Rothschild and CIA Publications Attack “Constitution-worshipers”

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars.com
September 25, 2010

The editors of the Economist have declared constitutionalists mentally ill. “Indeed, there is something infantile in the belief of the constitution-worshipers that the complex political arguments of today can be settled by simple fidelity to a document written in the 18th century,” the editors wrote on September 23. “When history is turned into scripture and men into deities, truth is the victim.”

	Following the Constitution is infantile behavior, according to two publications produced by the Rothschilds, the CFR, and the CIA.

The Economist is owned by members of the Rothschild banking family of England. It is run by the Economist Group, a known CIA front.

According to the Economist, the framers were aristocrats who “did not believe that poor men, or any women, let alone slaves, should have the vote.” The Constitution does not address the “hard questions thrown up by modern politics,” namely should gays be allowed to marry?

The Economist argument against the Constitution is the same one used by liberal academics. The document is antiquated, the product of a bygone era. The founders were afraid of “democracy taking hold,” so they crafted a document designed to exclude the common people and preserve their aristocratic position.

Globalists love democracy. It is an easy enough task to fool the people, especially these days with 24-7 media and satellite television. It is a relatively simple matter to have the benighted masses vote away their natural rights under some cooked up false pretense. “Democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for lunch. Freedom comes from the recognition of certain rights which may not be taken, not even by a 99% vote,” wrote Marvin Simkin. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote.

Soon after the Economist article appeared, the establishment publication Foreign Policy posted an article slamming the idea that we should follow the Constitution. Joshua Keating writes that he suspects “most Americans don’t realize quite how old the Constitution is by world standards,” that is to say globalist standards. In order to make his point, Keating cites an article published in the Onion, a popular satire publication.

Foreign Policy was established by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a think tank created by the “internationalist” Andrew Carnegie, who took his advice from Elihu Root, who worked to make the Council On Foreign Relations possible.

As Carroll Quigley noted in Tragedy and Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, the CFR, modeled on the British Round Table Group, “penetrated deeply into university life, the press, and… foreign policy,” and peddled its globalist influence through five American newspapers, including the Washington Post and the New York Times. “The CFR is the American Branch of a society which originated in England, and which believes that national boundaries should be obliterated, and a one-world rule established,” Quigley explains.

In 2008, Foreign Policy was bought by the Washington Post Company. The Washington Post is the crown jewel of the CIA’s Operation Mockingbird. Wall Street lawyer Frank Wisner, who ran the Office of Special Projects — later to become part of the CIA — recruited Philip Graham, the publisher of the Washington Post, to run Operation Mockingbird and subvert the free press in the United States.

The CFR wants “to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty of the national independence of the United States,” Admiral Chester Ward, a former member of the CFR, warned. In order to realize their one-world government scheme, the CFR and the ruling elite must undermine the sovereignty of the United States.

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

It must also undermine and subvert the Tea Party movement and the popular move to restore the constitutional foundation of the country.

The twin articles appearing in the Economist — at the behest of Rothschild and the City of London banking elite — and Foreign Policy — controlled by the Council On Foreign Relations — are designed to make constitutionalists appear to be not only infantile idealists who idolize an archaic document that the globalists argue has no relevance in our modern era of gay marriage, but also as dangerous people who suffer from mental illness.

–

Kurt Nimmo edits Infowars.com. He is the author of Another Day in the Empire: Life In Neoconservative America.

Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)

Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"!

Print this page

4 Reasons to Change the Way We View Education

Mary Hickcox
Activist Post

The way in which we view education has a lot to do with our past; how we grew up, societal influences, and the way we were schooled ourselves. It is the legacy that we pass on to our children. Tragically, the current way our education system is engineered, it appears our children seem doomed to be unsuccessful.

We live in a time where our schools are failing, our children are unhappy and overworked, and the current system becomes more obsolete every year. Something needs to change if we want our children to be happy, and our country to be successful, once again. The system we have now was built on a fault line and it has become increasingly evident that the cracks are growing exponentially. It isn’t too late to change that model.

We could talk about how to improve schools, maybe more money or less political involvement, but in the long run those are not the things that stand in the way of our children’s futures. What stands in the way is an archaic mindset build on false education and an inability to look past the norm. With our country in a dire economic situation with mass joblessness and stifled innovation, it is time to step outside of the box that public education has put us in to find solutions.


1. Our schools are failing miserably:That's not to say that some students do not do well in public school and end up happy, but statistics do not lie. At an annual average cost of over $10,000 per student, the U.S. is lagging behind countries that don’t spend half that much. Money does not appear to be the problem, so throwing more into a broken system is just adding fuel to the fire. No Child Left Behind has been a total failure, where states are suing the federal government over this catastrophe. NCLB puts extreme emphasis on tests -- as if still trying to churn out worker bees -- yet, the U.S. ranks far below most industrialized nations. We seem to be wasting money letting political agendas decide what is best, rather than the parents or teachers who know what children need.

