Yes, Virginia, There is an Establishment
In previous chapters we have seen that the Rockefellers exercise tremendous leverage over business,
banking, and the economy. In the last chapter we showed how the family has used that money to set
themselves up in the charity business, and then used their influence through their giveaways to guide
education, religion, and the media-and therefore public opinion-along the proper course. Proper for the
Rockefellers, that is
The perfect situation, from the Rockefellers' point of view, is to combine their economic muscle and
their political oomph so that one hand washes the other. They have mastered to a frightening degree the
art of using economic power to build political power which enhances economic power even further, and
so on, ad infinitum.
We have seen that the Rockefellers have spent generations developing an economic consortium that is
the sleekest, smoothest, and most powerful combine on earth. The incredibly powerful political complex
the Rockefellers have put together makes their economic activities look like the naive simplicity of a
backwoods general store, and consists of organizations which are thoroughly interlocked with and
financed by the House of Rockefeller.
Nelson Rockefeller, the unelected Vice President of the United States, is a leader in the campaign to
submerge American sovereignty in a World Superstate. Long-time internationalist Alan Cranston is also an avid promoter of World Government, in violation of his oath of office as a US Senator.
At the center of Insider power, influence, and planning in the United States is the pervasive Council on
Foreign Relations. Headquartered in the Harold Pratt House on 68th Street in New York City, its members have dominated the last seven Administrations and have complete control of the Ford
Administration now. The CFR was created by the Rockefellers and their allies to be the focus of their
drive for a "New World Order". While we hate to use the terribly trite cliché about the many arms of the
octopus being controlled by the same brain, we apologetically must include it because it is simply the
most apt analogy.
Some of these organizations, although they are very influential in government, are virtually unknown to the average citizen. Others you may hear cited by the media a, a source for an important opinion or -
inside information, about some national or international event. What you definitely are not told is that you are hearing the voice of Rockefeller under dozens of different guises from the family's loyal army of
Collectively, this group of individuals and organizations is known as the Eastern Liberal Establishment;
the key figures in it are often referred to as Insiders.
The keystone of the entire Establishment arch is the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The
leadership of the CFR is the equivalent to the brain of the octopus. David Rockefeller is chairman of the
board of the CFR. lt is impossible to comprehend fully the interlock of Rockefeller power without being
aware of the all-pervasive influence of the Council. So important is this organization that we will devote
the rest of this chapter to it. And throughout the rest of this book we shall designate its members by
putting CFR in parentheses after their names.
The Council on Foreign Relations, headquartered in New York City, is composed of an elite of
approximately 1600 of the nation's Establishment Insiders in the fields of high finance, academics,
politics, commerce, the foundations, and the mass media. The names of many of it members are
household words; others, equally important, are less familiar. (For example, you may not recognize the
name Harold Geneen. But when you hear he is chairman of the board of directors of IT & T, you can be
assured he is a very big wheel indeed.)
Although the membership of the CFR is a veritable "Who's Who" in big business and the media,
probably only one person in a thousand is familiar with the organization itself and even fewer are aware
of its real purposes.
During its first fifty years of existence, the CFR was almost never mentioned by any of the moguls of
the mass media. And when You realize that the membership of the CFR includes top executives from
the New York Times,the Washington Post,the Los Angeles Times, the Knight newspaper chain, NBC,
CBS, Time, Life, Fortune, Business Week, US News & World Report,and many others, you can be sure
that such anonymity is not accidental; it is deliberate.
For fifty years the CFR operated like the Invisible Man in the novel by H.G. Wells. In 1962, Dan
Smoot's pioneering study, The Invisible Government, was successfully smothered by the paper curtain.
Although its results were visible everywhere, the CFR seemed not to exist.
Then in 1972,two separate exposures of the Limousine Liberals of the CFR were published: None Dare
Call It Conspiracy by this author, and The Naked Capitalist by Professor W. Cleon Skousen, former
assistant to J. Edgar Hoover. Although both books were completely ignored by the Establishment's
captive book review organs, both became nationwide bestsellers because of widespread interest in them
at the grass roots level.
