Final warning
a history of the new world order
chapter eight
the illuminati influence on international affairs
the united nations
Jan Tinbergen (from the Netherlands), the winner of the 1969 Nobel Prize for Economics, has said: “Mankind’s problems can no longer be solved by national governments; what is needed is a world government.” Although this mentality is becoming more pronounced, getting to that point has taken many years.
In 1939, Dr. James T. Shotwell organized a group known as the Commission to Study the Organization of Peace, which was made up of a number of small subcommittees. One of these, the Subcommittee on International Organization was chaired by Sumner Wells, the Under Secretary of State, and its purpose was to plan postwar policy. Shotwell and Isaiah Bowman, members of the subcommittee, were also members of the League of Nations Association, and had been on Col. House’s staff at the Paris Peace Conference in 1918, where plans for the League of Nations had been laid out. This established a direct link between the League of Nations and the United Nations. The subcommittee’s work formed the basis for the Charter of the United Nations, and was the means by which the Council on Foreign Relations was able to condition the Congress, and the people of the country to accept the United Nations.
Two weeks after the attack on Pearl Harbor, Cordell Hull, the Secretary of State, sent a letter to President Roosevelt recommending the establishment of a Presidential Advisory Committee on Post War Foreign Policy, which actually became a planning group for the United Nations. Ten of the Fourteen Committee members came from the CFR. Roosevelt’s “Four Freedoms Speech” planted the seed for the United Nations. A conference held in Washington, D.C between the representatives of the 26 nations that had banded together against the axis powers, gave momentum to the movement by issuing the “Declaration of the Twenty-Six United Nations” on January 1, 1942. In February, 1942, the State Department’s Advisory Committee on Post-War Foreign Policy secretly worked out more details. One of their reports said: “Its discussions throughout were founded upon belief in the unqualified victory by the United Nations. It predicted, as an absolute prerequisite for world peace, the continuing strength of the United Nations through unbroken cooperation after the war.”
In 1942, Free World, a periodical published by the International Free World Association (organized in 1941), they stated that their objective was to create the “machinery for a world government in which the United Nations will serve as a nucleus ... in order to prepare in time the foundations for a future world order.”
Leading diplomats from the United States, Russia, England, and China, attended preliminary meetings in October, 1943, at a conference in Moscow. In November, Cordell Hull “secured the consent of Stalin to establish a general organization ... for the maintenance of international peace and security,” and in proposing it to Roosevelt, made it appear as though it was an American project. Among the leading U.S. figures who were involved in the planning of the United Nations: Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, Virginius Frank Coe, Noel Field, Laurance Duggan, Henry Julian Wadleigh, John Carter Vincent, David Weintraub, Nathan Gregory Silvermaster, Harold Glasser, Victor Perlo, Irving Kaplan, Solomon Adler, Abraham George Silverman, William L. Ullman, William H. Taylor, and Dean Acheson. All of these men, were either communists, or had pro-communist sympathies.
The idea for the United Nations was officially proposed in 1944, at the secret Dumbarton Oaks Conference, where the framework was developed, and the final plans laid out. The conference was attended by representatives from the U.S., England, and Russia, and it was all coordinated by Alger Hiss. Hiss was a Trustee of the Woodrow Wilson Foundation, a director of the Executive Committee of the American Association for the United Nations, a director of the American Peace Society, a Trustee of the World Peace Foundation, a director of the American Institute of Pacific Relations, and President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. In 1950, he was convicted of perjury, and sent to prison. Exposed as a Soviet spy, his communist activities extended back to 1939. Other Americans who attended: Harry Dexter White, Virginius Coe, Noel Field, Laurance Duggan, Harry Wadleigh, John Carter Vincent, David Weintraub, Nathan Silvermaster, Harold Glasser, Victor Perlo, Irving Kaplan, Solomon Adler, Abraham Silverman, William Ullman, William Taylor, and John Foster Dulles (who had been hired by Joseph Stalin to be the Soviet Union’s legal counsel in the United States).
In February, 1945, at the Yalta Conference, President Roosevelt, Winston Churchill, and Joseph Stalin agreed to the plans proposing the establishment of the United Nations.
The April, 1945 issue of Political Affairs, the official publication of the U.S. Communist Party, said: “Great popular support and enthusiasm for the United Nations policies should be built up, well organized and fully articulated ... The opposition must be rendered so impotent that it will be unable to gather any significant support in the Senate against the United Nations Charter and the treaties which will follow.”
On June 26, 1945, the San Francisco Conference, attended by 50 nations, established the United Nations, and adopted the Charter which had been drafted. The General Assembly held their first meeting in London, on January 10, 1946. The U.S. Senate ratified the UN Charter with only two dissenting votes; and in December, 1946, John D. Rockefeller, Jr. donated an 18-acre tract of land in Manhattan (which he had purchased for $8,500,000, with New York City contributing the remaining $4,250,000), to provide the organization with a permanent headquarters, which is located between First Avenue and Roosevelt Drive, and East 42nd and East 48th Streets.
The United World Federalists were established on February 22, 1947, by two CFR members, Norman Cousins and James P. Warburg, when the Americans United for World Government, World Federalists, Massachusetts Committee for World Federation, Student Federalists, World Citizens of Georgia, and World Republic, all merged. Their goal was to endorse “the efforts of the United Nations to bring about a world community favorable to peace ... (and) to strengthen the United Nations into a world government of limited powers adequate to prevent a war and having direct jurisdiction over the individual.” Nixon said of them: “Your organization can perform an important service by continuing to emphasize that world peace can only come through world law. Our goal is world peace.” Ronald Reagan was associated with them before he became a conservative. Various other left-wing organizations have also defended and supported this international organization.
The United Nations, “open to all peace-loving nations as sovereign equals,” is made up of 191 member nations, and exists primarily to maintain peace and security; develop international cooperation in solving the political, economic, social, cultural, and humanitarian problems of the world; and ensure the existence of friendly relations. Many of the countries are non-democratic, being ruled by dictators, royal families, military officers, or one-party governments.
As you have read, there was a strong communist influence during the establishment of the organization, and all indications are that it has maintained a socialistic slant to its affairs. Earl Browder, a former leader in the U.S. Communist Party, said in his book Victory and After: “The American Communists worked energetically and tirelessly to lay the foundations for the United Nations, which we were sure would come into existence.” Alger Hiss, who was later convicted as a communist traitor, became the acting Secretary-General after the establishment of the UN. The April 16, 1945 issue of Time magazine called him “one of the State Department’s brighter young men.” It was Hiss, and Joseph E. Johnson (who later became Secretary of the Bilderbergers) who wrote much of the UN Charter, patterning it after the Constitution of Russia, and the Communist Manifesto. An Associated Press dispatch from April 7, 1970 which appeared in the Los Angeles Times said: “Secretary-General U Thant praised Vladimir I. Lenin, founder of the Soviet Union, as a political leader, whose ideals were reflected in the UN Charter.” It contained self-granted powers for a one-world government. Even their official seal, which was similar to Russia’s, was designed by Aldo Marzani, a socialist.
Trygve Lie, the first official UN Secretary-General, was a high-ranking member of Norway’s Social Democratic Labor Party, which was an offshoot of the Third Communist International. Dag Hammarskjold, the second Secretary-General, was a Swedish socialist who openly pushed communist policies, and U Thant, the third Secretary, was a Marxist.
In 1978, Arkady Shevchenko, an ex-KGB agent, and Under Secretary for Political and Security Council Affairs, who defected, said that many Soviet UN delegates worked for the KGB.
With the United States having only one vote within the socialist-dominated organization, we were powerless to prevent the socialists from using diplomacy to achieve their goals. Nonaligned nations, a majority of the delegates, voted with the communists 85% of the time in the General Assembly; and in 1987, member nations voted with the U.S. only 18.7% of the time. In fact, on key issues, the UN has voted against the United States nearly 85% of the time.
The Constitutional right of Congress to declare war has been completely transferred to the UN Military Committee, and as such, they can order us into war at any time, without our consent, as they did in Korea. The United States didn’t make the treaty with Japan to end World War II, it was made with the UN. The UN refused to come to the aid of China in 1949, ignored the Hungarian freedom fighters in 1956, shunned the Tibetans when they were attacked by Chinese Communists, and in the early 1960’s, supported the communist attempt to overthrow the African country of Katanga.
They even criticized the American invasion of Grenada, which sought to stem communist activity in the Caribbean. Remember, the Under Secretary for Political and Security Council Affairs had always been a Russian, who along with the Chairman of the UN Military Staff Committee was responsible for all UN military action. Prior to the Korean War, the Chairman was Lt. Gen. Alexandre Vasiliev, who took a leave of absence from the position to command the communist troops, and actually gave the orders to attack. He continued to get valuable information about the UN’s military plans from his handpicked successor, Gen. Ivan A. Skliaro.
In 1915, in No. 40 of the Russian document The Socialist Democrat, Lenin called for a “United States of the World.” The Communist International in 1936, said that a world dictatorship “can be established only by victory of socialism in different countries or groups of countries, after which the Proletariat Republics would unite on federal lines with those already in existence, and this system would expand ... at length forming the World Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.” In the November, 1946 issue of the communist publication Bolshevik, it said: “The masses know that peace is possible only on the basis of cooperation among the existing states ... The Soviet Union is fighting to have the United Nations as effective as possible.”
On October 7, 1961 People’s World, a West Coast Communist Party newspaper, published an editorial, “Save the UN,” which said: “The UN commands a great reservoir of support in our country ... People should write President Kennedy, telling him- do not withdraw from the UN, restore the UN to the Grand Design of Franklin Roosevelt- the design for peaceful coexistence.” The Preamble to the Constitution of the U.S. Communist Party, urges the “strengthening of the United Nations as a universal instrument of peace.”
The Preamble of the UN Charter says: “We the people of the United Nations, determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war...” In light of this, you should be aware of what Albert Einstein said after the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima on August 6, 1945: “The secret of the bomb should be committed to a World Government and the U.S.A. should announce its readiness to give it to a World Government.”
According to the Congressional Record of June 7, 1949, on pages 7356 and 7357, this was the wording for HCR64, a joint resolution (corresponds to Senate Concurrent Resolution 56, the Tobey or ‘World Federalist’ Resolution) that was introduced in the House of Representatives: “Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring) that it is the sense of the Congress that it should be a fundamental objective of the foreign policy of the United States to support and strengthen the United Nations and to seek its development into a world federation, open to all nations, with defined and limited powers adequate to preserve peace and prevent aggression through the enactment, interpretation and enforcement of world law.”
Concerning this Resolution, Cord Meyer, chairman of the National Executive Committee of the United World Federalists, said at a hearing before the Senate Subcommittee on the United Nations Charter: “We in the United States would be declaring our willingness to join with other nations in transferring to the UN constitutional authority to administer and enforce law that was binding on national governments and their individual citizens.”
By February, 1950, after the public expressed their outrage over the Resolution, the Liberals who sponsored it turned their backs on it in an attempt to salvage their political reputations. Rep. Bernard W. Kearney (R-New York) said: “We signed the Resolution believing we were sponsoring a movement to set up a stronger power within the United Nations for world peace ... Then we learned that various organizations were working on state legislatures and on peace movements for world government action under which the entire U.S. Government would be submerged in a super world government ... Perhaps we should have read the fine print in the first place. We do not intend to continue in the role of sponsors of any movement which undermine U.S. sovereignty. Many Congressmen feel as I do. We will make our position thoroughly clear.” Within two years, 18 of the 23 states which had passed the Resolution eventually rescinded it.
Information about HCR64 / SCR56 can be found in the infamous Document No. 87, Review of the United Nations Charter: A Collection of Documents, by the Senate Subcommittee on the United Nations Charter, and published by the Government Printing Office in 1954. It was reportedly given to each of the Senators at the time, and only two copies now remain in existence. This report blows the lid off of the U.S. Government’s determination for one-world government. Also discussed are Senate Resolution 133, introduced July 8, 1949 by Sen. Sparkman (Democrat from Alabama) who said: “We can create now, with Russia if possible, without Russia if necessary an overwhelming collective front open to all nations under a law just to all.”