Unsettling Education Statistics

• Students are not faring well on national assessments. The most recent NAEP assessments indicate that less than one third of U.S. fourth graders are proficient in reading, mathematics, science, and American history.
• More than half of low-income students cannot even demonstrate basic knowledge of science, reading, and history.
• U.S. eighth graders ranked 19th out of 38 countries on mathematic assessments and 18th in science.
• U.S. twelfth graders ranked 18th out of 21 countries in combined mathematics and science assessments (Source: The Heritage Foundation)

History shows that modern-day schooling started with the Industrial Revolution, but many still refuse to accept that the people who funded its inception did not have children’s education as their main priority. Men like Rockefeller and Carnegie wanted good obedient workers to take the jobs they needed filled. They didn’t want free-thinking students to reach their potential; they wanted a large dumbed-down class, just disciplined and smart enough to show up on time and work their factory jobs.

John Taylor Gatto, teacher for over 30 years, NY Teacher of the Year, bestselling author, and homeschooling supporter, states: “The secret to American schooling is that it doesn’t teach the way children learn, nor is it supposed to. Schools were conceived to serve the economy and the social order rather than kids and their families….that is why it is compulsory.” This is a system set up for all the wrong reasons, and it is a system whose goals were set deep inside of ulterior motives and still are today. Maybe schools are not the best places for our children to gain knowledge.

2. Our children are unhappy: Our children are unhappy, overworked, and not learning what they need in order to be successful. The first thing that needs to change is how we define that word success. We hear it all the time used as a measure of how our children are doing in life, but what if the way we define success has been wrong all along? What exactly are we as parents supposed to focus on? Is happiness even on the radar screen when success is discussed?

It seems most parents these days get so caught up in competition that they can forget that our ultimate goal should be our children’s happiness. Who's to blame them, as we are all conditioned to survive in the rat-race dog-eat-dog economy. But this ultra-competitive model seems to make school an unhappy place, as a record number of children are now on mood-altering drugs to handle their pressure-cooker lives. It is a place where strangers with corporate-government mandates are controlling the minds and bodies of our children.

We cannot expect our children to be free-thinking independent adults if they are kept under lock and key, segregated by age, fully controlled by rules, and forced to learn a federally-mandated curriculum. It is an institutional and cold conditioning of the mind. Americans have been taught to think of the word success as being dependent on excelling at school, but it seems societal success is more dependent on knowledge -- and the two are not synonymous. If we can change our thinking about success then it can equal happiness -- the ultimate human success.

In 2007, for the first time, UNICEF did a study on the wellbeing and happiness of children in 21 industrialized nations. The US and UK, two of the wealthier nations on the list, came in dead last. This alone should raise some eyebrows and prove the point that our children are not happy, and that more money is not the answer to the problem.

Another study was conducted in 2009 by the American Psychological Association to survey stress levels in children; they found some alarming information. To start, it showed that stress levels in adults and children have risen dramatically over the past few years, but even more upsetting is that parents seemed mostly clueless to the fact that their children were stressed at all. What were the main issues causing stress in children? Worry about grades, about getting into college, and family finances top the list. These problems are causing children to experience headaches, nausea, and trouble sleeping. If our goal is happiness, the school system is again, a failure.

3. School has become obsolete: The last 10 years has seen more technological advancement than in the entire century before. All of the world's information is now literally available in the palm of our hands. Almost the entire world’s wealth of knowledge is accessible through the Internet and integrated into our everyday life. Small improvements have occurred to incorporate this new lifestyle, but not nearly enough to catch up with the rest of the world. In fact, some researchers suggest that students would be better off with self-directed learning using the Internet, because we all learn better when it is something that we are interested in.

The current system is repetitive, memorization and test driven, and downright boring. It’s a place that resembles prison where, “Very little of what is taught is learned, very little of what is learned is remembered, and very little of what is remembered is actually used," as John Holt states in How Children Learn. Couple that with the fact that 50% (technological knowledge) of what is learned in the first year of college is worthless by graduation, and you just have to ask yourself: What is the point? And can’t we do better than this? Our children not only deserve better, they require better in order to compete in a market with nearly 10% officialunemployment.

College seems to be less cost-effective every year. Rising college costs put our children in insurmountable debt due to the lack of viable employment. Tuitions have skyrocketed in the past few years (Harvard University is now $60,000 per year). To make matters worse, universities are now making kickback profits from credit card companies, while graduates aren’t even able to find jobs. With over 1/3 of college graduates now taking low-skill jobs, and over 65% graduating with crippling debt, it is now legitimate to question if college is the right path to put our children on.

4. The wrong people control the system for the wrong reasons: “The education system was deliberately designed to produce mediocre intellects, to hamstring the inner life, to deny students appreciable leadership skills, and to ensure docile and incomplete citizens in order to render the populace 'manageable.'" -- Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt, Sr. Policy Advisor for the US Dept. of Education, and whistleblower on government activities to deliberately dumb our children down.

She also notes that the system is set up to make good consumers, as well as standardize people to keep them predictable and easy to control. Does this sound like something you want to support? Do we really want our children controlled and held back in life?

The Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1890 were the first steps toward a large government role in education. What people failed to realize was that the money from these Acts became obligations to play by their rules and it continues today. Because the Feds were financially supporting the schools, they could control what was taught, thus bringing another facet of American life under their control. This is proven again and again when we see how difficult they make it for people to choose alternative education options for their own children.


