Project CA-35
The incredible story of a probable attempt to end World War Two early by
German industrialists. They could see they were about to loose the war and
their wealth.
Was Prince Bernhard waiting for the ill-fated industrialists with Princess
Juliana at the Chatham Bars Inn, Cape Cod? see also
Sub Sea Recovery's website.
The U-boat was sunk by a US Navy Blimp using depth charges - see scans of
the U-boat lying in sand off Cape Cod as well as original plans copied from
captured documents now in US archives.
The wreck of a giant and secret WWII U-boat has been found by the above off
Cape Cod, Mass. east coast USA. It slipped out of Germany on the same day as
the assassination attempt on Adolf Hitler.
What was it's mission and what happened between its first signal messages to
the map room at the White House and its sinking? Why, moreover, was the
Dutch Royal family, and possibly Bilderberg supremo Prince Bernhard,
holidaying on the coast that day? [TG]
VIII. RECENT RESEARCH
extract from CA-35 website
http://www.subsearecovery.com/ca35/
There have been some very interesting revelations in the Project's follow-up
of research data.
Due to the efforts of contributing researcher Mr. Eric
Brothers U.S. State Department Protocol documents are now available to
confirm one of this investigation's long-standing curiosities - the visit of
members of the Dutch Royal Family to Chatham, Cape Cod during the very same
time-frame in which the German Type XI-B U-Boat was known to have been
operational off Cape Cod.
These documents consist of a series of notifications between the
representatives of the Dutch Royal Family in exile and the Protocol Section
of the Department of State. On the surface they do indeed appear to be
routine in nature. It is only when viewed with the other known occurrences
off Cape Cod at this time that these Protocol records seem to indicate more
than just routine procedure.
For example: One of the most obvious details that stand out is the sudden
departure from Chatham of Princess Juliana and her royal attendants on the
morning of the 26th. of August, 1944, only hours after the known destruction
of the Type XI fourteen miles to the southeast.
This, combined with a
published news report in the local Cape Cod Times for that date, quote the
Princess as opening a short public statement upon her departure, stating:
"I
will not talk about anything political and cannot take questions".
She goes
on to say how the Royal Family enjoyed their stay at the Chatham Bars Inn,
etc.
Within five minutes the impromptu interview is over and the Royal Family
departs by car for Boston enroute to Canada. The fact that these State
Department Protocol documents were only declassified at the time Mr.
Brothers requested to view them in July of 1997 is possibly indicative -
fifty four years after the fact.
To add to this new information Trident had conducted background research
into the Dutch Royal Family due to its suspicions and has confirmed the
following:
-
The Royal Consort, Prince Bernhardt, Husband of Juliana since 1937, was
previous to their marriage an active card-carrying member of Hitler's
black-shirted SS.
-
Prince Consort Bernhardt was employed prior to, during, and after the war
by I.G.Farben's Industrial Espionage Unit "NW-7" which, needless to say,
placed him under great suspicions by both the British and American
intelligence communities. The mere fact of his employment as an "industrial
spy" for Farben places him squarely within the sphere of the German
Industrial community, links for which have already been established with the
Type XI-B U-Boat.
There are many more details regarding the Dutch Royal Family, Prince
Bernhardt, Princess Juliana and the German Industrialists which have not
been included in this specific brief due to space considerations.
However,
the basic facts as listed above give very strong indications regarding the
Dutch Royal visit to Cape Cod at this specific time in July and August of
1944. Suffice it to say that there is the very strong possibility that
Prince Consort Bernhardt, through his wife Princess Juliana, may very well
have been acting as a sort of liaison or facilitator in connections for
Armistice Negotiations between German Industrialists and certain members of
the American Department of State and Intelligence Community.
The final proof
for this is as yet not confirmed, but the stage is certainly set for such
endeavors. Perhaps the amplified documentation for such a situation is
contained within the hull of the Type XI off Cape Cod.
Back to Contents
The Prince and the Nazis
Extract from 'H. R. H. Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands
an authorized
biography' Harrap, 1962. by Alden Hatch
In order to finish his education quickly Bernhard had to make some
compromises with the monstrous political system that was fastening its grip
on Germany. The story that the Prince of the Netherlands once wore the black
uniform of Hitler’s SS is quite true.
It came about in this way.
Only eleven days after his father’s death, on June 30, 1934, Hitler’s first
purge, known as ‘The Night of the Long Knives,’ shocked Germany and the
world. On that pleasant summer evening Ernst Rohm, who had been Hitler’s
friend and ally from the beginning, and other leaders of the brown-shirted
SA (Storm Troopers), the private army which had brought Hitler to power and
who were now challenging his will, were taken in their beds and their
offices, in beer-halls and on railway trains or in the streets, and shot
without even a drumhead court-martial.
They were an evil and degenerate crew
who lived by violence and appropriately died by it, but the capricious
manner of their liquidation proved that justice in Germany had been replaced
by the will of a tyrant.
Nor were they the only victims. General Kurt von Schleicher, who had opposed
Hitler politically, was shot in the doorway of his home, and when his wife
protested too much she was murdered too. All sorts of private grudges were
satisfied in the slaughter which was said at the Nuremberg trials to have
taken over a thousand lives. It lasted for thirty-six hours.
From that moment no man or woman in the land was safe from the terror,
especially not those who wielded power, least of all Hitler himself. The SA
was disbanded and replaced by Heinrich Himmler’s black-uniformed SS (Schutzstaffel),
and the Gestapo (Secret State Police). They quickly set about tightening the
screws of the police state.
At the beginning of his serious studies Bernhard learned that a new sort of
test had been decreed for every one graduating from the universities - a
written and oral ‘political attitude” examination. With his ideals and high
temper he knew that was one examination he could not pass.
However, there was a way round it. Members of the various Nazi paramilitary
organizations were ipso facto considered “politically reliable.” Bernhard
had joined the League for Air Sports because he wanted to learn to fly. It
had been started by the Nazi Party as a sub-rosa method of training war
pilots, but it had virtually no political implications. Its leaders were the
old World War I airmen like Ernst Udet, who were not Nazis and cared only
about teaching young people to fly.
So Bernhard was all set until he went larking around the sky with a wild
young friend who flew their plane into a lake. They swam ashore, but the
plane had ceased to exist.
When they got back to the base their commander was furious.
“He was right,
of course,” says Bernhard, “and we were wrong. Even though I was not at the
controls, I knew I was out. So while the commandant was screaming at my
friend I said, “ I resign too. ”It was just a question of who could get the
words out first.”
His ignominious ejection from Air Sports left Bernhard in a very vulnerable
position.
He belonged to no organization and had no uniform or badge to
wear. He knew that the law examinations were made doubly difficult for
uncommitted people, and that even if he passed them the political attitude
test would eliminate him. So he looked around for a harmless cover. He found
it by the grace of the son of the man who owned Bernhard’s favorite Berlin
pub.
Young Walter Wunderlich was an idealistic Nazi: there were many such young
men who truly believed in the noble aspirations of the party as voiced, but
not practiced, by Hitler and his lieutenants. Wunderlich was head of the
Berlin unit of the Motor SS, which was made up of young men who had their
own cars. They put on their uniforms and met once a week for what almost
amounted to a sports-car rally.
Bernhard and five or six friends in the same
boat as he, including the Langenheim brothers from Morocco, went to
Wunderlich.
Bernhard knew that a man had to serve in the SS for a year and a half before
he was admitted to membership; until then he was on probation.
Speaking for
all of them, he said,
“Look, Walter, you know exactly how we think and what
we are. But we need some sort of protection. Will you take us into your
motor unit until we finish our studies? Then out we go.”
"Is that how you want it?” Walter asked.
“Yes,” said Bernhard. “You know just why we are doing this. Under no
circumstances does any of us want to become and SS man by quicker promotion
or whatsoever. We’ll come in our motorcars, and we’ll all drive together
till we graduate. Then out. That is the understanding.”
Though Walter was a dedicated Nazi, he was a loyal friend ready to stick his
neck out to help.
“I’ll take you,” he said.
They were issued overcoats, and went to the best tailor in Berlin to have
their uniforms specially made.
“I must say we looked smart in them,”
Bernhard says. “The extent of my services included the weekly rallies and
standing guard occasionally, because if you did that you could have a free
garage. We had a lot of fun and no trouble.”
At the end of their studies Bernhard’s whole group, with one exception, left
the SS and severed all connection with the party. This fellow appeared later
in Holland and took advantage of Bernhard’s trusting nature to commit an act
of treachery.
By the time Bernhard had graduated he was completely determined to get out
of Germany. Von Hindenburg was dead. The last vestige of constitutionalism
had disappeared as the office of President of the German Republic was
abolished and Hitler named himself Fuhrer. He was now more powerful than any
German Emperor had ever been, and more obsessed by lust of conquest than old
Frederick Barbarossa.
The Nazi movement had gathered such momentum that Bernhard could see no hope
of stopping it short of bloody catastrophe.
This is not to say that he
foresaw the future clearly in all its Wagnerian tragedy. He did not. But
neither did he believe for a moment that the Third Reich would last a
thousand years, or fifty for that matter. Even if it did he could not
conceive of living in a land of government by terror.
And despite the
military tradition of his family and his own creed of loyalty, he had not
the conscience to become, as conscription would soon compel him to, part of
a military machine dedicated to conquest.
Had he been older and his character more hardened by adversity he might have
considered remaining to oppose the regime, hopeless as opposition seemed.
Even so, open dissent was impossible, and he had neither the talent nor the
taste for conspiracy. In addition, the only organized underground resistance
was the Communist Party, which was equally distasteful to him. The only
solution was self-exile.
Bernhard did not burn all his bridges immediately. As a first step he got a
job in the Paris office of
I.G.Farben, the great German chemical combine.
Though his training had been in law, he was fascinated by industry and
finance, and thought that his talents lay in this direction. Which proved to
be the case.
In Paris Bernhard threw all his energy into his new career.
He says that he
wanted to prove that it was not nepotism that got him the job. But the truth
is that by now he was so geared to high-pressure work that he could not have
done otherwise. Also, the more he learned about business the more interested
he became.
Though his working hours were from 8 am to 7 pm he was among the first to
reach the office in the morning and the last to leave at night. In addition
he took a course in shorthand and typing in the evening or during his
lunch-hour, munching a sandwich while he worked.
“They were mad for garlic
in that school,” he says. “I have never smelt anything like it. I started
eating it in self-defense and learned to like it very much. I still do,
though my family is not quite in agreement with me.”
I.G.Farben’s Paris manager, Dr Passarge, soon recognized Bernhard as
executive material and sent him on a training course through the various
departments.
In the sales department he really found his
métier. He
negotiated several barter deals with French Indo-China - rice for chemicals
- and took part in various other selling campaigns. It gave him a chance to
use all his talents - financial acuteness, ability to think fast,
persuasiveness, and that God-given charm of which he was completely aware.
He did so well that Dr Passarge said,
“If you don’t do something stupid
you’ll be a manager by the time you’re thirty.”
A little later he got the
same promise in writing.
In Paris Bernhard lived in the luxurious house of his uncle and aunt by
marriage, Count and Countess Paul de Kotzebue. The Countess was an American,
Allene Tew, whose first husband had been Anson Wood Berther, an executive of
General Electric from whom she inherited a fine old-fashioned American
fortune.
Countess Kotzebue doted on Bernhard, Princess Armgard says,
“She
spoiled him terribly. All her cars were his to drive. She never refused him
anything he asked. His wish was literally her command. The Kotzebues had no
children, and she regarded him as a son.”
Bernhard, who always returned affection in full measure, was completely
devoted to “Aunt Allene,” and equally willing to gratify her wishes.
Count
Kotzebue says that many years later, when the Countess was dying at Nice,
Bernhard drove all the way from Soestdijk to see her once more.
“Though my
wife seemed to be unconscious,” he said, “she recognized his horn in the
courtyard and said, ‘That’s my Bernilo come to see me.’ ”
It is not to be supposed that the life of a bachelor prince in Paris was a
social blank.
No matter how hard Bernhard worked he always had energy left
for fun. He was invited to a great many parties and went to most of them. He
was a great favorite in the embassies, with one exception.
“Soon after I
began working for I.G.Farben [see note below],” he says, “ the German
Ambassador sent a man to ask me if I would join the organization of Germans
living abroad. It was, of course, a party organization, so I said, ‘No’.
