What is the FLQ but the Terrorist Wing of the NDP?

Who Is Running The Break-Up Of Canada?
“Liberals” Or NDP Communists?

DIVIDE, CONQUER & OVERTHROW:what

NDP plays the “Clarity” game for North American Union. They’ve been doing it for decades: turn the French against the English to break up the country, to dissolve the Constitution of Canada for North American Multicultural Soviet Union.

 

Where does Canada’s “break-up” come from?

It comes from the NDP’s man, Marxist-Machiavellian Trudeau, who promoted the NDP in 1963, and jumped to the Liberals AS A FRONT in 1965, to put Canada on the rails for his Marxist pals.

Using phony “trade deals” to hide the gradual remodeling of Canada for regional union, pending dissolution by phony referendums to “secede” as the means to dismantle Canada for regional union, Trudeau built up his Communist pal René Lévesque.

In the April 1962 issue of his magazine featured in the image at left, Trudeau and a raft of his fellow leftists promote regionalism for Canada as their “alternative” to the “separatism” which they, themselves, have been fomenting underground, creating the ‘problem’ so they could offer their own Marxist-globalist, anti-national, regional ‘solution’.

This begins the Trudeau march toward regional North American Union commenced by him and his own entourage in the 1950s. For, in the decade prior to this issue of Cité Libre, these same Marxists infiltrate Quebec trade unions and their publications, the daily newspapers such as La Presse and Le Devoir, and are encouraged by the federal broadcasting corporation, our outrageous CBC-Radio Canada, which virtually excludes all public opinion which opposes “the Left”. For eyewitness details on that, see my exclusive English translation of a couple of chapters from Robert Rumilly’s 1956 book, “The Leftist Infiltration in French Canada” (L’Infiltration gauchiste au Canada français).

The leftists infiltrated and undermined respectable nationalist institutions, diverting them all to their own leftist ideology, “class struggle” and support of violence and terror to destroy respectable Christian society.

These leftists, exposed by Rumilly, denounced the elected representatives of the French Canadians as “tyrants”. Well, what is their own alternative today? Under Marxist Trudeau’s 1982 coup constitution, which supposedly protects “rights”, a Christian minister, Pastor Mark Harding, has been convicted of “hate crimes” for opposing the advent of Islam in Canada. One of Canada’s new, Soviet-style socialist tribunals then sentenced the Christian pastor to “re-education camp” with a Muslim Imam, to forcibly alter his political and religious views, contrary to his own Christian conscience!

This same gang of Marxists in the 1950s, with the aid of their own Marxist lawyers, went to the Supreme Court of Canada to defend and protect the “rights” of Communists to freedom of conscience and expression. Apparently, now the tide has turned, these same Marxists having seized control of Canada, the new, true “tyrants” do not tolerate official views other than their own.

Meanwhile, back in the mid-1960s, Trudeau’s own pro-Soviet “Cité Libre” writers “quit” that magazine to become the two major FLQ terrorist leaders. One of the two also belonged to Trudeau’s true political choice, the NDP, before he “quit” to lead the terrorists: Pierre Vallières.

The other one, Charles Gagnon, would eventually “quit” the FLQ for the even more radical Maoists, and with Gilles Duceppe whose father was an NDP founding member, Gagnon then wrote for the even more radical magazine “En lutte !” (Struggle !).1

The NDP terrorists’ job: harness the FLQ to support Communist Lévesque and “sovereignty association” — which is the EU system for Canada, and the basis of global government over regional unions.

The NDP, like the CCF before it, has always supported world government; and both the NDP and its renamed version, the CCF, have always been members of the Socialist International, successor to the last Communist International, seeking world government.

Sedition is a criminal act. Sedition occurs when those in office abuse their power to promote or perpetrate unconstitutional acts. Turning citizens against each other is also the crime of sedition. Destroying the country and its lawful constitution is the high crime of treason known as a coup d’état — but you won’t notice who is really doing it, if you can blame it all on Quebec, by maligning its people while seizing and subverting its government.

There is no power to “secede” at s. 92 of the BNA Act, 1867; but that won’t stop a Marxist from infiltrating the Liberals to pretend there is one, any more than it will stop a Marxist from “quitting” the NDP to lead terrorists in demanding it. Thus, the NDP plays both ends against the middle!

And then comes FLQ terrorism: bombings and murders of Canadians, kidnappings, and phony “War Measures” by their man on top who infiltrated Canada for them. Let me underscore it: both major FLQ terrorist leaders came from Marxist-NDP-member-and-candidate Trudeau’s pro-Communist magazine, Cité Libre.2
 

Communist NDP leader Michel Chartrand backs Communist FLQ terrorist leader, Charles Gagnon

Communist NDP leader Michel Chartrand backs Communist FLQ terrorist leader, Charles Gagnon


In the midst of which, NDP Leader, Michel Chartrand:

“remained steadfast in his beliefs, and proved it by bailing FLQ leader Charles Gagnon out of jail, paying nearly three thousand dollars of his own money.”

That’s $3,000.00 in the 1960s.

What was the FLQ, if not the terrorist wing of the Marxist NDP, with its leaders issuing directly out of NDP’er Trudeau’s pro-Communist magazine?