It is clear that the purpose of school has become to serve corporations and government. This is evidenced most recently when we learn that BP played a role in writing the environmental curriculum in California. I think we all can agree that public schools should only serve the taxpayer's families and their children's best interests -- not the corporations that write the curriculum. When the day comes that the people in charge make families (and not greedy corporations) the priority then maybe, just maybe, our children will be learning what is really important, rather than learning how to serve the very people who set up this failing system.

Conclusion
In a time when our economy desperately needs more innovators, how can we change education to expand the potential of each child? It seems we must do some things we did NOT learn in school: Question assumptions about education; think for and believe in ourselves; speak up against what we know is wrong; and challenge what we've been taught to believe is right. It is each parent's right and responsibility to decide the best way to guide their child to maximum human potential.

It seems that our modern world provides all of the tools to support a child's natural curiosity to drive their own education. Homeschooling and unschooling may be the most powerful form of revolt against an establishment which is terrified of individuals that question authority and refuse to be good little worker bees. John Holt said it well: “To trust children we must first learn to trust ourselves . . . but most of us were taught as children that we could not be trusted.” We also must begin to trust our own abilities as parents to guide our children toward happiness and independence, not to blindly trust the failed government standards that have resulted in anxiety and stress conditioning.

It is time for all of us to look outside the box for solutions to our education system to ensure our children's happiness -- this should be deemed the ultimate success.

Author Mary Hickcox is an unschooling advocate, mother, and life guide to three sons (11, 7, 3).

Related Articles:
The Deschooling and Unschooling Movement is Growing
Hope Lost

Live Superfoods It is time to Wake Up! You too, can join the "Global Political Awakening"! Print this page

Tax-exempt Foundations: The Hidden Evil

The Hidden Evil

Tax-exempt Foundations were originally setup for humanitarian purposes to provide grants to existing institutions. Rene A. Wormser served as General Counsel to the Reece Committee, which was a congressional committee that investigated the Tax-exempt Foundations from 1953 to 1955. His book, 
Foundations: Their Power and Influence, is a documented expose of his experience with the committee. In it he wrote, "Foundations were originally created to support existing institutions and to undertake certain 'operating' functions."

Soon after (or possibly from their inception) foundations became a loop hole that the financial elite used to avoid taxes. "By the time the income tax became law in 1913, the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations were already operating. Income tax didn't soak the rich, it soaked the middle class," wrote Perloff. "Because it was a graduated tax, it tended to prevent anyone from rising into affluence. Thus it acted to consolidate the wealth of the entrenched interests, and protect them from new competition."

Smoot pointed out that the primary purpose of some of the large Tax-exempt Foundations is no longer humanitarian in nature, but "predominately tax avoidance." "One of the leading devices by which the wealthy dodge taxes" concurred Perloff "is the channeling of their fortunes into tax-free foundations." He also charged that, "The major foundations, though commonly regarded as charitable institutions, often use their grant-making powers to advance the interests of their founders."

The "independent, uncontrolled financial power often enables foundations to exert a decisive influence on public affairs," wrote Wormser. He further testified that, "They have a power comparable to political patronage." He cautioned "When they do harm, it can be immense harm--there is virtually no counterforce to oppose them."

What other projects do they fund? According to the findings of congressional investigations, the foundations have been known to fund political movements in a direction inclined to favor a socialistic, one-world government. Individual foundations have also been known to merge themselves in a "cartel-like" fashion to fund their political projects, which tends "to endanger the freedom of our intellectual and public life," warned Wormser. Wormser referred to this merging as the Tax-exempt Complex.

The first glimpse into foundation influence came under the Congressional Act of August 23, 1912, when the Commission on Industrial Relations studied labor conditions and the treatment of workers by the major U.S. industrial firms. They eventually examined the foundations, which were interlocked with them. "Starting with a study of labor exploitation, it [the Commission on Industrial Relations] went on to investigate concentrations of economic power, interlocking directorates, and the role of the then relatively new large charitable foundations (especially of Carnegie and Rockefeller) as instruments of power concentration," wrote Wormser.

During the commission hearings, future Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis testified on January 23, 1915, that he was seriously concerned about the emerging danger of such a concentration of power. He said, "When a great financial power has developed ... which can successfully summon forces from all parts of the country ... to carry out what they deem to be their business principle ... [there] develops within the State a state so powerful that the ordinary social and industrial forces existing are insufficient to cope with it."

"Control is being extended largely through the creation of enormous privately managed funds for indefinite purposes, hereinafter designated 'foundations'" declared Mr. Basil M. Manly, director of research for the commission. The commission's report concluded that, "As regards the 'foundations' created for unlimited general purposes and endowed with enormous resources, their ultimate possibilities are so grave a menace ... [that] it would be desirable to recommend their abolition."

Congress has declared that these foundations, which can be used to fund anything, should be eliminated because they are potentially destructive to the republic. According to Rene Wormser, even though these congressional findings occurred in 1915, the time period is irrelevant--they are still quite important. He stated, "Under totally different economic and social conditions, the findings of 1915 are still significant."