The report urged (p. 846): “American atomic, military, and economic superiority is only temporary. It is essential before that superiority is lost that there be created an international organization with strength to enforce the peace.” Senate Concurrent Resolution 57, introduced July 26, 1949 by Sen. Kefauver (D-Tennessee) called for an Atlantic Union of Canada, England, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the United States. The report said (p. 848): “The establishment of a federal union ... would involve not only basic economic and social changes but also important changes in the structure of the United States Government. It is very doubtful if the American people are ready to amend the Constitution to the extent necessary to give an Atlantic Union the powers it would need to be effective.”
Senate Concurrent Resolution 66, introduced September 13, 1949 by Sen. Taylor (D-Idaho) called for the Charter of the United Nations to “be changed to provide a true world government constitution.” He claimed: “Only a true world government can achieve everlasting peace.” The report stated (p. 850): “Anything less than world government would be merely a stopgap.” The existence of Document No. 87 proves that the government of the United States and the political leaders of this country are working behind the scenes to strengthen the United Nations and to move towards one-world government.
In 1953, during the World Federal Government Conference in Copenhagen, Denmark, UN supporters revealed plans to push for a revision of the UN Charter, which would provide for the UN to become a World Federal Government with a world legislature and court, mandatory universal membership with no right of secession; and a full and immediate disarmament which would be militarily supported by the UN. Another conference, in London, in 1954, by the World Movement for World Federation, also proposed similar ideas.
This movement to remove the sovereignty of the United States and member countries, convinced Senator John Bricker to propose his “Bricker Amendment” which would have placed in the U.S. Constitution, a safeguard against the possibility of a treaty which could result in a world government: “A provision of a Treaty or other international agreement which conflicts with this Constitution, or which is not made in pursuance thereof, shall not be supreme law of the land nor be of any force or effect.”
During debate on the Bill, Sen. Pat McCarren (D-Nevada) said of the powers provided to the UN by Articles 55 and 56 of the UN Charter: “The Congress of the United States, because of the power granted to it by treaty, could enact laws ... taking over all private and parochial schools, destroying all local school boards ... and substitute a federal system ... Congress could by law provide for censoring all press telegrams ... Congress could utilize this power to put into effect a complete system of socialized medicine, from cradle to grave ... even legislate compulsory labor, if it found that the goal of full employment required such legislation or would be served by it.”
The Bricker Amendment was opposed by all the “one-world” organizations and internationalists like U.S. Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas; Sen. Ralph Flanders (R-Vermont), Sen. Hubert Humphrey (D-Minnesota), John J. McCloy (former Assistant Secretary of Defense and former High Commissioner to Germany), Paul Hoffman (of the State Department), Thomas K. Finletter, John Foster Dulles (Secretary of State), and President Eisenhower, who said it would curtail the power of the Presidency. After a long, bitter fight, the Amendment failed by a vote of 60-31, just one vote short of the necessary two-thirds majority of the U.S. Senate.
H. G. Wells wrote in his 1933 book The Shape of Things to Come: “When the existing governments and ruling theories of life, the decaying religious and the decaying political forms of today, have sufficiently lost prestige through failure and catastrophe, then and then only will world-wide reconstruction be possible.”
Robert M. Hutchins (former President of Rockefeller’s University of Chicago) was the Chairman of the Committee to Form a World Government, who had drafted a new Constitution. On August 12, 1945, they said on a Round Table broadcast, that they wanted to turn control of our nation over to a Socialist world government. In Hutchin’s 1947 book, The Constitutional Foundations for World Order (published for the Foundation for World Order), he says: “Tinkering with the United Nations will not help us, if we agree with the New York Times that our only hope is in the ultimate abolition of war through an ultimate world government.” President Dwight D. Eisenhower said on October 31, 1956: “I am more deeply convinced that the United Nations represents the soundest hope for peace in the world.”
A State Department document, #7277, called Freedom From War: The United States’ Program for General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World, revealed a plan to disarm the U.S. military, shut down bases, and to give the UN control of our Armed Forces, and nuclear weapons. The UN military arm would then be the world’s police force to act as “peacekeepers.” The document, which on September 1, 1961, was sent by courier to the UN Secretary General, suggested a “progressive reduction of the war-making capability of the nations and the simultaneous strengthening of international institutions to settle disputes and maintain the peace...” It was to be done through a three-step program:
“The first stage would significantly reduce the capabilities of nations to wage war by reducing the armed forced of the nations ... nuclear capabilities would be reduced by treaties ... and UN peace-keeping powers would be strengthened ... The second stage would provide further substantial reductions in the armed forces and the establishment of a permanent international peace force within the United Nations ... The third stage would have the nations retaining only those forces required for maintaining internal order, but the United States would provide manpower for the United Nations Peace Force.”
The plan called for “all weapons of mass destruction” to be eliminated, except for “those required for a United Nations Peace Force” (page 12, 1st paragraph); and (on page 16, 8th paragraph) to “keep the peace, all states will reaffirm their obligations under the UN Charter to refrain from the threat of use of any type armed force.” I’m sure that this includes the disarming of American citizens. Sarah Brady, one of the leading proponents in this country against handguns, said: “Our task of creating a socialist America can only succeed when those who would resist us have been totally disarmed.”
Sen. Joseph S. Clark of Pennsylvania said during a March 1, 1962 debate on the Senate floor, that the program is “the fixed, determined, and approved policy of the government of the United States.” The Program was later revised in The Blueprint for the Peace Race, which said on page 33: “...the Parties to the Treaty would progressively strengthen the United Nations Police Force ... until it had sufficient armed forces and armaments so that no state could challenge it.” The Program was again revised by the present Outline of Basic Provisions of a Treaty on General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World.
In 1961, during the Kennedy administration, Robert McNamara, McGeorge Bundy and Dean Rusk (all CFR members), initiated a secret study to study the direct and indirect ramifications of war, and how they could control the economy during peace-time. They wanted to know what situations the United States would be exposed to in the world if it moved from a period of war to a time of permanent peace, or as the Report said, “to consider the problems involved in the contingency of a transition to a general condition of peace, and to recommend procedures for dealing with this contingency.”
Conceivably, it would look for ways to slowly move this country into the New World Order. By 1963, fifteen experts (known as the SSG or Special Study Group) from various academic fields: psychology, anthropology, international law, biochemistry, physics, astronomy, mathematics, literature, history, military, economy, sociology, and industry. Their first and last meeting had taken place at Iron Mountain in Hudson, New York, the first secure underground records storage center designed to protect vital corporate records in case of a nuclear disaster.
There was some speculation that the think-tank known as the Hudson Institute actually conducted the study. The Institute was started in 1961, “to help determine the entire future of the U.S.- and time permitting, much of the world beyond. Many of their fellows and members belonged to the CFR.
The long-term plan to control the population was said to have been completed in 1966. It was reported that President Johnson ordered the Report to be sealed, because with the knowledge it contained, the American people could have used it to prevent the takeover of their country during the early stages. The cover letter of the Report said:
“Because of the unusual circumstances surrounding the establishment of this Group, and in view of the nature of its finding, we do not recommend that this Report be released for publication … such actions would not be in the public interest … a lay reader, unexposed to the exigencies of higher political or military responsibility, will misconstrue the purposed of this project, and the intent …We urge that the circulation of the Report be closely restricted to those who’s responsibilities require that they be apprised of its contents…”
The Report, in fact, appeared to be a blueprint for the future of this country, and contained recommendations that included plans for governmental control and manipulation, depopulation, gun control and disarmament, an international police force, and concentration camps.
One man, calling himself John Doe, who was involved in the Report, decided to release its contents, it was published in 1967 by Dial Press (a division of Simon and Schuster) as the Report From Iron Mountain on the Possibility and Desirability of Peace. Even though it was publicly renounced by the Establishment as a hoax, it was translated into fifteen languages.
The SSG concluded that peace “would almost certainly not be in the best interest of stable society,” because War, was too much a part of the world economy, and therefore it was necessary to continue a state of war indefinitely:
“War has provided both ancient and modern societies with a dependable system for stabilizing and controlling national economies. No alternate method of control has yet been tested in a complex modern economy that has shown itself remotely comparable in scope or effectiveness. War fills certain functions essential to the stability of our society; until other ways of filling them are developed, the war system must be maintained, and improved in effectiveness.”
It also said that war, “provides anti-social elements with an acceptable role in the social structure ... the younger, and more dangerous, of these hostile social groupings have been kept under control by the Selective Service System ... man destroys surplus members of his own species by organized warfare ... enables the physically deteriorating older generation to maintain control of the younger, destroying it if necessary.”
The report also argued that the authority that the government exercised over the people came from its ability to wage war, and that without war the government might cease to exist: “War is virtually synonymous with nationhood. The elimination of war implies the inevitable elimination of national sovereignty and the traditional nation-state.”
The Report covered a number of recommendations that the Federal government should do in the event that they were thrust into an era of peace:
“(a) A comprehensive social-welfare program, directed toward maximum improvement of general conditions of human life;
(b) A giant open-end space research program, aimed at unreachable targets;
(c) A permanent, ritualized, ultra-elaborate disarmament inspection system, and variant of such a system.”
It also recommended the invention of “alternate enemies.”
Then in 1972, in a New York Times article, Leonard C. Lewin, a New York free lance writer and editor (A Treasury of American Political Humor), who wrote the introduction to the book, confessed to being the author of the Report, and said he wrote it “to caricature the bankruptcy of the think-tank mentality by pursuing its style of scientific thinking to its logical ends.”
In 1996 Simon & Schuster reprinted the Report with a new introduction. Evidently the germination of the Report took place in 1966 when Victor Navasky (Publisher and Editorial Director of The Nation ), who was editor of the Monacle a political satire magazine, read a New York Times article about the stock market declining because of a ‘peace scare.’ Navasky said something to Lewin who then wrote the report, and they presented the Report to E.L. Doctorow, Editor-in-Chief (and co-conspirator) of Dial Press, who agreed to publish it as nonfiction. Navasky said the purpose of the hoax was “to provoke thinking about the unthinkable- the conversion to a peacetime economy and the absurdity of the arms race.”
However, some still believe the Report to be authentic because a large portion of it has come to pass.
At the Conference on Conditions of World Order, which met from June 12-19, 1965 (which no doubt led to the establishment of the Club of Rome), at the Villa Serbelloni (facilities obtained through the Rockefeller Foundation) in Bellagio, Italy, which was sponsored by the Congress for Cultural Freedom (with a grant from the Ford Foundation and the American Academy of Arts and Sciences), 21 scholars, writers and scientists from all over the world met to define the concepts of world order. A segment of their report, by Helio Jaguaribe said:
“The establishment of world order depends not only on its intrinsic desirability and viability, but also on the support of men and groups who decide to dedicate themselves to the completion of such a goal. As increasing sectors of developed and underdeveloped societies begin to realize the urgent necessity of world order, the viability of its establishment, and the fact that it can be achieved by adopting measures which are reasonable in themselves, none of the governments will be able to escape public pressure for establishing world order ... It is incumbent upon the intellectuals to play the decisive role in the formation of pressure groups in favor of world order ... the establishment of world order demands the mobilization of groups dedicated to international pressure for the gradual implantation of that world order ... the negotiated establishment of world order is theoretically possible and practically feasible since, in the last analysis, the probable effects of nuclear conflagration have made way an impractical alternative to the peaceful solution of contemporary problems.”
On May 18, 1972, Roy Ash of the Office of Management and Budget during the Nixon Administration, said: “Within two decades the institutional framework for a World Economic Community will be in place ... (when) aspects of individual sovereignty will be given over to a supernational authority.”
ABC-TV’s Harry Reasoner (who later went to CBS) said on June 18, 1974: “The only eventual answer is some kind of World Government ... whether it is capitalist or communist.”
President Ford called for the development of a global strategy and a policy concerning food and oil; and President Carter, in what he called an organization for the “world structure of peace,” tried to persuade the Chinese to take part.
