Carroll Quigley

Puppets & Players VI: Council on Foreign Relations

 “The near monopoly of power once enjoyed by sovereign entities is being eroded … states must be prepared to cede some sovereignty to world bodies … Globalization thus implies that sovereignty is not only becoming weaker in reality, but that it needs to become weaker … The goal should be to redefine sovereignty for the era of globalization, to find a balance between a world of fully sovereign states and an international system of either world government or anarchy.”

– Richard Haas CFR President February 12 2006.


infinite-cash.comProfessor Carroll Quigley described in Tragedy and Hope the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) as “… the American Branch of a society which originated in England [and] believes national boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established.” [1]The founding members of CFR were some of the same members involved in the creation of the Federal Reserve System in 1913 and the Round Table movement of Cecil Rhodes and Lord Alfred Milner. Many members were drawn from the emerging Military-Industrial complex, incorporating the fresh young blood of the intelligence apparatus of the US government. The CIA’s Allen Dulles and John Foster Dulles had both been at the Paris Peace conference along with so many other world government enthusiasts and were founding members of the CFR. Allen Dulles became a member of CFR in 1926 and later its president. His brother John Foster, an in-law of the Rockefellers, Chairman of the Board of the Rockefeller Foundation, and Board Chairman of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was well placed for CFR steerage by the time he was Secretary of State under President Eisenhower. From a 1993 Annual report: “The Council on Foreign Relations is a non-profit, and nonpartisan membership organization dedicated to improving the understanding of US foreign policy, and international affairs through the exchange of ideas.”

This is vague enough to encompass almost any ideological and political persuasion while giving the impression of unsullied innocence. True to its Round Table origins its actual objectives are to forge a centralised system of global government based on an inter-locking financial and corporate architecture policed by a world Army. As Senator Earnest Hollings of South Carolina bluntly put it for the Congressional Record, June 30, of the same year: “If you ever run for President, you get very wonderful, embossed invitations from the Council on Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission, and you get the coffee and fine china, and, man, you are really a high muckety-muck. And then what they do is get you to swear on the altar of free trade an undying loyalty and support—free trade, free trade. That is all they want. And they co-opt every one of these young Senators that want to run for President.” [2]

Today, CFR membership is made up of presidents past and present, Secretaries of State, Wall Street investors, Joint Chiefs of Staff, international bankers, executives, ambassadors, think-tank executives, lobbyists, lawyers, NATO officiandos, Pentagon military leaders, Establishment press, media owners, academics, novelists, entertainers, university presidents, senators, and Congressmen, Supreme Court Justices, Federal Judges, and rich businessmen of every creed and colour. An ex-CFR member who seemed to wake up to the reality of what the organisation was promoting was former Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Navy, Retired Navy Admiral Chester Ward who wrote a scathing critique of CFR stating that their objective is the: “… submergence of U. S. sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful one-world government…” [3]

The overriding principles of a world government that would be based on the Chinese template of communist world state or world government and capitalist economy is still the dream of the CFR globalists as it was with J.D. Rockefeller. In 1962 a study titled, A World Effectively Controlled by the United Nations, CFR member Lincoln Bloomfield states: “… if the communist dynamic was greatly abated, the West might lose whatever incentive it has for world government.” And of course, in order to achieve world government and its interlocking “unions” it is necessary to dispense with the idea of sovereignty, economic or otherwise. The CFR members espouse just such a directive for their brand of globalisation.In April 1974, former U. S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State, Trilateralist and CFR member Richard Gardner published an article in the CFR’s Foreign Affairs entitled: ‘The Hard Road to World Order’ in which he declared: “… the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built from the bottom up rather than from the top down … but an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece, will accomplish much more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.”

cfr

Screen shots from the film clip: Council on Foreign Relations

cfr2

The usual suspects crop up again and again …

Since the creation of the Office of Secretary of Defence in 1947, 14 DoD secretaries have been CFR members. Since 1940, every Secretary of State, except James Byrnes, has been a CFR member and/or a member of the Trilateral Commission. Equally, for the past 80 years, almost every key US National Security and Foreign Policy Advisor has been a member. The majority of top generals and admirals and many former presidential candidates were/are CFR, including Herbert Hoover, Adlai Stevenson, Dwight Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter (and TC member), George HW Bush, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, and John McCain.