The second investigation into the Tax-exempt Foundations came from the Cox Committee which lasted from 1952 until 1953. Again, fears of subversive political objectives funded by these multi-billion-dollar organizations (acting in concert) were eminent.

On August 1, 1951, a motivated Congressman E. E. Cox (Democrat) of Georgia introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives to conduct a thorough investigation into the foundations. He asserted, "There are disquieting evidences that at least a few of the foundations have permitted themselves to be infiltrated by men and women who are disloyal to our American way of life. They should be investigated and exposed to the pitiless light of publicity..."

The Cox resolution to investigate the foundations was passed in 1952. Unfortunately, Congressman Cox died during the investigation. The commission met the same fate as the one before it. No actions were taken to prevent the expansion of these foundations, or provide means for future accountability to the public. And as Smoot described it, "the final report of his [Cox] committee (filed January 1, 1953) was a pathetic whitewash of the whole subject."

However, it did still yield some important facts. Part of the final report on January 1, 1953 said some foundations "supported persons, organizations, and projects which, if not subversive in the extreme sense of the word, tend to weaken or discredit [our] system as it exists in the United States and to favor Marxist socialism." Or in other words, they were found to promote Communism.

The third attempt to investigate the foundations lasted from 1953 to 1955, during the Reece Committee hearings. Smoot wrote, "On April 23, 1953, the late Congressman Carroll Reece, (Republican, Tennessee) introduced a resolution proposing a committee to carry on the 'unfinished business' of the defunct Cox Committee. The new committee to investigate tax-exempt foundations ... was approved by Congress on July 27, 1953." Author Perloff added, "For what was probably the ... last time, the CFR came under official scrutiny."

Other organizations which came under investigation included, The American Council of Learned Societies, The National Research Council, the Social Science Research Council, the American Council on Education, the National Education Association, the League for Industrial Democracy, the Progressive Education Association, the American Historical Association, the John Dewey Society, and the Anti-Defamation League.
During the investigation, Norman Dodd, Director of Research for the Reece Committee, was invited to the headquarters of the Ford Foundation by its president, H. Rowan Gaither. Gaither, a member of the CFR, revealed that the Ford Foundation was operating under directives from the White House to use their grant-making power to "make every effort to ... alter life in the United States ... to make possible a comfortable merger with the Soviet Union." Apparently Mr. Dodd was put under surveillance, stalked, and experienced character assassination.

The committee was attacked viciously and resulted in a whitewash. Recognizing another unsuccessful attempt to scrutinize the interlocks, Smoot said, "It went out of existence on January 3, 1955, having proven, mainly, that the mammoth tax-exempt foundations have such power in the White House, in Congress, and in the press that they are quite beyond the reach of a mere committee of the Congress of the United States."
But the committee did yield some helpful information. It found that the Tax-exempt Foundations, their intermediaries and interlocks have "exercised a strong effect" on "public education," which "has been accomplished by [using] vast propaganda, by supplying executives and advisors to government and by controlling much research in this area through the power of the purse." And that, "The net result of these combined efforts has been to promote a 'world government.'"

Quoting from the final report of the committee, Perloff wrote, "The report ... observed that major foundations have actively supported attacks upon our social and government system and financed the promotion of socialism and collectivist ideas." The Committee declared that the CFR was "in essence an agency of the United States Government" and that its "productions are not objective but are directed overwhelmingly at promoting the globalist concept."

"The Reece Committee ... proved with an overwhelming amount of evidence that the various Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations have been promoting socialism since their inception," agreed Allen. The Reece Committee hearings also revealed that individual Tax-exempt Foundations often act in concert with each other in order to amplify the enactment of their goals.

Congressman Reece made a final report on Tax-exempt Foundations, which was published by the government printing office on December 16, 1954. He said that there was clearly an interlock between The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and some of its associate organizations, such as the Council on Foreign Relations and other foundations, with the State Department. And that, "[the] foundations and organizations would not dream of denying this interlock. They proudly note it in reports."

Reece details the infiltration into the government, stating, "They [CFR/foundation interlock] have undertaken vital research projects for the [State] Department ... [and have] fed a constant stream of personnel into the State Department trained by themselves or under programs which they have financed."

Finally Reece concluded that "the Rockefeller Foundation, The Carnegie Corporation of New York, and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, [are] using their enormous public funds to finance a one-sided approach to foreign policy and to promote it actively ... by propaganda, and in the Government through infiltration. The power to do this comes out of the power of the vast funds employed."

The report clearly states that the CFR with interlocked foundations have infiltrated the government. And that they use enormous sums of money to propagandize "educate" the public in support of the policies which they decide we should adopt. What congress has told us is that the government has been infiltrated by the CFR using multi-billion-dollar private bank accounts known as Tax-exempt Foundations.

This means that when a major U.S. policy is filtered down from the federal government, into the local and state governments, that it may originate from the CFR/foundation interlock. Specifically, this means that it has come from the big corporations and the international banks, of which the CFR and other Think Tanks are composed.