They gave me no further trouble, but I was never invited to the German
Embassy.”
However, the Belgian Ambassador, Count van Kerckhoven, was especially
friendly.
He had been Ambassador to Berlin when Bernhard was a student there
and had been “awfully nice” to him. Their friendship continued in Paris.
Though Bernhard had only an hour off at noon, the Ambassador often invited
him for lunch and arranged things so that the meal was served the moment he
arrived and protocol dispensed with, so that he could eat and run back to
his job.
At one of these luncheons late in 1935 Bernhard found himself seated next do
Dr Loudon, the Dutch Minister to Portugal, whom he also knew quite well. The
conversation turned to the Winter Olympics at Garmisch-Partenkirchen, where
Bernhard planned to go during his winter holidays.
Dr Loudon told him that
Queen Wilhelmina and her daughter, Princess Juliana, also planned to go to
the Olympics.
“They will be staying at Igls, just over the mountain,” he
said. “Perhaps you would like to call Her Majesty’s aide-de-camp and arrange
to pay them a courtesy visit.”
“Thank you, I believe I will,” Bernhard said. “It might be amusing.”
Notes
A celebration was held at the Petersburg Hotel in 1937 with top Nazis and
the IG Farben board and friends to celebrate 'Nazification'.
I.G. Farben paid the SS three marks a day for unskilled concentration camp
workers and four marks a day for skilled. For child labour they paid the SS
1.5 marks a day.
Back to Contents
Bernhard and IG Farben
background explored
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 "independence''
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 "eliminated'' 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 "in
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
"All 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.
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 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
"old 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), ram-rodded 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 célèbre, 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 "a 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 honorary 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 been 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 "enemy''
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 focused 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 the US.
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 super-secret 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,
-
BASF $25.8
billion dollars
-
Bayer $23.6 billion dollars
-
Hoechst $23.5 billion
dollars
-
ICI $20 billion dollars
-
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 coziness that doesn't
exist in the U.S. chemical industry."
After the war, Americans were told they must support an
"altruistic'' 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 "a 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
"anti-communists'' 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 "anti-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 well-established 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,
"a beacon
light in progressive education''.
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 "anti-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,
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.
Back to Contents
WALL STREET AND THE RISE OF
HITLER
by Anthony C Sutton
1976
Chapter 12
-
CONCLUSIONS
We have demonstrated with documentary evidence a number of critical
associations between Wall Street international bankers and the rise of
Hitler and Nazism in Germany.
-
First: that Wall Street financed the German cartels in the mid-1920s which
in turn proceeded to bring Hitler to power.
-
Second: that the financing for Hitler and his S.S. street thugs came in part
from affiliates or subsidiaries of U.S. firms, including Henry Ford in 1922,
payments by I.G. Farben and General Electric in 1933, followed by the
Standard Oil of New Jersey and I.T.T. subsidiary payments to Heinrich
Himmler up to 1944.
-
Third: that U.S. multi-nationals under the control of Wall Street profited
handsomely from Hitler's military construction program in the 1930s and at
least until 1942.
-
Fourth: that these same international bankers used political influence in
the U.S. to cover up their wartime collaboration and to do this infiltrated
the U.S. Control Commission for Germany.
Our evidence for these four major assertions can be
summarized as follows:
In Chapter One we presented evidence that the Dawes and Young plans for
German reparations were formulated by Wall Streeters, temporarily wearing
the hats of statesmen, and these loans generated a rain of profits for these
international bankers.
Owen Young of General Electric, Hjalmar Schacht, A.
Voegler, and others intimately connected with Hitler's accession to power
had earlier been the negotiators for the U.S. and German sides,
respectively. Three Wall Street houses - Dillon, Read; Harris, Forbes; and,
National City Company - handled three-quarters of the reparations loans used
to create the German cartel system, including the dominant I.G. Farben and
Vereinigte Stahlwerke, which together produced 95 per cent of the explosives
for the Nazi side in World War II.
The central role of I.G. Farben in Hitler's coup d'etat was reviewed in
Chapter Two.
The directors of American I.G. (Farben) were identified as
prominent American businessmen:
-
Walter Teagle, a close Roosevelt associate
and backer and an NRA administrator
-
banker Paul Warburg (his brother Max
Warburg was on the board of I.G. Farben in Germany)
-
Edsel Ford. Farben
contributed 400,000 RM directly to Schacht and Hess for use in the crucial
1933 elections and Farben was subsequently in the forefront of military
development in Nazi Germany
A donation of 60,000 RM was made to Hitler by German General Electric (A.E.G.),
which had four directors and a 25-30 percent interest held by the U.S.
General Electric parent company.
This role was described in Chapter Three,
and we found that Gerard Swope, an originator of Roosevelt's New Deal (its
National Recovery Administration segment), together with Owen Young of the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York and Clark Minor of International General
Electric, were the dominant Wall Streeters in A.E.G. and most significant
single influence.
We also found no evidence to indict the German electrical firm Siemens,
which was not under Wall Street control. In contrast, there is documentary
evidence that both A.E.G. and Osram, the other units of the German
electrical industry - both of which had U.S. participation and control - did
finance Hitler.
In fact, almost all directors of German General Electric
were Hitler backers, either directly through A.E.G. or indirectly through
other German firms. G.E. rounded out its Hitler support by technical
co-operation with Krupp, aimed at restricting U.S. development of tungsten
carbide, which worked to the detriment of the U.S. in World War II. We
concluded that A.E.G. plants in Germany managed, by a yet unknown manoeuvre,
to avoid bombing by the Allies.
An examination of the role of Standard Oil of New Jersey (which was and is
controlled by the Rockefeller interests) was undertaken in Chapter Four.
Standard Oil apparently did not finance Hitler's accession to power in 1933
(that part of the "myth of Sidney Warburg" is not proven). On the other
hand, payments were made up to 1944 by Standard Oil of New Jersey, to
develop synthetic gasoline for war purposes on behalf of the Nazis and,
through its wholly owned subsidiary, to Heinrich Himmler's S.S. Circle of
Friends for political purposes.
Standard Oil's role was technical aid to
Nazi development of synthetic rubber and gasoline through a U.S. research
company under the management control of Standard Oil. The Ethyl Gasoline
Company, jointly owned by Standard Oil of New Jersey and General Motors, was
instrumental in supplying vital ethyl lead to Nazi Germany - over the
written protests of the U.S. War Department - with the clear knowledge that
the ethyl lead was for Nazi military purposes.
In Chapter Five we demonstrated that International Telephone and Telegraph
Company, one of the more notorious multi-nationals, worked both sides of
World War II through Baron Kurt von Schröder, of the Schroder banking group.
I.T.T. also held a 28-percent interest in FockeWolfe aircraft, which
manufactured excellent German fighter planes. We also found that Texaco
(Texas Oil Company) was involved in Nazi endeavors through German attorney
Westrick, but dropped its chairman of the board Rieber when these endeavors
were publicized.
Henry Ford was an early (1922) Hitler backer and Edsel Ford continued the
family tradition in 1942 by encouraging French Ford to profit from arming
the German Wehrmacht. Subsequently, these Ford-produced vehicles were used
against American soldiers as they landed in France in 1944. For his early
recognition of, and timely assistance to, the Nazis, Henry Ford received a
Nazi medal in 1938. The records of French Ford suggest Ford Motor received
kid glove treatment from the Nazis after 1940.
The provable threads of Hitler financing are drawn together in Chapter Seven
and answer with precise names and figures the question, who financed Adolf
Hitler? This chapter indicts Wall Street and, incidentally, no one else of
consequence in the United States except the Ford family.
The Ford family is
not normally associated with Wall Street but is certainly a part of the
"power elite."
In earlier chapters we cited several Roosevelt associates, including Teagle
of Standard Oil, the Warburg family, and Gerard Swope.
In Chapter Eight the
role of Putze Hanfstaengl, another Roosevelt friend and a participant in the
Reichstag fire, is traced. The composition of the Nazi inner circle during
World War II, and the financial contributions of Standard Oil of New Jersey
and I.T.T. subsidiaries, are traced in Chapter Nine. Documentary proof of
these monetary contributions is presented.
Kurt von Schroder is identified
as the key intermediary in this S.S. "slush fund."
Finally, in Chapter Ten we reviewed a book suppressed in 1934 and the "myth
of 'Sidney Warburg.'" The suppressed book accused the Rockefellers, the
Warburgs, and the major oil companies of financing Hitler. While the name
"Sidney Warburg" was no doubt an invention, the extraordinary fact remains
that the argument in the suppressed "Sidney Warburg" Book is remains that
the argument in the suppressed "Sidney Warburg" book is remarkably close to
the evidence presented now.
It also remains a puzzle why James Paul Warburg,
fifteen years later, would want to attempt, in a rather transparently
slipshod manner, to refute the contents of the "Warburg" book, a book he
claims not to have seen. It is perhaps even more of a puzzle why Warburg
would choose Nazi von Papen's Memoirs as the vehicle to present his
refutation.
Finally, in Chapter Eleven we examined the roles of the Morgan and Chase
Banks in World War II, specifically their collaboration with the Nazis in
France while a major war was raging.
In other works, as in our two previous examinations of the links between New
York international bankers and major historical events, we find a provable
pattern of subsidy and political manipulation.
The Pervasive Influence of International Bankers
Looking at the broad array of facts presented in the three volumes of the
Wall Street series, we find persistent recurrence of the same names:
-
Own
Young, Gerard Swope, Hjalmar Schacht, Bernard Baruch, etc.
-
the same international banks: J.P.
Morgan, Guaranty Trust, Chase Bank; and the same location in New
York: usually 120 Broadway
This group of international bakers backed the Bolshevik Revolution and
subsequently profited from the establishment of a Soviet Russia.
This group
backed Roosevelt and profited from New Deal socialism. This group also
backed Hitler and certainly profited from German armament in the 1930s. When
Big Business should have been running its business operations at Ford Motor,
Standard of New Jersey and so on, we find it actively and deeply involved in
political upheavals, war, and revolutions in three major countries.
The version of history presented here is that the financial elite knowingly
and with premeditation assisted the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917 in concert
with German bankers. After profiting handsomely from the German
hyper-inflationary distress of 1923, and planning to place the German
reparations burden onto the backs of American investors, Wall Street found
it had brought about the 1929 financial crisis.
Two men were then backed as leaders for major Western countries: Franklin D.
Roosevelt in the United States and Adolf Hitler in Germany. The Roosevelt
New Deal and Hitler's Four Year Plan had great similarities. The Roosevelt
and Hitler plans were plans for fascist take-overs of their respective
countries. While Roosevelt's NRA failed, due to then-operating
constitutional constraints, Hitler's Plan succeeded.
Why did the Wall Street elite, the international bakers, want Roosevelt and
Hitler in power? This is an aspect we have not explored. According to the
"myth of 'Sidney Warburg,'" Wall Street wanted a policy of revenge; that is,
it wanted war in Europe between France and Germany. We know even from
Establishment history that both Hitler and Roosevelt acted out policies
leading to war.
The link-ups between persons and events in this three-book series would
require another book. But a single example will perhaps indicate the
remarkable concentration of power within a relatively few organizations, and
the use of this power.
On May 1st, 1918, when the Bolsheviks controlled only a small fraction of
Russia (and were to come near to losing even that fraction in the summer of
1918), the American League to Aid and Co-operate with Russia was organized
in Washington, D.C. to support the Bolsheviks.
This was not a "Hands off
Russia" type of committee formed by the Communist Party U.S.A. or its
allies. It was a committee created by Wall Street with George P. Whalen of
Vacuum Oil Company as Treasurer and Coffin and Oudin of General Electric,
along with Thompson of the Federal Reserve System, Willard of the Baltimore
& Ohio Railroad, and assorted socialists.
When we look at the rise of Hitler and Nazism we find Vacuum Oil and General
Electric well represented. Ambassador Dodd in Germany was struck by the
monetary and technical contribution by the Rockefeller-controlled Vacuum Oil
Company in building up military gasoline facilities for the Nazis. The
Ambassador tried to warn Roosevelt.
Dodd believed, in his apparent naiveté
of world affairs, that Roosevelt would intervene, but Roosevelt himself was
backed by these same oil interests and Walter Teagle of Standard Oil of New
Jersey and the NRA was on the board of Roosevelt's Warm Springs Foundation.
