post on 'none dare call it conspiracy'

[brad]

and Carroll Quigley who clinton mentioned (thanked) in stae of union address

'Irrespective of Dr. Quigley's intentions in revealing the news that those international groups with the credit power were working to produce an international millenium, the publicity given to his history by Skousen, and later by Gary Allen in his best seller None Dare Call it Conspiracy, had a most revealing effect: Tragedy and Hope ...'
-----------------------------------------------------------

http://www.libertyforum.org/showthre...p;vc=1&t=1

In 1966 The Macmillan Company, New York, and Collier-Macmillan Limited, London, published a revealing history in which the author claimed, in essence, that international financial groups, exercising power through the creation and control of financial credit on an international scale, had worked closely with Communists for the purpose of creating a New World Order. The author was no 'Right-wing extremist', but the prestigious American historian, Dr. Carroll Quigley, who formerly taught at Harvard and Princeton, and who has done special research in the archives of France, Italy and England. He subsequently became professor of history at the Foreign Service School of Georgetown University in Washington.

D.C. Dr. Quigley's 1300-page Tragedy and Hope created little public interest until Mr. W. Cleon Skousen, who served with the American FBI for sixteen years and became publicly known with his best seller The Naked Communist, reviewed it in The Naked Capitalist (1970). As a highly trained investigator of Communism, Skousen had observed a number of strange developments which seemed to point to a conspiratorial control centre higher than either Moscow or Peking.
He had waited for someone 'on the inside' of the international power structure to talk, and was convinced that Quigley was a genuine insider.

Quigley states that 'I know of the operations of this network (of the international power structure) because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted, for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records.' Why did Dr. Quigley write such a revealing book, documenting the links between Big International Finance and Communism?

Quigley makes it clear that he is a strong supporter of those striving to create a New World Order: 'I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and I have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known' (p. 950).

Dr. Quigley's thesis is that the men working towards a New World Order are highly cultured, well-educated and have the best interests of the human race at heart. They offer the hope of the world. It is too late, anyhow, to turn back their progressive schemes, and therefore those who resist them represent tragedy. This is why he called his work Tragedy and Hope.

The will-to-power has been a dominant feature of man's long history and while it is true, as Lord Acton said, 'That all power tends to corrupt,' it is also true that many of those who have sought power over their fellows have been pleasant individuals. Some of them have been great idealists convinced that the world would be a much better place if they had complete power.

The idea of World Government is as old as man. But whereas an Alexander the Great had to rely primarily on the force of the sword to gain power, over the past two-hundred years a new instrument has become available for centralising power that of financial credit creation, increasingly operating on an international scale.

From the beginning of the famous Rothschild dynasty down to the present time Dr. Quigley gives a brilliant picture of the development of a closely-locked International Money Power. He quotes the famous statement made by Reginald McKenna, one-time British Chancellor of the Exchequer, and Chairman of the Midland Bank, who, in addressing a meeting of shareholders of the Bank on January 25, 1924, said, as recorded in his book, Post-War Banking, 'I am afraid the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can, and do create and destroy money. The amount of finance in existence varies only with the action of the banks in increasing or decreasing deposits and bank purchases. We know how this is effected. Every loan, overdraft or bank purchase creates a deposit, and every repayment of a loan, over*draft or bank sale destroys a deposit.'

A number of public investigations have taken place since Reginald McKenna publicly said what the operators of credit creation had known for centuries, all demonstrating that trading banks create new finances when making loans and advances. Giving evidence before the New Zealand Royal Commission on monetary systems in 1955, Mr. H. W. Whyte, Chairman of the Associated Banks of New Zealand, readily agreed to the realities of credit creation. 'They have been doing it for a long time, but they didn't quite realise it, and they did not admit it. Very few did. You will find it in all sorts of documents, financial text-books, etc. But in the intervening years, and we must be perfectly frank about these things, there has been a development of thought, until today I doubt very much whether you would get many prominent bankers to attempt to deny that banks create credit.'

The real credit of a community is its productive capacity and real wealth. But if this real credit can only be used on terms dictated by those who have a monopoly of creating and issuing financial credit, a mere book*keeping arrangement, then it is elementary that if this monopoly can be developed on an international scale, those controlling such a monopoly have a major instrument for imposing a World State.

Just as trading banks, whether called private or Government, have progressively become the mere instruments of Central Banks, so are Central Banks now becoming instruments of the International Monetary Fund, which now creates a form of international credit called 'Paper Gold' or Special Drawing Rights. One of the principal architects of the International Monetary Fund, and the World Bank, was Harry Dexter White, Under-Secretary of the U.S. Treasury during World War II, and subsequently discovered to have been one of the Soviet Union's top agents in the United States Administration.

When the White House was informed about White, he was neither removed nor arrested, but appointed as the new Executive Director of the U.S. Mission to the International Monetary Fund, and his salary was substantially increased!

The power to create financial credit is the power to control all forms of economic activity, including the media. Once the nature of this power is grasped, and how present methods of credit creation generate increasing debt, heavier taxation and accelerating inflation, the nexus between International Finance and International Communism can be readily seen. Credit loans are the instrument which has been used to move massive quantities of Western production and technology from the West to the Soviet Union. Irrespective of Dr. Quigley's intentions in revealing the news that those international groups with the credit power were working to produce an international millenium, the publicity given to his history by Skousen, and later by Gary Allen in his best seller None Dare Call it Conspiracy, had a most revealing effect: Tragedy and Hope soon became almost impossible to purchase! It disappeared from some libraries and today an original copy is a collector's item.