The "State within a state" that Justice Louis D. Brandeis warned about in 1915, was part of the beginning of a government within a government, or, as FBI Agent Dan Smoot calls it, The Invisible Government. Other notable components include: the emergence of the Federal Reserve System, and the creation and infiltration of the CFR, the Bilderbergers and the TC into the executive branch.

The Reece Committee found that, "When their activities spread into the field of the so-called, 'social sciences' or into other areas which our basic moral, social, economic, and governmental principles can be vitally affected, the public should be alerted to these activities and be made aware of the impact of foundation influence on our accepted way of life."

"The power of the individual large foundations is enormous," they concluded. "It can exercise various forms of patronage which carry with them elements of thought control. ... It is capable of invisible coercion through the power of its purse. ... This power to influence national policy is amplified tremendously when foundations act in concert. There is such a concentration of foundation power in the united States."

"Every significant movement to destroy the American way of life has been directed and financed, in whole or in part, by tax-exempt organizations, which are entrenched in public opinion as benefactors of our society," warned Smoot. And Wormser stated, "By engaging 'public relations counselors' (ethically, and even legally, a questionable practice), it can further create for itself a favorable press and enthusiastic publicity."

"As I see it, the foundations ... have, nonetheless, become the 'agencies' of the principal organization which they finance--the Council on Foreign Relations," said Smoot. So according to Smoot's conclusion, which is backed up by two congressional investigations, the tax-exempt giants are basically the private bank accounts of the interlocking Think Tanks.

Perloff arrived at the same conclusion when he noted, "The Rockefeller Foundation, for example, has poured millions into the Council on Foreign Relations, which in turn serves as the Establishment's main bridge of influence to the U.S. government." Wormser wrote that "Dr. Hutchins ... [former] President of The Ford Foundation's off-shoot, The Fund for the Republic, stated in 1948 ... that 'world government is necessary, therefore it is--or must be made--possible.'" Finally, Smoot summarized, "[foundations] do finance the vast, complex, and powerful interlock of organizations devoted to a socialist one-world system."

Writing about the results of other independent organizations which have investigated foundations, Wormser observed that, "ideas and organizations [supported] by tax-exempt foundations ... had become the breeding ground for socialist and related political movements and action." And that there were fears, "over the danger of foundation support of various undesirable concepts and movements having political implications." These fears included, "the impairment of our national sovereignty; and even subversion. Hence the support by a majority in Congress of both the Cox and Reece Committee inquires."

ln relativity" (the end justifies the means), and "social engineering" (mind-control), which are "detriment of our basic moral, religious, and governmental principles." Wormser indicated that they also supply grants to intermediary organizations, which they've created, in order to carry out private (political) projects. These organizations are essentially public front organizations, which are presented to the public as being humanitarian in nature.

Interestingly, the brutal MKULTRA experiments, which were carried out in prestigious hospitals and universities, were funded by the Rockefeller Foundation. In his book, The Search for the Manchurian Candidate, Jonathan Marks wrote, "He [Dr. Cameron] headed Allan Memorial since 1943, when the Rockefeller foundation had donated funds to set up a psychiatric facility at McGill University. With continuing help from the Rockefellers, McGill had built a hospital known far beyond Canada's borders..."

Summary

So, as these investigations and independent researchers have found, the true purpose for some of these foundations which are used by the financial elite, is to bankroll the installation of a one-world socialist dictatorship, and tax avoidance. These investigations were launched because Congress and others were concerned that these foundations were backing subversive socialist political moments by using vast propaganda and the power of the purse.

These investigations were launched because Congress & others were concerned that these foundations were backing subversive socialist political moments by using vast propaganda & the power of the purse. This appears to be exactly what the Hidden Evil is--part of a subversive political movement toward the installation of a socialist one-world government.

Commentary

There can be no denying that these organizations have infiltrated the executive branch. According to this information, it began with the documented overthrow of the true government in 1913 and continued with the appointment of members of elite Think Tanks into the executive branch.(*) First with the CFR, then the Bilderbergers and finally the Trilaterals. The infiltration by the Tax-exempt Foundations and the interlocking Think Tanks was done by the "power of the purse," according to the Reece Committee hearings.

There is a heavy cross membership between those in control of the foundations and the elite societies. The Tax-exempt Complex is essentially their private multi-billion-dollar bank account. There is a strong interlock between the elite societies, the owners of mainstream media, the foundations, the Federal Reserve, Wall Street, the multinational corporations, and international banks. This cabal controls the United States and other NATO governments.

Once the deciding members of these Think Tanks settle on a policy, significant resources are pooled to promote the policy, which filters down to the local government. Opposition is met with ridicule by an array of organizations which the elite use to confound and discredit their critics. And in their own publications, they've made their intentions perfectly clear--a removal of the constitution and individual freedom, and the creation of a one-world government with them in control. This will be an absolute nightmare of a dictatorship.

On August 30, 2003, Congressman Ron Paul was addressing an audience near Austin Texas and was asked if there existed a "deceptive conspiracy to overthrow the American Republic" and "Bill Of Rights" and to "usher in a totalitarian World Government," under the control of the UN. He answered, "Yes. I think there are 25,000 individuals that have used offices of power, and they are in our Universities and they are in our Congress, and they believe in One World Government. And if you believe in One World Government, then you are talking about undermining National Sovereignty and you are talking about setting up something that you could well call a Dictatorship."

