative postwar swindles, which included the Bretton Woods Agreement, 

United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation and others. 

After World War II, the Rockefellers used their war profits to buy a large share of Union 

Miniere du Haut Katanga, an African copper lode owned by Belgian interest, including 

the Societe Generale, a Jesuit controlled bank. Soon after their investment, the 

Rockefellers launched a bold attempt to seize total control of the mines through 

sponsoring a local revolution, using as their agent the Grangesberg operation. This 

enterprise had originally been developed by Sir Ernest Cassel, financial advisor to King 

Edward VII - Cassel's daughter later married Lord Mountbatten, a member of the British 

royal family, who was also related to the Rothschilds. Grangesberg was now headed by 

Bo Hammarskjold, whose brother, Dag Hammarskjold was then Secretary General of the 

United Nations - Bo Hammarskjold became a casualty of the Rockefeller revolution 

when his plane was shot down during hostilities in the Congo. Various stories have since

circulated about who killed him and why he was killed. The Rockefeller intervention in 

the Congo was carried out by their able lieutenants, Dean Rusk and George Ball of the 

State Department and by Fowler Hamilton. 

In the United States, the Rockefeller interests continue to play the major political role. 

Old John D. Rockefeller's treasurer at Standard Oil, Charles Pratt, bequeathed his New 

York mansion to the Council on Foreign Relations as its world headquarters. His 

grandson, George Pratt Shultz, is now Secretary of State. The Rockefellers also wielded 

a crucial role through their financing of the Trotskyite Communist group in the United 

States, the League for Industrial Democracy, whose directors include such staunch `ànticommunists'' 

as Jeane Kirkpatrick and Sidney Hook. The Rockefellers were also active 

on the ``right-wing'' front through their sponsorship of the John Birch Society. To enable 

Robert Welch, a 32nd degree Mason, to devote all of his time to the John Birch Society, 

Nelson Rockefeller purchased his family firm, the Welch Candy Company, from him at a 

handsome price. Welch chose the principal officers of the John Birch Society from his 

acquaintances at the Council On Foreign Relations. For years afterwards, American 

patriots were puzzled by the consistent inability of the John Birch Society to move 

forward on any of its well-advertised `ànti-Communist'' goals. The fact that the society 

had been set up at the behest of the backers of the world Communist revolution may have 

played some role in this development. Other patriots wondered why most American 

conservative writers, including the present writer, were steadily blacklisted by the John 

Birch Society for some thirty years. Despite thousands of requests from would be book 

buyers, the John Birch Society refused to review or list any of my books. After several 

decades of futility, the Society was totally discredited by its own record. In a desperate 

effort to restore its image, William Buckley, the CIA propagandist, launched a ``fierce'' 

attack against the John Birch Society in the pages of his magazine, the National Review. 

This free publicity campaign also did little to revive the moribund organization. 

The Rockefeller monopoly influence has had its effect on some of New York's largest 

and wealthiest churches. Trinity Church on Wall Street, whose financial resources had 

been directed by none other than J.P. Morgan, owns some forty commercial properties in 

Manhattan and has a stock portfolio of $50 million, which, due to informed investment, 

actually yields a return of $25 million a year! Only $2.6 million of this income is spent 

for charitable work. The rector, why receives a salary of $100,000 a year, lives on the 

fashionable Upper East Side. Trinity's mausoleum sells its spaces at fees starting at 

$1250 and rising to $20,000 . St. Bartholomew, on Fifth Avenue, has an annual budget 

of $3.2 million a year of which only $100,000 is spent on charity. Its rector resides in a 

thirteen room apartment on Park Avenue. 

In medicine, the Rockefeller influence remains entrenched in its Medical Monopoly. We 

have mentioned its control of the cancer industry through the Sloan Kettering Cancer 

Center. We have listed the directors of the major drug firms, each with its director from 

Chase Manhattan Bank, the Standard Oil Company or other Rockefeller firms. The 

American College of Surgeons maintains a monopolistic control of hospitals through the 

powerful Hospital Survey Committee, with members Winthrop Aldrich and David 

McAlpine Pyle representing the Rockefeller control.