Is terror a “Liberal” tool or a Marxist NDP tool?

Is “secession” a Liberal tool, or a Marxist NDP tool? Ask William Zebulon Foster, author of “Toward Soviet America” who threatened the USA with “secession” of the southern Black States.

Who but “former” NDP-Marxist-Cité Libre writer-FLQ terrorist leader, Pierre Vallières would falsely and maliciously call French Canada the “White Niggers of America,” thus modeling Quebec and the breakup of Canada on Foster’s Communist threats to use the Negroes in the southern “Black Belt” to split up America.3

Book cover: White Niggers of America by Pierre Vallières

Book cover: White Niggers of America by Pierre Vallières

The Liberals are always blamed for trying to annex Canada to the USA. That might be true if you are talking of real Liberals, who always wanted a republic. But it is not true if you are speaking of NDP Marxists who are closet Communists posing as Liberals and seeking North American Communist regional union: the destruction of that Republic, and of Canada.

Terror is not a tool of real Liberals; but it is a standard tool of Marxists, who wish to use it to abolish private property (check your NDP Party constitution, that’s a PLANK – no more private property).

 


“We have no compassion and we ask no compassion from you. When our turn comes, we shall not make excuses for the terror.”
— Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels “Suppression of the Neue Rheinische Zeitung“, Neue Rheinische Zeitung, May 19, 1849.

“Those dogs of democrats and liberal riff-raff will see that we’re the only chaps who haven’t been stultified by the ghastly period of peace.” – Karl Marx to Friedrich Engels (Letter, 25 February 1859).

Vallières entitled his pro-Communist diatribe “White Niggers of America”, adding a subtitle that fails to appear on subsequent big-press editions by McLelland and Stewart: The Precocious Autobiography of a Quebec “Terrorist”.

Vallières put “terrorist” in quotes on the cover, as if this unabashed description of an ignorant man who set out to lead murderers of his fellow citizens is inaccurate.

No greater defamation of parliamentary government could be heaped upon a nation and a people than to allege they are “slaves” in their country. No greater lie could be told than to pretend that French Canadians were “white niggers” and “slaves” in Canada.

The French Canadians in Quebec have always been “masters in their own house” in Confederation. They possessed supreme legislative institutions for their own self-government and protection. Whether they always knew how to use them, or even realized what they had, may be another question. Because if you know what you’ve got, you won’t easily buy the line that you are a “white nigger” and a “slave” in North America.

Moreover, Trudeau himself, arch-Marxist and beguiler, was well aware that French Canadians don’t know their own history and constitution (quite convenient to a Marxist deceiver). Law professor Trudeau admits it in the same April 1962 issue of Cité Libre featured above. Said Trudeau (translation):

“The upshot of all this is that in posing independence as a good thing in itself, an affair of dignity for every “normal people”, we launch the world on a strange war-ship. It has been claimed that any sincere anti-colonialist who wants independence for Algeria must also want it for Quebec. This reasoning contends that Quebec is a political dependency, which is to be ill informed of one’s constitutional history; but even if that were the case …. “

– – –

Footnotes:

1  Notice that today, Gilles Duceppe (ex-colleague of a Cité Libre terrorist) supports good old Communist regional union — underway now. In his 2005 article in French daily, Le Devoir, a paper long ago captured by the Marxists (read Rumilly), Duceppe demands “sovereignty” for Québec in order to protect its interests in the context of regional union.

In fact, regional union cannot be finalized until Canada and Quebec are both destroyed as sovereign entities, and that requires the initial step of a “Yes” in a final referendum to facilitate the “negotiations”. Which is precisely what the FLQ terrorists were created for: to provide an excuse to begin the “negotiations”.

Read my exclusive English translation of Duceppe’s: “For a continental integration respectful of the differences” or his French original: “Pour une intégration continentale respectueuse des différences“.

2  “Le directeur de Révolution québécoise, Pierre Vallières, 26 ans, est alors secrétaire du Syndicat des journalistes de Montréal (C.S.N.) et l’un des dirigeants de la grève en cours à La Presse. Ex-membre du parti socialiste, il a été codirecteur pendant six mois de Cité libre, une revue fondée par des intellectuels libéraux réformistes comme Pierre Elliott Trudeau et Gérard Pelletier pour combattre le régime Duplessis dans les années 50. Quant à Charles Gagnon, le secrétaire de la rédaction, il est chargé de cours en littérature à l’Université de Montréal. Âgé de 25 ans, il a œuvré à Cité libre avec Vallières et est très actif dans le mouvement étudiant.” Source: F.L.Q. Histoire d’un mouvement clandestin (1982) by Louis Fournier.

Translation: The director of Révolution québécoise, Pierre Vallières, is 26 years old, is secretary to the Syndicat des journalistes de Montréal (C.S.N.) (the Montreal journalists trade union), and is one of the directors of the strike underway at La Presse. A former member of the socialist party [meaning the NDP by another name in Quebec], he was a co-director for six months of Cité libre, a review founded by Liberal intellectual reformers such as Pierre Elliott Trudeau and Gérard Pelletier to combat the Duplessis régime in the 1950s. As for Charles Gagnon, a copy-editor, he is a junior lecturer in literature at the University of Montreal. Aged 25, he has worked at Cité libre with Vallières and is very active in the student movement.”