The fact that George Wallace was planning to seize upon the Council and its power, as an election-year
issue in his third party candidacy for President, also contributed to the partial lifting of the cloak of
secrecy which has surrounded the CFR. Obviously anticipating even more attention to the Council, two
very similar articles on the CFR appeared in the New York Times and New York magazine. The strategy
was to admit that the Council on Foreign Relations has long acted as the unelected super government of
the United States, but to maintain that it was always motivated by altruism, idealism, and selfless
devotion to the public good. Moreover, the articles claimed, the CFR has, at least momentarily,
withdrawn to the sidelines. Still, as John Franklin Campbell admitted in his magazine article:
Practically every lawyer, banker, professor, general, journalist and bureaucrat who has had any influence
on the foreign policy of the last six Presidents-from Franklin Roosevelt to Richard Nixon-has spent
some time in the Harold Pratt House, a four-story mansion on the corner of Park Avenue and 68th Street, donated 26 years ago by Mr. Pratt's widow [an heir to the Standard Oil fortune] to the Council on Foreign Relations, Inc....
If you can walk - or be carried - into the Pratt House, it usually means that you are a partner in an
investment bank or law firm-with occasional assignments in government. You believe in foreign aid,
NATO, and a bipartisan foreign policy. You've been pretty much running things in this country for the
last 25 years, and you know it. [Emphasis added]
Establishment apologist Anthony Lukas, writing in the New York Times magazine, also admitted that
the Insiders of the Council have been responsible for our disastrous foreign policy over the past twentyfive
From 1945 well into the sixties, Council members were in the forefront of America's globalist activism:
the United Nations organizational meeting in San Francisco (John Mccloy, Hamilton Fish Armstrong,
Joseph Johnson, Thomas Finletter and many others),* as ambassadors to the world body (Edward
Stettinius, Henry Cabot Lodge, James Wadsworth and all but three others); the US occupation in Germany (Lucius Clay as military governor, McCloy again and James Conant as High Commissioners); NATO (Finletter again, Harlan Cleveland, Charles Spofford as US delegates).
For the last three decades, American foreign policy has remained largely in the hands of men - the overwhelming majority of them Council members-whose world perspective was formed in World War II and in the economic reconstruction's and military security programs that followed.... The Council was
their way of staying in touch with the levels of power ....
One of the "many other" CFR members active in the founding of the UN, whom Mr. Lukas did not
mention, was the notorious traitor, perjurer, and Soviet agent, Alger Hiss, who actually served as
Secretary General of the San Francisco meeting.
Prior to this time the number of stories about the CFR appearing in the mass media could be counted on
the fingers of one hand. One of these early articles appeared in Harper's magazine in July 1958, and it
is revealing to look at it now because its author, "Liberal" columnist Joseph Kraft, was himself a member of the CFR, and he was obviously directing his message to potential members of the Establishment's exclusive circle. Describing the influence of the CFR, Kraft said:
It has been the seat of ... basic government decisions, has set the context for many more, and has repeatedly served as a recruiting ground for ranking officials.
It is worth noting that Kraft called his article "School for Statesmen" -an admission that the members of
the Council learn a "line-of strategy to be pursued in Washington".
Indeed, the CFR has served as a virtual employment agency for the federal government, under both
Democrat and Republican administrations. In his New York Times magazine article, Anthony Lukas
. . . everyone knows how fraternity brothers can help other brothers climb the ladder of life. If you want to make foreign policy, there's no better fraternity to belong to than the Council..."
fraternity- of Insiders has been so successful that its members have virtually dominated every
administration in Washington since the days of Franklin Delano Roosevelt.
CFR members occupied the major policy-making positions, especially in the field of foreign relations,
under Roosevelt, Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, and Nixon; and they are just as powerful
today, under the Administration of Gerald Ford.
As Joseph Kraft phrased it:
"the Council plays a special part in helping to bridge the gap between the two parties, affording unofficially a measure of continuity when the guard changes in Washington."
George Wallace made famous the slogan that there is not a dime's worth of difference between the Democrat and Republican parties. Many observers have noted that while the two parties use different rhetoric and aim their spiels at differing segments of the population, it seems to make little difference
who actually wins the election. The reason for this is that while grass roots. Democrats and Republicans
generally have greatly differing views on the economy, political policies, and federal activities, as you
climb the sides of the political pyramid the two parties become more and more alike. The reason their
dime's worth of difference is that instead of having two distinctly different groups called Democrats and
Republicans, we actually have Rockedems and Rockepubs.
Every four years the Americans have the privilege of choosing between the Rockepubs candidate and
the Rockedems standard bearer. In 1952 and 1956, CFR Adlai Stevenson challenged CFR Eisenhower.
In 1960, it was CFR Nixon vs. CFR Kennedy. In 1964, the conservative wing of the COP stunned the
Establishment by nominating its candidate over Nelson Rockefeller. At which point Rockefeller and the
CFR wing proceeded to picture Barry Goldwater as a dangerous radical who would abolish Social
Security, drop atom bombs on Hanoi, and in general be a reincarnation of the Fascist dictator Mussolini.