So, in but one of may examples, we find the Rockefeller-controlled Vacuum
Oil Company prominently assisting in the creation of Bolshevik Russia, the
military build-up of Nazi Germany, and backing Roosevelt's New Deal.
Is the United States Ruled by a Dictatorial
Elite?
Within the last decade or so, certainly
since the 1960s, a steady flow of literature has presented a thesis that the
United States is ruled by a self perpetuating and unelected power elite.
Even further, most of these books aver that this elite controls, or at the
least heavily influences, all foreign and domestic policy decisions, and
that no idea becomes respectable or is published in the United States
without the tacit approval, or perhaps lack of disapproval, of this elitist
circle.
Obviously the very flow of anti-establishment literature by itself testifies
that the United States cannot be wholly under the thumb of any single group
or elite. On the other hand, antiestablishment literature is not fully
recognized or reasonably discussed in academic or media circles. More often
than not it consists of a limited edition, privately produced, almost
hand-to-hand circulated.
There are some exceptions, true, but not enough to
dispute the observation that anti-establishment critics do not easily enter
normal information/distribution channels.
Whereas in the early and mid-1960s, any concept of rule by a conspiratorial
elite, or indeed any kind of elite, was reason enough to dismiss the
proponent out of hand as a "nut case," the atmosphere for such concepts has
changed radically. The Watergate affair probably added the final touches to
a long-developing environment of skepticism and doubt.
We are almost at the
point where anyone who accepts, for example, the Warren commission report,
or believes that the decline and fall of Mr. Nixon did not have some
conspiratorial aspects, is suspect. In brief, no one any longer really
believes the Establishment information process. And there is a wide variety
of alternative presentations of events now available for the curious.
Several hundred books, from the full range of the political and
philosophical spectrum, add bits and pieces of evidence, more hypotheses,
and more accusations. What was not too long ago a kooky idea, talked about
at midnight behind closed doors, in hushed and almost conspiratorial
whispers, is now openly debated - not, to be sure, in Establishment
newspapers, but certainly on non-network radio talk shows, the underground
press, and even from time to time in books from respectable Establishment
publishing houses.
So let us ask the question again: Is there an unelected power elite behind
the U.S. Government?
A substantive and often-cited source of information is Carroll Quigley,
Professor of International Relations at Georgetown University, who in 1966
had published a monumental modern history entitled Tragedy and Hope.
Quigley's book is apart from others in this revisionist vein, by virtue of
the fact that it was based on a two-year study of the internal documents of
one of the power centers. Quigley traces the history of the power elite:
.The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing
less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands
able to dominate the political system of each county and the economy of the
world as a whole.
Quigley also demonstrates that the Council on Foreign Relation, the National
Planning Association, and other groups are "semi-secret" policy-making
bodies under the control of this power elite.
In the following tabular presentation we have listed five such revisionist
books, including Quigley's. Their essential theses and compatibility with
the three volumes of the "Wall Street" series are summarized.
It is
surprising that in the three major historical events noted, Carroll Quigley
is not at all consistent with the "Wall Street" series evidence. Quigley
goes a long way to provide evidence for the existence of the power elite,
but does not penetrate the operations of the elite.
Possibly, the papers used by Quigley had been vetted, and did not include
documentation on elitist manipulation of such events as the Bolshevik
Revolution, Hitler's accession to power, and the election of Roosevelt in
1933. More likely, these political manipulations may not be recorded at all
in the files of the power groups They may have been unrecorded actions by a
small ad hoc segment of the elite. It is noteworthy that the documents used
by this author came from government sources, recording the day-to-day
actions of Trotsky, Lenin, Roosevelt, Hitler, J.P. Morgan and the various
firms and banks involved.
On the other hand, such authors as Jules Archer, Gary Allen, Helen P. Lasell,
and William Domhoff, writing from widely different political standpoints,
are consistent with the "Wall Street" evidence.
These writers present a hypothesized "power elite" has manipulated specific historical events.
Obviously any such exercise of unconstrained and supra-legal power is
unconstitutional, even though wrapped in the fabric of law-abiding actions.
We can therefore legitimately raise the question of the existence of a
subversive force operating to remove constitutionally guaranteed rights.
The New York Elite as a Subversive Force
Twentieth-century history, as recorded in Establishment textbooks and
journals, is inaccurate. It is a history which is based solely upon those
official documents which various Administrations have seen fit to release
for public consumption.
But an accurate history cannot be based on a selective release of
documentary archives. Accuracy requires access to all documents. In
practice, as previously classified documents in the U.S. State Department
files, the British Foreign Office, and German Foreign Ministry archives and
other depositories are acquired, a new version of history has emerged, the
prevailing Establishment version is seen to be, not only inaccurate, but
designed to hide a pervasive fabric of deceit and immoral conduct.
The centre of political power, as authorized by the U.S. Constitution, is
with an elected Congress and an elected President, working within the
framework and under the constraints of a Constitution, as interpreted by an
unbiased Supreme Court. We have in the past assumed that political power is
consequently carefully exercised by the Executive and legislative branch,
after due deliberation and assessment of the wishes of the electorate.
In
fact, nothing could be further from this assumption. The electorate has long
suspected, but now knows, that political promises are worth nothing.
Lies
are the order of the day for policy implementors. Wars are started (and
stopped) with no shred of coherent explanation. Political words have never
matched political deeds.
Why not? Apparently because the centre of political
power has been elsewhere than with elected and presumably responsive
representatives in Washington, and this power elite has its own objectives,
which are inconsistent with those of the public at large.
In this three-volume series we have identified for three historical events
the seat of political power in the United states - the power behind the
scenes, the hidden influence on Washington - as that of the financial
establishment in New York: the private international bankers, more
specifically the financial houses of J.P. Morgan, the Rockefeller-controlled
Chase Manhattan Bank, and in earlier days before amalgamation of their
Manhattan Bank with the former Chase Bank), the Warburgs.
The United States has, in spite of the Constitution and its supposed
constraints, become a quasi-totalitarian state.
While we do not (yet) have
the overt trapping of dictatorship, the concentration camps and the knock on
the door at midnight, we most certainly do have threats and actions aimed at
the survival of non-Establishment critics, use of the Internal Revenue
Service to bring dissidents in line, and manipulation of the Constitution by
a court system that is politically subservient to the Establishment.
It is in the pecuniary interests of the international bankers to centralize
political power - and this centralization can best be achieve within a
collectivist society, such as socialist Russia, national socialist Germany,
or a Fabian socialist United States.
There can be no full understanding and appreciation of twentieth-century
American politics and foreign policy without the realization that this
financial elite effectively monopolizes Washington policy.
In case after case, newly released documentation implicates this elite and
confirms this hypothesis. The revisionist versions of the entry of the
United States into World Wars I and II, Korea, and Vietnam reveal the
influence and objectives of this elite.
For most of the twentieth century the Federal Reserve System, particularly
the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (which is outside the control of
congress, unaudited and uncontrolled, with the power to print money and
crate credit at will), has exercised a virtual monopoly over the direction
of the American economy.
In foreign affairs the Council on Foreign
Relations, superficially an innocent forum for academics, businessmen, and
politicians, contains within its shell, perhaps unknown to many of its
members, a power centre that unilaterally determines U.S. foreign policy.
The major objective of this submerged - and obviously subversive - foreign
policy is the acquisition of markets and economic power (profits, if you
will), for a small group of giant multi-nationals under the virtual control
of a few banking investment houses and controlling families.
Through foundations controlled by this elite, research by compliant and
spineless academics, "conservatives" as well as "liberals," has been
directed into channels useful for the objectives of the elite essentially to
maintain this subversive and unconstitutional power apparatus.
Through publishing houses controlled by this same financial elite unwelcome
books have been squashed and useful books promoted; fortunately publishing
has few barriers to entry and is almost atomistically competitive. Through
control of a dozen or so major newspapers, run by editors who think alike,
public information can be almost orchestrated at will.
Yesterday, the space
program; today, an energy crisis or a campaign for ecology; tomorrow, a war
in the Middle East or some other manufactured "crisis."
The total result of this manipulation of society by the Establishment elite
has been four major wars in sixty years, a crippling national debt,
abandonment of the Constitution, suppression of freedom and opportunity, and
creation of a vast credibility gulf between the man in the street and
Washington, D.C.
While the transparent device of two major parties
trumpeting artificial differences, circus-like conventions, and the cliché
of "bipartisan foreign policy" no longer carries credibility, and the
financial elite itself recognizes that its policies lack public acceptance,
it is obviously prepared to go it alone without even nominal public support.
In brief, we now have to consider and debate whether this New York-based
elitist Establishment is a subversive force operating with deliberation and
knowledge to suppress the Constitution and a free society.
That will be the
task ahead in the next decade.
The slowly Emerging Revisionist truth
The arena for this debate and the
basis for our charges of subversion is the evidence provided by the
revisionist historian.
Slowly, over decades, book by book, almost line by
line, the truth of recent history has emerged as documents are released,
probed, analyzed, and set within a more valid historical framework.
Let us consider a few examples. American entry into World War II was
supposedly precipitated, according to the Establishment version, by the
Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Revisionists have established that Franklin
D. Roosevelt and General Marshall knew of the impending Japanese attack and
did nothing to warn the Pearl Harbour military authorities.
The
Establishment wanted war with Japan. Subsequently, the Establishment made
certain that Congressional investigation of Pearl Harbour would fit the
Roosevelt whitewash. In the words of Percy Greaves, chief research expert
for the Republican minority on the Joint Congressional Committee
investigation Pearl Harbor:
The complete facts will never be known. Most of the so-called investigations
have been attempts to suppress, mislead, or confuse those who seek the
truth. For the beginning to the end, facts and files have been withheld so
as to reveal only those items of information which benefit the
administration under investigation. Those seeking the truth are told that
other facts or documents cannot be revealed because they are intermingled in
personal diaries, pertain to our relations with foreign countries, or are
sworn to contain no information of value.
But this was not the first attempt to bring the United States into war, or
the last. The Morgan interests, in concert with Winston Churchill, tried to
bring the U.S. into World War 1 as early as 1915 and succeeded in doing so
in 1917. Colin Thompson's Lusitania implicates President Woodrow Wilson in
the sinking of the Lusitania - a horror device to generate a public backlash
to draw the United States into war with Germany.
Thompson demonstrates that
Woodrow Wilson knew four days beforehand that the Lusitania was carrying
six-million rounds of ammunition plus explosives, and therefore,
"passengers
who proposed to sail on that vessel were sailing in violation of statute of
this country."
The British Board of Inquiry under Lord Mersey was instructed by the British
Government,
"that it is considered politically expedient the Captain Turner,
the master of the Lusitania, be most prominently blamed for the disaster."
In retrospect, given Colin Thompson's evidence, the blame is more fairly to
be attributed to President Wilson, "Colonel" House, J.P. Morgan, and Winston
Churchill; this conspiratorial elite should have been brought to trial for
willful negligence, if not treason.
It is to Lord Mersey's eternal credit
that after performing his "duty" under instructions from His Majesty's
government, and placing the blame on Captain Turner, he resigned, rejected
his fee, and from that date on refused to handle British government
commissions. To his friends Lord Mersey would only say about the Lusitania
case that it was a "dirty business.
Then in 1933-4 came the attempt by the Morgan firm to install a fascist
dictatorship in the United States. In the words of Jules Archer, it was
planned to be a Fascist putsch to take over the government and "run it under
a dictator on behalf of America's bankers and industrialists." Darlington
Butler, who blew the whistle on the Wall Street conspiracy.
And once again
Congress stands out, particularly Congressmen Dickstein and MacCormack, by
its gutless refusal to do no more than conduct a token whitewash
investigation.
Since World War II we have seen the Korean War and the Vietnamese War -
meaningless, meandering no-win wars costly in dollars and lives, with no
other major purpose but o generate multibillion-dollar armaments contracts.
Certainly these wars were not fought to restrain communism, because for
fifty years the Establishment has been nurturing and subsidizing the Soviet
Union which supplied armaments to the other sides in both wars - Korea and
Vietnam. So our revisionist history will show that the United States
directly or indirectly armed both sides in at least Korea and Vietnam.
In the assassination of President Kennedy, to take a domestic example, it is
difficult to find anyone who today accepts the finding of the Warren
Commission - except perhaps the members of that Commission. Yet key evidence
is still hidden from public eyes for 50 to 75 years.