Translator’s note: Trudeau and Pelletier were not “Liberals” at the time they founded their Pro-Soviet Cité libre in the 50s. They were socialists and NDP’ers who modeled their review on the crypto-communist, pro-regionalist magazine Esprit in France which promoted Marxist principles, opposed traditional Christianity, and agitated for regionalism in Europe. Both men jumped to the Liberals in 1965 to use that other party as a front to push forward regional communist union for Canada and North America. You have to know a little before you read Fournier, who is a partisan of the leftist movement.

3  Said Communist author and leader William Z. Foster (pp. 303-304:

“The status of the American Negro is that of an oppressed national minority, and only a Soviet system can solve the question of such minorities. This it does, in addition to setting up real equality in the general political and social life, by establishing the right of self-determination for national minorities in those parts of the country where they constitute the bulk of the population. The constitution of the Soviet Union provides that, “Each united republic retains the right of free withdrawal from the Union.” “The recognition of the right of all nations, irrespective of race, to complete self-determination, that is, self-determination inclusive of the right to State separation.”

Accordingly, the right of self-determination will apply to Negroes in the American Soviet system. In the so-called Black Belt of the South, where the Negroes are in the majority, they will have the fullest right to govern themselves and also such white minorities as may live in this section.

Translator’s note: Ahoy, the double standard. If Negroes are a minority in all of the USA, the white majority is called upon to integrate them and give them equal rights to governance over all, which obviously would result in a quite different society, culture and form of government. However, if whites are a minority in the Black Belt, the Negroes will have the right to govern “over” them in a Soviet America.

In other words, the founding peoples of America, who happen to be white (a bad thing), have no right to preserve their own government and culture against dissimilar minorities. They have no right to ask these minorities to adopt their system. But these dissimilar minorities have an absolute right to subordinate white people to their own Black rule and culture. This is not statesmanship, but double-talk to divide and conquer existing powerful nations and peoples.

The same approach was taken in Canada by Cité Libre terrorist, Pierre Vallières, who chose to identify white French Canadians and Quebec in Canada with the Negroes of the Black Belt in William Foster’s American South.

– 30 –

 

Advertisements

The "Money Power" and The Left

Source: Tragedy and Hope, A History of the World in Our Time by Carroll Quigley, Volumes 1-8, New York: The Macmillan Company 1966.

This text has been taken from a non-paginated OCR of the book.

The Chief Links Between Wall Street,
the Left and Communists

Thomas W. Lamont

Thomas W. Lamont

Our concern at the moment is with the links between Wall Street and the Left, especially the Communists. Here the chief link was the Thomas W. Lamont family. This family was in many ways parallel to the Straight family. Tom Lamont had been brought into the Morgan firm, as Straight was several years later, by Henry P. Davison, a Morgan partner from 1909. Lamont became a partner in 1910, as Straight did in 1913. Each had a wife who became a patroness of Leftish causes, and two sons, of which the elder was a conventional banker, and the younger was a Left-wing sympathizer and sponsor. In fact, all the evidence would indicate that Tom Lamont was simply Morgan’s apostle to the Left in succession to Straight, a change made necessary by the latter’s premature death in 1918. Both were financial supporters of liberal publications; in Lamont’s case The Saturday Review of Literature, which he supported throughout the 1920’s and 1930’s, and the New York Post, which he owned from 1918 to 1924.

The Files of the House Un-American Activities
Committee

The chief evidence, however, can be found in the files of the HUAC which show Tom Lamont, his wife Flora, and his son Corliss as sponsors and financial angels to almost a score of extreme Left organizations, including the Communist Party itself. Among these we need mention only two. One of these was a Communist-front organization, the Trade Union Services, Incorporated, of New York City, which in 1947 published fifteen trade-union papers for various CIO unions. Among its officers were Corliss Lamont and Frederick Vanderbilt Field (another link between Wall Street and the Communists). The latter was on the editorial boards of the official Communist newspaper in New York, the Daily Worker, as well as its magazine, The New Masses, and was the chief link between the Communists and the Institute of Pacific Relations in 1928-1947. Corliss Lamont was the leading light in another Communist organization, which started life in the 1920’s as the Friends of the Soviet Union, but in 1943 was reorganized, with Lamont as chairman of the board and chief incorporator, as the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship.

Corliss Lamont Was One of the Chief Spokesmen for the
Soviet Point of View in America

During this whole period of over two decades, Corliss Lamont, with the full support of his parents, was one of the chief figures in “fellow traveler” circles and one of the chief spokesmen for the Soviet point of view both in these organizations and also in connections which came to him either as son of the most influential man in Wall Street or as professor of philosophy at Columbia University. His relationship with his parents may be reflected in a few events of this period.

Lamont Refuses to Testify Before Congress

In January 1946, Corliss Lamont was called before HUAC to give testimony on the National Council of American-Soviet Friendship. He refused to produce records, was subpoenaed, refused, was charged with contempt of Congress, and was so cited by the House of Representatives on June 26, 1946. In the midst of this controversy, in May, Corliss Lamont and his mother, Mrs. Thomas Lamont, presented their valuable collection of the works of Spinoza to Columbia University. The adverse publicity continued, yet when Thomas Lamont rewrote his will, on January 6, 1948, Corliss Lamont remained in it as co-heir to his father’s fortune of scores of millions of dollars.

