Treason

the New World Order

by Gurudas

Cassandra Press

San Rafael, Ca
 Cassandra Press
P.O. Box 150868
San Rafael, CA. 94915

© 1996 by Gurudas. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced
in any manner whatsoever without the written permission of Gurudas.

Printed in the United States of America

Other books by Gurudas

Flower Essences and Vibrational Healing

Gem Elixirs and Vibrational Healing, Vol. I
Gem Elixirs and Vibrational Healing, Vol II
The Spiritual Properties of Herbs
 i

Table of Contents

Preface v

Chapter I Introduction 1
Purpose in Doing This Book, America Today, Weimar Republic, Danger of
Complacency, Confronting Evil, Corporate Control, Increasingly the New World
Order is Here, Warnings From Many That Our Rights Are Threatened.

Chapter II Freedom is Being Lost 5

Intentions of the Founding Fathers, Republic vs. Democracy, The Constitution
and Bill of Rights, Dangers of a Moneyed Elite, Views of Gerry Spence, William
Greider, Lewis Lapham.

Chapter III The Secret Government 11

Members and Writings on the Secret Government, Four Factions, Treason and
Corruption, Controlled Press, Carroll Quigley, Council on Foreign Relations,
Trilateral Commission, Bilderbergers, Control of U.S. Foreign Policy, Reece
Committee, Power of Foundations, Barry Goldwater and Buckminstcr Fuller on
Ruling Elite, Conspiracy View of History.

Chapter IV New World Order 25

New World Order Defined, Hundreds of Books, and Articles Describe the Coming
Police State, End of U.S. Sovereignty and Constitution, Role of Socialism,
Quotes By Bertrand Russell, Arnold Toynbee, H.G. Wells, and Paul Ehrlich,
Population Threat, Family Control, Congress Debates World Government,
Communist Threat, Catholic Church, Report From Iron Mountain.

Chapter V Fooling The People 43

Our Present Paradigm, Creating Crime, Friendly Fascism, Gradualism, Library of
Congress, Vote Fraud, Executive Orders, Creating Diversions, History is
Changed, The UN Threat, Federal Reserve, Contract With America, False New
Deal, Phony Investigations, Phony Excuses to Create A World Government, War
on Drugs, New Constitution.

Chapter VI State Rights and the Federal Government 65

Sovereign States, Nullification, Intrusions of the Federal Government, Addiction
to Federal Dollars, Tenth Amendment, Returning Power to the States, Separation
of Powers, Bureaucracy, Lobbyists, Federalization of Crime, The Ultimate
Resolution, Sovereignty Resolution, Judicial Tyranny.

Chapter VII Early Signs of Treason 79

Corporations Support Communism and Nazis, Corporate Support for Fascism in
the U.S., Coup d'etat Attempts in the U.S., General Butler Saves the Day,
Munitions Hearings, GM and the Nazis, Trading with the Nazis During W.W. II,
Bringing Nazi War Criminals into the U.S.
ii

Chapter VIII Rise of the Corporate State 97

Corporate Charters, Rise of the Corporate Culture, Consumerism Replaces
Citizenship, Lost Rights and the New Deal, Merging of Government and
Business, Corporations As Citizens, Corporate Welfare, Corporate Crime.

Chapter IX Rise of the Transnational Corporations 113

Fusion of Economic and Political power, Growth of Undemocratic International
Agencies, NAFTA and GATT, Control of Third World Governments, Mexico
Loan, One World Currency, Controlling Transnational Corporations, Managed
Trade.

Chapter X Rise of the National Security State: Cold War and Democracy 123
Rise of Nationalism, War, Cold War and Lost Rights, War Scare of 1948, W h o
Started the Cold War, N A T O , Classified Documents, Weaker FOIA, Warnings
About Cold War, Secrecy, Military Conversion.

Chapter XI The CIA and the Intelligence Community 137

CIA and the Secret Government, Above Top Secret, NRO, Out of Control
Agency, Black Budget and Government Secrecy, Congressional Oversight
Committees, Congress is the Enemy, Past Warnings About the CIA, History of
the CIA, BCCI, S&L Scandal, Richard Ames, Abolish the CIA.

Chapter XII State and Federal Police 153

Intimidation of Political Activists, COINTELPRO Continues Against Patriots
and Environmentalists, Ruby Ridge, Waco, Many Raids, Seizing Guns, ATF,
L.A. Riots, Corrupt Justice Department, Federal Police, Private Security Industry,
Controlling the Intelligence Community.

Chapter XIII Militias in American History 171

Role of State Militias, View of the Founders, Gradual Federalization of State
Militias, The Courts Intervene, Right to Bear Arms, Unenrolled Militias Today.

Chapter XIV Our Hidden Past: History of Martial Law In the U.S 177
Nature of Martial Law, History of Martial Law in the U.S., Martial Law During
the Civil War, Habeas Corpus, Martial Law From Civil War Still in Effect,
Emergency Powers, U.S. Flag.

Chapter XV Martial Law and Emergency Rule Today 183

False Emergency, Secret Plans For Martial Law, FEMA, Unconstitutional Laws,
RX 84, 1994 Survey Asks Marines About Killing Americans, Garden Plot, Iran-
Contra, Michael New, Foreign Troops in U.S., Growing Power of U.N., Military
Exercises, Current Surveillance of Americans, Street Gangs, Prison Camps.

Chapter XVI The Oklahoma Bombing 201

Government Cover-up, Motives For Bombing, World Trade Center, Terrorism On
Demand, John Doe 2, McVeigh's Money, Bombs Inside Building, Seismographic
Evidence, Rush to Destroy Evidence, Illegally Stored Munitions, Advanced
Warnings of Bombing, Witnesses Threatened by FBI, Fired Grand Juror, Missing
ATF Agents, Suppressed Surveillance Videos, Foreign Operatives.
 iii

Chapter XVII Recent Attacks on the Militias and Patriot Movement 217
Evidence Militias and Patriots Are Not Racist or Anti-Semitic, Phony Critics of
the Right, White Supremacist and Neo-Nazis, Media Propaganda, FBI Infiltrates
Militias, Left and Right Working Together, Liberal Paradox, Polls Supporting
Militias, Progressives Attack GATT/NAFTA, Populisms vs. Conservatives.
Focus on Large Corporations, Political Debate Not Allowed.

Chapter XVIII Murder as a Political Weapon in America 231

Arranged Suicides and Accidents, Death of the Kennedys, Martin Luther King,
Malcolm X, Walter Reuther, Vince Foster, and Karen Silkwood, Many Deaths
Around Clinton, Daniel Casolaro and Inslaw, Killing the Musicians, Threatened
Into Silence, Deaths in the FBI, CIA, and the Military, Murder by Cancer and
Heart Attack.

Chapter XIX Radiation, Biological, and Chemical Experiments on People 243

The People As Guinea Pigs, Exposure to Atomic Tests, Increased Cancer,
Difficulty Receiving Treatment, Nuclear Weapons Industry Cover-Up, Mustard
Gas Experiments, Aspartame, BGH, Floridation, Food Irradiation, Genetics, Gulf
War Syndrome, Malathion, MTBE, Mustard Gas, Sewage Sludge in Our Food.

Chapter XX Restoring Constitutional Government 257

Awakening the People, Education to Stop Treason, What Will the People Do,
Responsibility of the People, Current Dangerous Situation, Patriotic Military,
Predictions of Coming Dictatorship, Third Political Parties, Future Actions, It's
the Constitution, Spiritual Politics, George Washington's Vision.

Notes 269

Bibliography 301

Index 309
 iv

Acknowledgments

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to all the people who contributed to
the writing of this book.
 V

Preface

I originally was drawn to write this book because of my years of involvement

in alternative health. In the 1980s I founded and later sold Pegasus Products, Inc. a
firm that produces and distributes flower essences, gem elixirs, and homeopathic
remedies. I was also a health practitioner for some years and have written four
books on alternative health. FDA abuses have become the norm, and gradually I
came to understand how dangerous the federal government has become to our
freedoms.
My purpose in writing this book is to awaken more people to the fact that
these are very dangerous times for America. More and more of the rights we take
for granted are being lost. Too many politicians have sold out to the special
interests, and most people are too busy watching TV to notice or take
responsibility for what is happening. In the name of stopping illegal drugs and
crime our rights are gradually being forfeited, as the federal government tightens
control over the people.
I have also written this book so that people can more easily look at the whole
picture. I have focused my research on extracting information from hundreds of
books, newspapers, and magazines so that people can more easily understand what
is taking place in America. Some might say that several stories of government
abuse that are heard in one part of the country don't appear too threatening. Yet
when you look at many different incidents all across the country and grasp the full
picture it is clear that something is very wrong.
 1

Chapter I

Introduction

“In our country the lie has become not just a moral category, but a pillar of the
state.”
Alexander Solzhenitsyn

“Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and
slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God—I know not what course others may take; but
as for me, give me liberty or give me death?”
Patrick Henry