The Watergate affair
demonstrated even to the man in the street that the White House can be a
vicious nest of intrigue and deception.
Of all recent history the story of Operation Keelhaul is perhaps the most
disgusting. Operation Keelhaul was the forced repatriation of millions of
Russians at the orders of President (then General) Dwight D. Eisenhower, in
direct violation of the Geneva Convention of 1929 and the long-standing
American tradition of political refuge.
Operation Keelhaul, which
contravenes all our ideas of elementary decency and individual freedom, was
undertaken at the direct orders of General Eisenhower and, we may now
presume, was a part of a long-range program of nurturing collectivism,
whether it be Soviet communism, Hitler's Nazism, or FDR's New Deal. Yet
until recent publication of documentary evidence by Julius Epstein, anyone
who dared to suggest Eisenhower would betray millions of innocent
individuals for political purposes was viciously and mercilessly attacked.
What this revisionist history really teaches us is that our willingness as
individual citizens to surrender political power to an elite has cost the
world approximately two-hundred-million persons killed from 1820 to 1975.
Add to that untold misery the concentration camps, the political prisoners,
the suppression and oppression of those who try to bring the truth to light.
When will it all stop?
It will not stop until we act upon one simple axiom:
that the power system continues only so long as individuals want it to
continue, and it will continue only so long as individuals try to get
something for nothing. the day when a majority of individuals declares or
acts as if it wants nothing from government, declares it will look after its
own welfare and interests, then on that date power elites are doomed.
The
attraction to "go along" with power elites is the attraction of something
for nothing. That is the bait. The Establishment always offers something for
nothing, but the something is taken from someone else, as taxes or plunder,
and awarded elsewhere in exchange for political support.
Periodic crises and wars are used to whip up support for other
plunder-reward cycles which in effect tighten the noose around our
individual liberties. And of course we have hordes of academic sponges,
amoral businessmen, and just plain hangers-on, to act as non-productive
recipients for the plunder.
Stop the circle of plunder and immoral reward and elitist structures
collapse.
But not until a majority finds the moral courage and the internal
fortitude to reject the something-for-nothing con game and replace it by
voluntary association, voluntary communes, or local rule and decentralized
societies, will the killing and the plunder cease.
Back to Contents
Extract from - The Lockheed
Papers
David Boulton - Jonathan Cape - 1978 pp 258-261
The Grease Machine Exposed - extract
Certainly there was no hint, late in
1974, of a Lockheed connection.
Which is why, in total ignorance of the
time-bomb on which his American friends were sitting, Prince Bernhard of the
Netherlands felt confident enough in September to write to Burbank asking
for a new commission arrangement.
The sum involved this time: anything up to
six million dollars.
2
Early in 1973 the Dutch government
had begun to consider a long-term replacement for the navy's obsolete
Lockheed P-2V Neptune patrol and anti-submarine planes. By June the
admiralty council had three candidates under consideration: the British
Nimrod from Hawker Siddeley, the French Breguet Atlantique Mark lA and
II, and Lockheed's P-3C Orion.
The Dutch deliberations soon came to the notice of Fred C. Meuser in his
mountain retreat at St Moritz. Mouser was by now something of an
elder-statesman among the master-salesmen of the aerospace industry. He
had served Lockheed, Northrop, and Lockheed again. His loyalty to Prince
Bernhard, meanwhile, had never wavered.
Now, with an immense new order
in the offing (the Dutch admiralty were talking of spending up to 148
million guilders on thirteen planes between 1974 and 1978, and a further
452 million in the 1979-83 period) his eye for the main chance did not
fail him.
Meuser contacted the prince and put to him a simple proposition. If the
Orion were selected, and if a consultant's contract were concluded with
Lockheed on the basis of commission for aircraft supplied to the Dutch
navy and for the supply of spare parts, a large sum of money would be at
the prince's disposal. He might wish to pass it, for instance, to his
very own prestige charity, the World Wildlife Fund.
Bernhard didn't turn down the idea and Meuser was encouraged to take it
a step further. In April 1974 he gave the prince a draft note and
suggested he send it to Lockheed. It read:
Last time around it would have been of no use to accept Lockheed's offer
to appoint Dr. H. Weisbrod agent for the reequipping of the Navy's ASW
aircraft fleet with Orions, as European pressures required a European
solution. This time around the situation may be more favourable for the
Orion, in part due to Dr. Weisbrod's efforts, and it would now seem
appropriate for Lockheed to appoint him their 'sub silentio' agent for a
prospective Orion program.
This could be done on the basis of an agent's
agreement between Lockheed and Dr. Weisbrod, calling for a 4 per cent
commission on all Lockheed billings for complete aircraft and 8 per cent
for parts, services, etc., for the life of the program. As and when
payments are received by Lockheed, corresponding commission payments to
be made in a manner to be indicated by Dr. Weisbrod.
It was the same old formula that had proved so successful in the past:
The Meuser-Weisbrod connection, with Bernhard as the intended principal
beneficiary.
When Meuser wrote that the Orion's prospects were good 'in
part due to Weisbrod's effort,' he was unmistakably signalling to
Lockheed that the prince himself had been, and could continue to be,
active on Lockheed's behalf. In fact there is no evidence whatever that
Bernhard really did involve himself in any way with the admiralty's
evaluations.
But what mattered was that Lockheed should believe he was
rooting for them, and that this could be decisive.
Bernhard accepted Meuser's draft but did not send it to Lockheed
immediately. Possibly he was shaken by the much-publicized conviction of
his friend Tom Jones on May 1 and fearful of further revelations: but if
so, he had overcome such fears by September. On the ninth of that month
he sent the note to Roger Bixby-Smith, the intermediary with Lockheed on
the abortive Orion deal in 1968 when $100,000 had ended up in the pocket
of 'Victor Baarn'.
With it he sent a covering letter in his own
handwriting. It was one of two letters which, when unexpectedly made
public, would finally destroy his good name.
It was short and to the point. He recalled the talks of 'a few years
ago', evidently meaning 1968, and said that 'after a hell of a lot of
pushing and pulling' it now looked as if something positive might
develop and that it therefore might be a good idea to 'process the
enclosed idea personally'. Neither the letter nor enclosure referred to
the World Wildlife Fund, which seems by now to have dropped from
Bernhard's mind.
Bixby-Smith passed the letter and note on to Burbank, probably direct to
Haughton or Kotchian, but when they calculated that commission at the
rate suggested would add up to between $4 million and $6 million they
decided the prince's price was altogether too high. Smith was asked to
convey as much to Bernhard, and to explain that in any case commission
wasn't allowed on a government-to-government contract - though this
prohibition hadn't always inhibited the company in the past.
Accordingly, Bixby-Smith arranged to meet the prince on October 30 on
one of his frequent visits to Paris in the elegant company of Miss Helen
'Pussy' Grinda. The prince expressed surprise that the commission rate
he was asking had checked out at so high a total. He had in mind, he
told Smith, 'only about $1 million'. But he was angry at Lockheed's flat
rejection of his proposal, and as the evening wore on he became angrier.
Three days later the prince dispatched a second hand-written letter to
Burbank. He was to claim later that he based it on a draft suggested by
Smith. It seemed incredible, he wrote, that his approach had been
rejected without discussion and without consideration of other
possibilities.
And he added bitterly:
'It would never have happened in
the days of Bob or Courtlandt Gross.' He had 'spent a great deal of time
and effort' since 1968 'to turn things in the right direction and to
prevent wrong decisions influenced by political considerations' - meaning
a French or British purchase in the interests of European unity (of
which he was a professed champion.)
He had done this because of his old
friendship for Lockheed 'and based on its past actions'.
He now felt 'a
little bitter' and would do nothing more for the company. What's more,
he would make his attitude clear if he were consulted on the procurement
decision by the admiralty or government. Finally, he was considering
writing to or phoning Courtlandt Gross, who was still on Lockheed's
board with the title 'Senior Adviser', and - at least in Bernhard's
view - not without influence.
The letter evidently made a strong impression on Haughton and Kotchian.
Whether moved by Bernhard's recollections of old and productive
friendships, or by the implied threat to throw his influence decisively
against the Orion, Lockheed came up with a new otter. Presumably
Bixby-Smith had conveyed to them the prince's expectation of 'about $1
million', because that is exactly what was now proposed: a fixed
commission of $1 million provided at least four aircraft were bought.
The prohibition of commission on a government-to-government sale was
conveniently forgotten. Bixby-Smith conveyed the offer to the prince on
December 2 during a visit to the royal palace at Soestdijk, and he
accepted immediately. Weisbrod, however, was to be cut out of the
reduced sum.
The prince, for reasons which are not clear, told Smith he
did not wish the money to be paid through the Weisbrod route and would
prefer it to be paid into a numbered account in Geneva specially opened
for the purpose.
As it turned out, Bernhard never received his million dollars. The Dutch
Government opted for defense cuts and postponed its purchase of a
successor to the Neptunes. The prince's fateful, tell-tale letter lay
forgotten in Haughton's files.
And meanwhile the time-bomb in Washington
ticked away on an ever-shortening fuse.
3
Concurrent with all the Watergate
investigations and quite independent of them was another which had quite
separate origins.
In 1972 the Democratic Senator from Idaho, Frank
Church, had set up a Sub-committee on Multinational Corporations of the
powerful Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, to follow up disclosures
of ITT's interventions in Chile and to investigate how far big companies
were influencing or forming foreign policy.
From ITT Church and his
Sub-committee moved on to the oil giants, opening public hearings on
Gulf, Exxon and Mobil on May 16, 1975.
'What we are concerned with', Church told a huge array of press, radio
and television reporters who would soon become very familiar with the
dark-paneled Hearings Room, No. 4221, in the Dirksen Senate Building,
'is not a question of private or public morality. What concerns us here
is a major issue of foreign policy for the United States.'
Watergate had
shown how domestic corruption could weaken democratic government. The
multinationals' investigation would show that corruption abroad
subverted the free world and weakened America's international standing.
The Senate's revelations of huge, systematic bribery by the oil
companies caused a sensation. Suddenly it was Church rather than Sam
Irvin, Archibald Cox or Stanley Sporkin who held the limelight; and now
the Sub-committee decided to expand its reach and go after Northrop.
Extract from 'The Lockheed
Papers '- Chapter 'The Grease Machine' - by David Boulton
Back to Contents
At The Hand Of Man - The
White Man's Game
by Raymond Bonner
Prince Bernhard and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF)
The White Man's Game pp. 66-71
To attract donors, large and small, as well as media attention, Nicholson,
Scott and the founding fathers of WWF wanted the royal family to lend their
name.
They approached Prince Philip to be president. Philip was an avid
outdoorsman and hunter - in January 1961 he had bagged a Bengal tiger in
India - and he and Queen Elizabeth had been to Kenya, on a safari best
remembered because King George VI died while they were watching wild animals
and Princess Elizabeth had become Queen. Scott sent Philip a draft of the
proposed charter.
Philip read it carefully, replying that one provision was
"unctuous," and another "to wordy." This careful reading was not what Scott
hold expected. It is "a great bore that he suggests so much alteration,"
Scott wrote Nicholson.
The founding fathers had wanted the Prince only as a
figurehead. Philip agreed to head up the British chapter of WWF, but he
turned down the presidency of the International and suggested his friend
Prince Bernhard for the post. The men were alike in many ways. Both had been
born into European royal families, but not very distinguished ones, and had
acquired their status and string of titles when they married - Bernhard to the
future Queen Juliana of the Netherlands. The two men were handsome, dashing,
and staunchly conservative politically.
Scott, who liked consorting with royalty, made the pitch. "Prince Philip
(who was sailing with me at Cowes in the 12 meter 'sceptre' on Saturday)... told me that he was very keen that you should 'head-up' the international
Trustees," Scott wrote to Bernhard. "Please may I ask Your Royal Highness to
say that you will be President of the Trustees of The World Wildlife Fund.''
Prince Bernhard he eventually said yes, and he served as president until
1976, when he was forced to resign after it became public that he had
solicited more than a million dollars in 'commissions" from Lockheed in
exchange for Lockheed's receiving contracts to build warplanes for the
Netherlands. At One point after the scandal broke, Bernhard said that he
had intended to give the money from Lockheed to WWF; a member of the board
at the time insists this is not true.
