[NWO] Don ’t Blame the Brits

[Henk Elegeert]

REPLY TO: D66 at nic.surfnet.nl

Don’t Blame the
Brits<http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/08/08/dont-blame-the-brits/>
Is there an 'Anglophile conspiracy' seeking world domination?
by Dr. K R Bolton August 8, 2010
 The exceedingly well-informed American journalist Michael Collins Piper, a
fearless critic of Zionist and US policies, stated in a recent report on the
acquisition of *Newsweek* by “Zionist billionaire” Sidney Harman and his
wife, Congresswoman Jane:

Now *Newsweek* falls into the hands of the Harmans, who, by the way, are
both members of the Council on Foreign Relations, the New York-based
affiliate of the London-based Royal Institute of International Affairs,
which is the foreign policy arm of the Rothschild empire.[1]

<http://static.foreignpolicyjournal.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/eye.jpg>I
respectfully differ from Mr Piper in his description of the Anglophile link.
The claim in regard to an “international Anglophile conspiracy,” which is a
variant or often associated with other conspiracy theories, which include
those of Jews, Zionists, E.T. Lizards, bankers, and/or the Illuminati, has
quite a wide currency among political and foreign policy analysts. Among
these might be counted Dr Henry Makow, David Icke,[2] and the LaRouche
movement.

Hence Dr Makow, a courageous anti-Zionist Jew, writes for example:

Our main misconception about the CIA is that it serves US interests. In
fact, it has always been the instrument of a dynastic international banking
and oil elite (Rothschild, Rockefeller, Morgan) coordinated by the Royal
Institute for Internal Affairs in London and their US branch, the Council
for Foreign Relations. It was established and peopled by blue bloods from
the New York banking establishment and graduates of Yale University’s secret
pagan “Skull and Bones” society. Our current President, his father and
grandfather fit this profile.[3]

Lyndon LaRouche seems to be the most avid in advocating the existence of a
long-running conspiracy orchestrated by a British Establishment, with the
British Monarch near the top, and involving in particular narcotics trading.
A representative sampling of the British-orientated conspiracy theory from
the LaRouche movement states in part:

…Yet few critics, with the exception of Lyndon LaRouche, have raised the
specter of a foreign hand behind the Bush-Cheney wrecking operations. This
is largely explained by the fact that the vast majority of Americans,
including within the political class, have lost a true sense of history.
They perceive the consequences of the government’s actions from the more
limited standpoint of relatively near-term cause and effect, or from the
vantage point of a specialist’s limited historical lens. Moreover, they all
generally accept the false notion that the British hand in world affairs has
been vastly reduced, and that the impulse towards empire has been abandoned
or suppressed, due to England’s “diminished” condition. One need only read
the inserted special report in the Feb. 3, 2007 edition of the
*Economist*to recognize that the City of London is now celebrating
“another British
imperial moment,” centered around the successful promulgation of yet another
devastating myth: that globalization is an irreversible, driving force in
world economic and political affairs.

It is in this context that the present review of the Quigley book is
written. For what Professor Quigley recounts, with impeccable documentation,
is a more than 100-year assault upon the American Constitutional republic by
a conspiracy of leading British imperialists, who saw the survival of the
British Empire in apocalyptic terms: Either the United States would be
coopted back under London domination, or the Empire would crumble. Based on
this assessment, a tight-knit group of leading British oligarchs launched a
series of projects, aimed at recasting the British Empire as a “Commonwealth
of Nations” and drawing the United States, forever, back into the fold.

The project documented by Professor Quigley, involved the philosophical
assault on the American republican outlook, and the gradual establishment of
an alternative ideology, based on the “Anglo-American” or “English-speaking”
vision of the world…[4]

The book Steinberg is referring to is *The Anglo-American Established*,
written by the eminent Harvard historian Carroll Quigley in the 1940s, but
published in 1981.[5]

The book that Quigley did have published during his lifetime was *Tragedy
and Hope*, a wide-sweeping history that he used as a basic text for his
classes at Harvard.[6] The few dozen pages of his 1300 page *magnum
opus*has provided conspiracy theorists, particularly in the USA, with
ongoing
ammunition, and the theory was popularized by reviews from John Birch
Society affiliated authors; in particular W Cleon Skousen’s book, *The Naked
Capitalist*,[7] which was specifically devoted to analyzing *Tragedy and
Hope*.