America today exists in a twilight zone, not a democracy or a Republic but

not yet a police state. America has become an elitist corporate oligarchy. We as a
people clearly do not have the freedoms that the Founding Fathers had and that
they envisioned for future generations. The many cases of government abuse
described in this book are no longer rare or unique, they are increasingly the norm.
Especially since the late 1960s, numerous American political activists have been
murdered, maimed, framed, kidnapped, bombed, and spied on by government
agents. We now have camouflaged police that look like terrorists, undercover
police in the schools, curfews, roadblocks, urine tests, and informer networks.
Government terrorism against the people continues to grow.
While I discuss the secret, or invisible government, that controls America, I
also show how society is changing as the new world order dictatorship gradually
takes hold. The cultural, economic, social, and political trends that are creating the
new world order are discussed in detail. Over many years the large corporations
have taken control of our society, and we are all worse off because of this. In the
1930s the banking/corporate elite attempted to establish a dictatorship while their
agent Roosevelt was in power. Now, with an out-of-control intelligence commu-
nity, the situation is more dangerous. Presidential edicts establish secret laws,
while Congress has little say as federal power grows. The dictatorship of the new
world order would be much worse than Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union,
because the technology to control people is much more advanced today. The U.S.
News & World Report was quite accurate to present an article on North Korea with
1
a caption under a photo entitled new world order. That type of extreme control is
what awaits America.
Historians have shown that one reason Hitler took control in Germany was
because people were too busy with their own personal and professional lives to get
involved in politics. Many felt that if Hitler took power he would become a good
German because his advisors would control him. By the time people awoke, it was
too late. A former Berlin businessman “blamed his own group, people with the
time and money and the opportunity to know better, for what happened to
 2 Treason The New World Order

Germany. We ignored Hitler. We considered him an unimportant fellow....We

2
considered it just a bit vulgar to bother with him, to bother with politics at all.”
In certain respects America today is like Germany in the 1930s. In the later
days of the Weimar government, key leaders were assassinated just as in America.
George McGovern said, as in the Weimar period many people today are angry and
3
distrust the government. As happened in Germany we have turned away from our
Constitution. Hitler introduced gun control just as is happening today. Our 1968
gun control law is taken almost word for word from the 1938 German gun control
law. As in Germany there are people in America today trying to warn the public
that we face a disastrous turn away from our heritage if the people don't wake up.
Germany had a developed culture, so the people did not believe the warnings. In
America we have a democratic heritage and people are uneducated as to what is
happening to our society partly because of a corporate-controlled press. Most
people quietly go about their professional and personal lives not understanding that
our way of life is gravely threatened by the coming new world order.
Many readers will read this material and think it foolish to say a dictatorship
is coming. Unfortunately, that cavalier attitude is one reason why a Republic can
be lost. Daniel Webster said: “God grants liberty only to those who love it, and
are always ready to guard and defend it.” If every one sits back complacently who
will protect the Republic? Edmund Burke said, “All that is necessary for the
triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.” Many issues discussed in this book
are ignored by the national press. People need to get more involved and study what
is really happening in America. Newsweek published a letter from someone after
the congressional Ruby Ridge hearings who said: “It concerns me that people I had
4
believed to be paranoid extremists and lunatics may actually have a point.”
When decent people are confronted by evil, it can be difficult for them to
accept it. This is one reason why people find it difficult to accept conspiracies. A
few years ago the Texas Attorney General visited the place where people had been
sacrificed in satanic rituals. On national television, this official said he wouldn't
believe it except that he had seen it. In World War II after the Soviet army captured
Treblinka, one of the first major death camps to be overrun, Western reporters
were brought in. They reported the gas chambers and mass killings to the West,
but it wasn't initially believed. It was considered to be anti-Nazi propaganda
because supposedly even the Nazis couldn't kill people like cattle. Indeed, normal
people have a right to ask why should people so thirst for money and power. It
can be a sickness that decent people cannot understand.
Some people who hear this information laugh or get very upset because it
disturbs their perception of reality. If you only get news from the national media,
this book will be quite shocking. The truth is so scary that many people don't
want to confront it. Patrick Henry said: “It is natural for man to indulge in the
illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth....For my
part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole
truth; to know the worst; and to provide for it.”
In recent years millions of Americans have learned that special interest groups
now control the political process and own this country. Various banking groups
and business leaders, along with rogue elements in the military and intelligence
communities behind the scenes, are the dominant special interest group in Amer-
ica. Many politicians are controlled by these people, sometimes without politi-
cians even realizing it. With great power, unlimited funds, occasional threats, and
 Introduction 3

numerous contacts, this elite force secretly controls many special interest groups
which actually serve as front organizations. Second, just as many politicians have
sold out to special interest groups, there is today in America a systematic avoid-
ance, distortion, and suppression of news in the national media, which today is
controlled by a handful of bankers and corporations allied to this corporate elite.
While I often refer to corporations in this book, behind the large corporations are
large banks. David M. Kotz said banks generally control the large U.S. corpora-
tions by exerting outside pressure, placing their representatives on the board of
5
directors, or through stock ownership.
One doesn't have to believe in the power of the banking groups to understand
that a dictatorship is coming. The bankers and corporate elite in hundreds of
books, articles, and speeches openly write of their plans to disarm the U.S. mili-
tary and end our sovereignty, while creating a one world government led by the
UN with a powerful new army. Much of this literature is discussed in this book.
Consider the actions of the UN, various U.S. government agencies, current laws,
and how they are being enforced against the people. Numerous presidential edicts
often nullify the Constitution.
One of the scary things about this book is that much of the material contained
here was obtained from reading various newspapers and magazines or by just
watching television. Many of the things discussed in this book accurately portray
in frightening detail a growing trend towards the future society depicted in Brave
New World by Huxley and 1984 by Orwell. In December, 1978 in The Futurist,
David Goodman listed 137 predictions made by George Orwell. Over 100 of them
had already come true. Goodman said: “The possibility of Orwell's 1984 becoming
reality...is clear....Though 1984 has failed as a warning, it has been succeeding
brilliantly as a forecast.” In recent years, especially in doing the research for this
book, I have noticed over and over again people asking “How could this happen in
America?” It will keep on happening, unless we the people take back the govern-
ment.
In recent years the press has released much shocking information. If I had
written a book years ago just listing the many exposes released in shows like 60
Minutes on how the government has abused its citizens, few people would have
believed such things could happen in America! If I had written several years ago
that thousands of Americans had been secretly exposed to radiation, including even
plutonium, without their knowledge or consent and that some of these people were
pregnant, who would have believed this. When this was reported in late 1993,
some said this only occurred in dictatorships like the former Soviet Union. It is
time to understand that, in many respects, we are already living in a dictatorship. It
is just very sophisticated. As Rousseau said: “There is no subjugation so perfect
as that which keeps the appearance of freedom, for in that way one captures
volition itself.” When you control what people think, without people even realiz-
ing this is being done, it is possible to control and transform a society without
using force. We are all blinded by propaganda.
Over 400,000 people have had their assets forfeited, the majority without even
being accused of a crime. Many lose their properly after they are found innocent of
a crime. Your assets are guilty until proven innocent. No free society would allow
such laws. Prosecutors openly harass criminal attorneys, and there is increasingly
harsh anti-crime legislation with an attempt to remove guns from the people in
the phony war on drugs. Law enforcement agencies act with increased aggressive-
4 Treason The New World Order

6
ness against all citizens. The traditional rights of a juror have been greatly
weakened, while surveillance cameras are becoming common. Millions of
Americans were exposed to open air nuclear tests which the government said were
quite safe knowing this was a lie. America today has one of the largest prison
populations in the world, and all signs indicate that population will greatly expand
in the next few years, with many new prisons now being built.
The contents of this book may be new to many. However, Americans in-
creasingly understand the vast treason and corruption now taking place. It is just
that the national media will rarely discuss these issues, or they are discussed in a
very biased manner, so many readers will not appreciate how widespread is the
discussion and understanding of these problems. What if the information in this
book is true? What if only part of it is true? Isn't it time to stop blindly believing
the propaganda we are fed in the national media, ignoring politics or just pressing
the lever at the polling station concluding that you have fulfilled your responsib-
ility as a citizen. The present dangerous state of affairs has taken place partly
because we as citizens have shirked our responsibilities. We must all get involved
in the political process if we are to reverse the overwhelming power of the federal
government and Wall Street.
Last year I listened to a conservative radio announcer attack the conspiracy
views of the Christie Institute and The Secret Government by Bill Moyer. What
the announcer didn't add is that many on the right also strongly attack the national
security apparatus and the hidden power of the banking groups. Pat Robertson in
the New World Order is not the only conservative attacking these forces. When Pat
Robertson and Bill Moyers can agree that our nation is today threatened by certain
internal forces, this is one more sign that people should take a closer look at what
is happening today. Over the months I read and found relevant information in
conservative publications, such as The American Spectator and the National
Review, and in progressive publications, such as Z Magazine and In These Times.
This book is not meant to be liberal or conservative; it is meant to support
restoring constitutional government.
Across the political spectrum there are voices trying to warn the people that
the country is gravely threatened. Some, like Gore Vidal, Stewart Udall, and Bill
Moyers, talk about the nefarious activities of the national security state. Noam
Chomsky describes the one world government in various books and articles.
Others, like Buckminister Fuller in Critical Path, present a broad history of how
the invisible corporate government has long controlled and manipulated the
people. People like William Domhoff and C. Wright Mills describe the elite that
have long ruled America from behind the scenes. Barry Goldwater and Pat
Robertson describe the dangerous activities of certain bank controlled groups.
Christopher Lasch and Gerry Spence feel our constitutional form of government
has been seriously weakened by the corporate elite.
All these people say there are powerful groups threatening our way of life.
Some sources identify the bankers and corporate elite as the source of our
problems, while others feel the national security state is the threat. The power of
Wall Street is now obvious to many. So much is happening today that it is
increasingly clear a police state is no longer some distant event to fear. The
American people must awaken and join together to restore constitutional govern-
ment and diminish the power of the large corporations and their agent, the federal
government, so that we can again be a free people.
 5