Bernhard remained active behind the scenes in WWF, but a couple of years
after he resigned, Philip became president of the International, and though
it was thought he would serve for only a few years, he is still in power.
The Prince is a committed conservationist and he undoubtedly has given
prestige and visibility to WWF around the world.
At the same time, however,
many in the Third World have questioned whether he is the right person to
head an organization that does most of its work in developing countries.
At
a meeting of the Commonwealth Heads of state, most of them from the Third
World and black, Philip said to an aide,
"You wouldn't think the peace of
the world rested on this lot, would you'?" on another occasion, he referred
to the Chinese as "slitty-eyed."
WWF was set up to raise money, but in spite of the initial successes, it did
not prove very effective.
Nicholson had said that $1.5 million each year
would be needed for conservation, which Scott thought he could easily raise;
indeed, he anticipated coaxing $25 million from the rich. Scott discovered
that socializing with the elite was one thing, getting them to part with
their money quite another, and it was several years before the total of
WWF's revenues reached $1 million.
WWF's financial fortunes began to change dramatically after a hard-driving
South African businessman, Anton Rupert, joined the board. An Afrikaaner
from the Cape, Rupert had already made millions as the owner of Rothmans
International tobacco company, the foundation of the Rembrandt Group, his
wholly owned business empire.
When Rupert expanded beyond South Africa, he
bought Dunhill and Cartier, and eventually he became one of the richest men
in South Africa, rivaled only by Harry Oppenheimer, the gold and diamond
industrialist.
Rupert had long been interested in conservation, including
the restoration of historic buildings, and in 1968 he joined the WWF board
of trustees; he stayed on the board for twenty-two years, ill spite of a
provision in the organization's original incorporation documents that
limited members to two three-year terms, a provision that was routinely
ignored for the benefit of several other influential members of the board as
well. Rupert brought a considerable amount of his own money to WWF, but,
more important, he conceived a plan that would raise millions
Rupert's idea was the "1001 Club" The "one" was Prince Bernhard The other
one thousand were wealthy individuals who could be persuaded to part with
$10,000. The one-time donation brings lifetime membership, and the names of
the generous patrons are kept secret by the organization.
According to these
secret lists, American givers have included August A Busch, Jr, of the beer
company; Henry Ford II; Peter Grace; Nelson Bunker Hunt, the silver trader;
Mrs Geoffrey Kent, of Abercrombie & Kent; Robert S. McNamara; Cyril Magnin;
Lew Wasserman, of MCA; Thomas Watson, of IBM. Many of the donors
understandably wish to remain anonymous (in part to avoid being badgered by
other charities), but it is also understandable why WWF does not want the
list made public.
It has included many less savory individuals:
-
Zaire's
President Mobutu, Sese Seko, one of the most corrupt leaders in Africa
-
Daniel K Ludwig, the reclusive American
billionaire, whose companies destroyed thousands of miles of the
Amazon rain forest
-
Agha Hasan Abedi,
the founder of the Bank of Credit and Commerce International (BCC1)
-
Robert Vesco, the financier who fled the
United States in the 1970s to escape trial on charges of fraud,
embezzlement and obstruction of justice
-
Tibor
Rosenbaum, founder of a Swiss bank that laundered billions of dollars of
organized crime money and who was accused of embezzling Israeli deposits in
the bank
-
Thomas Jones, who was forced out as chief executive of Northrop
after it was revealed that the company paid $30 million in bribes to
government officials and agents around the world in exchange for contracts
-
Lord Kagan, a British businessman convicted of theft and conspiracy to
defraud the British tax service
-
a Norwegian shipowner convicted of taking a
£1 million bribe
-
an individual who was the conduit for
the money from Lockheed to Prince Bernhard
There has been another remarkable feature about the 1001 Club
- the number of
South Africans.
On the 1989 list, at least sixty individuals were from South
Africa, including seven of Rupert's relatives. Many were also members of the Broederbond, the secret, conservative Afrikaaner society that has
traditionally wielded immense political power in South Africa. Only five
countries had more donors, and as a percentage of their population, South
African whites had three hundred times as many members as the United States.
It is easy to understand why so many South Africans have been willing to
part with $10,000 to Join the 1001 and not all of it has to do with
conservation. Not many international clubs welcomed white South Africans,
and membership in the 1001 provided them an opportunity to mingle and do
business with tycoons, as well as with Prince Philip and Prince Bernhard.
What else they may have gained from the membership is unknown, in part
because so much of what WWF-International does is kept from the public and
even from the organization's own trustees.
Because of the secrecy and closed
nature of the WWF club, it is also difficult to know the extent of the
influence that so much South African money has had on the organization's
conservation work. There can be little doubt, however, that
WWF-International's initial opposition to the ivory ban reflected South
African power on the board - South Africa was adamantly opposed to the ban,
because its elephants were not being poached and it made money from selling
ivory.
One place where South Africa's clout has been felt is in the office of the
director-general, the man who runs WWF.
Since 1977 that man has been Charles
de Haes. Much of de Haes's past is vague, which seems to be by design: he
has chosen to reveal very little about his background and some of what the
organization does say publicly about him is at odds with the facts. On WWF's
public list of officers and trustees, de Haes is identified as being from
Belgium, and he was born there, in 1938.
But as a young boy, he moved with
his family to South Africa.
After graduating from Cape Town University with
a law degree, he got a job with Rothmans International, Rupert's tobacco
company. De Haes's Official resume - that is, the one WWF distributes - makes a
point of noting that he went to work for the tobacco company "although
himself a nonsmoker."
It then says de Haes "helped establish companies" in
Sudan, Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania. What it does not say is that these were
companies that sold cigarettes. Maybe de Haes didn't smoke, but he made
money by encouraging others to do so.
De Haes was brought to WWF through the back door by Anton Rupert in 1971. He
was first assigned to be personal assistant to Prince Bernhard. One of his
tasks was to implement the 1001 Club project. He was tremendously
successful. Ten thousand dollars was worth even more back then, yet it took
de Haes only three years to find one thousand donors.
Prince Bernhard
provided the letters of introduction, but de Haes was the salesman who
clinched the deals. Even de Haes's fiercest critics - and they are many - use
the word "brilliant" when describing his fund-raising skills.
In 1975, with the backing of Rupert and Prince Philip de Haes was named
joint director-general of WWF, and two years later he had the top position
to himself.
De Haes had no education or experience in conservation, other
than his few years at WWF, yet he was now in charge of the most prestigious
and influential conservation organization in the world. It was a position
that would have appealed to the most qualified and eminent individuals in
the field, yet no effort was made to recruit any of them.
WWF may have taken on someone without conservation experience, but then, it
cost the organization nothing:
Rupert agreed to pay de Haes's salary - which,
according to a British trustee, goes far in explaining why de Haes got the
Job.
WWF never said at the time that Rupert was paying de Haes, and it still
tries to conceal this fact.
The organization's chief spokesman, Robert
SanGeorge, stated emphatically during an interview in 1991 that de Haes had
not been seconded from Rothmans to Prince Bernhard and WWF during the early
years. But an internal WWF memorandum signed by the organization's executive
vice-president in 1975 talks specifically about "Mr. de Haes's period of
secondment to WWF."
What this means, of course, is that de Haes was still
employed by a South African corporation while working for WWF.
"I thought it
was a scandal," says a former board member from North America, who added
that it was only by accident that he learned that Rupert was paying de Haes.
This board member did not like the arrangement.
"Who does the director
general serve'? Is the interest of a South African tobacco company
synonymous with the world conservation movement? Even more troubling to this
director was the fact that it was kept a secret. "lf it was such a good
thing, why weren't they willing to say so in the annual report?"
In a similar vein, the organization treats as a state secret the question of
who paid de Haes after he became director-general. It was "an anonymous
donor" SanGeorge says.
Even board members have been in the dark. When on
occasion one asked, he was told that the donor wished to remain anonymous.
It is unlikely that any other charitable organization that depends on public
support operates with such little accountability and in such secrecy as WWF
has under de Haes. It is easier to penetrate the CIA. And when WWF has been
caught in embarrassing conducts it has engaged in damage control and
cover-ups of the kind that might be expected from a company whose products
have caused injury to consumers and the environment.
Under rules de Haes
promulgated, WWF employees are prohibited from talking to anyone outside the
organization about anything except what the organization has already made
public; the obligation to secrecy binds the employee even after he or she
has left WWF. Few are willing to break this code of silence - given their fear
of de Haes and, in the case of current employees, the generous salaries and
pleasant living conditions in Switzerland.
It may well be, as one senior WWF officer put it somewhat defensively, that
a dollar given to WWF is still a dollar well spent for conservation.
But, as
this person added,
"imagine what the organization could be with better
leadership."
Over the years there has been increasing dissatisfaction with de Haes's
leadership.
One of the most serious challenges to his rule came in the early
1980s, when the heads of the WWF organizations in Britain, the Netherlands
and Switzerland began to discuss among themselves changes they thought were
necessary in the organization. These organizations should be able to effect
change because they provide most of the funds for the International - WWF-UK
alone contributes nearly one-third of the International's budget, and
Switzerland and the Netherlands rank second and third.
The way WWF was set
up, two-thirds of the money raised by the national organizations goes to the
International, while one third remains with the national organization.
The
"dissident" leaders of the three national organizations objected to this
because there was no accountability over how the International spent the
money. They also did not like the fact that the WWF-International board of
trustees doesn't represent the national organizations. The board is a
self-selected body - that is, those on the board decide whom to place on
it - and the national organizations, even though they give the money, have no
right of representation.
In short, the heads of the British, Dutch and Swiss
organizations felt that too much power was concentrated in Gland - the Swiss
town where WWF-International's headquarters is located - and that the local
organizations should have more autonomy.
Sir Arthur Norman, the head of WWF-UK at the time, was particularly
disturbed by the manner in which WWF-International set up chapters in other
countries. He thought they should "be triggered off by local people, local
enthusiasm, and not by someone in Bland saying "it's time".
Prince Bernhard and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF)
The White Man's Game - pp78-81
Phillipson found that,
"a diligent auditor set among the project account
files in Switzerland would surely open a cupboard full of skeletons."
He was
referring to the International's field projects - from some there were no
reports at all, and many others had made no accounting of how the money was
spent.
Phillipson's conclusion that WWF's attitude engendered accusations of
"neo-colonialism" remained in the summary.
Occasionally other skeletons got out, and when they did, it became clear
that WWF had lost its ethical way, at least in carrying out its conservation
work in Africa. In the late 1980s, for example, WWF provided Zimbabwe's
Department of National Parks and Wildlife Management with funds to buy a
helicopter for its anti-poaching operations in the Zambezi Valley, where the
black rhino was on the verge of extinction because of poachers.
The
department used the helicopter to deploy anti-poaching units when it
received reports of poachers in an area. At least fifty-seven poachers were
killed in the helicopter-supported operations, and the WWF office in
Zimbabwe reported that the helicopter,
"has made an enormous difference to
staff morale and efficiency" in the wildlife department.
That WWF was involved was not flown publicly until the environment
correspondent of the British newspaper The Guardian, Paul Brown, broke the
story.
WWF responded with a statement saying that it had provided the funds
for the helicopter,
"on the strict understanding that the helicopter would
never be used as a gun-ship," and that it was "official WWF policy not to
use any of its funds for purchase of arms or ammunition."
The truth is the organization knew that the helicopter would be used in operations in which
poachers would be killed.
Indeed, there had been a long and fierce debate
within WWF about the project, and many on the staff were opposed because
Zimbabwe's policy was "Shoot first, ask questions later," as one of those
involved in the debate puts it. Providing the helicopter "made the policy
more effective," he said. As for WWF's statement that it did not provide
funds for arms or ammunition, the organization's internal documents show
that it was doing precisely that for at least one project in Tanzania in
1987.
De Haes and WWF-International had to work harder to cover up another scandal
in Africa, this one involving mercenaries, intrigue, high level WWF
officials and Prince Bernhard.
The mercenaries were former British commandos
who worked for KAS Enterprises, a company headed by Sir David Stirling, the
legendary founder of Britain's Special Air Services (SAS), Britain's most
elite commando force. Stirling, who died in 1990, engaged in clandestine
activities throughout the world, setting up ostensibly private companies
that were in fact covers for Britain's MI-5 and MI-6. In Africa s
conservation wars, in the late 1980S KAS, as part of its arrangement with
WWF officials, trained anti-poaching units in Namibia, which was then still
under the control of South Africa, as well as Mozambicans in South Africa.
