Tuesday, May 28, 2019

Pestilence and Genocide excerpted from the book American Holocaust

Pestilence and Genocide

excerpted from the book

American Holocaust

by David Stannard

Oxford University Press, 1992

 

p57 The Spain that Christopher Columbus and his crews left behind before dawn on August 3, 1492, as they sailed forth from Palos and out into the Atlantic, was for most of its people a land of violence, squalor, treachery, and intolerance. In this respect Spain was no different from the rest of Europe.

Epidemic outbreaks of plague and smallpox, along with routine attacks of measles, influenza, diphtheria, typhus, typhoid fever, and more, frequently swept European cities and towns clean of 10 to 20 percent of their populations at a single stroke. As late as the mid-seventeenth century more than 80,000 Londoners-one out of every six residents in the city-died from plague in a matter of months. And again and again, as with its companion diseases, the pestilence they called the Black Death returned. Like most of the other urban centers in Europe, says one historian who has specialized in the subject, "every twenty-five or thirty years-sometimes more frequently-the city was convulsed by a great epidemic." Indeed, for centuries an individual's life chances in Europe's pesthouse cities were so poor that the natural populations of the towns were in perpetual decline that was offset only by in-migration from the countryside-in-migration, says one historian, that was "vital if [the cities] were to be preserved from extinction."

Famine, too, was common. What J. H. Elliott has said of sixteenth century Spain had held true throughout the Continent for generations beyond memory: "The rich ate, and ate to excess, watched by a thousand hungry eyes as they consumed their gargantuan meals. The rest of the population starved." This was in normal times. The slightest fluctuation in food prices could cause the sudden deaths of additional tens of thousands who lived on the margins of perpetual hunger. So precarious was the existence of these multitudes in France that as late as the seventeenth century each "average" increase in the price of wheat or millet directly killed a proportion of the French population equal to nearly twice the percentage of Americans who died in the Civil War.

That was the seventeenth century, when times were getting better. In the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries prices fluctuated constantly, leading people to complain as a Spanish agriculturalist did in 1513 that "today a pound of mutton costs as much as a whole sheep used to, a loaf as much as a fanega [a bushel and a half] of wheat, a pound of wax or oil as much as an arroba [25 Spanish pounds]." The result of this, as one French historian has observed, was that "the epidemic that raged in Paris in 1482 fits the classic pattern: famine in the countryside, flight of the poor in search of help, then outbreak of disease in the city following upon the malnutrition." And in Spain the threat of famine in the countryside was especially omnipresent. Areas such as Castile and Andalusia were wracked with harvest failures that brought on mass death repeatedly during the fifteenth century. But since both causes of death, disease and famine, were so common throughout Europe, many surviving records did not bother (or were unable) to make distinctions between them. Consequently, even today historians find it difficult or impossible to distinguish between those of the citizenry who died of disease and those who merely starved to death.

Roadside ditches, filled with stagnant water, served as public latrines in the cities of the fifteenth century, and they would continue to do so for centuries to follow. So too would other noxious habits and public health hazards of the time persist on into the future-from the practice of leaving the decomposing offal of butchered animals to fester in the streets, to London's "special problem," as historian Lawrence Stone puts it, of "poor's holes." These were "large, deep, open pits in which were laid the bodies of the poor, side by side, row upon row. Only when the pit was filled with bodies was it finally covered over with earth." As one contemporary, quoted by Stone, delicately observed: "How noisome the stench is that arises from these holes so stowed with dead bodies, especially in sultry seasons and after rain."

Along with the stench and repulsive appearance of the openly displayed dead, human and animal alike, a modern visitor to a European city in this era would be repelled by the appearance and the vile aromas given off by the living as well. Most people never bathed, not once in an entire lifetime. Almost everyone had his or her brush with smallpox and other deforming diseases that left survivors partially blinded, pock-marked, or crippled, while it was the norm for men and women to have "bad breath from the rotting teeth and constant stomach disorders which can be documented from many sources, while suppurating ulcers, eczema, scabs, running sores and other nauseating skin diseases were extremely common, and often lasted for years."

Street crime in most cities lurked around every corner. One especially popular technique for robbing someone was to drop a heavy rock or chunk of masonry on his head from an upper-story window and then to rifle the body for jewelry and money. This was a time, observes Norbert Elias, when "it was one of the festive pleasures of Midsummer Day to burn alive one or two dozen cats," and when, as Johan Huizinga once put it, "the continuous disruption of town and country by every kind of dangerous rabble [and] the permanent threat of harsh and unreliable law enforcement nourished a feeling of universal uncertainty." With neither culturally developed systems of social obligation and restraint in place, nor effective police forces in their stead, the cities of Europe during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries were little more than chaotic population agglomerates with entire sections serving as the residential turf of thieves and brigands, and where the wealthy were forced to hire torch-bearing bodyguards to accompany them out at night. In times of famine, cities and towns became the setting for food riots. And the largest riot of all, of course-though the word hardly does it justice-was the Peasants' War, which broke out in 1S24 following a series of local revolts that had been occurring repeatedly since the previous century. The Peasants' War killed over 100,000 people.

As for rural life in calmer moments, Jean de La Bruyere's seventeenth century description of human existence in the French countryside gives an apt summary of what historians for the past several decades have been uncovering in their research on rustic communities in Europe at large during the entire late medieval to early modern epoch: "sullen animals, male and female [are] scattered over the country, dark, livid, scorched by the sun, attached to the earth they dig up and turn over with invincible persistence; they have a kind of articulate speech, and when they rise to their feet, they show a human face, and, indeed, they are men. At night they retire to dens where they live on black bread, water, and roots."

To be sure, La Bruyere was a satirist and although, in the manner of all caricaturists, his portrait contains key elements of truth, it also is cruel in what it omits. And what it omits is the fact that these wretchedly poor country folk, for all their life-threatening deprivations, were not "sullen animals." They were, in fact, people quite capable of experiencing the same feelings of tenderness and love and fear and sadness, however constricted by the limitations of their existence, as did, and do, all human beings in every corner of the globe.

But what Lawrence Stone has said about the typical English village also was likely true throughout Europe at this time-that is, that because of the dismal social conditions and prevailing social values, it "was a place filled with malice and hatred, its only unifying bond being the occasional episode of mass hysteria, which temporarily bound together the majority in order to harry and persecute the local witch." Indeed, as in England, there were towns on the Continent where as many as a third of the population were accused of witchcraft and where ten out of every hundred people were executed for it in a single year. In one small, remote locale within reputedly peaceful Switzerland, more than 3300 people were killed in the late sixteenth- and seventeenth-century for allegedly Satanic activities. The tiny village of Wiesensteig saw sixty-three women burned to death in one year alone, while in Obermarchtal fifty-four people-out of a total population of barely 700-died at the stake during a three-year period. Thus, while it is true that the Europeans of those days possessed the same range of emotions that we do, as Stone puts it, "it is noticeable that hate seems to have been more prominent an emotion than love."

At the time La Bruyere was writing (which was a good bit later than the time of Columbus, during which time conditions had improved), the French "knew every nuance of poverty... At the top were those who "at best lived at subsistence level, at worst fell far below," while at the bottom were those described as dans un e'tat d'indigence absolue, meaning that "one had no food or adequate clothing or proper shelter, that one had parted with the few battered cooking-pots and blankets which often constituted the main assets of a working-class family." Across the whole of France, between a third and half the population fell under one of these categories of destitution, and in regions such as Brittany, western Normandy, Poitou, and the Massif the proportion ascended upwards of two-thirds. In rural areas in general, between half and 90 percent of the population did not have land sufficient for their support, forcing them to migrate out, fall into permanent debt, or die.

And France was hardly unique. In Genoa, writes historian Fernand Braudel, "the homeless poor sold themselves as galley slaves every winter." They were fortunate to have that option. In more northern climes, during winter months, the indigent simply froze to death. The summer, on the other hand, was when the plague made its cyclical visitations. That is why, m summer months, the wealthy left the cities to the poor: as Braudel points out elsewhere, Rome along with other towns "was a graveyard of fever" during times of warmer weather.

Throughout Europe, about half the children born during this time died before reaching the age of ten. Among the poorer classes-and in Spain particularly, which had an infant mortality rate almost 40 percent higher even than England's-things were much worse. In addition to exposure, disease, and malnutrition, one of the causes for such a high infant mortality rate (close to three out of ten babies in Spain did not live to see their first birthdays) was abandonment. Thousands upon thousands of children who could not be cared for were simply left to die on dungheaps or in roadside ditches. Others were sold into slavery.

East European children, particularly Romanians, seem to have been favorites of the fourteenth- and fifteenth-century slave trade, although many thousands of adults were enslaved as well. Child slaves, however, were as expensive as adults, for reasons best left to the imagination, as is indicated by a fourteenth-century letter from a man involved in the business: "We are informed about the little slave girl you say you personally need," he wrote to his prospective client, "and about her features and age, and for what you want her.... Whenever ships come from Romania, they should carry some [slave girls]; but keep in mind that little slave girls are as expensive as the grown ones, and there will be none that does not cost 50 to 60 florins if we want one of any value." Those purchasing female slaves of child-bearing age sometimes were particularly lucky and received a free bonus of a baby on the way. As historian John Boswell has reported: "Ten to twenty percent of the female slaves sold in Seville in the fifteenth century were pregnant or breast-feeding, and their infants were usually included with them at no extra cost."

The wealthy had their problems too. They hungered after gold and silver. The Crusades, begun four centuries earlier, had increased the appetites of affluent Europeans for exotic foreign luxuries-for silks and spices, fine cotton, drugs, perfumes, and jewelry-material pleasures that required pay in bullion. Thus, gold had become for Europeans, in the words of one Venetian commentator of the time, "the sinews of all government . . . its mind, soul . . . its essence and its very life." The supply of the precious metal, by way of the Middle East and Africa, had always been uncertain. Now, however, the wars in eastern Europe had nearly emptied the Continent's coffers. A new supply, a more regular supply-and preferably a cheaper supply-was needed.

Violence, of course, was everywhere, as alluded to above; but occasionally it took on an especially perverse character. In addition to the hunting down and burning of witches, which was an everyday affair in most locales, in Milan in 1476 a man was torn to pieces by an enraged mob and his dismembered limbs were then eaten by his tormenters. In Paris and Lyon, Huguenots were killed and butchered, and their various body parts were sold openly in the streets. Other eruptions of bizarre torture, murder, and ritual cannibalism were not uncommon.

Such behavior, nonetheless, was not officially condoned, at least not usually. Indeed, wild and untrue accusations of such activities formed the basis for many of the witch hunts and religious persecutions-particularly of Jews-during this time. In precisely those years when Columbus was trekking around Europe in search of support for his maritime adventures, the Inquisition was raging in Spain. Here, and elsewhere in Europe, those out of favor with the powerful-particularly those who were believed to be un-Christian-were tortured and killed in the most ingenious of fashions: on the gallows, at the stake, on the rack-while others were crushed I beheaded, flayed alive, or drawn and quartered.

*** p63 If it sounded like Paradise, that was no accident. Paradise filled with gold. And when he came to describe the people he had met, Columbus's Edenic imagery never faltered:

The people of this island and of all the other islands which I have found and ,\ seen, or have not seen, all go naked, men and women, as their mothers bore / them, except that some women cover one place only with the leaf of a plant or with a net of cotton which they make for that purpose. They have no iron or steel or weapons, nor are they capable of using them, although they are well-built people of handsome stature, because they are wondrous timid. . . . [T]hey are so artless and free with all they possess, that no one would believe it without having seen it. Of anything they have, if you ask them for it, they never say no; rather they invite the person to share it, and show as much love as if they were giving their hearts; and whether the thing be of value or of small price, at once they are content with whatever little thing of whatever kind may be given to them.

*** p66 I certify to you that, with the help of God, we shall powerfully enter into your country and shall make war against you in all ways and manners that we can, and shall subject you to the yoke and obedience of the Church and of Their Highnesses. We shall take you and your wives and your children, and shall make slaves of them, and as such shall sell and dispose of them as Their Highnesses may command. And we shall take your goods, and shall do you all the mischief and damage that we can, as to vassals who do not obey and refuse to receive their lord and resist and contradict him.

a statement Spaniards were required to read to Indians they encountered in the New World

*** p69 Wherever the marauding, diseased, and heavily armed Spanish forces went out on patrol, accompanied by ferocious armored dogs that had been trained to kill and disembowel, they preyed on the local communities- already plague-enfeebled-forcing them to supply food and women and slaves, and whatever else the soldiers might desire. At virtually every previous landing on this trip Columbus's troops had gone ashore and killed indiscriminately, as though for sport, whatever animals and birds and natives they encountered, "looting and destroying all they found," as the Admiral's son Fernando blithely put it. Once on Hispaniola, however, Columbus fell ill-whether from the flu or, more likely, from some other malady-and what little restraint he had maintained over his men disappeared as he went through a lengthy period of recuperation. The troops went wild, stealing, killing, raping, and torturing natives, trying to force them to divulge the whereabouts of the imagined treasure-houses of gold.

