The Naked Capitalist: Readings in international finance

The Capitalist Threat - George Soros:
http://www.flora.org/library/mai/soros.html
Classic Financial Scandals:
http://www.ex.ac.uk/~RDavies/arian/scandals/classic.html
The Financial Fiction Genre 1 and 2:
http://www.ex.ac.uk/~RDavies/bankfiction/bigbang.html
http://www.ex.ac.uk/~RDavies/bankfiction/frontiers.html
Paul Erdman:
 http://www.dn.se/DNet/departments/172-static/english/eerdman.html
http://www.internetional.se/erdman9812.htm
Knowledge Is Power;  Banking:
http://www.kipnotes.com/Banking.htm

An email newsgroup has led me to the newsletter copied below.  In it  Boudewijn Wegerif reviews Rightist maven W. Cleon Skousen's Naked Capitalist: a review and commentary on  Carroll Quigley's book, Tragedy and Hope  ... "telling Europe US version of how banker families developed a network to control high  finance and affairs of government".   Pofessor Quigley was a highly respected educator and writer in his lifetime and the material which Wegerif quotes from Skousen's book is of considerable interest.

Note:  Despite Rightist derogations of Georgetown University Prof. Quigley as a "Liberal", he and the post Viet Nam Left seemingly had little use for one another; Helen Veits' note  indicates that this was because of his refusal to denounce that war and support the movement in opposition to it, and the impression that he had a bias toward the "history of  dead white men".    http://www.tboyle.net/Catholicism/Helen_Veit.html

Professor Quigley's 1949 "The Anglo-American Establishment" is regarded by some as his seminal work. (New York: Books in Focus, 1981. 354 pages.)    A  note on this is copied at the end of this page.

WHAT MATTERS-105                             October 24, 2002
 http://www.whatmatters.nu/wmemails/wmemails21.html#WM-105

Dear list members,

After 9.11, it has become politically correct, almost, to talk and write about there being 'a conspiracy' by a power elite to set up a 'New World Order', in which our feeble attempts at democracy will be null and voided for something sinisterly mind controlled for perpetual war, as in George Orwell's 1984. (In my E-letters, I have been referring to the NWO power elite as plutocrats and as 'the money masters', after the excellent video The Money Masters - see PS.)

W. Cleon Skousen, who has been variously a professor of ancient scripture, an FBI agent and a police chief, and who is now a popular writer and speaker on the rightwing circuit, has lent respectability to the word 'conspiracy' with his book 'The Naked Capitalist, A Review and Commentary on Carroll Quigley's Book, Tragedy and Hope'.

I have the material for this E-letter thanks to my being on the ultra rightwing, patriot E-list of Charleston Voice - bilrum@knology.net. mailto:bilrum@knology.net   (And if you are prejudiced against the right wing, please bear in mind, I am also on leftwing lists. Between the two wings, I get a more balanced bird's eye view of things.)

Dr. Carroll Quigley is (sic) a professor of history at the Foreign Service School of Georgetown University. He formerly taught at Princeton and Harvard.  The last democratically elected president, Bill Clinton, has credited Quigley with helping to form his political outlook. In the 1,300-page Tragedy and Hope Quigley deliberately exposes the machinations of the money masters to gain total global control. What makes the book remarkable is that he writes as an 'insider' who, by and large, warmly supports the goals and purposes of the 'network'.

Below are excerpts from The Naked Capitalist, including excerpts from Tragedy and Hope, and an added comment by Charleston Voice, I suspect. The whole tells the story of how the money masters have shaped vast, secret pockets of power, through a network of banks, to control the economies, and governments, of the world. The sub-headings have been inserted by Skousen.

In his commentary, Cleon Skousen asks why Quigley would want to expose the money masters? "Obviously," writes Skousen, "disclosing the existence of a mammoth power network which is trying to take over the world could not help but arouse the vigorous resistance of the millions of people who are its intended victims. So why did Dr. Quigley write this hook?"

The answer, according to Skousen, is that Quigley wants to show that "it is now too late for the little people to turn back the tide. In a spirit of kindness Quigley is therefore urging them not to fight the noose which is already around their necks. He feels certain that those who do will only choke themselves to death. On the other hand, those who go along with the immense pressure which is beginning to be felt by all humanity will eventually find themselves in a man-made millennium of peace and prosperity.  All through his book. Dr. Quigley assures us that we can trust these benevolent, well-meaning men who are secretly operating behind the scenes.  THEY are the HOPE of the world. All who resist them represent TRAGEDY.  Hence, the title for his book.

"Anyone reading Dr. Quigley's Tragedy and Hope will have little difficulty detecting the tremendous self-esteem of the author. He considers himself not only an 'insider' but a member of the intellectual elite among the insiders.  He feels that the forces of total global control are now sufficiently entrenched so that they can reveal their true identity without fear of being successfully overturned. He expresses the utmost contempt for members of the American middle class who think they can preserve what he calls their 'petty-bourgeois' property rights and constitutional privileges."

