Lines of Credit: Ropes of Bondage
by Robert Henry Goldsborough
ABOUT the author:
ROBERT HENRY GOLDSBOROUGH became alerted to the dangers of communism when in 1955, after his cum laude graduation from college, he took an intensive course on the strategy and tactics of communism from Louis Budenz. Budenz had been a U.S. Communist Party boss and editor of its official paper until he renounced communism and became a Christian.
Later, as a staff investigator for the House Committee on Un-American Activities, Mr. Goldsborough had the rare opportunity to study the habits and habitats, to investigate the strategy and tactics, and to see first-hand that destructive breed – the communist – in action. As a congressional investigator, one of his tasks was to prepare committee hearings, thus witnessing events which are rarely, if ever, reported by the media.
Mr. Goldsborough resigned from the House Committee to become assistant editor of the highly respected intelligence report, INFORM. With agents in both hemispheres, INFORM gathered sensitive data on international revolutionary activity which often went undetected by government intelligence agencies.
At the request of Richard Arens, who as chief counsel for the Joint House-Senate Committee on Immigration, had drafted the McCarran-Walter Act, Mr. Goldsborough organized the American Committee on Immigration Policies to support and promote the security provisions of the McCarran-Walter Act.
Although working in support of the law-of-the-land, Mr. Goldsborough was subjected to undercover pressures from the highest levels of the Johnson administration to stop the work.
In 1975, Mr. Goldsborough developed a close personal friendship with Norman Dodd, former research director of the special congressional committee ordered to investigate tax-exempt funding of communism and socialism. He regularly visited Mr. Dodd at his home, recording Dodd’s experiences during the investigations of the Rockefeller, Ford, and Carnegie foundations.
Dodd’s expertise was of particular interest, because in 1964, Mr. Goldsborough had written the best seller – MORE DEADLY THAN THE BOMB! – which exposed foundation funding of communist and socialist activities.
For over 30 years, the author has lectured nationally to over 1,000 audiences – in person and over radio and TV. His speeches expose the dangers of illegal immigration, the strategy and tactics and goals of communism, the real meaning of détente, Fabian socialism and the power of such shadowy groups as the Council on Foreign Relations (the CFR).
In 1977, Mr. Goldsborough co-founded the editorial service and news letter WASHINGTON DATELINE. During the 12 years of continuous publication, he has written over 500 columns on world affairs, and vital current events. His clear, concise and logical analysis of issues has been widely praised by knowledgeable persons such as Senator Jesse Helms who wrote, “No column available to conservatives is more succinct, accurate and timely than WASHINGTON DATELINE,” and President Ronald Reagan* who wrote, “Thanks to you, we have begun our historic journey toward national renewal.”
Mr. Goldsborough and his wife live in Baltimore, Maryland where they were both born and raised. Married for over 27 years, they have five children and one grandchild.
A recent (2012) interview with Mr. Goldsborough can be found here: Reflections on Border and Internal Security Battles – An exclusive interview with Robert H. Goldsborough By Peter Gemma for The Social Contract Press, Volume 22, Number 2 (Winter 2011-2012).
*P.S.: Reagan turned out to be a game-player. He actually signed up the U.S.A. to joint educational plans with the Soviet Union; and is credited by the North American Forum on Integration (NAFI) — launched in 2003 and based in Montreal — with issuing the first open invitation to Canada to join the USA in a (Communist) regional union. KM/HCC
_ _ _
Table Of Contents:
Chapter One: Communism: An Anti-Christian Conspiracy
- Winston Churchill identifies the conspiracy
- Adam Weishaupt and the Bavarian Illuminati
- Rousseau, Voltaire and anti-Christian doctrine
- Whittaker Chambers reveals age of conspiracy
Chapter Two: The French Revolution Of 1789
- Conspiracy and created grievances
- Warning about Jacobins in America
- Yale President Timothy Dwight in 1798 warns of Illuminati-inspired chaos and terror
- Grand Orient Lodge member warns of fanatical universal revolution
- Influence of Feuerbach and Hegel on Marx
Chapter Three: The Spectre That Still Haunts Europe
- Marx, Engels, and the Communist Manifesto
- Marx’s hatred of God and man
- Hallmark of all communists
- Marx a sick and disturbed man
- Marx plans for many revolutions
- The graduated income tax a Marxist must
Chapter Four: Bankers And Boxcars
- Lenin and Trotsky and the plot to destroy Christian civilization
- Kuhn-Loeb bankers finance communist revolution
- Why a second revolution in Russia in 1917
- The ultimate motives of communists and their financiers
- Lenin and the demonic dictatorship
Chapter Five: Compulsion For Communism
- Armand Hammer – his Odessa roots
- Julius Hammer and his compulsion for communism
- Lenin meets Hammer
- Julius Hammer chairs extremist Socialist Party
- Sen. Metzenbaum opposes a Christian America
- Patrick Buchanan and the war for the soul
Chapter Six: World Communism & The Money Connection
- American J. H. Rubin helps establish Soviet Government
- Otto Kahn, Jacob Schiff, Felix Warburg, financiers of communist revolution
- Percy Rockefeller and the communist revolution
- League for Industrial Democracy and Otto Kahn
- Mrs. Otto Kahn receives red carpet in Moscow
- Woodrow Wilson’s assist to Leon Trotsky
- A director of the New York Federal Reserve Bank finances The Bolsheviks
- David Rockefeller, the Chase Manhattan Bank and the Bolsheviks
- Amtorg and USTEC
Chapter Seven: Globalist Intrigues Of The Elitist Council On Foreign Relations
- Senator Fulbright supports a ruling “Elite”
- Walter Lippman on the need to manipulate pubic opinion
- Colonel E M. House, the League of Nations and the origins of the Council on Foreign Relations
- Carnegie Endowment, Rockefeller Foundation & CFR make US foreign policy
- Otto Kahn, Paul Warburg, Allen Dulles, CFR directors
- Rockefeller family and foundations fund CFR
- CFR begins to manipulate U.S. State Dept 1939
- Alger Hiss and Wilson’s son-in-law
- FDR told of Hiss’s activities as a Soviet spy
- First Secretary General of U.N. – a Soviet agent
- U.N. charter favors Soviet Union
- U.N. and the Rockefellers
- Hiss trial reveals powerful friends
- Some past and present cabinet officials with CFR credentials
Chapter Eight: Transmission Belts For Communist Propaganda
- Congressional committee investigates foundation funding of communism
- Moscow uses some U.S. foundations as transmission-belts for communist line
- Communists use music to influence youth
- Rockefeller money funds communists
Chapter Nine: A Diabolical Conspiracy
- Alger Hiss and the Carnegie Endowment
- Evidence of a diabolical conspiracy
- Ford Foundation money used against Congress
- Capitalist money used to destroy capitalism
Chapter Ten: Foundation-Funded Non-Bloody Revolution
- Trustees of a “peace” foundation want war
- Foundation plans to alter American ethos
- Foundation trustees want to control educational curricula
- Non-bloody U.S. Revolution: 1933-36
- Consequences of Wilson-House failed mission
- FDR, Alger Hiss, and significance of U.N.
Chapter Eleven: An Admission Of Conspiracy And A Death Threat For Silence
- Foundation president admits conspiracy
- Plans to merge U.S. and USSR
- White House and OSS involvement
- The most powerful organization in America
- The death threat
- Sam Rayburn uses Wayne Hays in cover-up
Chapter Twelve: Lines Of Credit: Ropes Of Bondage
- Lenin’s NEP foreshadows Gorbachev’s perestroika
- Lenin’s NEP sets stage for Stalin’s mass murders
- U.S. companies’ joint-ventures with Soviets
- U.S.-USSR Trade and Economic Council (USTEC)
- USTEC’s Soviet members are KGB agents
- USTEC’s U.S. defense corporate members are Soviet espionage targets
- FBI refers to USTEC as suspected spy apparatus
- CIA data on Soviet forgeries
- Chase Manhattan chief source of funds for Soviet Amtorg
- Americans build Soviet war machine
– – –
Lines Of Credit: Ropes Of Bondage is about the financiers, their fellow conspirators and the plot to destroy Western Christian civilization. It was written for the concerned American – not for the skeptic.
In likelihood, the skeptic will, without ever having read it, dismiss this – with a roll of the eyes and wave of the hand while at the same time declaring it to be outrageous fiction – just another attempt to promote the “conspiracy theory of history.”
Quite honestly, I did not write Lines Of Credit: Ropes Of Bondage with a hope or intention of convincing those “doubting Thomases” who, unlike the Apostle Thomas who finally believed, will continue to deny the existence of the conspiracy in spite of overwhelming and conclusive evidence to the contrary. Actually, these skeptics are important to the conspirators; they are the “useful idiots” so cherished by Lenin.
Primarily, this work was written for anyone who suspects that there is much more to modern European and American history than can be learned from the standard and approved history textbooks. This work is written for the Godfearing citizen who finds it difficult to believe that our country fought two world wars and spilled the blood of our sons supposedly to make the world free for all mankind, when in actuality we made it possible for the two bloodiest empires in history to enslave over a fourth of the world’s people in godless communism.
In this work, I have tried to answer some obvious questions. why, who, where, what, when. Why is there a conspiracy? Who are some of the conspirators? Where does the funding come from? What is the motivation? When did it all begin? In such a brief work, I don’t pretend to present all of the answers or name all of the conspirators or their naive “useful idiots.’