Chapter II

Freedom Is Being Lost

“The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with
power to endanger the public liberty.”
John Adams

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they
are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights....When a long train
of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to
reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw
off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
Declaration of Independence

Right from the founding of the Republic, the people have been controlled and
ruled by an elite group of wealthy people. As students of the Constitution are well
aware, the constitutional convention was conducted by men of means, determined
to protect themselves and their class from the people. This is why the Senate and
president were elected by separate representatives to protect society from dangerous
democratic impulses. Alexander Hamilton said: “It is admitted that you cannot
have a good executive upon a democratic plan....The people, sir, are a great beast.”
John Quincy Adams said: the framers of the Constitution did not profess to be
“slavish adorers of our sovereign lords the people.” Most who attended the consti-
tutional convention feared and distrusted the political involvement of the people.
Some, like Benjamin Franklin, initially disliked the Constitution believing it
cheated the people.
While the constitutional convention was held because of dissatisfaction with
the Articles of Confederation, the greater inspiration was the growing Shays Re-
bellion. Farmers and townspeople were revolting against the increased tax burden
and political repression by the ruling elite. “It is clear that Shays rebellion played
1
an integral part of the genesis and formation of the U.S. Constitution.” J a m e s
Madison said this rebellion “contributed more to that uneasiness which produced
the Convention...than those...from the inadequacy of the Confederation.” Dele-
gates at the convention wanted a strong central government to weaken the local
power of the common people and to promote commerce. John Jay, the first Chief
Justice of the Supreme Court, said: “The people who own the country ought to
govern it.” The intention was to establish the rule of law, not the rule of the
2
common people.
The Constitution established America as a Republic, not a democracy. James
Madison said: “The two great points of difference between a democracy and a
Republic are the delegation of the government in the latter, to a small number of
citizens elected by the rest; secondly, the greater number of citizens and greater
6 Treason The New World Order

sphere of country over which the latter may be extended.” In 1828 Noah Webster's
Dictionary defined a Republic as “A commonwealth: a state in which the exercise
of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In
modern usage, it differs from a democracy or democratic state in which the people
exercise the powers of sovereignty in person.”
In a Republic the rights of all citizens are protected; in a democracy there is a
danger of tyranny from the majority. A Republic exists under the rule of law,
while a democracy is threatened by tyranny from the majority. Tocqueville said:
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist
until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largess from the public
treasure. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate
promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a
democracy collapses over loose fiscal policy...always followed by a dictatorship.”
We have a limited democracy, in that the people are today allowed to directly elect
members of Congress and to serve as jurors and on a grand jury. However, those
who today think we are a democracy, not a Republic, should remember that the
“Pledge of Allegiance” is to the Republic, not to the democracy. The word democ-
racy isn't even in the Constitution.
Last year I heard a radio speech by a president from the early 1920s. He called
America a Republic; this was the first time I had heard a politician use this word
to describe America. Today, as the people's rights are being replaced by false ex-
ternal trappings, we are constantly assured that America is a democracy. Before the
New Deal, America was rarely referred to as a democracy. The Constitution, in
Article IV, Section 4, says: “The U.S. shall guarantee in every State in this Union
a Republican form of government....”
Many people were aware that the new Constitution was prepared by the ruling
elite. This is partly why many felt the constitutional convention had gone too far.
In Rhode Island, where small farmers controlled state politics, the proposed Con-
stitution was passed out to the people and, unlike in other states, they were
allowed to directly vote on it. The result was 237 for and 2,708 against the
Constitution. Two states rejected the Constitution, and intense pressure including
secrecy and deceit were used to ratify it. Delegates to the Pennsylvania legislature
were dragged to the assembly by a mob and forced to vote. In most states the
Constitution was approved because the state legislatures were from the ruling
class. The Federalist Papers were written to ease the concerns of many, and some
states ratified the Constitution with the understanding that a Bill of Rights would
be added.
The Bill of Rights was not originally in the Constitution, partly because the
delegates were not overly interested in protecting the people's right, and the federal
government was to have very limited powers, so many felt it wasn't needed.
Pennsylvania delegate James Wilson said there was no need for a federal Bill of
Rights because the new federal government would only have the powers expressly
delegated to it. Many felt that state sovereignty and each state's Bill of Rights
would be sufficient to protect the people, because governing would mainly be done
by state and local authorities.
The difference between people today and those in the Revolutionary War is
that then the average person understood they were trading rule by England for rule
by the moneyed interests. And the people weren't always willing to accept this
new rule. This is partly why the Shays and Whisky rebellions took place. Taxes
 Freedom is Being Lost 7

were only part of the problem, despite what historians claim. In contrast, today
there is a myth that America is a democracy and there is no ruling elite, and until
recently people have not been willing to defend their rights. In the 1930s the
oppressive actions of the federal government would have caused riots in most
cities if the people had been as determined as our forefathers to defend their rights.
The myth that America is a real democracy has existed for many years, partly
because the people have enjoyed certain rights lacking in most nations. At the turn
of the last century, Brooks Adams said the choice of the ruling class was to coerce
or bribe the majority. Now the federal government is owned by the large corpora-
tions, and our rights are increasingly vanishing. Adam Smith in the Wealth of
Nations warned that throughout history there are always forces attempting to
control the people to gain increased wealth and power. Smith said governments
must act to control these forces or there would be dreadful consequences. Smith
identified the “merchants and manufacturers” as the “principle architects” of gov-
ernment policies that brought great harm to the English people. Max Weber
warned: “The question is how are freedom and democracy in the long run possible
at all under the domination of highly developed capitalism? Freedom and democ-
racy are only possible where the resolute will of a nation not to allow itself to be
ruled like sheep is permanently alive.”
That so few people today participate in the political process is cause for great
concern. Not only is there a vacuum in political leadership, but that void is being
filled by a corporate elite with the ready approval of a controlled press. James Q.
Wilson, past president of the American Political Science Association, said:
“Elections have become less important, because the real policy-making is now
done by courts, bureaucracies and legislatures operated by an ambitious political
class with very little orientation towards public preferences.” These people repre-
3
sent their own interests, not that of the people. The very legitimacy of govern-
ment is now at stake with so few people voting. People understand that they are
no longer part of the decision-making process.
In the 20th century many people have discussed the ruling elite. Gaetano
Mosca said: “All political regimes are of necessity ruled by...an organized
minority controlling a disorganized majority....The first class, always the less
numerous, performs all political functions, monopolizes power and enjoys the
advantages that power brings, whereas the second, the more numerous class, is
directed and controlled by the first, in a manner that is now more or less legal,
now more or less arbitrary and violent.” Noam Chomsky said in America “the
specialized class are offered the opportunity to manage public affairs by virtue of
their subordination to those with real power in our societies, dominant business
interests....These ideas...have an unmistakable resemblance to the Leninist concept
of a vanguard party that leads the masses to a bettter life that they cannot conceive
or construct on their own....” Lippmann's specialized class and Lenin's vanguard of
revolutionary intellectuals will lead the way to a better society, however many
4
must be sacrificed along the way.
Supposedly there must be the manufacture of consent because the elite cannot
trust public opinion because only certain capable people can manage society.
Harold Lasswell said when elites cannot use force to compel obedience, social
managers must turn to “a whole new technique of control, largely through propa-
ganda.” We must acknowledge “the ignorance and stupidity (of)...the masses” and
 8 Treason The New World Order

not succumb to “democratic dogmatism about men being the best judges of their
own interests.”
These doctrines “and others are entirely natural in any society in which power
is narrowly concentrated but formal mechanisms exist by which ordinary people
may, in theory, play some role in shaping their own affairs—a threat that plainly
must be barred.” America does have more freedom for the people than in other
western societies “so the ignorant and stupid masses are more dangerous....As the
state loses the capacity to control the population by force, privileged sectors must
find other methods to ensure that the rascal multitude is removed from the public
arena.” The people “can be permitted, even encouraged, to ratify the decisions of
5
their betters in periodic elections.”
Gerry Spence, one of America's most respected criminal lawyers, said: “In this
country we embrace the myth that we are still a democracy when we know that we
are not a democracy, that we are not free, that the government does not serve us
but subjugates us. Although we give lip service to the notion of freedom, we
know the government is no longer the servant of the people but, at last, has
become the people's master...for the ultimate enemy of any people is not the
angry hate groups that fester within, but a government itself that has lost its
respect for the individual. The ultimate enemy of democracy is not the drug dealer
or the crooked politician or the crazed skinhead. The ultimate enemy is the New
6
King that has become so powerful it can murder its own citizens with impunity.”
“A new tyranny has cast its cold and ugly shadow over the nation, a nation
where the rights of the people, criminals, and citizens alike exist mostly in myth,
where the police have become the handmaidens of power, where trials have become
mere window dressing and mockeries of justice, and where the corporations are left
free to pillage and ravage the people with utter impunity....Entrapped in our
concrete reservations, indentured to our corporate masters, impoverished of our
land, separated from the earth, and at last placed at odds with nature herself, many
7
no longer see the issue of freedom as relevant.”
“It is a tyranny supported by the people...,one that enslaves the people while
it convinces the people they are free....We have delivered our power to our oppres-
sors in exchange for their promise that we will be safe....We have accepted the
myths of freedom as fact in the place of freedom itself. We love our servitude. But
why not? It often feels as good as freedom and we can enjoy it without the risk
8
that always accompanies the struggle for freedom.” Too many Americans are
willing to give up their freedom to feel safe. We speak about our rights as long as
we don't have to sacrifice for them. We are free as long as we don't too vehemently
express our beliefs. Then we may be labeled a political activist, terrorist, or racist
and paranoid extremist and may be harassed by the police.
William Greider said: “The decayed condition of American democracy is
difficult to grasp....Symptoms of distress are accumulating freely in the political
system and citizens are demoralized by the lack of coherent remedies....The things
that Americans were taught and still wish to believe about self-government—the
articles of civic faith we loosely call democracy—no longer seem to fit the present
reality...American democracy is in much deeper trouble than most people wish to
acknowledge. Citizens are cut out of politics surrounding the most important
governing questions. The representative system has undergone a grotesque distor-
tion of its original purpose.” Instead of a real democracy, we get false promises
and many new laws. The corporations control both political parties, and the people
 Freedom is Being Lost 9