Quigley is of particular significance not only because of his eminence as a
mainstream historian, but because of his admitted role as a so-called
Establishment “Insider” (until he published the book) who states of an
“Anglophile network”: “I know 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.”[8] He described a
worldwide network of international bankers that emerged, centered on the
Rothschilds.[9] Establishing the center of international finance in the City
of London, the firms “at the core of English financial life” were listed as
being Baring Bros., N M Rothschild, J Henry Shroder, Morgan Grenfell,
Hambros and Larzard Bros. It might be noted that there is a glaring lack of
Anglo-Saxon names among the merchant banking families. In the USA there were
Warburg, Lehman, Schiff, and among the few Anglo exceptions, J P Morgan and
Rockefellers, these two being considered the focus of the Anglophile
conspiracy in the USA.

Quigley traces the Anglophile conspiracy to the intellectual influence of
John Ruskin of Oxford, who imbued with his ideals those who were to become
prominent in the British Empire such as most significantly Cecil Rhodes.[10]
Ruskin, like some other well-placed Victorians, did not like the Darwinistic
system of *laissez faire* that operated in Britain and was indeed the basis
of plutocracy. However, to many Americans any call for social justice and
limitation of free trade is bolshevism-run-rampant, and this “socialistic”
orientation has provided grist for the mill of some conservative conspiracy
theorists such as Skousen.* Ruskin also had a vision of an imperialism that
would pervade the world with social justice under the auspices of the
British Empire.[11] Rhodes sought to fulfill this mission with others such
as Lord Alfred Milner, by establishing a secret society, later called The
Round Table Group, from which emerged the Royal Institute of International
Affairs (RIIA). Lord Rothschild, as Rhodes’ banker, was in this from the
start.[12] Quigley states that other similar think tanks were organized
throughout the British Dominions, and in the USA, where it became known as
the Council on Foreign Relations.

>From here the Anglophile conspiracy proceeded to map out a lineal conspiracy
of British imperialism that continues to seek world domination, of which the
CFR is merely a flunky, with Queen Elizabeth II being among the top of the
conspiratorial hierarchy. Such a British conspiracy operating against the
interests of the USA would have an appeal to “American patriots”,
considering America’s founding as a rebellion against British rule.

*BANKERS’ “PATRIOTISM”*

What Quigley somehow managed to overlook, and what has distorted the views
of theorists of the Anglophile conspiracy, is that the internationalists of
the American delegation at the 1919 Versailles Peace Conference and the
British imperialists who considered a joint project for a post-war ‘new
world order’ decided from before the beginning not to proceed in
conjunction. Therefore it is balderdash to consider the CFR and all that
that implies, to have been a veritable “branch” of the RIIA with a
commitment to push the USA into pursuing a renewal of British imperialism.

The insistence by sundry students of history that there is an Anglophile
conspiracy among bankers to restore the Empire seems oddly naïve, and a
fundamental misunderstanding as to the nature of globalist capital. The
theory implies that international plutocrats can be or are loyal to anything
other than their own greed-driven motives, with a possible exception being
the tribal loyalty owed by some to Israel.

Bankers such as the Rothschilds were “loyal” to empires as long as those
empires were the most effective power blocs for extending their economic
control further afield. It should be recalled that the original Meyer
Amschel Rothschild sent four of his five sons out to the leading economic
centers of the day: Vienna, London, Paris, and Naples. If he did not do so
to establish the House of Rothschild as *international* – as distinct from
specifically national of even imperial – bankers – then what? Just as the
British branch became supposedly ardent imperialists for the British, the
Rothschild branches in France and Germany became ardent for the French and
German Empires.

Were the brothers of the House of Rothschild then at war among themselves
because they had decided to become jingoists for whatever states and empires
in which they happened to reside? Hardly. Their loyalty was, and presumably
remains to this day, with their dynasty, like all the other international
banking dynasties, which are no longer constricted by nation-states let
alone empires, but now embrace a global financial empire.

It would be foolish to believe that these, and other leading plutocrats such
as Soros, et al, have formed a cheering squad for any particular
nation-state out of a sense of intense national loyalties. One might expect
many of them to present themselves as “American patriots” because the USA
provides the guns to protect and expand the international financial empire,
just as the European empires provided the cannon fodder in prior centuries.

If one seeks a British connection, the obvious examples here are the Opium
Wars at the behest of the House of Sassoon, and the Anglo-Boer Wars, for the
benefit of Alfred Beit, et al. One might also consider another prominent
banking dynasty, the Warburgs; brother Max being the financial adviser to
the Kaiser during the world war, while Paul came to the USA. Did Max and
Paul thereby become enemies as the result of hostilities between the USA and
Germany? Where were their localities? With Germany and the USA respectively,
or with the House of Warburg?