The Indians tried to retaliate by launching ineffective ambushes of stray Spaniards. But the combined killing force of Spanish diseases and Spanish military might was far greater than anything the natives could ever have imagined. Finally, they decided the best response was flight. Crops were left to rot in the fields as the Indians attempted to escape the frenzy of the conquistadors' attacks. Starvation then added its contribution, along with pestilence and mass murder, to the native peoples' woes.

*** p70 The massacres continued. Columbus remained ill for months while his soldiers wandered freely. More than 50,000 natives were reported dead from these encounters by the time the Admiral had recovered from his sickness. And when at last his health and strength had been restored Columbus's response to his men's unorganized depredations was to organize them. In March of 1495 he massed together several hundred armored troops, cavalry, and a score or more of trained attack dogs. They set forth across the countryside, tearing into assembled masses of sick and unarmed native people, slaughtering them by the thousands. The pattern set by these raids would be the model the Spanish would follow for the next decade and beyond. As Bartolome de Las Casas, the most famous of the accompanying Spanish missionaries from that trip recalled:

Once the Indians were in the woods, the next step was to form squadrons and pursue them, and whenever the Spaniards found them, they pitilessly slaughtered everyone like sheep in a corral. It was a general rule among Spaniards to be cruel; not just cruel, but extraordinarily cruel so that harsh and bitter treatment would prevent Indians from daring to think of themselves as human beings or having a minute to think at all. So they would cut an Indian's hands and leave them dangling by a shred of skin and they would send him on saying "Go now, spread the news to your chiefs." They would test their swords and their manly strength on captured Indians and place bets on the slicing off of heads or the cutting of bodies in half with one blow. They burned or hanged captured chiefs."

At least one chief, the man considered by Columbus to be Hispaniola's ranking native leader, was not burned or hanged, however. He was captured, put in chains, and sent off by ship for public display and imprisonment in Spain. Like most of the Indians who had been forced to make that voyage, though, he never made it to Seville: he died en route.

With the same determination Columbus had shown in organizing his troops' previously disorganized and indiscriminate killings, the Admiral then set about the task of systematizing their haphazard enslavement of the natives. Gold was all that they were seeking, so every Indian on the island who was not a child was ordered to deliver to the Spanish a certain amount of the precious ore every three months. When the gold was delivered the individual was presented with a token to wear around his or her neck as proof that the tribute had been paid. Anyone found without the appropriate number of tokens had his hands cut off.

Since Hispaniola's gold supply was far less than what the Spaniards' fantasies suggested, Indians who wished to survive were driven to seek out their quotas of the ore at the expense of other endeavors, including food production. The famines that had begun earlier, when the Indians attempted to hide from the Spanish murderers, now grew much worse, while new diseases that the Spanish carried with them preyed ever more intensely on the malnourished and weakened bodies of the natives. And the soldiers never ceased to take delight in killing just for fun.

Spanish reports of their own murderous sadism during this time are legion. For a lark they "tore babes from their mother's breast by their feet, and dashed their heads against the rocks." The bodies of other infants "they spitted . . . together with their mothers and all who were before them, on their swords." On one famous occasion in Cuba a troop of a hundred or more Spaniards stopped by the banks of a dry river and sharpened their swords on the whetstones in its bed. Eager to compare the sharpness of their blades, reported an eyewitness to the events, they drew their weapons and began to rip open the bellies, to cut and kill those lambs-men, women, children, and old folk, all of whom were seated, off guard and frightened, watching the mares and the Spaniards. And within two credos, not a man of all of them there remains alive. The Spaniards enter the large house nearby, for this was happening at its door, and in the same way, with cuts and stabs, begin to kill as many as they found there, so that a stream of blood was running, as if a great number of cows had perished.... To see the wounds which covered the bodies of the dead and dying was a spectacle of horror and dread.

This particular slaughter began at the village of Zucayo, where the townsfolk earlier had provided for the conquistadors a feast of cassava, fruit, and fish. From there it spread. No one knows just how many Indians the Spanish killed in this sadistic spree, but Las Casas put the number at well over 20,000 before the soldiers' thirst for horror had been slaked.

Another report, this one by a group of concerned Dominican friars, concentrated on the way the Spanish soldiers treated native infants:

Some Christians encounter an Indian woman, who was carrying in her arms a child at suck; and since the dog they had with them was hungry, they tore the child from the mother's arms and flung it still living to the dog, who proceeded to devour it before the mother's eyes.... When there were among the prisoners some women who had recently given birth, if the new-born babes happened to cry, they seized them by the legs and hurled them against the rocks, or flung them into the jungle so that they would be certain to die there.

Or, Las Casas again, in another incident he witnessed:

The Spaniards found pleasure in inventing all kinds of odd cruelties, the more cruel the better, with which to spill human blood. They built a long gibbet, low enough for the toes to touch the ground and prevent strangling, and hanged thirteen [natives] at a time in honor of Christ Our Saviour and the twelve Apostles. When the Indians were thus still alive and hanging, the Spaniards tested their strength and their blades against them, ripping chests open with one blow and exposing entrails, and there were those who did worse. Then, straw was wrapped around their torn bodies and they were burned alive. One man caught two children about two years old, pierced their throats with a dagger, then hurled them down a precipice.

If some of this has a sickeningly familiar ring to readers who recall the massacres at My Lai and Song My and other Vietnamese villages in the not too distant past, the familiarity is reinforced by the term the Spanish used to describe their campaign of terror: "pacification." But as horrific as those bloodbaths were in Vietnam, in sheer magnitude they were as nothing compared with what happened on the single island of Hispaniola five hundred years ago: the island's population of about eight million people at the time of Columbus's arrival in 1492 already had declined by a third to a half before the year 1496 was out. And after 1496 the death rate, if anything, accelerated.

In plotting on a graph the decline of Hispaniola's native population there appears a curious bulge, around the year 1510, when the diminishing numbers seemed to stabilize and even grow a bit. Then the inexorable downward spiral toward extinction continues. What that little blip on the demographic record indicates is not, however, a moment of respite for the island's people, nor a contradiction to the overall pattern of Hispaniola's population free-fall following Columbus's arrival. Rather, it is a shadowy and passing footnote to the holocaust the Spanish at the same time were bringing to the rest of the Caribbean, for that fleeting instant of population stabilization was caused by the importation of tens of thousands of slaves from surrounding islands in a fruitless attempt by the Spanish to replace the dying natives of Hispaniola.

But death seized these imported slaves as quickly as it had Hispaniola's natives. And thus, the islands of the Bahamas were rapidly stripped of perhaps half a million people, in large part for use as short-lived replacements by the Spanish for Hispaniola's nearly eradicated indigenous inhabitants. Then Cuba, with its enormous population, suffered the same fate.

With the Caribbean's millions of native people thereby effectively liquidated in barely a quarter of a century, forced through the murderous vortex of Spanish savagery and greed, the slavers turned next to the smaller islands off the mainland coast. The first raid took place in 1515 when natives from Guanaja in the Bay Islands off Honduras were captured and taken to forced labor camps in depopulated Cuba. Other slave expeditions followed, and by 1525, when Cortes arrived in the region, all the Bay Islands themselves had been entirely shorn of their inhabitants.

In order to exploit most fully the land and its populace, and to satisfy the increasingly dangerous and rebellion-organizing ambitions of his well-armed Spanish troops, Columbus instituted a program called the repartimiento or "Indian grants"-later referred to, in a revised version, as the system of encomiendas. This was a dividing-up, not of the land, but of entire peoples and communities, and the bestowal of them upon a would-be Spanish master. The master was free to do what he wished with "his people"-have them plant, have them work in the mines, have them do anything, as Carl Sauer puts it, "without limit or benefit of tenure."

The result was an even greater increase in cruelty and a magnification of the firestorm of human devastation. Caring only for short-term material wealth that could be wrenched up from the earth, the Spanish overlords on Hispaniola removed their slaves to unfamiliar locales-"the roads to the mines were like anthills," Las Casas recalled-deprived them of food, and forced them to work until they dropped. At the mines and fields in which they labored, the Indians were herded together under the supervision of Spanish overseers, known as mineros in the mines and estancieros on the plantations, who "treated the Indians with such rigor and inhumanity that they seemed the very ministers of Hell, driving them day and night with beatings, kicks, lashes and blows and calling them no sweeter names than dogs." Needless to say, some Indians attempted to escape from this. They were hunted down with mastiffs. When found, if not torn apart on the spot, they were returned and a show-trial was held for them, and for the edification of other Indians who were made to stand and watch. The escapees were brought before the visitador [Spanish inspector-magistrate] and the accuser, that is, the supposedly pious master, who accused them of being rebellious dogs and good-for-nothings and demanded stiff punishment. The visitador then had them tied to a post and he himself, with his own hands, as the most honorable man in town, took a sailor's tarred whip as tough as iron, the kind they use in galleys, and flogged them until blood ran from their naked bodies, mere skin and bones from starvation. Then, leaving them for dead, he stopped and threatened the same punishment if they tried it again.

Occasionally, when slaves were so broken by illness, malnutrition, or exhaustion unto death that they became incapable of further labor output, they were dismissed from the mines or the fields where they worked. Las Casas estimated that perhaps 10 percent of the Indian conscripts survived long enough for this to happen. However, he continued:

When they were allowed to go home, they often found it deserted and had no other recourse than to go out into the woods to find food and to die. When they fell ill, which was very frequently because they are a delicate people unaccustomed to such work, the Spaniards did not believe them and pitilessly called them lazy dogs, and kicked and beat them; and when illness was apparent they sent them home as useless, giving them some cassava for the twenty- to eighty-league journey. They would go then, falling into the first stream and dying there in desperation; others would hold on longer, but very few ever made it home. I sometimes came upon dead bodies on my way, and upon others who were gasping and moaning in their death agony, repeating "Hungry, hungry."

In the face of utter hopelessness, the Indians began simply surrendering their lives. Some committed suicide. Many refused to have children, recognizing that their offspring, even if they successfully endured the Spanish cruelties, would only become slaves themselves. And others, wrote Las Casas, saw that without any offence on their part they were despoiled of their kingdoms, their lands and liberties and of their lives, their wives, and homes. As they saw themselves each day perishing by the cruel and inhuman treatment of the Spaniards, crushed to the earth by the horses, cut in pieces by swords, eaten and torn by dogs, many buried alive and suffering all kinds of exquisite tortures . . . [they] decided to abandon themselves to their unhappy fate with no further struggles, placing themselves in the hands of their enemies that they might do with them as they liked.

Other natives, in time, did find ways to become reunited with whatever remained of their families. But when most wives and husbands were brought back together, they were so exhausted and depressed on both sides that they had no mind for marital communication and in this way they ceased to procreate. As for the newly born, they died early because their mothers, overworked and famished, had no milk to nurse them, and for this reason, while I was in Cuba, 7,000 babies died in three months. Some mothers even drowned their babies from sheer desperation, while others caused themselves to abort with certain herbs that produced stillborn children. In this way husbands died in the mines, wives died at work, and children died from lack of milk, while others had not time or energy for procreation, and in a short time this land which was so great, so powerful and fertile, though so unfortunate, was depopulated.

By 1496, we already have noted, the population of Hispaniola had fallen from eight million to between four and five million. By 1508 it was down to less than a hundred thousand. By 1518 it numbered less than twenty thousand. And by 1535, say the leading scholars on this grim topic, "for all practical purposes, the native population was extinct."

In less than the normal lifetime of a single human being, an entire culture of millions of people, thousands of years resident in their homeland, had been exterminated. The same fate befell the native peoples of the surrounding islands in the Caribbean as well. Of all the horrific genocides that have occurred in the twentieth century against Armenians, Jews, Gypsies, Ibos, Bengalis, Timorese, Kampucheans, Ugandans, and more, none has come close to destroying this many-or this great a proportion of wholly innocent people.

And then the Spanish turned their attention to the mainland of Mexico and Central America. The slaughter had barely begun. The exquisite city of Tenochtitlan was next.

*** p82

The gratuitous killing and outright sadism that the Spanish soldiers had carried out on Hispaniola and in Central Mexico was repeated in the long march to the south. Numerous reports, from numerous reporters, tell of Indians being led to the mines in columns, chained together at the neck, and decapitated if they faltered. Of children trapped and burned alive in their houses, or stabbed to death because they walked too slowly. Of the routine cutting off of women's breasts, and the tying of heavy gourds to their feet before tossing them to drown in lakes and lagoons. Of babies taken from their mothers' breasts, killed, and left as roadside markers. Of "stray" Indians dismembered and sent back to their villages with their chopped-off hands and noses strung around their necks. Of "pregnant and confined women, children, old men, as many as they could capture," thrown into pits in which stakes had been imbedded and "left stuck on the stakes, until the pits were filled." And much, much more.