have become powerless in the political process. The elite decision makers are too
cut off from the people to really understand or represent the people. “The mutual
understanding between citizens and government necessary for genuine democracy is
now deformed or neglected....A genuine democracy will not likely develop until
the two realms are reconciled—the irregular citizens and the formal structure of
power....Modern representation has assumed a different purpose—taking care of
9
clients, not the larger public interest.”
According to Ferdinand Lundberg, “The general public in most instances is
completely helpless because it is disorganized and very much at odds within
itself—lacking knowledge, single-minded leadership and staying power. The
national public must at all times also deal with many local and personal problems.
10
It is, therefore, always easily defeated by determined entrenched interests.”
Lewis Lapham said: “In the name of making the world safe for democracy, the
United States revised its own democratic traditions and constitutional principles.
By presidential fiat and Defense Department decree, the newly appointed guarantors
of the world's peace suppressed the turbulent and newly un-American habits of free
speech....The government learned to define freedom as freedom for the state, not
for the citizens. The national interest became the parochial interest of the ruling
class, not the multifarious interests of the individuals subsumed under the rubric of
'the American people.' The question was one of how a government by the
11
judicious few could best control and improve the instincts of the foolish many.”
“The Constitution was made for the uses of the individual...and the institu-
tions of American government were meant to support the liberties of the people,
not the ambitions of the state. It was the law that had to give way to the citizen's
freedom of thought and action, not the citizen's freedom of thought and action that
had to give way to the law.” Today, “the government reserves to itself unenumer-
ated powers and seeks to limit the freedoms of the individual to a list of enumer-
ated rights. The increasingly punitive uses and interpretations of the law support
12
the ambitions of the state, not the liberties of the people.” Gore Vidal said:
“Political decadence occurs when the forms that a state pretends to observe are
known to be empty of all meaning. Who does not publicly worship the Constitu-
tion? Who, in practice, observes it at all? Congress has only two great powers
13
under the Constitution: the power to declare war and the power of the purse.”
Both have been largely lost to the national security state and the corporations.
As Charles Beard demonstrated in Economic Basis of Politics, our Constitu-
tion is firmly based on private economic interests. The Framers saw their task as
preserving liberty, but they also wanted to protect property rights as basic to
liberty. Widespread ownership of land gave people an economic stake in their
freedom and in the system. The Founders were concerned with property rights and
abstract rights because they wanted to protect “the real rights of real people.” The
Founders felt that along with a separation of powers in society, if a Republic was
based on commerce and industry, it would be easier to prevent a tyranny of the
majority. And it would be easier to achieve material gain in such a Republic, so
14
the people would be more satisfied.
However, increased use of maritime or commercial law has encroached upon
constitutional and common law. Corporations attained rights but not the
responsibilities of citizens. Corporate welfare became more important than citi-
zen's rights. The corporate elite appointed their representatives, the lawyers and
judges, to flood the country with thousands of complex laws, often too long for
 10 Treason The New World Order

even Congress to read or understand. Gradually, judges enforced these laws and
forgot about the Constitution and common law. Today government is controlled
by the large corporations, and federal tyranny is growing. When our Republic was
founded, wealth was tied to assets like property, and even the wealthy were gener-
ally cash poor. Everyone benefited from a good infrastructure. Today wealth is
more purely monetary and can easily be moved between nations. Wealth is no
longer tied to what also benefits the people. This is partly why the ruling elite has
turned against the people.
Perhaps the greatest blessing of the Declaration of Independence, Constitu-
tion, and Bill of Rights is the recognition that people have natural rights that
come from God; they are not delegated by the government. William Blackstone
said: “This law of nature being coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself
is, of course, superior in obligation to any other....No human laws are of any
validity if contrary to this....” Thus the power of a government must be limited,
which was a fundamental principle of the Founders. The state was to respect and
not interfere with the free exercise of natural rights.
In more recent years certain natural rights, like the right to property, are
ending as the asset forfeiture laws seize people's assets, often when people aren't
even charged with a crime. In addition, the state now grants the people many
rights such as in the welfare state. Instead of being a passive observer that did not
grant or even interfere with people's rights, the government has created and granted
rights such as providing food and housing. For millions addicted to government
support, all needs are provided by the state, which greatly increased government
power because the state needed many new laws and regulations to fulfill its new
obligations to the people. If the government has the power to grant rights, it will
inevitably limit those rights and commit crimes against the people as we see
today. What a government grants, it can take away. Citizens have the legal and
moral right to resist unjust laws. This is why the right to jury nullification was
widely accepted for over 100 years before the founding of the Republic. People
have a right and duty when on a jury to reject unjust laws.
While it may be possible to improve the Constitution, I do not attack it,
especially since the Bill of Rights was added. I agree with the Founders, like
Benjamin Franklin, who felt that by establishing a Republic with a Bill of Rights
they were also protecting the people's rights. The problem is not the Constitution,
it is the nature of the human condition. Thucydides said: “Of the Gods we believe,
and of men we know, that by a necessary law of their nature they rule wherever
they can.” Most communist nations had a Constitution with clauses protecting
human rights. Such words had little value. Our Constitution will only work if the
people actively strive to protect their rights and if the rule of law prevails. If the
large corporations aren't soon stopped, our Republic will one day become a distant
memory. Already most Americans think we are a democracy when, in fact, we are
a Republic. The Republic should be reestablished with democratically-orientated
institutions.
 11

Chapter III

The Secret Government

“I sincerely believe...that banking establishments are more dangerous than

standing armies.”
Thomas Jefferson

“For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own
soul? Or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?”
Matthew 16:26

Many books written by political and social scientists describe the corporate
elite. While many consider America a pluralist society, too many well-researched
books, such as Who Rules America Now? by G. William Domhoff and The
Power Elite by C. Wright Mills, have shown that there is a cohesive upper class
ruling America, a power elite consisting especially of corporate executives which
dominates public policy, the electorial process, and government through numerous
organizations and the expertise of foundations and think-tanks. These political
scientists do not speak of conspiracies; yet what they write is often similar to
what many on the right and left say about the corporate elite that controls Amer-
ica. Domhoff and many others have presented considerable evidence about the
power and influence of the Trilateral Commission (TC) and Council on Foreign
Relations (CFR) over our lives.
FDR My Exploited Father-In-Law, by C.B. Dall is a very important book
because it provides an inside look at how certain people have controlled our
political destiny throughout the 20th century. Dall describes how the corporate
elite ruthlessly advance their objectives at the people's expense, grooming phony
politicians, creating wars and then phony peace treaties to mislead the public. Dall
said CFR control of our political destiny had created a “subtle dictatorship by the
few.” Dall called people like Colonel House, a key aide to President Wilson,
“early one-worlders.” Bernard Baruch guided Wilson, “leading him like one would a
poodle on a string.” Before Wilson could become a presidential candidate he had to
support establishing the Federal Reserve, the direct election of senators, introduce
the income tax, follow orders if a war started in Europe, and follow recommenda-
tions for cabinet posts. Dall called Baruch the number one political operative
behind FDR. For some time Dall was confused by FDR's policies, but he came to
understand that “Most of his (FDR's) thoughts, his political 'ammunition,' as it
were, was carefully manufactured for him in advance by the CFR-One-World
Money group.” Gradually, Dall became rather dismayed at these events, because
1
FDR supported the one worlders and the “UN hoax.” As R. Buckminister Fuller
has also noted, the push for world government is a poison that has quietly existed
among the ruling elite throughout the 20th century.
 12 Treason The New World Order

FDR's son Elliott Roosevelt wrote The Conservators in which he declared:

“There are within our world perhaps only a dozen organizations which shape the
courses of our various destinies as rigidly as they regularly constituted govern-
ments....The impact of their decisions reach...into every home and office building
in the modern world.” These groups are “the creme de la creme of global planners.”
2
Roosevelt proceeded to describe the elite groups discussed in this book. On
August 2 3 , 1993 Christopher Hitchens, the writer and Oxford friend of Clintons,
on C-Span said: “It is, of course, the case that there is a ruling class in this
country, and that it has allies internationally.” On August 28, 1994 Cokie Roberts
said on ABC's This Week With David Brinkley that “Global bankers are really
running the world.”
Just as we now have one national political party with two branches, we have
a secret government divided into four factions. The ruling faction includes the
superrich, corporate and bank leaders, foundation heads, European aristocracy, and
certain managers. The managers are often brilliant and ambitious people with few
morals. These people generally belong to the TC, CFR, and the Bilderbergers. The
secret government primarily includes the elites of Europe and America, although
in recent years elites, from other regions have joined the corporate front groups
discussed below. George Seldes said: “If it is true that money prevails in national
and state elections, then it must also be true that the men who put up the money,
the handful including the Du Ponts, Pews, Mellons, Rockefellers and others...also
control our political life, our Congress, and the Presidency itself. A conspiracy of
3
silence has always existed on this subject.” In the July 26, 1936 New York
Times Joseph Kennedy, father of the future president, said: “Fifty men have run
America, and that's a high figure.” The second faction includes those in the
national security state. The bankers and corporate elite are slightly more captivated
by money, while the rogue military/intelligence groups are more drawn to power.
The bankers and large corporations comprise the dominant force in control of the
secret government. All CIA heads have been CFR members.
These factions form an extremely powerful special interest group determined
to destroy the Constitution and establishing a one world government. People in
this group created World Wars I and II and many other conflicts in this century.
Human life has no meaning to these people. Remember, only a few people around
Hitler really understood his plans; yet consider the destruction that resulted. From
this group come the dedicated fanatics determined to kill however many people it
takes to establish the planned world dictatorship. It is difficult to put into words
just how ruthless these people are. There are probably no more than several hun-
dred people actually directing events. These people are supported by dedicated op-
eratives including hit squads and people in the local, state, and federal police who
carry out orders. Many of these operatives understand that a police state is planned,
but they do not understand the ramifications and details.
The execution of President Kennedy shows the determination of these fanatics.
Fletcher Prouty, former officer in the Defense Intelligence Agency and author of
The Secret Team, said the assassination of JFK was the work of the “Secret
Team,” an elite group that operates behind the scenes inside and outside the gov-
ernment. While in the service, Prouty served as liaison officer between the
Pentagon and the CIA. He said since World War II “more and more control over
military and diplomatic operations at home and abroad” was assumed by elites
 The Secret Government 13

“whose activities are secret, whose budget is secret, whose very identities as often
as not are secret....” He also said this group has always controlled the CIA.
In High Treason, members of the “Secret Team,” or “The Club,” were
identified as some of the wealthiest and most powerful people in America. “The
Secret Team runs the U.S., and to a large extent, they have circumvented the
Constitution. They are highly suspicious of the democratic process, and they have
consistently tried to control and manipulate elections.” These people felt that
Kennedy threatened their power. “The Secret Team did things to each President to
make him understand that the power did not lie with the Presidency. His mandate
may come from the people, but the power—and policy making—came from
outside, from this shadow government....John Kennedy's murder was an example
to all who followed, telling them to toe the line, and to do as they were
told....Flag waving, super-patriotism, defense and 'national security' was the cover
for these men to enrich themselves and entrench themselves in power. This Club,
a loosely knit, informal organization, has gradually established a shadow
government with a secret, institutionalized covert action capability outside the
4
official government.”
The third faction of the secret government are the Utopian dreamers or idealists
who use slogans like “world peace through world law.” Here are the scholars and
think-tank experts and many members of the World Federalist Association (WFA).
I once heard two such people being interviewed. They were smug in their belief
that the nation state must end. Some of these people understand that many will die
to create a world government, but they accept this as a necessary transition stage.
Some in this faction have deluded themselves into believing that this new society
will help the people. This may be from a sense of superiority that they, as the
elite, know what is best for the people or from a belief that one world government
will prevent war, promote peace, protect the environment, and raise the people's
standard of living. History has shown that there are always some Utopian dreamers
who delude themselves into presenting a grandiose totalitarian scheme such as
communism to improve or save humanity. Behind these dreamers always lurk
those determined to enhance their power and wealth however many people must be
killed along the way.
The fourth faction of the secret government includes opportunists who don't
really care what a new world order means, but they believe that joining groups like
the CFR provides career advancement, prestige, contacts and a means to earn more
money. These members give the secret planners another layer of protection and
respectability. Many CFR members in the media are in this category. Carroll
Quigley, a professor and former teacher of President Clinton, wrote Tragedy and
Hope: A History of the World in Our Time, describing in 1,348 pages the behind-
5
the-scenes influence of bankers like the Morgans, Rothschilds, and Rockefellers.
Quigley, the official biographer of the CFR, said there was an inner circle who
directed things, partly by manipulating a larger, outer circle through persuasion,
patronage, and social pressure. C.B. Dall said: “Few members of the CFR know
6
the long-range plans of its small top-management group.” While membership in
these organizations doesn't mean there is monolithic servitude to the objectives as
set forth by the leadership, all members of the groups described in this chapter
support certain objectives like world government, NAFTA, and GATT.
However much money and power these people obtain, it is never enough. It is
difficult for normal people to understand the deep insecurity in those promoting
14 Treason The New World Order

the new world order. In 1776 Benjamin Franklin wrote: “Sir, there are two pas-
sions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men...the love of power
and the love of money....When united in view of the same object, they have in
many minds the most violent effects.” The Bible warns: “For the love of money is
7
the root of all evil....” The drive to control people for money and power is relent-
less. Disagreements sometimes occur in these factions, but arguments are settled
behind the scenes. Such disagreements are usually based on the means, not on the
end goal of world domination and greater wealth. However, there are also commu-
nist and Catholic factions pushing plans for world domination that are in sharp
agreement with the corporate plan for a world government
In speaking about the plans of the secret government, one is describing
treason. A second, often unrelated factor is the vast corruption that has overtaken
America because the rule of money has replaced the rule of law. Organized gangs
steal whatever they can, usually with no participation by the secret government,
although there may be an occasional alliance as for example when the CIA and
mafia raided certain banks during the S&L scandal. As Ambrose Evans Pritchard,
the Washington, D.C. based reporter for the London Telegraph, said there is so
much corruption in America that it is now like many third world countries he has
reported from. A third factor to consider is the bureaucracy and the slow but
inevitable growth of government. Those who want the federal government to
dominate all aspects of our lives are adept at using the bureaucracy to assist in
achieving their goals. In The Twilight of Democracy, released in 1995, Patrick
Kennon, a former CIA official, said democracy “has become marginal as a system
of government” so we should turn to bureaucratic experts.
Some may ask why there is little information about the secret government in
the press if they really rule America. It is because the corporate elite owns the
national media. Many books like None Dare Call It Treason and None Dare Call It
8
Conspiracy list the owners of the national media in the CFR and TC. The
interaction of the press, intelligence community, government, and our corporate
masters is exemplified by the career of Leslie Gelb. In 1984, the Washington
Post, and then the New York Times, said New York Times reporter Leslie Gelb
had cooperated with the CIA during the Carter administration in 1978 to recruit
reporters in Europe to publish stories that would encourage people to support
development of the neutron bomb. Gelb worked in the State and Defense Depart-
ments under Johnson and Carter. Today he is president of the CFR.
Over the years the national media has issued brief reports on the corporate
elite acknowledging their influence. In the September 1, 1961 issue of the
Christian Science Monitor, the CFR was described as “probably one of the most
influential, semipublic organizations in the field of foreign policy....It has staffed
almost every key position of every administration since FDR.” In a May 1962
article in Esquire, Richard H. Rovere said: “The directors of the CFR make up a
sort of Presidium for that part of the Establishment that guides our destiny as a
nation.” On November 2 1 , 1971, Anthony Lukas said, in the New York Times,
“For the last three decades American foreign policy has remained largely in the
hands of men—the overwhelming majority of them Council members (CFR)
....One of the most remarkable aspects of this remarkable organization...is how
little is known about it outside a narrow circle of East Coast insiders.” On October
30, 1993, the Washington Post assured us that the CFR is in charge and all is
well. A column by CFR member Richard Harwood acknowledged that many gov-
 The Secret Government 15

ernment leaders are in the CFR and this organization manages foreign affairs and
the military-industrial complex. Harwood said 10 percent of the CFR now come
from the media, and he listed key people in the national media who are CFR
9
members.
Quigley described the early influence of Cecil Rhodes in establishing certain
secret societies, usually called Round Table organizations in various countries.
Rhodes also established Rhodes scholarships for people to attend Oxford Univer-
sity. The groups kept in touch through correspondence, visits, and the quarterly
magazine, The Round Table, which was established in 1910. In 1919 the Royal
Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) was founded in London. They
controlled many university chairs and newspapers like The Times of London and
The Observer. On December 14, 1992 Christopher Hitchens in The Nation
described how the Rhodes alumni work together as part of a ruling elite. Many of
these people became very influential in government.
With a British perspective A.K. Chesterton, in The New Unhappy Lords,
described how the secret government has dominated the major events of the 20th
century. Chesterton first learned of the secret government in England when, as a
journalist, he discovered that they could bring people from throughout the world to
London to attend conferences during World War II. Even the British government
couldn't do this. The CFR, established in 1921, was an outgrowth of this early
British influence. From the start the CFR controlled The New York Times, Herald
Tribune, Christian Science Monitor, and Washington Post. Controlling the
national media was always understood to be crucial.
According to Quigley, “There does exist, and has existed for a generation, an
international Anglophile network which operates, to some extent, in the way the
radical 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....In general my chief difference of opinion is
that it wishes to remain unknown, and I believe its role in history is significant
10
enough to be known.”
“The powers of financial capitalism had another far-reaching aim, nothing less
than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate
the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole.
This system was to be controlled in a feudalist fashion by the central banks of the
world acting in concert, by secret agreements arrived at in frequent private meet-
ings and conferences.” The privately owned Bank of International Settlements in
Basle, Switzerland played a key role in this interaction of central banks. “The
growth of financial capitalism made possible a centralization of world economic
control and a use of this power for the direct benefit of financiers and the indirect
11
injury of all other economic groups.”
In his next book, The Anglo American Establishment, Quigley had trouble
finding a publisher. His first book was withdrawn after 9,000 copies were sold,
despite its popularity, and the negatives were destroyed. The corporate controllers
were displeased with what Quigley revealed. In this new book Quigley said: “It is
not easy for an outsider to write the history of a secret group of this kind, but...it
should be done, for this group is...one of the most important historical facts of the
16 Treason The New World Order