The CFR Rockepubs drew up the indictment, the Rockedems prosecuted the case, and. Goldwater went
down to ignominious defeat-without ever understanding how he had been sandbagged by the leaders of
his own party.
Having disposed of the challenge to the Establishment in 1964, the CFR was firmly back in the saddle in
1968. That year CFR Nixon was "-pitted against" CFR Humphrey. The 1972 "-contest " featured CFR
Nixon vs. CFR Mc Covern. The Rockefellers were sure to win no matter which candidate emerged
In recent years, Establishment apologists would have you believe that the CFR was thrust into the cold
by Richard Nixon (one such article was even titled "-The Death Rattle of the Eastern Establishment-).
Such protestations are about as sincere as Br'er Rabbit begging not to be thrown into the briar patch.
The truth is that Nixon was completely under the thumb of the CFR, and served his masters faithfully until
they abandoned him to open the White House doors for Nelson Rockefeller as an unelected Vice
President. At the beginning of his Administration, Nixon placed at least 115 CFR members in key
positions in the Executive Branch an all-time high for any President. The vast majority of these men are
still around today, running the Ford Administration.
Perhaps the most important and certainly the most prominent of all these Establishment Insiders is
No man alive could more effectively represent the Council on Foreign Relations than Herr Kissinger,
who for all practical purposes has emerged as the Assistant President of the United States. Kissinger was
a Rockefeller man, serving on the staff of the CFR, when he received his appointment to the Nixon
Kissinger has long recognized how much he owes to the Council on Foreign Relations. In the preface to
his book The Necessity For Choice, published in 1961, he said:
Five years ago, the Council on Foreign Relations gave me my first opportunity to work systematically on problems of foreign relations. My relations with it have remained close and my admiration for it has, if anything, increased.
Consider: In 1956,Kissinger was an obscure German immigrant who was a mere professor at Harvard
University. In less than twenty years, he has become so powerful that he survives the dismissal of his
ostensible boss, and apparently tells presidents, prime ministers, and other potentates what to say and do.
What is the source of his remarkable authority?
Professor Kissinger's public commitments were in nearly every case the opposite of those expressed by
Richard Nixon in his successful bid for the Presidency. But, after the rah-rah of the campaign was over,
the CFR boys were brought in to run the show-and Henry Kissinger was Numero Uno.
Richard Nixon's own membership in the Council on Foreign Relations became an issue in 1962, during
his contest with Joe Shell in California for the Republican guber natorial nomination. After that, Mr.
Nixon arranged with the Council for his name not to appear on public releases as a member. The CFR
admits that it is sometimes necessary for its members to appear to have left the Council. On page 42 of
the Council's 1952 Report, for example, we read:
Members of the Council are sometimes obliged, by their acceptance of government posts in Washington
and else where, to curtail or suspend for a time their participation in Council activities.
Was Richard Nixon a secret member of the CFR throughout his Presidency? The Reece Congressional
Committee discovered during its investigation of foundations that there are a number ofsecret members
of the Council, including industrialist Cyrus Eaton and Senator William Fulbright. Our guess is that
Richard Nixon was among them.
Consider, after all, Mr. Nixon's CFR foreign policy - a subject in which he has certainly earned his
scarlet "A ".
-Disarmament without inspections, -increased trade-on credit with the Communists, -abandonment of our anti Communist allies, -détente with the Soviet Union and Red China,
programs of the CFR. Every one of these policies contradicts the Republican Party Platform of 1968.
But, once in the White House, Mr. Nixon ignored the Republican Platform on which he was elected and
proceeded to follow the dictates of the Council on Foreign Relations.
What are the Rockefellers attempting to accomplish with their CFR?
For the first time we now have an actual member of the CFR who is willing to testify against the
organization. He is Admiral Chester Ward, US Navy (Ret.), who as a hotshot youngish Admiral had
become Judge Advocate General of the Navy. As a "man on the rise" he was invited to become a
member of the -prestigious- CFR. The Establishment obviously assumed that Admiral Ward, like so
many hundreds before him, would succumb to the flattery of being invited into the inner sanctums of the
Establishment, and that through subtle appeals to personal ambition would quickly fall in line. The
Insiders badly underestimated the toughness and stern character of Admiral Ward. He soon became a
vocal opponent of the organization. And while the Rockefellers were not so gauche as to remove him
from the rolls of the organio longer invited to attend the private the private luncheons and briefing
sessions. The Admiral states:
The Objective of the influential majority of members of CFR has not changed since its founding in 1922, more than 50 years ago. In the 50th anniversary issue of Foreign Affairs [the official quarterly publication of the CFR], the first and leading article was written by CFR member Kingman Brewster,
Jr., entitled -"Reflections on Our National Purpose." He did not back away from defining it: our national
purpose should be to abolish our nationality. Indeed, he pulled out all the emotional stops in a hardsell
for global government. He described our "Vietnam-seared generation" as being" far from America
Firsters " an expression meant as a patronizing sop to our young people. in the entire CFR lexicon, there is no term of revulsion carrying a meaning so deep as -America First.-
While CFR members are not robots and may disagree on many minor matters, according to the Admiral,
this "lust to surrender" our independence is common to most of them:
Although, from the inside, CFR is certainly not the monolith that some members and most non members
consider it, this lust to surrender the sovereignty and independence of the United States is pervasive throughout most of the membership, and particularly in the leadership of the several divergent cliques ....