The late Congressman Carroll Reece (R-TN) chaired a congressional committee which investigated the spending patterns of some major tax-exempt foundations and concluded that there was evidence of a “diabolical conspiracy” to enslave America. The assertion that this conspiracy is a plot to overthrow Western Christian civilization is borne out by the evidence.
This work is nothing more or less than a primer about the players, and payers in, the plot. Hopefully, the reader will be provided with an understanding of certain international events which otherwise would be inexplicable.
In this case, although the truth may or may not set us free, it can help us understand why we are gradually losing our freedoms and being eased into a one-world socialist federation/government where Christianity is considered a superstition for the under-educated.
During the darkest days of World War II, the very survival of Britain was at stake when Prime Minister Winston Churchill rallied the nation against an implacable foe. His famous “V” for victory signal was recognized around the world and became symbolic of a people unwilling to surrender to an evil oppressor. Twenty years earlier, Churchill had warned of an even greater threat; but his words went unheeded.
In a 1920 magazine article, Winston Churchill spoke of “this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstruction of society.” Tragically, for the entire human race in general and Western Christian civilization in particular, Churchill’s caveat was heard by too few, and understood by fewer still.
Churchill’s World War II ally, Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) either failed or refused to understand that a communist conspiracy threatened the West, including America; his chief foreign policy advisor for the crucial Yalta Summit with Joe Stalin had already been identified as a Soviet agent. When told by fellow Democrat Martin Dies that some of his most sensitive appointments were communists, FDR angrily retorted, “Several of the best friends I have are communists.”
The French writer George Sand once wrote that “universal revolution” was the goal of the conspirators, who had reached the “point of fanaticism.” Certainly Karl Marx’s fanaticism had reached the level of madness when he declared “I hate all the gods.”
If communism is anything, it is madness. It is a fatally flawed system which denies the existence of God, the dignity of man and the freedom of the marketplace. To the communist leader, the end always justifies the means, which was amply demonstrated by Deng Tsiao-ping in Peking’s Tiananmen Square on June 4, 1989, when over 2,500 peaceful demonstrators, many of whom were students asleep in tents, were systematically slaughtered. Some were machine-gunned; others were crushed by tanks. Some of the medical personnel tending the injured were shot in the back.
Deng’s mentor, Mao Tse-tung, believed and taught, as have all communist leaders, that “political power grows out of the barrel of a gun. So, the Tiananmen Square massacre, like the Gorbachev-sanctioned massacre of Georgians in April of ’89, should have surprised no one. Communists were acting predictably like communists.
What is surprising however, is that for almost a century, wealthy capitalists have financed the communist conspiracy both here and abroad. Historian George Knupffer’s suspicion that this alliance smelled “of treason and collusion between alleged opponents,” was subsequently confirmed when a U.S. Communist Party official bragged to his comrades, “We are using capitalist money to destroy capitalism.”
This treatise deals with the atheistic conspiracy and its strange appeal to Western capitalists, international bankers, and certain influential U.S. leaders who have made continuing efforts to substitute humanism for Christianity and a socialist economy for the free marketplace, thereby changing life in America “so as to make possible a merger with the Soviet Union.”
– – –
Communism: An Anti-Christian Conspiracy
IN 1920, as Lenin and his band of Bolsheviks were brutally solidifying their stranglehold on the Russian peasants, Winston Churchill wrote,
“From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxemburg (Germany) and Emma Goldman (USA), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstruction of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played… a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement, during the Nineteenth Century; and now, at last, this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”
(ILLUSTRATED SUNDAY HERALD, February 8, 1920.)
Many students of atheistic communism are under the impression that Marx started the movement about the time he wrote the Communist Manifesto in 1848, when actually, the fires of communist revolution had already been smoldering in Europe for at least seventy-five years. Significantly, Churchill charged that this subversive conspiracy “played a definitely recognizable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution.”
However, Churchill gives first place among communist revolutionaries not to Marx, but to “Spartacus-Weishaupt.”
Weishaupt, born in Germany in 1748, received his early training from the Jesuits and although inspired by their organizational ability, nevertheless developed an intense hatred for their religious order. “He turned with eagerness to the subversive teaching of the French philosophers [Rousseau and Voltaire] and the anti-Christian doctrines of the Manicheans,” wrote British historian Nesta Webster (WORLD REVOLUTION). Wieshaupt was greatly influenced by Voltaire who was described by J. Cretineau-Joly as “the most perfect incarnation of satan that the world has ever seen.”
In Ingoldstadt, on May 1, 1776, Adam Weishaupt adopted the alias “Spartacus” when he organized the Bavarian Illuminati, a secret revolutionary society which later was headquartered in Munich.
Weishaupt, like Rousseau, held that civilization was a mistake. And like Voltaire, he believed that man should return to raw nature. Love of God, love of country and love of family must give way to an intense hatred of Christ and a vague concept of love for a universal happy family always, of course, under the watchful eyes and forceful direction of the elitist Illuminati. Weishaupt predicted that mankind, in this natural state unhindered by Christianity, patriotism and love of one’s family, would reach “its highest perfection” and ultimately develop “the capacity for governing itself.”
Publicly, Marx made similar predictions that after a perfect state of atheistic communism was reached, government would wither away. However, in private, Weishaupt and his ideological descendants Marx and Lenin, expressed the belief that the average man was too stupid to govern himself and that a self-appointed inner-circle or Illuminati would secretly rule.
Until Bavarian police discovered Illumnist documents on the person of a dead courier, Weishaupt had operated secretly so as not to alert the authorities. His inner-circle adepts infiltrated and manipulated other European secret societies in order to avoid discovery, build power, influence minds and convert sympathizers. They took aliases like “Spartacus”; they used misleading language or doubletalk; they denied the existence of the Illuminati when questioned by governments; they lied when it served their purposes; and like modern-day communists, they used any means, no matter how brutal, immoral, or illegal, to achieve their ends: the absolute destruction of Christian civilization, and the creation of a BRAVE NEW WORLD in an atheistic new age where, in the name of humanism, illumined man would perfect and worship himself.
The late Whittaker Chambers after his long agonizing search for truth, finally realized that man’s ultimate happiness could be found only in Christianity, not in communism. He wrote that the humanistic-communist conspiracy ‘is not new. It is, in fact, man’s second oldest faith. Its promise was whispered in the first days of the Creation under the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil: ‘Ye shall be as Gods.’
_ _ _
The French Revolution Of 1789
FREQUENTLY, the French Revolution of 1789 is compared to the 1776 American war for independence. It has even been suggested that the French were inspired to action by the American example. Nothing could be further from reality: the God-fearing American colonialists wanted to free their land from foreign government; the French Revolution, on the other hand, was the conscious result of a godless conspiratorial plotting and of created grievances.
“To whatever agency we attribute it, however, the mechanism of the French Revolution distinguishes it from all previous revolutions… But in the French Revolution we see for the first time that plan in operation which has been carried on right up to the present moment – the systematic attempt to create grievances in order to exploit them,” wrote Nesta Webster (WORLD REVOLUTION).
Adam Weishaupt’s revolutionary and atheistic Illuminati had spread its tenacles throughout Europe after he and his secret society were banned in Bavaria. Weishaupt spent several years in Paris where the Illuminati, the Jacobins and members of Grand Orient Lodge, inspired by the writings of Rousseau and Voltaire, plotted the French Revolution.
At Charlestown, S.C. on May 9, 1798, the Rev. Jedediah Morse preached this remarkable sermon on the Illuminati:
“Practically all of the civil and ecclesiastical establishments of Europe have already been shaken to their foundations by this terrible organization; the French Revolution itself is doubtless to be traced to its machinations… The Jacobins are nothing more nor less than the open manifestation of the hidden system of the Illuminati. The order has its branches
established and its emissaries at work in America. The affiliated Jacobin societies in America have doubtless had as the object of their establishment the propagation of the principles of the illuminated mother club in France.”
Morse’s warning of the secret conspiracy was not an isolated incident. No less a personage than the president of Yale University, the Rev. Timothy Dwight, in July 1798, spoke to New Raven churchgoers of his deep concern about the influence of the Illuminati and the outrages of the French Revolution,
“no impious sentiment of action against God has been spared; no malignant hostility against Christ and his religion has been unattempted. Justice, truth, kindness, piety, and moral obligation universally have been not merely trodden underfoot… but ridiculed, spurned, and insulted… Is it that we may see the Bible cast into a bonfire, the vessels of the sacramental supper borne by an ass in public procession, and our children either wheedled or terrified, uniting in the mob, chanting mockeries against God and hailing to the sounds of the ‘ça ira‘, the ruin of their religion and the loss of their souls? Shall our sons become the disciples of Voltaire and… our daughters the concubines of the Illuminati?”
The blasphemies against God, the desecration of churches, the massacre of clergy, the rape of nuns, the beheading of innocent persons solely because of their class, the pillaging of private property, the burning of libraries, and the destruction of the Christian monarchy – all of these violent cruelties first took place on a grand scale during the French Revolution and the subsequent “Reign of Terror.”
Robespierre, revolutionary leader and disciple of Weishaupt and Rousseau, introduced the tactic of class warfare during the French Revolution.