twentieth century.” Quigley admitted “In this group were persons whose lives have
been a disaster to our way of life.” The front cover of this book shows the U.S.
flag upside down which has long been a sign of distress. The cover also shows the
U.S. flag inside the British flag. For decades England has controlled the U.S. far
more than people understand.
The corporate elite hoped to establish a world government using the League of
Nations, but this failed partly because the U.S. wouldn't join that organization.
Colonel Edward House helped establish the CFR, and in Philip Dru, he said his
goal was for “socialism as dreamed of by Karl Marx.” The book described a
“conspiracy” to capture both political parties and use them to create a socialist
world government. The plan included electing a president by using “deception
regarding his real opinions and intentions.” Written in 1912, the book called for a
graduated income tax and establishing a state-controlled central bank. These laws
were passed in 1913, and many other goals outlined in the book also became
reality. House called for a one-world government, one-world army, and one-world
economy ruled by an Anglo-Saxon financial oligarchy with a dictator served by a
12 man council. Our Constitution would be greatly changed. President Roosevelt
wrote Colonel House on November 23, 1933 “The real truth of the matter is, as
you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the
government ever since the days of (President) Andrew Jackson—and I am not
wholly excepting the Administration of W.W. (Woodrow Wilson). The country is
going through a repetition of Jackson's fight with the Bank of the U.S.—only on
12
a far bigger and broader basis.”
The CFR is based in New York with a branch in Washington, D.C. In recent
years it has grown to over 3,000 members. David Rockefeller was chairman of the
board from 1970-1985, and Henry Kissinger is a prominent member. The 1952
CFR annual report said its members sometimes suspend their membership when
they join the government, and the Recce congressional investigation said there
were secret CFR members. As suggested by the writings of its members, its goal
is to condition the people to rely on government as the solution to all problems
and to pull the country into a one world government directed by the UN. The CFR
position of promoting free trade and a world government controlled by the elites of
the U.S., Europe, and Japan with limited democracy is well expressed in The
Management of Interdependence: A Preliminary View, by Miriam Camps.
The CFR has dominated U.S. foreign policy and the State Department for
decades through its publications, meetings, and private study groups. Kraft, in a
July, 1958 Harpers article, said its study groups played a key role in shaping the
UN charter. Weekly in the news, CFR experts discuss foreign affairs as guest
experts. Rear Admiral Chester Ward, a CFR member for 16 years, said: “Once the
ruling members of the CFR have decided that the U.S. Government should adopt a
particular policy, the very substantial research facilities of CFR are put to work to
develop arguments, intellectual and emotional, to support the new policy, and to
13
confound and discredit, intellectually and politically, any opposition.” Just re-
cently a CFR panel proposed ending a 19-year policy that prevented the press from
working for the CIA, and this is probably what will happen. The CFR announces
14
policy and the U.S. government follows orders.
“The most powerful clique in these elitist groups have one objective in
common—they want to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the
national independence of the U.S.” They want to end national boundaries and racial
 The Secret Government 17

and ethnic loyalties, supposedly to increase business and ensure world peace. What
they strive for would inevitably lead to dictatorship and loss of freedoms by the
people. The CFR was founded for “the purpose of promoting disarmament and
submergence of U.S. sovereignty and national independence into an all-powerful
one-world government....This lust to surrender the sovereignty and independence of
15
the U.S. is pervasive throughout most of the membership....”
FBI Bureau File 62-5256 shows that the FBI has investigated the CFR several
times since 1931 especially for Nazi and communist activities. CFR headquarters
is near the old Soviet Embassy to the UN. Obtained through a Freedom of Infor-
mation Act request, the 371-page file, with 336 pages released, had 263 instances
of censoring. The record shows that, starting with Roosevelt, various presidents
have blocked FBI investigations of the CFR citing national defense. It is quite
unusual for a president to intervene in such investigations, and this is one more
sign of the CFR's power. Over the years two ex-FBI agents have written books
strongly attacking the CFR for its treasonous activities. Dan Smoot wrote The
Invisible Government, and W. Cleon Skousen wrote The Naked Capitalist. Ted
Gunderson and other ex-FBI agents also strongly attack CFR activities. Days after
Hoover started another major investigation of the CFR, he died mysteriously. His
successor, Patrick Gray III, started another investigation of the CFR, and he was
forced to resign eight days after receiving detailed information about a CFR con-
spiracy against the U.S. government. The next FBI director, Clarence Kelley, was
a CFR member. On March 15, 1974 he lied and wrote to Senator Hartke that the
16
FBI had never investigated the CFR.
The Trilateral Commission was established in 1973 by David Rockefeller
after he read Zbigniew Brzezinski's book, Between Two Ages, which praised
socialism and said the U.S. is becoming obsolete so we should join a one world
government. National sovereignty was no longer a viable concept. The U.S. Con-
stitution should be rewritten while the existing federal system of having sovereign
states was no longer necessary. He called for an alliance among North America,
Western Europe, Japan, and ultimately, the communist countries. He said:
“Marxism represents a further vital and creative stage in the maturing of man's
universal vision....Though Stalinism may have been a needless tragedy for both
the Russian people and communism as an ideal, there is the intellectually tan-
17
talizing possibility that for the world at large it was...a blessing in disguise.”
These were strange words for a man who became President Carter's National
Security Advisor; however, this was magic to David Rockefeller. He hired
Brzezinski to direct the TC and brought in Carter as well. Comrade Rockefeller in
1972 made the remarkable statement: “The social experiment in China under
Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human
18
history.” Over 60 million Chinese died in Mao's experiment. Based in New York
City, the TC has several hundred members from Western Europe, Japan, Canada,
and the U.S. with a goal of fostering closer cooperation among these regions to
establish a global government.
The TC published The Crisis of Democracy, which claimed there was a crisis
and excess of democracy because citizens had become too politically active. The
democratic surge had created a “democratic distemper....A pervasive spirit of
democracy may pose an intrinsic threat and undermine all forms of association,
weakening the social bonds which hold together family, enterprise, and commu-
nity....An excess of democracy means a deficit in governabilily....” Thus there was
18 Treason The New World Order

a need to restrain the American people. It was deemed necessary to protect the
elites and restore a more equitable relationship between government authority and
the people. Since the media had become too critical of government policy, there
was a need to restrict freedom of the press and change the way officials are elected
19
in order to weaken the people's influence.
The Bilderberg group was founded in 1954 in Europe. According to TC-
20
approved sources, its first meeting in 1954 was financed by the C I A . It has an
annual meeting, usually in Europe, and the Rothschilds play a major role in its
affairs. In 1990 American Hegemony and the Trilateral Commission, by Stephen
Gil, explained the activities of the TC and the Bilderbergers. Many members are in
the European aristocracy, while American members are often also in the CFR. Its
1995 meeting in Switzerland was guarded by the Swiss army, which is strange for
a private group. A recent member is William Kristol, editor of Rupert Murdocks'
Weekly Standard. A relative unknown Kristol suddenly became an expert on many
talk shows. When Kristol speaks he often represents the Bilderberg group. After
Dole won the nomination, Kristol attacked him in the Weekly Standard because
the Bilderberg group wants Clinton reelected. Kristol should register as a foreign
lobbyist.
In a private June, 1991 Bilderberg meeting David Rockefeller said: “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
promise of discretion for almost forty years....It would have been impossible for
us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of
publicity during those years. But the world is now more sophisticated and prepared
to march towards a world government. The supernational sovereignty of an intel-
lectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determina-
tion practiced in past centuries.”
The Carnegie Endowment for International Peace (CEIP) is another corporate
group. Officially it is another Washington think-tank. For several years it was
directed by Alger Hiss, the former senior State Department official found guilty of
perjury for denying he'd copied government papers for the Soviet Union. And
Councils on World Affairs groups exist in many cities across the U.S. Allied to
the CFR and the State Department, these groups hold lectures to promote an
international outlook.
There is also the World Federalist Association (WFA) based in Washington,
D.C., which was previously called the United World Federalists, with members
like Ronald Reagan and George Bush. Founded in 1947 its membership has
dwindled to around 9,000 from a peak of 40,000 in the 1950s. Unlike the other
corporate fronts, this group has openly called for immediate world government.
One of its early brochures, Beliefs, Purposes, Policies, said its aim was to “create
a world federal government with authority to enact, interpret and enforce world law
adequate to maintain peace....World law should be enforceable directly upon
individuals.” Nations in a world government should have no right of secession,
direct taxes should be paid by individuals, and there should be a world police force
with nations being disarmed except for light arms to deal with internal matters.
The first WFA head Cord Meyer, Jr., who later became a senior CIA official,
in 1947, wrote Peace or Anarchy, in which he called for a world government, full
national disarmament, and a UN army that controlled all nuclear weapons. If a
nation attempted to overthrow the UN, it would be crushed. The sovereign-nation
 The Secret Government 19