If the Rockefeller family's CFR has a "passion to surrender" US sovereignty to whom are we supposed
to surrender? Admiral Ward answers that the goal is the "submergence of US sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful one-world government."
And, according to the Admiral, about 95 % of the 1,600 members of the CFR are aware
that this is the real purpose of the Council-and support that goal!
For centuries, naive idealists have dreamed of a "parliament of man" that would put an end to poverty,
ignorance and disease. Modern one-worlders have added pollution and over-population to the list of evils World Government would cure. The allure of a world super state to such starry-eyed dreamers is obvious.
But what is the appeal of a World Government to such canny rationalists as the Rockefellers and others
of the international super-rich? You might think that such a World Government would threaten their
financial power and therefore would be the last thing on earth they would support. The answer is
obvious - they expect the coming World Government to be under their control!
You will remember that John D. Rockefeller Sr. ,who proclaimed that "competition is a sin," used
every devious trick he could devise to create a national oil monopoly. His strategy was as ruthless as it
was effective: Get control of your competitors, and then keep control of them.
Old John D. quickly learned that political power was essential to protect and advance his economic
clout, so he went into the politics business. Once he controlled the purse strings of enough captive
Congressmen, he could get them to pull strings to benefit Standard Oil and the family's other business
interests. In other words. he sought national control to protect his national monopoly.
Today, however, the Rockefeller interests are not just nationwide, they are worldwide. Both Exxon and
Chase Manhattan Bank do business in more than one hundred countries. The majority of these countries
are found in what is euphemistically called the "third world". Many of these are former colonies of
Western nations who owe their so-called independence to the Rockefellers and the CFR. Now they are
ruled, for the most part, by tin-pot dictators who have no more understanding of the realities of
economics than Elizabeth Taylor does of the sanctity of a convent. And there is always the chance that
one of these new "people's republics- will forget who owns them.
An even greater danger to the internationalists of the CFR, however, is the fear that enough Americans
will finally understand what they are doing and, in the age-old tradition of an angry electorate, "throw
the rascals out" Faced with the possibility that any one of a hundred mininations might suddenly thumb
its nose at you; or even worse, that the citizens of your own country might get wise to the game plan and
give you the heave-ho, what do you do?
The answer has been obvious to the Rockefellers for more than fifty years: you create a one-world
government which you will control, and you have that government rule all the others.
This has been the game plan for at least the past 54 years-ever since Daddy Oilbucks himself donated
money to build theLeague of Nationsheadquarters in Geneva. Unfortunately for his own ambitions,
there were still enough un-bought Senators and un-controlled newspapers in the United States to thwart
his plans. His countrymen escaped the noose he and his comrades had prepared for them by refusing to
join the budding World Government.
But the conspirators learned their lesson and did not make the same mistake again. They went to work at
once, first, by creating the Council on Foreign Relations, and then by using it to soften up the US for the
next World Government they would propose.*
*For more details about this whole plot, read None Dare Call It Conspiracy by this author.
The Insiders cloak their grasp for world political power in many idealistic cloches, and hide their true
intentions behind a number of code phrases.
The current favorite seems to be "New World Order."
The expression is as old as the diabolical scheme of a secret society of the Eighteenth Century called the
Illuminati, for a novus ordo seclorum -in fact, "new world order" is merely a translation of the
Illuminati's avowed goal. (see ONE US DOLLAR BILL )
By 1945, the Rockefellers were ready. Grandson Nelson was one of the 74 CFR members at the
founding meeting of the United Nations in San Francisco. Later, Nelson and his brothers donated the
land for the United Nations complex along the East River in New York-possibly because they did not
want the new headquarters of their World Government to be more than a short taxi-ride away from their
Such a "New World Order" most emphatically does not mean an impotent debating society to the CFR.
lt means an international regime that controls the world's armies, the world's weapons, its courts, its tax
collectors, its schools, its governments and everything else. In succeeding chapters we will see exactly
how the Rockefellers intend to nurture their embryonic structure until it has all of these powers, and
more. For the moment, take our word that the " New World Order" these international wheeler-dealers
have in mind would not be a republic, bound down by the chains of a constitution (as Jefferson phrased
it), working to increase freedom for all of us, where the rights of every citizen are protected from a
tyrannical Big Brother.