The French Revolution set the pattern for future communist revolutions and it bequeathed its godlessness to Karl Marx who, by 1838, at the age of 20 had become an atheist. In 1843, he moved to Paris where he immersed himself in a study of the French communists and their revolution against Christian civilization. On the subject of the French revolutionaries, George Sand, member of the French Grand Orient lodge, wrote, “It [the conspiracy] was maturing in the minds of believers to the point of fanaticism, in the form of a dream of universal revolution …”
Karl Marx was just such a fanatic. Inspired by the materialism of Ludwig Feuerbach and the dialectics of G. F. W. Hegel, Marx and his collaborator Friedrich Engels developed the “science” of communism (i.e. Marxism) which would inspire revolutionary fanatics of the future.
_ _ _
The Spectre That Still Haunts Europe
IN 1848, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote the Manifesto of the Communist Party which began,
“A spectre is haunting Europe – the spectre of
Communism. All the powers of Europe have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre; Pope and Czar, Metternich and Guizot… Communism is already acknowledged by all European powers to be itself a Power. It is high time that communists should openly, in the face of the whole world, publish their views, their aims, their tendencies, and meet this nursery tale of the Spectre of Communism with a manifesto.
Karl Marx, who co-authored the Communist Manifesto which changed the course of history, was a man inspired and motivated not by love but by an intense
all-consuming hatred of God and his fellow man.
The cause and development of this fanatical, even maniacal hatred, was in part rooted in his childhood.
Born May 5, 1818, in the Rhenish town of Trier, Marx lived until 1883. According to Sidney Hook in THE AMBIGUOUS LEGACY, “On both sides of his family he
was descended from a long line of Jewish rabbis. For social reasons, Marx’s father became converted to protestantism and his son grew up without any consciousness of himself as being Jewish… Marx attended briefly the University of Bonn and then the University of Berlin where he developed strong intellectual interests in law, philology, and theology. Upon the completion of his doctorate, he was made editor of the Rheinische Zeitung, which was shortly suppressed because of its advanced liberal views.”
Dr. Agnes Murphy in her book AN EVIL TREE, presents a different perspective of Marx. She asserts that Marx reacted irrationally to his father’s conversion from Judaism to Christianity. “As the intelligent and temperamental Karl grew older, he… felt keenly the hypocrisy he had to assume. He began to hate both Jew and non-Jew. This experience was probably the first contribution to the reservoir of hate which he was to build in his soul as he grew from youth to manhood to old age.”
Herschel Marx wrote letters to his son Karl in which he expressed his deep gloom and terrifying fear about his son’s future because of young Marx’s excessive egotism and total lack of love for his parents. By the time he was 20, Karl had decided that there was nothing in the universe except that which could be weighed and measured. Therefore, he had no soul to save and no God to interfere with his liberty. He had become a hate-filled atheist declaring, “I hate all the gods.”
This is the contradictory hallmark of communists: as avowed atheists, they deny the existence of God and yet they emphatically declare their hatred of God.
According to the late J. Edgar Hoover, Marx “called for war against religion, a war that was to become the cornerstone of communist philosophy.”
On June 12, 1843 Marx married his hometown sweetheart Jenny von Westphalen, the daughter of a prominent and successful government official in Trier. In spite of having a loving wife and growing family, Marx, refused to work regularly for a living. Hook wrote that the wealthy Engels not only collaborated with Marx in the development of the theory of communism but also “relieved the burden of crushing poverty on Marx’s family. Exiled from Paris, Marx went to Brussels where he joined the Communist League and on the eve of the Revolution of 1848 wrote the Communist Manifesto. He took a lively part in helping to organize [that] Revolution… in Western Europe, [and] was banished from Brussels, arrested, tried and freed in Germany, and compelled to leave France again. He finally found political asylum in London, where he spent the rest of his life.”
Despite handouts from Engels and occasional fees for articles for the NEW YORK TRIBUNE, Marx lived in squalor, was often sick, and suffered from boils and rheumatism. Jenny’s health failed and her seventh child was stillborn. When another child, Franziska, died in infancy, there was not enough money for a funeral and so a neighbor gave them a pittance for a small coffin. Often, Jenny kept their remaining children alive by feeding them nothing more than bread and potatoes. Ironically, Marx, whose Manifesto called for the abolition of all inheritance, was hoping for the quick death of Jenny’s uncle so they would inherit his money.
“But Marx was stubborn,” wrote Hoover. In spite of the tremendous suffering and deprivations to which he subjected Jenny and his children, his thoughts and concerns, his writings and work, were always about revolution and communism.
According to a 1960 U.S. Congressional report on the history of communism, after the revolution of 1848, Marx “began to prepare systematically the ground for further revolutionary upheavals.”
In their Manifesto, Marx and Engels enumerated the goals for a successful communist revolution. The following are four of their specific proposals with the author’s comments in parentheses:
- “A heavy progressive or graduated income tax“;
(a graduated income tax was first passed into U.S. law in 1913 and during the Presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt, it became heavily graduated. Ronald Reagan reduced the extreme graduation of the tax levels, although the principle of the graduated tax remains.)
- “Abolition of all rights of inheritance“;
(a heavy inheritance tax partially accomplishes this goal.)
- “Centralization of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly“;
(Federal Reserve Bank)
- “Free education for all children in public schools.”
(no comment necessary)
When Karl Marx was finally expelled from Prussia, he penned this arrogant farewell message:
“We are ruthless. We ask no quarter from you, the officials. When our turn comes, we will not hide our terrorism.”
Every Soviet communist leader from Lenin to the current secretary general has openly proclaimed strict adherence to Marxism. And ruthless they all have been – for a communist totalitarian regime cannot exist otherwise.
_ _ _
Bankers And Boxcars
REVOLUTIONS don’t just happen. They aren’t spontaneous and they certainly aren’t cheap. Karl Marx, one of the principal players in the centuries-old plot to overthrow Christian civilization, was in large part financed by fellow conspirator Friedrich Engels, who benefitted from his wealthy and industrious father.
Similarly, Lev Bronstein and Vladimir Ilyich Ulianov – better known by their aliases Trotsky and Lenin – who developed the actual principles of the Communist Party, were financed in their atheistic revolutionary activities by some very wealthy foreign bankers.
In his book THE STRUGGLE FOR WORLD POWER, Russian historian George Knupffer concluded, “the main point was that this revolution was supported first and foremost by certain circles to whom national boundaries were a matter of no importance and who thought and acted internationally at all times.”
Other historical writers support Knupffer’s conclusion. Former Canadian naval officer and intelligence expert Commander William G. Carr, in his book PAWNS IN THE GAME, reveals,
“In the summer of 1917… it was finally decided that Kuhn-Loeb of New York should place $50,000,000 to the credit of Lenin and Trotsky in the bank of Sweden. Both British and American intelligence officers reported these facts to their respective governments in 1917.”
The book WATERS PLOWING EASTWARD by the Parisian, L. Fry (a.k.a. Paquita de Shishinaraff) reveals that Jacob Schiff, a senior partner in the New York-based international banking house of Kuhn-Loeb and Co., “had long been interested in the revolutionary movement in Russia and had transferred large sums to support it through his bank as far back as 1905.”
According to Knupffer, the revolution “was heavily subsidized during the decades preceding it, and more especially during the First World War. Most of the money came from two sources: New York and Berlin. This may seem somewhat strange to the uninitiated, as in the last period of the war, Germany and America were enemies… Nevertheless, the truth is simple: In New York, the money was given by such as the banking firm of Kuhn, Loeb & Co. whose directors included Mr. J. Schiff and Mr. Warburg, founder of the Federal Reserve System. While in Berlin the financing of the revolution was handled by the German Imperial Staff working in conjunction with a German banker [Max Warburg] who was a brother to the New York Warburg …” Apologists for Schiff, Warburg, and the Kuhn-Loeb banking house, say that the Jewish bankers gave tens of millions of dollars to fund the communist revolution, to gain equality for Russian Jews; but this rationale disregards that Kerensky obtained equality for Jews without Lenin and without declaring war on Christianity.
When anarchy in Russia reached a boiling point in early 1917, Tsar Nicholas abdicated and the centuries-old Romanov dynasty collapsed in March of that year. Guaranteeing the imperial family safe passage to exile in England, socialist Kerensky and his Menshevik party took control of the provisional government of Russia, whereupon he passed laws creating total equality for Jews. In his epic work, THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION, William Henry Chamberlin explains that on April 2, 1917, the Kerensky government abolished “all legal limitations on the rights of Russian citizens, based on faith or nationality. This decree primarily benefited the Jews.”
Kerensky had no intention of having the Christian monarch assassinated nor did he express plans to close and destroy the churches or to outlaw Christian worship.
World War I was raging and Lenin was in neutral Switzerland unable to travel to Russia to take part in the revolution. According to Chamberlin, “Vladimir Ilyitch Lenin, the man who was to impose on the Russian Revolution its final form, was still pacing the streets of dull, respectable, middle-class Zurich, conjuring up one scheme after another for crossing the inhospitable battle-fronts that separated him from his native country, which he instinctively realized, was ripe as never before for social upheaval on the grand scale.”
The Tsar was out; Kerensky was in; and Jews had total equality. However, Jacob Schiff was not satisfied. He and his Kuhn-Loeb bank made tens of millions of dollars available to Lenin and Trotsky and the German Imperial general-staff made available a train of sealed boxcars to assure safe passage for Lenin and his aides through the war zones.