Obviously, no presidential candidate is allowed to get close to the White House without beingowned by this cabal. Although voting fraud probably does exist, the elections themselves are apparently scams, which offer the illusion of choice. This explains why there have been no major positive changes throughout multiple administrations.

"Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of the day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ... [administrations] too plainly proves a deliberate, systematic plan of reducing us to slavery."
-Thomas Jefferson

In his book, How the World Really Works, Alan B. Jones wrote, "the elites who wish to set up their world dictatorship recognize their main enemy to be the great middle class of the United States, which, being made up of individuals who have acquired a little education, property, and independence, will fight strenuously to keep them."

"The strategy," says Jones, "of the elites is to squeeze the middle class to death by creating or exacerbating the major problems facing the society, including class warfare, crime, education, moral decay, etc., and then creating in response spurious governmental programs to "cure" the problems that they just created." What Jones is describing here is the financial elite's consistent use of the Problem-Reaction-Solution formula.

"I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me and the Bankers in the rear. Of the two, the one at my rear is my greatest foe."
-Abraham Lincoln

Now that you have an understanding of the real power behind the throne, in upcoming chapters we'll explore how these organizations have manipulated some major world events. But first let's examine their control of mainstream information more closely. This will help explain why you may never have heard of them, or the authentic version of how some historical events occurred.

[Footnotes]
* Former presidents, such as Garfield and Lincoln have attested to having running battles for the republic with the international banks and corporations. So some researchers may contend that this overthrow occurred at an earlier date, and they may be correct. Other authors suggest that despite winning the Revolutionary War, the United States was never truly removed from the grip of British Royalty. They too may be correct. But I listed 1913 as it was documented as an overthrow in a Congressional Record dated December 22, 1913, vol. 51, and echoed by Congressman Louis McFadden. This evidence was provided in the Federal Reserve section.

Control of the Media

In his book, The Rockefeller File, free-lance journalist and bestselling author Gary Allen declared, "Rockefeller gang's plans for monopolistic World Government are never, but never, discussed in the machines of mass misinformation." By now you probably already know why you haven't heard of the Hidden Evil, or the coming socialist dictatorship in mainstream news. The people who are installing it control the media. "Why don't investigative news shows like Sixty Minutes ... tackle the ... Trilateralist-CFR hold on our government," asks Perloff. "Surely such material would have sufficient audience appeal."

"The so-called founders of such giants as The New York Times and NBC were chosen, financed and directed by Morgan, Schiff, and their allies," wrote Allen. Regarding the beginning of the takeover of the mainstream news, Perloff says, "A prime mover in this process was J.P. Morgan--the original force behind the CFR." Perloff quotes Congressman Callaway's notation inCongressional Record volume 54, dated February 9, 1917, which stated, "In March, 1915, the J.P. Morgan interests ... got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select the most influential newspapers ... to control generally the policy of the daily press of the United States."

The record continued, "These 12 men ... found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers. ... Emissaries were sent to purchase the policy, national and international, of these papers ... [and] an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding ... things of national and international nature considered vital to the interest of the purchasers. ... This policy also included the suppression of everything in opposition to the wishes of the interests served."

"The CFR needs to reach the mass audience of Americans who do not belong to, or attend the meetings of, or read material distributed by, the propaganda organizations," declared Smoot. He continued, "[The] Council on Foreign Relations leaders are aware of this need, and they have met it." Allen agreed, when he wrote, "Public opinion is manufactured by the CFR's ventriloquists in the mass media."

Former CFR member, Admiral Chester Ward, described the CFR's influence in the mass media, too. He proclaimed, "They control or own major newspapers, magazines, radio and television networks," and "the most powerful companies in the book publishing business." The Associated Press, New York Times, Washington Post, and LA Times have their own wire services, which most mainstream news outlets use. According to Allen, the CFR controls these wire services.

Ross observed, "The CFR could not accomplish their goals without complicity of the mainstream news media which they absolutely control with an iron fist." He explained that, "Occasionally they will hold a public meeting, and invite the open press (including C-SPAN), in order to give the impression that they are a harmless group engaged only in social activities."

Allen refers to the mainstream media as "CFR's ventriloquists," and writes, "At the center of Insider power, influence, and planning in the United States is the pervasive Council on Foreign Relations." He adds, "The CFR was created by the Rockefellers and their allies to be the focus of their drive for a 'New World Order.'"

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, the New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subjected to the lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries."

-David Rockefeller, Bilderberg Meeting, Baden-Baden Germany, 1991

Other outlets allegedly under the control of the CFR include, the National Broadcasting Corporation, Columbia Broadcasting System, Time, Fortune, Look, Newsweek, New York Post, Denver Post, Louisville Courier Journal, Minneapolis Tribune, and the Knight Papers. Publishing houses under CFR control include, McGraw-Hill, Simon & Schuster, Harper Bros., Random House, Little Brown & Co., Macmillan Co., Viking Press, Saturday Review, Business Week, and Book of the Month Club.
The mainstream media appears to serve multiple functions. First, to distribute information that the controlling cabal wants you to believe is real news. Secondly, to assist in the cover-up of information that has leaked out through other sources. In other words, Damage Control. Thirdly, as a weapon to assassinate the characters of those who expose the practices of the Establishment. Also, to act as a firewall to prevent information detrimental to the elite's control from reaching the public. Finally, to continue to reinforce mainstream accounts of current and historical events. The mainstream news essentially serves as a primary tool for social conditioning or mind-control.