The Borger New Herald in Texas reported: “A meeting was held May 24, 1976 through July 4, 1976, in Valley Forge Park, King of Prussia, PA, to formulate a new World Constitution, elaborating a Bill of Human Rights for the world and setting up a permanent Secretariat of Human Rights there to superintend the Government of the World...” The World Constitution and Parliament Association (WCPA, located at 1480 Hoyt Street, Suite 31, Lakewood, CO) was established in 1959 by Philip Isely who had emerged during the 1940’s as a leader in the one-world movement; as an organizer for the Action for World Federation from 1946-50 and the North American Council for the People’s World Convention from 1954-58. The WCPA have assumed the task of trying to establish a New World Order, and have assembled a Provisional World Parliament.
Their original “Agreement to Call a World Constitutional Convention” was first circulated from 1958-61, where it was signed by several thousand dignitaries. In 1965, work began on a world constitution, and a meeting was held in the City Hall of Wolfach, West Germany, in June, 1968. A second meeting, known as the World Constituent Assembly was held at Innsbruck, Austria, from June 16-29, 1977, to draft a “Constitution for the Federation of Earth,” which was adopted by participants from 25 countries. It was revised in 1991. Reinhart Ruge, President of the WCPA said: “Only a full-scale world government will save the world from nuclear holocaust.”
The Preamble of the Constitution began: “Realizing that Humanity today has come to a turning point in history and that we are on the threshold of a new world order, which promises to usher in an era of peace, prosperity, justice and harmony ... We, the citizens of the world, hereby resolve to establish a world federation to be governed in accordance with this Constitution for the Federation of Earth.”
A third session was held in January, 1979, in Colombo, Sri Lanka, where a strategy was discussed on how to get the Constitution ratified by national parliaments and governments. There were four later meetings of the Provisional World Parliament: 1982, in Brighten, England; 1985, in New Delhi, India; 1987, in Miami, Florida; and 1996, in Innsbruck, Austria. A timetable announced in 1984, called for a world government to be instituted by 1990, which obviously didn’t happen. They announced that when the Provisional World Parliament met for the fifth time, a world government would emerge. Well, they met on the island of Malta in 2000, and there is still no world government. So far, they have released 11 World Legislative Acts.
They sent out a letter, dated December 12, 1990, “To All Presidents, Prime Ministers, Kings, Queens, and Other Heads of Governments and National Parliaments”: “We who sign this appeal to you, are ready for a Democratic Federal World Government, under a ratified World Constitution ... Will you support this move for a federal world government? ... Will you appoint official delegates to the world constituent assembly ... Now is the time to assure the dawn and full blooming of a new era for humanity on Planet Earth.”
Not satisfied with how long it is taking the UN, the WCPA has been organizing for the time when they feel they can usurp existing sovereign governments. And they’re pretty cocky about it too, because as far as the UN, they say: “Viable agencies of the UN, are transferred to the World Government.”
The directorship of the WCPA is closely linked with the United World Federalists, the American Civil Liberties Union, Global Education Associates, Friends of the Earth, Planetary Society, Worldwatch Institute, Planetary Citizens (founded in 1974 by UN executive Robert Mueller, author Norman Cousins, and activist Donald Keyes, to push for a one-world government by the year 2000), World Future Society, Planetary Initiative, American Movement for World Government, Rainbow Coalition, World Citizens Assembly, and others. Nearly 20% of their members are affiliated with the UN in various capacities.
It is quite clear, that America has become preoccupied with the goal of achieving peace in the world, and would do anything to accomplish that. President Truman said in 1948: “I would rather have peace in the world than be President.” On another occasion he said: “Our goal must be, not peace in our time, but peace for all time.” U Thant, the third UN Secretary-General said in 1969:
“I do not wish to seem overdramatic, but I can only conclude from the information that is available to me as Secretary-General that the members of the United Nations have perhaps ten years left in which to subordinate their ancient quarrels and launch a global partnership to curb the arms race, to improve the human environment, to diffuse the population explosion, and supply the required momentum to world development efforts. If such a global partnership is not forged within the next decade, then I very much fear the problems I mentioned will have reached staggering proportions that they will be beyond our capacity to control.”
In the quest for that peace, the United States has allowed itself to become weaker, and has ignored all the signs, that along with world peace, will be a new world order dominated by a socialist form of government. In 1983, Elliot Roosevelt, the son of FDR, published a book called The Conservators, calling world government “an immediate necessity.”
The United Nations is the root of that one-world government, and since its inception, seventeen of their agencies have been working toward that goal:
Brock Chisholm, the first director of the UN World Health Organization said:
“To achieve one world government it is necessary to remove from the minds of men their individualism, their loyalty to family traditions and national identification.”
When he accepted an award from the World Federalist Association, CBS newscaster Walter Cronkite said:
“We must strengthen the United Nations as a first step toward a world government … We Americans will have to yield up some of our sovereignty.”
The Ditchley Group, which first met in May, 1982, at Ditchley Park in London, is engineering a plan by Harold Lever (a director on the Board of the UNILEVER conglomerate) to control the fiscal and the monetary policies of the United States and called for the International Monetary Fund to control the central banks of all nations. Representatives of 36 of the world’s biggest banks met at the Vista Hotel in New York in January, 1982, to lay the groundwork; then met again in October, where it was reported that plans were underway to bring legislation before the U.S. Senate that would designate the IMF as the Controller of U.S. fiscal policy by the year 2000.
On January 8, 1983, Hans Vogel of the Club of Rome, met at the White House with President Reagan, Secretary of State George Schultz, Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, George Kennan, and Lane Kirkland (President of the AFL-CIO), to discuss the objectives of the Ditchley Group. The Group met on January 10-11, 1983 in Washington to discuss the IMF takeover; and later in the year, in Williamsburg, Virginia, with a group of international bankers, to discuss a disintegration of the U.S. banking system which would force the Senate into accepting IMF control. Dennis Weatherstone of Morgan Guaranty said that this was the only way for the U.S. to save itself.
The propaganda of world peace propels the United Nations further into the control of this world, and what negative publicity has emerged, has done little to slow its momentum. Originally the UN wanted the United States to pay 50% of their budget, but eventually, negotiations lowered the amount to 39.89%. Later it was lowered further to 25%, or about $3.9 billion. At one point, the Soviet Union was only paying 13%; Japan, 10%; West Germany, 8%; Great Britain, 4%; and Saudi Arabia, .5%. The 100+ Third World-non-aligned countries were only paying 9%, yet controlled 3/4 of the voting power in the General Assembly; and the 80 poorest countries were contributing less than 1% of the UN budget. In September, 1983, the Senate introduced legislation that sought to cut the U.S.’s contribution by 21% for 1983-84, and 10% more for each of the following three years, which would make America’s portion of the UN budget less than 15%.
The United States further showed their displeasure with the United Nations, when in December, 1983, the Reagan Administration announced it was withdrawing from UNESCO, because the UN agency had “increasingly placed an overfed bureaucracy at the service of a coalition of Soviet bloc and Third World countries,” which was to be effective January 1, 1985, unless reforms were made. UNESCO was labeled by newsman Paul Harvey as “communism’s trap for our youth.”
Another area which demonstrated the UN’s communist leanings was revealed by the McGraw Edison Committee for Public Affairs: “The United Nations’ International Children’s Emergency Fund (UNICEF) ... appropriated $59,000,000 between 1947 and 1958 to Communist countries. In a ratio not unlike that of other UN ventures, the United States has furnished $42,000,000 of the money ... As with other aid programs, the assistance does not go to the needy but it is administered through governments.”
Since the establishment of the UN, up to 1991, there were 157 wars. J. Reuben Clark, Jr., Ambassador to Mexico, and Under Secretary of State, in his August, 1945, analysis of the UN Charter, wrote: “The Charter is built to prepare for war, not to promote peace ... The Charter is a war document, not a peace document...” He is quoted (pg. 27) in the book The United Nations Today as saying: “Not only does the Charter Organization (UN) not prevent future wars, but it makes it practically certain that we shall have future wars; and as to such wars, it takes from us (U.S.) the power to declare them, to choose the side on which we shall fight, and to determine what forces and military equipment we shall use in the war, and to control and command our sons who do the fighting.”
Former President Herbert Hoover said in an August 10, 1962 speech: “I urged the ratification of the United Nations Charter by the Senate. But I stated at that time ‘The American people should be under no illusions that the Charter assures lasting peace.’ But now we must realize that the United Nations has failed to give us even a remote hope of lasting peace. Instead, it adds the dangers of wars which now surround us.” An article about the UN in the March 2, 1964 edition of the Santa Ana Register made this comment:
“The whole purpose and, indeed, the method of the UN is to use armed might against any nation presumed to be an aggressor. Its function is to make war...”
Rep. John E. Rankin (D-MS, 1921-53) said: “The United Nations is the greatest fraud in all history. Its purpose is to destroy the United States.” According to the March 9, 2003 edition of the Washington Times, Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) said: “I think the United Nations is dangerous to our republic and therefore we ought not to participate.”
As long as prominent members of our government and our uninformed elected representatives continue to tout the United Nations as being the only way for lasting peace, then the propaganda will continue to grow, and we will become more desensitized to the campaign that continues to slowly take away the freedoms that our forefathers fought and died for.
While campaigning for the Presidency, Bill Clinton said: “My vision is that we would become an instrument working as much as possible through the United Nations for freedom and democracy and human rights and global economic growth.” In a speech to the World Affairs Council in Los Angeles, Clinton called for a permanent UN “rapid deployment force.” Richard Gardner, a Clinton advisor on the UN, and a professor of international law, has outlined a plan for a world army of 30,000 men. The five member nations of the Security Council would provide 2,000 men, and 30 other nations would add up to 750 each. This would create a military force that the Security Council could deploy within 48 hours to maintain the peace.
In a February 1, 1992 speech to the UN General Assembly, President George Bush said: “It is the sacred principles enshrined in the United Nations charter to which the American people will henceforth pledge their allegiance.”
In 1993, the UN became financially stretched to the limit, because of all the peace-keeping operations throughout the world (numbering about 70,000, they pay each country $988 per soldier every month, and more for specialized troops), which forced it to cutback on travel, meetings, and the use of consultants. While the U.S. is still paying about 25% of its annual budget of over $1 billion, and about 30% of all peace-keeping costs, a move was on to force member nations to contribute a portion of their defense budgets to the UN. According to the January 16, 1996 Washington Times it was announced that “Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali ... urged the (UN) to consider imposing its own taxes to become less dependent on the United States…”
We can expect one of two things to happen in the future. Either the UN will steadily grow in power, until it evolves into a one-world government; or if perceptions continue that it has not lived up to expectations, it could be disbanded (perhaps if the United States would drop out), and replaced by an already burgeoning alliance, such as the WCPA. Walter Hoffman, the executive Vice President of the World Federalist Association, wrote in a letter to a national news magazine, that we need “a new, more effective UN, one that will have the power to stop wars and arbitrate disputes between national groups.”
It seems likely, that the strength of our economy may determine how soon our country agrees to become part of a one world government. If it continues to decline due to government mismanagement and manipulation by the Illuminati, it may not be long till we have to be ‘saved’ in order to survive, even if it is, as part of a new world order dominated by a socialistic political ideology.
EUROPEAN UNION
The European Union, formerly known as the European Communities (EC), or European Economic Community (Common Market), is a movement to unite Western Europe. For hundreds of years, there has been an ongoing effort to unify Europe. Prior to World War II, because of intermarriage between Royal families, all crowned heads were closely related.
French philosopher Montesquieu said in the 18th century: “Whenever in the past Europe has been united by force, the unity lasted no longer than the space of a single reign.” He went on to predict the peaceful unification of Europe. In 1871, Victor Hugo, the French novelist, said: “Let us have the United States of Europe; let us have continental federation; let us have European freedom.”
In 1922, Count Richard Coudenhove-Kalergi founded the Pan European Union. He fled Austria in 1940, and came to the United States, where he continued to work towards European unity. In 1941, Andre Malraux called for a “European New Deal, a federal Europe excluding the USSR.” In an October, 1942 letter to the British War Cabinet, Winston Churchill wrote: “Hard as it is to say now, I trust that the European family may act unitedly as one under a Council of Europe. I look forward to a United States of Europe.” He also said in a September 19, 1946 speech at the University of Zurich: “We must build a kind of United States of Europe.”