THE REALITY OF CONSPIRACY

Governments do not govern, but merely control the machinery of government, being themselves controlled by the hidden hand. This provocative statement was made by a character in one of Benjamin Disraelis's novels. The famous British Conservative Prime Minister of Jewish background used his novels to shed light on the suppressed realities of the world. Disraeli clearly was convinced that even in his times the 'hidden hand' was that of an international money power associated with revolutionary groups to subvert traditional society.

Controllers of the news media of the world insist that there is no such thing as a conspiracy operating behind national and international events, but themselves provide evidence of conspiracy by the manner in which they attempt to suppress or distort information which provides a strikingly different picture of world affairs to that generally presented.

When a senior South African Cabinet Minister, Mr. P. W. Botha, attacked the notorious American Council on Foreign Relations praised by Quigley in his work in 1973, stressing that it was dominated by Socialist-minded individuals and was subverting South Africans associated with it, there was a howl of rage and indignation from both the Afrikaans and English press of South Africa. The Pretoria News of September 6, 1973, said that it was ridiculous that an organisation chaired by Mr. David Rockefeller, the well-known international financier, could be pro-Communist. The Pretoria News said that 'A London report said that Western diplomats had received the Botha charge with a mixture of mirth and sorrow.'
And then came the comment that Mr. David Rockefeller 'can safely be presumed to have no interest in supporting an organisation dedicated to world socialism.'
Shortly afterwards, while visiting South Africa, Mr. Rockefeller described the Botha charges as 'absurd' but as will be seen in this examination of censored history, Mr. David Rockefeller and other international financiers have played a major role in financing Communism.

When he opened his Chase National Bank in Moscow in May, 1973, it was at the most prestigious address in Moscow: 1 Carl Marx Plaza. The Rockefellers have for a long time been financing and urging closer co*operation with the Communists. On November 25, 1959, Study No. 7, published by the Council on Foreign Relations, advocated 'building a new international order which must be responsive to world aspirations for peace and for social and economic change... a new international order including states labelling themselves as 'Socialist''.

In May of 1973 David Rockefeller was urging American Congress to grant favoured nation status to the Soviet. As far back as 1955 David Rockefeller was saying that it was 'politically foolish' to ignore Communist China. In July, 1974, the Rockefeller Manhattan Bank started doing business with Red China, the first Western Bank to do this for 24 years. David Rockefeller urged that Red China also be given favoured nation status.

At a press conference in Hong Kong at the time of the Red China deal, David Rockefeller said that apart from the banking arrangement with the Red Chinese, he had discussed with them the possibility of links between the Council on Foreign Relations and the Chinese People's Institute for Foreign Relations. 'I think they were very much interested in knowing more about how we conduct foreign relations and our attitudes on many subjects', he said.

As the amazing Dr. Henry Kissinger has played a major role in advancing closer relations between the United States and both Communist China and Communist Russia his background is of importance. Before Richard Nixon was first elected President in 1968, Kissinger rather contemptuously said that he was unfitted to be the President of the United States. Kissinger had worked for the Rockefellers for years. He is a One World advocate. But when elected Nixon's first major appointment was Dr. Henry Kissinger as his personal adviser on foreign affairs, thus demonstrating the source of real power in the United States. It was Kissinger who prepared the way for the dramatic Nixon change of attitude towards Peking, a victory for the policies of International Finance. Kissinger negotiated the 'peace-with-honour' deal in South Vietnam, leaving South Vietnam with no peace and the prospect of ultimate take-over by the Communists.

Henry Kissinger immigrated to the United States from Germany before the Second World War. Serving with him in the U.S. Army's Jewish intelligence task force in Germany at the end of the Second World War were Michael Fribourg, the multi-billionaire grain operator who is reputed to have cleared $700 million from Kissinger's massive wheat deal with the Soviet Union, Captain Walt Rostow, later White House Chief Adviser under Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, and Helmut Sonnenfeldt, now top adviser to the U.S. State Department.
A former K.G.B. agent, Colonel Michael Golleniewski, has been quoted as charging that Kissinger was at one time a secret unit of Communist intelligence.

In spite of former State Department officials and security officers charging that Sonnenfeldt was a security risk, one charge being that he had leaked highly classified information to the Israel Embassy in Washington, Sonnenfeldt was employed by Kissinger as one of the top aides on the National Security Council staff. He accompanied Kissinger on all his trips to Peking and Moscow and is therefore familiar with all secret deals made by Kissinger.

When a group of American Congressmen proposed that Aleksander Solzhenitsyn, the famous exiled Russian writer, be brought to America to address the American Congress on the oppression inside the Soviet Union, Kissinger strongly opposed this, arguing that it would jeopardise detente. But Solzhenitsyn warned that massive American economic aid to the Soviet was enabling the Soviet to expand its military strength; detente was a myth.

Paul Scott, distinguished American commentator, in The Wanderer, March 26, 1974, states that 'In his testimony before the Senate Finance Committee Kissinger clearly indicated that the Nixon Administration policy of accommodating the Russians now has priority over U.S. relations with Western nations. The signing of 67 bilaterial U.S.-Soviet agreements, ranging from political consultation to joint space exploration, since President Nixon took office is cited as proof that the Nixon*Kissinger policy puts relationships with Russia ahead of proven allies.

'Like the international power groups he is serving, Dr. Kissinger takes a detached approach to the suffering of the millions of victims of Communism in both the Soviet Empire and Red China. These noble advocates of a New One World are opposed to any policies which might free the victims of Communist tyranny. They are prepared to ensure that Soviet military strength is maintained with financial and economic blood transfusions from the U.S.A. and other Western nations. They may be well-educated, as Dr. Quigley asserts, but they are traitors to Civilisation.