Skousen is sharply critical of Carroll Quigley's arrogant assumptions, but acknowledges that Quigley takes issue with the money masters' desire to keep their conspiratorial subversion a secret. He thinks it is time people knew who was running things.

"The real value of Tragedy and Hope," writes Skousen, "is not so much as a 'history of the world in our time' (as its subtitle suggests) but rather as a bold and boastful admission by Dr. Quigley that there actually exists a relatively small but powerful group which has succeeded in acquiring a choke-hold on the affairs of practically the entire human race."

He adds, "Of course, we should he quick to recognize that no small group could wield such gigantic power unless millions of people in all walks of life were 'in on the take' and were willing to knuckle down to the iron-clad regimentation of the ruthless bosses behind the scene." And: "perhaps we should have anticipated just such a development. [For] anyone familiar with the writings of John's Apocalypse might have suspected that modern history would eventually contain the account of a gigantic complex of political and economic power which would cover the whole earth.

"John predicted that before the great epic of Messianic or Millennial peace, the human race would be subjected to a ruthless, world-wide conglomerate of dictatorial authority which would attempt to make all men subservient to it or be killed (Revelations 13: 1 5). He said it would compel all men, "both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond," to be identified with it (Rev. 13: 16). John also referred to its economic grip on humanity and said that unless a person were identified with its monopoly network,  'no man might buy or sell' (13: 17).

"Dr. Quigley assures us that this type of global power structure is on the verge of becoming a total reality. He points out that during the past two centuries, when the peoples of the world were gradually winning their political freedom from the dynastic monarchies, the major banking families of Europe and America were actually reversing the trend by setting up new dynasties of political control through the formation of' international financial combines.

"Dr. Quigley points out that these banking dynasties had learned that all governments must have sources of revenue from which to borrow in times of' emergency. They had also learned that by providing such funds from their own private resources, they could make both kings and democratic leaders tremendously subservient to their will. It had proven to be a most effective means of controlling political appointments and deciding political issues."

I hope that you get as much conspiratorial edification from what follows as I did. There is a lot of familiar material here, out of the history of money, concisely digested into a good overview of how the money masters have taken control of the now thoroughly interlocked world economies, through the Bank of England and the Federal Reserve Bank principally.

In friendship,

Boudewijn Wegerif
What Matters Programme
Folkhogskola Vardingeby **

PS - For information on The Money Masters, see the web site,
http://www.themoneymasters.com .    http://www.themoneymasters.com
________________________
Excerpts from "The Naked Capitalist" by W. Cleon Skousen,
including excerpts from "Tragedy and Hope" by Carroll Quigley.
The sub-headings are by Cleon Skousen.

THE BANKER FAMILIES DEVELOP A VAST NETWORK TO CONTROL HIGH FINANCE AND THE AFFAIRS OF GOVERNMENTS:

''In time they [the banker families] brought into their financial network the provincial banking centers, organized as commercial banks and savings banks, as well as insurance companies, to form all of these into a single financial system on an international scale which manipulated the quantity and flow of money so that they were able to influence, if not control, governments on one side and industries on the other. The men who did this...  aspired to establish dynasties of international bankers and were at least as successful at this as were many of the dynastic political rulers." (p. 51)

INTRODUCING SOME OF THE MAJOR BANKING FAMILY DYNASTIES:

"The greatest of these dynasties, of course, were the descendants of Meyer Amschel Rothschild (1743-1812) of Frankfort, whose male descendants, for at least two generations, generally married first cousins or even nieces. Rothschild's five sons, established at branches in Vienna, London, Naples, and Paris, as well as Frankfurt, cooperated together in ways which other international banking dynasties copied but rarely excelled .

''The names of some of these other banking families are familiar to all of us and should be more so. They include Baring, Lazard, Erlanger, Warburg, Schroder, Selingman, the Speyers, Mirabaud, Mallet Fould, and above all Rothschild and Morgan. " (pp. 51-52 )

WAS THIS A JEWISH CONSPIRACY? (A NOTE BY THE REVIEWER)

It should be noted in passing that while the Rothschilds and certain other Jewish families cooperated together in these ventures, this was by no means a Jewish monopoly as some have alleged. Neither was it a "Jewish  conspiracy." As we shall see, men of finance of many nationalities and many religious or non-religious backgrounds collaborated together to create the super-structure of economic and political power which Dr. Quigley is about to disclose. No student of the global conspiracy should fall for the Hitlerian doctrine that the root of all evil is a super "Jewish conspiracy."  Nor should they fall for that long-since-discredited document, The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, which Hitler palmed off on the German people as an authentic declaration of policy by an all-Jewish congress. The spurious origin of this document was proven decades ago and serves as an object lesson to those who are inclined to accept an over-simplified explanation for the rise of the global power structure which has snared mankind. Some would answer this by saying that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and certain other Jewish organizations have been in the forefront of the collectivist movement and also in the suppression of American voices seeking to warn the nation. However, this infiltration of the Jewish community is no more applicable to the Jewish people as a whole than the scurrilous left-wing activities of the National and World Councils of Churches is a reflection on all Protestants or the liberal, irreligious Catholic left-wing is a reflection on all Catholics. In studying the global conspiracy it is important to keep in mind that it was not any particular race or religion but the "passion for money and power" which has drawn the tycoons of world finance into a tightly-knit, mutual-aid society. Dr. Quigley identifies this group as the 'International Bankers'.