One favorite sport of the conquistadors was "dogging." Traveling as they did with packs of armored wolfhounds and mastiffs that were raised on a diet of human flesh and were trained to disembowel Indians, the Spanish used the dogs to terrorize slaves and to entertain the troops. An entire book, Dogs of the Conquest, has been published recently, detailing the exploits of these animals as they accompanied their masters throughout the course of the Spanish depredations. "A properly fleshed dog," these authors say, "could pursue a 'savage' as zealously and effectively as a deer or a boar.... To many of the conquerors, the Indian was merely another savage animal, and the dogs were trained to pursue and rip apart their human quarry with the same zest as they felt when hunting wild beasts.''

Vasco Nunez de Balboa was famous for such exploits and, like others, he had his own favorite dog-Leoncico, or "little lion," a reddish-colored cross between a greyhound and a mastiff-that was rewarded at the end of a campaign for the amount of killing it had done. On one much celebrated occasion, Leoncico tore the head off an Indian leader in Panama while Balboa, his men, and other dogs completed the slaughter of everyone in a village that had the ill fortune to lie in their journey's path. Heads of human adults do not come off easily, so the authors of Dogs of the Conquest seem correct in calling this a "remarkable feat," although Balboa's men usually were able to do quite well by themselves. As one contemporary description of this same massacre notes:

The Spaniards cut off the arm of one, the leg or hip of another, and from some their heads at one stroke, like butchers cutting up beef and mutton for market. Six hundred, including the cacique, were thus slain like brute beasts. ...Vasco ordered forty of them to be torn to pieces by dogs.

Just as the Spanish soldiers seem to have particularly enjoyed testing the sharpness of their yard-long rapier blades on the bodies of Indian children, so their dogs seemed to find the soft bodies of infants especially tasty, and thus the accounts of the invading conquistadors and the padres who traveled with them are filled with detailed descriptions of young Indian children routinely taken from their parents and fed to the hungry animals. *** p85 ... overall in central Mexico the population fell by almost 95 percent within seventy-five years following the Europeans' first appearance - from more than 25,000,000 people in 1519 to barely 1,300,000 in 1595. ***

p91 For the Andean society as a whole ... within a century following their first encounter with the Spanish, 94-96 percent of their once-enormous population had been exterminated; along their 2000 miles of coastline, where once 6,500,000 people had lived, everyone was dead.

***

p135

The earliest European mariners and explorers in California ... repeatedly referred to the great numbers of Indians living there. In places where Vizcaino's ships could approach the coast or his men could go ashore, the Captain recorded, again and again, that the land was thickly filled with people. And where he couldn't approach or go ashore "because the coast was wild," the Indians signaled greetings by building fires-fires that "made so many columns of smoke on the mainland that at night it looked like a procession and in the daytime the sky was overcast." In sum, as Father Ascension put it, "this realm of California is very large and embraces much territory, nearly all inhabited by numberless people."

But not for very long. Throughout the late sixteenth and the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, Spanish disease and Spanish cruelty took a large but mostly uncalculated toll. Few detailed records of what happened during that time exist, but a wealth of research in other locales has shown the early decades following Western contact to be almost invariably the worst for native people, because that is when the fires of epidemic disease burn most freely. Whatever the population of California was before the Spanish came, however, and whatever happened during the first few centuries following Spanish entry into the region, by 1845 the Indian population of California had been slashed to 150,000 (down from many times that number prior to European contact) by swarming epidemics of influenza, diphtheria, measles, pneumonia, whooping cough, smallpox, malaria, typhoid, cholera, tuberculosis, dysentery, syphilis, and gonorrhea-along with everyday settler and explorer violence. As late as 1833 a malaria epidemic brought in by some Hudson's Bay Company trappers killed 20,000 Indians by itself, wiping out entire parts of the great central valleys. "A decade later," writes one historian, "there still remained macabre reminders of the malaria epidemic: collapsed houses filled with skulls and bones, the ground littered with skeletal remains."

Terrible as such deaths must have been, if the lives that preceded them were lived outside the Spanish missions that were founded in the eighteenth century, the victims might have counted themselves lucky. Two centuries earlier the Puritan minister John Robinson had complained to Plymouth's William Bradford that although a group of massacred Indians no doubt "deserved" to be killed, "Oh, how happy a thing had it been, if you had converted some before you had killed any!" That was probably the only thing the New England Puritans and California's Spanish Catholics would have agreed upon. So, using armed Spanish troops to capture Indians and herd them into the mission stockades, the Spanish padres did their best to convert the natives before they killed them.

And kill they did. First there were the Jesuit missions, founded early in the eighteenth century, and from which few vital statistics are available. Then the Franciscans took the Jesuits' place. At the mission of Nuestra Senora de Loreto, reported the Franciscan chronicler Father Francisco Palou, during the first three years of Franciscan rule 76 children and adults were baptized, while 131 were buried. At the mission of San Jose Cumundu during the same time period 94 were baptized, while 241 died. At the mission of Purisima de Cadegomo, meanwhile, 39 were baptized-120 died. At the mission of Nuestra Senora de Guadalupe the figures were similar: 53 baptisms, 130 deaths. The same held true at others, from the mission of Santa Rosalia de Mulege, with 48 baptisms and 113 deaths, to the mission of San Ignacio, with 115 baptisms and 293 deaths-all within the same initial three-year period.

*** p142

By 1845 the Indian population of California was down to no more than a quarter of what it had been when the Franciscan missions were established in 1769. That is, it had declined by at least 75 percent during seventy-five years of Spanish rule. In the course of just the next twenty-five years, under American rule, it would fall by another 80 percent. The gold rush brought to California a flood of American miners and ranchers who seemed to delight in killing Indians, miners and ranchers who rose to political power and prominence-and from those platforms not only legalized the enslavement of California Indians, but, as in Colorado and elsewhere, launched public campaigns of genocide with the explicitly stated goal of all-out Indian extermination.

*** p145

Between 1852 and 1860, under American supervision, the indigenous population of California plunged from 85,000 to 35,000, a collapse of about 60 percent within eight years of the first gubernatorial demands for the Indians' destruction. By 1890 that number was halved again: now 80 percent of the natives who had been alive when California became a state had been wiped out by an official policy of genocide. Fewer than 18,000 California Indians were still living, and the number was continuing to drop. In the late 1840s and 1850s one observer of the California scene had watched his fellow American whites begin their furious assault "upon [the Indians], shooting them down like wolves, men, women, and children, wherever they could find them," and had warned that this "war of extermination against the aborigines, commenced in effect at the landing of Columbus, and continued to this day, [is] gradually and surely tending to the final and utter extinction of the race." While to most white Californians such a conclusion was hardly lamentable, to this commentator it was a major concern-but only because the extermination "policy [has] proved so injurious to the interests of the whites." That was because the Indians' "labor, once very useful, and, in fact, indispensable in a country where no other species of laborers were to be obtained at any price, and which might now be rendered of immense value by pursuing a judicious policy, has been utterly sacrificed by this extensive system of indiscriminate revenge."

*** p146 ... between 95 and 98 percent of California's Indians had been exterminated in little more than a century. And even this ghastly numerical calculation is inadequate, not only because it reveals nothing of the hideous suffering endured by those hundreds of thousands of California native peoples, but because it is based on decline only from the estimated population for the year 1769-a population that already had been reduced savagely by earlier invasions of European plague and violence. Nationwide by this time only about one-third of one percent of America's population-250,000 out of 76, 000,000 people-were natives. The worst human holocaust the world had ever witnessed, roaring across two continents non-stop for four centuries and consuming the lives of countless tens of millions of people, finally had leveled off. There was, at last, almost no one left to kill.

*** p147 During the course of four centuries - from the 1490s to the 1890s - Europeans and white Americans engaged in an unbroken string of genocide campaigns against the native peoples of the Americas.


American Holocaust

0

British - America ownership

Friday, January 22, 2010

City of London and American

—————————————————————————————————–  Social – Disclaimer: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, any copyrighted work in the Aladins Miracle Lamp is archived here under fair use without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in reviewing the included information for personal use, non-profit research and educational purposes only. Ref. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. The opinions rendered are the authors and not necessarily those of this website or Aladin -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

City of London’s Ownership of American Colonies

The misplaced reverence to the ill formulated U.S Constitution and hidden subjugation back to the City of London is one aspect of history that is not taught in government schools or discussed in institutes of higher education. This subject is probably new to most observers of the legacy from the Founding Father’s biggest mistake. Regular readers of BREAKING ALL THE RULES are familiar with the arguments made in the essays, In the beginning: Let there be the Articles of Confederation and Articles of Confederation was Preferable. Now the case for the betrayal of the purpose of the American Revolution needs to be explored.
Cited on the US Constitution Gave Legal Ownership and Control of the United States to London site is an assessment by Michael Edward.
“Neither the American people nor the Queen of Britain own America. The Crown Temple owns America through the deception of those who have worn their allegiance by oath to the Middle Templar Bar. The Crown Bankers and their Middle Templar Attorneys rule America through unlawful contracts, unlawful taxes, and, contract documents of false equity through debt deceit, all strictly enforced by their completely unlawful, but ‘legal,’ Orders, Rules and Codes of the Crown Temple Courts Our so-called ‘judiciary’ in America. This is because the Crown Temple holds the land titles and estate deeds to all of North America.”
An examination of The Templars of the Crown provides elaboration on this appraisal. For an even more in-depth analysis, review the material that probes AMERICAN LAND OWNERSHIP, A TRUE OXYMORON, which deals with the work of James Montgomery.
“Many of you are aware that the laws of this nation and it’s states, were made to be in compliance and submission to the laws of England, only modified by state and federal law. You will see in this last Chapter state statutes from just a few of the original colonies, that this is the case. Are these what are called ancient statutes? Yes. However, since the king’s Corporation is alive and well as are his heirs, so is his Trust and the law used to create and govern it. The law that governs his Trust can only be amended, no law could be enacted contrary to the king’s will and cestui que trust, the main corporate sole where office is always found, the Crown. The king’s practice of granting lands in this country to those loyal to him continues, along with their land grants being protected by state ancient statutes which are still on the books. We are governed by the king’s nobles just as in times of old England, self proclaimed nobles, and corporate trusts. They rule this country and the world. The huge corporations have been granted power and liberty not known by the common man. The nobles, real and the created, occupy their possessions as fiduciaries and trustees of the king’s grants; only if they remain loyal to the system, their privilege and life style are their reward.”
Invest the time in discovering all the historic accounts, legal rulings and linkages that go back to the Crown, AKA, the City of London.
If you are unfamiliar with The (British) Crown Empire and the City of London Corporation take a quick refresher course on the actual nature of the financial foundation and codified sanction that purports to be lawful. Jurisprudence may be legal by the definition and formulations of the judicious barrister class, but it certainly is not founded on the basic principles of natural law.
Julian Websdale concludes: “The whole Earth is governed by The Crown, through Crown Colonies which belong to The City – The Crown Empire. It governs Africa and still governs China and India. The colonies of the Earth are really just Crown Colonies – The United States of America are states of The Crown.”
Now this interpretation may seem bizarre to most and the plot thickens in the The construe Powers – Behind the Global Empire piecing together a long account of legalized equity mandates.
“The signed treaties and charters between Britain and the United States reveals that King James the 1st was not only famous for translating the Bible, but for signing the first charter of Virginia in 1606. That charter granted America’s British forefathers a license to settle and colonize America and guaranteed future kings and queens of England to have sovereign authority over citizens and colonized land in America. The treaty of 1783 identifies the king of England as the prince of the United States. King George the 3rd gave up most of his claims over American colonies, but he kept his right to continue receiving payment for his business venture of colonizing America.”
The next element to consider has The Top of the Pyramid: The Rothschilds, the British Crown and the Vatican Rule the World. Read this account and trace back the historic lineage of  some of the Englishmen who founded America.
“To have the Declaration of Independence recognized internationally, Middle Templar King George III agreed in the Treaty of Paris of 1783 to establish the legal Crown entity of the incorporated United States, referred to internally as the Crown Temple States (Colonies). States spelled with a capital letter ‘S,’ denotes a legal entity of the Crown.
At least five Templar Bar Attorneys under solemn oath to the Crown, signed the American Declaration of Independence. This means that both parties were agents of the Crown.”
As time proceeds, the sell out of the “shot heard around the world” revolution deepens. Two Constitutions in the United States. 1st was illegally suspended in favor of a Vatican “Crown” corporation in 1871. This approving assessment of the Federal Constitution views a Shadow Government in place since 1871.
“Since 1871 the United States president and the United States Congress has been playing politics under a different set of rules and policies.  The American people do not know that there are two Constitutions in the United States.  The first penned by the leaders of the newly independent states of the United States in 1776.  On July 4, 1776, the people claimed their independence from the Crown (temporal authority of the Roman Catholic Pope) and Democracy was born.  And for 95 years the United States people were free and independent.  That freedom ended in 1871 when the original “Constitution for the United States for America” was changed to the “THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA”.
The Congress realized that the country was in dire financial straits, so they made  a financial deal with the devil –  the Crown (a.k.a. City of London Corporation – est. by the Catholic Church on Jan 1, 1855 ) thereby incurring a DEBT to the Pope.  The conniving Pope and his bankers were not about to lend the floundering nation any money without some serious stipulations. So, they devised a way of taking back control of the United States and thus, the Act of 1871 was passed.  With no constitutional authority to do so, Congress created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia.
With the passage of  “the Act of 1871” a city state (a state within a state) called the District of Columbia located on 10 sq miles of land in the heart of Washington was formed with its own flag and its own independent constitution – the United States’ secret second constitution.”
Lastly, Three Corporations run the world: City of London, Washington DC and Vatican City list the City of London houses as including:
Rothschild controlled ‘Bank of England’
Lloyds of London
The London Stock Exchange
All British Banks
The Branch offices of 384 Foreign Banks
70 USA Banks
Fleet Streets Newspaper and Publishing Monopolies
Headquarters for Worldwide Freemasonry
Headquarters for the worldwide money cartel known as ’THE CROWN’
Conclusion: “City of London directly and indirectly controls all mayors, councils, regional councils, multi-national and trans-national banks, corporations, judicial systems (through Old Bailey, Temple Bar and the Royal Courts of Justice in London), the IMF, World Bank, Vatican Bank (through N. M. Rothschild & Sons London Italian subsidiary Torlonia), European Central Bank, United States Federal Reserve (which is privately owned and secretly controlled by eight British-controlled shareholding banks), the Bank for International Settlements in Switzerland (which is also British-controlled and oversees all of the Reserve Banks around the world including our own) and the European Union and the United Nations Organization.”
This introduction to the actual influence and pompous legal authority that underpins the financial hierarchy is based upon a historic explanation that is foreign to most Americans. The implications are staggering and for this reason alone, most are not willing to do their own research. Do not get caught up in the uncanny departure from the usual rendering of reality. Remember that the City of London’s coat-of-arms reads in Latin – Domine Dirige Nos – which translates, Lord, direct us. The true question, asks just which deity do the soldiers of the Crown adore?
SARTRE – March 24, 2015
————————————————————————————————————