THE SUTTON REVELATIONS

100,000 Americans have been killed in Korea and Vietnam 'by our own technology. The only response from Washington and the Nixon Administration is the effort to hush up the scandal.' This is the explosive indictment, not of some 'neurotic right-wing extremist', but of Antony C. Sutton, the Western world's most out*standing academic on Western technological and economic aid to the Soviet Empire.

Antony Sutton's carefully documented studies shatters completely the most dangerous myth ever presented to a gullible mankind; a myth accepted by non-Communists as well as Communists and their fellow-travellers. The myth was once stated to me as follows by a young first-year school teacher: 'Communism has certainly been responsible for brutalities with which we cannot agree. But starting with an impoverished Russia in 1917, Communism has in the face of bitter opposition from the capitalist world, progressively built the Soviet Union up to the stage where it is one of the great super-powers in the world. We must admit its tremendous industrial and technological achievements and now learn how to co-exist with the Soviet Union.'
Like tens of millions of other people, that teacher was reflecting an image created by the instruments of modern centralised propaganda.

A false image can be created by a combination of both distortion and suppression. The result is that people are living in two worlds: the one presented by the creators of false images and the one of reality.The reality presented by Antony Sutton is one which the deeper students of Communism have known about for a long time. Some of these have dealt with different aspects of the evidence concerning the external financing of the Soviet Union.

In his last book, The Bolshevik invasion of the West (1966), the late Louis Budenz, the former top Communist and Managing Editor of The Daily Worker (U.S.A.), who eventually came back to his Christian Faith, warned of a growing alliance between 'Wall Street' 'international financial groups' and Moscow.

However, the evidence presented by Sutton is much more concrete than that presented by others. Once it is grasped that Western technology and industry has been primarily responsible for the creation of the formidable Soviet military machine, and the expanding Soviet naval power, the reality takes on a chilling significance which those who wish to retain freedom can only ignore at their peril.

British-born Antony Sutton, former professor of economics at California State University at Los Angeles, began a study late in the 1950's of the transfer of Western technology to the Soviet Union and how the Soviet economy and military-industrial complex had benefitted from this flow of Western assistance. The first work was completed in 1966 and published in 1968 by the Hoover Institution at Stanford University under the title Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development, 1917 to 1930.
Deeper students of International Communism quickly perceived that an outstanding academic had carefully documented in detail the vast technological and economic aid which the West had been supplying to the Soviet Union since 1918, confirming what they already knew.

The second volume of Sutton's study was published by the Hoover Institution in 1971 under the title Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development, 1945 to 1965.

Although Sutton's studies are of the greatest significance, they were only publicised in reviews in a few conservative and anti-Communist publications. But the media generally ignored what is beyond doubt the most significant work of the last 50 years. However, a few Members of the Republican Party grasped the vital importance of Sutton's research work with the result that he was invited to testify before a sub-committee of the Platform Committee of the Republican Party at Miami Beach, Florida, on August 15, 1972.

I am informed that many of those who heard Sutton found it a most shattering experience, which is not surprising when they were told that President Nixon, the man they were planning to re-elect in November, was permitting American troops in Vietnam to be killed with American technology. If it had been adequately publicised, Sutton's testimony would have caused a national sensation and had a major impact on the elections.

BOMBSHELL FACTS

Sutton made his position clear at the beginning by stating that he was not a politician and that his responsibility was to present facts. He was not concerned about whether his listeners liked or disliked his facts. After pointing out that he had spent ten years in research on Soviet technology, he then proceeded in a short fifteen minutes to drop bombshells such as the following:
There was no such thing as Soviet technology. 'Almost all' perhaps 90-95% came directly or indirectly from the United States and its allies. In effect the United States and the NATO countries have built the Soviet Union, its industrial and its military capabilities. This massive construction job has taken 50 years. It has been carried out through trade and the sale of plants, equipment and technical assistance. The United States is spending $80 billion a year on defence against an enemy built by the United States and West Europe.
Even stranger, the U.S. apparently wants to make sure this enemy remains in the business of being an enemy. The Soviets have the largest merchant marine in the world, about 6,000 ships. I have the specification for each ship. About two-thirds were built outside the Soviet Union. About four-fifths of the engines for these ships were also built outside the Soviet Union.
About 100 Soviet ships are used on the Haiphong run to carry Soviet weapons and supplies for Hanoi's annual aggression.
I was able to identify 84 of these ships. None of the main engines in these ships was designed and manufactured inside the USSR. All the larger and faster vessels on the Haiphong run were built outside theUSSR.
All Soviet automobile, truck and engine technology comes from the West.|AMP|#8221; The Gorki organisation, built by the Ford and Austin companies, produced most of the trucks used to carry Soviet-supplied military equipment down the Ho Chi Minh trail. Automobile factories can also be used to build tanks.

Antony Sutton summarised his testimony with his charge that 100,000 Americans had been killed with American technology, adding - The only response from Washington and the Nixon Administration is the effort to hush up the scandal. No wonder the Republicans listening felt chilly!

While they could not argue against Sutton's charge that 'You do not subsidise an enemy', they also feared that Sutton was right when he said that 'when this story gets out and about in the United States, it's going to translate into a shift of votes.' It was therefore essential to ensure that as far as possible the story did not get publicised. Political survival and party loyalties were much more important than trying to expose a treacherous policy of aid to an enemy killing American troops.

But what about the news media? Surely the Sutton exposure was news by any standard? Both the two major American wire services UPI and AP received copies of the Sutton testimony. Both suppressed it! And the media generally has ignored Antony Sutton's book, National Suicide (1973) in which he tells the whole dreadful story of how the Soviet has been built up by the West over fifty years.