Churchill made the United Europe Movement a cohesive group, by merging the Union of European Federalists, the Economic League for European Cooperation, and the French Council for a United Europe, into an organization known as the International Committee of Movements for European Unity.
Late in 1947, various people and groups formed a committee to coordinate their efforts, and by May, 1948, organized the Congress of Europe, which convened at the Hague in the Netherlands. Nearly 1000 prominent Europeans from 16 countries called for the establishment of a United Europe. Dr. Joseph Retinger, who had helped organized the meeting at the Hague, came to the United States in July, 1948, along with Winston Churchill, Duncan Sandys, and former Belgian Prime Minister Henri-Paul Spaak, to raise money for the movement. This led to the establishment of the American Committee on a United Europe (ACUE) on March 29, 1949.
Their first Chairman was William Donovan, the first Director of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS, the forerunner of the CIA); the Vice-Chairman was Allen Dulles, who later became the Director of the CIA; and the Secretary was George S. Franklin, who was a Director in the Council on Foreign Relations, and later a coordinator with the Trilateral Commission.
Lord James Edward Salisbury, the conservative British statesman, said: “Federation is the only hope of the world.” The historic address on June 5, 1947, by Gen. George C. Marshall, the Secretary of State, which made proposals for European aid known as the Marshall Plan, also called for the unification of Europe.
On March 17, 1948, a 50 year treaty was signed for “collaboration in economic, social, and cultural matters and for collective self defense,” in Brussels, by England, France, the Netherlands, Belgium, and Luxembourg. In 1950, its functions were transferred to NATO, and in May, 1955, a military alliance, known as the Council of Western European Union was established, made up of the foreign ministers from Belgium, France, West Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Luxembourg, and England, who met every three months. There was also a Western European Union Assembly made up of delegates to the Consultive Assembly of the Council of Europe in Paris.
The Western European Coalition began on June 8, 1948, with the signing of the Benelux Agreement by Luxembourg, Belgium, and the Netherlands, to unite their economic and domestic policies.
On May 5, 1949, Foreign Ministers from ten European countries signed a Treaty in London, for the purpose of working for “greater European unity, to improve the conditions of life and principle human value in Europe and to uphold the principles of parliamentary democracy, the rule of law and human rights.” The Treaty sought to promote unity, both socially and economically, among its first members were: Belgium (1949), Denmark (1949), France (1949), Ireland (1949), Italy (1949), Luxembourg (1949), Netherlands (1949), Norway (1949), Sweden (1949), England (1949), Greece (1949), Turkey (1949), and Iceland (1949). It now has 45 member states. The Council of Europe, led by a Secretary-General, is open to all European States which accepted the “principles of the rule of law and of the enjoyment by all persons within (their) jurisdiction of human rights and fundamental freedoms.” They are headquartered in Strasbourg, France (Avenue de l´Europe).
The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the father of the Common Market, was a defense alliance developed to implement the North Atlantic Treaty in 1949, and to apply counter pressure against the growing Soviet military presence in Europe. Article V states:
“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an attack occurs, each of them ... will assist the Party or Parties so attacked ... to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic Area.”
Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Italy, West Germany, Spain, Luxembourg, United Kingdom, Canada, Denmark, Greece, Iceland, Norway, Portugal, Turkey, and the United States, all joined to oppose the growing threat of communism. Soon afterwards, the Russians, recognizing NATO as a stumbling block to their plans, emulated the group by uniting their communist satellites in 1955 with the Warsaw Treaty Organization. The Warsaw Pact alliance included the countries of Albania, Czechoslovakia, East Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Russia.
In 1950, Robert Schuman, the French Foreign Minister, came up with an idea to integrate all the coal and steel industries of the western European nations; and in 1951, the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) was set up with six member countries: Belgium, West Germany, Luxembourg, France, Italy, and the Netherlands. An independent body known as the ‘High Authority’ was able to make decisions in regard to the industries in those countries. Their first President was the French economist and diplomat, Jean Monnet, called the ‘Father of Europe.’
On May 27, 1952, the European Defense Community Treaty was signed in Paris, and provided for the armies of West Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg, to become closely aligned with England’s. On October 23, 1954, it was replaced with the Western European Union, who merged their armies into a multi-national armed force.
Jean Monnet said: “As long as Europe remains divided, it is no match for the Soviet Union. Europe must unite.” He established a pressure group in 1955 called the Action Committee for the United States of Europe. He also said: “Once a Common Market interest has been created, then political union will come naturally.”
On March 25, 1957, the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM) and the European Economic Community (EEC) was established with a 378-page Declaration of Intent, called the Treaty of Rome, to facilitate the removal of barriers, so trade could be accomplished among member nations; eventual coordination of transportation systems, agricultural and economic policies; the removal of all measures restricting free competition; and the assurance of the mobility of labor, capital, and entrepreneurship. The partnership began with six countries: France, West Germany, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Luxembourg. George McGhee, the former U.S. ambassador to West Germany, said that “the Treaty of Rome, which brought the Common Market into being, was nurtured at the Bilderberg meetings.” In 1967, the ECSC, EURATOM, and EEC were brought together into a single group that was known as the European Community.
In 1973, Henry Kissinger, Nixon’s Secretary of State (known to favor one-world government) urged the Common Market to include four more nations: Norway, United Kingdom, Denmark, and Ireland. Norway eventually backed out, but on May 28, 1979, in Athens, Greece became the tenth nation to join the Common Market. When they officially became a member in January, 1981, Europe was as unified as it was in 814, when Charlemagne, founder of the Roman Empire, died.
A French foreign minister said: “The Europe of the future, when it finally unites politically as well as economically, will be the mightiest force on earth.” Walter Hallstein said: “Make no mistake about it, we are not in business, we are in politics. We are building the United States of Europe.” Time magazine wrote: “If the Europe of tomorrow could muster the political will, it could become a co-equal of the other two superpowers, the United States and Russia...” Another publication said: “The European Common Market is emerging to shake the world economically and politically.” England’s former Prime Minister, Edward Heath, said: “Europe must unite or perish.”
Another huge step was taken toward a united Europe when a direct-election was held June 7-9, 1979 that elected a 410 member European Parliament, the first in over 1,000 years. It was made up of members from the countries of Great Britain, France, West Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, and Luxembourg. With the Maastricht Treaty in 1992, and the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997, they now possess actual legislative authority. Now with 626 members, the body includes the United Kingdom and Germany, as well as Greece, Spain, Portugal, Finland, Sweden, and Austria. They are headquartered in Strasbourg, France, but are also known to work in Brussels, Belgium and Luxembourg. They are the parliamentary body of the European Union.
On March 17, 1979, the Common Market initiated a new monetary system to encourage trade and investment by stabilizing their currency values in relation to each other. The main feature of this link-up was a $33 billion fund made up of each other’s gold and currency reserves. Members could borrow against this fund to support their own currencies. The value of each of the participating currencies was set against “European Currency Units” established by the fund.
On January 1, 1986, Spain and Portugal became the 11th and 12th members of the European Community. On November 11, 1991, Jeane Kirkpatrick, former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, wrote: “If the Bush Administration has a vision of the New World Order, it is time to share it with the Europeans and Americans, because a New World Order is precisely what is emerging on the continent of Europe today.” On December 9-11, 1991, at a meeting in Maastricht, in the Netherlands, a serious effort was made to establish a common currency, and discussions were held concerning a common foreign policy, and a common defense policy. After the 1992 Treaty of Maastricht, the Common Market became known as the European Union.
On December 31, 1992, the “Single Europe Act” went into effect, uniting the 12 nations into a federation and lifting the restrictions on the movement of goods, services, capital, workers and tourists within the Community. They also adopted common agricultural, fisheries, and nuclear research policies. Jacques Delors, in the Delors Report, a blueprint for EC unification, called for a “transfer of decision-making power from member states to the community.”
On January 1, 1995, Austria became the 13th nation.
The European Union (located at Rue de la Loi, Brussels, Belgium) is now made up of Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Irish Republic, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. It had been reported that the EU was looking to have a total of 20 member nations, yet in 2004 they are adding Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia.
After deciding in 1992 to move towards a single European currency controlled by a European Central Bank; that currency, known as the ‘euro,’ emerged in 2002, when euro notes and coins replaced the national currencies of 12 of the 15 countries of the European Union.
The industrial capability of the European Union is nearly equal to that of the United States. Western Europe also accounts for about 25% of the world’s production, and 35% of its trade. When the time comes, and it surely will, that the people of the European Union finally allow themselves to become a single political entity, they will be a world power, and a force to be reckoned with.
THE BILDERBERGER GROUP
Dr. Joseph H. Retinger (who died in 1960), economist, political philosopher, communist Poland’s Charge d’Affaires, and a major proponent of a united Europe; along with Prince Bernhard (of Lippe-Biesterfeld) of the Netherlands, Colin Gubbins (former director of the British SOE, Special Operations Executive), and Gen. Walter Bedell Smith (former American Ambassador to Moscow, and director of the CIA, who said when he took over the CIA: “We can’t lick world communism- no counterinsurgency plans will work. We must compromise and co-exist with communism.”
He later became an Under Secretary of State in the Eisenhower Administration); joined together in 1954 to organize this secret group. Created under the direction of Alastair Buchan, son of Lord Tweedsmuir, and Chairman of the Royal Institute of International Affairs; its governing council was made up of Robert Ellsworth (Lazard Freres), John Loudon (N. M. Rothschild), Paul Nitze (Shroeder Bank), C. L. Sulzberger (New York Times), Stansfield Turner (who later became CIA Director), Peter Calvocoressi (Penguin Books), Andrew Schoenberg (RIIA), Daniel Ellsburg, and Henry Kissinger.
Bernhard said: “It is difficult to reeducate the people who have been brought up on nationalism to the idea of relinquishing part of their sovereignty to a supranational body…”
Lord Rothschild and Laurance Rockefeller handpicked 100 of the world’s elite, and they have a heavy cross membership with the Council on Foreign Relations (which they control), the English Speaking Union, the Pilgrims Society, the Round Table, and the Trilateral Commission. Their purpose was to regionalize Europe, according to Giovanni Agnelli, the head of Fiat, who said: “European integration is our goal and where the politicians have failed, we industrialists hope to succeed.” In Alden Hatch’s biography of Bernhard, he stated that the Bilderberg Group gave birth to the European Community (now the European Union). Their ultimate goal is to have a one-world government.
Their first meeting was held at the Hotel de Bilderberg (hence the name of the group, even though they have referred to themselves as ‘The Alliance’) in Oosterbeek, Holland, from May 29-31, in 1954. Charles Douglas Jackson (Vice President of Time magazine, delegate to the United Nations, Special Assistant to the President, and later publisher of Life magazine), spokesman for the American delegation, led by David Rockefeller, promised those present: “Whether he (Sen. Joseph McCarthy) dies by an assassin’s bullet, or is eliminated in the normal American way of getting rid of boils on the body politic, I prophecy that by the time we hold our next meeting, he will be gone from the American scene.” McCarthy was the crusading Senator who revealed that communists had infiltrated high level posts within the U.S. Government. He didn’t die until 1957.
The Bilderbergers hold annual meetings in locations all over the world. In Europe, the Rothschilds have hosted some of the meetings, while the meetings in 1962 and 1973, in Saltsjobaden, Sweden, were hosted by the Wallenbergs (who had an estimated fortune of $10 billion). The meetings were chaired by the German-born Prince Bernhard, the husband of Queen Juliana of the Netherlands, said to be the richest woman in the world (because of her partnership with Baron Victor Rothschild in the Royal Dutch Shell Oil Co., owning 5% of the stock, which in 1978 was worth $425 million; and also holds stock in Exxon), until he was forced to resign in August, 1976, because of his involvement in the Lockheed Aircraft bribery scandal, and his extramarital affairs.
Bernhard wrote:
“Here comes our greatest difficulty. For the governments of the free nations are elected by the people, and if they do something the people don’t like they are thrown out. It is difficult to reeducate the people who have been brought up on nationalism to the idea of relinquishing part of their sovereignty to a supernational body...”