Arriving at the now famous Finland Station in Petrograd on the night of April 16th, Lenin proclaimed to his fellow Bolsheviks,
‘The Russian Revolution which you have carried out has laid the foundation for a new epoch. Long live the worldwide socialist revolution!”
With this battlecry, Lenin boldly announced the ultimate goal of the Marxists – the establishment of world-wide atheistic communism. In November, Lenin
led the second Russian revolution of 1917, this time against the popular Kerensky and his Mensheviks. The Tsar and his family were imprisoned and forbidden to go into exile, and then, in 1918, were brutally assassinated by the Bolsheviks [There are credible rumours that the Russian royal family actually escaped. KM/HCC]. Thus began the bloodiest chapter in modern history and the establishment of a “government” whose leaders had vowed to destroy property rights and Christianity while enslaving the world’s people in barbaric
bondage. They had created what they called the “dictatorship of the proletariat” when in fact they had created a demonic dictatorship which had no use for the Christian virtues of faith, hope and charity.
The irony is that while Lenin and Trotsky were establishing their violently anti-Christian government in Russia with the financial backing of some New York bankers, revolutionaries in New York were establishing an American communist party with the financial backing of Dr. Julius Hammer, a wealthy New York City pharmaceutical manufacturer from Odessa, Russia.
A strange and mysterious pattern had been established whereby certain wealthy capitalists – bankers, industrialists, philanthropists – funded communist revolutionary activities and their ensuing atheistic communist governments. Tragically, this pattern, described by Knupffer as smelling “of treason and collusion between alleged opponents,” remains in use even today.
_ _ _
Compulsion For Communism
DR. ARMAND HAMMER, chairman of Occidental Petroleum and headline-grabbing friend of present and past Soviet leaders, is well known to Americans. Like his communist friends in the Soviet Union, he frequently indulges in exaggeration when describing his successes in life – real or imagined. When it comes to selling himself, his own aggressiveness knows few equals. This unparalleled brashness, this penchant for aiding communists, this aggressive deal-making, all these characteristics seem to be inherited directly from his father Julius Hammer who was born in Russia in 1873 and brought to America the following year by his adoptive parents, Jacob and Victoria Hammer who, according to author Joseph Finder, in RED CARPET, were a Russian-Jewish family from Odessa, merchants in this port city legendary for its aggressive Jewish traders.”
The Hammers settled at first in Bradford Connecticut, stronghold at that time of the socialist movement in America. Julius worked in a foundry and joined the Socialist Labor Party. After the Hammers moved to New York City, young Julius aggressively pursued a pharmaceutical career. He started as a druggist’s apprentice and quickly advanced to registered pharmacist. He next became a drugstore owner, and then established a drugstore chain. Finally, he began
manufacturing pharmaceuticals. During this time, he also studied medicine and obtained his M.D. at Columbia University.
America, the “land of opportunity” had rewarded another immigrant; at an early age, Julius had become a wealthy capitalist. But in spite of the numerous benefits which had accrued to Hammer as a result of the free enterprise system, he still joined the Socialist Labor Party in New York. It was there that he met and later married a fellow Socialist Party member named Rose. In 1898, they had a son whom they named Armand. Julius told fellow socialist Bertram Wolfe that Arm and had been named after the party insignia – a worker’s ARM holding a HAMMER.
However, Julius Hammer’s dedication to socialism and communism was far more than just symbolic. Naming his son after the socialistic communist insignia was simply an indication of his undiluted commitment to worldwide communist revolution, and Hammer’s aggressive nature – his Odessa heritage – was as apparent in the revolutionary cause as it was in the business world. At the same time that Julius was funding New York-based Soviet agent Ludwig Martens and fellow communists in America, he was also supporting V. I. Lenin and the Bolsheviks abroad.
Julius Hammer first met Lenin at the 1907 International Socialist Congress in Stuttgart, Germany. Ten years later, when the Bolshevik revolution was about to collapse because the French and English blockades of Soviet ports were preventing supplies ftom reaching Lenin’s revolutionaries, Hammer illegally circumvented the blockades and sent the needed materials – on credit!
Then in 1919, in New York City, he was made chairman of the radically extremist Greater New York Left-Wing Section of the Socialist Party of the U.S. and donated the building to be used for party headquarters. This group advocated immediate revolution in America modeled after Lenin’s Bolshevik revolution.
Finder examined Hammer’s motivations and concluded,
“Julius’s party was controlled and made up largely of Russian Jews like himself. It seems curious that these ardent revolutionaries were, by and large, not oppressed workers but men of means. One explanation for this apparent paradox has been offered by Harvard sociologist Nathan Glazer: ‘Despite the relatively good economic position of Jews, their rapid rise to middle-class status produced certain strains – a sense of discrimination, a feeling of oppression and exploitation, if not its reality.’ Many of the Russian Jews in the party, who had been hounded from Russia by the czar’s anti-Semitic pogroms, looked to the Russian Revolution which had to a large extent been accomplished by Jews – as a triumph of a new, just world order.”
Finder, no anti-Semite, does not excuse Hammer’s treasonous actions; quite the contrary, he has gone to great lengths to document and expose Hammer. But the author of RED CARPET has overlooked the very important point that Lenin’s Bolshevik revolution overthrew Kerensky’s provisional government which had already given equality to the Jews. The “feeling of oppression” as Nathan Glazer described Jewish motivations, was hardly reason for Julius to actively support a communist revolution in America for in America, the Jews enjoyed equality and freedom as never before in modem history.
Objectively, the serious student of history can only conclude that Julius Hammer must have had other reasons to justify the seeming contradiction: a wealthy capitalist supporting atheistic communism. According to Finder, one of Hammer’s reasons was greed. “Julius profited handsomely from the accession of the Bolsheviks to power; his political convictions had material as well as psychological rewards.”
Historian George Knupffer, however, believes that this type of behavior smells of “treason and collusion.” Perhaps a clue to Hammer’s reason for supporting communism can be found in a November 6, 1986 speech given by U.S. Senator Howard Metzenbaum (D-OH) to a Jewish audience at the Wise Center in Cincinnati, Ohio. In a November 13 issue of the AMERICAN ISRAELITE, editor Phyllis Singer writes,
“‘We must see to it’ says Sen. Howard Metzenbaum, ‘that we will not permit the religious right to take over this country… Do not let the forces of evil take over to make this a Christian America.”‘
Coincidentally, Metzenbaum is a multimillionaire who is reported to have belonged to several communist-front organizations in the past.
This irrational belief that committed Christians are the “forces of evil,” is also the cornerstone of the communist philosophy which Julius Hammer helped to install in Russia and tried to establish in the United States. The ultimate goal of the communist conspiracy is to destroy Christianity. Noted columnist and former presidential speech writer, Pat Buchanan put it succinctly in his book RIGHT FROM THE START,
“The war between West and East is not between the economic systems of capitalism and Marxism; it is a religious war for control of the soul and destiny of mankind, the outcome of which cannot be arbitrated or negotiated.”
_ _ _
World Communism And The Money Connection
In 1921, banker Jacob H. Rubin, president of Rubin Brothers located at West 34th Street in New York City, admitted with remarkable candor to the House Committee on Foreign Affairs,
“I had been with the American Red Cross people at Odessa. I was there when the Red Army took possession of Odessa. At that time, I was favorably inclined toward the Soviet government, because I was a socialist and had been a member of that party for 20 years. I must admit that to a certain extent I helped to form the Soviet government of Odessa …”
Rubin had a close working association with the New York-based Provident Loan Society. In WALL STREET AND THE BOLSHEVIK REVOLUTION, Antony C. Sutton explains that Provident’s trustees included persons “having [a] connection with the Bolshevik Revolution: P. [Percy] A. Rockefeller, Mortimer L. Schiff, and James Speyer.”
Percy Rockefeller was one of the directors of the American International Corporation, as was Otto H. Kahn. Kahn and Mortimer Schiff, together with Jacob Schiff and Felix Warburg, were managing partners of Kuhn, Loeb & Company. A State Department document (Decimal File 861.00/5339) dated November 13, 1918, names the following as persons engaged in supporting the Bolshevik revolution: Jacob Schiff, Felix Warburg, Otto H. Kahn, Mortimer L. Schiff, and Jerome J. Hanauer. Kuhn, Loeb and Company, itself, was also named in the document. In the 1970s, Jacob Schiff’s son readily admitted to syndicated columnist Cholly Knickerhoker that his father had given a large sum of money to help finance the Bolshevik revolution.
On December 30, 1924, the financial titan and capitalist extraordinaire Otto Kahn, in a speech to the radically left-wing League for Industrial Democracy, offered the socialist revolutionaries a friendly hand and shared goals.
“What you radicals and we who hold opposing views differ about is not so much the end as the means, not so much what should be brought about as how it should, and can, be brought about …”
The Rev. Denis Fahey, in THE RULERS OF RUSSIA, wrote about the continuing political love affair between capitalist Otto Kahn and the anti- capitalist Soviet government and revealed that during Stalin’s reign, long after the 1917 revolution, Otto Kahn enjoyed a relationship with the Soviet empire which should have raised questions as to where his loyalties lay. FIGARO, the highly regarded Parisian magazine, reported in April 1932 that in June of the previous year, Mrs. Otto Kahn visited the USSR,
“where she was oflicially received by the Soviet government, which gave in her honor a grand diplomatic dinner and several brilliant receptions… The Red Army lined the roads at the present of arms… It was the least that the head of the ‘proletarian dictatorship’ could do in order to honour the wife of one of their sovereigns.”