At the conclusion of an address to a British audience in 1972, during which I had mentioned the emerging policy of Western nations openly providing the Soviet with increasing credits on a long-term basis and at low interest rates, a member of the audience took me aside and introduced himself as an oil technologist whose work took him throughout much of Soviet Russia. He stressed the appalling state of much of the Soviet economy, particularly agriculture. He also told me of how in Moscow he had met with a number of American computer experts who had come to the Soviet to instruct the Russians on the latest American computer equipment being supplied on credit. Sutton points out that computers are now indispensable in modern warfare. And so are heavy, multi-axle trucks for transporting both troops and heavy equipment.
The huge Soviet Kama organisation, the biggest in the world, has been virtually a gift from the United States.

The American Export-Import Bank has advanced direct loans of $86.5 million for the project, while the Rockefeller Chase National Bank of New York anticipates making loans up to $192 million. The Kama organisation is projected to manufacture 100,000 trucks per year, more than all the American truck manufacturers put together.

In a testimony presented to the United States of America House International Trade Sub-committee of the Banking and Currency Committee, on April 24, 1974, Sutton said that 'About 1968 I became concerned with our policy of technical assistance to the Soviet military-industrial complex, a policy denied by the State Department, and some Members of Congress. This technically subsidised Soviet economy was providing about 80 per cent of all supplies to North Vietnam and U.S. troops were being killed in Vietnam. I made numerous attempts to bring the problem to public attention, none of these efforts on my part had any recognisable impact. Therefore, in late 1972 I put together the information immediately at hand into a book: National Suicide: Military Aid To The Soviet Union, published by Arlington House in New York.'

This was in October, 1973. National Suicide published as an appendix Sutton's testimony before the Republican Party Platform Committee in August, 1972. Also given are the specifications of the ninety-six Soviet ships identified transporting weapons and supplies to North Vietnam, 1966-1971. Sutton tells the whole dreadful story of how the Soviet has been built up over fifty years. He names firms, organisations and Presidents. National Suicide has been generally ignored by the media. It is too explosive, even for those self-proclaimed 'fearless' journalists who are allegedly always searching for the truth.

National Suicide was also too much for some professed anti-Communists. In his Testimony before the American Banking and Currency Sub-committee, Sutton revealed how, after National Suicide came to the attention of the Hoover Institution, 'Immediately and I mean immediately' came under considerable criticism and hostility for publishing the book. My name was removed from my position as Research Fellow at the Hoover Institution. My hasty conversion into a non-person was so complete that the third volume of my Hoover series, which was then in press, had its dust jacket changed to read 'was a Research Fellow at the Hoover Institute from 1968 to 1973'.

'Sutton has commented that his shameful treatment by the Hoover Institution because of his protests against American military aid to the Soviet Union 'parallels the police state tactics of Hitler's Germany and is a pitiful state of affairs to encounter at one of this country's great universities'.

Sutton effectively disposes of the argument that it is possible to have 'peaceful' trade with the Soviet Union. Automobile manufacturing organisations can also be used for producing a variety of military vehicles. The Gorki organisation, for example, built under the guise of 'peaceful trade', produced in 1964 the first Soviet wire-guided anti-tank system.

Western-provided tractor plants have been used to produce Soviet tanks. Technological assistance to the Soviet to produce chemicals for agriculture has in fact meant vital assistance to the Soviet munitions industry. Antony Sutton says 'let's take a look at the Soviet industry that provides the parts and materials for Soviet armaments: the guns, tanks, aircraft. The Soviets have the largest iron and steel plant in the world. It was built by McKee Corporation. It is a copy of the U.S. steel plant in Gary, Indiana. All Soviet iron and steel technology comes from the U.S. and its allies. The Soviets use open hearths, American electric furnaces, American wide strip mills, and so on, all developed in the West and shipped in as peaceful trade.' The Soviets have the largest tube and pipe mill in Europe, one million tons a year. The equipment is Fretz-Moon, Salem, Aetna Standard, Mannesman, etc. All Soviet tube and pipe making technology comes from the U.S. and its allies. If you know anyone in the space business, ask him how many miles of tubes and pipes go into a missile.

Perhaps the classical example of what 'peaceful' trade with the Soviet means was provided by the U.S. State Department's approval that Burmeister and Wain of Copenhagen, Denmark, should provide the Soviet with technical assistance for the manufacturing of diesel engines. These engines were used in the ships which carried Soviet nuclear missiles to Cuba!

Early this century the Baku oil field in Russia was producing more than a half of the total world output of crude oil, but the Bolshevik Revolution resulted in a halt to all drilling. As Sutton points out, by 1922 half the wells were idle and the others were producing increasing quantities of water. The Soviet imported 'massive quantities of equipment from the American firms of International Barnsdall Corporation and Lucey Manufacturing Company. Rotary drilling methods introduced by Barnsdall increased speed of drilling by a factor of ten and reduced costs by more than one-half between 1924 and 1928.'

The Soviet granted a number of foreign companies concessions to develop Soviet oil fields. Nineteen large oil refineries were constructed in the Soviet between 1917 and 1930, but only one of these contained units manufactured in the Soviet. The electrical equipment was supplied largely by General Electric. By 1923 a number of foreign oil companies, including Standard Oil, were purchasing Soviet oil. In 1927 Standard of New York built a kerosene factory at Batum, leasing it back from the Soviet to supply Standard markets in the Near and Far East markets. Standard was one of John D. Rockefeller's creations. Closely associated with Standard Oil and other Rockefeller concerns was Jacob Schiffi of the Wall Street banking firm of Kuhn, Loeb and Company.