Walter Scheel of Germany took over as Chairman, and then it was Britain’s Lord Carrington, who is on the Board of the Hambros Bank.
There are about 120 participants that are invited to the Bilderberg meetings, of whom about two-thirds come from Europe and the rest are from North America; and about one-third are from government and politics, and the other two-thirds are from the fields of finance, industry, labor, education, communications. The meetings are closed to the public and the press, although a brief press conference is usually held at the conclusion of each meeting, to reveal, in general terms, some of the topics which were discussed. The resort areas and hotels where they meet, are cleared of residents and visitors, and surrounded by soldiers, armed guards, the Secret Service, State and local police. All conference and meeting rooms are scanned for bugging devices before every single meeting.
Among those who have attended their meetings: Owen Lattimore (CFR, former Director of Planning and Coordination for the State Department), Winston Lord (CFR, Clinton’s Assistant Secretary of State), Allen Dulles (CIA), Sen. William J. Fulbright (from Arkansas, a Rhodes Scholar), Dean Acheson (Secretary of State under Truman), Gabriel Hauge (Assistant to President Eisenhower, who according to the Wall Street Journal, “helped teach Ike what to think”; and later became Chairman of Manufacturers Hanover Trust Co.), George Ball (CFR, Johnson’s Under Secretary of State from 1961-66, and foreign policy consultant to Nixon), Philip Jessup (representative to the International Court), Henry A. Kissinger (Chairman, Kissinger Associates), David Rockefeller (Member, JP Morgan International Council), Nelson Rockefeller, Laurance Rockefeller, Dean Rusk (Kennedy’s Secretary of State and former President of the Rockefeller Foundation), Gerald Ford, Henry J. Heinz II (Chairman of the H. J. Heinz Co.), Sen. Henry M. Jackson, Sen. Jacob J. Javits (NY), Prince Phillip of Great Britain, Lord Louis Mountbatten, Denis Healy (former British Defense Minister), Manlio Brosio (Secretary of NATO), Wilfred S. Baumgartner (Bank of France), Guido Carli (Bank of Italy), Thomas L. Hughes (President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace), Robert S. McNamara (Kennedy’s Secretary of Defense and former President of the World Bank), Margaret Thatcher (Prime Minister of England), Valery Giscard D’Estang (President of France), Harold Wilson (Prime Minister of England), Edward Heath (Prime Minister of England), William P. Bundy (former President of the Ford Foundation, and editor of the CFR’s Foreign Affairs journal), John J. McCloy former President of the Chase Manhattan Bank), Christian Herter (Secretary of State under Eisenhower), Lester Pearson (former Prime Minister of Canada), Shepard Stone (Director of International Affairs for the Ford Foundation), Dirk U. Stikker (Secretary-General of NATO), Gardner Cowles (Editor-in-Chief and Publisher of Look magazine), Paul G. Hoffman (of the Ford Foundation, U.S. Chief of Foreign Aid, and head of the UN Special Fund), Donald H. Rumsfeld (President Ford’s and George W. Bush’s Secretary of Defense), Father Theodore M. Hesburgh (former President of Notre Dame University), Helmut Schmidt (Chancellor of West Germany), George F. Kennan (former U.S. Ambassador to the Soviet Union), Paul H. Nitze, Robert O. Anderson (Chairman of Atlantic-Richfield Co. and head of the Aspen Institute for Humanisitic Studies), Donald S. MacDonald (Canadian Minister of National Defense), Prince Claus of the Netherlands, Marcus WaIlenberg (Chairman of Stockholm’s EnskiIda Bank), Nuri M. Birgi (Turkish Ambassador to NATO), Bill Moyers (journalist), William F. Buckley (editor of National Review), John D. Rockefeller IV (Governor of West Virginia, now U.S. Senator), Cyrus Vance (Secretary of State under Carter), Rep. Donald F. Fraser, Rep. Peter Frelinghuysen, Rep. Henry S. Reuss, Rep. Donald W. Riegle, Sen. Adlai Stevenson III, Sen. Charles Mathias (MD), Lt. Gen. John W. Vogt (former Director of the Joint Chiefs of Staff), Eugene Black (former President of the World Bank), Joseph Johnson (President of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace), Hannes Androsch (Austrian Minister of Finance), David J. McDonald (President of the United Steelworkers Union), Paul van Zeeland (Prime Minister of Belgium), Pierre Commin (Secretary of the French Socialist Party), Imbriani Longo (Director-General of the Banco Nationale del Lavoro in Italy), Vimcomte Davignon (Belgium Minister of Foreign Affairs), Walter Leisler Kiep (member of the German Parliament), Ole Myrvoll (member of Norway’s Parliament), Krister Wickman (former Swedish Minister of Foreign Affairs, and Governor of the Bank of Sweden), Sen. Walter Mondale (MN, later Vice President under Carter), Rep. Thomas S. Foley (former Speaker of the House), Henry Ford III (head of the Ford Motor Co.), Gen. Walter Bedell Smith, Gen. Andrew J. Goodpaster (former Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, and later superintendent of the West Point Academy), Zbigniew Brzezinski, Gen. Alexander Haig (European NATO Commander, former assistant to Kissinger, later became Secretary of State under Reagan), Alan Greenspan (Chairman, Federal Reserve System), C. Douglas Dillon (Secretary of Treasury in the Kennedy and Johnson Administrations, from Dillon, Read and Co.), Baron Edmond de Rothschild, Pierce Paul Schweitzer (Managing Director of the UN’s International Monetary Fund), Paul B. Finney (editor of Fortune magazine), James Rockefeller (Chairman, First National City Bank), Giovanni Agnelli (Chairman of Fiat in Italy), Otto Wolff (German industrialist), Theo Sommer (German newspaper columnist), Arthur Taylor (former Chairman of CBS-TV), Neil Norlund (Editor-in-Chief of Berlingske Tindende in Denmark), and Sen. Lloyd Bentsen (TX, Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, candidate for Vice President in 1988 with Michael Dukakis, and now the Secretary of Treasury under Bill Clinton).
Although this list is a bit tedious to go through, you have probably started to see how the same names keep showing up over and over.
Bilderberg policy is carried out by a 35 member Bilderberg Steering Committee, including an inner circle known as an Advisory Committee, which is said to be made up of Giovanni Agnelli (Italy), David Rockefeller (U.S.), Eric Roll (Great Britain), and Otto Wolff von Amerongen (Germany). Some of the Steering Committee members are: Henry Kissinger, Jessica T. Mathews (President, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace), James D. Wolfensohn (President, World Bank), Marie-Josee Kravis (Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute), and Jorma Ollila (Chairman of the Board and CEO of Nokia Corp.). All American members of the Steering Committee are members of the CFR.
A few of the Bilderberg permanent U.S. members are: George W. Ball, Gabriel Hauge, Richard C. Holbrooke, Winston Lord, Bill Moyers, and Paul Wolfowitz.
The permanent Bilderberg Secretariat is located at: 1 Smidswater, the Hague, the Netherlands (though another address is sometimes reported at 2301 Da Leiden, in the Netherlands) Their address in America was at 345 E. 46th Street, in New York City (which was also the location of the Trilateral Commission, and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace). The American Friends of Bilderbergs, with offices at 477 Madison Avenue (6th floor) in New York City, is an IRS-approved charitable organization that received regular contributions from the likes of Exxon, Arco, and IBM; while their meetings are funded by the Ford Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, and the Carnegie Endowment Fund.
The Goals 2000 program, developed during the presidency of George Bush to revamp the nation’s public school system, was born at the April, 1970, Bilderberger meeting in Bad Ragaz, Switzerland. The purpose of the new educational philosophy was the “subordination of national ambitions to the idea of the international community.” Because our schools are “too nationalistic,” children, in the future, will be indoctrinated to consider themselves “world citizens.”
Prior to the 1971 meeting in Woodstock, Virginia, Prince Bernhard said that the subject of the meeting was the “change in the world role of the United States.” After the weekend conference, Kissinger was sent to Red China to open up trade relations, and an international monetary crisis developed, which prompted the devaluing of the dollar by 8.57% (which made a tremendous profit for those who converted to the European Currency).
In 1976, fifteen representatives from the Soviet Union attended the meeting which was held in the Arizona desert, and it was believed, that at that time, the plans were formulated for the “break-up of communism in the Soviet Union.” At the 1978 meeting, they predicted that a depression would hit the world in 1979, and that the dollar would die. Their solution was to replace the dollar with an international ‘bancor’ system (international bank note) of currency that would be universally acceptable as a medium of exchange. The ‘bancor’ system would have the international gold reserve deposited in a neutral country. It is an offshoot of the same Keynesian system developed at Bretton Woods in 1944 from the idea by German economist Julius Wolf in 1892. This system would protect the Illuminati when they spring their trap, and the world economy would crumble.
At their 1990 meeting at Glen Cove, Long Island in New York, they decided that taxes had to be raised to pay more towards the debt owed to the International Bankers. And George Bush, who pledged during the campaign, “Read my lips- no new taxes!” found himself signing one of the biggest tax increases in history on November 15, 1990, a move which was a contributing factor to his defeat when he ran for re-election.
At their 1991 meeting at the Black Forest resort in Baden Baden, Germany, they discussed plans for a common European currency, and European central banking; and reviewed Middle Eastern events and developments in the Soviet Union. David Rockefeller, said during the meeting:
“We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine, and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years ... It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during these years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supernational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries.”
Then Governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton (a Rhodes Scholar, who attended Oxford University in England), was invited to speak, and a decision was made to endorse his candidacy (according to Jim Tucker, a Spotlight reporter, who had a source within the group, code-named ‘Pipeline’). No wonder Clinton was able to survive all the media attacks regarding his personal life and lack of experience. One of his top money men was investor and international banker Jackson Stephens, who also donated $100,000 to the Bush campaign. His wife was the Co-Chairwoman of the national “Bush for President” organization in 1988.
Also in attendance, were Michael Boskin, Chairman of Bush’s Council of Economic Advisors, who was a speaker; Nicholas Brady, U.S. Treasury Secretary; and Vice President Dan Quayle, who impressed the group enough, that there was talk of supporting him for the Republican nomination in 1996. In fact, after the meeting, Bilderberger member Katherine Graham, head of the Washington Post, published a series of positive articles on Quayle.
At their 1992 meeting, the group discussed the possibility of “conditioning the public to accept the idea of a UN army that could, by force, impose its will on the internal affairs of any nation.” Henry Kissinger, who attended the meeting, said: “Today, Americans would be outraged if UN forces entered Los Angeles to restore order. Tomorrow, they will be grateful.”
The official press release for their 2002 Conference said: “Bilderberg’s only activity is its annual Conference. At the meetings, no resolutions are proposed, no votes taken, and no policy statements issued.” They are just “a small flexible, informal and off-the-record international forum in which different viewpoints can be expressed and mutual understanding enhanced.” However, Phyllis Schlafly wrote in A Choice Not An Echo, that the Bilderbergers are a “little clique of powerful men who meet secretly and plan events that appear to ‘just happen’.”
ATLAS SHRUGGED
In 1957, a 1,168 page book by Ayn Rand, called Atlas Shrugged, was published. According to one source, Rand was alleged to be a mistress to Philippe Rothschild, who instructed her to write the book in order to show that through the raising of oil prices, then destroying the oil fields and shutting down the coal mines, the Illuminati would take over the world. It also related how they would blow up grain mills, derail trains, bankrupt and destroy their own companies, till they had destroyed the economy of the entire world; and yet, they would be so wealthy, that it would not substantially affect their vast holdings. The novel is about a man who stops the motor of the world, of what happens when,
“the men of the mind, the intellectuals of the world, the originators and innovators in every line of industry go on strike; when the men of creative ability in every profession, in protest against regulation, quit and disappear.”
If we are to believe that the book represents the Illuminati’s plans for the future, then the following excerpts may provide some insight to the mentality of the elitists who are preparing us for one-world government.