Kahn, Schiff and Warburg were recognized not only as financial giants of their day, but also as three of the wealthiest and most powerful men in America. In addition, they were known to be close to “Colonel” Edward M. House, Woodrow Wilson’s confidant and alter ego. House, who espoused communist sentiments for America’s future, used Wilson’s presidency as a launching pad for the League of Nations and a socialist world government. In WOODROW WILSON: DISCIPLE OF REVOLUTION, Jennings C. Wise revealed that Wilson willingly played his part in the conspiracy, “Historians must never forget that Woodrow Wilson, despite the efforts of the British police, made it possible for [the Russian revolutionary] Leon Trotsky to enter Russia with an American passport.”
There were other wealthy Americans in addition to the Kahns, Warburgs, Rockefellers, and Schiffs who were actively supporting the Bolshevik revolution. One of the more arrogant promoters of the atheistic revolt in Russia was William B. Thompson who served on the board of the powerful Federal Reserve Bank of New York (coincidentally, Paul Warburg, Felix’s brother was the first [vice] chairman of the Federal Reserve System). While Thompson was leading a Red Cross Mission to Russia which he had funded heavily, the WASHINGTON POST of Feb. 2, 1918 reported that he had “made a personal contribution of $1,000,000 to the Bolsheviki for the purpose of spreading their doctrine in Germany and Austria.” The POST continued,
“He believes that the Bolsheviki constitute the greatest power against Pro-Germanism in Russia and their [Marxist] propaganda has been undermining the militarist regimes of the General Empires. Mr. Thompson deprecates American criticism of the Bosheviki. He believes they have been misrepresented and has made financial contribution to the cause in the belief that it will be money well spent for the future of Russia as well as for the Allied cause.”
Thompson’s actions raise the serious question of why an American citizen, an influential director of the powerful Federal Reserve Bank of New York, would donate 1 million dollars (roughly equivalent to 20 million today) to communist revolutionaries in order to promote a world-wide revolutionary movement whose goal is the destruction of Western Christian civilization. The question is all the more serious if Antony Sutton is correct when he states,
“Without the financial and, more important, the diplomatic propaganda assistance given to Trotsky and Lenin by Thompson, Robins and their New York associates, the Bolsheviks may well have withered away and Russia evolved into a socialist constitutional society.”
Biographer Herman Hagedorn in THE MAGNATE, WILLIAM BOYCE THOMPSON AND HIS TIMES, reproduced a photo of a December 8, 1917 telegram from J.P. Morgan in New York addressed to W. B. Thompson, care of American Red Cross Hotel Europe, Petrograd. The Morgan cable said,
“Your cable received, We have paid National City Bank one million dollars as instructed – Morgan.”
By this time the Bolsheviks had nationalized all Russian banks – foreign and domestic with one exception – the National City Bank (NCB) branch in Petrograd. In 1917, Percy and William Rockefeller were members of NCB’s board of directors – it was part of the Rockefeller family’s financial empire: The Chase Manhattan Bank, formerly
the Chase National Bank, and is still part of the Rockefeller family empire – David Rockefeller is the retired chairman of the Chase. In RED CARPET, Joseph Finder wrote,
“Chase National Bank was the Soviet government’s leading lender almost from the time of the Revolution. During the twenties, it financed Soviet
imports of American cotton. When AMTORG [the Soviet trade mission and a front in the U.S.] was established in 1924, Chase agreed to handle its promissory notes and letters of credit in order to aid the import from Russia of our timber and precious metals; and in 1926, Chase advanced the Soviet government revolving credit of thirty million dollars.”
Amtorg was, in a limited sense, the Soviet predecessor to USTEC, (US-USSR Trade and Economic Council) established in 1972 as a vehicle for Western
capitalists and bankers to prop up the ever-failing socialist s[ys]tem of the Soviet Union.
In a February 29, 1984 speech to the Senate, Senator Jesse Helms (NC) sounded an alarm when he warned “over the years, loans and credits to the Soviet Union
by Western bankers as well as by Western governments, have served to build the Soviet war machine and to keep the peoples and nations contained within the Soviet borders and in Soviet satellites in slavery.”
The record of an on-going conspiracy has been thoroughly and repeatedly documented. The world revolutionary movement has been and is being funded by amoral capitalists and bankers – men at the highest levels of U.S. finance and government.
_ _ _
Globalist Intrigues Of The Elitist Council On Foreign Relations
ANY LIBERALS – whether pink or red – whether closet socialists or militant communists, frequently suffer from a blind ideological weakness which author Dan Smoot called a “deistic complex”; and it matters not whether they are self-proclaimed atheists or agnostics posing as Christians. In their firm conviction that they, and they only, know what is best for the masses, they act out a deep desire to play God.
“The case for government by elites is irrefutable… government by the People is possible but highly improbable”,
pontificated J. William Fulbright, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, at a 1963 symposium sponsored by the left-wing Fund for the Republic, one of the many ultra-liberal projects of the Ford Foundation. The symposium was titled, “THE ELITE AND THE ELECTORATE – IS GOVERNMENT BY THE PEOPLE POSSIBLE?” To support his contention, Fulbright relied heavily upon the words of Walter Lippman, well-known columnist and not-so-well-known founding member of the far left socialist League for Industrial Democracy,
‘The people have acquired power which they are incapable of exercising, and the governments they elect have lost powers which they must recover if they are to govern.”
Lippman complained that, because of public opinion, America had mishandled the peace process after World War I by refusing to enter the League of Nations, that vehicle for global government which had been piously promoted by “Colonel” Edward Mandell House.
According to the “elite,” public opinion must be altered to assure that, after a second world war, America would readily accept the one-world concept.
Closet socialist Lippmann, as a member of the media, was prepared to facilitate that change.
Lippman was not just a media elitist; he was also a director of the Council on Foreign Relations, the internationalist organization envisioned by House.
After the rejection of the League of Nations by the Senate, the undaunted “Colonel” had gathered together his most dedicated young intellectual followers at a dinner meeting in May of 1919 at the magnificent Majestic Hotel in Paris, whereupon they agreed to form an organization to study and influence international affairs. Subsequently, the group, which had among its American members Christian A. Herter and the Dulles brothers, Allen and John Foster, organized the Council on Foreign Relations, which was incorporated in 1921.
Author, historian, former Harvard faculty member and ex-FBI official Dan Smoot describes the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) as the centerpiece of an invisible government.
“I am convinced”, wrote Smoot in THE INVISIBLE GOVERNMENT, that “the objective of this invisible government is to convert America into a socialist state and then make it a unit in a one-world socialist system.”
A one-world socialist system was exactly what “Colonel” House had wanted; he even wrote a blueprint for its enactment in the political romance, PHILIP DRU: ADMINISTRATOR, which he published anonymously in 1912. In the book, House rewrote the U.S. Constitution and incorporated many of Marx and Engels’ ideas for a socialist dictatorship.
Over the years, the CFR came to play an increasingly greater role in guiding America’s foreign policy towards a liberal and internationalist bias. The Reece Committee, a congressional committee investigating the funding of left-wing activities by tax-exempt foundations, concluded in the early ’50s, that the Council on Foreign Relations
“is another organization dealing with internationalism which has substantial financial support of both the Carnegie Endowment and the Rockefeller Foundation… The Council on Foreign Relations came to be in essence an agency of the United States government, no doubt carrying its
internationalist bias with it… its productions are not objective but are directed overwhelmingly at promoting the globalism concept… There can be no doubt that much of the thinking in the State Department and much of the background of direction of its policies came from the personnel of the Carnegie Endowment and the Council on Foreign Relations.”
Coincidentally, one of the founding directors of the Council on Foreign Relations was the legendary financier, Otto Kahn, who, as a managing partner of the Kuhn, Loeb investment house had contributed heavily to the Bolshevik revolution. Kahn served as a CFR director from 1921 until 1934.
Another of the CFR’s original directors was Paul M. Warburg, the first chairman of the Federal Reserve System and brother of another Kuhn, Loeb partner, Felix Warburg.
Allen W. Dulles, who had been one of the “young intellectuals” at “Colonel” House’s 1919 Paris planning dinner, became a CFR director in 1927 and served continuously until 1969. During the 1950’s, he was Director of the CIA under President Eisenhower while his brother, John Foster Dulles, another of House’s “young intellectuals,” was Secretary of State. The “iron curtain” of Soviet-controlled Eastern Europe was never challenged under the so-called “cold war” policy of John Foster Dulles. This containment policy allowed the 1956 freedom movement in Hungary to bleed to death and guaranteed the sanctity of Soviet hegemony over iron curtain countries – a continuation of the policy established by FDR.
By 1927, the Rockefeller family, via its various foundations, had begun to pour money into the CFR; and in 1929, largely with Rockefeller money, the CFR bought its present headquarters, the Harold Pratt House at 58 East 68th Street, New York City. Following Rockefeller’s lead, the Carnegie and Ford foundations soon funneled large sums of money into the CFR.
Shortly after World War II exploded in 1939, the Council visited the U.S. State Department to offer its assistance and an agreement was reached whereby, according to the Reece Committee,
“the Council would do research and make recommendations for the State Department, without formal assignment or responsibility.”
These State Department papers, prepared by the CFR became known as the “War and Peace Studies… financed by the Rockefeller Foundation …”.