A medical fraternity known as the ``rich man's club,'' the New York Academy of 

Medicine, was offered grants for a new building by the Rockefeller Foundation and the 

Carnegie Foundation, its subsidiary group. This ``seed money'' was then used to finance 

a public campaign which brought in funds to erect a new building. For Director of the 

new facility, the Rockefellers chose Dr. Lindsly Williams, son-in-law of the managing 

partner of Kidder, Peabody, a firm strongly affiliated with the J.P. Morgan interests (the 

J.P. Morgan Company had originally been called the Peabody Company). Williams was 

married to Grace Kidder Ford. Although Dr. Williams was widely known to be an 

incompetent physician, his family connections were impeccable. He became a factor in 

Franklin D. Roosevelt's election campaign when he publicly certified that Roosevelt, a 

cripple in a wheelchair who suffered from a number of oppressive ailments, was both 

physically and mentally fit to be the President of United States. Dr. Williams' opinion, 

published in an article in the widely circulated Collier's Magazine, allayed public doubts 

about Roosevelt's condition. As a result, Williams was to be offered a newly created post 

in Roosevelt's cabinet, Secretary of Health. However, it was another thirty years before 

Health became a cabinet post, due to the politicking of Oscar Ewing. 

The Rockefellers had greatly extended their business interests in the impoverished 

Southern states by establishing the Rockefeller Sanitary Commission. It was headed by 

Dr. Wickliffe Rose, a longtime Rockefeller henchman whose name appears on the 

original charter of the Rockefeller Foundation. Despite its philanthropic goals, the 

Rockefeller Sanitary Commission required financial contributions from each of the 

eleven Southern states in which it operated, resulting in the creation of State Departments 

of Health in those states and opening up important new spheres of influence for their 

Drug Trust. In Tennessee, the Rockefeller representative was a Dr. Olin West, who 

moved on to Chicago to become the power behind the scenes at the American Medical 

Association for forty years, as secretary and general manager. 

The Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research finally dropped the ``Medical Research'' 

part of its title; its president, Dr. Detlev Bronk, resided in a $600,000 mansion furnished 

by this charitable operation. Rockefeller's general Education Board has spent more than 

$100 million to gain control of the nation's medical schools and turn our physicians to 

physicians of the allopathic school, dedicated to surgery and the heavy use of drugs. The 

Board, which had developed from the original Peabody Foundation, also spent some $66 

million for Negro education. 

One of the most far-reaching consequences of the General Education Board's political 

philosophy was achieved with a mere six million dollar grant to Columbia University in 

1917, to set up the ``progressive'' Lincoln School. From this school descended the 

national network of progressive educators and social scientists, whose pernicious 

influence closely paralleled the goals of the Communist Party, another favorite recipient 

of the Rockefeller millions . From its outset, the Lincoln School was described frankly as 

a revolutionary school for the primary and secondary schools of the entire United States. 

It immediately discarded all theories of education which were based on formal and wellestablished 

disciplines, that is, the McGuffey Reader type of education which worked by 

teaching such subjects as Latin and algebra, thus teaching children to think logically

about problems. Rockefeller biographer Jules Abel hails the Lincoln School as `à 

beacon light in progressive education ''.=20 

Rockefeller Institute financial fellowships produced many prominent workers in our 

atomic programs, such as J. Robert Oppenheimer, who was later removed from 

government laboratories as a suspected Soviet agent. Although most of his friends and 

associates were known Soviet agents, this was called ``guilt by association.'' The 

Rockefeller Foundation created a number of spin-off groups, which now plague the 

nation with a host of ills, one of them being the Social Science Research Council, which 

single-handedly spawned the nationwide ``poverty industry,'' a business which expends 

some $130 billion a year of taxpayer funds while grossing some $6 billion income for its 

practitioners. The money, which would amply feed and house all of the nation's ``poor,'' 

is dissipated through a vast administrative network which awards generous concessions 

to a host of parasitic ``consultants''. 

Despite years of research, the present writer has been able to merely scratch the surface 

of the Rockefeller influences listed here. For instance, the huge Burroughs Wellcome 

drug firm is wholly owned by the ``charitable'' Wellcome Trust. This trust is directed by 

Lord Oliver Franks, a key member of the London Connection which maintains the United 

States as a British Colony. Franks was Ambassador to the United States from 1948 to 

1952. He is now a director of the Rockefeller Foundation, as its principal representative 

in England. He also is a director of the Schröder Bank, which handled Hitler's personal 

bank account, director of the Rhodes Trust in charge of approving Rhodes scholarships, 

visiting professor at the University of Chicago and chairman of Lloyd's Bank, one of 

England's Big Five. 

Other Rockefeller Foundation spin-offs include the influential Washington think-tank, the 

Brookings Institution, the National Bureau of Economic Research, whose findings play a 

critical role in manipulating the stock market; the Public Administration Clearing House, 

which indoctrinates the nation's municipal employees ; the Council of State 

Governments, which controls the nation's state legislatures; and the Institute of Pacific 

Relations, the most notorious Communist front in the United States. The Rockefellers 

appeared as directors of this group, funneling money to it through their financial advisor, 

Lewis Lichtenstein Strauss, of Kuhn, Loeb Company. 