The McCarran Committee Shows that China Was Lost to the Communists
by the Deliberate Actions of the State Department and the Institute of Pacific Relations

In 1951 the Subcommittee on Internal Security of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the so-called McCarran Committee, sought to show that China had been lost to the Communists by the deliberate actions of a group of academic experts on the Far East and Communist fellow travelers whose work in that direction was controlled and coordinated by the Institute of Pacific Relations (IPR). The influence of the Communists in IPR is well established, but the patronage of Wall Street is less well known.

The IPR Was Financed by the Carnegie and Rockefeller Foundations

The IPR was a private association of ten independent national councils in ten countries concerned with affairs in the Pacific.

The headquarters of the IPR and of the American Council of IPR were both in New York and were closely associated on an interlocking basis. Each spent about $2.5 million dollars over the quarter-century from 1925 to 1950, of which about half, in each case, came from the Carnegie Foundation and the Rockefeller Foundation (which were themselves interlocking groups controlled by an alliance of Morgan and Rockefeller interests in Wall Street). Much of the rest, especially of the American Council, came from firms closely allied to these two Wall Street interests, such as Standard Oil, International Telephone and Telegraph, International General Electric, the National City Bank, and the Chase National Bank. In each case, about l0 percent of income came from sales of publications and, of course, a certain amount came from ordinary members who paid $15 a year and received the periodicals of the IPR and its American Council, Pacific Affairs and Far Eastern Survey.

Large Funds Were Given to IPR by Wall Street
and the Large Foundations

The financial deficits which occurred each year were picked up by financial angels, almost all with close Wall Street connections. The chief identifiable contributions here were about $60,000 from Frederick Vanderbilt Field over eighteen years, $14,700 from Thomas Lamont over fourteen years, $800 from Corliss Lamont (only after 1947), and $18,000 from a member of Lee, Higginson in Boston who seems to have been Jerome D. Greene. In addition, large sums of money each year were directed to private individuals for research and travel expenses from similar sources, chiefly the great financial foundations.

The IPR Line Was Parroted by the State Department,
Ivy League Schools and Scholars Funded by Wall Street

Most of these awards for work in the Far Eastern area required approval or recommendation from members of IPR. Moreover, access to publication and recommendations to academic positions in the handful of great American universities concerned with the Far East required similar sponsorship. And, finally, there can be little doubt that consultant jobs on Far Eastern matters in the State Department or other government agencies were largely restricted to IPR-approved people. The individuals who published, who had money, found jobs, were consulted, and who were appointed intermittently to government missions were those who were tolerant of the IPR line. The fact that all these lines of communication passed through the Ivy League universities or their scattered equivalents west of the Appalachians, such as Chicago, Stanford, or California, unquestionably went back to Morgan’s influence in handling large academic endowments.

IPR Scholars, the State Department and the Kremlin
Promote the Same Viewpoint

There can be little doubt that the more active academic members of IPR, the professors and publicists who became members of its governing board (such as Owen Lattimore, Joseph P. Chamberlain, and Philip C. Jessup of Columbia, William W. Lockwood of Princeton, John K. Fairbank of Harvard, and others) and the administrative staff (which became, in time, the most significant influence in its policies) developed an IPR party line. It is, furthermore, fairly clear that this IPR line had many points in common both with the Kremlin’s party line on the Far East and with the State Department’s policy line in the same area. The interrelations among these, or the influence of one on another, is highly disputed. Certainly no final conclusions can be drawn.

There Was a Great Deal of Intrigue Used
to Influence U.S. Policy

Clearly there were some Communists, even party members, involved (such as Frederick Vanderbilt Field)…. Furthermore, there was a great deal of intrigue both to help those who agreed with the IPR line and to influence United States government policy in this direction., but there is no evidence of which I am aware of any explicit plot or conspiracy to direct American policy in a direction favorable either to the Soviet Union or to international Communism. [The evidence alluded to here exists, however,

the real aim of these individuals and groups was to betray China into the hands of the communists in order to build a new Imperial System. The Soviet Union is a part of this secret Imperial Order and was set up by the Money Power in 1917. They planned to support and build Communist China into a new Super Power to rule Asia.]….

Many People in the U.S. Accept the Communist Ideology

The true explanation of what happened is not yet completely known and, as far as it is known, is too complicated to elucidate here. It is, however, clear that many persons who were born in the period 1900-1920 and came to maturity in the period 1928-1940 were so influenced by their experiences of war, depression, and insecurity that they adopted, more or less unconsciously, certain aspects of the Communist ideology (such as the economic interpretation of history, the role of a dualistic class struggle in human events, or the exploitative interpretation of the role of capital in the productive system and of the possessing groups in any society). Many of these ideas were nonsense, even in terms of their own experiences, but they were facile interpretative guides for people who, whatever their expert knowledge of their special areas, were lacking in total perspective on society as a whole or human experience as a whole…. This outlook was, for example, prevalent in that ubiquitous intriguer, Lionel Curtis, who was the original guide and parent of the IPR and of many similar organizations….