THE INTERNATIONAL BANKERS ARE DIFFERENT FROM ORDINARY BANKERS:

" ... they remained different from ordinary bankers in distinctive ways: (1) they were cosmopolitan and international; (2) they were close to governments and were particularly concerned with questions of government debts . . . (3) their interests were almost exclusively in bonds and very rarely in goods... (4) they were, accordingly, fanatical devotees of deflation . . . (5) they were almost equally devoted to secrecy and the secret use of financial influence in political life. These bankers came to be called 'international bankers' and, more particularly, were known as 'merchant bankers' in England, 'private bankers' in France, and 'investment bankers' in the United States. In all countries they carried on various kinds of banking and exchange activities, but everywhere they were sharply distinguishable from other more obvious, kinds of banks, such as savings banks or commercial banks." (p.52)

HOW THE CENTERS OF MONETARY POWER WERE KEPT SECRET:

"One of their less obvious characteristics was that they remained as private unincorporated firms, usually partnerships, until relatively recently, offering no shares, no reports, and usually no advertising to the public.  This risky status, which deprived them of limited liability, was retained, in most cases, until modern inheritance taxes made it essential to surround such family wealth with the immortality of corporate status for tax avoidance purposes. This persistence as private firms continued because it ensured the maximum of anonymity and secrecy to persons of tremendous public power who dreaded public knowledge of their activities as an evil almost as great as inflation. As a consequence, ordinary people had no way of knowing the wealth or areas of operation of such firms, and often were somewhat hazy as to their membership. Thus, people of' considerable political knowledge might not associate the names of' Walter Burns, Clinton Dawkins, Edward Grenfell, Willard Straight, Thomas Lamont, Dwight Morrow, Nelson Perkins, Russell Leffingwell, Elihu Root, John W. Davis, John Foster Dulles, and S. Parker Gilbert with the name "Morgan," yet all these and many others were parts of the system of influence which centered on the J. P. Morgan office at 23 Wall Street. This firm, like others of the international banking fraternity, constantly operated through corporations and governments." (pp. 52-5 3)

THE CAMPAIGN TO KEEP GOVERNMENTS FROM CONTROLLING THEIR OWN MONEY SYSTEMS:

"The influence of financial capitalism and of the international bankers who created it was exercised both on business and on governments, but could have done neither if it had not been able to persuade both of these to accept two "axioms" of its own ideology. Both of these were based on the assumption that politicians were too weak and too subject to temporary popular pressures to be trusted with control of the money system. ... To do this it was necessary to conceal or even to mislead, both governments and people about the nature of money and its methods of operation." (p. 53)

THE PRIVATE BANKERS DECIDE TO SET UP THE BANK OF ENGLAND AS A MEANS OF CREATING CREDIT OUT OF NOTHING:

"Credit has been known to the Italians and Netherlanders long before it became one of the instruments of English world supremacy. Nevertheless, the founding of the Bank of England by William Paterson and his friends in 1694 is one of the great dates in world history. For generations men had sought to avoid the one draw-back of gold, its heaviness, by using pieces of paper to represent specific pieces of gold. Today we call such pieces of paper gold certificates. Such a certificate entitles its bearer to exchange it for its piece of gold on demand, but in view of the convenience of paper, only a small fraction of certificate holders ever did make such demands. It early became clear that gold need be held on hand ONLY to the amount needed to cover the FRACTION of certificates likely to be presented for payment:  accordingly, the rest of the gold could he used for business purposes, or, what amounts to the same thing, a volume of certificates could be issued GREATER than the volume of gold reserved for payment ... Such an excess volume of paper claims against reserves we now call bank notes.

"In effect, this creation of paper claims greater than the reserves available means that bankers were creating money out of nothing. The same thing could be done in another way . . . Deposit bankers discovered that orders and checks drawn against DEPOSITS by depositors and given to a third person were often not cashed by the latter but were deposited to their own accounts. Thus there were no actual movements of funds, and payments were made simply by bookkeeping transactions on the accounts. Accordingly, it was necessary for the banker to keep on hand in actual money (gold, certificates, and notes) no more than the FRACTION of deposits likely to be drawn upon and cashed: the rest could be used for loans, and if these loans were made by creating a deposit account for the borrower, who in turn would draw checks upon it rather than withdraw it in money, such 'created deposits ' or loans could also be covered adequately by retaining reserves to only a FRACTION of their value. Such created deposits also were a creation of money out of nothing, although bankers usually refused to express their actions, either note issuing or deposit lending, in these terms. William Paterson, however, on obtaining the charter of the Bank of England in 1694, to use the moneys he had won in privateering, said, "The bank hath benefit of interest on all moneys which it creates out of nothing.'" (pp. 48-49, emphasis added)

THE BANK OF ENGLAND BECOMES THE SECRET CENTER OF POLITICAL POWER

"In government the power of the Bank of England was a considerable restriction on political action as early as 1819 but an effort to break this power by a modification of the bank's charter in 1844 failed. In 1852, Gladstone, then Chancellor of the Exchequer and later prime minister, declared, 'The hinge of the whole situation was this: the government itself was not to be a substantive power in matters of Finance, but was to leave the Money Power supreme and unquestioned.'