The Rockefellers have maintained their controlling interest in the Chase Manhattan Bank, 

owning five per cent of the stock. Through this one asset they control $42.5 billion worth 

of assets. Chase Manhattan interlocks closely with the Big Four insurance companies, of 

which three, Metropolitan, Equitable and New York Life had $113 billion in assets in 

1969. 

With the advent of the Reagan Administration in 1980, the Rockefeller interests sought to 

obscure their longtime support of world Communism by bringing to Washington a 

vocally `ànti-Communist'' administration. Reagan was soon wining and dining Soviet 

premiers as enthusiastically as had his predecessor Jimmy Carter. The Reagan campaign 

had been managed by two officials of Bechtel Corporation, its president, George Pratt 

Schultz, a Standard Oil heir, and his counsel, Casper Weinberger. Shultz was named 

Secretary of State, Weinberger, Secretary of Defense, Bechtel had been financed by the

Schröder-Rockefeller Company, the 1936 alliance between the Schröder Bank and the 

Rockefeller heirs. 

The Rockefeller influence also remains preeminent in the monetary field. Since 

November, 1910, when Senator Nelson Aldrich chaired the secret conference at Jekyl 

Island which gave us the Federal Reserve Act, the Rockefellers have kept us within the 

sphere of the London Connection. During the Carter Administration, David Rockefeller 

generously sent his personal assistant, Paul Volcker, to Washington to head the Federal 

Reserve Board . Reagan finally replaced him in 1987 with Alan Greenspan, a partner of 

J.P. Morgan Company. Their influence on our banking system has remained constant 

through many financial coups on their part, one of the most profitable being the 

confiscation of privately owned gold from American citizens by Roosevelt's edict. Our 

citizens had to turn over their gold to the privately owned Federal Reserve System. The 

Constitution permits confiscation for purposes of eminent domain, but prohibits 

confiscation for private gain. The gold's new owners then had the gold revalued from 

$20 an ounce to $35, giving them an enormous profit. 

In reviewing the all-pervasive influence of the Rockefellers and their foreign controllers, 

the Rothschilds, in every aspect of American life, the citizen must ask himself, "What can 

be done'' Right can prevail only when the citizen actively seeks justice . Justice can 

prevail only when each citizen realizes that it is his God-given duty to mete out justice. 

History has documented all of the crimes of the usurpers of our Constitution. We have 

learned the painful lesson that the Rockefeller monopolists exercise their evil power 

almost solely through federal and state agents. At this writing, former Congressman Ron 

Paul is running for the Presidency of the United States on an eminently sensible and 

practical campaign - abolish the Federal Reserve System - abolish the FBI - abolish the 

Internal Revenue Service - and abolish the CIA. It has been known for years that 90% of 

the Federal Bureau of Investigation, ostensibly set up to ``fight crime'' has been to harass 

and isolate political dissidents. 

The criminal syndicalists are now looting the American nation of one trillion dollars each 

year, of which about one-third, more than three hundred billion dollars per year, 

represents the profitable depredations of the Drug Trust and its medical subsidiaries . 

Before a sustained effort to combat these depredations can be mounted, Americans must 

make every effort to regain their health. As Ezra Pound demanded in one of his famous 

radio broadcasts, ``Health, dammit !'' America became the greatest and most productive 

nation in the world because we had the healthiest citizens in the world. When the 

Rockefeller Syndicate began its takeover of our medical profession in 1910, our citizens 

went into a sharp decline. Today, we suffer from a host of debilitating ailments, both 

mental and physical, nearly all of which can be traced directly to the operations of the 

chemical and drug monopoly and which pose the greatest threat to our continued 

existence as a nation. Unite now to restore our national health - the result will be the 

restoration of our national pride, the resumption of our role as the inventors and 

producers of the modern world, and the custodian of the world's hopes and dreams of 

liberty and freedom.

Gyeorgos C. Haton's Suggested Reading List 

Brzezinski, Zbigniew - "Between Two Ages: America's Role in The Technotronic Era" 

New York: The Viking Press, 1970 

Collier, Peter and David Horowitz. "The Rockefellers: An American Dynasty" New 

York: New American Library, 1976 

Domhoff, G. William. "The Powers That Be: Process of Ruling Class Domination in 

America" New York: Vintage Books, 1978 

Shoup, Laurence H. and Minter, William. "Imperial Brain Trust: The Council on Foreign 