CIA directors were/are CFR, including Richard Helms, James Schlesinger, William Casey, William Webster, Robert Gates, James Woolsey, John Deutsch, George Tenet, Porter Goss, Michael Hayden, and Leon Panetta. Many Treasury Secretaries were/are also in the Club such as Douglas Dillon, George Schultz, William Simon, James Baker, Nicholas Brady, Lloyd Bentsen, Robert Rubin, Henry Paulson, and Tim Geithner. [4]

Virtually everyone who has held a position at the US administrative level in the US has been a member of the CFR. Some past and present members include: David Rockefeller, Thomas Foley, Jeane Kirkpatrick, Paul A. Volcker, Prince Edward, Prince Charles of Wales, Madeleine K. Albright, Robert S. McNamara, Zbigniew Brzezinski, George H.W. Bush, Donald E. Graham, Henry A. Kissinger, Richard N. Perle, George Soros, Lawrence H. Summers, John D. Rockefeller IV. Bankers, Alan Greenspan, and World Bank President Robert Zoellick. Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger, Condoleezza Rice, Hillary Clinton. MSM CFR includes Katie Couric, Bill Moyers, Diane Sawyer, Tom Brokaw as well as foreign heads of state Mikhail Gorbachev, Benyamin Netanyahu and Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe and even the Dalai Lama. Corporate membership spans most of the Fortune 500 companies such as BP, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Google, Merck, NASDAQ, Pfizer and VISA.

One only has to take a look at the Council on Foreign Relations website to see that it has developed a sophisticated propaganda machine. Simply read the associated blogs and you’ll get an immediate flavour of what their objectives are all about. Unlike Le Cercle or Skull & Bones and occult groupings, this is indeed an open conspiracy. They are happy to court those in the entertainment business who usually have a very superficial understanding of Anglo-American designs but nevertheless due to their mass appeal and willingness to feed their egos and perceived social conscience, promote highly simplistic “solutions” while admirably serving the hidden interests of their backers.Actors such as George Clooney and Angelina Jolie are a case in point, the latter having become a satisfied CFR member last year and is busy doing her best to promote the organisation’s principles. She has very broad social appeal and represents quite a coup for the media focused think-tank.

To that end, social engineering and “information dominance” through the world’s media is essential part of CFR operations and has always played a major part in the shaping the minds of both old and new members so they may in turn, mould the public mind. As Quigley mentions: “The American branch of this ‘English Establishment’ exerted much of its influence through five American newspapers (The New York Times, New York Herald Tribune, Christian Science Monitor, the Washington Post, and the lamented Boston Evening News).” The RAND Corporation is most closely associated with the group and its expertise in PSYOPS is routinely used by a various members of the American Establishment and their promotional arms; from the internet to carefully stage-managed media press conferences. [5]

Most importantly for the CFR and other groups, the decision to infiltrate the left-wing and liberal leaning political movements as far back as 1917 by Round Table and J.P Morgan agents proved hugely important as the MSM evolved. Wall St. was a vital component in the placing of editors and staff amenable to their vision. A Congressional record verifies this fact from statements made by Congressman Oscar Callaway who stated: “… the J.P. Morgan [banking] interests …. and their subsidiary organizations got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press of the US … They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers. … an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information …” [6] Quigley observes that the“… purpose was not to destroy … or take over but was really threefold:

(1) to keep informed about the thinking of Left-wing or liberal groups;

(2) to provide them with a mouthpiece so that they could “blow off steam,” and

(3) to have a final veto on their publicity and possibly on their actions, if they ever went “radical.” [7]

Sociologist Hadley Cantril wrote in his 1967 book The Human Dimension – Experiences in Policy Research: “Psycho-political operations are propaganda campaigns designed to create perpetual tension and to manipulate different groups of people to accept the particular climate of opinion the CFR seeks to achieve in the world.” They have been supremely successful in doing just that. Their policy of non-attribution where nothing that is said in public contradicts their message of openness and transparency as does their numerous secret meetings not open to the public. Twenty years ago, the CFR was relatively unknown. Now, with the information age, there is much greater awareness, which is why its slick media campaigns are highly sophisticated in order to match the changing times.

See also: Behind the Big News: Propaganda and the CFR  and The Mainstream Media (MSM)

 


Notes

[1] pp.951-952; Quigley, Carroll, Tragedy and Hope (1966)
[2] Senator Earnest Hollings (D) of South Carolina, Congressional Record, June 30, 1993, S8315.
[3] CFR Annual Report 1993-1994.
[4] The True Story of the Bilderberg Group By Daniel Estulin. Published by Trine Day, 2nd edition 2009. | ISBN-10: 0979988624.
[5] op. cit. Quigley The Anglo-American Establishment (1981).
[6] Congressman Oscar Callaway statements were included in the Congressional Record, vol. 54, February 9, 1917, p. 2947.
[7] op. cit. Quigley (1966)