(The South African government was trying to destabilize Mozambique.)
KAS
also set up a "sting" operation to catch traffickers in ivory and rhino
horn. The project was code-named "Operation Lock," Lock being the maiden
name of the wife of a former SAS officer, Lieutenant-Colonel Ian Crooke, who
was in charge of it.
Some of KAS's anti-poaching activities were exposed in July 1989 by Robert
Powell, the Reuters correspondent in Nairobi. Powell, however, was unable to
link WWF to the operation, and so WWF remained silent when Powell's story
appeared, and continued working with KAS.
But Powell's article provoked
Stephen Ellis, editor of Africa Confidential, a fortnightly newsletter
published in London, to probe further. Ellis, also a freelance journalist,
got an assignment from The Independent to write an article about Operation
Lock. In the course of his reporting he called WWF and talked with Robert SanGeorge, the
organization's chief spokesman.
SanGeorge, an American, had
come to WWF-International in 1940 along with his wife, a tough lawyer who
became executive assistant to de Haes. Without telling Ellis, SanGeorge, who
has been seen with a recording device attached to his phone, made a verbatim
transcript of their conversation, which he passed on to de Haes - SanGeorge
even noted when Ellis "paused to fetch a cup of coffee he had left in
another room.
A few days later, SanGeorge faxed a statement to Ellis. The statement began:
"it is, and always has been, the policy of WWF not to engage in clandestine
or covert operations which might be considered unethical by governments, the
public, or supporters of WWF."
The organization then went on to lay the
blame for the covert operation on John Hanks, head of the Africa Program
at WWF-International.
It said that Hanks had initiated the project,
"without
the knowledge or approval of WWF-International's management."
Six months
earlier Hanks had been forced out of WWF by de Haes and had gone to South
Africa as director of the Southern African Nature Foundation, the name of
WWF's affiliate in South Africa.
Not wanting to cross de Haes again and
being loyal to WWF, Hanks signed a statement assuming responsibility for
Operation Lock.
Ellis wrote his story, and the day it appeared, SanGeorge sent a memorandum
to all WWF national organizations.
The memo reiterated what SanGeorge had
told Ellis, and emphasized that Operation Lock,
"was initiated without the
knowledge or authority of the Director General" and that "no funds for the
Operation were channeled through WWF International's books."
It was a
carefully crafted statement, befitting the work of a lawyer who wants to
keep his client out of Jail. But it was hardly an honest explanation
befitting a charitable organization.
The truth, which has never come out publicly, is found in a series of
communications from Frans Stroebel, executive director of WWF's South
African affiliate when Operation Lock commenced and the man who had
introduced Lieutenant-Colonel Crooke to senior police and conservation
officials in South Africa. Stroebel wrote Prince Philip:
I have given Mr. de Haes a number of comprehensive briefings on the project
since I first became involved. In May 1989, I gave him full details. He then
went to HRH Prince Bernhard to confirm that Prince Bernhard was indeed the
sponsor. Mr. de Haes satisfied himself with the developments, and in
subsequent discussions with me he never expressed any concern about my
involvement, or, for that matter, the covert program itself.
As for the funds for the operation, Stroebel said, in another letter,
"The
funds for Operation Lock were actually WWF funds."
The money had come to
WWF-International, then was channeled back out to Bernhard for Operation
Lock in a series of strange transactions.
First, in December 1988, Sotheby's
auctioned two paintings owned by Bernhard - The Holy Family, a
seven-by-five-foot oil by Bartolome Esteban Murillo, and The Rape of Europa,
a four-by-five-foot oil by Elisabetta Sirani. Together they brought in
£610,000. On Bernhard's instructions the proceeds were donated to
WWF-International; Sotheby's had noted in its catalogue that they would be.
But if the buyer - who remains anonymous - thought the money was going toward
WWF's general conservation work, he was mistaken. Within a few weeks after
the sale, Bernhard called the administrator of the 1001 Club and asked her
to transfer £500,000 from the 1001 Club account to Queen Juliana's (his
wife's) account in the Netherlands.
The £500,000 was needed for Operation
Lock, according to Stroebel, and de Haes "agreed to the use of these funds
as requested." (Bernhard told WWF it could keep the remaining £110,000,
which at the time was worth a little less than $200,000.)
After Ellis's story appeared, many Western conservationists working in
Africa were embarrassed, because Operation Lock had been exposed - not because
they thought it was wrong to engage in a covert operation to stop the
illegal trade in rhino horn and ivory. Indeed, the possibility of covert
operations had often been discussed by elephant and rhino specialists.
On
one occasion, at a meeting attended by conservationists from WWF, AWF and
other organizations, Hanks outlined what he had in mind and the general
response, as described by a person who attended, was,
"Get on with it. Don't
tell us what you're doing, but get on with it."
Government officials in
Zambia, Tanzania and Kenya did not feel quite the same way. They declined
offers of assistance from KAS.
That there was a schism as big as a canyon between the approach to
conservation taken by the Africans on the one hand and the conservation
organizations on the other was not surprising, not when one looked at the
conservation organizations: they were the monopoly of white Westerners.
Whites headed them, hired whites to staff them, and implemented programs
that reflected Western values.
WWF-International has its headquarters in Gland, a quintessential Swiss
town - small, quiet, neat, and white. It carries out programs around the
world, most of them in the Third World, yet one has rarely seen other than a
white face in the Gland offices.. For thirty years, not a single African,
and only a handful of Asians and Latin Americans, were ever hired by
WWF-International.
Only one black has ever held a professional position in
the Africa section of WWF-US, and he was not hired until 1991.
In the
field - that is, in Africa - walk into the organization's offices, and it is
like colonial days: white at the top, blacks in the inferior positions.
WWF's major presence in Africa has been its regional office in Nairobi,
which in various incarnations has existed since the 1960s; it has always
been headed by whites, and not until 1989 was there a single African in a
professional position.
Only one WWF program anywhere on the continent has
ever been headed by an African.
Back to Contents
COMODO - Group campaigning to expose the Dutch Royal Family
ORANGE SQUASH
Amsterdam, 2-2-2002: Party &
Resistance at the Royal Wedding
Dodgyness is the keyword in all the Dutch Royal Affairs. Following the
tradition of Queen Beatrix's marriage to an ex-Hitlerjugend member and her
mother Juliana's marriage to an up-to-1938 member of the German Nazi's,
Dutch crown prince Willem Alexander is marrying the daughter of a minister
in the Argentinean fascist junta.
Committee March on the House of Orange (COMODO) is planning to have a big
party of resistance and anarchy in Amsterdam, The Netherlands, on the day of
the royal wedding, 2-2-2002 of the crown-prince with his Argentinean
sweetheart Maxima.
As the Dutch royal family, the Dutch parliament, the police and security
services are preparing for the wedding, so should we.
It will be a day with lots of actions, fun and possibilities: so please join
us and come to Holland on the wedding day! Interested to help preparing?
Send an email to comodo@squat.net
A first public meeting, discussion and action will take place on May 26th in
Amsterdam by De Vrije Zone (The Free Zone) and COMODO.
SOME BACKGROUND INFO
In dutch newspapers and magazines the hype around the father of Maxim, Jorge
Zorreguieta, who has been Minister of agriculture in the Videla-junta in
Argentina and was spokesman for the big farmers and landowners, has been
going on for months now.
"Is it appropiate for such a person to attend the wedding of his daughter
with 'our' prince?" Or: "Shouldn't he be ill just for that day?". And the
most progressive: "Should she not denounce the junta publicly before she can
become princess of the Netherlands?"
For us the questions are of course different: should there be a royal family
at all and is this case not precisely what is wrong with an institute like
the monarchy?
The Dutch royal family is quite famous for their contacts with
"wrong" regimes and dictators throughout history. This is nothing new for
us. An institute like the monarchy is an expression of how this capitalistic
world works, nothing is democratic, just 'bread and plays' for 'normal
people'. Give us queens-day every year, a hand-waving queen and people will be
happy?
We cannot accept backward institutes like monarchies. That is why we will
not accept the royal wedding. There is no justification for the existence of
a wealthy elite which stands above the law, consolidates hierarchic
structures, stimulates nationalism and tortures animals.
We want the entire
monarchy abolished.
WHY SHOULD THE DUTCH MONARCHY BE A TARGET WORLDWIDE?
http://replay.web.archive.org/20090829160056/http://squat.net/beakomt/
Well, it shouldn't. But it is interesting
to note that our current queen, Beatrix, is one of the few permanent members
of the Bilderberg group, and very respected in those high level circles that
discuss what should happen to the world.
The secretary general of the group
is a Dutch economic professor, Victor Rosenboom, and has been put in charge
by Beatrix of teaching Maxima Zorreguieta the finer points of Dutch society,
such as the world renowned Dutch policies of repressive tolerance.
The Dutch monarchy is a powerful party in global high-circles and represents
Dutch transnationals, such as Shell, Unilever and Philips on the forefront
of developments in globalization.
The Dutch tend to be a favorite for
international posts because of their pseudo-neutrality, always wearing the
coat of political correctness and compromise. Recent example is the
appointment of ex prime minister Ruud Lubbers as UN high commissioner for
refugees. In the eighties and early nineties he was the responsible cabinet
leader for closing the borders, disallowing refugees to work, the Schengen
and Maastricht treaties.
In this time, the Dutch also invented the 'third way', now so revered by
social democrats worldwide, by starting the Dutch 'poldermodel' of permanent
negotiation between unions and employers, effectively paralyzing what was
left of worker's protests, while inequality kept growing.
A decade earlier, the Dutch were one of the major economic partners for the
fascist Argentinean junta under general Videla.
Tens of thousands of people,
especially thousands of leftists and Jews, were tortured and murdered.
"We
have to separate the economic and political side of things", have always
been the Dutch motto.
Thus the Dutch supplied the Fokker planes with which
the Argentinean victims where simply thrown in to the ocean.
"Now we have to separate politics and romance", and thus allow one of the fascist cabinet
members become the queen's father and have a direct line of influence in
both Dutch and global politics.
Anarchists and antifascists may find the Dutch monarchy a worthy symbol of
hierarchy, backwardness, fascism and especially deceit.
There is a lot more about the Dutch royal family. Interested in the history
of the Dutch royal family?
Send us an email: comodo@squat.net or look at the website
COMODO
Our group, Committee March on the House of Orange (COMODO) was formed last
year when queen Beatrix planned to visit Leiden on queens-day (30th of
April,
the birthday of her mother) and a lot of repressive measures were announced.
With a successful day of action and a public tribunal against the royals in
Leiden, we had a load of fun.
For the manifesto (in English as well) of Committee March on the House of
Orange: see our website http://squat.net/beakomt There is the possibility to
get on the mailing-list.
Note: our phone nr. has changed! (see below)
NO COMPROMISE! http://www.antenna.nl/nvda/groenfront
groenfr@dds.nl (PGPkey on site)
PO BOX 85069 3508 AB Utrecht Netherlands
Giro 4370351 tnv Steungroep NVDA te Utrecht ovv GroenFront!
Phone/fax: +31 84 8666018
Germans black-out their past
The sensibility for "shadow
governments" and "New World Order" is quite minor in Ger"money"... the
reasons may lie in the tendency of Germans to "black out" their past.
So far
as I know Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands was a former SS-officer before
marrying into the Dutch Kings-House. He was also employee of a sub-division
of the German "IG Farben", "IG Farben und Bilder". The latter fact
indicates, that the choice of the Hotel Bilder-Burg for the first meeting
was not accidental.
There was even a close relationship between Exxon
(Standard Oil company) and IG Farben. This connections last until the
present time - Monsanto Inc. took over much of the expertise of IG Farben
concerning chemical weapons. "Agent Orange" was a "follow up" of Sarin,
Senfgas and Tabun.
When Monsanto faced financial difficulties in
restructuring from a chemical to a biogenetic Company, Citibank (part of the
Rothschild-universe) helped out with a loan.
Hannes Oberlindober <h2o@tekomedia.de>
Back to Contents
Dutch Royal family insights
13 February 2011
In the article 'Prince Bernhard and the Nazi's' his aunt's name is wrongly
spelled. Her correct name is The Countess Paul de Kotzebue née Allene Tew
formerly Princess Heinrich Reuss XXXIII formerly the Widow Anson Wood
Burchard (1876-1955).