"This power of the Bank of England and of its governor was admitted by most qualified observers. In January, 1924, Reginald McKenna, who had been Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1915-1916, as chairman of the board of the Midland Bank told its stock-holders: 'I am afraid the ordinary citizen will not like to be told that the banks can, and do, create money. . . .

And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of Governments and hold in the hollow of their hands THE DESTINY OF THE PEOPLE.  ' In that same year, Sir Drummond Fraser, vice-president of the Institute of Bankers, stated, 'The Governor of the Bank of England must be the autocrat who dictates the terms upon which alone the Government can obtain borrowed money." (p. 325, emphasis added)

CONCERNING THE DYNASTIC POWERS SECRETLY ENTRENCHED BEHIND BRITISH FINANCIAL LIFE:

"Although this situation is changing slowly, the inner circle of English financial life remains a matter of 'whom one knows,' rather than ~what one knows.' Jobs are still obtained by family, marriage, or school connections; character is considered far more important than knowledge or skill: and important positions, on this basis, are given to men who have no training, experience, or knowledge to qualify them.

"As part of this system and at the core of English financial life have been seventeen private firms of 'merchant bankers' who find money for established and wealthy enterprises. . . .

These merchant bankers, WITH A TOTAL OF LESS THAN A HUNDRED ACTIVE PARTNERS, include the firms of Baring Brothers, N. M. Rothschild, J. Henry Schroder, Morgan Grenfell, Hambros, and Lazard Brothers. These merchant hankers in the period of financial capitalism had a dominant position with the Bank of England and, strangely enough STILL HAVE RETAINED SOME OF THIS, DESPITE THE NATIONALIZATION OF THE BANK by the Labour government in 1946. As late as 1961 a Baring (Lord Cromer) was named governor of the bank, and his board of directors, called the 'Court' of the bank, included representatives of Lazard. of Hambros, and of Morgan Grenfell, as well as an industrial firm (English Electric) controlled by these." (pp. 499-500, emphasis added)

SIMILAR FINANCIAL DYNASTIES DEVELOPED IN THE UNITED STATES:

"This period, 1884-1933, was the period of financial capitalism in which investment hankers moving into commercial banking and insurance on one side and into railroading and heavy industry on the other were able to mobilize enormous wealth and wield enormous economic, political and social power.  Popularly known as 'Society,' or the '400' they lived a life of dazzling splendor. Sailing the ocean in peat private yachts or traveling on land by private trains, they moved in a ceremonious round between their spectacular estates and town houses in Palm Beach, Long Island, the Berkshires, Newport,   and Bar Harbor, assembling from their fortress-like New York residences to attend the Metropolitan Opera under the critical eye of Mrs. Astor; or gathering for business meetings of the highest strategic level in the awesome presence of J. P. Morgan himself.

"The structure of financial controls created by the tycoons of 'Big Banking' and 'Big Business' in the period 1880-1933 was of extraordinary complexity, one business fief being built on another, both being allied with semi-independent associates, the whole rearing upward into two pinnacles of economic and financial power, of which one, centered in New York, was headed by J. P. Morgan and Company, and the other, in Ohio, was headed by the Rockefeller family. When these two cooperated, as they generally did, they could influence the economic life of the country to a large degree and could almost control its political life, at least on the Federal level." (pp.71-72)

MONOPOLISTIC FINANCIAL STRUCTURE OF THE AMERICAN DYNASTIES:

"In the United States the number of billion-dollar corporations rose from one in 1909 (United States Steel, controlled by Morgan) to fifteen in 1930.  The share of all corporation assets held by the 200 largest corporations rose from 32 percent in 1909 to 49 percent in 1930 and reached 57 percent in 1939. By 1930 these 200 largest corporations held 49.2 percent of the assets of all 40,000 corporations in the country ($81 billion out of $165 billion).  . . . In fact, in 1930, one corporation (American Telephone and Telegraph.  controlled by Morgan) had greater assets than the total wealth in twenty-one states of the Union.

"The influence of these business leaders was so great that the Morgan and Rockefeller groups acting together, or even Morgan acting alone, could have wrecked the economic system of the country. . . (p. 72)

AMERICAN BANKING FAMILIES DECIDE TO ORGANIZE A FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

By the beginning of the Twentieth Century, the American economy had become so dynamic that the major banking dynasties found it increasingly difficult to maintain a tight control. Even the control they had SO carefully kept secret was being challenged as a major political issue in national elections.