state was called the great threat to peace, and individual citizens must submit
themselves to world law and UN courts. The cold war required “total preparedness”
which meant “totalitarianism for American citizens....This brutalization of life
must be extended even to the control of the mind. Propaganda will be substituted
for fact, and official ideology will supplant the free search for truth. Every source
of public information...must be perverted. Those who dissent will (ultimately)
21
face arrest.”
The journal, Foreign Affairs, with a circulation of 115,000, is the mouthpiece
of the CFR. Over the years it has introduced important new foreign policies that
became official U.S. government policy. For instance, George Kennan's contain-
ment of communism and Richard Nixon's position about reopening relations with
Communist China were first announced in this journal. The journal, Foreign
Policy, is published by the CEIP, while the quarterly, World Federalist, is
published by the WFA. Also, if you want to see what is planned for our future,
read Futurist magazine. From describing a cashless society to implants to control
people, this publication reveals much.
These organizations have interlocking members with a common goal of
establishing a one world government by dividing the world into three regions:
Europe, North and South America, and the Pacific Union under the UN. Members
comes from the economic, political, charitable, media, religious, educational, and
academic elites. A recent book, Who's Who of the Elite by Robert G. Ross, Sr.,
lists most members in these groups.
Every administration since 1920 has included members of the CFR which has
dominated the federal government, especially the Departments of Defense, State,
and Treasury, since World War II. Thomas Dewey, the Republican presidential
candidate in 1944 and 1948, was a CFR member as was Eisenhower, Nixon,
Bush, Stevenson, Kennedy, Humphrey, and McGovern. Over 70 of Kennedy's
appointments were members of these organizations. At the end of None Dare Call
It Conspiracy, by Gary Allen, is a list of 110 members of the CFR Nixon
appointed to his regime. Most key officials in Carter's administration were
members of these groups, while Bush had 380 CFR members in his government.
Clinton is a member of the CFR and TC. The May 2 1 , 1995 Arkansas Democrat
Gazette discussed Clinton's attending the 1991 Bilderberger convention and his
alignment with Rockefeller. Over 80 percent of the heads of the federal govern-
ment executive branches since World War II have been members of these groups.
CFR members in Clinton's regime include Secretary of State Christopher,
Secretary of Interior Bruce Babbitt, Secretaries of Treasury Lloyd Bentsen and
Robert Rubin, Secretary of Health and Human Services Donna Shalala, Secretary
of Housing and Urban Development Henry Cisneros, Deputy Secretary of State
Strobe Talbott, Under Secretary for Political Affairs Peter Tarnoff, Assistant
Secretary of State for East Asian and Public Affairs Winston Lord, National
Security Advisor Anthony Lake, UN Ambassador Madeleine Albright, recent CIA
Director James Woolsey and current CIA head John Deutch (also in TC), Council
of Economic Advisors Chairman Laura Tyson, and White House Science Advisor
John Gibbons. This is only a partial list.
Former House speaker Foley and present House speaker Newt Gingrich, as
well as former Senate majority leader George Mitchell, and former House majority
leader Gephardt are members of the CFR, as are Supreme Court justices Stephen
Breyer, Sandra O'Connor, and Ruth Ginsburg. Breyer and Ginsburg were only two
20 Treason The New World Order

of three U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judges in the CFR. This nation of about
255 million people is more than capable of producing many dedicated public
servants outside these elite groups yet they continue to dominate the government
22
and the press rarely discusses this.
Over the decades many heads of state and leaders of international organizations
like NATO and the World Bank visit CFR headquarters in New York. In 1990
Nelson Mandela visited the CFR, as did Yeltsin soon after. Jean-Bertrand Aristide
of Haiti gave a speech at the CFR on September 25, 1991. In 1995, when Castro
visited New York, he promptly went to CFR headquarters to meet corporate lead-
ers. U.S. foreign policy has been manipulated for decades to promote world
government.
Leaders of various governments understand where real power resides, so rep-
resentatives of the secret government are allowed to intervene in world affairs. In
April, 1994 a private group led by Henry Kissinger and Lord Carrington, the
former British Foreign Secretary, went to South Africa with “some private
citizens” to settle things. Officially the mission was not labeled a success; how-
ever, shortly after this visit Chief Buthelezi finally agreed to bring his party into
the electorial process, and peaceful elections took place with a transition of
governments. In the spring of 1994, Selig Harrison from the CEIP visited North
Korea to mediate the quarrel over North Korea obtaining nuclear arms. In mid-
June, 1994 former President Carter also visited Norm Korea. In December, 1994
Rep. Richardson, another CFR member, visited North Korea. Even the North
Koreans understand who really controls America, so they are willing to meet
corporate representatives. Richardson went to Burma, and the imprisoned Burmese
leader Aung San Suu Kyi was soon released. He also visited Iraq, and brought
home two imprisoned Americans. Journalists like Cokie Roberts wondered in
amazement how Richardson was so effective! In July, 1995 Kissinger met with
senior U.S. and Chinese officials to improve the worsening relations.
National Security and the U.S. Constitution declared that “post-World War II
and pre-Vietnam foreign policy operated in the context of an establishment con-
sensus, brokered by major East Coast diplomatic and financial figures active in the
23
C F R . ” In 1994 Clinton said he would renew the most-favored trade status for
China without tying it to human rights concerns. Shortly before this announce-
ment, the TC released Triangle Paper number 45 “An Emerging China in a World
of Interdependence” urging that China be allowed into existing regional organi-
zations and be involved in security matters. If you want to learn what is in store
for U.S. foreign policy, read CFR and TC reports.
The great danger to our Republic is that the traitors, although small in
numbers, are a dedicated, well-financed, and well-organized group of utterly ruth-
less fanatics with no morals, who will use any method to establish a world
government police state. While this is happening, most people ignore the evidence
and watch football. This is how the communists and Nazis took control. In the
20th century, some have understood this danger.
John F. Hylan, Mayor of New York City, said on March 26, 1922: “The real
menace of our Republic is the invisible government which like a giant octopus
sprawls its slimy length over our city, state, and nation. Like the octopus of real
life, it operates under cover of a self-created screen....It seizes in its long and pow-
erful tentacles our executive officers, our legislative bodies, our schools, our
courts, our newspapers, and every agency created for the public protection....At the
 The Secret Government 21

head of this octopus are the Rockefeller-Standard Oil interests and a small group of
powerful banking houses generally referred to as the international bankers. (They)
virtually run the U.S. government for their own selfish purposes. They practically
control both parties, write political platforms, make catspaws of party leaders, use
the leading men of private organizations, and resort to every device to place in
nomination for high public office only such candidates as will be amenable to the
dictates of corrupt big business. They connive at centralization of government on
the theory that a small group of hand-picked, privately controlled individuals in
power can be more easily handled than a larger group among whom there will
24
most likely be men sincerely interested in public welfare.”
In 1954 Senator Jenner said: “Today the path to total dictatorship in the U.S.
can be laid by strictly legal means, unseen and unheard by Congress, the President,
or the people....We have a well-organized political-action group in this country,
determined to destroy our Constitution and establish a one-party state....The im-
portant point to remember about this group is not its ideology but its
organization. It is a dynamic, aggressive, elite corps, forcing its way through
every opening, to make a breach for a collectivist one-party state. It operates
secretly, silently, continuously to transform our Government without suspecting
that change is under way....If I seem to be extremist, the reason is that this
revolutionary clique cannot be understood, unless we accept the fact that they are
extremist. It is difficult for people governed by reasonableness and morality to
imagine the existence of a movement which ignores reasonableness and boasts of
its determination to destroy, which ignores morality, and boasts of its cleverness
in outwitting its opponents by abandoning all scruples. This ruthless power-seek-
ing elite is a disease of our century....This group...is answerable neither to the
President, the Congress, nor the courts. It is practically irremovable.” The
25
senator's two page speech should be read by every American. Over the decades,
many in Congress have attacked the power of the secret government.
In 1953 and 1954 the Reece Committee investigated the tax-exempt founda-
tions and their relationship to left-wing groups. At that time Congress said CFR
“productions are not objective but are directed overwhelmingly at promoting the
globalistic concept.” The CFR had become “in essence an agency of the U.S.
government...carrying its internationalist bias with it.” However, little changed and
the investigation soon ended, because the foundations were too powerful. These
foundations work together supporting common goals like transforming education,
supporting the UN, and supporting foreign aid to promote the new world order.
Ford Foundation chairman John J. McCloy was also chairman of the Chase Man-
hattan Bank and the CFR. The Ford, Rockefeller, and Carnegie Foundations and
others were established to restore the reputations of big bankers and large corpora-
tions which were criticized harshly before World Wars I and II. They also avoided
paying taxes while taking others' money as they attained great power and
26
influence.
In 1958 Rene Wormser the general counsel of the Reece Committee wrote
Foundations: Their Power and Influence revealing how the tax-exempt foundations
were used by the corporate elite to secretly shape and influence American life
through social manipulation and political power. From research grants to univer-
sities to influence in government these foundations are an unchecked power that is
“interlocking and self-perpetuating.” The author said more public control should be
exerted over how these foundations spend their money, and they should be banned
22 Treason The New World Order