Queen Wilhelmina (1880-1962) was the only surviving child of King Willem III
of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg (1817-1890). The whole future
of the Dutch monarchy and the House of Orange-Nassau was on the shoulders of
the young Wilhelmina.
Would something happen to her, then via her father's sister -Queen
Wilhelmina's aunt- Grand Duchess Sophie von Sachsen-Weimar-Eisenach the most
likely Heir to the throne was Prince Heinrich XXIII Reuss, who would later
marry the dazzlingly rich American widow Mrs Anson Wood Burchard née Allene
Tew. This lady would divorce Prince Heinrich and marry for a third time, now
with Count Paul de Kotzebue.
For some reason she managed it to bring the apple of her eye, Prince
Bernhard zur Lippe-Biesterfeld (1911-2004) in contact with Queen
Wilhelmina's single child and heiress, Queen Juliana of the Netherlands
(1909-2004).
They would have a stormy marriage of 67 years surviving the Hofmans Affair, the Lockheed Scandal, etc. Prince Bernhard, co-founder and
central figure of Bilderberg, was the father of the present Queen Beatrix.
Marcel d'Ailly
Eindhoven, the Netherlands
Back to Contents
What's Wrong with "Sustainable
Use"?
From
ANIMAL PEOPLE, June 1994
U.S. World Wildlife Fund president Kathryn Fuller didn't just rattle the
Clinton administration with her May 12 declaration of opposition to any
"first step toward the resumption of commercial whaling."
More significant
was her statement that, "Even if commercial whaling could be sustainable, it
cannot be justified," a welcome marked departure from 35 years of WWF
policy, which essentially has endorsed any use of wildlife that even
promised to be sustainable.
The most influential of all animal and habitat protection groups
internationally, WWF has been problematic since 1961, when founder Sir Peter
Scott, a trophy hunter, recruited the leadership elite from among fellow
hunters who feared that African independence would lead to the rapid loss of
target species.
The elite included longtime WWF International president
Prince Bernhard of The Netherlands, who escaped punishment for allegedly
overshooting bird quotas in Italy in the early 1970s to resign, finally, in
1987, after being implicated in a Dutch bribery scandal.
Bernhard was
succeeded by another of the founding elite, Prince Philip, long the honorary
head of the British chapter. One of the world's most prolific tiger-killers
when tigers were abundant, Philip showed his allegiance to conservation
ethics that Christmas by leading his sons Charles, Andrew, and Edward in
killing 10,000 pigeons, 7,000 pheasants, 300 partridges, and several hundred
ducks, geese, and rabbits - all captive-raised - in a six-week vacation
bloodbath.
This slightly exceeded Philip's previous record of 15,500 captive
birds killed during a five-week spree. Early WWF U.S. chapter presidents
included C.R. "Pink" Gutermuth, who doubled as president of the National
Rifle Association, and Francis L. Kellogg, a notorious trophy hunter.
The attitude of WWF in those days was characterized by support for
seal-clubbing off the east coast of Canada, benefit fur auctions (only
halted in 1988), and Bernhardt's formation of the 1001 Club, a group of
billionaire patrons.
A 1988 probe of the 1001 Club by the magazine Private
Eye found that the members,
"by and large owe their fortunes to activities
completely at odds with preserving wildlife habitat."
The most notorious
member was Mobuto Sese Soto, who ruled Zaire from 1965 until mid-1993.
Under
Mobuto, Zaire protected about 84,000 elephants on spacious reserves. Then,
as two decades of reckless spending and blatant corruption brought on the
national crisis that finally toppled Mobuto, poachers slew about 60% of the
elephants in just five years - while Mobuto and supporters reputedly stashed
the take in Swiss banks.
Despite or perhaps because of such fancy patronage, WWF meanwhile spent so
much of its income on direct mail fundraising that in 1990 it failed to meet
the National Charities Information Bureau requirement that it spend at least
60% on program service. Simultaneously WWF was severely embarrassed by a
leaked internal study that documented 20 years of massive waste.
Nearly
every major WWF project had failed. Even pandas, the WWF symbol species,
were near extinction. WWF had bribed Chinese officials to preserve panda
habitat by allowing them to use donated funds for such projects as building
a hydroelectric dam - which only brought demands for still bigger bribes.
WWF turned down the heat by officially turning from a so-called
"preservationist" philosophy, which in WWF practice meant only the
privileged were allowed to kill endangered wildlife, to endorsement of
"sustainable use" - interpreted to mean killing animals for the most
profitable use possible at the fastest rate each species can withstand.
The
WWF doctrine has huge influence. Just a month ago Tufts Center for Animals
and Public Policy director Andrew Rowan found a single difference in the
responses of zoo and humane representatives to 12 hypothetical ethical
problems he posed at the White Oak conference on zoos and animal protection.
Most agreed that hunting is both ethically and pragmatically dubious as an
alleged tool of wildlife management.
Yet, endorsing the WWF view, the zoo
people were virtually all willing to tolerate trophy hunting as a way to
make wildlife lucrative for poor nations, and presumably therefore worth
protecting.
The case for "sustainable use" holds accurately enough that poor nations
usually can't or won't protect wildlife without both economic means and an
economic incentive; notes that trophy hunters pay much more for a head than
tourists do for a snapshot; and asserts that trophy hunters, armed with guns
and bribes, will go places and take risks that most tourists won't.
One
might counter that since potential tourists are much more plentiful than
trophy hunters, and since tourism creates more jobs than trophy hunting,
even though tourists spend less per capita, a wise conservation strategy
would help poor nations to create the political stability and economic
infrastructure that would attract more tourists, and would oppose activity,
including both poaching and trophy hunting, that contributes to instability
by heightening the concentration of wealth and privilege with the
well-positioned few instead of the desperately needy many.
Instead, the sustainable use doctrine asserts that since hunting is going
on, and will go on anyway, legally or not, better to regulate it and make a
buck than to merely spend bucks trying to control poaching, as the wildlife
traffickers continually jack up the price for bootlegged animal parts and
corrupt officials accept ever larger bribes to ignore poachers who often are
better equipped than their national armies - or in many cases are themselves
renegade army units, with strong clandestine ties to government leaders.
Currently, "sustainable users" point out, hunting is restricted, at least on
paper, across much of Africa and Asia.
Yet poachers are annihilating
elephants, rhinos, and tigers wherever they can, to supply the Asiatic
demand for aphrodisiacs and traditional medicines derived from their ivory,
horns, bones, and genitals. The demand increases as growth of the leading
Asian economies comes faster than the absorption of modern medical
knowledge, while ruthless mercantilism shoves aside Buddhist and Hindu
teachings which stress human kinship to other species.
Because the only
current source of the most coveted animal parts is the international black
market, and because prices climb as supplies become scarcer, cartels such as
the notorious Poon or Pong family of Hong Kong not only promote poaching,
but allegedly seek the extinction of the target species, at least in the
wild, to guarantee the lasting value of their animal part stockpiles.
Species conservation programs should cash in, the "sustainable users"
contend, by helping poor nations to manage wildlife reserves like huge game
farms, combining canned hunts for culled animals with the legal sale of
their remains. This would supposedly undercut poaching in the marketplace.
Principles and Practice "Sustainable use" is attractive to free marketers
who don't know their wildlife history - but there is no evidence that legal
traffic in wildlife parts can preserve species.
On the contrary, legal ivory
traffic provided the cover that nearly wiped out elephants in much of Africa
before 1989, when the ivory trading ban adopted by the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species curtailed poaching by giving
customs officials worldwide the ability to interdict ivory shipments,
regardless of purported origin.
The elephant episode duplicated the disastrous attempted international
regulation of commercial whaling, begun with the formation of the
International Whaling Commission in 1946: by 1986, when the current whaling
moratorium began, every species of whale was severely depleted and some were
near extinction because of ruthless poaching that used the legal quotas for
cover.
Russian whaling authorities disclosed recently that some Soviet
vessels killed from 10 to 30 times as many whales as they admitted
killing - and killed hundreds of some species which were completely off
limits.
Even in the closely regulated climate of the U.S. and Canada, the
"sustainable use" theory doesn't work, as flagrant poaching continues to
masquerade behind legal hunting and game farming. The high rate of poaching
in North America also belies the claim, made in support of "sustainable use"
in Africa, that the presence of hunters deters poachers.
"Sustainable users"
contend the mandatory employment of guides will discourage hunters from
becoming poachers - but that hasn't worked in Maine, Alaska, or Alberta,
where veteran guides have lately been caught running poaching rings after
many years of simultaneously catering to both wealthy trophy hunters and the
Asian wildlife parts market.
Hunters and parts traffickers in effect
subsidize each other, with corrupt guides as brokers.
Truth is, those who commit crimes against wildlife will exploit any
opportunity. "Sustainable use" is a one-way ticket to extinction because
bloodlust and greed, once accepted as legitimate conduct, cannot be appeased
or restrained by mere regulation. The political argument against
"sustainable use" is equally rooted.
"Sustainable users" hope to convince
poor Africans and Asians that they should not kill wildlife to collect the
equivalent of several years' wages, while rich Europeans and Americans kill
the same animals for fun - a new and dangerous idea to people whose own
killing is mostly from need, especially when coupled with the idea that
thrill-killing has a higher rationale.
"Sustainable users" argue that giving poor Africans and Asians a collective
economic stock in wildlife will lead to the development of a collective
ethic, whereby poachers will become pariahs.
This ignores the history of
collectivism wherever it has been attempted, from the failed USSR to
Africa's own overgrazed grasslands. It also overlooks the poachers' own
collective ethic (perhaps a higher ethic in that it excludes mere
thrill-killing). They already use the animals they kill for what they
perceive as the common good, the good of their families.
Having no faith in
corrupt governments that purport to protect wildlife, but in fact sell
animals to the highest bidder, they see no reason why they should not poach
animals now, before others do and take the profits.
Finally, Africa in particular already suffers too much from the idea that
whoever has the most money and firepower is above morality. The example of
the Great White Hunter who receives special privileges because he has money
reinforces the notion of the Big Man who is above the law because he
commands a well-armed tribe.
The "sustainable use" doctrine could be applied to other Third World
problems. For instance, the same newly rich and ethically alienated Asian
men who buy aphrodisiacs made from wildlife parts are also the chief patrons
of the increasingly notorious brothels of the poorest regions of Southeast
Asia, where up to 400,000 children a year are bought from illiterate parents
in remote villages and held for enforced prostitution until, diseased and
often cruelly injured, they are cast out and replaced at the advanced age of
perhaps 15.
One hopes "sustainable users" would not also endorse financing
schools and orphanages by letting well-heeled pedophiles rape selected
children - even though child prostitution is reportedly a
$3.77-billion-a-year business in Taiwan alone, twice the size of the U.S.
retail fur trade at its peak.
Some may respond that the ethics of human welfare should not be the same as
those of species conservation. Yet the leaders of the Rwandan massacres in
April and May rationalized their deeds with "sustainable use" rhetoric.
Hutus didn't massacre Tutsis, reporters were told; they merely culled them.
Then, Juliana Mukankwaya explained to Mark Fritz of the Associated Press,
she and other women of their village bludgeoned the orphaned children as a
purported act of mercy.
WWF is not responsible for the deaths of half a million civilians in Rwanda,
nor for the ongoing tribal strife elsewhere in Africa. Nor is WWF to blame
for perversions of conservation rhetoric, any more than humane societies are
to blame for Mukankwaya's warped notion of euthanasia.
Yet WWF is culpable
for advancing the view that thrill-killing can be excused - for a price.
We
hope Fuller's apparent turn away from "sustainable use" means WWF is ready
to take a different direction.
[ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing original
investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide, founded in 1992. Our
readership of 30,000-plus includes the decision-makers at more than 8,300
animal protection organizations. We have no alignment or affiliation with
any other entity.]
Back to Contents
Fall of the Royal Fortune - How a Dutch prince knocked his family down the
Forbes list
by Friso Endt and Karen Lowry Miller
30 June 2003
Newsweek International
"Kings, Queens and Despots," a short list of the world's most wealthy rulers
published by Forbes magazine, comes with a number of caveats. Valuing these
multibillion-dollar private fortunes is a "tricky business," says Forbes.