There was a time, during and immediately following World War I when many
prominent British figures regarded the financial network as part of a
German-Jewish alliance, *London Times* editor Wickham Steed, commenting on
this when he observed at the Peace Conference the lobbying by the Schiff,
Warburg, et al, for the recognition of Bolshevik Russia.[13] American Labor
leader Samuel Gompers, observing a similar pro-Bolshevik phenomenon among
the international bankers described them as “the American-Anglo-German
financing combinations.”[14]

*EARLY U.S., BRITISH BREACH*

What then of the supposed joining of the US and “British” branches” of
international finance after World War I to work for a revived British
Empire?

In 2005, a mainstream publishing company produced a series of small volumes
called “Conspiracy Books.” *Who Really Runs the World?* by Thom Burnett and
Alex Games,[15] is particularly well researched. After considering numerous
candidates indulging the Illuminati, Lodge 322, Bilderbergers and Trilateral
Commission, the authors settle for the Council on Foreign Relations.[16]
Whether the reader agrees with the choice by Burnett and Games of the CFR as
being at the apex of world control, they do nonetheless provide a
well-documented history of the CFR. They also provide a valuable discussion
on the relationship between the American and British delegations at the
Versailles Peace Conference in regard to the hatching of the alleged
Anglophile conspiracy.

Burnett and Games state that the idea of a think tank on foreign policy was
mooted in 1917 by Col. Edward M House, Wilson’s key adviser, who was an
Anglophile, along with his friend Supreme Court Justice Felix
Frankfurter,[17] who was of course not inclined to British imperialism, but
was suspected later of having Bolshevik sympathies. This think tank became *The
Inquiry*. Another group, comprising “New York financiers and international
lawyers” had established the CFR in 1918. Both groups went to the Versailles
Peace Conference as Pres. Wilson’s advisers.[18] Both British and US groups
met after the peace conference at Versailles at the Hotel Majestic with the
aim of establishing a joint Anglo-American Institute of International
Affairs.[19] BY 1921 the CFR had dwindled to insignificance and merged with
The Inquiry in 1921, but by this time the idea of a US Institute of
International Affairs, the British section having been established, was no
longer in favor. Whitney Shepardson, the aide to Col. House, was sent to
Britain to inform the RIIA that the US branch would not now eventuate.
However, the British group had already decided to also reject a joint
project with the US.[20] Burnett and Games conclude from their study of CFR
documents that:

Conspiracy theorists who claim that the Council on Foreign Relations is
controlled by the Round Table through the Institute of International Affairs
are wrong and haven’t done their research. This lack of agreement, and
definite desire not to be linked, forces an enormous rift between these
secret groups. Theorists tend to concentrate on the wishful thinking voiced
at the Hotel Majestic without following the actual subsequent developments.
Any sentence that combines the CFR and the IIA as co-conspirators must be
viewed a false.[21]

Peter Grosse, the official CFR historian, confirms this early Anglo-US
breach in the official CFR history:

…To Shepardson fell the task of informing the British colleagues of this
unfortunate reality. Crossing to London, he recalled thinking that “it might
be quite unpleasant to have to say for the first time that the Paris Group
of British colleagues could not be members” of the American branch. “The
explanation to the British was begun (shall we say?) haltingly. However,
instead of the frigid look which had been feared, the faces of the British
governing body showed slightly red and very happy. They had reached the same
conclusion in reverse, but had not yet found a good way of getting word to
the other side of the Atlantic!”[22]

Games and Burnett state, and the history by Grosse concurs, that the CFR was
anxious to try and create a new world order with the USSR rather than with
Britain following World War II. However, when the CFR approached the Soviet
Embassy in 1944 with an offer of co-operation they were firmly rejected by
Gromyko. “The new world order, as envisaged by the CFR, did involve
co-existence with the USSR. The demise of world power for the British was
evident by this action.”[23]

*SUBVERSION OF EMPIRES*

After World War I international finance was requiring an international
financial system beyond the confines of the empires. World War II finalized
the process of dismantling the empires started by the First World War. The
powers that emerged over the ashes of the European imperial powers were the
USA and the USSR. Both pursued anti-colonialist policies, or one might say,
neo-colonialist policies of their own, competing to fill the void of
European colonial scuttle.