Cartel Economics I

2013-07-04 18.28.14© infrakshun

 By M.K. Styllinski

“The Central Bank is an institution of the most deadly hostility existing against the principles and form of our Constitution … if the American people allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

Thomas Jefferson


January 8th 1835, was a special day and year in American history: it was the only time that the United States had no national debt. Now, the national public debt has surpassed all possibilities for even a gradual repayment standing at the time of writing at: $ 16,698, 618, 743, 942. 57. With the estimated population of the US at 314,525,808 each citizen’s share of this debt is $53,091.41. This has continued to increase by an average of $3.88 billion per day since September 28, 2007. [1] This abstract figure is on top of almost half of all Americans today classified as ‘living in poverty’ or ‘barely scraping by’ whilst 46.4% pay no income tax. [2]

How on earth did it get to such a point of no return?

President Thomas Jefferson, like so many American forefathers was right again. Our present global economic system is founded on the enslavement of older cultures which informs the new with psychopathological dispositions remaining hidden behind its inception. This archaic and grossly inadequate financial system has overseen the steady decline in job opportunities, and the accompanying fragmentation of the community. A heavily invested hi-tech global economy is producing a surplus of goods and services with an ever smaller work force. Poverty of mind and body fluctuates under a vast divide with tiny pockets of jealously guarded affluence. This is leading to greater destabilisation, as various sub-cultures of youth crime emerge under well-established mafia-led economies; to act as their corporate cannon fodder.

Global financial debt, wage dependence and a kind of “export warfare” are maintained and regulated by the IMF and the World Bank. These bastions of financial brokering are seen as the epitome of free trade ethic, yet rather than being the facilitator of all things financially rosy, they are in fact the gatekeepers of debt slavery and economic disparity. If free trade was to be truly conducive to the majority of humankind then it would be founded on justice rather than on utility and strength alone. The IMF has engineered these controls at the behest of both international banking cartels and the fortune 500 corporations preventing individual nations from managing their own economic affairs, while increasing the centralisation of power under the auspices of global governance as an exemplar of good economic practice. [3] For each nation to control its own destiny, including the inflow and outflow of capital, this would take away the dependence on the resources that provide a rich bounty for wealthy countries.

Despite the theoretical and abstract theories of free trade worshippers, the present financial architecture remains the primary base for an abundance of capital resources for those at the top of the pyramid. These institutions remain in their economic eminence gris where their so called “loans” to the developing world is no more than a mechanism to keep these nations at the beck and call of financiers. The debt based financial system which keeps the blood-money flowing is a seemingly invincible arrangement that is energised by “borrowing” thereby affirming the future of developing nations assets (i.e. its people) which will then be held in bondage and ransomed out to whoever’s buying. American hegemony has ensured that the extraordinarily damaging forces of economic globalisation continue unabated.

Behind this monopolisation are highly influential institutions which include: the World Economic Forum (or the Davos Group) the International Chamber of Commerce, The Business Industry Advisory Committee, World Business Council on Sustainable Development, The US Council on International Business, The Business Round Table Europe and The European Round Table of Industrialists. The most noted of these global steerage organisations are The Council on Foreign Relations,[4] The Bilderberg Group [5] and the Trilateral Commission [6] whom, admittedly have a legendary conspiratorial mythos and not without reason. These three organizations offer a cultivated and refined air of respectability and economic savoir-faire. Yet the reality of their global manoeuvres offer important reasons as to why developing countries continue to drown in varying degrees of corruption, famine, poverty and crippling economic hardship.

The overriding theme that connects all three groups is the historical and unquestioned belief that national boundaries should be obliterated and global governance established, along with the requisite central bank and currency. No matter how these accusations may be repudiated in the rare addresses to the press in public and via their respective websites, this is the overarching objective. Its members write scholarly pieces which are then used in the decision making process where the academic discourse often reaches dizzying heights of rhetoric, extolling the virtues of a borderless and united (read monopolised) world which the media happily disseminates via its editorials and commentary sections. Guest writers are frequently drawn from those very same think tanks and myriad organisations sympathetic to the cause. These steering groups bring together CEOs of global corporations, leaders of national political parties and a general mix of “movers and shakers” to enjoy some consensus building in how to mould and shape the global economy. The public is never privy to these inside negotiations.