One of the characters, Francisco d’Anconia, a copper industrialist and heir to a great fortune, the first to join the strike, says:
“I am destroying d’Anconia Copper, consciously, deliberately, by plan and by my own hand. I have to plan it carefully and work as hard as if I were producing a fortune- in order not to let them notice it and stop me, in order not to let them seize the mines until it is too late ... I shall destroy every last bit of it and every last penny of my fortune and every ounce of copper that could feed the looters. I shall not leave it as I found it- I shall leave it as Sebastian d’Anconia found it- then let them try to exist without him or me!”
A bit later, d’Anconia says: “We produced the wealth of the world- but we let our enemies write its moral code.” Still later, he says: “We’ll survive without it. They won’t.”
Dagney Taggart, the main character of the book, is the head of the Taggart Transcontinental Railroad. Her goal was to find out who John Galt was. She discovered that he was a young inventor with the Twentieth Century Motor Company, who said he would put an end to the regulations which bound a man to his job indefinitely. Before disappearing, he said: “I will stop the motor of the world.” He told her:
“Dagney, we who’ve been called ‘materialists’ ... we’re the only ones who know how little value or meaning there is in material objects ... we’re the ones who create their value and meaning. We can afford to give them up ... We are the soul, of which railroads, copper mines, steel mines, and oil wells are the body- and they are living entities that beat day and night, like our hearts, in the sacred function of supporting human life, but only so long as they remain our body, only so long as they remain the expression, the reward and the property of achievement. Without us, they are corpses and their sole product is poison, not wealth or food, the poison of disintegration that turns men into hordes of scavengers ... You do not have to depend on any material possessions, they depend on you, you create them, you own the one and only tool of production ... leave them the carcass of that railroad, leave them all the rusted nails and rotted ties and gutted engines- but don’t leave them your mind.”
Later in the book, Galt says:
“And the same will be happening in every other industry, wherever machines are used- the machines which they thought could replace our minds. Plane crashes, oil tank explosions, blast furnace breakouts, high tension wire electrocutions, subway cave-ins, and trestle collapses- they’ll see them all. The very machines that made their life so safe- will now make it a continuous peril ... You know that the cities will be hit worst of all. The cities were made by the railroads and will go with them ... When the rails are cut, the city of New York will starve in two days. That’s all the supply of food its got. It’s fed by a continent three thousand miles long. How will they carry food to New York? By directive and ox-cart? But first, before it happens, they’ll go through the whole of the agony- through the shrinking, the shortages, the hunger riots, the stampeding violence in the midst of the growing stillness ... They’ll lose the airplanes first, then their automobiles, then their trucks, then their horsecarts ... Their factories will stop, then their furnaces and their radios. Then their electric light system will go.”
Francisco d’Anconia, who blew up all the copper mines in the world, said of Galt:
“He had quit the Twentieth Century. He was living in a garret in a slum neighborhood. He stepped to the window and pointed at the skyscrapers of the city. He said that we had to extinguish the lights of the world, and when we would see the lights of New York go out, we would know that our job was done.”
Galt led the men of the mind, on strike, and they retired to a self-supporting valley, where a character, Midas Mulligan, says that “the world is falling apart so fast that it will soon be starving. But we will be able to support ourselves in this valley.” Galt said: “There is only one kind of men who have never been on strike in human history ... the men who have carried the world on their shoulders, have kept it alive, have endured torture as sole payment ... Well, their turn has come. Let the world discover who they are, what they do and what happens when they refuse to function. This is the strike of the men of the mind.”
The book describes what resulted from the strike: “But years later, when we saw the lights going out, one after another, in the great factories that had stood like mountains for generations, when we saw the gates closing and the conveyer belts turning still, when we saw the roads growing empty and the streams of cars draining off, when it began to look as if some silent power were stopping the generators of the world and the world was crumbling quietly...” And the culmination of their efforts: “The plane was above the peaks of the skyscrapers when suddenly, with the abruptness of a shudder, as if the ground had parted to engulf it, the city had disappeared from the face of the earth. It took them a moment to realize that the panic had reached the power stations- and the lights of New York had gone out.” The men of the mind had taken over the world.
Ayn Rand, author of Atlas Shrugged, which was a bestseller; had previously written We the Living (1936); The Fountainhead (1943), which became a 1949 movie starring Gary Cooper as an architect willing to blow up his own work, rather than see it perverted by public housing bureaucrats; and Anthem (1946). She later wrote For the New Intellectual (1961), Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal (1966), and The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution (1970). She also published a monthly journal (with Nathaniel Branden, a psychological theorist) called The Objectivist.
Rand based her novel on her philosophy which she calls Objectivism. As she puts it: “We are the radicals for capitalism ... because it is the only system geared to the life of a rational being ... The method of capitalism’s destruction rests on never letting the world discover what it is that is being destroyed.” She also said about the book: “I trust that no one will tell me that men such as I write about don’t exist. That this book has been written- and published- is proof that they do.”
In the book Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal, in a chapter titled “Is Atlas Shrugging” she wrote that “the purpose of this book is to prevent itself from being prophetic.” She also quoted several news stories which seemed to indicate that the world was indeed being depleted of its brains and intellectuals.
Is Atlas Shrugged a coded blueprint for the Illuminati’s plans of bringing this world to a point where they can institute a one world government? It certainly is thought provoking, and it is included only for the sake of conjecture. Being that the Illuminati is destroying our economy, and they do control the corporate structure of the United States, if not the world, there just may be something to this book, and maybe we should consider it a warning.
THE SEVEN SISTERS
One oil cartel is the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, known as OPEC, which is made up of Iran, Iraq, Venezuela, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Algeria, Indonesia, Libya, Nigeria, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates. The group was created on September 14, 1960, for the purpose of setting oil prices by controlling oil production. They were originally thought to be primarily Arabian, in ownership, however, it is actually an international group, which includes Americans.
The cartel was established from an agreement signed on September 17, 1920, by Royal Dutch Shell, Anglo-Iranian, and Standard Oil, for the purpose of fixing oil prices. By 1949, the cartel was made up of Anglo-Iranian, Socony-Vacuum, Royal Dutch Shell, Gulf, Esso, Texaco, and Calso. In the early 1950’s, revelations surfaced that the oil companies would pump the oil from the Middle East, then split the profits with the government of the country where the oil was produced. OPEC was formed to make people believe that the Arabian oil reserves were not owned by non-Arabian oil companies.
Those non-Arabian oil companies are another cartel, which had been informally called “The Seven Sisters,” and control what is shipped to the United States, and how much is refined into gas and heating oil. Originally, it was made up of the Rockefeller-controlled Exxon (previously known as Standard Oil of New Jersey, or Esso), Mobil (Socony or Standard Oil of New York, which merged with Vacuum Oil), and Chevron (Socal or Standard Oil of California); the Mellon’s Gulf Oil; Shell (Royal Dutch Petroleum), Texaco, and British Petroleum (Anglo-Iranian).
They controlled 90% of crude exports to world markets by controlling every important pipeline in the world, such as the 753-mile TransArabian Pipeline, from Qaisuma in Saudi Arabia to the Mediterranean Sea, which was owned by Exxon, Chevron, Texaco, and Mobil. Exxon owned the 100-mile Interprovincial Pipeline in Canada; and also the 143-mile pipeline in Venezuela. The 799-mile Alaskan Pipeline was owned by British Petroleum and Exxon. By controlling these, and other vital arteries, they can restrict the flow of oil, limiting supplies to refineries.
You could also see their link, through the joint ownership of the major crude oil production companies:
The Sisters were also interlocked with eight of the largest banks in the country, and with each other: Exxon had ties to Mobil, Chevron, and Texaco; and Mobil had ties to Exxon, Shell, and Texaco. When six of the nation’s major commercial banks held their Executive Board meetings, the directors of the top eight oil companies, with the exception of Gulf and Chevron, met with them. When the Bank of America had a Board meeting, the directors of Chevron and Getty Oil met with them. Chevron also had ties with Western Bancorp. Shell and Mobil directors were present at the Board meetings of First National City Bank.
Mobil also had ties with Bankers Trust, and Chemical Bank. Exxon was tied in with the Chase Manhattan Bank (a holding company for hundreds of smaller oil companies, including Humble Oil and Creole Petroleum), Morgan Guaranty, and Chemical Bank. Amoco (Standard Oil of Indiana) was tied in with Chase Manhattan, Continental Illinois, and National Bank and Trust.
Some of the oil executives who were members of the Council on Foreign Relations: Lawrence G. Rawl (Chairman of Exxon), Lee R. Raymond (President of Exxon, and Trilateral Commission member), Jack G. Clark, Sr. (Vice President of Exxon); Alfred C. Decrane, Jr. (Chairman of Texaco), John Brademas (a Director of Texaco, and Trilateral Commission member), William J. Crowe, Jr. (a Director of Texaco, and Trilateral Commission member); Allan E. Murray (Chairman & President of Mobil, and Trilateral Commission member), Lewis M. Branscomb (a Director of Mobil), and Helene L. Kaplan (a Director of Mobil).
The Seven Sisters also controlled 70% of the U.S. coal supply, which during World War II, the Germans used to make pollution-free synthetic fuel. Their philosophy was “to mine it now, it’s coal; to mine it later, it will be like gold.”
These seven companies announced their alliance with the statement: “We have formed a very exclusive club ... And we are now united. We are making history.” Remember, in 1914, Congress referred to Standard Oil as “the invisible government.” The oil companies are powerful, and their power was never more apparent, then it was during the manufactured crisis of 1973.
On October 6, 1973, as synagogues in Israel observed Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement, Syrian MiG-21’s attacked a group of Israeli jets. Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and eight other Arab nations had mobilized against Israel. Egypt attacked the Sinai Peninsula with 4,000 tanks, knocking out many Israeli tanks; while Syria attacked the Golan Heights with 1,200. New Soviet-made SAM-6 missiles plucked Israeli planes out of the sky with ease. However, within a few days, the tide was turned. Israel regained control of the Heights, and took a large part of Syria. On October 12, they were only 18 miles from Damascus. With 12,000 soldiers, and 200 tanks, they swept across the Suez Canal in two directions to surround the Egyptian Third Army, which had been caught on the east side, and came within 12 miles of Cairo.
Since the first day of the war, Russia had been airlifting supplies to the Arabs, so to counter that move, the United States said they intended to supply Israel “with whatever it needs.” Once Israel began smashing their way to victory, Russia sent a Naval force of 71 ships, including 16 submarines, to the Mediterranean, and put their seven airborne divisions on full alert.
On October 12th, the Chairmen of Exxon, Texaco, Mobil, and Chevron (who made up the production company of Aramco in Saudi Arabia), sent Chief of Staff Gen. Alexander Haig (who later became Reagan’s Secretary of State) a memo warning against any increased aid to Israel, by saying it would “have a critical and adverse effect on our relations with the moderate Arab producing countries.” On October 17th, Omar Saqqaf, the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia, gave President Nixon a letter from King Faisal, which said that if the U.S. did not discontinue their shipment of military supplies to Israel within two days, there would be an embargo. Nixon stated that he was committed to supporting Israel. The U.S. Sixth Fleet of 49 ships, including 2 aircraft carriers, was sent to the Mediterranean, where they maintained a state of combat readiness.
OPEC met and decided to raise the price of oil to $5.12 a barrel, which was 70% higher than they had agreed to before the Arab-Israeli War. The next day, the Arab countries met, and decided to cut oil production by 5%, however, the Saudis later decided to cut back production by more than 20%, and by October 20th, had embargoed all oil shipments to the U.S., and countries that were partial to Israel.
As the Israeli counterattack continued, Egypt and Syria were in serious trouble, and Russia urged the UN to call a ceasefire. Jim Akins, the ambassador to Saudi Arabia sent a message to Aramco that the oil embargo would not be lifted “unless the political struggle is settled in a manner satisfactory to the Arabs.” Two days later, the Saudis requested from the Aramco directors, information concerning the amount of oil used by the U.S. military, which they supplied. The Saudis then instructed them to stop all supplies to the military. In December, OPEC announced a price of $11.65 a barrel, and the result was economic chaos in the United States and Western Europe.