The Right’s Fairy Tale

The … Right[‘s] version of these events as written up by John T. Flynn, Freda Utley, and others … had a tremendous impact on American opinion and American relations with other countries in the years 1947-1955. This … Right fairy tale, which is now an accepted folk myth in many groups in America, pictured the recent history of the United States, in regard to domestic reform and in foreign affairs, as a well-organized plot by extreme Left-wing elements, operating from the White House itself and controlling all the chief avenues of publicity in the United States, to destroy the American way of life, based on private enterprise, laissez faire, and isolationism, in behalf of alien ideologies of Russian Socialism and British cosmopolitanism (or internationalism). This plot, if we are to believe the myth, worked through such avenues of publicity as The New York Times and the Herald Tribune, the Christian Science Monitor and the Washington Post, the Atlantic Monthly and Harper’s Magazine and had at its core the wild-eyed and bushy-haired theoreticians of Socialist Harvard and the London School of Economics. It was determined to bring the United States into World War II on the side of England (Roosevelt’s first love) and Soviet Russia (his second love) in order to destroy every finer element of American life and, as part of this consciously planned scheme, invited Japan to attack Pearl Harbor, and destroyed Chiang Kai-shek, all the while undermining America’s real strength by excessive spending and unbalanced budgets.

The Right’s Fairy Tale Does Have a Modicum of Truth

This myth, like all fables, does in fact have a modicum of truth. There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the … Right believes the Communists act. In fact, this network, which we may identify as the Round Table Groups, has no aversion to cooperating with the Communists, or any other groups, and frequently does so. I know of the operations of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years, in the early 1960’s. to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments. I have objected, both in the past and recently, to a few of its policies (notably to its belief that England was an Atlantic rather than a European Power and must be allied, or even federated, with the United States and must remain isolated from Europe), but in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant enough to be known.

The Round Table Groups Have Played a Very Significant
Role in the History of the U.S.

The Round Table Groups have already been mentioned in this book several times, notably in connection with the formation of the British Commonwealth in chapter 4 and in the discussion of appeasement in chapter 12 (“the Cliveden Set”). At the risk of some repetition, the story will be summarized here, because the American branch of this organization (sometimes called the “Eastern Establishment’) has played a very significant role in the history of the United States in the last generation.

The Original Purpose of the Round Table Groups

The Round Table Groups were semi-secrel discussion and lobbying groups organized by Lionel Curtis, Philip H. Kerr (Lord Lothian), and (Sir) William S. Marris in 1908-1911. This was done on behalf of Lord Milner, the dominant Trustee of the Rhodes Trust in the two decades 1905-1925.

The original purpose of these groups was to seek to federate the English-speaking world along lines laid down by Cecil Rhodes (1853-1902) and William T. Stead (1849-1912), and the money for the organizational work came originally from the Rhodes Trust.

By 1915 Round Table groups existed in seven countries, including England, South Africa, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, and a rather loosely organized group in the United States (George Louis Beer, Walter Lippmann, Frank Aydelotte, Whitney Shepardson, Thomas W. Lamont, Jerome D. Greene, Erwin D. Canham of the Christian Science Monitor, and others). The attitudes of the various groups were coordinated by frequent visits and discussions and by a well-informed and totally anonymous quarterly magazine. The Round Table, whose first issue, largely written by Philip Kerr, appeared in November 1910.

The Leaders of the Round Table Groups

The leaders of this group were: Milner, until his death in 1925, followed by Curtis (1872-1955), Robert H, (Lord) Brand (brother-in-law of Lady Astor) until his death in 1963, and now Adam D. Marris, son of Sir William and Brand’s successor as managing director of Lazard Brothers bank. The original intention had been to have collegia! leadership, but Milner was too secretive and headstrong to share the role. He did so only in the period 1913-1919 when he held regular meetings with some of his closest friends to coordinate their activities as a pressure group in the struggle with Wilhelmine Germany. This they called their “Ginger Group.” After Milner’s death in 1925, the leadership was largely shared by the survivors of Milner’s “Kindergarten,” that is, the group of young Oxford men whom he used as civil servants in his reconstruction of South Africa in 1901-1910. Brand was the last survivor of the “Kindergarten”: since his death, the greatly reduced activities of the organization have been exercised largely through the Editorial Committee of The Round Table magazine under Adam Marris.

Financial Backers of the Found Table Groups

Money for the widely ramified activities of this organization came originally from the associates and followers of Cecil Rhodes, chiefly from the Rhodes Trust itself, and from wealthy associates such as the Beit brothers, from Sir Abe Bailey, and (after 1915) from the Astor family. Since 1925 there have been substantial contributions from wealthy individuals and from foundations and firms associated with the international banking fraternity, especially the Carnegie United Kingdom Trust, and other organizations associated with J. P. Morgan, the Rockefeller and Whitney families, and the associates of Lazard Brothers and of Morgan, Grenfell, and Company.