Members include most of the rich and famous in the political and financial arena since before the Second World War. (The Trilateral Commission is a more recent arrival). As such, these meetings are about an old boy’s network of Caucasian males, from Northern industrial backgrounds of the wealthy elite primarily concerned with maintaining the prosperity of an Anglo-American style economy. This naturally requires a long-term dominion over the world’s resources and markets, to the exclusion of most of the world population’s aspiration for a better life. Steps are taken to ensure that international development loans can never be paid back and thus not only lock many developing countries into a spiral of unending debt, but the necessary impositions of civil war and poverty to ensure compliance and unfettered access to resources far into the future. Most policy directives can be traced back to these closed meetings between leaders that are effectively arranged to preclude alternatives to prevailing economic status quo. [7] Without any elected, democratic process involved they are able to influence governments, financiers and corporations, NGOs and entertainers alike according to their own narrow wishes.

Though many of the more naive participants believe they are holding hands around the table, inaugurating the seeds of prosperity tied up in a nice blue bow of international relations, the reality is somewhat different. The members are involved in an exclusive process that is wholly directed towards the corporate, Neo-Libertarian ethos of economic integration and that sickly sweet euphemism of “harmonization.” Or more accurately: a rampant conglomeration of cartels maintaining an elite agenda for power, where alternative visions of the financial and economic development are never up for discussion and resisted at all costs.

The late author and journalist Eustace Mullins laid out the global structure which is largely unchanged today:

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. [8]

Though as some will recall, the Lehman Brothers was sacrificed in the 2008 financial warfare phase that saw even greater asset consolidation for J.P Morgan (Rothschild) Citibank, Bank of America and others.

One-time mentor to future US president Bill Clinton, Professor Carroll Quigley taught History at Georgetown University from 1941 to 1976. He also taught at Princeton and Harvard universities and lectured at the Brookings Institution, the Foreign Service Institute, the U.S. Naval Weapons Laboratory and the Naval College at Norfolk, Virginia. Moving into consultancy in 1958 he worked at the Congressional Select Committee which set up the National Space Agency. In other words, this man was an insider. He was able to expose many of the workings of the Anglo-American Establishment by gaining access to the private archives of that Rockefeller baby: the Council on Foreign Relations closely associated with the Trilateral Commission and the Royal Institute of International Affairs.

His masterpiece in this regard is: Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time published in 1966. The book is dense, over 1,300 pages and meticulously sourced. Readers are encouraged to seek out the book themselves to validate its quality.

Quigley details the emergence of the commercial world and international finance and their historical repercussions. Initially, the Georgetown professor had great difficulties with his publisher over the distribution of the tome.  “The publisher claimed demand was poor. When Quigley sought and acquired the necessary demand, the publisher responded by saying that the plates had been destroyed.” [9] It has also been suggested that the upper levels of Elite banking were not amused and initiated a form of censorship which was perhaps one reason why the book was very hard to find over the last few decades.

Rather than attacking the principles behind an intellectual elite and an updated feudal system commonly labelled a “New World Order” Quigley’s confession was very much one of support. The differences of opinion he had with his Elite friends were in terms of secrecy and openness.

In his own words:

There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960’s, to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies … but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known. [10]

The information the professor conveys dove-tails perfectly into the speculation, supposition, circumstantial and deductive evidence of the actions of unknown agencies operating within governments, banking and occult societies. Quigley confirms the fact that if it were just a case of a Darwinian relapse caused by the inherently selfish human beings that create deleterious effects on societies then it would be relatively easy to adjust over time by improving our social systems while retaining the overall modes of capitalism. But it seems the financial architecture of modern economics is a symptom of something very different to the ideal of capitalism with a small “c”.

What was originally the primary goal of traditional capitalism at its inception?

According to Quigley, commercial capitalism traversed five stages, the first of which was “… self-sufficient agrarian units (manors)… in a society organized so that its upper ranks—the lords, lay and ecclesiastical—found their desires for necessities so well met that they sought to exchange their surpluses of necessities for luxuries of remote origin.” The second stage: “… mercantile profits and widening markets created a demand for textiles and other goods which could be met only by application of power to production”. This produced the third stage of: “…industrial capitalism [which] soon gave rise to such an insatiable demand for heavy fixed capital, like railroad lines, steel mills, shipyards, and so on, that these investments could not be financed from the profits and private fortunes of individual proprietors. New instruments for financing industry came into existence in the form of limited-liability corporations and investment banks. These were soon in a position to control the chief parts of the industrial system, since they provided capital to it.” [11] This was where financial capitalism evolved to the fourth stage whereby it: “… was used to integrate the industrial system into ever-larger units with interlinking financial controls. This made possible a reduction of competition with a resulting increase in profits. As a result, the industrial system soon found that it was again able to finance its own expansion from its own profits, and, with this achievement, financial controls were weakened, and the stage of monopoly capitalism arrived.” [12]