By 1942, the State Department’s newly created Division of Special Research was dominated by Council members. Even the director, Leo Pasvolsky, was a member of the CFR. But it was another Council member, Alger Hiss, who significantly advanced the cause of the liberal elitists in the tradition of “Colonel” House. Educated at Johns Hopkins University and Harvard Law School, Hiss, a protege of Felix Frankfurter, started on his government career in the early 1930s and in 1936, was personally invited by Assistant Secretary of State Francis B. Sayre, President Wilson’s son-in-law, to come to the State Department as Sayre’s assistant. By this time, wrote Dr. Emanuel M. Josephson in ROCKEFELLER INTERNATIONALIST,
“Hiss was deeply involved in espionage.”
By 1939, when he became State’s assistant adviser on political relations, ex-communist Whittaker Chambers, as editor of TIME magazine, told Adolph A. Berle, Assistant Secretary of State for security, that Hiss was a communist spy. Berle, who was also a personal adviser to the President, told Roosevelt, who responded by telling Berle, in effect, to go jump in the lake.
As assistant secretary of the State Department, Hiss became a special adviser to President Roosevelt at the disastrous Yalta summit where the dying president gave in to all of Stalin’s demands.
By 1945, Hiss’s superiors at the State Department had been completely briefed on his communist activities; but he was chosen to be Secretary General of the United Nations Conference on International Organization at San Francisco, nonetheless. With assistance from two Soviet representatives, Hiss prepared the United Nations Charter and gave the Soviet Union three votes in the General Assembly and America only one vote. Alger Hiss had finally instituted “Colonel” House’s grand design, and America was at last involved in a one-world socialist government organization.
[ The “Principles and Postulates” on which the UN Charter came to be based were actually prepared by some 200 unelected Canadians and Americans in meetings held in North America in the early 1940s under the auspices of The Carnegie Endowment. I discovered this in an article published at that time in the Canadian Bar Review of the Canadian Bar Association. Attendees at these meetings are listed in the article, which ought to be an excellent new resource for researchers. See: “The International Law 0f The Future, The Canadian Bar Review, Vol. Xxii April, 1944 No. 4”, http://v.calameo.com/2.1/cviewer.swf?bkcode=000111790b7c289b9b81c&langid=en. KM/HCC]
Hiss had been accompanied to the San Francisco conference by Nelson Rockefeller, and, as they had done for the Council on Foreign Relations, the Rockefellers donated the land for the United Nations building in New York.
Elitists move, as through a revolving-door, from liberal establishment universities to government to the CFR, to foundations and back again, and so CFR member Hiss was appropriately rewarded with the presidency of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
All was proceeding according to plan for the CFR elitists, when unexpectedly Alger Hiss was indicted and tried for perjury. Hiss had denied knowing Whittaker Chambers, who had accused him of being a Soviet espionage agent. His first trial ended in a hung jury when CFR friends and supporters including John Foster Dulles, Secretary of State Dean Acheson, and Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter testified as character witnesses. However, at his second trial, when the case against him was conclusively air-tight, Hiss was abandoned by his supporters, was found guilty and sent to prison.
The conviction of one-of-its-own was no more than a brief unacknowledged embarrassment for the Council on Foreign Relations, which continued to supply succeeding administrations with secretaries of state, secretaries of defense, national security advisers, CIA directors, and even Vice-Presidents and a President. A few examples will suffice:
- John Foster Dulles – secretary of state for Eisenhower;
- Dean Rusk – secretary of state for Kennedy and
- * Henry Kissinger – secretary of state for Nixon;
- Nelson Rockefeller – vice president for Ford;
- * Cyrus Vance – secretary of state for Carter;
- * Zbigniew Brezezinski – national security adviser for
- * George P. Shultz – secretary of state for Reagan;
- * Brent Scowcroft – national security advisor for Bush;
- * Richard B. Cheney – secretary of defense for Bush;
- * President George Bush was himself a director of the
Council from 1977-79.
(* past or present officer/director of the CFR.)
The Council on Foreign Relations of “Colonel” Edward M. House has more than adequately fulfilled its commitment to study and influence international affairs!
_ _ _
Transmission Belts For Communist Propaganda
IN THE LATE 1940s and early 1950s, after the successful prosecution of Soviet spies Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, who stole U.S. atomic bomb secrets for the USSR, and Soviet espionage agent Alger Hiss who was foreign policy “advisor” to President Franklin D. Roosevelt and later the president of the huge tax-exempt Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, there was a realization that the government needed to discover and then interdict the funding sources of the Soviet agents and communist operations in America.
Hence, twice in the early 1950s, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to establish a “special” or “select” committee to conduct a complete investigation of tax-exempt educational and philanthropic foundations and comparable organizations to determine if any of these foundations and organizations were misusing their funds “for un-American and subversive activities; for political purposes; propaganda or attempts to influence legislation.”
Established in 1952 by a Democrat-controlled House of Representatives, the first of these two committees was chaired by Representative Eugene E. Cox, (D-GA) and was popularly referred to as the Cox Committee.
In 1953, the Republican-controlled House established a “Special Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations and Comparable Organizations” or “Reece Committee” named after its chairman Carroll B. Reece (R-TN).
The Cox Committee heard testimony from a number of knowledgable witnesses, including Fordham University faculty member Louis F. Budenz. Budenz, who, in addition to having been editor of the U.S. Communist Party’s official paper the DAILY WORKER, had been a member of the party’s ruling national committee for nine years until his break in 1945. He informed the House Committee that the Communist Party (CPUSA) had two specific objectives regarding foundations.
“One, to obtain grants for Communists or those favorable to the Communist line on those matters which the Communists wished advanced… and then, secondly, to prevent if possible, critics of the Communist movement from getting grants.” American communists were under direct orders from Moscow to make foundations and other organizations “transmission belts for the Communist line.”
A CPUSA subcommittee on foundations supervised communist efforts in this regard, and targeted key foundations for penetration. Budenz named some of the target foundations, “They were the Carnegie, Rockefeller, and Guggenheim Foundations. Based on his own experience as a party official, Budenz gave the Committee specific examples of successful communist penetration and manipulation of foundations.
Testifying under oath, Budenz named individuals who, as communists, had become trustee members, or key officials or had received grants from a number of tax-exempt foundations. Some of these communist activists were in key teaching positions at prestigious colleges or universities. Some had received foundation grants to influence, from a radical communist viewpoint, civil-rights issues and others received large tax- exempt grants to “develop new forms of music.” The recipients of foundation largesse were well-placed to mold the impressionable young minds of the leaders of America’s next generation.
A few of the Communist Party members named by Budenz were:
- Dr. Mary Van Kleek of the Rusell Sage Foundation and Smith College;
- Frederick Vanderbilt Field, millionaire head of his own tax-exempt
American People’s Fund;
- Doxie Wilkerson, board member of the General Education Board, a major
- Louise Bransten, a trustee of the Rosenberg Foundation;
- and Walter Gelhorn, recipient of a substantial grant from the Rockefeller
Foundation for work on civil liberties studies at Cornell University. Gelhorn later denied that he was a member of the CPUSA but under cross examination reluctantly admitted to being a member of the National Lawyers Guild, cited by Congress as the legal arm of the CPUSA.
The Rockefeller Foundation also dispensed a large grant for the purpose of developing “new forms of music” to Hans Eisler, who, according to Budenz, was head of the Red International Music Bureau of Moscow and had the specific commission in America “to direct the penetration of the musical world, composers, critics, and the like, for the Communist Party.” This information was given to Budenz by CPUSA cultural official Alexander Trachtenberg who smugly stated, “We are using capitalist money to destroy capitalism.”
Those few examples indicate just how successful the Communist Party U.S.A. has been at using some of America’s wealthiest and most respected tax-exempt foundations in order to finance Soviet espionage, promote communist propaganda, influence legislation and reshape young minds in America.
Since the premature and abrupt demise of the Reece Committee in 1954, and even though suspicions are that the situation remains much the same, there has been no congressional investigation of foundations to determine whether or not billions of tax-exempt dollars are being used in violation of the public trust and to finance subversive communist activities.
In January 1986, suggesting that the need for such a committee is even greater today than it was in the early ’50s, Senator Jesse Helms, (R-NC) called for a new independent congressional committee with the full power of subpoena, to update the work of the Cox and Reece Committees. Unfortunately though, with just a few of the largest foundations controlling billions of dollars and dispensing hundreds of millions of those dollars annually to pet liberal projects, it is unlikely that the left-wing controlled Congress will challenge their tax-exempt status.
_ _ _
A Diabolical Conspiracy?
Due to the unexpected death of Chairman Cox on December 24, 1952, the Cox Committee was in operation for only eight months; but it discovered enough evidence to convince the Republicans to establish a similar House investigative committee under their leadership in July of 1953.
The final report of the Cox Committee stated,
“The committee is satisfied that as long as 20 years ago, Moscow decided upon a program of infiltrating cultural and educational groups and organizations in this country, including the foundations. The American Communist Party, following the program laid down in Moscow, went so far as to create a… Cultural Commission which gave specific attention to foundations.”
Convinced that infiltration had occurred, the Cox committee continued,
“there remains the ugly unalterable fact that Alger Hiss became the president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.”
The information gathered by the Cox Committee led Representative Carroll Reece (R-TN), chairman of the 1953-4 investigating committee, to state: “No one seems to know the number of tax-exempt foundations. There are probably 300,000… In the past, they have made a magnificent contribution to our national life. In the past, the majority have justified these tax exemptions, even though the probable cost to the taxpayers runs into the billions.”