As has been related, certain conspiracy theorists state that the aim of
international plutocracy is to reassert British imperial interests. Post-war
history does not accord with this theory.

Soviet Foreign Minister Gromyko notes in his autobiography *Memories* that:

Washington tended to view colonial empires as an anachronism and made no
secret that it would shed no tears were they to be disabled… In any case it
was time for the old masters to move aside.[24]

Please read the above passage again if it has not sunken in to
consciousness, as it provides a key to understanding post-war US foreign
policy. Note that Gromyko states that Washington, i.e. the globalist elite
that runs the place, regarded empires as “anachronistic,” meaning that they
were now too constrictive for the global ramifications of banking and
industry.

An example of the subversive agendas of the USA-plutocratic nexus in regard
to Africa was the creation in 1953 – at a time when only Ethiopia and
Liberia were self-governing – of the Africa-America Institute, spanning 50
states, the aim being to bring together US and African policy-makers, to
provide training programs in order to “build relations with the new African
leadership.” When the USSR did this with Patrice Lumumba University,
American conservatives considered them to be subverting Africa for the
benefit of “world communism.” What should then be made of the AAI? Its
educational program has resulted in a US-trained African elite, virtually
all of who have returned to Africa.[25] The Board of AAI is instructive:[26]

   - Kofi Appenteng, AAI Chair, Co-Founder and partner of The West Africa
   Fund; formerly a partner with Thacher Proffitt,[27] one of the big Wall
   Street law firms; life member of the CFR, and a board member of the Ford
   Foundation, etc.
   - Mora McLean, AAI President and CEO, came to AAI from the Ford
   Foundation where she had been Deputy Director for Africa and Middle East
   Programs; she is a CFR member.
   - William Asiko, AAI board member; President of The Coca-Cola Africa
   Foundation & Director of Public Affairs and Communications for The Coca-Cola
   Company in Africa.
   - Rosalind Kainyah, Vice President of External Affairs, Tullow Oil plc;
   formerly Director of Public Affairs, USA for the De Beers Group, part of the
   Oppenheimer mining conglomerate.
   - George Kirkland is Executive Vice President, Chevron Corporation.
   - Carlton Masters, CFR, among other bodies.
   - Steven B. Pfeiffer, Chair of the Executive Committee of Fulbright &
   Jaworski L.L.P.

Maurice Tempelsman, Senior Partner, Leon Tempelsman & Son. Tempelsman does
not have a profile on the AAI website, which is not to say that his
background is not rather interesting. He is a major actor in the
exploitation of minerals in Africa. An informative article on the African
diamond trade states of Tempelsman:

…Angola’s state firm Endiama is tied to the Lazare Kaplan diamond company
owned by the Israeli-American Tempelsman diamond cartel. Maurice
Tempelsman’s diamond interests were established in the Congo in the early
1960’s with the help of the CIA.

Belgian-born Maurice Tempelsman has a long and bloody history in Africa.
When Congo’s first Premier, Patrice Lumumba, pledged to return diamond
wealth back to the newly independent Congo in the early 60’s, Tempelsman,
who began with De Beers in the 1950’s, helped engineer the coup d’etat that
consolidated the dictatorship of 29 year-old Colonel Mobutu, and the coup
against Ghana’s Kwame Nkrumah; diamonds were at stake in each.

“I believe this was the beginning of what we now know of as conflict
diamonds in the Congo,” says blood diamond expert and investigative
journalist Janine Roberts, author of the book Glitter and Greed: The Secret
World of the Diamond Cartel. “From then on diamonds would be extensively
used to discreetly fund wars, coups, repression and dictatorships, in
Africa.”

The Tempelsman empire remains rock solid behind Leon Tempelsman & Sons, De
Beers, and Lazare Kaplan International—supplier of Tiffany’s and Cartier’s
diamonds.

… Tempelsman shared a panel at the Council on Foreign Relations with people
like Walter Kansteiner, National Security under Bill Clinton and current
director of a gold company involved in Congo’s bloody eastern zone.[28]

Tempelsman is also profiled by the Eurasia Foundation, where he described as
chairman of the board of Lazare Kaplan International, “one of the nation’s
foremost diamond houses.” It is further stated that Tempelsman is on the
board of trustees of AI and was “immediate past chairman.” “Mr. Tempelsman
is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations.”[29]

Are we supposed to conclude that Tempelsman, and all the other corporate
executives and CFR members on the AAI board are there for no other reason
than philanthropy?