Relations and United States Policy" New York: Monthly Review Press, 1977 

Sklar, Holly "Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World 

Management" Boston: South End Press, 1980 

Josephson, Matthew "The Robber Barons: The Great American Capitalists" Orlando, 

Florida: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1962 

Lundberg, Ferdinand "The Rockefeller Syndrome" New Jersey: Lyle Stuart Inc, 1975 

Patman, Wright "Chain Banking: Stockholder and Loan Links of 200 Largest Member 

Banks" Washington, D.C. U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963 

Josephson, Emmanuel M. "The Federal Reserve Conspiracy and The Rockefellers: Their 

Gold Corner" New York: Chedney Press, 1968 

Lundberg, Ferdinand "The Rich and The Super Rich" New Jersey: Lyle Stuart, 1968 

Roth, Cecil "The Magnificent Rothschilds" Robert Hale Co, 1939 

Rothschild de Guy "The Whims of Fortune", New York: Random House, 1985 

Morton, Frederic "The Rothschilds" Curtis Publishing Co., 1961 

Sutton, Antony "The War On Gold" 76 Press, California 1977 

Sutton, Antony "Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler" 76 Press, California 1976 

Sutton, Antony "Trilaterals over Washington" Scottsdale, Arizona : The August 

Corporation, 1979 

Kitson, Arthur "The Bankers Conspiracy" 1933

Goldman, Steinberg et al., "Dope Inc." New York: New Benjamin Franklin House 

Publishing Company, N.Y. 1978 

Bach, G.L. "Federal Reserve Policy Making" New York: Knapf 1950 

Larson, Martin A. "The Federal Reserve and Our Manipulated Dollar" Old Greenwich, 

Conn Devin Adair Co., 1975 

E.M. House "Phillip Dru, Administrator" New York: B.W. Huebsch 1912 

Smith, Howden D. Arthur "Men Who Run America" New York: Bobbs Merril 1935 

Hapgood, David "The Screwing of the Average Man" New York: Doubleday & Co., 

1974 

Josephson, Emanuel M. "The Truth About The Rockefellers: Public Enemy No. 1; 

Studies in Criminal Psychopathy" New York: Chedney Press, 1964 

Manning, Thomas G. "The Standard Oil Company: The Rise of a National Monopoly" 

New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1962 

Stern, Phillip M. "The Rape of The Taxpayer" New York: Random House 1973 

Tarbell, Ida "The History of the Standard Oil Company" (The masterwork on the original 

company). 2 vols. New York: MacMillan, 1905 

Shoup, Laurence "The Carter Presidency and Beyond: Power and Politics in the 1980s" 

Palo Alto, California: Ramparts Press, 1979 

Ball, George W., ed. "Global Companies: The Political Economy of World Business" 

Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice-Hall, 1975 

Who's Who in America 1890-1983 A.N. Marquis Co. 

The Great Soviet Encyclopaedia, MacMillan, London, 1973 

Warburg, Paul "The Federal Reserve System" New York: MacMillan, 1930 

Winkler K. John "Morgan the Magnificent" New York: Vanguard, 1930 

Rockester, Anna "Rulers of America, A Study of Finance Capital" New York: 

International Publishers, 1936 

Standard and Poor's Register of Directors 1928-1983 

Senate Committee Hearings on Federal Reserve Act, 1913

House Committee Hearings on Federal Reserve Act, 1913 

Federal Reserve Directors: A Study of Corporate and Banking Influence. Staff Report, 

Committee on Banking, Currency and Housing, House of Representatives, 94th 

Congress, 2nd Session, August 1976 

Directory of Directors, London 1896-1983 

Mullins, Eustace "The Secrets of The Federal Reserve" Bankers Research Institute, PO 

Box 1105, Staunton, Va. 1983 

Hatonn, C. Gyeorgos "Rape Of The Constitution; Death of Freedom" Vol II. Tehachapi, 

California: America West Publishers, 1990 

Zajac, John "The Delicate Balance" Lafayette, Louisiana: Prescott Press, Inc., 1989, 

1990/Huntington House - Distrib. 

Ashman, R. Charles "Kissinger: The Adventures of Super-Kraut" Secaucus, New Jersey: 

Lyle Stuart, 1972 

Crump, Spencer "Ride The Big Red Cars - The Pacific Electric Story" Glendale, 

California: Trans-Anglo Books, 1983 

Coleman, John "The Club of Rome, The Enemy of Mankind" Arcadia, Lousiana: 

Christian Defense League, 1983 

Coleman, John "Conspirators Hierarchy: The Committee of 300" Tehachapi, California: 

America West Publishers PO Box 6451 93582, 1992 ed. 

Your Own Mind is Your Most Important 

Freedom Resource

70-years-chart-illustrates-the-dominance-by-the-cfr-trilaterals-bilderbergers

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?