The "New World Order" the Rockefellers are planning will be a world dictatorship. Conservatives will
call it Socialism or Communism, Liberals will call it Fascism. The label makes little difference; it will
be the Gulag Archipelago on a worldwide basis.
Of course, proponents of such a World Government disguise their intentions behind all kinds of double
talk. For example. Senator Alan Cranston of California (for many years the president of the Rockefeller-interlocked
United World Federalists), defended his proposal for a world super-state with these words:
(World Government) Proposition 64 does not propose that we give up a shred of sovereignty. Plainly it
proposes a means by which we can gain the ability to exercise our presently impotent sovereignty in the
vital area of war prevention. It proposes that we create a limited world government and deposit our
sovereignty there ....
Let us repeat that. Senator Cranston says we won't give up a shred of sovereignty- if we -create a limited
world government and deposit our sovereignty there.
Lewis Carroll couldn't have said it better. George Orwell didn't even try; he called it "newspeak."
But while Senator Cranston and many of his colleagues play the string section in the orchestration for
World Government, other CFR members trumpet other parts in this carefully rehearsed symphony.
Nelson Rockefeller, for example, as an "altruistic millionaire," sounds the melody line for international
taxation. In his book The Future of Federalism, first published in 1962 and then reprinted when he was
nominated for the Vice Presidency, Nelson stated :
"...I think the answer is some free-world supernational
political being with the power to tax. . . "
Ask yourself this question: Does Nelson Rockefeller
want to tax his wealth to aid the world's poor? If so, why doesn't he eliminate those expensive
bureaucratic middlemen, and simply give his money to the downtrodden masses now ? Is it possible that
he is trying to become richer-wads and wads richer, as the family representative put it - by dividing your
wealth with himself?
During the confirmation hearings over his nomination as the nation's second unelected Vice President [Ford was the first], a
few courageous Congressmen, such as Representive John Ashbrook and Senator Jesse Helms, asked
how it would be possible for Nelson to uphold an oath to protect and defend the Constitution of the
United States when he was already on record as supporting a World Government that would scrap our
national charter. Such inquiries, however, were ignored by both Rockefeller and the national media. You
would think that the issue of the survival of the United States might rate a line or two in your local Daily
Bugle. But instead, all of the space was given to a planned farce about whether or not Rocky financed a
derogatory book about a political opponent. That's like launching a newspaper crusade accusing Jack the
Ripper of throwing gum wrappers in the gutter and ignoring his penchant for slitting throats!
In The Future of Federalism, Noble Nelson proclaimed:
No nation today can defend its freedom, or fulfill the needs and aspirations of its own people, from
within its own borders or through its own resources alone .... And so the nation-state, standing alone,
threatens, in many ways, to seem as anachronistic as the Greek city-states eventually became in ancient
Get it? The man who could not be elected to the White House, but managed to arrange an entrance there
anyway, says that a free and independent United States is now anachronistic.
Webster's defines "anachronism" as something from a former age that is incongruous in the present.
Every effective World Government proponent learns early in the game some rhetorical tricks, such as
calling black "white." Nelson Rockefeller is no exception. In the same book, he suggests:
The federal idea, which our Founding Fathers applied in their historic act of political creation in the
eighteenth century, can be applied in this twentieth century in the larger context of the world of free
nations - if we will but match our forefathers in courage and vision.
Even Nelson Rockefeller knows that the American Revolution was a protest against exactly the sort of
centralized power that he himself now advocates. The British Empire was the World Government of its
day. Our forefathers did not want to be inter-dependent; they wanted to be independent. And they were
willing to pay the price for their independence in the same coin that free men must always be willing to
pay-blood and gold.
During the early 1950's, Nelson Rockefeller encouraged the wide distribution of a photograph of
himself. It showed him holding a globe in his hands, and staring pensively into the future. Many people
are convinced that the symbolism involved was not accidental.
All information posted on this web site is
the opinion of the author and is provided for educational purposes only.
It is not to be construed as medical advice. Only a licensed medical doctor
can legally offer medical advice in the United States. Consult the healer
of your choice for medical care and advice.