The NWO is the British Empire – the Whole World to Belong to the Rothshild/Jesuit City of London.

“I care not what puppet is placed on the throne of England to rule the Empire. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire and I control the British money supply.” (Nathan Rothschild said (1777-1836)).
“The truth is that the United States, under its present administration, is the tool of the British Empire – the monetary financial empire which sits like a parasite, sucking the life out of Britain from the City of London and which has never gone away. (John Yoo in an article for the National Review – quoted by The UKColumn 4 Jan 2012″.
*
The  League of Nations after WWI was seen as a failure. Nevertheless, It was the beginning of the final attempt of achieving total world domination by the “British Empire” and the “British Crown”, the NWO,  –  cover names for the rule of the world through the City of London by its masters, the Jesuits/ Rothschild dynasty.
great-seal-hexagram-of-pentagramsThe Great Seal of the USA was  a gift from Mayer Amschel Rothschild to his Masonic/Illuminati brethren in “The New World” to remind them of his and Weishaupt´s New Order – brought byRothschild´s agent, Haym Salomon, who raised the money for the American Revolution.illuminati-horus-osiris-eye-200
The following Report is nearly 100 years old – and the British empire has apparently vanished in the meantime – and the USA has not returned to the British “Crown” – or has it? The Telegraph 18 Aug 2014: “The United Kingdom may now be a second-rate power, but the City’s unparalleled legacy as a global financial capital still underpins its pre-eminence.” Forbes found London and New York held a “hegemony” over the rest of the world.”

Henry Makow 4 oct. 2014:The New World Order is an extension of the imperialism of the “Crown”, a clique of Jewish bankers and their Gentile accomplices devoted to “absorbing the wealth of the world” (in Cecil Rhodes words) and enslaving the human race. The first step was Wilson’s plan for the League of Nations “which we prepared for him.”
We are being colonized by this financial invisible invader. The bogus “War of Terror” obviously is directed against us.  Our jobs and resources are exported. Illegal aliens are imported. The education system is used for mass indoctrination. News is controlled. Entertainment is filled with trivia, the occult, violence and pornography.”
The London City rules the US FED and Wall Street, The rulers of the USA, the Council on Foreign Relations, the AIPAC, the ADL, the whole Jewish Lobby are servants of the the Jesuits/Rothschild. The US was founded by Masons and Illuminati – who work for a united world under the British “Crown” – i.e. the Jesuit/Rothschild dynasty.
Edward_Grey_1914The UN is the continuation of the League of Nations woven into the PeaceTreaty of Versailles after WWI. It was conceived by the British Foreign Minister, Edward Grey (1905–1916), until 1910 under King Edward VII, the Rothschild puppet, who was the son of Lionel Rothschild, and closelycollaborating with Col. Edward Mandell House, Pres. Woodrow Wilson´s Rasputin. Grey´s next master, King George Vhimself thus City-of-london-tower-of-babela grandson of Lione
Rothschild,
was also surrounded by Jewish–intermarried nobility.
The immensely wealthy private bank of N. M. Rothschild & Son controlled the British Empire then as well as now – took over the Bank of England in 1815.Then it controlled the press, the railroads and the industries with minor exceptions. It is building the Tower of Babel in defiance of God –  since their God is Lucifer.
mandell-houseJesuit and Jewish Rothschild agent Colonel Edward Mandell House was the driving force behind the Federal Reserve coup d´Etat in 1913, behind the Council on Foreign Relations in 1921 –  and behind Pres. Woodrow Wilson´s decision to enter WWI –  as well as Wilson´s chief negotiator at the Versailles Peace Negotiations. More about Mandell House.
“The Colonel House Report (1919)” aka the “Col. E. M. House letter”: This report, or letter, was presented to the House of Representatives by Congressman Thorkelson of Montana, and is published in the Congressional Record of October 13, 1919, p. 598-604 inclusive. Its authenticity was discussed by members of the House and an effort was made to strike it from the Record, which failed.
No minor official would dare write such a letter to the British Prime Minister (Lloyd George), or dare discuss the important subjects contained in it; except in the line of duty. It was not written by Col. E. M. House – a nom de plume. It discloses that it wasprobably written by Lord Northcliffe, who was at that time the head of the British Propaganda Department in enemy countries. He sustained toward Lloyd George the same intimate relationship that once existed between Woodrow Wilson and Colonel House, and this fact may explain the name he assumed.
NorthcliffeLord Northcliffe aka Viscount Alfred Charles William Harmsworth was a famous journalist and publisher of the Daily Mail, The Daily Mirror, and The Times. He was Prime Minister Lloyd George´s director of propaganda – and exercised vast influence over British popular opinion. Lord Northcliffe helped Lloyd George into power –  but later turned against him, when Lloyd George would not punish the defeated Germans as hard as Northcliffe wanted. Lord Northcliffe was a founder of the notorious Tavistock Institute to manipulate the British public opinion to accept war with Germany (WWI). This brainwashing octopus was funded by the British Royal family and the Rothschilds (to whom Northcliffe was said to be related by marriage) – and spread to the US –  where no one gets a high public office without a Tavistock brainwashing.
This is the plan of the British Illuminati elite for their one-world government, the “British Empire”. The British Royal family is Jewish (see above and here in comment 2) and Masonic, servants of the Jesuits/Rothschilds.
The Colonel House Report (1919)” aka the “Col. E. M. House letter
“The World’s Peace Foundation has issued for us a series of League of Nations pamphlets, which, with our other literature, tax the mails to the limit of their capacity. Our film concerns are preparing an epoch-making picture entitled “The League of Nations.” In brief, our entire system of thought control is working ceaselessly,tirelessly, ruthlessly, to insure the adoption of the League. And it will be adopted, for business wants peace, the righteous cannot resist a covenant, and the politicians, after shadow-boxing for patronage purposes, will yield valiantly lest the fate of the wanton and wilful pursue them.

By these means we hope smoothly to overcome all effective opposition on the part of our colony America to entering the League — that is, the Empire. As soon as the League is functioning properly, His Majesty in response to loyal and repeated solicitation, might graciously be pleased to consent to restore to this (American) people their ancient right to petition at the foot of the throne; to confer the ancient rank and style of governor general upon our Ambassador, that this colony may enjoy a status inferior to no other colony’s.
Round-tableCecil-rhodesSince that memorable day, September 19, 1877, on which the late Cecil Rhodes devised by will a fund “to and for the establishment, promotion, and development of a secret society (The Round Table)– the true aim of which and object of which shall be the extension ofBritish rule throughout the world, and especially the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire” — the energy and intelligence of England has not been spent in vain. It would perhaps be presumptuous of me to refer here to the admirable services rendered not only by LORD NORTHCLlFFE (the probable author of the report).
The Carnegie League to Enforce Peace and its affiliate League of Small Nations are even now leading the van in our fight. Only the last great battle remains to be fought — the battle to compel America´s acceptance of the terms of the League of Nations.”
City-of-london-british-empireLeague-of-nationsFrom the moment of my arrival here, it was evident to me that such an Anglo-American alliance as would ultimately result in thepeaceful return of the American Colonies to the dominion of the Crown could be brought about only with the consent of the dominant group of the controlling clans.
For those who can afford the universities, we are, as I have already mentioned, plentifully supplying British-born or trained professors, lecturers, and presidents.  British-born editors and reporters now create imperial sentiment in most American newspapers. A Canadian-born admiral now heads the United States Naval College.
Through the Red Cross, the Scout movement, the YMCA, the church, and other humane, religious, and quasi-religious organizations, we have created an atmosphere ofinternational effort which strengthens the idea of unity of the English-speaking world. In the co-ordination of this work, Mr. Raymond Fosdick, formerly of theRockefeller Foundation, has been especially conspicuous.
As the consortium for China, and the security company for Mexico show, our brokers and their aids have become the unchallenged financiers of the world. We have been particularly fortunate in our fiscal agents here, Messrs Pierpont Morgan & Company.Lamont and Davidson gave you valuable aid at the peace conference. They loaned $200,000,000 to Japan that our ally might build a fleet to compete with America on the Pacific carrying routes. Their attempts to retain for us control of the international mercantile marine are well known to you.
City-of-londonThrough our fiscal agents we have become the world’s purchasers. Moreover, the war has made us the custodian of the greater part of the world’s raw materials and we now largely control the oil fields of the world and thereby the world’s transportation and industry. This control would enable us to exert such pressure as would make American industrial interests amenable to His Majesty’s pleasure.
In the financial world the Anglo-American alliance is a well-established fact.
City-of-london2The City of London is an independent state marking its limits by the symbol of the Devil: dragons. The world economy is ruled from here.

We must quickly act to transfer its (US) dangerous sovereignty  to the custody of the Crown (City of London). We must, in short, now bring America within the Empire. The first visible step in this direction has been taken; President Wilson has accepted and sponsored the plan for a League of Nations which we prepared for him(Rothschild puppet Edward Grey – see above). We have wrapped this plan in the peace treaty so that the world must accept from us the League or a continuance of the war. The League is in substance (the Jesuit/Rothschild) Empire with America admitted on the same basis as our other colonies.
The Americans must see that far from surrendering their independence to the League they are actually extending their sovereignty by it. Pres. Wilson alone can satisfy them on this. He alone can father an anti-Bolshevik act which judicially interpreted — will enable appropriate punitive measures to be applied to any American who may be unwise enough to assert that America must again declare her independence. And he alone, therefore, is qualified to act for us as first president of the League.”
Jesuit-collegeFrancis-coats-of-arms-reversed
Jesuit Pope Francis I has a coats of arms full of pagan symbols –  turned upside down it shows the satanic pentagram (left). On 28/29 June 1963, The Vatican  alongside with Albert Pike’s Southern division of the Scottish Rite Freemasonry celebrated a black mass in the Cappella Paolina in the Vatican –  making Satan the head of the Church. Right: Detail from the  Jesuit College.
This entry was posted in english, euromed. Bookmark the permalink.
————————————————————————————————————-

3 ‘City States’ Rule the World




The Colonel House Report (1919)