- “Certainly the Congress has a right and a duty to inquire into the purposes and conduct of institutions to which the taxpayers have made such great sacrifices.
- “In any event, the Congress should concern itself with certain weaknesses and dangers which have arisen in a minority of these.
- “Some of these activities and some of these institutions support efforts to overthrow our Government and to undermine our American way of life.
- “These activities urgently require investigation. Here lies the story of how communism and socialism are financed in the United States, where they get their money. It is the story of who pays the bill.
- “There is evidence to show there is a diabolical conspiracy back of all this. Its aim is the furtherance of socialism in the United States.
- “Communism is only a brand name for socialism, and the Communist state represents itself to be only the true form of socialism.
- “The facts will show that, as usual, it is the ordinary taxpaying citizen who foots most of the bill, not the Communists and the Socialist, who know only how to spend money, not how to earn it.
- “The method by which this is done seems fantastic to reasonable men, for these Communists and Socialists seize control of fortunes left behind by capitalists when they die, and turn these fortunes around to finance the destruction of capitalism.”
Congressman Reece revealed that in the early ’50s, the Ford Foundation made a grant of $15 million (the equivalent of $60-$70 million in today’s dollars) to “investigate from a critical point of view” those Congressional Committees which were investigating Soviet and other communist operations in the United States. Little wonder Reece called it a “diabolical conspiracy!” The existence of a foundation-funded conspiracy was well-documented but a conspiracy of silence would keep the American people from realizing the seriousness of the threat.
By the late seventies, even the liberal Henry Ford II finally resigned in disgust from the board of the multi-billion dollar Ford Foundation. He charged that the foundation – the nation’s largest – funded by his family, was paying for projects which were aimed at overthrowing the very free-enterprise system, which created the wealth that supported the foundation.
In the boastful words of Communist party official Alexander Trachtenberg, “We are using capitalist money to destroy capitalism.”
_ _ _
Foundation-Funded Non-Bloody Revolution
COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN B. Carroll Reece warned fellow congressmen of a “diabolical conspiracy,” that a certain few foundations were financing the Socialist and Communist overthrow of the United States.”
The Reece Committee learned that the Rockefeller Foundation and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, were, with tax-exempt dollars, funding leftist propaganda operations, aimed at changing America through the brain, not the battlefield. Patriotism, national sovereignty, individual responsibility, and Christian beliefs were belittled while the concepts of a one-world government, socialism, collectivism and humanism were deemed essential for peace in the modern age.
A clandestine and successful non-bloody revolution had been masterminded by some of America’s most powerful and devious men – men who did not want to be exposed by a congressional investigating committee.
The man chosen by Reece to be the committee’s research director was Norman Dodd, Yale graduate, intellectual and N.Y. investment banker. During this writer’s frequent visits to Dodd’s retirement home in Keene, Virginia, he repeatedly spoke of his conviction that justice demanded that those foundations “should be compelled to spend a like amount of dollars to undo the damage they have done to America.”
Dodd sent committee questionnaires to numerous foundations, and as a result of one such request, Joseph E. Johnson, president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, invited Dodd to send a committee staffer to Carnegie’s headquarters in New York City to examine the minutes of the meetings of the Endowment’s trustees. These minutes had long since been stored away in a warehouse and obviously Johnson, who was a close friend of former Carnegie President and Soviet spy Alger Hiss, had no idea what was in them.
The minutes revealed that in 1910, the Carnegie trustees asked themselves this question:
“Is there any way known to man more effective than war, to so
alter the life of an entire people?”
For a year, the trustees sought an effective “peaceful” method to “alter the life of an entire people”; but ultimately, they concluded that war was the most effective way to change people.
Consequently, the trustees of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace next asked themselves:
“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.”
Norman Dodd said that the trustees’ minutes reinforced what the Reece Committee had uncovered elsewhere about the Carnegie Endowment, that “it had already become a powerful policy-making force inside the State Department.”
During those early years of the Carnegie Endowment, war clouds were already forming over Europe and the opportunity for the enactment of their plan was drawing near.
History proved that World War I did indeed have an enormous impact on the American people. For the first time in our history, large numbers of wives and mothers had to leave the home to work in war factories, thus effectively eroding woman’s historic role as the “heart” of the family. The sanctity of the family itself was placed in jeopardy. Life in America was so thoroughly changed that, according to Norman Dodd, “the trustees had the brashness to congratulate themselves on the wisdom and validity of their original decision.” They sent a confidential message to President Wilson, insisting that the war not be ended too quickly. Carnegie trustee Cleveland H. Dodge, one of Wilson’s financial supporters, had direct access to the President, as did Elihu Root, Endowment president from 1910 to 1925.
After the War, the Carnegie Endowment trustees reasoned that if they could get control of education in the United States, they would be able to prevent a return to the way of life as it had been prior to the war; and they recruited the Rockefeller Foundation to assist in such a monumental task. According to Dodd,
“They divided the task in parts, giving to the Rockefeller Foundation the responsibility of altering education as it pertains to domestic subjects, but Carnegie retained the task of altering our education in foreign affairs and about international relations.”
The foundations decided that the most effective method of achieving this goal would be by altering American History, so they awarded grants, fellowships and scholarships to those professors and historians who would rewrite American history and promote one-worldism, humanism and socialism. By the early ’30s, the well-laid plans of the foundation trustees had reached fruition, and a Reece Committee staff report concluded:
- (1) that there had indeed been a non-bloody revolution in America between 1933 and 1936;
- (2) that a certain few foundations had funded efforts to change the beliefs of the American people through education and propaganda; and
- (3) that these revolutionary changes had been accepted without resistance.
To demonstrate how thoroughly American opinion had been changed according to the plan of the foundations, we cite the following historical example: At the end of World War I, Woodrow Wilson and his shadowy alter-ego “Colonel” Edward M. House tried to sell the U.S. Senate and the American people on the idea of the League of Nations. This was, of course, the first concerted international effort towards a one world government.
Wilson and House failed in their mission; but a generation later, after another great war and much re-education via college International Relations Clubs, international studies educational grants and the like, the Senate and the people readily accepted membership in the United Nations.
Roosevelt’s foreign policy advisor Alger Hiss helped write the U.N. Charter in which the Soviet Union was given three votes in the General Assembly and the
United States only one; and then, before his perjury conviction for lying about his Soviet espionage activities, he went on to become president of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
Chairman Reece expressed justifiable rage when he described what was happening as a “diabolical conspiracy.” The conspirators had left little to chance.
_ _ _
An Admission Of Conspiracy And A Death Threat For Silence
THOSE CONGRESSIONAL INVESTIGATIONS of the early ’50s into tax-exempt foundations were mandated by the House of Representatives in a resolution stating,
“The Committee is authorized and directed to conduct a full and complete investigation… to determine which of such foundations and organizations are using their resources for un-American and subversive activities; for political purposes; propaganda, or attempts to influence legislation.”
The tax-exempt status granted to foundations by the Congress of the United States is a special and powerful privilege subsidized by the American taxpayer. Therefore, Congress has not only the authority but also the obligation to investigate how tax-exempt funds are spent.
The Ford Foundation, largest of all the foundations, balked when it received a preliminary questionnaire from the Reece Committee. H. Rowan Gaither, president of the multi-billion dollar foundation, summoned committee research director Dodd to foundation offices in New York City.
At the meeting, Gaither asked,
“Mr. Dodd we invited you to come here because we thought that perhaps, off the record, you would be kind enough to tell us why
the Congress is interested in the operations of foundations such as ours?”
Gaither answered his own rhetorical question with a startling admission:
“Mr. Dodd, all of us here at the policy making level of the foundation have at one time or another served in the 0SS [the Office of Strategic Services, the forerunner of the CIA) or the European Economic Administration, operating under directives from the White House. We operate under those same directives…. The substance of the directives under which we operate is that we shall use our grant making power to so alter life in the United States that we can he comfortably merged with the Soviet Union.”
Stunned, Dodd finally replied, “Why don’t you tell the American people what you just told me and you could save the taxpayers thousands of dollars set aside for this investigation?” Gaither responded, “Mr. Dodd, we wouldn’t think of doing that.”
In public, of course, Gaither never admitted what he had revealed in private. However, on numerous public occasions, Norman Dodd repeated what Gaither had said, and was neither sued by Gaither nor challenged by the Ford Foundation.
Within days of the Reece Committee’s announcement of the purpose of the investigation and the identity of the organizations to be questioned, Norman Dodd was invited to dine privately at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington with Herman Edelsberg who was the Washington representative of the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) of B’nai B’rith. Edelsberg told Dodd that the ADL was one of the most powerful organizations in America – becoming more powerful each year – and that the only thing it feared was bad publicity. Obviously, then, the ADL was not pleased about being investigated by the committee and had sent Edelsberg to find out who on the committee had decided to question the ADL. When he learned that it had been Dodd’s decision, not the chairman’s, Edelsberg asked, “How do we dispose of you?”
Dodd was undeterred by the threat, however, because he had been forewarned by Chrysler Corporation’s finance committee chairman, B. E. Hutchinson, who, though he supported the Reece Committee inquiry, was well aware of the dangers involved and had warned Dodd,
“If you proceed with the investigation as you have outlined, you will be killed.”