Stalin himself provided the most revealing statement concerning the manner in which the Communists in the Soviet Union have been almost completely dependent upon the West for their industrial and technological developments. W. Averell Harriman, closely associated with the Wall Street financial groups which have financed the Soviet, and American Ambassador to the Soviet Union during the Second World War, reported in June, 1944, to the State Department on a discussion with Stalin:' Stalin paid tribute to the assistance rendered by the United States to Soviet industry before and during the war. He said that about two-thirds of all the large industrial enterprises in the Soviet Union had been built with United States help or technical assistance.'

Sutton observes in National Suicide that Stalin could have added that the 'remaining third of Russia's industrial enterprises and military plants have been built with German, French, British, Swedish, Italian, Danish, Finnish, Czech, and Japanese help or technical assistance.'

Any realistic examination of the long-term motives of those responsible for financing the Soviet Union, thus enabling Soviet strategists to maintain. an international programme of revolution and subversion, backed by an expanding military and naval power, must start with the First World War.
Two events of the greatest significance took place during this war: the establishment of the Bolshevik regime in Russia and the British Government's agreement to the Political Zionist policy of establishing a 'National Home' for Jews in Palestine. Both events were closely linked.

They were two major preliminary events in a course of events which have brought man-kind to the present world crisis. They were a dramatic demonstration of the power of credit creation exercised by international banking groups operating across national borders even during times of world wars.

During World War I the international banking organisation of Kuhn, Loeb and Company, and a number of associates, based upon Wall Street, New York, were pro-German, anti-Russian and anti-British right up until the Czarist Government was overthrown in Russia and the British Government signed what was known as the Balfour Agreement, promising the Zionists a 'National Home' in Palestine.

Well-known Zionist writer, Professor Norman Bent*wich, wrote in Wanderer in War that 'The Russian Revolution and the Declaration concerning the Jewish National Home were born in the same month, November 1917. Soviet Russia and Palestine represent the most striking achievements in our time of reconstruction for peaceful needs.' In Judea Lives Again (London 19##), Bentwich said that the seizure of power by the Bolsheviks and the British Declaration on Palestine 'might seem to have little direct connection, but there was a deeper relation between them than that of chronological coincidence. In origin they are related to twin aspects of man's perpetual effort to establish God's kingdom on earth, although one claims to be godless. They go back to that millenial vision of the Prophets for whom the return of the people of Israel of Zion was bound up with a just order and peace on earth. For Russia inherited, too, a Messianic faith, and a passion for the regeneration of mankind. And she established the first Socialist State on the principles of a Jewish thinker (Marx)'.

THE TRUTH ABOUT THE 'RUSSIAN' REVOLUTION

One of the biggest hoaxes ever inflicted upon a gullible mankind is the generally-believed story that the revolution which took place in Russia in November, 1917, was the result of the down-trodden Russian people rising up against their exploiters under the brilliant leadership of Lenin and Trotsky. The hoax also insists that from 1917 until the present time the Communists have, in the face of world-wide opposition from 'the wicked capitalists', literally pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps until they have created one of the two greater super*powers of the world.

When the Russian Czar was forced to abdicate in March, 1917, by revolutionary pressures generated by the activities of Jacob Schiff and his colleagues of Kuhn, Loeb and Company, and similar international financiers, Trotsky was in New York working for a Communist newspaper. Lenin was in Switzerland. He had been in Europe since 1905 when he was expelled from Russia for his part in the abortive Communist uprising which took place that year.
Bolshevism was not in March, 1917, a viable force capable of taking over Russia with its own limited resources. First Lenin was sent from Switzerland into Russia in a sealed train along with at least 50 of his fellow Bolsheviks. As Winston Churchill graphically described this remarkable episode, Lenin was sent into Russia 'in the same way that you might send a phial containing a culture of Cholera to be poured into the water supply of a great city. No sooner did Lenin arrive than he began beckoning a finger here and a finger there to obscure persons in sheltered retreats in New York.

In a revealing article written in 1920, Churchill wrote about 'This world-wide conspiracy': Trotsky lost no time responding to the beckoning finger of Lenin, boarding a ship in New York and taking with him 275 fellow Bolshevik revolutionaries. But when his ship, the S.S. Christiana, reached Halifax, Nova Scotia, the Canadian Government promptly arrested him and impounded the large sum of money he was carrying. The Canadian Government very logically took the view that as Trotsky and his fellow Bolsheviks had openly proclaimed that when they took control of Russia they were going to make a separate peace with Germany, and that as this would mean the use of all German troops against the Western Front where large numbers of Canadians were fighting, they should prevent Trotsky from continuing on his revolutionary mission. Trotsky was held for five days, but then allowed to proceed by a Canadian Government forced to yield to the 'world-wide conspiracy'.

The core of this conspiracy was the international financial groups linked with Kuhn, Loeb and Company. One of the principal figures was Jacob Schiff, whose own grandson has admitted he had invested at least $20 million in a revolution which in fact was imposed upon the unfortunate Russians from outside their country. Trotsky later married the daughter of one of the wealthy bankers who backed the Bolshevik Revolution, Jivotovsky.

A leading member of Kuhn, Loeb and Company was Mr. Paul Warburg, who together with his brother Felix left Germany for the United States in 1902, leaving behind brother Max to run the family bank of M. N. Warburg and Company, Frankfurt. Paul Warburg married Solomon Loeb's daughter, and Felix married Jacob Schiff's daughter. Mr. Paul Warburg was the architect of the Federal Reserve Board, one of the early steps towards developing what later became known as Central Banking.

While millions of troops were locked in battle in Western Europe during the First World War, the international financiers were operating on both sides of the fighting lines. Max Warburg, for example, was playing a vital role in Germany while brothers Felix and Paul were doing likewise in the U.S.A. A very cosy type of family arrangement!