"It is through the press and the media that the lie is penetrating through to the masses," declared Professor Marrs. The media is used as a weapon. So when you watch, read, or listen to mainstream news, ask yourself, "what will the CFR like me to believe today?" Allen sums up the real purpose of the mainstream news, stating, "These are the Establishment's official landscape painters whose jobs it is to make sure the public does not discover the C.F.R. and its role in creating a world socialist dictatorship."

According to Allen, "psychology and propaganda" used in the mainstream news, were "developed in the West in such places as the Rockefeller financed Tavistock Institute in England." He says, "The hidden persuaders from Madison Avenue, the Rand Corp. think tank or Hudson Institute, can and do manipulate public opinion." "The Establishment elitists," he explains "refer to it as 'the engineering of consent.' That means we are made to think the manacles they are slipping on our wrists are love bracelets." Allen charges that the techniques developed at these Think Tanks have been used successfully by Communist states.

"Think of the press as a great keyboard on which the government can play."
-Dr. Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Propaganda Minister

From the descriptions that these researchers have given, an accurate analogy could be drawn from the Wizard of Oz. America and other NATO are the great and powerful Oz, which appear to be run by their respective leaders. The mainstream news is the "curtain," which prevents us from understanding that the real controllers behind it are Think Tanks, the Fed, Wall Street, and the Tax-exempt Complex.

Another role of the mainstream news is to project the illusion of a two party system. The grass roots Democrats and Republicans have their philosophical differences. But, says Allen, "as you move up the party ladders these differences become less and less distinguishable until finally the ladders disappear behind the Establishment's managed news curtain and come together at the apex under the control of the C.F.R."

"There is no such thing at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it... The business of journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright... We are the tools of rich men behind the scenes. We are jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes."
-Journalist John Swinton, New York Press Club 1953

Most people pay attention to the events illuminated by these corporate-owned spotlights because they're big, common, socially accepted, and because they're all most people have ever known. When you start listening to independent news broadcasts, your conditioning begins to come undone, you start to connect the dots and find that events that were puzzling and seemed unrelated are part of the same picture. These independent news outlets broadcast on shortwave, and web cast. Some have past MP3 shows available for download. These shows are extremely educational.(*)

By listening to these broadcasts you can become familiar with who really runs this planet, what they've done, and where they're taking you. Most of the topics discussed on these shows will never be covered on mainstream news. If you do begin to listen to these shows, you may find yourself watching mainstream news less frequently due to its high rubbish content. You may also become temporarily upset after realizing you've been deceived, you've been misled, conned, tricked--and that most of your friends and relatives have too.

Control of History and Education

"According to some, history is basically a jumble of events: blunders, coincidences, and happenstances that have brought us to where we are today," wrote Perloff. "However, seen in the context of globalist influence and maneuvering, history ... begins to make sense, as if snapping into place upon a calculated blueprint."

In 1915, Mr. Basil M. Manly, director of research for a congressional investigation known as the Commission on Industrial Relations, observed that control of information was being extended by, the "endowment of colleges and universities, [and] through controlling or influencing the public press," wrote Wormser. During the Reece Committee hearings, Professor Kenneth Colegrove at Northwestern University testified, "The officers of these foundations wield a staggering sum of influence and direction upon research, education and propaganda in the United States and even in foreign countries."

The Reece Committee concluded, "The impact of foundation money upon education has been very heavy, largely tending to promote uniformity in approach and method, tending to induce the educator to become an agent for social change and a propagandist for the development of our society in the direction of some form of collectivism. Foundations have supported text books ... which are destructive of our basic governmental and social principles and highly critical of some of our cherished institutions."

Wormser exposed the profound influence that foundations have on public education, when he stated, "Foundation giving most obviously has an enormous impact on education, on social thinking, and ultimately on political action. This influence reaches the public through the schools and academies, through publicity, and through education and other associations dedicated to public and international affairs." He sustained, "Foundation grants have become so important a source of support that college and university presidents cannot often afford to ignore the opinions and wishes of the executives who distribute foundation largess."
Finally, he added, "This situation permits large foundations to exercise a profound influence upon public opinion." Senator Goldwater agreed, writing, "The intellectual influence of the academic community ... is subservient to the wealth of the great tax-free foundations."

Observing the effort by the Establishment to lie about history, former FBI Agent Dan Smoot said, "The Reece Committee investigation threw some revealing light on the historical blackout which the Council on Foreign Relations has ordered and conducted." Smoot gave one example which included a two-volume history of World War II, written in part by William L. Langer of the CFR and funded by grants from the Rockefeller Foundation and the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation.