As we have previously noted, the dynastic "banker families" in England had established their monopoly control over finance by setting up the Bank of England as a privately controlled institution which had the appearance of an official government institution. Similar centers of financial control had been set up in France, Germany, Italy and Switzerland. Many of these European banking families had intermarried or bought their way into the American banking dynasties so it was inevitable that eventually the same device for centralized control would be set up in the United States as that which had worked so well in various European countries.

The formula called for a scheme which would look like the government was taking over when in reality, the control would be solidified in the same secret group which had always held it. As Dr. Gabriel Kolko pointed out:  "Ironically, contrary to the consensus of historians, it was not the existence of monopoly that caused the federal government to intervene in the economy, but the lack of it. . . . In the long run, key business leaders realized they had no vested interest in a chaotic uncontrolled industry and economy in which not only their profits hut their very existence might be challenged." (The Triumph of Conservatism, Quadrangle Books, Chicago, 1967, p. 4-6)

WHO WERE THESE 'KEY BUSINESS LEADERS'?

Dr. Quigley has identified them in Tragedy and Hope, and Serano S. Pratt supports the Quigley position, in his book entitled, The Work of Wall Street:

"When we speak in Wall Street of the 'private bankers,' we refer to a handful of great banking houses whose operations are on an international scale and which in the United States represent the same power that the Rothschilds have so long possessed in Europe. These houses may, like J. P. Morgan & Co., and Brown Bros. & Co., be closely allied by partnership ties to other powerful firms in other cities: and represent here the great firms and institutions of Europe,just as August Belmont & Co. have long represented the Rothschilds." (Appleton & Company, New York, 1916, p.340)

By the turn of the century, the Rockefellers had also joined the dynastic banking families. John D. Rockefeller had purchased the Chase Bank and his brother William bought the National City Bank of New York. The Rockefeller Chase Bank was later merged with the Warburg's Manhattan Bank to form Chase-Manhattan, the most powerful financial combine in the world today.

The scheme to set up a privately-controlled Federal Reserve System was supported by all of these dynastic banking families.

THE FIRST ATTEMPT FAILS

To appreciate some of Dr. Quigley's comments in Tragedy and Hope we should summarize the origin and history of the Federal Reserve System.

Stephen Birmingham (in his book, Our Crowd. Dell Publishing Co.. New York, 1967, p. 400) says the person who played the most significant part in getting the Federal Reserve adopted was Paul Warburg. He had come to the United States with his brother, Felix Warburg, from Germany in 1902. They left their brother Max in Frankfurt to run the family bank. In due time Paul married Nina Loeb of Kuhn, Loeb and Company, while Felix married Jacob Schiff's daughter, Frieda Schiff. Both brothers became Kuhn-Loeb partners and Paul was awarded a yearly salary of $500,000 to go up and down the country preparing the climate for a central banking system in the United States.

Working with Warburg was J. P. Morgan's leading Washington representative, Senator Nelson Aldrich whose daughter Abby was married to John D. Rockefeller, Jr. (Nelson Rockefeller, governor of New York, is named after his maternal grandfather.)  Senator Aldrich and Paul Warburg set up an extremely secretive meeting with representatives of the leading banking dynasties to prepare the first draft for the Federal Reserve System. They met on Jekyl Island, Georgia.

Rockefeller's agent, Frank Vanderlip admitted many years later:

"Despite my views about the value to society of greater publicity [or the affairs of corporations, there was an occasion, near the close of 1910, when I was as secretive- indeed as furtive- as any conspirator.

I do not feel it is any exaggeration to speak of our secret expedition to Jekyl Island as the occasion of the actual conception of what eventually became the Federal Reserve System." (Frank Vanderlip, "Farm Boy to Financier," Saturday Evening Post, February 9, 1935, p.25)  The secret meeting on Jekyl Island included Henry P. Davison of J. P. Morgan & Company; Frank A. Vanderlip. President of the Rockefeller-owned National City Bank; A. Piatt Andrew, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury; Benjamin Strong of Morgan's Bankers Trust Company, and, of course, Paul Warburg.

This was right at the time when the idea of creating a Federal central bank "free of Wall Street or any monopolistic interest'' was being promoted by the Banking Law Journal and a number of national political personalities.  Therefore, the object of the conference on Jekyl Island was to set up a central bank which had the appearance of meeting this demand while actually thwarting it. Paul Warburg went to the conference with a plan copied after the private central banks in England and Europe. Professor Kolko writes:  "The plan which emerged from the conference was very much like Warburg's in principle, and Warburg claimed authorship for it even though Vanderlip actually drafted the final plan." (Op. Cit., p. 1 84)

But the plan failed. It was introduced into the Senate as the Aldrich Bill. The name of Aldrich was so closely linked to Morgan and Wall Street, and the resentment against these influences was so strong. that the bill was readily defeated. The group of master planners backed away to devise a new tactic.

THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM FINALLY BECOMES A REALITY

It was decided that the Republican Party was too closely connected with Wall Street and the only hope of getting a central bank adopted would be to get the Democrats in power and have a new bill introduced which would be promoted into popular acceptance by claiming that it was a measure designed to strip Wall Street of its power. The Wall Street cadre thereupon set forth to achieve this in the presidential election of 1912.

At first this looked virtually impossible, because President William Howard Taft (a Republican who had opposed the Aldrich Bill) was very popular and seemed a sure-fire bet for re-election. The picture changed when the former President Teddy Roosevelt (also a Republican but opposed to Taft) decided to run on the Progressive Party ticket against Taft. The Democrats then nominated Woodrow Wilson, making it a three-way race. Suddenly the central bank promoters saw the opportunity they needed.

Two Morgan agents, Frank Munsey and George Perkins moved in behind Teddy Roosevelt with money and manpower from Wall Street. As Ferdinand Lundberg states:

"As soon as Roosevelt signified that he would again challenge Taft, the President's defeat was inevitable. Throughout the three-cornered fight Roosevelt had Munsey and Perkins constantly at his heels, supplying money, going over his speeches, bringing people from Wall Street in to help, and, in general, carrying the entire burden of the campaign against Taft. .

"Perkins and J. P. Morgan and Company were the substance of the Progressive Party; everything else was trimming. . . . In short, most of Roosevelt's campaign fund was supplied by the two Morgan hatchet men who were seeking Taft's scalp." (America's 60 Families, the Vanguard Press, New York. 1938, pp. 110-112)

Meanwhile, Wall Street was ALSO backing Wilson. Clear back in 1906, George Harvey, president of the Morgan-controlled Harper's Weekly, had suggested Wilson for President.

Then the Rockefellers took up the fund-raising for Wilson together with other Wall Street backers of the Democratic Party. Ferdinand Lundberg says:

"The financial genius behind Woodrow Wilson was Cleveland H. Dodge of the [Rockefeller] National City Bank. ... Sitting with Dodge as co-directors of the National City Bank at the time were the younger Rockefeller, J. Ogden Armour, and James Stillman. In short, except for George I. Baker, everyone whom the Pujo Committee (in Congress) had termed rulers of the 'Money 'Trust ' was in this bank." (Op. Cit., pp. 109-113)

Additional supporters of Wilson who belonged to the dynastic banking families included Jacob Schiff, Bernard Baruch, Henry Morgenthau, Thomas Fortune Ryan, and the publisher of the New York Times, Adolph Ochs. (Kolko, Op. Cit., pp. 205 and 211)

Even Morgan's men who managed Teddy Roosevelt's campaign had money behind Wilson. The idea was to give Roosevelt enough support to divide Taft's Republican vote and give Wilson enough support to beat them both. This strategy worked, and Wilson was elected.

Even before the election, however, the promoters of the central bank set up a front organization to create a public climate, which would be favorable to the Federal Reserve idea. Professor Kolko says: "During the spring of 1911 the backers of the plan moved to create the 'National Citizens League for the Promotion of a Sound Banking System' to accomplish the task. Warburg and the other New York bankers behind the Aldrich plan arranged to have the league centered in Chicago. . . ." (Op. Cit.. p. 186)

Because of the Rockefeller influence over the University of Chicago, this new front organization was headed by J. Lawrence Laughlin of that institution with his former student and close confidante, H. Parker Willis writing the necessary legislation. It was simply the Aldrich Bill in a new dress.

To see that the newly elected President would have the right advisors, Wilson's financial backers surrounded him with their own agents. The most important of these was "Colonel" Edward Mandell House, the British-educated son of  a financier who represented certain British financial interests in the Southern States. House gradually emerged as the virtual president during the Wilson administration. Two of his pet projects, the central bank and the graduated income tax, were both successfully adopted through the amazing capacity of house to pull wires behind the scenes. It is now known that House was the author of the book, Philip Dru: Administrator, which described how Dru worked to establish "Socialism as dreamed by Karl Marx."

Professor Charles Seymour who edited The Intimate Papers of' (Colonel House, assures us that House was the "unseen guardian angel" of the Federal Reserve Act. There was constant contact between House and Paul Warburg. The biographer for House assures us further that "The Schiffs, the Warburgs, the Kahns, the Rockefellers, and the Morgans had faith in House.  To prevent opponents of Wall Street from identifying the Federal Reserve Act with the international bankers, a smoke-screen of opposition was fulminated.  In his autobiography, William McAdoo, Wilson's Secretary of the Treasury and son-in-law, wrote:

"Bankers fought the Federal Reserve legislation-and every provision of the Federal Reserve Act with the tireless energy of men fighting a forest fire.  They said it was populistic, socialistic, half-baked, destructive, infantile, badly conceived and unworkable." (p.213)

However, McAdoo talked with these heated opponents of President Wilson's Federal Reserve project and decided there might be something phoney about the smoke-screen of opposition.  "These interviews with bankers led me to an interesting conclusion.  I perceived gradually, through all the haze and smoke of controversy, that the banking world was not really as much opposed to the bill as it pretended to be. . . ." (p. 225)

Thus the stage was set. It was December 22, 1913, that the Federal Reserve Act passed the I louse of Representatives by a vote of 298 to 60 and the Senate passed it by a majority of 43 to 25.