The Existing Financial Network in New York and London

The chief backbone of this organization grew up along the already existing financial cooperation running from the Morgan Bank in New York to a group of international financiers in London led hy Lazard Brothers. Milner himself in 1901 had refused a fabulous offer, worth up to S100,000 a year, to become one of the three partners of the Morgan Bank in London, in succession to the younger J. P. Morgan who moved from London to join his father in New York (eventually the vacancy went to E. C. Grenfell, so that the London affiliate of Morgan became known as Morgan, Grenfell, and Company). Instead, Milner became director of a number of public banks, chiefly the London Joint Stock Bank, corporate precursor of the Midland Bank. He became one of the greatest political and financial powers in England, with his disciples strategically placed throughout England in significant places, such as the editorship of The Times, the editorship of The Observer, the managing directorship of Lazard Brothers, various administrative posts, and even Cabinet positions. Ramifications were established in politics, high finance, Oxford and London universities, periodicals, the civil service, and tax-exempt foundations.

Front Organizations Established in Key Countries

At the end of the war of 1914, it became clear that the organization of this system had to be greatly extended. Once again the task was entrusted to Lionel Curtis who established, in England and each dominion, a front organization to the existing local Round Table Group. This front organization, called the Royal Institute of International Affairs, had as its nucleus in each area the existing submerged Round Table Group. In New York it was known as the Council on Foreign Relations, and was a front for J. P. Morgan and Company in association with the very small American Round Table Group. The American organizers were dominated by the large number of Morgan “experts,” including Lamont and Beer, who had gone to the Paris Peace Conference and there became close friends with the similar group of English “experts” which had been recruited by the Milner group.

In fact, the original plans for the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Council on Foreign Relations were drawn up at Paris.

The Council of the RIIA (which, by Curtis’s energy came to be housed in Chatham House, across St. James’s Square from the Astors, and was soon known by the name of this headquarters) and the board of the Council on Foreign Relations have carried ever since the marks of their origin. Until 1960 the council at Chatham House was dominated by the dwindling group of Milner’s associates, while the paid staff members were largely the agents of Lionel Curtis. The Round Table for years (until 1961) was edited from the back door of Chatham House grounds in Ormond Yard, and its telephone came through the Chatham House switchboard.

The Council on Foreign Relations in New York Was Dominated
by J. P. Morgan

The New York branch was dominated by the associates of the Morgan Bank. For example, in 1928 the Council on Foreign Relations had John W. Davis as president, Paul Cravath as vice-president, and a council of thirteen others, which included Owen D. Young, Russell C. Leffingwell, Norman Davis, Allen Dulles, George W. Wickersham, Frank L. Polk, Whitney Shepardson, Isaiah Bowman, Stephen P. Duggan, and Otto Kahn. Throughout its history the council has been associated with the American Round Tablers, such as Beer, Lippmann. Shepardson. and Jerome Greene.

Wall Street Contacts

The academic figures have been those linked to Morgan, such as James T. Shotwell, Charles Seymour, Joseph P. Chamberlain, Philip Jessup, Isaiah Bowman and, more recently, Philip Moseley, Grayson L Kirk, and Henry M. Wriston. The Wall Street contacts with these were created originally from Morgan’s influence in handling large academic endowments. In the case of the largest of these endowments, that at Harvard, the influence was usually exercised indirectly through “State Street,” Boston, which, for much of the twentieth century, came through the Boston banker Thomas Nelson Perkins.

Wall Street Law Firms

Closely allied with this Morgan influence were a small group of Wall Street law firms, whose chief figures were Elihu Root, John W. Davis, Paul D. Cravath, Russell Leffingwell, the Dulles brothers and, more recently. Arthur R Dean. Philip D. Reed, and John J. McCloy. Other nonlegal agents of Morgan included men like Owen D. Young and Norman H. Davis.

J. P. Morgan and Company Were the Center of the
Round Table Group in America

On this basis, which was originally financial and goes back to George Peabody, there grew up in the twentieth century a power structure between London and New York which penetrated deeply into university life, the press, and the practice of foreign policy. In England the center was the Round Table Group, while in the United States it was J. P. Morgan and Company or its local branches in Boston, Philadelphia, and Cleveland. Some rather incidental examples of the operations of this structure are very revealing, just because they are incidental. For example, it set up in Princeton a reasonable copy of the Round Table Group’s chief Oxford headquarters. All Souls College. This copy, called the Institute for Advanced Study, and best known, perhaps, as the refuge of Einstein, Oppenheimer, John von Neumann, and George F. Ken nan. was organized by Abraham Flexner of the Carnegie Foundation and Rockefeller’s General Education Board after he had experienced the delights of All Souls while serving as Rhodes Memorial Lecturer at Oxford. The plans were largely drawn by Tom Jones, one of the Round Table’s most active intriguers and foundation administrators.

The American Branch Exerted Its Influence Through
Five American Newspapers

The American branch of this “English Establishment” exerted much of its influence through five American newspapers (The New York Times, New York Herald Tribune. Christian Science Monitor, the Washington Post, and the lamented Boston Evening Transcript). In fact, the editor of the Christian Science Monitor was the chief American correspondent (anonymously) of The Round Table, and Lord Lothian, the original editor of The Round Table and later secretary of the Rhodes Trust (1925-1939) and ambassador to Washington, was a frequent writer in the Monitor. It might be mentioned that the existence of this Wall Street, Anglo-American axis is quite obvious once it is pointed out. It is reflected in the fact that such Wall Street luminaries as John W. Davis, Lewis Douglas, Jock Whitney, and Douglas Dillon were appointed to he American ambassadors in London.