"Foundations have supported a conscious distortion of history," revealed the Reece Committee. The phrase "conscious distortion" is a polite way of saying blatant lie. "Twentieth-century history, as recorded in Establishment textbooks and journals, is inaccurate," stated Professor Sutton. "The prevailing Establishment version is seen to be, not only inaccurate, but designed to hide a pervasive fabric of deceit and immoral conduct." Professor Sutton explained that they are effective, "Not so much because of outright censorship, although that is an important element, but more because of the gullibility of the American 'educated public.'"
Professor Marrs concludes that these historical lies are deliberately manufactured so the public will be easier to control. He charges, "The rewriting and deceitful misinterpretation of American and world history is one of the main methods used to manipulate and shape public opinion." "The establishment of the American Historical Society was no doubt an unprecedented step in instituting this diabolical plan to rewrite the past," he observes.

The accrediting agencies themselves may also be controlled by the Tax-exempt Foundations, as suggested by the Reece Committee. It stated that the "so-called "accrediting' organizations ... are extra-governmental, yet ... [influence] education to a considerable degree. For various reasons colleges, universities, and specialized schools and departments today require 'accreditation,' that is, approval of one or more of these organizations which presume to set standards. Some of these accrediting organizations are supported by foundations..."
"Universities, hospitals, institutes and learned societies sometimes supply nothing but their name labels affixed to what is actually a pet project of foundation managers," announced Wormser. According to Wormser, they pick the professors, they pick the topics, and they even pick the research staff. And they already know what the outcome is going to be. These doctors, professors, research staff, etc. are made well aware in advance that there will be a particular conclusion that they must arrive at. Not adhering to this predetermined conclusion will result in a denial of grants.

Professor Sutton agreed, writing, "Through foundations controlled by this elite, research by compliant and spineless academics, 'conservatives' as well as 'liberals' has been directed into channels useful for the objectives of the elite essentially to maintain this subversive and unconstitutional power apparatus. Through publishing houses controlled by this same financial elite unwelcome books have been squashed and useful books promoted."

"It is understandable," continued the professor, "that universities and research organizations, dependent on financial aid from foundations that are controlled by this same New York financial elite, would hardly want to support and to publish research on these aspects of [authentic] international politics." Books critical of the official account of history don't get reviewed or are not available through mainstream outlets. And according to author Perloff, historians that do not adhere to their version of history are often blacklisted.

Smoot asks, "Where will you find a college administration that will not defend the Ford Foundation against all critics--if the college has just received, or is in line to receive, a million-dollar gift from the Foundation? How far must you search to find college professors or school teachers who will not defend the Foundation which gives 25 million dollars at one time, to raise the salaries of professors or school teachers?"

In a future chapter called, The Satanic Influence, we'll find evidence that the AHA was setup by an Establishment organization known as The Order of Skull and Bones. This organization, like its elite Think Tank counterparts, works toward the objective of a one-world socialist dictatorship under elite control. The mainstream media is used as a weapon by these groups.

Allen, observed that the Rockefellers "do not pour money into local school board races; they put their bucks into the schools that train the teachers and they finance the writing of textbooks." He stated, "The family couldn't care less who controls the local school board." According to Allen, the publishing houses under CFR control also specialize in publishing school textbooks.

Speaking of the movement by the Council on Foreign Relations to use professors in their deliberate campaign to rewrite the past, author Perloff noted, "The council's [CFR's] steering committee moved to distinguish the roster by adding college professors. ... They hailed from campuses beholden to J.P. Morgan. As Dr. Quigley observed: 'The Wall Street contacts with these professors were created originally from Morgan's influence in handling large academic endowments.'"

This evidence suggests that mainstream schools and media are conduits for historical lies. It also suggests that they are a medium for social conditioning, also known as mind-control. Professor Sutton observed, "The existing system of education is little more than a conditioning mechanism. It has little to do with education in the true sense, and a lot to do with control of the individual. This requires suppression of individualist tenancies and a careful spoon-feeding of approved knowledge."

Professor Marrs declared, "Few of us are aware that such techniques are being utilized against us since we're constantly being led to believe ... that we are independent, resourceful, intelligent, and fully able to make up our own minds." Many of us have operated most of our lives on a filtered version of history. Or, in essence, lies.(**)

Summary

So, according to the results of congressional investigations and independent researchers, mainstream history is written by the financial elite. The CFR and interlocking Think Tanks have literally rewritten history using schools and publishing houses which they control by grants from their private multi-billion-dollar bank accounts (Tax-exempt Foundations).

I'm not an expert on history, but the information I'll be presenting in future chapters will be more accurate than some mainstream accounts. Now that you understand that a financial elite does exist and that they exercise an enormous amount of control over mainstream publications, it will be easier to understand why the following events did not unfold as presented in schools and mainstream media. Although some of this information pertains directly to the U.S., it is relevant to all NATO countries, because as goes America, so goes the rest of the world.

[Footnotes]
* I would highly recommend the Republic Broadcasting Network (RBN), at www.republicbroadcasting.org, and the Genesis Communications Network (GCN), at www.gcnlive.com.
** I include myself in this category, researching information for this book has been a learning and sometimes shocking experience. And there is still much to learn

Read Full Article