[The following comes from Geo. W. Armstrong's THE ZIONISTS (1950). I have looked in the Congressional Record and can confirm the contention that it was submitted by Congressman Thorkelson but did not make it into the bound volume. Also, I have found several discussions in the Record where at least one Texas House member objected because it was not favorable to Col. House. Therefore, it is either: 1) a hoax, 2) a created summary of what might have been written by a British agent, or 3) is a genuine expose of the true British plan. For me it forms an insightful basis for additional research. The names mentioned include: Nicholas Murray Butler (1862-1947) (President, Columbia University, 1902-1945, President, CEIP, 1925-1945, etc.), Raymond Blaine Fosdick (1883-1972) (BB/CFR21) (President of the General Education Board, 1936-1948, Undersecretary-General, League of Nations, 1919-1920, etc.), Samuel Gompers, Franklin Lane and W. B. Wilson. The date is interesting since it is within a couple of weeks of the Majestic Hotel meeting in Paris where the British and American delegates met to fashion what became the RIIA and the CFR. From the content itself Lord Northcliffe seems not to have been the author. I have not yet found the promised later book].
The British Secret Service Report No. 1919, called the "Col. E. M. House letter," contains an official and authentic report of the First World War, the agency that brought it about and the purpose of it. This report in its entirety is highly interesting but the discussion here will be limited to "Imperial Unity," J P. Morgan & Company, British Duplicity, and the League of Nations.
This report, or letter, was presented to the House of Representatives by Congressman Thorkelson of Montana, and is published in the Congressional Record of October 13, 1919, p. 598-604 inclusive. Its authenticity was discussed by members of the House and an effort was made to strike it from the Record, which failed. See Congressional Record, October 11, 1939, p.714 et seq.; also of September 9, 1940, p.17835; and September 11, 1940, p.18311.
The letter or report is not published in the bound volumes of the Congressional Record of October 11, 1939, or the appendix of that date. Evidently some interested person prevented its publication, despite the refusal of the House of Representatives to strike it from the Record. The text as here set forth can be easily verified by reference to an original unbound copy of the Congressional Record of October 11 1939. It will be published in full in the next edition of this booklet.
It was called the "Col. E. M. House letter," but it is not a letter. It is an official report made by an important officer of the British Secret Service, on stationery of the British Consulate. It reveals its official character and its verity upon its face.
No minor official would dare write such a letter to the British Prime Minister, or dare discuss the important subjects contained in it; except in the line of duty. Moreover, it was written by a man who KNEW and whose duty it was to know. It was not written by Col. E. M. House. This name was merely an adopted name; a nom de plume. It is the custom of secret agents to disguise themselves under a number or an assumed name. The letter is known as the British Secret Service Report No.1919. Sec Congressional Record, October 13. 1939, p.714.
It discloses that it was probably written by Lord Northcliffe, who was at that time the head of the British Propaganda Department in enemy countries. He sustained toward Lloyd George the same intimate relationship that once existed between Woodrow Wilson and Colonel House, and this fact may explain the name he assumed.
This document should be considered in connection with the drive by the Fair Dealers, the press, the radio. and the uplifters, for the Atlantic Pact, "Union Now," "Federal Union, Inc.," etc., for it will enable us to determine the true meaning of it all.
The immensely wealthy private bank of N. M. Rothschild & Son, and the Zionists, controlled the British Empire then as well as now. Then they controlled the Bank of England, the press, the railroads. and the industries with minor exceptions. Lord Northcliffe was the publisher of the Daily Mail and other papers.
The report follows:
Imperial Unity
British Consulate
New York City
June 10, 1919
"The Right Honorable David Lloyd George,
Sir:
I was highly honored by your personal letter of May 24 last (written same week as Paris meeting), and wish to thank you for the cordial expression of approval of my work which it contained. You were very good enough to require from me a frank and confidential account of the campaign conducted under my direction in this country, together with such suggestions as might further help to lead it speedily to a successful conclusion. As the campaign had been under way for a considerable time before you were called to direct the destinies of England, I shall review it from its commencement, and, emboldened by your sanction, I shall freely make whatever suggestions seem to me good.
From the moment of my arrival here, it was evident to me that such an Anglo-American alliance as would ultimately result in the peaceful return of the American Colonies to the dominion of the Crown could be brought about only with the consent of the dominant group of the controlling clans.
For those who can afford the universities, we are, as I have already mentioned, plentifully supplying British-born or trained professors, lecturers, and presidents. A Canadian-born admiral now heads the United States Naval College. We are arranging for a greater interchange of professors between the two countries. The student interchange could be much improved. The Rhodes scholarships are inadequate in number. I would suggest that the Carnegie trustees be approached to extend to American students the benefits of the scheme by which Scottish students are subsidised at Scottish universities. If necessary, a grant from the treasury should be obtained for this excellent work, which however, should remain for the present -- at least outwardly -- private enterprise...
Through the Red Cross, the Scout movement, the YMC, the church, and other humane, religious, and quasi-religious organizations, we have created an atmosphere of international effort which strengthens the idea of unity of the English-speaking world. In the co-ordination of this work, Mr. Raymond Fosdick, formerly of the Rockefeller Foundation, has been especially conspicuous. I would also like to mention President Nicholas Murray Butler of Columbia University, who has eloquently advocated this form of internationalism and carefully emphasize its distinction from the false internationalism which is infecting the proletariat.
The Overseas Club in this country now contains nearly hundred thousand pledged members with a Journal of their own. Our thanks are due to Lord St. George's, St. David's, St. Andrew's, and Pilgrim Clubs, together with the Daughters of the Empire. the Prince of Wales Fund, and the other association and guilds connected with our multitudinous war charities enable us to pervade all sections and classes of the country, and provide us with a force of empire builders whose loyalty an services are both invaluable to us and highly appreciated by the native colonists.
The censorship, together with our monopoly of cables and our passport control of passengers, enables us to hold all American newspapers as isolated from the non-American world as if they had been in another planet instead of in another hemisphere The realization of this by the Associated Press and the other universal news gatherers -- except Hearst -- was most helpful in bringing only our point of view to the papers they served.
British-born editors and reporters now create imperial sentiment in most American newspapers. As their identity and origins are not usually known, they can talk and write for us as Americans to Americans.
Below that level, imperial unity cannot be securely established upon the debris of the Constitution here. We will not passively permit this unity to be now menaced when it is all but perfect. Has not America, while still maintaining an outward show of independence, yielded to our wishes in the Panama Canal tolls and Canadian fisheries' disputes, as was fitting and filial? Was not America happy to fight our war in Europe? Was not America, like Canada, willing not only to pay her own war expenses but also to loan us money for ours? Was not America, like Canada, content to seek nothing in return for her war duty, so long as the motherland was completely indemnified in Egypt and the rest of Africa, in Persia, Mesopotamia, Syria, and elsewhere? Was not America as proud to be honored by knighthood and lesser titulary distinctions, as Canada was, or, rather, more proud?
Has not President Wilson cancelled the big Navy program and dutifully conceded to us the command of the seas, confident that we shall defend America against all future foes that may threaten our supremacy, just as we defended America and Canada against Germany? In matters lingual, legal and financial, fiscal, commercial, social evangelical, administrative, martial, naval, educational -- are not in all these matters the established relations of America to England, in kind -- if not precisely in degree -- identical with the relations of the other colonies and dominions to the Crown? Indeed, I might justifiably sustain the thesis that so-distant American Republic is now more happily and more closely bound to the Empire than are, for example, the ungrateful and insolent colonies which lately were the Boer Republics.
As long as President Wilson, with our Canadian-born Secretary of the Interior, Mr. Franklin Lane, with our Scotch-born Secretary of Labor, Mr. W. B. Wilson, and with our London-born Mr. Samuel Gompers, -- now controls the administration, imperial unity will daily grow more intimate and more perfect. But I regret to inform you that our committee on American Elections has reported (Appendix 38) that no matter how lavishly we finance the next election, the Wilson administration will pass, and with it, perchance, that absolute administrative control over the Legislature, which has meant so much to us. Willful, wanton, and wicked men will unite in the next election with labor and those industrialists whose profit-patriotism ratio has been allowed to fall below the threshold of loyalty to imperial unity. These combined forces of disorder will seek to elect a legislature which will attempt to make the administration responsible to it, instead of to us and our auxiliaries, and will strive to rend the bonds which bind this colony to the motherland, for the sole, selfish, and seditious purpose of erecting a separate, national, economic unit independent of us -- and even perhaps, competing with us. We must, therefore, hasten to remove from this legislature, with the aid of our supporters here, such of its powers as could be used against imperial unity.

J. P. MORGAN & CO. ARE BRITISH AGENTS

In the financial world the Anglo-American alliance is a well-established fact. And as the consortium for China, and the security company for Mexico show, our brokers and their aids have become the unchallenged financiers of the world. We have been particularly fortunate in our fiscal agents here, Messrs Pierpont Morgan & Company. The commissions they charged, both as our brokers and purchasing agents no doubt were high enough to warrant their summary treatment at the hands of Mr. Balfour during his visit here. But they advantageously placed our many bond issues and every American holder of these bonds having now a stake in the Empire is a defender of its integrity and a potential supporter of its extension over here. Their services in putting this country into the war have not been altruistic, but they were nonetheless effective. They contributed liberally to our Americanization campaign. They ousted Miss Boardman, and through Messrs. Taft and H. P. Davidson they nationalized and directed the American Red Cross, and then internationalized it under the direction of Mr. H. P. Davison Through Mr. Thomas Lamont they purchased Harpers Magazine and the New York Evening Post. Through advertisers they control, they have exerted widespread influence on newspaper policy. Messrs. Lamont and Davidson gave you valuable aid at the peace conference. They loaned $200,000,000 to Japan that our ally might build a fleet to compete with America on the Pacific carrying routes. Their attempts to retain for us control of the international mercantile marine are well known to you. And I would he amiss if I did not remind you that they relieved the government of considerable embarrassment by pensioning worthily the widow of our late Ambassador Sir Cecil Spring-Rice, at a time when the antagonism of Lord Northcliffe made it impossible for us officially to do so. As the greater part of their capital is invested within the Empire. the Government of His Majesty will doubtless have opportunity to appreciate the value of the services of Messrs. Pierpont Morgan & Company.

BRITISH DUPLICITY

Through our fiscal agents here and our aids who act for other Allied countries, as Sir Clifford Sifton acts for Rumania, we have become the world's purchasers. Moreover, the war has made us the custodian of the greater part of the world's raw materials. With moneys lent to us by the American Government for war purposes, we have. acting through quasi-American companies by the aid of Mr. Connor Guthrie, obtained control of the large oil fields in California and in Costa Rica. And through the nationalization of His Majesty's Government of the Cowdray, Pearson, and Royal Dutch Shell interests in Mexico, we having become masters of the Mexican, Canadian, Rumanian, Armenian. Persian, and lessor oil fields, now largely control the oil fields of the world and thereby the world's transportation and industry. We have not yet succeeded in controlling the pipe lines owned by the Standard Oil Company, and its subsidiaries, for those companies have long been established. But, although uncontrolled companies may continue to get their oil to the seaboard, the proposed system of preferential treatment at our universal oiling stations for ships supplied at the port of departures with British oil (Appendix 37) will prevent the use of any oil but ours on the high seas.
This control would enable us to exert such pressure as would make American industrial interests amenable to His Majesty's pleasure. But it would be unwise to make disciplinary use of our fuel power before we secure remission of our $4,000,000,000 debt. Otherwise, the American industrial interests might retaliate by forcing the United States Government to exact from us the agreed interest, to maintain tariff barriers against our merchandise, and to withdraw support from the rate of exchange. Which make our labor and resources for years pay tribute to this country an unnatural, unfilial, and unthinkable proceeding. We are conducting a vigorous campaign for the cancellation of this war debt, on the grounds (a) that we fought America's fight for her for 2 years, while she was prospering in cowardice and (b) that at least the material burdens should be distributed justly, if the world is to be made safe for democracy. . Synchronously with this agitation for the remission of our debt, we are agitating for further loans of American money to rebuild our markets in Europe. There is no possibility of these two agitations endangering their mutual success, for we have repeatedly proved beyond question that the American mind cannot synchronously fix and correlate facts, with two cognate items on the statements to be judged each on its merits. Hence, we are able in a cloud of candor to state the merit of the loan -- viz, that unless the money be lent to us we cannot pay the interest on it. in these agitations we are receiving valuable, if not wholly disinterested, aid from our financial auxiliaries and fiscal agents (J. P. Morgan & Co.)
In Mexico our friends made a tentative adventure with the gallant Blanquet, but it miscarried, perhaps owing to a slight misunderstanding between the bond interests and the industrial interests. However, we are quietly continuing our work in Mexico until the United States Government shall be put in a position to take it over. An American war with Mexico would cost us nothing; it would satisfy certain American industrial interests; it would guarantee out title to the Mexican oil fields; it would humble, by impoverishing, this purse-proud people; it would give us an opportunity to show the American that he isolated in the world needs our protection against our ally, Japan; and while America was busy warring we would enjoy a clear field in the European, African, and Asiatic trade, together with the monopoly of the markets of a South America hostile to the Monroe Doctrinaries of democracy. For these reasons our press is fully reporting Mexican outrages, but a strange apathy seems to have fallen on the people, an apathy from which only border raids or special atrocities will arouse them. . .