The Empires, including of course the British, were considered primary
obstacles, as “anachronisms” as Gromyko explained, by international finance
after World War II. To claim that there is an international bankers’
conspiracy centered around the British Monarchy and aiming for the extension
of British influence throughout the world, is a significant error that
results in flawed historical analyses.
------------------------------
* This is not to say that I regard Skousen el al as totally hopeless as
historians.

[1] Michael Collins Piper, “Influential Newsweek Magazine Sold for $1To
CFR’s Super-Rich, Pro-Israel Harman Couple,” *American Free Press*, August
6, 2010,
http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/newsweek_magazine_sold_232.html(Accessed
on August 7, 2010).

[2] David Icke, *The Pilgrims Society: A study of the Anglo-American
Establishment*,
http://www.isgp.eu/organisations/Pilgrims_Society02.htm(Accessed on
August 7, 2010).

[3] Henry Makow, “Gloria Steinem: How the CIA Used Feminism to Destabilize
Society,” http://www.henrymakow.com/180302.html

[4] Jeffrey Steinberg, “Britain’s Assault on American Revisited,” *Executive
Intelligence Review*, February 23, 2007,
http://www.larouchepub.com/other/book_reviews/2007/3408quigley_jeff.html

[5] Carroll Quigley, The Anglo-American Establishment (New York: Books in
Focus, Inc., 1981).

[6] Carroll Quigley, *Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our
Time*(New York: The MacMillan Co., 1966).

[7] W Cleon Skousen , *The Naked Capitalist: a review and commentary on Dr
Carroll Quigley’s book Tragedy and Hope* (Salt Lake City: privately
published, 1970).

[8] C Quigley, 1966, op.cit., 950.

[9] Ibid., 51-52.

[10] Ibid., 130.

[11] Ibid., 130.

[12] Ibid., 131.

[13] Henry Wickham Steed, *Through Thirty Years 1892-1922 A personal
narrative, *The Peace Conference, The Bullitt Mission, Vol. II.  (New York:
Doubleday Page and Co., 1924), 301.

[14] “Soviet Bribe Found Here, Says Gompers,” *New York Times*, May 1, 1922.

[15] Thom Burnett and Alex Games*, **Who Really Runs the World*? (London:
Collins and Brown, 2005).

[16] Ibid., Chapter 4, “The New Knights of the Round Table.”

[17] Ibid., 99-100.

[18] Quigley, op.cit, 1966, 951-952.

[19] Burnett and Games, op.cit., 101.

[20] Ibid., 102.

[21] Ibid., 103.

[22] Peter Grosse, *Continuing The Inquiry:* *The Council on Foreign
Relations from 1921 to 1996, *“Continuing the Inquiry.” (New York: CFR,
1996). http://www.cfr.org/about/history/cfr/

[23] Burnett and Games, op.cit., 107. For the origins of the Cold War and
the failure of the globalist policy to incorporate the USSR into the “new
world order” see: K R Bolton, “Origins of the Cold War: How Stalin Foiled a
‘New World Order’ Relevance for the Present,” *Foreign Policy Journal*, May
31, 2010,

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2010/05/31/origins-of-the-cold-war-how-stalin-foild-a-new-world-order/all/1

[24] Andrei Gromyko, *Memories* (London: Hutchinson, 1989).

[25] Africa-America Institute, http://www.aaionline.org/About.aspx

[26] http://www.aaionline.org/About/Board.aspx

[27] Closed in 2009, after 160 years.

[28] Keith Harmon Snow, Chloe’s Blood Diamond: Angola Rock sold for $16
million to GUESS Jeans Founder,
http://www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=7423

The full article is well worth reading.

[29] “Maurice Tempelsman,” Eurasia Foundation,
http://www.eurasia.org/about/bio_tempelsman.aspx
The Eurasia Foundation sounds like a duplicate of the Soros Open Society
Institute.
"

:)

In hoeverre/hoe diep zit eigenlijk onze 'midden'partij (CDA) bij de zgn. NWO
?

Henk Elegeert

**********
Dit bericht is verzonden via de informele D66 discussielijst (D66 at nic.surfnet.nl).
Aanmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SUBSCRIBE D66 uwvoornaam uwachternaam
Afmelden: stuur een email naar LISTSERV at nic.surfnet.nl met in het tekstveld alleen: SIGNOFF D66
Het on-line archief is te vinden op: http://listserv.surfnet.nl/archives/d66.html
**********