Sir Cecil Spring-Rice, British Ambassador to Washington during the first part of World War I, complained on numerous occasions about the pro-German attitude of these groups. In a letter to Sir Edward Grey, British Foreign Minister, on November 15, 1914, Sir Cecil Spring-Rice wrote, 'The Jews have a strong preference for the (German) Emperor, and there must be some bargain ...'

The desperate British later did make a bargain, a major part of which was outlined in a letter dated November 2, 1917, from Lord Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary, to Lord Rothschild, informing him that the British Cabinet was in favour of 'the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people'. Lord Rothschild was requested to bring the British Cabinet's decision to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.

Some of those members of the British Government which agreed to the 'Balfour Declaration', including Winston Churchill, subsequently recorded quite frankly that the promise was made to the Political Zionists in order that they would use their enormous international influence on the side of the Western Allies at a time when their military situation was so desperate that failing assistance from the United States, there was no real alternative to making some type of peace agreement with Germany.

Probably bearing in mind that the promise to the Political Zionists conflicted with an earlier promise made to Arab leaders, who were promised Arab independence if they would join against their colonial masters, the Turks, one of Germany’s main allies, the British Cabinet did declare in the Balfour agreement that the establishment of a National Home for the Jews must not “prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine . ."

When Great Britain was given the Mandate over Palestine at the end of the First World War, the population was 95% Moslem and Christian Arabs, and only 5% Jews, many of these coming in from Russia under various Zionist colonising schemes. The Palestinians could trace their history back over two thousand years. They had a far greater rightful claim to Palestine than have, for example, the Europeans to the United States. But the imposition of the Political Zionist programme upon Great Britain set in motion a chain of explosive events leading to the expulsion of the Palestinians from their country, a frightful Palestinian refugee problem, the cynical exploitation of that problem by the Soviet Union, and a Middle East crisis which has resulted in periodic major military explosions between the Arab nations and the Zionist State of Israel.

WHO ARE THE JEWS?

One of the most potent emotional arguments used by the Political Zionists to establish a State in another people’s country, is that they have a special moral and religious claim to “the land of their forbears”. The great majority of those called Jews, probably at least 85%, have no racial relationship whatever with Palestine.

The Universal Jewish Encyclopaedia gives the history of the great Khazar Empire of Middle Asia, the people being of mixed stock with Mongol and Turkish affinities. They were an extremely warlike but able people. It was probably towards the end of the eighth century that King Bulan, having called representatives of Judaism, Christianity and Mohammedanism, decided upon Judaism as a State religion. The eminent Jewish history Professor H. Graetz, in his History of the Jews deals with the progressive Judaising of the Khazars, relating how it became the fundamental law of the State that only Jewish rulers could ascend the throne. The Khazars were the first population of people to be called Jews in Eastern Europe. Eventually they were dispersed throughout Russia, Eastern Europe and then through to Western Europe.

Obviously there has been considerable mixing with other peoples over the centuries, but this group of Jews, broadly described as Askenazims, can claim no racial relationship with Palestine. The small minority group of the Jews, the Sephardim, have lived in peace and harmony with the Arab peoples over the centuries. They are different from the Askenazim Jew in may ways, including appearance.

One of the most distinguished members of this group was the British Prime Minister, Benjamin Disraeli, whose novels revealed that he had a great understanding of the power exercised by international finance. He said that “the world is governed by very different people from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes”. The famous writer, Dr. Oscar Levy, was also a Sephardic Jew, and persecuted by the Zionists because of his critical anti-Zionist writings.

Political Zionism was born amongst Eastern European (Askenazim) Jews, its philosophical power concept being first outlined in The Jewish State, by Theodor Herzl, a work originally entitled An Address to the Rothschilds. Political Zionism was strongly opposed by prominent Jews in the West. The distinguished American Jew, Henry Morgenthau, Snr., summarised the feelings of his fellow anti-Zionist Jews with his comment that “Zionism is the most stupendous fallacy in Jewish history . . . It is a retrogression into the blackest error and not progress towards the light . . it is a betrayal; it is an Eastern European proposal, fathered in this country by American Jews which if it were to succeed, would cost the Jews of America most that they have gained of liberty, equality and fraternity.”

The first Australian-born Governor-General, Sir Isaac lsaacs, was badly smeared by the Zionists because of his anti-Zionist stand. Not even the status of that cultured Jew, Moshe Menuhin, father of the famous violinist, Yehudi Menuhin, saved him from the hatchet attacks of the Political Zionists when he wrote his classic work, The Decadence of Judaism in Our Times (1965) in which he described Political Zionism as “A monstrous historical crime and curse.”

The views of the many prominent Jews who have warned about the long-term dangers of the policies of the Political Zionists, have been almost completely drowned out by international propaganda supporting Zionist policies. Or the non-Zionist Jews are given the silent treatment.

FINANCING THE SOVIET BY WALL STREET

Following the imposition of the Bolsheviks upon the Russian peoples, and the British acceptance of the Zionist project for Palestine, the Schiffs, Warburgs and their international associates took the necessary steps, including the entry of the United States into the conflict, to bring the First World War to an end. They were represented on both sides at the Versailles Peace Conference. British Prime Minister Lloyd George later wrote, “The international bankers swept statesmen, politicians, journalists and jurists all on one side and issued their orders with the imperiousness of absolute monarchs . . .“
American President Woodrow Wilson changed his attitude on a vital issue following the receipt of a telegram from Jacob Schiff.

At Versailles Schiff and associates insisted upon the recognition of the Bolshevik Government in Russia. They also supported the first step towards trying to create a World Government, the League of Nations. But although American public opinion revolted against accepting the Bolsheviks, the international financiers took every possible step to ensure that the newly established Bolshevik regime did not collapse. Credits were furnished through Germany, these enabling the Bolsheviks to obtain the Western economic assistance they desperately needed to keep control of Russia.