LEAGUE OF NATIONS

In other words, we must quickly act to transfer its dangerous sovereignty from this colony to the custody of the Crown. We must, in short, now bring America with in the Empire. God helping us, we can do no other. The first visible step in this direction has been taken; President Wilson has accepted and sponsored the plan for a League of Nations which we prepared for him. We have wrapped this plan in the peace treaty so that the world must accept from us the League or a continuance of the war. The League is in substance the Empire with America admitted on the same basis as our other colonies.
The effectiveness of the League will depend upon the power with which it can be endowed, and that will hinge upon the skill with which the cardinal functions of the American legislature are transferred to the executive Council of the League. Any abrupt change may startle the ignorant American masses and rouse them to action against it. And us. Our best policy, therefore, would be to appoint President Wilson first president of the League. When the fourteen points seemed to our Government twice seven daily sins, I analyzed with care his diverse and numerous notes and discourses and divided them into their two parts: One, the Wilson creed, "I believe in open covenants and in the freedom of the seas," etc.; and two, the Wilson commandments, "Might shall not prevail over right, the strong shall not oppress the weak," etc. From the "too proud to fight" and "he kept us out of war" episodes, I ventured to deduce (September 29, 1918, Appendix 36) that he would at the appropriate moment oblige us by transferring the "not" from his commandments to his creed without as much as a "may I not," and in such a way that his people will be none the wiser.
The plain people of this country are inveterate and incurable hero worshipers. They are, however, sincere in sentiment; and for a hero to become established in the public shrine, he must first succeed in getting his name associated with the phrases and slogans that seem to reflect the undefined aspirations of the average inhabitant. When this has been accomplished the allegiance is at once transferred from the sentiment to the sentimentalist, from the ideal to the maker of the longed-for phrase. No one understands this peculiarity of the native behavior better than Mr. Wilson, which accounts largely for his exceptional usefulness to us. He knows that Americans will not scrutinise any performance too closely, provided their faith in the performer has been adequately established. Mr. Wilson has since made the transfer amid American acclamation. In the same way he will now be able to satisfy them that far from surrendering their independence to the League they are actually extending their sovereignty by it. He alone can satisfy them on this. He alone can father an anti-Bolshevik act which judicially interpreted -- will enable appropriate punitive measures to be applied to any American who may be unwise enough to assert that America must again declare her independence. And he alone, therefore, is qualified to act for us as first president of the League.
I confess I am a little uneasy lest in the exigencies of diplomatic combat, Mr. Wilson may not have found the joy he anticipated from matching his wits against the best brains of Europe. He is easily slighted and remarkably vindictive. It is the highest degree desirable that any traces of resentment his mind may be harboring against us should be radically removed before he returns. I would, therefore, suggest that the work of adulation planned in Appendix 32 should be instructed to consult the inventories I have prepared (appendixes 45-83), which show that he is now surfeited with diamond stomachers, brooches, and bracelets, Gobelin tapestries, mosaics, and vases, gold caskets, and plates.
The program we arranged for his visit to England (appendix 33) including a royal reception at Buckingham Palace, with which the President was well pleased. The fruitful visit of the President to the King should be returned as early as possible. I would suggest that as soon as the President is settled once more in the White House, the visit should be returned by His Royal Highness, the Prince of Wales, who would be an admirable representative of His Royal Sire, and would satisfy President Wilson's sense of fitness. It is perhaps unfortunate that there is not a Presidential daughter of the Prince's age, for such a union would have greatly advanced our purpose not only with the American people, but also with a President who feels that lese majeste should be punishable with 20 years' imprisonment, and who acts as if he considered his son-in-law, Mr. McAdoo, as his heir apparent.

PRESIDENT WILSON'S PECULIARITIES

Too great attention cannot be given at this time to the Presidential peculiarities, for his devotion to our purpose will depend upon our ability to pander to them. I would suggest that the new ambassador to Washington should be chosen only after the most careful thought. He should not be too clever, lest Mr. Wilson shun him. He should be able to evince hilarity at the most venerable jest, no matter how often he may have to suffer it. This qualification is vitally important whether Mr. Wilson's "humor" is merely assumed to perpetuate the "human" tradition established for Presidents by Lincoln, or whether it is studied descent from Jovelike isolation to Jovelike jest. The ambassador should be a Wilson worshiper. I enclose (appendix 34) resumes of the methods of worship practiced by various members of his inner circle. The appointee would do well to familiarize himself with them, and my services are at his disposal should be desire more extended information on the method of worship he selects. He should of course be a commoner, that we may not lose democratic favor -- preferably a professor -- and sufficiently subsidized to be able to entertain regally. If a list were submitted to Mr. Wilson he might be prepared to indicate all of whom he did not approve, and the one against whom he expressed no prejudices should be appointed. The pressing need of our embassy at Washington is not so much an ambassador as a gentleman in waiting to the President.
I would suggest that his powers as President of the League of Nations be left undefined for the present. He may be trusted to assume what power he can and to use it in the interests of the Crown.
A grant of a privy purse of $100,000,000 would prove most acceptable to him and would be useful for private espionage, private wars, Siberian railroads, etc. His appointment should be for life, and you might definitely promise him that any instructions he may care to convey concerning his successor will receive the most careful attention of His Majesty's Government.
Nevertheless, it would be well quickly to reinforce him in the presidency of the League of Nations by staging the first session of the League in Washington. This will convince these simple people that they are the League and its power resides in them. Their pride in this power should be exalted. Perhaps you, yourself, might condescend to visit this country. Or, if that be impracticable, you might send such noble statesmen, and stately noblemen, as will suffice to make of the first League session a spectacle of unsurpassed brilliance. Indeed, it would be well to commence at an early date a series of spectacles by which the mob may be diverted from any attempt to think too much of matters beyond their province. The success of the Joffre, Vivianti Balfour, and other missions in amusing the people while the country was quietly put into the war shows that similar missions would likewise amuse the people -- while the country was quietly put into the League. I would suggest that missions of thanksgiving to America be organized, and that His Majesty the King of the Belgians, Cardinal Mercier, Field Marshal Foch, Venizelos, and an eminent Italian or two be sent seriatim.

PROPAGANDA

While awaiting these diversions for the vulgar, we are incessantly instructing them in the wonders of the League. Its praises are thundered by our press, decreed by our college presidents, and professed by our professors. Our authors, writers. and lecturers are analyzing its selected virtues for whomsoever will read or listen. As will be seen from appendix 39, circulars issued by the League of Nations committee, we have enlisted 8,000 pulpiteers or propagandists for the League. We have organized international and national synods, consistories, committees, conferences, convocations, conventions, councils, congresses, and assemblies, as well as their State, municipal, and district equivalents, to herald the birth of the League as the dawn of universal peace. A special Sunday will be observed as League Sunday in all churches. In this connection, may I remark that the appointment of Mr. Raymond Fosdick to the Secretariat of the League, has pleased not only the Rockefeller interests but also the less disingenuous uplifters, for it stamps the League as an endowed organization for promiscuous uplifting, under the triple crown of religion, respectability, and finance. Agriculturalists, bankers, brokers, chartered accounts, chemists, and all other functional groups capable of exerting organized professional, business, financial, or social pressure are meeting to endorse the League in the name of peace, progress, and prosperity.
The World's Peace Foundation has issued for us a series of League of Nations pamphlets, which, with our other literature, tax the mails to the limit of their capacity. Our film concerns are preparing an epoch-making picture entitled "The League of Nations." In brief, our entire system of thought control is working ceaselessly, tirelessly, ruthlessly, to insure the adoption of the League. And it will be adopted, for business wants peace, the righteous cannot resist a covenant, and the politicians, after shadow-boxing for patronage purposes, will yield valiantly lest the fate of the wanton and wilful pursue them.
By these means we hope smoothly to overcome all effective opposition on the on the part of our colony America to entering the League -- that is, the Empire. As soon as the League is functioning properly, His Majesty in response to loyal and repeated solicitation, might graciously be pleased to consent to restore to this people their ancient right to petition at the foot of the throne; to confer the ancient rank and style of governor general upon our Ambassador, that this colony may enjoy a status inferior to no other colony's; to establish the primacy of the Metropolitan See, with the Right Reverend Dr. Manning as first primate; to appoint Mr. Elihu Root lord chief justice of the colony, and to nominate Messrs. W. H. Taft, Nicholas Murray Butler, J. P. Morgan, Elizabeth Marbury, Adolph Ochs, and Thomas Lamont to the colonial privity council; as a special mark of royal and imperial condescension, to rename the Federal Capital of the Colony Georgetown, and lest section jealousy be thereby excited, to grant royal charters to the cities of Boston and Chicago entitling them thereafter to style themselves, respectively, Kingston and Guelf -- concisely to bestow in time and in measure such tokens of the bounty of the Crown as the fealty of the colonists merit.

BRITISH-AMERICAN UNION URGED

Since that memorable day, September 19, 1877, on which the late Cecil Rhodes devised by will a fund "to and for the establishment, promotion, and development of a secret society -- the true aim of which and object of which shall be the extension of British rule throughout the world, and especially the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire" -- the energy and intelligence of England has not been spent in vain. It would perhaps be presumptuous of me to refer here to the admirable services rendered not only by LORD NORTHCLlFFE (the probable author of the report) and the corps of 12,000 trained workers whom he introduced here during the year as purchasing agents under the direction of Sir Campbell Stuart, but also the right Honorable Arthur J. Balfour, and by Lord Reading. But my report would be incomplete without a reference to Mr. Andrew Carnegie, of Skibo Castle, Sutherlandshire, and New York City. He unobtrusively assumed the mantle of the late Mr. Cecil Rhodes. Through the Carnegie Foundation, he obtained such control over the professorate of this country that even President Wilson was a suppliant for a Carnegie pension before this people and allied gratitude placed him beyond prospective want.
The Carnegie League to Enforce Peace and its affiliate League of Small Nations are even now leading the van in our fight. In the North American Review, June 1893, Mr. Carnegie wrote: "Let men say what they will, I say that as surely as the sun in the heavens once shone upon Britain and America united, so surely is it one morning to rise, to shine upon, to greet again, the reunited state -- the British-American union."
The object of Cecil Rhodes is almost attained. The day prophesied by Mr. Carnegie is near at hand, the day when the American Colonies will be in all things one with the motherland, one and indivisible. Only the last great battle remains to be. fought -- the battle to compel her acceptance of the terms of the League of Nations."



An Introduction to the "Little Sister" of The Royal Institute of International Affairs: The U.S. Council on Foreign Relations

By Eric Samuelson, J.D.
janeric@concentric.net

"Since its founding... the CFR has been the preeminent intermediary between the world of high finance, big oil, corporate elitism, and the U.S. government. Its members slide smoothly into cabinet-level jobs in Republican and Democratic administrations. The policies promulgated in its quarterly journal, Foreign Affairs, become U.S. government policy." -- Jonathan Vankin (1)

