The Rockefeller World, Council on Foreign Relations & the Trilateral Commission

‘The Ultimate Networking & Socializing institution among the American elite’

By Andrew Gavin Marshall

The following is a sneak peak from a chapter in Andrew Gavin Marshall’s upcoming book funded through The People’s Book Project.

It is quite apparent in the history of America from the late 19th century and into the 20th century, that the Rockefeller family has wielded massive influence in shaping the socio-political economic landscape of society. However, up until the first half of the 20th century came to a close, there were several other large dominant families with whom the Rockefellers shared power and purpose, notably among them, the Morgans. As the century progressed, their interests aligned further still, and following World War II, the Rockefellers became the dominant group in America, and arguably, the world. Of course, there was the well-established business links between the major families emerging out of the American Industrial Revolution going into the 20th century, followed with the establishment of the major foundations designed to engage in social engineering. It was with the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) that the changing dynamics of the Morgan-Rockefeller clan became most apparent.

As discussed earlier in this book, the Council on Foreign Relations is the ultimate networking and socializing institution among the American elite. The influence of the CFR is unparalleled among other think tanks. One study revealed that between 1945 and 1972, roughly 45% of the top foreign policy officials who served in the United States government were also members of the Council, leading one prominent member to once state that membership in the Council is essentially a “rite of passage” for being a member of the foreign policy establishment. One Council member, Theodore White, explained that the Council’s “roster of members has for a generation, under Republican and Democratic administrations alike, been the chief recruiting ground for Cabinet-level officials in Washington.”[1]

The CIA, as previously examined, is also no stranger to this network, since more often than not in the first several decades of the existence of the Agency, its leaders were drawn from Council membership, such as Allen Dulles, John A. McCone, Richard Helms, William Colby, and George H.W. Bush. As some researchers have examined: [Read more...]

Part IV. POGO: Mastering the Art of Lap-Dancing for Mega Sugar Daddies

Follow the Money …Even when it comes to NGO Mini Lap-Dogs

lapdogWe began our series with a snapshot of Mega Corporate Foundations extending their tentacles to organizations and entities involved in government watchdog practices and grassroots activism. We summarized the classic story of the transformation from Government Watchdogs to Mega-Corporate Lapdogs. We presented to you the profile of “An Ideal Watch-Dog Lap-Dog” from the perspective of a well-known Mega Corporate Foundation-Carnegie: A Government Watch-Dog Lap-Dog that is loved & cherished by the entire government. Now it is time to take a look at the profile of a mini watch-dog lap-dog: the sugar daddies pouring large sums into their panties, how much money they get, who conducts and choreographs the lap-dance shows internally, and what they show and market as ‘performance’ to the public .

Project on Government Oversight (POGO)

Like many grassroots and government watchdog entities out there POGO started small and passionate with noble intentions and objectives: [Read more...]

Part III. A Watch-Dog for All Seasons

Carnegie Corporation: We Love POGO, So Does the Entire US Government!

JokerIn the spring of 2010 the Carnegie Corporation issued a glowing report on their favorite government watchdog Project on Government Oversight (POGO). The report was meant to justify and showcase the large grants given to POGO by the corporation over the last few years. In 2008 and 2009 alone the corporation had given over $700,000 to this pet-project (lap-dog aka watch-dog). After reading the report one can’t help but wonder at the miscalculation that went with this report’s intention. What was intended to be a glowing report ends up being a major indicator as to the real nature of this corporate-foundation funded government watch-dog turned lap-dog. Allow me to explain further:

Real government watchdogs, if they are doing what they are supposed to be doing, if they are engaged in what they say they are engaged in, become the object of the government’s wrath and hatred. There is no way around this. No way. The executive branch agencies would be up in arms against them: digging their graves as ferocious and as fast as they can; overtly and covertly. And this includes the office of the United States President; the White House.

The legislative branch would be extremely wary of real government watchdogs. After all, real separation of powers ceased to exist a long time ago. Not only that; the last thing the US Congress wants is the existence of whistleblowers in their own backyard. Considering the level of corruption in Congress (think foreign lobby influence; think various methods of going around campaign finance laws; think campaign donors and conflicts of interest when it comes to the congressional decision and legislation making process) how many whistleblowers have we had coming out of congressional offices with reports of corruption, bribery, and other related misdeeds? I believe I have made the case here; suffice to say, Congress has never liked whistleblowers or genuine watchdog groups, evident by their resistance to providing real protection for whistleblowers, holding real hearings on legit whistleblower cases, and holding the executive branch accountable based on proven reports provided to them by whistleblowers.