Communism as a production system is an abject failure, as demonstrated in the Soviet Union over half a century.

The Great Depression of the thirties, eventually becoming world-wide, was precipitated by the Wall Street international financiers. They demonstrated the truth of the statement attributed to the first Rothschild, Mayer Amschel, of Frankfurt, that so long as he could issue the credit of a nation he did not care who made the laws.

Congressman Louis McFadden, Chairman of the American House Banking and Currency Committee, and former President of the Pennsylvania Bankers’ Association, bluntly said in the U.S. Congress on December 15, 1931, that the Great Depression “was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence — the International Bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they could emerge as rulers of us all.”

The sudden drastic curtailment of credit in the United States produced the necessary conditions for the election of President Roosevelt. Desperate Americans were urged to recognise the Soviet Union so that loans could be openly granted to them. This would be “good for American business,” was the theme. This is the same theme being used today to justify massive credit and economic blood transfusions not only to the Soviet Empire, but also to the Red Chinese. The international financiers have an excellent public relations man developing this theme with an added emphasis: the building up of both the Soviet Union and Red China will lead to the creation of an “international order.” This public relations man is Dr. Henry Kissinger.

Those thrusting towards the age-old dream of a World State today are using a variety of policies and techniques, including economic centralism.

Also essential is a continuing state of crisis, with each new crisis being exploited to develop centralised power still further. Consider how Political Zionism and the Soviet Union have combined to produce a series of Middle East crises, the October 1973, crisis resulting in a “solution” by Dr. Henry Kissinger. This met with the warm approval of the Soviet leaders, who look forward to the reopening of the Suez Canal so that they can easily move their growing naval forces from the Mediterranean Sea into the Indian Ocean.

SOVIET-ZIONIST COLLABORATION

The Middle East crisis started to develop from the moment the British permitted the Zionists to start establishing a “National Home” in Palestine after the First World War. Growing Zionist immigration, the overwhelming majority of the migrants being Askenazim Jews, produced inevitable friction with the indigenous people, the British trying to preserve peace. As the Second World War approached, the British decided to revise their policy and in the White Paper of 1939 announced a drastic curtailment of Zionist immigration to Palestine. There was a storm of protest from the Zionists and violent anti-British threats.

The British declaration of war on Hitler’s Germany temporarily ended the Zionist threats, but as the war proceeded there was a growing Zionist drive to use Jewish refugees from Europe to breach British immigration laws for Palestine. Steps were also taken to establish a Zionist underground terrorist movement, ready to strike against the British when the war ended.

In a world where terror tactics have become almost commonplace, it is easy to forget that the Zionist terrorists were responsible for some of the most shocking crimes. There was the blowing up of the King David Hotel, the murdering of British soldiers and police. Some were kidnapped, flogged and then hanged. The deadly letter bomb was used. The British Minister-Resident in Cairo, Lord Moyne, was murdered in cold blood.

The British who had exhausted themselves in the war against Hitler, were now vilified internationally, particularly in the United States, as being “worse than Hitler”—merely because they were attempting to ensure that a balance was maintained in Palestine.

The co-operation of the Soviet leaders with the Zionist drive on Palestine was dramatically highlighted when the British Chief of the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Organisation, Lieut-General Sir Frederick Morgan, publicly charged that there was a “secret organisation to further mass movement of Jews from Europe” and that this movement was being used as “an umbrella for Russian secret and criminal agents”.

The Soviet not only provided Jewish manpower for the Zionist Palestinian campaign, but when the Zionist forces looked like being defeated militarily by the Arab armies following the Zionist conquest of Palestine, following the British withdrawal in May 1948, Stalin personally ordered that the Zionists be provided with the best available military equipment.

Pressured by both the Communists and the Politicial Zionists the United Nations had previously decided that when the British left, Palestine should be partitioned under the UN supervision. But the Zionists launched a terror campaign which resulted in hundreds of thousands of Palestinians fleeing from their own country. This was the beginning of the dreadful Palestinian refugee problem which predictably led to what has taken place since: exploitation of the situation by the Soviet strategists, experts in exploiting problems they have helped to create.

The assassination on September 17 1948, of Count Folke Bernadotte is another generally-forgotten example of Zionist terror tactics to establish themselves in Palestine. Former President of the Swedish Red Cross and noted internationally for his humanitarian works, Count Bernadotte was appointed as United Nations mediator in Palestine. Arriving immediately following the Zionist campaign against the Palestinians and the proclamation of the State of Israel on May 14 1948, Count Bernadotte was shocked to see the tens of thousands of Arab families scattered all over Palestine and neighbouring Arab countries.

In his report to the UN, he said that the new State had been born “in violence and bloodshed.” When Count Bernadotte’s proposed solution for fixing boundaries was presented to the UN on September 18 1948, the Zionists were hostile that they should be asked to hand back territories occupied in excess of what they had been allocated under the UN Partition Plan. The Count was murdered in Jerusalem on September 17, his murderers never brought to justice by Israel.

Zionist writer Ben Hecht, author of the statement that “One of the finest things ever done by the mob was the crucifixion of Christ”, commented that Count Bernadotte’s assassination was “that of an ass who wasn’t worth so fine a death."

When eventually fighting was brought to an end between Israel and the Arab States by Armistice agreements, Israel held all of Galilee and the northern part of the Negev, thus enlarging Israeli-held territory by 22 per cent in excess of that allocated by the UN Partition plan.

The Armistice agreement contained a paragraph stating that “The Armistice Demarcation lines should not be considered as the permanent boundary between Israel and her neighbours.” This was only an armistice, not a peace settlement, and the longer the stalemate continued without settlement the deeper became the bitterness amongst the Arabs and the greater their determination to attempt to recover the homeland of Palestinian Arabs.