BUT WHO CONTROLS THE FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM?

The operation of the Federal Reserve System is one of the most interesting and mysterious combines in the country. Since it was founded in 1913 it has successfully resisted every attempt to conduct an audit of its affairs. The system consists of 12 "National Banks" but the only one of any significance is the one in New York. The New York bank has always been managed by someone completely congenial to the interests of the international bankers. It is important to realize that the Federal Reserve System is not a bona fide Government agency.

Technically the stock is owned by the 12 National Banks which receive a dividend of six percent each year. Any profits from the System are supposed to be turned over to the U. S. Treasury. In fact, the President appoints the seven members of the Federal Reserve Board for fourteen-year terms, but in spite of all this window dressing the Federal Reserve Board is completely independent in its decisions. President Johnson admitted this when the Federal Reserve defied him during his administration and when David Kennedy, the Nixon Secretary of the treasury, was asked about the credit-tightening policies of the Federal Reserve, he replied: "It's not my job to approve or disapprove. It is the action of the Federal Reserve." (U S. News and World Report, May 5, 1969)

The mammoth and secret operations of the Federal Reserve are therefore proceeding along the lines which Dr. Quigley says the international bankers were determined to achieve. They intended to use the financial power of Britain and the United States to force all the major countries to operate "through central banks free from all political control, with all questions of international finance to be settled by agreements by such central banks without interference from governments." (Quigley, p. 326)

The motivation for such a scheme can be better appreciated when it is realized that loaning money to governments can be a very lucrative business, especially loans to the United States Government. The U. S. presently owes more money (most of it to the international banking institutions) than all the money owed by the rest of the nations in the world combined. The U. S. national debt is presently 372 billion dollars. EVERY YEAR American taxpayers are required to contribute 20 billion dollars to pay the interest on this indebtedness. It is the third largest item in the Federal budget. It can be readily seen why those who are appointed to the key positions in the L'. S. Federal Reserve System (where loans are negotiated and interest rates fixed occupy possibly the most critically influential spot in the entire world.  Dr. Quigley says the true dimensions of the whole scheme are better appreciated when it is realized that the far-reaching aim of the dynastic bankers was:

"...nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the POLITICAL SYSTEM of each country and the ECONOMY of the world as a whole. This system was to he controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences.  The apex of the system was to be the Bank for International Settlements in Basle, Switzerland, a private bank owned and controlled by the world's central banks which were themselves private corporations. Each central bank, in the hands of men like Montague Norman of the Bank of England, Benjamin Strong of the New York Federal Reserve Bank, Charles Rist of the Bank of France, and Hjalmer Schacht of the Reichs bank, sought to dominate its government by its ability to control Treasury loans, to manipulate foreign exchanges, to influence the level of economic activity in the country, and to influence cooperative politicians by subsequent economic rewards in the business world." (p. 324, emphasis added)

That the international bankers have been in complete control of the U. S. Federal Reserve System from its inception is readily demonstrated. Dr. Quigley points out that the first governor of' the Federal Reserve Bank of New York was Benjamin Strong. who became a close colleague of Montague Norman of the Bank of' England.

"Strong owed his career to the favor of the Morgan Bank, especially of' Henry P. Davison, who made him secretary of the Bankers Trust Company of New York (in succession to Thomas W. Lamont) in 1904, used him as Morgan's agent in the banking rearrangements following the crash of 1907, and made him vice-president of the Bankers Trust (still in succession to Lamont) in 1909.  He became governor of the Federal Reserve Bank of' New York as the joint nominee of Morgan and of Kuhn, Loeb and Company in 1914. Two years later, Strong met Norman for the first time, and they at once made an agreement to work in cooperation for the financial practices they both revered." (p. 326)

The original Federal Reserve Board was largely hand-picked by "Colonel" House and included Paul Warburg. Subsequent appointments have always been completely congenial to the interests of Wall Street and the international bankers. Ferdinand Lundberg confirms Quigley's evaluations:

"In practice the Federal Reserve Bank of New York became the fountainhead of the system of twelve regional banks, for New York was the money market of the nation.  The other eleven banks were so many expensive mausoleums erected to salve the local pride and quell the Jacksonian fears of the Hinterland.  Benjamin Strong . . . president of the Bankers Trust Company [Morgan], was selected as the first Governor of the New York Reserve Bank. An adept in high finance, Strong for many years manipulated the country's monetary system at the discretion of directors representing the leading New York banks. Under Strong the Reserve System. unsuspected by the nation, was brought into interlocking relations with the Bank of England and the Bank of France. . . ." (Op. Cit., p. 1 22)

So now we have run full circle. Dr. Carroll Quigley was anxious to have us know who has been running the world. He makes it clear that in spite of' their power, these secret centers of control are seldom in dictatorial positions where they can actually take direct, decisive political action; but their financial stranglehold on the world allows them to INFLUENCE and MANIPULATE the affairs of various nations to an amazing degree and to suit their own purposes. Therefore, whatever the purposes and goals of this group happen to be, they are of monumental importance to the rest of the world.