Most royal families decline to comment on their wealth. But last December,
as the 2003 list was being compiled, a prominent member of the Netherland's
illustrious House of Orange broke the family's long silence on the issue.
Prince Bernhard, feisty 92-year-old father of Queen Beatrix, phoned
Christopher Forbes, who is married to his German niece, and demanded that he
stop printing "bulls - t" exaggerations of his family fortune.
Forbes told
him to call editor Luisa Kroll, who wanted evidence. Bernhard faxed a
handwritten letter with enough detail about holdings in companies like Royal
Dutch Shell and ABN AMRO to persuade her to slash the estimate from $2.5
billion in 2002 to $250 million.
The Oranges would have been in the billionaire class occupied by the House
of Saud and Prince Hans Adam II of Liechtenstein. But when the list was
published earlier this year, they were wedged in among the lowly
multimillionaires, like Yasir Arafat and Fidel Castro.
It was the first time Kroll had ever gotten a call from a complaining
prince, but the plainspoken Bernhard is not your typical royal. In an
increasingly transparent financial world, the massive restatement is a
reminder of how difficult it remains to penetrate the regal sphere. Dutch
stipends are a matter of public record - Queen Beatrix takes home 3.8 Euros
million per year in "salary" and other expenses.
But support for the family
is spread across so many departments and "hidden posts" that "nobody, no
member of Parliament," knows the real total, according to the Republican
Association, a Dutch group of royal reformers.
As for the Orange family
fortune, which goes back to the early-19th-century spice-, rubber-, tea- and
coffee-trading exploits of King Willem I in the East Indies, the discreet
Dutch generally consider the subject off-limits.
"We are not so rich,"
Bernhard said in a brief phone interview. "People think we are stingy with
money and the truth is that we have to be careful with money."
So why would a prince bother downplaying his fortune for the commoners?
According to people who have spoken to Bernhard recently, he worries that
exaggerated estimates could inspire personal attacks - either from criminals
like those who tried to kidnap his wife, Juliana, in the 1970s, or perhaps
from budget cutters in Parliament.
(In fact, Parliament last discussed royal
funding in the 1960s, when Juliana complained that she had to spend her own
money on royal-household expenses, and Parliament agreed to pick up the
tab.)
The whole episode also fits the prince's reputation for impulsive
meddling. Last year, after two supermarket workers were fined for injuring a
thief while handing him over to the police, the outraged prince called
newspapers to complain about the fine and made a public show of paying it
for the two men.
His actions this time have exposed cracks in a family that prides itself on
not behaving badly. Bernhard told a close family friend that his daughter
was angry at him for calling Forbes.
She has been titular head of the family
since 1980, when she took over the mantle of queen from her aging mother,
but that doesn't mean Bernhard listens to her - "he just reminds her that he
is her father," says one royal watcher.
Once a high flier (who in 1954 helped launch a secretive gathering of the
global elite called the Bilderberg Group), Bernhard's reputation took a
sharp blow in the Lockheed scandal of 1976. He was accused of taking a $1
million bribe. Queen Juliana kept the law at bay, but the prime minister
devised a devastating penalty: a onetime Spitfire pilot, Bernhard was
forbidden to don a military uniform in public.
The wounds are still raw. He
and his wife have barely spoken since, and live in separate halves of the Soestdijk Palace. Each has different treasurers, says a former member of the
government information service.
That's led some Dutch royal watchers to suspect that Bernhard is now
underestimating the family fortune. It's not clear he's privy to the right
information: like all royal spouses, Bernhard lives on a stipend and does
not have access to the family capital.
Republican Association member Hans
van den Bergh scoffs at the $250 million estimate and figures the Oranges
have a fortune worth between $17 billion and $23 billion, including
Rembrandt paintings and silver services from tsarist Russia.
"He has a sharp
mind, he knows what he wants and he gets what he wants," says Cor de Horde,
editor of a monthly royals magazine. "If Prince Bernhard phones you up and
doesn't like what you've written, you have to stand firm."
Estimating the
real wealth of kings, queens and despots remains as tricky as ever.
Back to Contents
Royal fortunes tricky to pin
down
by Friso Endt and Karen Lowry Miller
26 June 2003
New Zealand Herald
"Kings, Queens and Despots," a shortlist of the world's most wealthy rulers
published by Forbes magazine, comes with several caveats. Valuing these
multibillion-dollar private fortunes is a "tricky business", says Forbes.
Most royal families decline to comment on their wealth. But in December, as
the 2003 list was being compiled, a prominent member of the Netherlands'
illustrious House of Orange broke the family's long silence on the issue.
Prince Bernhard, feisty 92-year-old father of Queen Beatrix, phoned
Christopher Forbes, who is married to his German niece, and demanded that he
stop printing "bulls***t" exaggerations of his family fortune.
Forbes told him to call editor Luisa Kroll, who wanted evidence. Bernhard
faxed a handwritten letter with enough detail about holdings in companies
like Royal Dutch Shell and ABN Amro to persuade her to slash the estimate
from US$2.5 billion ($4.28 billion) last year to US$250 million.
The Oranges would have been in the billionaire class occupied by the House
of Saud and Prince Hans Adam II of Liechtenstein.
But when the list was published this year, they were wedged in among the
lowly multimillionaires, like Yasser Arafat and Fidel Castro.
It was the first time Kroll had ever had a call from a complaining prince,
but the plainspoken Bernhard is not your typical royal.
In an increasingly transparent financial world, the massive restatement is a
reminder of how difficult it remains to penetrate the regal sphere.
Dutch stipends are a matter of public record - Queen Beatrix takes home 3.8
million ($7.49 million) a year in "salary" and other expenses.
But support for the family is spread across so many departments and "hidden
posts" that "nobody, no member of Parliament", knows the real total, says
the Republican Association, a Dutch group of royal reformers.
As for the Orange family fortune, which goes back to King Willem I's trading
of spice, rubber, tea and coffee in the East Indies in the early 19th
century, the discreet Dutch generally consider the subject off-limits.
"We are not so rich," Bernhard said in a brief phone interview.
"People think we are stingy with money and the truth is that we have to be
careful with money."
So why would a Prince bother downplaying his fortune for the commoners?
People who have spoken to Bernhard recently say he worries that exaggerated
estimates could inspire personal attacks - either from criminals like those
who tried to kidnap his wife, Juliana, in the 1970s, or from budget-cutters
in Parliament.
(In fact, Parliament last discussed royal funding in the 1960s, when Juliana
complained that she had to spend her own money on royal-household expenses,
and Parliament agreed to pick up the tab.)
The whole episode also fits the Prince's reputation for impulsive meddling.
Last year, after two supermarket workers were fined for injuring a thief
while handing him over to the police, the outraged Prince called newspapers
to complain about the fine and made a public show of paying it for the two
men.
His actions this time have exposed cracks in a family that prides itself on
not behaving badly.
Bernhard told a close family friend that his daughter was angry at him for
calling Forbes. She has been titular head of the family since 1980, when she
took over the mantle of Queen from her aging mother, but that doesn't mean
Bernhard listens to her.
"He just reminds her that he is her father," says
one royal watcher.
Once a high flyer (who in 1954 helped to launch a secretive gathering of the
global elite called the Bilderberg Group), Bernhard's reputation took a blow
in the Lockheed scandal of 1976. He was accused of taking a US$1 million
bribe.
Queen Juliana kept the law at bay, but the Prime Minister devised a
devastating penalty: a one-time Spitfire pilot, Bernhard was forbidden to
don a military uniform in public.
The wounds are still raw. He and his wife have barely spoken since, and live
in separate halves of the Soestdijk Palace. Each has different treasurers,
says a former member of the Government information service.
That's led some royal watchers to suspect that Bernhard is now
underestimating the family fortune.
Republican Association member Hans van den Bergh scoffs at the US$250
million estimate and figures the Oranges have a fortune worth between US$17
billion and US$23 billion, including Rembrandt paintings and silver from
tsarist Russia.
"He has a sharp mind, he knows what he wants and he gets what he wants,"
says Cor de Horde, editor of a monthly royals magazine.
"If Prince Bernhard phones you up and doesn't like what you've written, you
have to stand firm."
Estimating the real wealth of Kings, Queens and despots remains as tricky as
ever.
- NEWSWEEK.
Back to Contents
The Prince and the Bilderbergers
Article 30 in 'The banned articles of
C. Gordon Tether'
This censored Financial Times' 'Lombard' Column was written 3rd May 1976
Published in Verdict - November 1976
Whatever the conclusions reached by the committee which the Dutch Government
has very sensibly set up to inquire into the charge that Prince Bernhard was
a recipient of Lockheed largess, one thing is certain.
It is that the affair
will breathe new life into that long-smoldering controversy over the role
that the Bilderberg group and its clandestine get-togethers play in world
economics and business affairs. For the prince took a large part in the
formation of this organization, its first meeting having been held under his
chairmanship in 1954.
And, as the president, he has been the master of
ceremonies at its annual conferences ever since.
A pamphlet published by an organization calling itself the 'American Friends
of Bilderberg' says that the group owes its origin to the fact that, in the
early 1950's a number of people on both sides of the Atlantic were seeking a
means of bringing together leading citizens - in and out of government - for
informal discussions on problems facing the Atlantic community.
'It was
felt' it goes on, 'that such meetings would create a better understanding of
the forces and trends affecting Western nations, and, in particular, would
help to clear up differences and misunderstandings that might weaken the
West.'
Nothing much wrong with that, you might say.
Are there not, indeed, many
other organizations that concern themselves with the same good cause? And
this being so, why should the activities of the Bilderberg group be singled
out for special attention - and largely hostile attention at that?
Two Reasons
There seems to be two main reasons for this.
One is that the 'Bilderbergers'
have always insisted upon clothing their comings and goings in the closest
secrecy. Until a few years back, this was carried to such lengths that their
annual conclave went entirely unmarked in the world's Press. In the more
recent past, the veil has been raised to the extent of letting it be known
that the meetings were taking place.
But the total ban on the reporting of
what went on has remained in force.
This acute concern with privacy is usually justified on the grounds - as the
American Friends of Bilderberg put it - that 'the gatherings have to be
closed and off the record in order to assure freedom of speech and opinion.'
But there has been an inevitable tendency for conspiratologists to argue
that only those with something to hide could consistently behave in such
clandestine fashion.
The other main reason why the Bilderberg set-up has come to be a favorite
target for the finger of suspicion is to be found in the nature of its
'cast-list'.
There are no members of Bilderberg as such. 'Each year' - and again I quote
- 'an invitation list is compiled by Prince Bernhard in consultation with an
informal international steering committee.' Yet invariably included in the
80 to 100 participants are representatives of many of the world's largest
capitalist empires - men wielding immense power in the fields of economics
and business.
And many of these attend all the meetings , along with a
number of 'regulars' operating in other parts of the corridors of power -
one of them being Mr. Healy, the Chancellor of the Exchequer.
Evidence
It is this close identification with the megaton-weights of the
international business community that has encouraged the growth of the idea
that Bilderbergism is the arm of a movement whose main aim is to create - 'a
world fit for multinationals to live in' - which may indeed even see itself
as spear-heading the establishment of World Government by such interests.
And it is because of this that prince Bernhard's involvement in the Lockheed
affair must be expected to give new impetus to the Bilderberg controversy.
It naturally has to be accepted that the Prince did not take bribes from
Lockheed unless and until the investigating body has proved otherwise.
But
this does not alter the fact that there is a strong suggestion in what has
emerged so far that he was involved in some degree in the 'wheeling and
dealing' processes which have evidently played an extremely important part
in the international fight for aircraft business.
There is no difficulty in seeing that this does not prove anything so far as
the Bilderberg group is concerned. But it would hardly be surprising if the
fact that light of this kind has been thrown on the activities of its top
man was not seized upon as supporting evidence by those who maintain that
Bilderbergism is an unseen force of great significance in world affairs that
we aught to know a lot more about.
I should add that official accounts I have seen of Bilderberg meetings
issued on a 'personal and strictly confidential' basis do not contain
anything that would not rank as standard fare at any international
conference whose purpose was,
'to clear up differences and misunderstandings
that might weaken the West.'
But any conspiratologist who has the
Bilderbergers in his sights will quickly make the point that the real meat
of their discussions - the alleged global conspiracy work - will find no
place in such documentation and then proceed to ask why it is that, if there
is so little to hide, so much effort is devoted to hiding it?
Back to Contents