The Double International Network Extended into New Countries through
Institute of International Affairs

This double international network in which the Round Table groups formed the semi-secret or secret nuclei of the Institutes of International Affairs was extended into a third network in 1925, organized by the same people for the same motives. Once again the mastermind was Lionel Curtis, and the earlier Round Table Groups and Institutes of International Affairs were used as nuclei for the new network. However, this new organization for Pacific affairs was extended to ten countries, while the Round Table Groups existed only in seven. The new additions, ultimately China, Japan, France, the Netherlands, and Soviet Russia, had Pacific councils set up from scratch. In Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, Pacific councils, interlocked and dominated by the Institutes of International Affairs, were set up. In England, Chatham House served as the English center for both nets, while in the United States the two were parallel creations (not subordinate) of the Wall Street allies of the Morgan Bank. The financing came from the same international banking groups and their subsidiary commercial and industrial firms. In England, Chatham House was financed for both networks by the contributions of Sir Abe Bailey, the Astor family, and additional funds largely acquired by the persuasive powers of Lionel Curtis. The financial difficulties of the IPR Councils in the British Dominions in the depression of 1929-1935 resulted in a very revealing effort to save money, when the local Institute of International Affairs absorbed the local Pacific Council, both of which were, in a way, expensive and needless fronts for the local Round Table groups.

The Chief Aim of the Elaborate and Semi-secret Organization

The chief aims of this elaborate, semi-secret organization were… to coordinate the international activities and outlooks of all the English-speaking world into one (which would largely, it is true, be that of the London group);

to work to… help backward, colonial, and underdeveloped areas to advance toward stability, law and order, and prosperity along lines somewhat similar to those taught at Oxford and the University of London (especially the School of Economics and the Schools of African and Oriental Studies). (Democratic socialism, finance capitalism, monopoly capitalism, secularism, internationalism, ect.)

These organizations and their financial backers were in no sense reactionary or Fascistic persons, as Communist propaganda would like to depict them. Quite the contrary. They were gracious and cultured gentlemen of… social experience who were much concerned with the freedom of expression of minorities and the rule of law for all, who constantly thought in terms of Anglo-American solidarity, of political partition and federation, and who were convinced that they could gracefully civilize the Boers of South Africa, the Irish, the Arabs, and the Hindus, and who are largely responsible for the partitions of Ireland, Palestine, and India, as well as the federations of South Africa, Central Africa, and the West Indies. Their desire to win over the opposition by cooperation worked with Smuts but failed with Hertzog, worked with Gandhi but failed with Menon, worked with Stresemann…. If their failures now loom larger than their successes, this should not be allowed to conceal the high motives with which they attempted both.

Contrary to published claims, the real goal of these individuals and organizations is to further the development of a New Imperial Order and World Empire.]

Round Table Groups Jettison Communists When Congress
Discovers Their Activities

It was this group of people, whose wealth and influence so exceeded their experience and understanding, who provided much of the framework of influence which the Communist sympathizers and fellow travelers took over in the United States in the 1930’s.

It must be recognized that the power that these energetic Left-wingers exercised was never their own power or Communist power but was ultimately the power of the international financial coterie

and, once the anger and suspicions of the American people were aroused, as they were by 1950, it was a fairly simple matter to get rid of the Red sympathizers.FN1

The Reece Committee to Investigate Tax Exempt Foundations

Before this could be done, however, a congressional committee, following backward to their source the threads which led from admitted Communists like Whittaker Chambers, through Alger Hiss, and the Carnegie Endowment to Thomas Lamont and the Morgan Bank, fell into the whole complicated network of the interlocking tax-exempt foundations.

The Eighty-third Congress in July 1953 set up a Special Committee to Investigate Tax-Exempt Foundations with Representative B. Carroll Reece, of Tennessee, as chairman.

It soon became clear that people of immense wealth would be unhappy if the investigation went too far and that the “most respected” newspapers in the country, closely allied with these men of wealth, would not get excited enough about any revelations to make the publicity worth while, in terms of votes or campaign contributions. An interesting report showing the Left-wing associations of the interlocking nexus of tax-exempt foundations was issued in 1954 rather quietly. Four years later, the Reece committee‘s general counsel, Rene A. Wormser, wrote a shocked, but not shocking, book on the subject called Foundations: Their Power and Influence. See the Staff Reports prepared by the Committee under the direction of Norman Dodd. 1

Jerome D. Greene Is One of the Key Figures in the Establishment of the
Council on Foreign Relations

One of the most interesting members of this Anglo-American power structure was Jerome D. Greene (1874-1959). Born in Japan of missionary parents, Greene graduated from Harvard’s college and law school by 1899 and became secretary to Harvard’s president and corporation in 1901-1910. This gave him contacts with Wall Street which made him general manager of the Rockefeller Institute (1910-1912), assistant to John D. Rockefeller in philanthropic work for two years, then trustee to the Rockefeller Institute, to the Rockefeller Foundation, and to the Rockefeller General Education Board until 1939. For fifteen years (1917-1932) he was with the Boston investment banking firm of Lee, Higginson, and Company, most of the period as its chief officer, as well as with its London branch. As executive secretary of the American section of the Allied Maritime Transport Council, stationed in London in 1918, he lived in Toynbee Hall, the world’s first settlement house, which had been founded hy Alfred Milner and his friends in 1884. This brought him in contact with the Round Table Group in England, a contact which was strengthened in 1919 when he was secretary to the Reparations Commission at the Paris Peace Conference. Accordingly, on his return to the United States he was one of the early figures in the establishment of the Council on Foreign Relations, which served as the New York branch of Lionel Curtis’s Institute of International Affairs.