Perhaps the threat was not carried out against Dodd because far subtler methods had been developed to end the investigation. The Reece Committee was sabotaged from within by a Democrat committee member, the liberal Wayne Hays of Ohio. On one occasion, Hays sarcastically interrupted a friendly witness, Aaron Sargent, 246 times during 185 minutes of testimony. Many of Hays’ questions were totally irrelevant, childish and sarcastic, designed to waste the witness’s time and bring the hearings to a halt. Hays admitted to the committee’s staff that Sam Rayburn, the most powerful Democrat in the House of Representatives, had assigned him to the committee for one purpose, “to break-up the investigation,” and he intended to do just that. Hays told committee counsel, Rene Wormser, that the White House had been in touch with him and asked Hays if “he would cooperate to kill the committee.”
The success of the conspiracy to silence the investigation and to thwart corrective legislation so as to preserve its power-base is self-evident.
_ _ _
Lines Of Credit: Ropes Of Bondage
AFTER THE DEATH of Konstantin Chernenko in March of 1985, Mikahil Gorbachev won a monumental power struggle in the Kremlin and emerged as leader of the Soviet Union. Almost immediately, the crafty new secretary general of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union began to institute what appeared to be radical changes known as ‘glasnost’ (openess) and ‘perestroika’ (restructuring) in an attempt to salvage the rapidly crumbling communist system. His role model was V.1. Lenin, who in a 1921 effort to save the system, had instituted his New Economic Policy (NEP) which allowed limited free market privileges to farmers.
Without the subsequent infusions of Western credit, plus construction and corporate know-how, the communist dictatorship might well have collapsed within its first decade. Lenin referred to the NEP when he uttered his famous phrase, “two steps forward, one step back.”
Western credit and commodities, lured to the Soviet empire by the temporary openness and appearance of reform in Lenin’s NEP, enabled him and his successor, Joseph Stalin, to tighten the ropes of bondage around the necks of the Soviet people. In the 1920s, American newspapers wrote about U.S. companies and entrepreneurs who built everything from tractor plants to pencil factories in Russia with financing arranged by U.S. banks and trade details prepared by the pro-Soviet American International Corporation (AIC).
Those many American bankers and businessmen who rescued the communist system from certain collapse in the 1920s helped to create Lenin’s legacy: Stalin’s reign of terror, that appalling period in the 1930s when between 300,000 to 500,000 persons a month were brutally “eliminated” in one purge after another. “Most of the private beneficiaries of Lenin’s New Economic Policy became, ten years later, liquidated Kulaks [free farmers) under Joseph Stalin,” writes Dr. Warren H. Carroll in his epic work 70 YEARS OF THE COMMUNIST REVOLUTION.
In 1975, Alexander Solzhenitsyn beseeched the West not to save – once again – the communist government and its failed economic system; but his plea has gone unnoticed or unheeded by many in the West, who, like lemmings racing suicidally to the sea, seek to sell to the Soviets, on credit, the rope with which they intend to hang the free world.
To students of history, it is inconceivable that Gorbachev’s “perestroika,” which could more accurately be described as NEP, has seduced so many in the West; and yet American newspapers are once again touting the advent of Soviet reform and reporting on the great new business ventures to be found in the Soviet Union. THE WALL STREET JOURNAL of March 30, 1989 proclaimed “SOVIETS, 6 U.S. FIRMS REACH TRADE ACCORD” and then described the ambitious agreement for joint US-USSR trade and economic ventures in the Soviet Union. The JOURNAL article named Chevron, Archer-Daniels-Midland (ADM), Eastman Kodak, RJR Nabisco, and Johnson & Johnson as the corporations poised to invest up to 10 billion dollars in the USSR.
Chevron, according to the WALL STREET JOURNAL, “is one of the keys to the consortium’s success. Sources say it is working with the Soviet Oil Ministry to find possible sites for joint oil and gas exploration and development.” The products from Chevron’s ventures are potentially the biggest producer of desperately needed hard currency for the Soviet Union.
It is expected that lines of credit for the Soviet joint ventures will be arranged in the West by the sixth U.S. participant in the venture, the Mercator Corporation, the merchant bank whose president, James H. Giffen, is a member of the shadowy Council on Foreign Relations and past co-chairman of the secretive and controversial US-USSR Trade and Economic Council (USTEC).
USTEC was founded in 1973 to promote trade with the Soviet Union and on the surface appears to be a giant U.S-Soviet chamber of commerce – a friendly facilitator of business – with an equal number of U.S. and Soviet officials. In reality, though, America’s corporate members are private companies and the Soviet members are government agencies, a situation which, in 1987, prompted ranking minority member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee Jesse Helms (R-NC) to try to raise the ominous veil of secrecy surrounding USTEC’s U.S. membership list.
The senator’s concern that USTEC was being used as a vehicle for the transfer of advanced U.S technology and hard currency credits to the Soviet Union was based on some alarming facts:
The CIA had confirmed that Yevgeniy Petrovich Pitovranov, then chairman of the Soviet chamber of commerce and a member of USTEC’s executive committee, was a lieutenant general (ret) of the KGB;
- * KGB staff officers fill about half of the senior management slots in the chamber’s Moscow apparatus which supplies operatives for USTEC;
- * Soviet trade members of USTEC who often are KGB or GRU intelligence spies can travel freely in the U.S. and gain access to U.S. technology plants and research facilities without the usual security limitations which restrict the travel of Soviet embassy and consulate employees;
- * An internal FBI memo refers to USMC as a “targeted hostile intelligence” as well as a “suspected espionage apparatus”;
- * The CIA has evidence that the Soviets have forged end-user documents to hide the fact that their use of U.S. technology will be for military purposes rather than for civilian uses as “officially” claimed;
- * According to the CIA, a number of USTEC’s U.S. corporate members which have defense contracts, such as General Electric, Tenneco, IBM, Rockwell International, General Motors, DuPont, Xerox, and FMC, have, on numerous occasions, been the direct object of repeated Soviet intelligence gathering;
- * President Reagan’s secretary of commerce, C. William Verity, Jr., had tried several years earlier, when he was co-chairman of USTEC, to have the U.S. government remove or reduce its technology-protective trade barriers against the USSR;
- * At the annual USTEC’s director’s meeting of 1986, Council on Foreign Relations member and former undersecretary of commerce Bruce Smart stated enthusiastically,
“Complete factories can be exported to the Soviet Union totally comparable to new factories built in the U.S. with all the most modern equipment including process controls”.
A legitimate ethical conflict-of-interest exists: does a U.S. defense contractor which has received hundreds of millions – even billions – of dollars from the government for research and development of advanced defense technology have the right to be a member of any organization which is used by the enemy as an intelligence gathering operation? It was similar U.S.-Soviet commerce which helped the Red armed forces massacre one million Afghans. In 1979, the Soviet military swept down a U.S. built highway to Kabul in modern military trucks built in “the giant Khama River truck plant at Naberzhnye Chelnny, financed by David Rockefeller and a group of Wall Street banks, technology courtesy of Mack trucks,” writes Dr. John Coleman in his article “High Tech Treason” for the August ’88 issue of World Economic Review.
Two years before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, at the 1977 annual meeting of USTEC directors, David Rockefeller, who had been a director of USTEC since its inception and was chairman of the CFR for 15 years, praised Chase Manhattan Bank for its 50 years of financial assistance to the Soviet government as well as to Amtorg Trading Corp (a Soviet espionage front in earlier years), “During World War II, Chase became Amtorg Trading Corp’s principal U.S. bank.”
The efforts of the Rockefellers, the Giffens and others of their ilk who have substituted internationalism for patriotism and greed for compassion and who are working to consolidate the U.S. and the USSR into a giant cartel with loans and credits to the Soviet Union supplied by Western bankers and governments have, in the words of Jesse Helms,
“served to build the Soviet war machine and to keep the people and nations contained within the Soviet borders and in Soviet satellites in slavery.”
When, for the sake of greed, trade becomes treason and compromise becomes collusion, lines of credit form ropes of bondage.
THE LATE Dr. Bella V. Dodd had been an active member of the Communist Party, U.S.A., (CPUSA) since her college days in New York City and by the mid-’40s had become a member of the party’s inner circle leadership. However, by 1950, after discovering the total deceitfulness of all things communist, she left the party and embraced Christianity.
Dr. Dodd revealed that during the worst days of World War II, the Kremlin told the leadership of the CPUSA that if they were unable to contact Moscow, they could obtain emergency orders directly from any one of three wealthy and powerful Americans living in the towers of a famous mid-town Manhattan hotel. She never publicly revealed the names of those men. However, in response to the inevitable question, “Who is the hidden power, the real leader, behind the entire world-wide communist conspiracy?” she stated, “If the final authority for the atheistic communist conspiracy could be unmasked, it would be Satan.”
Bella Dodd had seen the conflict from both sides and she painstakingly explained that the ultimate objective of the Satanic conspiracy, of which communism was but one part, was the destruction of Christianity.
There seems to be no end to the struggle. However, in America’s continuing fight against communism’s ideological soulmates, socialism and humanism, we can surely take heart and be encouraged by the words of George Washington, written during those dark days of June, 1776, “If it be the will of God that America should be independent of Great Britain, and that this be the season for it, even I and these unhopeful men around may not be thought unworthy instruments in His hands… In this persuasion I resolve to go on, contented to save my country, or die in the last ditch.”
– 30 –