Finally, the fifth stage saw: “…great industrial units, working together either directly or through cartels and trade associations, were in a position to exploit the majority of the people. The result was a great economic crisis which soon developed into a struggle for control of the state—the minority hoping to use political power to defend their privileged position, the majority hoping to use the state to curtail the power and privileges of the minority. This dualist struggle dwindled with the rise of economic and social pluralism after 1945.” [13]

Therefore, the primary goal of capitalism was profit where values of the majority underwent a rapid process of attrition resulting in their extinction. It reached a stage where the very nature of human values and alternative concepts of “growth” were ridiculed or questioned if they did not fit in with the current paradigm of exploitation. As Quigley states capitalism is:

“… never primarily seeking to achieve prosperity, high production, high consumption, political power, patriotic improvement, or moral uplift. Any of these may be achieved under capitalism, and any (or all) of them may he sacrificed and lost under capitalism, depending on this relationship to the primary goal of capitalist activity—the pursuit of profits. During the nine-hundred-year history of capitalism, it has, at various times, contributed both to the achievement and to the destruction of these other social goals.” [14]

 


Notes


[1] US National Debt Clock at http://www.brillig.com/debt_clock/ and wwww.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_public_debt#Public_and_government_accounts
[2] ‘When The U.S. Paid Off The Entire National Debt (And Why It Didn’t Last)’ by Robert Smith, “Planet Money” on http://www.npr.org | ‘The kind of money matters’ by E.G. Austin, The Economist, Mar 1st 2012.
[3] While the carte blanche exploitation of Africa was signed for in 2000 the American Union has stalled somewhat, thanks largely to the efforts of Victor Chavez the President of Venezuela and Evo Morales of Bolivia who will not play ball. The Global Union is an entirely elitist plan for an “New International Order” that Neo-Conservative , corporate and Zionist elites wish to suck in all nations of North, Central and South America as well as the Caribbean Islands, and which would function just like the present European Union, which was completed in the year 2000. Like the European Union, there will be one monetary system, one central bank, one unelected governing body, one military force, one judicial system, no borders, and no Constitution and Bill of Rights. NAFTA, has now become the FTAA,  (Free Trade Area of the Americas).
[4] Further reading: ‘Kinder capitalists in Armani specs’ by Will Hutton, The Observer, 1st February 1998, p22; ‘Goldwater Sees Elitist Sentiments Threatening Liberties’, By US Senator Barry M. Goldwater, 1979. See also: The Shadows of Power: The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline by James Perloff. 1988 | ISBN: 0882791346.
[5] Further reading: American Hegemony and the Trilateral Commission by Stephen Gill, Cambridge University Press; Reprint edition (1991) ISBN: 052142433X; Trilateralism: The Trilateral Commission and Elite Planning for World Management, Published by South End Press, 1980| ISBN: 0896081036.
[6] Further reading: ‘The Bilderberg Group and the project of European unification’ by Mike Peters, The Lobster, Issue 32, 1996; Bilderberg Group, The Global Manipulators, by Robert Eringer, Pentacle Books, (1980); ‘European Parliament examining Bilderbergers -Bilderberg questions tabled at European Parliament by Patricia McKenna MEP’ – November 1998 to February 1999 by Tony Gosling., http://www.Bilderberg.org.
[7] pp.133-140; When Corporations Rule the World, by David C. Korten, Published by Earthscan, 1995 | ISBN 1-85383-434-3 | ‘Building Elite Consensus.’
[8] Murder by Injection: The Story of the Medical Conspiracy Against America by Eustace Mullins. Chapter 10: ‘The Rockefeller Syndicate 310.’ Published by The National Council for Medical Research; third printing edition, 1995 | ASIN: B002S1BNKA
[9] The Global Manipulators. the Bilderberg Group. the Trilateral Commission. Covert Power Groups of the West by Robert Eringer, Pentacle Books, 1980 | ASIN: B00AMPT9XM
[10] Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time published by New York: The Macmillan Company, 1966 | Sourced from online PDF file version  found at http://www.wanttoknow.info/war/tragedy_and_hope_quigley_full1090pg.pdf
[11] Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time by Carroll Quigley, Published by Angriff Pr, June 1975, ISBN-10: 094500110X. Chapter 5: European Economic Developments.
[12] Ibid. Part One—Introduction: Western Civilization In Its World Setting Chapter 1—Cultural Evolution in Civilizations.
[13]  Ibid. Chapter 5—European Economic Developments; Commercial Capitalism.
[14] Ibid. Chapter 5—European Economic Developments; The Primary Goal of Capitalism.