In three oustanding works, Mr. Alfred Lilienthal, the American Jewish expert on the Middle East, warned of what must happen as the result of forcing the Zionist “thorn” into the Moslem world. What Price Israel?, There Goes the Middle East, and The Other Side of the Coin, are essential source works for those wishing to study a terrible story by a non-Zionist Jew.

Mr. Liienthal has been threatened and smeared and his books are now very difficult to obtain. Events have confirmed Mr. Lilienthal’s central warning: that uncritical Western support for the Zionist State of Israel must assist Soviet strategy in penetrating the Middle East and influencing the whole of the Moslem world.

A constant state of crisis has been punctuated by three major military explosions, the first in 1956, when the British under Prime Minister Eden decided, together with the French, to make an effort to re-establish their authority over the Suez Canal area. They were forced to retreat in a major loss of face, not by Egyptian military force, but by combined threats from Moscow and Washington. Washington threatened severe finance-economic sanctions if the British refused to retreat. Soviet influence increased enormously.

[Chris Alger]

The passage is a good example of the dishonesty and distortion for which right-wing conspiracy theorists are notorious.

The part about Quigley is just a lunatic's spin on what Quigly actually wrote. According to libertyforum, paraphrasing W. Cleon Skousen, "a highly trained investigator of Communism" in Hoover's FBI, Quigley wrote "in essence" that "international financial groups, exercising power through the creation and control of financial credit on an international scale, had worked closely with Communists for the purpose of creating a New World Order" involving "a conspiratorial control centre higher than either Moscow or Peking." Quigly suppoesedly blew the whistle on the conpiracy, of which he was a "genuine insider." Shifting to Quigley's words, the article points to this damning evidence of conspiracy: <ul type="square"> I know of the operations of this network (of the international power structure) because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted, for two years, in the early 1960's, to examine its papers and secret records.[/list]The same quote appears in "None Dare Call it Conspiracy."

In both cases, the quote is utterly misleading and ripped from a context that undermines the point of view professed by those purporting to have adopted Quigley's "insider" confession.

Here's the context of Dr. Quigley's quote: <ul type="square"> The radical Right version of these events as written up by John T. Flynn, Freda Utley, and others, was even more remote from the truth than were Budenz’s or Bentley’s versions, although it had a tremendous impact on American opinion and American relations with other countries in the years 1947-1955. This radical Right fairy tale, which is now an accepted folk myth in many groups in America, pictured the recent history of the United States, in regard to domestic reform and in foreign affairs, as a well-organized plot by extreme Left-wing elements, operating from the White House itself and controlling all the chief avenues of publicity in the United States, to destroy the American way of life, based on private enterprise, laissez faire, and isolationism, in behalf of alien ideologies of Russian Socialism and British cosmopolitanism (or internationalism). This plot, if we are to believe the myth, worked through such avenues of publicity as The New York Times and the Harold Tribune, the Christian Science Monitor and the Washington Post, the Atlantic Monthly and Harper’s Magazine and had at its core the wild-eyed and bushy-haired theoreticians of Socialist Harvard and the London School of Economics. It was determined to bring the United States into World War II on the side of England (Roosevelt's first love) and Soviet Russia (his second love) in order to destroy every finer element of American life and, as part of this consciously planned scheme, invited Japan to attack Pearl Harbor, and destroyed Chiang Kai-shek, all the while undermining America’s real strength by excessive spending and unbalanced budgets.

This myth, like all fables, does in fact have a modicum of truth. There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the radical Right believes the communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960’s, to examine its papers and secret records.[/list]In other words, the "higher conpsiracy" theory is a "fairy tale" and "myth" which "like all fables" has only a modicum of truth. That modicum amounts to a "network" of anglophile foreign policy makers. I assume Quigley means the pragmatic pro-business, pro-trade, pro-Europe "realist" foreign policy makers that dominated the scene quite visibly from Cabot Lodge through Dean Acheson. These elites operate "to some extent" the way the radical Right believes the communists act and have "no aversion to cooperating with the Communists," which the right-wing crazies distorted into an admission that they either work for or control all Communism.

In other words, foreign policy is dominated (or was during Quigley's time) by Anglophile elites that comprise a "network." No news, no big deal. Quigley says nothing about a conspiracy, certainly not one that controls communists or communism, and nothing about a "New World Order."

But then Quigley wrote two things that the conspiracy theorists couldn't resist: (1) he referred to this group as a "Round Table Group" and (2) said it had "papers and secret records."

I pulled this quote from a Dr. Quigley's Smoking Gun and don't have access to the full text, so I don't know what "secret records" he's referring to. But since he's a foreign policy historian I assume he means various classified cables and letters. But that "secret" thing smacks too much of "conspiracy" for the crazies to resist. Also, the "Round Table Group" sounds way too much like the mythical cabal that sits around a big table in their secret hideawy, controlling the planet and planning the New World Order, as they supposedly have in many of the instances that Quigley ridicules.

[jokerswild]

You are correct in the majority of your analysis. The right wing also frequently cites the Zionist conspiracy as being part of the same cabal. They claim that Israel controls the USA, and that the Rothchilds gave brth to the illuminati. This is classic Hitler out of Mein Kempf, but the right wing loonies buy it anyway.

[brad]

interesting, i didnt know that. i saw his book (quigleys) in bookstore but it was so big i didnt buy it (unlike james bamfords which covered northwoods , which i did).

but in any case it doesnt take a genius to see the consolidation of power and the destruction of the middle class as goals of the elite. just look at nafta and gatt, which is currently being expanded to all the americas.