Though Aramco claimed that they had no choice in what they did, and that they weren’t acting as agents of a foreign government against the United States, the cry went out that the oil industry was putting “profits before patriotism.” Before the embargo, America was importing 1.2 million barrels oil a day; and by February, only 18,000 barrels, which was a drop of 98%. The rush was on to reallocate other sources of oil (Venezuela and Iran had not joined the boycott), and to distribute it throughout the world. The global emphasis of the American oil companies were revealed, when they refused to favor the U.S. at the expense of the other countries, causing us to lose a higher percentage of the available oil supply.
In Egypt, Sadat’s terms for a ceasefire, was that Israel had to withdraw from all territories that it had won during the 1967 war; thus pressure from the United States and the Soviets, forced Israel to turn their victory into a negotiated compromise.
To add insult to injury, when the winter was at its worst during the shortage, the announcement that oil companies were experiencing record profits, left a very sour taste in the mouths of Americans. Exxon announced that their third quarter profits were up 80% over the previous year, while Gulf was up 91%. Exxon ended up the year with a profit that was an all-time record for any company, in any industry.
By March, 1974, the embargo was lifted from the U.S., and the oil companies scrambled to salvage their shattered reputations. However, the incident would never be forgotten, because it shocked the American people back to the reality of just how much control a foreign government, and multinational corporations could exert over our nation. The price of oil never went down to their pre-embargo levels, and the threat of another shortage would always remain as the Arabs realized that they could achieve political leverage by using oil to blackmail the world.
There have been many changes in the oil industry since the inception of the Seven Sisters. In 1984, Chevron (Standard Oil of California) bought, and merged with Gulf Oil; and then in 2001, merged with Texaco (who in 1984 had bought Getty Oil), to become ChevronTexaco, the 2nd largest oil company in the country, and 5th largest in the world. In 2002, Shell Oil acquired a couple of Texaco’s interests. In 1998, Exxon (Esso, Standard Oil of New Jersey) merged with Mobil (Socony, Standard Oil of New York) to become ExxonMobil, the biggest oil company in the country, and third largest company in the U.S. In 1987 British Petroleum purchased the remaining 45% of Sohio (Standard Oil of Ohio) that they didn’t already own, then in 1998, merged with Amoco (Standard Oil of Indiana), and in 2000 merged with Arco (Atlantic Richfield).
The Seven Sisters are now the Four Sisters, so what you have now is an expanded amount of power and influence that is concentrated in less hands, as oil companies have sought to consolidate their interests because of economic concerns. It’s uncanny in that it has happened in less than 20 years. It’s almost as if the old Standard Oil Company was coming back together. In 2001, Conoco (Continental Oil) and Phillips Petroleum (Phillips 66) merged, to make ConocoPhillips, the 3rd largest oil company, the 12th largest company, and the 6th largest oil company in the world. If this trend continues, it will make it all the more easier for oil companies to manipulate and control a crucial commodity like gasoline and oil.
CLUB OF ROME
This think-tank of Anglo-American financiers, scientists, economists, politicians, heads of state, and industrialists from ten different countries, met in April, 1968 at Rockefeller’s private estate in Bellagio, Italy, at the request of Aurelio Peccei, the Italian industrialist who had close ties to Fiat and the Olivetti Corporation. He claimed to have solutions for world peace and prosperity, which could be accomplished through world government. The Club of Rome (COR) was established with a membership of 75 prominent scientists, industrialists, and economists from 25 countries, which along with the Bilderbergers, have become one of the most important foreign policy arms of the Roundtable group.
Many of the COR executives were drawn from NATO, and they have been able to formulate a lot of what NATO claims are its policies. Through Lord Carrington, they were able to split NATO into two factions, a left-wing political group (whose doctrine was formed on the basis of Peccei’s book Human Quality), and its former military alliance.
The first Club of Rome conference in the U.S. was in 1969, where the American branch was organized as the “American Association of the Club of Rome.” Among its members were: Norman Cousins (honorary Chairman of Planetary Citizens), John Naisbitt (author of Megatrends), Amory Lovins (a speaker at Windstar, John Denver’s New Age center in Snowmass, Colorado), Betty Friedan (founding President of NOW, the National Organization of Women), Jean Houston and Hazel Henderson (New Age authors and speakers), Robert O. Anderson and Harlan B. Cleveland (CFR members and part of the Aspen Institute for Humanistic Studies), Sen. Claiborne Pell (D-RI), and Rep. Frank M. Potter (staff director of the House Subcommittee on Energy).
Their first book, called The Limits to Growth, was published in 1972, and described their vision for the world:
“We believe in fact that the need will quickly become evident for social innovation to match technical change, for radical reform of the institutions and political processes at all levels, including the highest, that of world polity. And since intellectual enlightenment is without effect if it is not also political, The Club of Rome also will encourage the creation of a world forum where statesmen, policy-makers, and scientists can discuss the dangers and hopes for the future global system without the constraints of formal intergovernmental negotiation.”
For the most part, the Club (main office at 193 Rissener Landstr. In Hamburg, Germany) functions as a research institute on economic, political, and social problems, and claim that “there is no other viable alternative to the future survival of civilization than a new global community under a common leadership.” Their website claims:
“The Club of Rome’s mission is to act as a global catalyst of change that is free of any political, ideological or business interest. The Club of Rome contributes to the solution of what it calls the world problematique, the complex set of the most crucial problems- political, social, economic, technological, environmental, psychological and cultural- facing humanity. It does so taking a global, long term and interdisciplinary prospective aware of the increasing interdependence of nations and the globalization of problems that pose predicaments beyond the capacity of individual countries.”
It almost sounds like the Club of Rome is the A-Team of internationalist groups. Just like how the proposals suggested by the Bilderbergers seem to gain acceptance, we have to worry that the same thing will happen with the COR.
On September 17, 1973, they released a Report called the “Regionalized and Adaptive Model of the Global World System,” which was prepared by Directors Mihajlo Mesarovic and Eduard Pestel (part of the “Strategy for Survival Project”), which revealed the Club’s goal of dividing the world into ten political/economic regions (which have been equated to the 10 “Kingdoms” of Bible prophecy), which would unite the entire world under a single form of government.
These regions are: North America, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, Japan, Rest of Developed World, Latin America, Middle East, Rest of Africa, South and Southeast Asia, and China. The same plan was published in a Club of Rome book called Mankind at the Turning Point, which said: “The solution of these crises can be developed only in a global context with full and explicit recognition of the emerging world system and on a long-term basis. This would necessitate, among other changes, a new world economic order and a global resources allocation system…”
In 1976, they published RIO: Reshaping the International Order which called for a new international order, including an economic redistribution of wealth.
Howard T. Odum, a marine biologist at the University of Florida, who is a member of the Club of Rome, was quoted in the August, 1980 edition of Fusion magazine, as saying: “It is necessary that the United States cut its population by two-thirds within the next 50 years.” He didn’t say how this would be accomplished. Their 1972 book, The Limits to Growth (which sold 12 million copies in 27 languages), dealt with the problem of worldwide overpopulation, and stated that “if the world’s consumption patterns and population growth continued at the same high rates of the time, the earth would strike its limits within a century.”
During the Carter Administration, a task force was appointed to expand upon this report, and on July 24, 1980, a two-volume document called “Global 2000 Report,” which had been written by former Secretary of State Cyrus R. Vance, was presented to President Carter, and then Secretary of State Edward S. Muskie. It attempted to project global economic trends for the next twenty years, and indicated that the resources of the planet were not sufficient enough to support the expect dramatic increase in the world population. The report called for the population of the U.S. to be reduced by 100 million people by the year 2050.
About six months later, the Council on Environmental Quality made recommendations based on the Report, called “Global Future: A Time to Act.” They suggested an aggressive program of population control which included sterilization, contraception and abortion. In August, 1982, the Executive Intelligence Review published a report called “Global 2000: Blueprint for Genocide” which said that the two aforementioned Presidential reports “are correctly understood as political statements of intent- the intent on the part of such policy centers as the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, and the International Monetary Fund, to pursue policies that will result not only in the death of the 120 million cited in the reports, but in the death of upwards of two billion people by the year 2000.”
Peccei wrote (based on a report by COR member Harland Cleveland, U.S. Ambassador to NATO, who believed that Third World countries should decide for themselves who should be eliminated):
“Damaged by conflicting policies of three major countries and blocs, roughly patched up here and there, the existing international economic order is visibly coming apart at the seams ... The prospect of the necessity of the recourse to triage deciding who must be saved is a very grim one indeed. But, if lamentably, events should come to such a pass, the right to make such decisions cannot be left to just a few nations because it would lend themselves to ominous power over life of the world's hungry.”
Throughout the world, the Club of Rome has indicated that genocide should be used to eliminate people who they refer to as “useless eaters.”
This would be accomplished by using limited wars in advanced countries, and even a limited nuclear strike at a strategic location; as well as starvation through created famines and diseases in Third World countries.
In the 1976 novel Ceremony of the Innocent by Taylor Caldwell, she effectively explains the rationale behind their actions: “...there will be no peace in the tormented world, only a programmed and systematic series of wars and calamities- until the plotters have gained their objective: an exhausted world willing to submit to a planned Marxist economy and total and meek enslavement- in the name of peace.”
Have their plans for genocide already started? AIDS (Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome) has become a plague in our society, spreading to 91 nations. In the early 1990’s the U.S. News and World Report stated: “If there is not a cure for AIDS within the next thirteen years, tens of millions will die.” Even though there has been a lot of talk about AIDS awareness and prevention, the full danger of it has been covered-up by the Center for Disease Control, and the media, which has increasingly shown its pro-homosexual bias.
In 1969, at a House Appropriations hearing, the Defense Department’s Biological Warfare unit requested funds to develop, through gene-splicing, a new disease that would be resistant to treatment, and break down a victim’s immune system. They received $10 million (H.B. 15090), to produce “a synthetic biological agent, an agent that does not naturally exist and for which no natural immunity could have been acquired.”
In the 1972 Bulletin of the UN’s World Health Organization (WHO), volume 47, page 251, it says: “An attempt should be made to see if viruses can in fact exert selective effects on immune function. The possibility should be looked into that the immune response to the virus itself may be impaired if the inflicting virus damages, more or less selectively, the cell responding to the virus.” This sounds like the AIDS virus, so why is it being discussed by a health organization?
Derivatives from sheep and cattle have been commonly used to manufacture vaccines, however, certain viruses common to these animals can interact indefinitely, forming a new strain of deadly viruses called retro-viruses. In 1974, the National Academy of Sciences recommended that “Scientists throughout the world join with members of this committee in voluntarily deferring experiments (linking) animal viruses.”
Dr. Robert Strecker, a practicing gastroenterologist, with a Ph.D. in pharmacology, who was hired as a consultant to work on a health-care proposal for Security Pacific Bank, said: “I don’t think there is any doubt that AIDS is a man-made problem. The question is whether it was created either accidentally or intentionally. I believe the AIDS virus was requested, predicted, produced, and deployed.”
The most common theory about the origin of AIDS was that it came from green monkeys in Africa. Yet several virologists have said that the AIDS virus does not occur naturally in any animal. Besides, it would have been statistically impossible to reach the point we are at now, just from a single episode. If the AIDS virus had originated with the monkeys, then the disease would have surfaced with the Pygmies, who are closer to them, and use them as a food source, yet, it appeared first in the cities. Further damaging evidence comes from the fact that AIDS practically occurred simultaneously in the United States, Haiti, Brazil, and Central Africa.
Strecker’s research indicated that the AIDS virus (code-named ‘MKNAOMI’) was developed by the Frederick Cancer Research Facility of the National Cancer Institute, in cooperation with the WHO, in their laboratories at Fort Detrick, Maryland (which until 1969 was part of the U.S. Army’s germ warfare unit, known as the Army Infectious Disease Unit, or Special Operations Division); by combining bovine (cow) leukemia virus and visna (sheep) virus, and injecting them into human tissue cultures.