"As a teenager, I heard John Kennedy's summons to citizenship. And then, as a student, I heard that call clarified by a professor I had named Carroll Quigley." -- Democratic Presidential Nominee Bill Clinton
When Bill Clinton delivered his acceptance speech at the Democratic convention, on July 16, 1992, Carroll Quigley's name was not exactly a household word.(2) Quigley, Dean of The School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, had graduated magna cum from Harvard. He made Ripley's "Believe It or Not" for being Harvard's youngest person to receive a Ph.D. After teaching at Harvard and Princeton, he went to Georgetown where for 28 consecutive years alumni selected him as their most influential professor. Clinton, Quigley's student, went on to become a Rhodes Scholar, a CFR member, a Trilateral Commission member and a Bilderberger participant. He joined the Council on Foreign Relations in 1989, attended a Bilderberg meeting in 1991 and was a current member of the Trilateral Commission at the time of his nomination.(3) Clinton, before the American public, openly acknowledged his Georgetown mentor and clued his followers from the convention podium. He then went on in November to defeat former CFR/Trilateralist/Skull and Bones member President George H.W. Bush.
The shadowy political and even "foreign" beginnings of the Council on Foreign Relations have long been intentionally obscured. For more than three decades the CFR received no notice by authors, the general public or serious researchers. When mentioned, it is almost always in articles detailing how many of the appointees of a given administration, as usual, have a "CFR connection". (4)
Santa Barbara sociologist G. William Domhoff wrote in 1978 that the CFR had been the subject of only two "academic studies." This, he said, provided "an impressive commentary in itself on how little social scientists know about policy-making in the United States."(5) A lack of academic commentary has also been paralleled by little coverage in the media or press. It was not until some 37 years after the creation of the CFR that a mainstream magazine article was published in Harper's by Joseph Kraft in July 1958 entitled: "School for Statesmen."(6)
A major clue was given by Georgetown University Professor Carroll Quigley in an interview. Quigley, in his best Boston accent, dismissed the Radical-Right interpretation as 'garbage'. But he then added: 'To be perfectly blunt, you could find yourself in trouble dealing with this subject." He explained that his career as a lecturer in the government institution circuit was all but ruined because of the twenty or so pages he had written about the existence of Round Table Groups. As we will see, the CFR was, indeed, a British Round Table creation. This is one of the most important hidden secrets of the NYC-based CFR.
The story of the British connection to the Council on Foreign Relations may be traced back to George Peabody, J.P. Morgan, Andrew Carnegie, Nicholas M. Butler and Col. Edward House -- all who may be described a British loyalists. A Secret Society was established by Cecil Rhodes in connection with Rothschild, Morgan, Carnegie, and Rockefeller. A small highly secret group called the Round Table directed operations.(7)
The story begins at least when George Peabody moved to London and took up English residence in 1837 -- the same year Queen Victoria ascended the throne. He joined with other merchant bankers who traded in dry goods in "high finance." This consisted of exclusive service to "governments, large companies and rich individuals." (8) Soon after his arrival in London, Peabody was summoned by Baron Nathan Mayer Rothschild. Rothschild offered to pay all his entertainment bills. Hence, the famous Peabody July 4th dinners were bought and paid for by funds from the Rothschilds.(9) In 1837, Peabody was warned, in advance, by his British friends of their decision "to withdraw credits from the worldwide markets and thereby depress commercial values; so he was fully liquid and ready to pounce on the American properties rendered bargains by the British move."(10) In the crash of 1837 Peabody made a fortune purchasing depressed property in America.(11) In 1854 the American Ambassador to London, James Buchanan, stormed out of the room when George Peabody toasted Queen Victoria before President Pierce.(12) Peabody "was the founder of the Morgan financial empire." (13) In 1859 Junius Morgan assumed control of George Peabody and Company. He traded Union bonds. The Civil War was "a bonanza for German-Jewish bankers on Wall Street, who raised loans from the numerous Union sympathizers in Germany." (14) Peabody's American agent was the Boston firm of Beebe, Morgan and Company -- headed by Junius Morgan.(15) When J. Pierpont Morgan was in Vienna, his father wrote that Alexander Duncan had an opening in Duncan, Sherman & Company -- a bank affiliated with George Peabody in London. Pierpont "soon was acting as George Peabody & Company's American representative.(16)
Andrew Carnegie (1835-1919), in 1872, was paid a $150,000 commission for placing $6 million of bonds of a Pennsylvania branch road in Europe. He made another $75,000 on a second trip. While in England in 1873, on one of his frequent trips to Great Britain, he met Henry Bessemer and saw the Bessemer process of making steel. He then organized Carnegie, McCandless & Company with a capital of $700,000 and built a new steel plant named the Edgar Thompson Steel Works (to flatter the president of the Pennsylvania Railroad to get generous rebates). (17)
In the original edition of Andrew Carnegie's 1893 book, Triumphant Democracy, he stated: "Time may dispel many pleasing illusions and destroy many noble dreams but it will never shake my belief that the wound caused by the wholly unlooked for and undesired separation of the Mother from her child is not to bleed forever. Let men say what they will, therefore I say, that surely as the sun in the heavens once shone upon Britain and America united, so surely is it one morning to rise, shine upon, and greet again the United States, the British American Union."(18) In 1948 a bio of Carnegie ended: "There is bound to be universal peace, he believed, through the final interlocking of the national interests throughout the world. At first a coalition of America and England -- a union of the English-speaking race. Then a United States of Europe. And finally a unification of the entire human race."(19) Carnegie was a vice president and generous financial supporter of the Anti-Imperialist League from its formation in 1898 until his death. His profits went from almost $3.5 million in 1887 to $40 million in 1900. (20) He consolidated his holdings into Carnegie Steel Co. in 1899. On December 12, 1900 an informal parliament of "all the biggest men of New York" was held as a dinner party to the president of the Carnegie Steel Company -- "Smiling Charlie" Schwab. After an all night session, some weeks later, Morgan sent Schwab to Carnegie: "Go and find his price." The resulting price of $492,000,000, dubbed a "stupendous ransom," was paid to Carnegie with $300,000,000 in bonds and preferred stock. (21) Carnegie's assets were actually worth only $80 million but Morgan merged other corporations to create U.S. Steel Company controlling 65% of U.S. steelmaking capacity. (22) At the end of his steel career, in 1901, he turned over his Carnegie Steel to J.P. Morgan who merged it with three other steel giants (the Tennessee Coal and Iron Company, the Illinois Steel Company and Colorado Fuel and Iron) to form the U.S. Steel Corporation -- the first billion dollar corporation in America. (23)
Andrew Carnegie financed three temples of peace: Central America Court of Justice, the Pan American Union and the Palace of Peace at the Hague (which cost $1.5 million to construct in 1903). (24) He was also a member of the Philippine Independence Committee (1904) and a vice president of the Filipino Progress Association (1905-1907). In 1905 Carnegie gave $10 million to provide pensions for retired college professors. Those who gathered at Carnegie's mansion on November 15, 1905, included Charles W. Eliot (Harvard), Woodrow Wilson (Princeton), Arthur Hadley (Yale) and David Star Jordan (Stanford).(25)
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace was set up in 1910. The initial direction of the fund was given by Carnegie to Dr. Nicholas Murray Butler (1862-1947). Butler got excited about the peril of the Allies in World War I and decided that the best way to establish peace was to help get the United States into the War. (26) Butler was President of Columbia University (1901-1945), helped establish the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and served as its President (1925-1945). Norman Dodd, research director for the Reece Committee, was invited to examine the warehoused records of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. The minutes, inspected by a Dodd researcher, revealed that in 1910 the Carnegie trustees asked: "Is there any way known to man more effective than war, to so alter the life of an entire people?" The trustees ultimately decided that war was the most effective way to change people. A year later the minutes showed that the trustees asked: "How do we involve the United States in a war?" And they answered: "We must control the diplomatic machinery of the United States," by first gaining "control of the State Department." The trustees also sent a confidential message to President Wilson insisting that the war not end too quickly. Dodd also found that all high appointments in the State Department took place only after they had been cleared by the Council of Learned Societies (established by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace). (27) The Church Peace Union was established at a meeting at the home of Andrew Carnegie in 1914 with an endowment of over $2 million. (28) Andrew Carnegie, J.P. Morgan and Otto Kahn backed the 1915 Anglo-French loan. (29) The 1915 loans were said by Morgan to be made for "trade" purposes. (30)
The League of Free Nations was created in early 1918 (in 1920 it became the Foreign Policy Association). (31) The Foreign Policy Association "grew out of a meeting of nineteen writers, editors, educators, and such with a view to selling Wilsonian policies and the League of Nations to the public." (32) The Foreign Policy Association, however, soon began to play "second fiddle" to the CFR.
In June 1918, a "more discrete" club of New York "financiers and international lawyers" was formed headed by Elihu Root (an Andrew Carnegie lawyer). (33) The 108 members of the original Council on Foreign Relations were described by Whitney Shepardson as "high-ranking officers of banking, manufacturing, trading and finance companies, together with many lawyers." (34) International Bankers provided the money: "In Britain the organization was (initially) called the Institute for International Affairs (IIA) while in New York it operated as the Council for Foreign Relations (CFR). The finances for the group came from wealthy international bankers..." (35) The CFR was founded "by East Coast bankers, lawyers and academicians..." (36) By April 1919, however, the CFR "went dormant." (37)
A Texan named House was a key individual before and during the Wilson administration. He helped establish the income tax, the Federal Reserve System, coined the phrase "league of nations," drafted the covenant for the League of Nations and presided over the creation of the Council on Foreign Relations (C.F.R.).
Col. Edward M. House (the title came from a Texas Governor) inherited a fortune estimated at around $1.5 million. He was born in Houston, Texas -- the son of a wealthy planter and banker. (38) Originally the House ("Huis") family was Dutch. House's family had lived in England for 300 years before his father came to Texas. (39) Thomas William House came to Texas to fight under Sam Houston and was an American agent for London Banking interests "said by some to the House of Rothschild..." (40) Edward House attended school in England for several years as a young boy: "Much of his youth and adult life was spent in the British Isles, which he regularly visited." (41) The elder House said he wanted to raise his sons to "know and serve England." (42) House surrounded himself with prominent members of the Fabian Society. (43) Between 1892 and 1902 he elected four Texas Governors. (44)
In the winter of 1911-1912, House wrote Philip Dru: Administrator. House said he was working for "Socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx..." The book was a fictional plan for the conquest of America by gaining control of both the Republican and Democratic parties and using them to create a socialist world government. Central portions of the plan included a graduated federal income tax and a central bank. (45) The book also outlined an inheritance tax and suggested taking functions away from the states. (46) It suggested a conspiracy "insinuated into the primaries, in order that no candidate might be nominated whose views were not in accord with theirs." (47) House passed the book to his father-in-law in New York City -- Dr. Sidney E. Mezes. Mezes, who read and approved the book, was Director of the College of the City of New York and former President of the University of Texas. House then sent the book to future Wilson cabinet member David F. Houston. Houston declared the work economically sound but said the fiction in it was so thin that he advised it be rewritten as a serious work. (48)
After his November 1912 election, Woodrow Wilson, on vacation in Bermuda, read Philip Dru. (49) Arthur Howden Smith wrote: "In nine months the Wilson administration completely reorganized the financial structure in accordance with the conceptions outlined in 'Philip Dru.'" (50) From 1912-1914, Wilson's legislative program "was largely the program of House's book..." (51) The New York Times in January 1913 found the authorship of Philip Dru to still be a puzzle. (52) In 1915 House was still trying to conceal his connection as author of the book. (53) Among those who read the novel was Franklin Delano Roosevelt -- then Assistant Secretary of the Navy -- whose mother was then and always a close friend of Colonel House. (54) It was published by B.W. Huebsch -- "a favorite publisher of the Left and for many years a valued collaborator of American Fabian Socialist groups." (55) In 1917 a bookseller wrote regarding the House book: "As time goes on the interest in it becomes more intense, due to the fact that so many of the ideas expressed...have become laws of this Republic, and so many of his ideas have been discussed as becoming laws." He ended with the question: "Is Colonel E.M. House of Texas the author? If not, who is?" Seymour admitted: "Colonel House was, in truth, the author; to his other occupations he added that of novelist." (56) Both Franklin K. Lane and W. J. Bryan commented on the influence of Philip Dru on Wilson. (57) In 1918, Franklin K. Lane, Woodrow Wilson's Secretary of the Interior, stated in a private letter: "All that book has said should be, comes about...The President comes to Philip Dru, in the end." (58) House's book has been said to have outlined the next 40-50 years in code (DRU is also said to be the code for David Rex Universe). (59)
Charles Seymour called Col. House "the unseen guardian angel of the (Federal Reserve) bill." (60) The banker J. Horace Harding held a dinner at which House "convinced the financial overlords that the Democratic donkey, with Wilson in the saddle, would not kick over the traces....The Schiffs, the Warburgs, the Kuhns, the Rockefellers, the Morgans put their faith in House..." (61) On November 17, 1913, Paul Warburg requested an interview, with House, to include Jacob Schiff and Cleveland Dodge. Dodge was grateful for a "substantial subscription for the Y.M.C.A. fund." Warburg did most of the talking. Schiff favored only four regional reserve banks. (62) Schiff said House was the Moses and they would be the Aarons: "He asked if I knew my Bible well enough for this to be clear to be. I told him I did." (63) Schiff then wrote to House on December 23, 1913: "I want to say a word of appreciation to you for the silent, but no doubt effective work you have done in the interest of currency legislation..." (64) After getting the Federal Reserve through, House then turned to international affairs. (65) House "had powerful connections with international bankers in New York. He was influential...with great financial institutions represented by such people as Paul and Felix Warburg, Otto H. Kahn, Louis Marburg, Henry Morgenthau, Jacob and Mortimer Schiff and Herbert Lehman. House had equally powerful connections with bankers and politicians of Europe." (66) Jacob Schiff died on September 25, 1920. Of all the other living bankers named by Smoot, all, without an exception, were later founding members of the CFR in 1921. (67) The original 270-secret crowd that created the Federal Reserve System "were all in the original (CFR) membership." They included Jacob Schiff, Averell Harriman, Frank Vanderlip, Nelson Aldrich, Bernard Baruch, J.P. Morgan and John D. Rockefeller. (68)
Associates of J.P. Morgan and Company created an American parallel group to the Milner Group before the first World War. (69) The RIIA was an above-ground group: "During the Versailles Treaty talks after the war, Round Table members Lionel Curtis, Balfour, Milner, and others formed an above-ground group called the Royal Institute of International Affairs for the purpose of coordinating Anglo-American cooperative efforts. They decided also to form an American branch, but gave it a different name in order to secure its antecedents. Thus was born the Council on Foreign Relations, originally staffed by J.P. Morgan men and financed by Morgan money." (70) The two groups were established to prevent the American people from reacting with patriotic fury if it was discovered that the CFR was in fact a subsidiary of the British Round Table. (71) The man most responsible for creating subgroups of the Round Table was Lionel Curtis. He established local chapters of the Round Table called the Royal Institute of International Affairs: "In the United States, the Round Table 'front group' was named the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)." (72)
A savy observer has described the CFR's British front-role: "The interlock problem is conspicuous for another reason, one which has never been addressed by Congress. It seems that certain huge Yankee foundations, namely Rockefeller, Ford, and Carnegie, have been conscious instruments of covert U.S. foreign policy, with directors and officers who can only be described as agents of U.S. intelligence. According to Quigley, the roots for this can be traced to the establishment of an American branch of the British Royal Institute in 1921, which itself had grown out of the Rhodes Trust. The American branch, called the Council on Foreign Relations, was a largely a front for J. P. Morgan and Company." (73)
The Council on Foreign Relations Handbook of 1936 stated: "On May 30, 1919, several leading members of the delegations to the Paris Peace Conference met at the Hotel Majestic in Paris to discuss setting up an international group which would advise their respective governments on international affairs. The U.S. was represented by Gen. Tasker H. Bliss (Chief of Staff, U.S. Army), Col. Edward M. House, Whitney H. Shepardson, Dr. James T. Shotwell, and Prof. Archibald Coolidge. Great Britain was unofficially represented by Lord Robert Cecil, Lionel Curtis, Lord Eustace Percy, and Harold Temperley." The May 30th meeting was held at the billet of the British delegation and proposed an Anglo-American Institute of International Affairs -- one branch in London and one in New York. (74) The New York and London locations were appropriate since "nearly all of them were bankers and lawyers." (75)
The British moved quickly to establish their branch. (76) The establishment of the American branch was much slower. When the American delegates got home their fellow citizens were "absorbed in isolationism and prohibition, throughly inhospitable to the ideas of the League of Nations." (77)
So far no complete list of the fifty dinner guests has been located. It has been stated, however: "The twenty-one Americans, who, together with (their 29) British counterparts, founded in Paris The Institute of International Affairs, were a diverse group that included Col. Edward M. House, Herbert Hoover, Gen. Tasker Bliss, Christian Herter, and such scholars as Charles Seymour, later President of Yale, Professors Archibald Cary Coolidge of Harvard and James T. Shotwell of Columbia." (78) There were two camps. One was headed by the U.S. official negotiators Tasker H. Bliss and Edward House along with advisors Herbert Hoover and Thomas W. Lamont -- along with their aides. The other side was composed of the twelve scholars that had served the American delegation in an advisory capacity. (79) Most of the scholars were from Harvard, Yale and Columbia. (80)
The returning Inquiry scholars lacked the funds to create the envisioned American Institute of International Affairs but offered diplomatic experience, expertise and high-level contacts: "The men of law and banking, by contrast, could tap untold resources of finance...This was the synergy that produced the modern Council..." (81) The money to found the CFR came in part from J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Bernard Baruch, Otto Kahn Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg. (82)
Another source suggests that the original CFR itself had fund-raising problems: "They took the name of an organization already in existence. The original Council on Foreign Relations had been formed in New York in July, 1918, but in little more than a year had become inactive owing to an inability to raise the necessary funds. It was with 66 members of this original crowd that the peacemongers from Paris merged to form the organization we know today." (83)
J.P. Morgan's personal attorney, John W. Davis (and later Republican presidential candidate), was the founding President of the CFR. Paul Carvath, the first Vice-President of the CFR, also represented the J.P. Morgan interests. The council's first chairman was Morgan partner Russell Leffingwell. Morgan also had the loyalty of many professors due to his large academic endowments. (84) Paul Cravath was also the founder of the famous law firm of Cravath, Swaine & Moore. (85)
In summary, the Federal Reserve System, the League of Nations and the Council on Foreign Relations had both common origins and creators. Last, but not least, the CFR was of British -- not U.S. origin.