Green Sells Fraudulent Securities of Ivor Kreuger

As an investment banker, Greene is chiefly remembered for his sales of millions of dollars of the fraudulent securities of the Swedish match king, Ivor Kreuger. That Greene offered these to the American investing public in good faith is evident from the fact that he put a substantial part of his own fortune in the same investments. As a consequence, Kreuger’s suicide in Paris in April 1932 left Greene with little money and no job. He wrote to Lionel Curtis, asking for help, and was given, for two years, a professorship of international relations at Aberystwyth, Wales. The Round Table Group controlled that professorship from its founding by David Davies in 1919, in spite of the fact that Davies, who was made a peer in 1932, had broken with the Round Table because of its subversion of the League of Nations and European collective security.

Greene Returns to America

On his return to America in 1934, Greene also returned to his secretaryship of the Harvard Corporation and became, for the remainder of his life, practically a symbol of Yankee Boston, as trustee and officer of the Boston Symphony Orchestra, the Gardner Museum in Fenway Court, the New England Conservatory of Music, the American Academy in Rome, the Brookings Institution, the Rockefeller Foundation, and the General Education Board (only until 1939). He was also director of the Harvard Tercentenary Celebration in 1934-1937.

Greene Was Wall Street’s Chief Conduct of Funds
for the IPR

Greene is of much greater significance in indicating the real influences within the Institute of Pacific Relations than any Communists or fellow travelers. He wrote the constitution for the IPR in 1926, was for years the chief conduit for Wall Street funds and influence into the organization, was treasurer of the American Council for three years, and chairman for three more, as well as chairman of the International Council for four years.

There Is a Very Real Power Structure in Existence

Jerome Greene is a symbol of much more than the Wall Street influence in the IPR. He is also a symbol of the relationship betAveen the financial circles of London and those of the eastern United States which reflects one of the most powerful influences in twentieth-century American and world history. The two ends of this English-speaking axis have sometimes been called, perhaps facetiously, the English and American Establishments. There is, however, a considerable degree of truth behind the joke, a truth which reflects a very real power structure. It is this power structure which the… Right in the United States has been attacking for years in the belief that they are attacking the Communists. This is particularly true when these attacks are directed, as they so frequently are at “Harvard Socialism,” or at “Left-wing newspapers” like The New York Times and the Washington Post, or at foundations and their dependent establishments, such as the Institute of International Education.

Misdirected Attacks by the Right

These misdirected attacks by the… Right did much to confuse the American people in the period 1948-1955, and left consequences which were still significant a decade later. By the end of 1953, most of these attacks had run their course. The American people, thoroughly bewildered at widespread charges of twenty years of treason and subversion, had rejected the Democrats and put into the White House the Republican Party’s traditional favorite… Dwight D. Eisenhower. At the time, two events, one public and one secret, were still in process. The public one was the Korean War of 1950-1953: the secret one was the race for the thermonuclear bomb.

– 30 –

FN1 NoSnow: It’s a little bit difficult to take Professor Quigley seriously at this point. First, because Quigley himself has said that the “Money Power” set up the Soviet Union in 1917. Then, Quigley says, the real aim of Sovietizing Russia and China, (an aim which was a secret), is the set-up of a new Imperial Order. Finally, if the “Reds” were dispensed with, as Quigley says, in the aftermath of the Reece and McCarran investigations…. how does a Soviet spy, Lester Bowles Pearson, (exposed as such in the McCarran hearings) nonetheless then become President of the CIIA — the Canadian counterpart of the CFR (and the secretariat in Canada to the Institute of Pacific Relations) and rise into federal politics in Canada despite the RCMP’s having been warned by the FBI?

If the “Reds” were cleared out, why is Communist Pierre Trudeau a member of the CIIA? How does he become Prime Minister of Canada? Trudeau, on succeeding Pearson in the Prime Minister’s Office, appointed elite Soviet spies to run Canada’s national security, police, and communications.

It doesn’t sound to me as if the Reds were cleared out at all; nor, given the plans alleged by Quigley for a Soviet new world empire, would it be logical. Said Quigley:

the real aim of these individuals and groups was to betray China into the hands of the communists in order to build a new Imperial System. The Soviet Union is a part of this secret Imperial Order and was set up by the Money Power in 1917.

Norman Dodd‘s revelations (in the video clip above) of White House secret instructions to the tax-free foundations to affect education so as to Sovietize America, substantiate Quigley’s allegations.

The Reds were not cleared out; they’ve just got themselves a much better cover story, and better propaganda departments.

– – –