The bovine leukemia virus is lethal to cows, but not to humans; and the visna virus is deadly to sheep, but not to man. However, when combined, they produce a retro-virus that can change the genetic composition of the cells that they enter. He said:
“If one analyzes the genes of the human AIDS virus and the genes of the bovine leukemia virus of cattle and the visna virus of sheep, and compares them, the genes appear related. How is it possible that the bovine visna virus- which looks like AIDS and produces an AIDS-like disease, and which produced pneumocystis carinii pneumonia in chimpanzees in 1972- has not been analyzed and compared with AIDS ... until 1987 when ‘Characterization and Molecular Cloning of Bovine Lente (Latin for ‘slow’) Virus Related to Human Immunodeficiency Virus’ was published in Nature magazine. Matthew Gonda, the author, described a virus that looks like AIDS, named bovine visna virus, and suggested that it was most closely related to AIDS and may well be its precursor.”
On August 11, 1988, Ted Strecker, Dr. Strecker’s brother was found shot to death in his home in Springfield, Missouri. His death was ruled a suicide. On September 22, 1988, Illinois State Representative Douglas Huff of Chicago was found dead in his home. The autopsy revealed that he died of a stroke as a result of an overdose of cocaine and heroin. Rep. Huff just happened to be a very vocal supporter of Dr. Strecker’s work to publicize the AIDS cover-up. Coincidence or conspiracy?
There was a vaccination program for Smallpox in Africa by the WHO. Some researchers believe that the Smallpox vaccination program in 1972 was used to introduce the virus into the population. On May 11, 1987, the London Times ran an article called “Smallpox Vaccine ‘Triggered AIDS Virus’,” written by Science Editor Pearce Wright, who linked the mass vaccination program of the World Health Organization in the 1970’s to the outbreak of AIDS, because Central Africa was the focus of the program, and they have become the most affected area in the world.
Though in Africa, AIDS is generally regarded as a heterosexual disease, in the United States, it has the stigma of being a ‘gay’ disease. Prior to 1978, there was no sign of the AIDS virus here, yet in 1978, the killer disease struck with a vengeance within the homosexual community. The evidence points to the introduction of an experimental Hepatitis B vaccine. In 1969, Dr. W. Schmugner, a Polish physician, who was educated in Russia, came to the United States, where he became head of the New York City Blood Bank. He set up guidelines for a Hepatitis vaccine study, and only promiscuous males between the ages of 20 and 40 were included in the study, which has led some to believe that this was how the virus was introduced into the gay population.
In 1978, more than 1,000 non-monogamous gay adult males received an experimental vaccination against Hepatitis B, which was sponsored by the National Institute of Health and the Center for Disease Control. With the Hepatitis vaccine, which is not produced from a human tissue culture, it is impossible to have an accidental contamination, which seems to indicate that the AIDS virus was intentionally put in the vaccine. In 1981, the Center for Disease Control reported that 6% of those receiving the Hepatitis vaccine were infected with AIDS, but in 1984, they admitted that it was actually 64%. These Hepatitis vaccine studies are now in the possession of the Justice Department in Washington, DC.
To allow the disease to become entrenched within the population, various facts were covered-up and glossed-over. A great deal of emphasis had been put on the prime cause of AIDS infection, being the exchange of body fluid, through sexual activity and intravenous drug use, which has brought a campaign for the importance of using clean, unused needles, and condoms. The use of a condom does not guarantee protection against the transmission of the AIDS virus. All it takes is one AIDS virion (a complete virus particle with its outer coat intact), and the smallest sperm is 500 times larger that one such virion. In addition, the quality of condoms have become highly suspect, since failure rates of 30-50% have been reported.
The risk of casual contact has been played down when in fact AIDS is a highly contagious disease which demands that a quarantine be placed on those who suffer from the disease. Rather than treat the disease as the epidemic it is, the government has concerned itself with giving AIDS carriers more rights and more exposure to the general population. There is concrete medical evidence that indicates that the virus can survive up to 7 days on a dry petri dish, and up to 15 days, in an aqueous (wet) environment. This raises the question, what would happen if an AIDS carrier would sneeze into a punch bowl or a salad bowl. It can incubate 10-15 years before causing any noticeable signs of illness, which means that sexual relations exposes you to every sexual contact your partner has had in that period of time.
A February, 1985 report in the British medical journal Lancet, said: “There is little evidence for homosexual activity among African AIDS patients (and it) appears to be transmitted through heterosexual contact or exposure to blood through insect bites...” On September 9, 1985, a research team of researchers from the National Cancer Institute, the Laboratory of Tumor Cell Biology and the Institute of Tropical Medicine, said that “human retroviruses could be transmitted by mosquitoes or within the parasite itself.” In a report published in the October, 1981, issue of Science, Boston hematologist Dr. Jerome Groopman, and researchers with the National Institute of Health said that recovery of the AIDS virus “from saliva suggests that direct contact with this body fluid should be avoided...”
On January 11, 1985, the Center for Disease Control reported: “There is a risk of infecting others by ... exposure of others through oral-genital contact or intimate kissing (‘french’ kissing).” Dr. Richard Restak, a Washington neurologist, made this statement:
“At this point live AIDS virus has been isolated from blood, semen, serum, saliva, urine and now tears. If the virus exists in these fluids, the better part of wisdom dictates that we assume the possibility that it can also be transmitted by these routes. It seems reasonable, therefore, that AIDS victims should not donate blood or blood products, should not contribute to semen banks, should not donate tissues or organs to organ banks, should not work as dental or medical technicians, and should probably not be employed as food handlers.”
Professor William Haseltine of the Harvard Medical School, in a presentation to a University audience, said that anyone “who tells you categorically that AIDS is not contracted by saliva is not telling you the truth. AIDS may in fact be transmissible by tears, saliva, bodily fluids, and mosquito bites.”
AIDS is an epidemic that will not be stopped. The scientists that created this deadly virus, have created a virus that multiplies 100 times faster than influenza. There are more than 180 different AIDS viruses, and 300 strains, which makes blood testing meaningless. The virus is constantly mutating, which makes it impossible to develop a general vaccine that would be effective with everyone.
Quite simply, AIDS is a world-wide, modern-day plague, and every year, the number of those affected increases drastically. In the March, 1987 issue of Vanity Fair, Dr. William Grace, chief of Oncology at St. Vincent’s Hospital in New York, is quoted as saying: “I think AIDS is going to devastate the American medical system.” Besides not being able to combat it medically, the disease will progress to being an economic drain, especially if national health care is instituted.”
If its purpose was to glean out the population, it certainly will be successful. It must be assumed that the progenitors of this disease must have a measure of protection to prevent themselves from being exposed. The elite have already segregated themselves from the general population by virtue of their position, so from that aspect, there is little risk from being contaminated. In the event of medical treatment, they have access to the best medical treatment that money can buy, and most likely possess a private, untainted blood supply.
Somehow, I just can’t help thinking, that when their goal of limits to the population have been reached, how will they end the scourge which they have placed upon the earth. Just as the saying goes, that a lawyer in court doesn’t ask the witness a question that he doesn’t already have the answer for; the same reasoning would seem to apply here, that the Illuminati would not unleash a disease that they didn’t already have a cure for.
Bro. R. G. Stair, a well-known radio evangelist, had received an anonymous letter which seemed to confirm this theory. The writer claimed to be a molecular biologist who worked in the same laboratory with Dr. Robert C. Gallo (the molecular biologist noted for his involvement in the co-discovery of the AIDS virus). The writer claimed that there is an AIDS vaccine that is now available, and that 500,000,000 doses have been produced and is now available. Now the bombshell. The writer accidentally discovered that Gallo had actually created the AIDS virus, and found a couple letters in his office, from high government officials which mentioned the New World Order.
In 1961, in a Litton Bionetics laboratory (who was working with the Navy’s Biomedical Research Laboratory, in association with the Univeristy of California), retroviral experiments with African Green Monkeys and Human T-Cell Leukemia were being conducted under the auspices of the National Institute of Health (contract # SVCP PR#8 NIH #71-2025). It consisted of taking monkey viruses that were harmless to humans, recombined them with DNA, RNA and enzymes from other animal viruses that were known to cause leukemias, lymphomas, and sarcomas; then got them to jump species, and cultured the new mutant viruses into human white blood cells in some studies, and in other studies- human fetal tissues, which produced an “immune-system destroying, cancer-causing viruses” for which “no natural immunity could have been acquired, and no cure exists.” The scientist who was directing the tests was Dr. Robert Gallo.
In 1975, Gallo and eight other scientists (working at the Bethesda Cancer Research Center in Maryland) had been working to modify the genetic structure of the virus so that it can be more easily transmitted. That same year, after Fort Detrick had become demilitarized, the newly established Frederick Cancer Research Facility was placed under the direction of the Bethesda Cancer Research Center, where Gallo was the Director. One investigation revealed that in March, 1976, a special federal government virus development program began producing the AIDS virus, and it was headed by Dr. Gallo and Dr. Novakhatskiy of the Ivanosku Institute in Russia. Gallo would later be investigated and found guilty of scientific misconduct, but President Clinton pardoned him.
In response to the charges that AIDS was developed as a military biological warfare weapon, in February, 1987, Army Col. David Huxsoll said: “Studies at army laboratories have shown that the AIDS virus would be an extremely poor biological warfare agent.” He later denied saying it.
Whether AIDS is the vehicle of elimination, that the Club of Rome has referred to, or a precursor, just like Gulf War Syndrome, Ebola, and SARS, is undoubtedly open to speculation, even in light of all the questions raised. However, you can’t deny how neatly this little piece of the puzzle fits into the entire picture of preparing the world for a one-world government.
INDEPENDENT COMMISSION ON INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT ISSUES
The Toronto Globe and Mail, on April 7, 1980, reported the story of a conference to be hosted by Canadian Prime Minister Trudeau, that fall, which would “reshape global structures.” The Summit, known as the “North-South Dialogue,” which would “make recommendations on ways of breaking through existing international political impasse in North-South negotiations for global development,” was sponsored by the Independent Commission on International Development Issues, and was to include President Jimmy Carter, Newsweek and Washington Post publisher Kathryn Graham, Robert McNamara, former British Prime Minister Edward Heath, and West German Chancelor Helmut Schmidt.
On January 14, 1977, Robert McNamara, President of the World Bank, proposed the establishment of an international commission of politicians and economists who would meet, not as government representatives, but independently to discuss “basic proposals on which global agreement is both essential and possible.” Willy Brandt, the former West German Chancellor was asked to chair the commission.
On September 28, 1977, Brandt announced his intention to launch the Independent Commission on International Development Issues, and said that it “would not interfere with ongoing international negotiations, and would make recommendations to help improve the climate of North-South relations.” Brandt wanted the Commission, consisting of 18 members, to represent many views, and to be politically and regionally balanced, with a majority coming from developed countries. Their initial meeting was in December, 1977.
There was two phases to what is more commonly referred to as Brandt’s Commission. The funding for the first ($750,000) in 1980, producing North-South: A Program for Survival, was provided by the Dutch Government, as well as Denmark, Finland, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Norway, Saudi Arabia, Sweden, United Kingdom, the Commission of the European Communities, OPEC Special Fund, German Marshall Fund of the United States, the Ford Foundation, Friedrich-Ebert and Friedrich-Naumann Foundations of the Federal Republic of Germany, and the International Development Research Center of Canada.
Subsequent funding was provided by the governments of Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom, and the OPEC Special Fund.
The funding for the second phase ($350,000), which produced the 1983 report Common Crisis: North-South Cooperation for World Recovery, came from the governments of Canada, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Netherlands, Kuwait, the Commission of the European Communities, and the German Marshall Fund of the United States.
In short, the Brandt Reports “called for a full-scale restructuring of the global economy,” and the purpose of the Commission was “to influence public opinion to help change government attitudes, as well as to make proposals for revitalizing North-South negotiations.”
In the 380-page report called North-South, which called for the “instant” redistribution of wealth from the richer, to poorer nations, and a stepping up of world disarmament. They wanted “greater power for the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.” Their rationale was that the “transfer of wealth must be tackled, not out of charity, but to ward off economic collapse ... Hence, the global super summit now. Worldwide security is not achieved by granting more aid, but by reshaping global structures, by greater regionalized planning and development.” In Common Crisis they recommended that a supernational authority be established to regulate world commerce and industry, international currency, and an international police force, under the direction of the UN Security Council.
No comments:
Post a Comment