I’ll go even further: The corporate mainstream media has never been very kind to government whistleblowers, and they usually perceive a genuine watchdog group as a real threat exposing their own cover-up or biased-filled reporting tainted by their masters in corporate and government. I mean, come on, what happens if a genuine watchdog group issues a report exposing illegal wiretapping by the government, when a giant media group, per order of their bosses, chooses to bury and sit on that same revelation? You see what I mean? The reason for the dislike goes beyond a ‘competitive’ relationship; way beyond it.

Now what should be the first thing, first inference, first conclusion, to come to mind (a rational mind that is) when one comes across a self-proclaimed tax-exempt mega corporation-funded watch-dog that happens to be adored by mega corporations, intensely liked by the Congress, truly liked by the executive branch including the White House, and very much admired and complemented by the tainted corporate media? Do you see something extremely disturbing yet very revealing with this picture? Then, with that in mind, let’s read the glowing report issued by the mega corporation, Carnegie Foundation, on their favorite watch-dog, POGO: [Read more...]

Sunday Noteworthy Articles & Reports

US Mega Corporations & Bilderberg, The Strange Silencing of Liberal America, The Eight Outrageous Costs of the War on Terror & More!

I have a few note-worthy articles and reports for this Sunday.

bilderbergSince we have been covering Mega Corporate-Foundations I am going to begin with a well-researched and nicely-written report on Bilderberg and US Corporations by Gavin Marshall at Center for Research on Globalization:

Bilderberg 2011: The Rockefeller World Order and the "High Priests of Globalization" 
By Andrew Gavin Marshall, Global Research.ca

The fact that the major American foundations – Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford – were so pivotal in the origins of the Bilderberg Group is not a mere coincidence. The foundations have, since their founding at the beginning of the 20th century, been the central institutions in constructing consensus among elites, and creating consent to power. They are, in short, the engines of social engineering: both for elite circles specifically, and society as a whole, more generally. As Professor of Education Robert F. Arnove wrote in his book Philanthropy and Cultural Imperialism:

Foundations like Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Ford have a corrosive influence on a democratic society; they represent relatively unregulated and unaccountable concentrations of power and wealth which buy talent, promote causes, and, in effect, establish an agenda of what merits society’s attention. They serve as “cooling-out” agencies, delaying and preventing more radical, structural change. They help maintain an economic and political order, international in scope, which benefits the ruling-class interests of philanthropists and philanthropoids – a system which... has worked against the interests of minorities, the working class, and Third World peoples.[8]

These foundations had been central in promoting the ideology of ‘globalism’ that laid the groundwork for organizations such as the Council on Foreign Relations and the Bilderberg Group to exist. The Rockefeller Foundation, in particular, supported several organizations that promoted a ‘liberal internationalist’ philosophy, the aim of which:

was to support a foreign policy within a new world order that was to feature the United States as the leading power – a programme defined by the Rockefeller Foundation as ‘disinterested’, ‘objective’ and even ‘non-political’... The construction of a new internationalist consensus required the conscious, targeted funding of individuals and organizations who questioned and undermined the supporters of the ‘old order’ while simultaneously promoting the ‘new’.[9]

The major foundations funded and created not only policy-oriented institutes such as think tanks, but they were also pivotal in the organization and construction of universities and education itself, in particular, the study of ‘international relations.’[10] The influence of foundations over education and universities and thus, ‘knowledge’ itself, is unparalleled.

You can read the entire article here.

The New York Times published an appalling report on our war in Afghanistan. Before you read the article recall the following: the Afghanistan government happens to be our puppet government installed by us; the Taliban has no military headquarters like the Pentagon, no tanks, warplanes, no nuclear or modern bombs, no organized military…Think of caves, pitchforks or maybe a few old and outdated Kalashnikovs; think a third world country with a GDP of less than $15 billion. So we’ve been bombing the hell out of this third world country-their mud houses and caves, with our own government in charge there, and we keep bombing. We keep escalating our bombing. Those bomb inventories need to be reduced so that the megas can produce and sell more bombs (to our government in return for billions of our tax dollars). For every bomb dropped, for every piece of equipment deployed, a handful of megas make millions of dollars. OK? [Read more...]