WHAT ARE THE GOALS OF THE WORLD'S SECRET POWER MANIPULATORS?

Having established how powerful the money-managers of the world have now become, Dr. Quigley's second purpose appears to have been his desire to let us know what the political philosophy of these world giants has turned out to be. This is undoubtedly the most shocking aspect of his book.  It is all the more disturbing because the facts in this part of his book fit perfectly with the world of reality in which we find ourselves. Many things which have seemed inconsistent and incongruous suddenly loom up with startling clarity as Dr. Quigley provides an insider's analysis of what has been happening.

In the beginning of this presentation I pointed out, some of the disturbing questions which are likely to occur to anyone who has been trying to understand the significance of the amazing trends of current history. There is a growing volume of evidence that the highest centers of political and economic power have been forcing the entire human race toward a global, socialist, dictatorial-oriented society. And what has been most baffling about it has been the fact that this drift toward dictatorship with its inevitable obliteration of a thousand years of struggle toward human freedom, is being plotted, promoted and implemented by the leaders of free nations and the super-rich of those nations whose positions of affluence would seem to make them the foremost beneficiaries of the free-enterprise, property-oriented, open society in which so much progress has been made.  Certainly they, above all men, should know that in order for this system to survive, freedom of action and the integrity of property rights must be preserved. Then why are the super-capitalists trying to destroy them?

Dr. Quigley provides an answer to this question but it is so startling that at first it seems virtually inconceivable. It becomes rational only as his scattered references to it are collected and digested point by point. In a nutshell, Dr. Quigley has undertaken to expose what every insider like himself has known all along -that the world hierarchy of the dynastic super-rich is out to take over the entire planet, doing it with Socialistic legislation where possible, but having no reluctance to use Communist revolution where necessary.

- - - Dr. Quigley is sometimes reluctant to admit the full ramifications of his ugly thesis when the shocking and often revolting implications of it spill out on the blood-stained pages of recent history. This is why we find him proving his thesis up to a point and then frantically endeavoring to cover up the consequences of it by denying the validity of what Congressional Committees have exposed through their investigations. This black thread of strange contradiction runs through several important sections of Dr. Quigley's book, but should offer no difficulty to the reader once he understands what is happening.

(ends excerpts from "The Naked Capitalist", by W. Cleon Skousen)
______________________
This E-letter will shortly be posted at
http://www.whatmatters.nu/wmemails/wmemails21.html#WM-105

** The What Matters Programme is an initiative by Boudewijn Wegerif, to spread information about what is happening in the world today, and how things could be, given a schooling at all levels to free the self and the world from debt/guilt oppression and money madness - a schooling for Satyagraha, truth and love force. The trustees of the What Matters Programme are the collegiate of Folkhögskola Vårdinge By, an adult education residential college south of Stockholm.

You can read WHAT MATTERS E-letters 1-103 at the WHAT MATTERS web site -
http://www.whatmatters.nu/wmemails/wmemailsindex.html

To subscribe or unsubscribe to the WHAT MATTERS E-letters:
http://www.whatmatters.nu/contacts.html or write direct to me at
wegerif@connectit.co.za

(ends copy of the Wegerif newsletter)

Quigley, Carroll. The Anglo-American Establishment. New York: Books in Focus, 1981. 354 pages.

Carroll Quigley (1910-1977) taught history at Georgetown's School of Foreign Service since 1941. This book was written in 1949 and covers the Rhodes-Milner Round Table Groups, a secret Oxford-related cabal that had tremendous influence in British foreign policy from the time that Cecil Rhodes began funding it at the turn of the century. In 1919 the Council on Foreign Relations became the American branch of the Round Table. Quigley is better known for "Tragedy and Hope" (1966), which reaffirms his earlier suspicions (he says he had access to the Round Table's secret archives), but lacks the rich detail of the earlier work. Quigley basically agreed with the goals of these high-minded internationalists, but disliked their inherited wealth and power, their methods, and particularly their secrecy.

Quigley became a darling of the anti-internationalist Right in the U.S., from Cleon Skousen (The Naked Capitalist, 1970) through Pat Robertson (The New World Order, 1991). Then to top it off, Bill Clinton mentioned Quigley as his mentor in his nomination acceptance speech on July 16, 1992. Clinton studied under Quigley at Georgetown in the middle 1960s, and then became a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford. Now he's a member of CFR, Trilateral Commission, and Bilderberg, and many of his appointees are from the same Rhodes-CFR-Trilateral circles. We don't know what this means, if anything.
ISBN 0-916728-50-1

This book was recently listed at addall.com

from:  http://www.pir.org/sources/TA.html

http://www.jimpivonka.com/pages

Write!