The Round Table

ENDNOTES:
1. Conspiracies, Coverups and Crimes 70 (1992).
2. NameBase NewsLine, No. 1, "Clinton, Quigley, and Conspiracy: What's Going on Here?" (April-June 1993).
3. NameBase NewsLine, No. 1, "Clinton, Quigley, and Conspiracy: What's Going on Here?" (April-June 1993).
4. A collection of the charts of F.R.E.E. (Fund To Restore An Educated Electorate, founded by Johnny Stewart of Waco), proves the dominance of the CFR from the Democratic Carter administration, to the Republican Reagan administration, to the Bush and also the Bill Clinton administrations. It truly does not matter which party happens to be in power-the CFR runs U.S. foreign policy regardless of the political party in power. In 1952 and 1956 CFR Adlai Stevenson challenged CFR Ike. In 1960 it was CFR Nixon or CFR JFK. In 1968 it was a choice of CFR Nixon or CFR Humphrey. In 1972 the candidates were CFR Nixon and CFR McGovern. Gary Allen, The Rockefeller File 56 (1976).
5. G. William Domhoff, The Powers That Be 64 (1978). 6. An exception to the lack of CFR coverage came in the December 9, 1950 issue of the Chicago Tribune where an editorial said of CFR members: "There is blood on them-the dried blood of the last war (WWII) and the fresh blood of the present one (Korean War)." Des Griffin, Fourth Reich of the Rich 129 (1989). For a relatively early article, See Also: J. Anthony Lukas, "The Council on Foreign Relations - Is It a Club? Seminar? Presidium? 'Invisible Government'? New York Times Magazine (November 21, 1971). 7. W. Cleon Skousen, The Naked Capitalist 50 (1970)
.
8. Ron Chernow, The House of Morgan 4 (1990).
9. Eustace Mullins, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve 49 (1991). 10. Anton Chaitkin, Treason in America 319 (1985). 11. Anton Chaitkin, Treason in America 344 (1985). 12. Ron Chernow, The House of Morgan 7 (1990). 13. Anton Chaitkin, Treason in America 307 (1985). 14. Ron Chernow, The House of Morgan 13 (1990). 15. Eustace Mullins, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve 50 (1991). 16. Cass Canfield, Outrageous Fortunes 68 (1981). 17. B.C. Forbes, Men Who Made America Great 42 (1917). 18. Wickliffe B. Vennard, Sr., The Federal Reserve Hoax Exposed 121 (1973). 19. Henry Thomas and Danna Lee Thomas, 50 Great Americans 241 (Doubleday & Co.: N.Y. 1948). 20. Robert Green McCloskey, American Conservatism In The Age of Enterprise 146 (1951). 21. Matthew Josephson, The Robber Barons 424-425 (1934).James B. Dill was the man who brought Andrew Carnegie and J.P. Morgan together for the purchase and sale of the Carnegie steel properties. 22. James Trager, The People's Chronology 679 (1979). 23. Thomas R. Dye and L. Harmon Zeigler, The Irony of Democracy 75 (4th Ed. 1978). 24. William P. Hoar, Architects of Conspiracy 69 (1984). 25. David Tyack & Larry Cuban, Tinkering Toward Utopia: a Century of Public School Reform 91 (1995). 26. Rene A. Wormser, Foundations: Their Power and Influence 204 (1958). 27. William T. Still, New World Order: The Ancient Plan of Secret Societies 154 (1990). 28. C. Gregg Singer, The Unholy Alliance 39 (1975). Carnegie was very deferential to Elihu Root who on March 31, 1919, prepared his will witnessed by Silas W. Howland and Clinton Combes (both N.Y. lawyers). The Last Will and Testament 16 (RAF Books 1968). 29. William P. Hoar, Architects of Conspiracy 70 (1984). 30. Antony Sutton, Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution 53 (1974). 31. Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry 5-7 (1996). 32. Ferdinand Lundberg, The Rockefeller Syndrome 293 (1976). 33. Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry 7 (1996). 34. Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry 7 (1996). 35. Michael Howard, The Occult Conspiracy 165 (1989). 36. G. William Domhoff, The Powers That Be 64 (1978). 37. Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry 8 (1996). 38. Alan Stang, The Actor 2 (1968). 39. Eustace Mullins, The Secrets of the Federal Reserve 25 (1991). 40. Rose L. Martin, Fabian Freeway: High Road to Socialism in the U.S.A. 160 (1966). 41. Rose L. Martin, Fabian Freeway: High Road to Socialism in the U.S.A. 160 (1966). 42. Rose L. Martin, Fabian Freeway: High Road to Socialism in the U.S.A. 160 (1966). House "habitually permitted Sir William Wiseman, head of the British Secret Service in the United States, to sit in his private office in New York and read the most secret documents of the American government. House's father and mother had both been English." Sigmund Freud and William C. Bullitt, Thomas Woodrow Wilson: A Psychological Study 160 (1966). 43. G. Edward Griffin, Creature From Jekyll Island 239 (1994). 44. Alan Stang, The Actor 2 (1968). 45. John E. McManus, The Insiders 7 (1992). 46. Alan Stang, The Actor 13 (1968). 47. Alan Stang, The Actor 14 (1968). 48. Vol. I, The Intimate Papers of Colonel House 154 (Charles Seymour Ed. 1926). 49. Robert F. Rifkind, "The Colonel's Dream of Power," American Heritage 64 (February 1959). 50. Wickliffe B. Vennard, Sr., The Federal Reserve Hoax Exposed 37 (1973). 51. Sigmund Freud and William C. Bullitt, Thomas Woodrow Wilson: A Psychological Study 152 (1966). 52. Robert F. Rifkind, "The Colonel's Dream of Power," American Heritage 62 (February 1959). 53. Alexander L. George & Guliette L. George, Woodrow Wilson and Colonel House 131 (1964). 54. Rose L. Martin, Fabian Freeway: High Road to Socialism in the U.S.A. 159 (1966). 55. Rose L. Martin, Fabian Freeway: High Road to Socialism in the U.S.A. 158 (1966). 56. Vol. I, The Intimate Papers of Colonel House 153 (Charles Seymour Ed. 1926). 57. Rupert Norval Richardson, Colonel Edward M. House: The Texas Years 1858-1912 264 (1964). 58. Dan Smoot, The Invisible Government 44 (1962). 59. Paul Stevens, "The Origin of the Federal Reserve Act," Vol. LXXXIV, No. 401, American Mercury 10-11 (June 1957). In 1932, FDR, as the Democrat candidate, met Col. House at Magnolia, Massachusetts, as they were returning East from the Chicago Convention. Curtis B. Dall, F.D.R.: My Exploited Father-In-Law 109-110 (1968). It has also been said: "That Roosevelt's legislative program of the 1930's followed the Dru course is beyond dispute: The National Industrial Recovery Act, the Agricultural Act, the 'Wealth Tax Act,' the huge measures for relief, the social security program, and the fight to change the structure of the Supreme Court--these are of the essence of Philip Dru's philosophy, and in part follow his practices." Rupert Norval Richardson, Colonel Edward M. House: The Texas Years 1858-1912 264-265 (1964). 60. G. Edward Griffin, Creature from Jekyll Island 459 (1994). 61. Alan Stang, The Actor 16 (1968); George Sylvester Viereck, The Strangest Friendship in History 36-37 (1932). 62. Vol. I, The Intimate Papers of Colonel House 165 (Charles Seymour Ed. 1926). 63. Vol. I, The Intimate Papers of Colonel House 166 (Charles Seymour Ed. 1926). 64. Vol. I, The Intimate Papers of Colonel House 174 (Charles Seymour Ed. 1926). 65. Vol. I, The Intimate Papers of Colonel House 175 (Charles Seymour Ed. 1926). 66. Dan Smoot, The Invisible Government 2 (1962). 67. Paul Warburg, Henry Morgenthau and Jacob Schiff were also all 33rd degree Masons. 68. Larry Abraham, Call It Conspiracy 93 (1985). 69. Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment 260 (1981). 70. Alan B. Jones, How The World Really Works 7 (1996). 71. Larry Abraham, Call it Conspiracy 93 (1985). 72. William Bramley, The Gods of Eden 362 (1990). 73. Daniel Brandt, "Philanthropists at War," NameBase NewsLine, No. 15 (October- December 1996). 74. Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry (1996). 75. Robert D. Schulzinger, The Wise Men of Foreign Affairs: The History of the Council on Foreign Relations 6 (1984). 76. Leonard & Mark Silk, The American Establishment 186 (1980). 77. Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry 5 (1996). 78. Council on Foreign Relations-Annual Report: 1979-1980. 79. Leonard & Mark Silk, The American Establishment 186 (1980). 80. Leonard & Mark Silk, The American Establishment 187 (1980). 81. Peter Grose, Continuing The Inquiry 8 (1996). 82. A. Ralph Epperson, The Unseen Hand 197 (1985). 83. Alan Stang, The Actor 43 (1968). See Also: Whitney H. Shepardson, Early History of the Council on Foreign Relations 1, 8-9 (1960). 84. James Perloff, The Shadows of Power 38 (1988). 85. Thomas R. Dye, Who's Running America? 151 1983).


http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/
Subscribe Bible Believers' Newsletter
Top of File
0

No comments:

Post a Comment