from participating in political activities. Public trustees should be required in

foundations, courts should examine their activities, and some foundations should
27
lose their tax-exempt status.
Certain popular books contributed to attacks on the corporate rulers. None
Dare Call It Treason by John Stormer and None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary
Allen sold millions of copies. Both books described in detail the corporate elite
and their alignment with communism. A Choice Not An Echo and The Grave-
diggers by Phyllis Schlafly said the Republican party was secretly controlled by
the Bilderberger group and global communist domination was the goal.
For years conservative factions of the Republican party, especially in the
West, attacked the CFR. Barry Goldwater said: “The CFR...believes national
28
boundaries should be obliterated and one-world rule established.” “The TC...is
intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and
banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the U.S....In
my view, the TC represents a skilled, coordinated effort to seize control and con-
solidate the four centers of power—political, monetary, intellectual, and ecclesiast-
ical....What the Trilaterals truly intend is the creation of a worldwide economic
power superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved. As
29
managers and creators of the system, they will rule the future.”
R. Buckminster Fuller, a widely respected observer of our culture, also under-
stood the great power of what he called the invisible government. In Critical Path,
in the chapter “Legally Piggily,” Fuller describes how large corporations and their
lawyers control the U.S. “The U.S.A. is not run by its would-be 'democratic' gov-
ernment. All the latter can do is try to adjust to the initiatives already taken by
(leaders of the) great corporations. Nothing could be more pathetic than the role
that has to be played by the President of the United States, whose power is ap-
proximately zero. Nevertheless, the news media and most over-thirty-years-of-age
U.S.A. citizens carry on as if the President has supreme power.” The invisible
power groups manipulate us through “its enormous media control and its election-
30
funding and lobbying power of the American political game.”
On May 22, 1975 Fuller testified before the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee stating, when asked where our country and people were going, “Not
only have all the big corporations become transnational and taken all the former
U.S.A. gold and other negotiable assets with them....Today most of the people in
America still think of their nation as being the most powerful of the world
nations—ergo, free to make its own most constructive moves. Quite the opposite
is now true...The U.S. is both internally and externally bankrupt.” In the 1960s
and 1970s various sources such as C.B. Dall in FDR, My Exploited Father-in-
31
Law, said most of the gold in Fort Knox had been taken by the bankers because
the U.S. was bankrupt. Fuller also said the second great gasoline shortage of June,
1979 was created by the invisible government to divert the public from concern
generated by the Three Mile Island radiation accident.
In 1980 the American Legion (AL) passed Resolution 773 at their national
convention demanding that Congress investigate the TC and CFR. This resolution
was introduced into the House February 4, 1981 by Rep. McDonald, but Congress
did nothing. In 1981 the AL introduced Resolution 243 again asking Congress to
investigate the CFR and TC. The Veterans of Foreign Wars introduced a similarly
worded Resolution 460 at their national convention in 1981.
 The Secret Government 23

The influence of the secret government has also been discussed in several
elections. Christopher Lydon, in The Atlantic Monthly, said conspiracy theories
are banned in mainstream American journalism and then, to his surprise, described
how Rockefeller and the TC got Carter, a member of the TC and a man from a
small southern state with no base in the democratic party, elected president. For
months no one except the press took Carter's candidacy seriously. Time put Carter
32
on the cover in 1971 and continued to present him in glowing terms.
A chapter in The Carter Presidency and Beyond describes how the TC pro-
moted Carter. The Rockefellers had old business ties in Atlanta; David Horowitz,
co-author of The Rockefellers, said “Atlanta is Rockefeller South.” Rockefeller
intervened with the black leadership in Atlanta to get national black support for
Carter. As president, Carter promoted the agenda of the corporate elite. Robertson,
in The New World Order, describes how Carter and his administration were domi-
nated by the New York banker groups, especially through the CFR. One reporter
said: “It would be unfair to say the TC dominates the Carter administration. The
33
TC is the Carter administration.” On the same morning I read the Atlantic
34
Monthly articles about Carter, I also read several articles in the Nation which
described how the media, especially Time, had distorted the news to protect
Clinton, especially concerning his involvement with money laundering, the CIA,
and drug running in Arkansas. I could have been reading about the same candidate
except for the 19 year difference.
It was fairly common, up to the early 1980s, to attack the power of the TC
and the CFR. Reagan and Connally harshly attacked them during the 1980 election
campaign partly because they got Carter elected President. Bush resigned from the
CFR over the uproar but his CFR membership helped cost him the Republican
nomination. However, once elected, Reagan brought many TC and CFR people
into his administration.
By the mid 1980s these corporate groups had come to so dominate the na-
tional media and both political parties that they were rarely discussed. It was as if
they never existed, despite the fact that they have dominated every White House for
decades. In 1988 former Interior Secretary James Watt was a lone voice when he
said the Reagan government was greatly influenced by the TC, which was using
its influence to “protect their fortunes and preserve their political clout.”
Congress and the president are increasingly irrelevant to the secret govern-
ment. The CFR uses money and lobbyists to control Congress, as shown by the
passage of NAFTA and GATT. The bankers are quite sophisticated, using lobby-
ists so some politicians have sold out to them without even realizing it. Many
politicians do what they are ordered to do by various special interest groups which
are secretly controlled by the corporations with their unlimited funds and influence.
These organizations have enormous economic and political clout. For in-
stance, the Business Roundtable is a lobbyist group for major corporations and
banks that played a major role in getting NAFTA and GATT passed. Both
political parties have key leaders who are members of these elite groups. The
parties often disagree because, if the Democratic and Republican leadership sup-
ported every bill, it would become too obvious that we really have only one
national political party. Joseph Kraft said: “The Council (CFR) plays a special
part in helping bridge the gap between the two parties, affording unofficially a
35
measure of continuity when the guard changes in Washington.” The present
dominant power of the corporate elite represents a decline of American pluralism.
24 Treason The New World Order

Labor, farmers, small businesses, professionals, environmentalists, and consumers

now have little say in the affairs of the nation, because big business controls both
political parties. Money rules all.
Many believe one can trace the roots of the corporate elite and the secret gov-
ernment back to the late 1700s with the influence of the Illuminati. However, to
go into that here would go beyond the scope of this book. There are many
excellent texts that readers can study, and some of these books are listed in the
bibliography. Other groups in the secret government such as the Order of Skull
36
and Bones, the Club of Rome, and 33rd degree Masons should be studied by the
serious student to understand our present predicament. Conspirators' Hierarchy:
The Story of the Committee of 300, by Dr. John Coleman, is a good review on
the broad reach of the secret government into many areas of society.
 25

Chapter IV

The New World Order

“We can have democracy in this country or we can have great wealth concentrated
in the hands of a few, but we cannot have both.”
Justice Louis D. Brandeis

“The money power preys upon the nation in times of peace and conspires against
it in times of adversity. It is more despotic than monarchy, more insolent than
autocracy, more selfish than bureaucracy. It denounces, as public enemies, all who
question its methods or throw light upon its crimes.”
Abraham Lincoln

In hundreds of books, articles, studies, and speeches in the 20th century, many
influential and powerful people including many in Congress have called for a new
world order and the surrender of U.S. sovereignty and individual freedoms to a one
world government usually, involving the UN. People who attack these plans are
called paranoid conspiracy theorists, extremists, or racists, but the national media
ignores this extensive literature. Consider this, and you will begin to appreciate
how the press deliberately and maliciously uses propaganda to lie to the people.
When confronted with this evidence, elitists deny the existence of this literature or
lie and say this is no longer the policy. Some, like Kenneth S. Stern in A Force
Upon the Plain, make a brief comment about one part of this literature, down-
playing and making fun of it to fool the public. People who think it is paranoid to
be concerned about those who call for a world government should ask why this
literature exists and why critics of the right almost never discuss this material.
When you carefully study this literature and the events of the 20th century, the
threat to our rights and way of life in a one world government with a new
corporate-inspired Constitution is obvious.
During the 20th century many prominent leaders have supported the new
world order and world government. For instance, on May 13, 1947 in London
Winston Churchill said: “Unless some effective world supergovernment, for the
purposes of preventing war, can be set up and begin its reign, the prospects for
peace and human progress are dark and doubtful....Without a United Europe there
1
is no prospect of world government.” Elsewhere Churchill said: “The creation of
an authoritative world order is the ultimate aim toward which we must strive.”
Charles De Gaulle said: “Nations must unite in a world government or perish.”
Nehru said: “We have arrived at a stage where the next step must comprise a world
and all its states, each having economic independence, but submitting to the
2
authority of world organization.”
26 Treason The New World Order

Secrecy is very important to these people. While many leading politicians

support a world government, they refuse to openly discuss this topic with voters.
In a 1976 interview in Transition, Senator Cranston warned against publicly pro-
moting world government since “the more talk about world government the less
3
chance of achieving it, because it frightens people....” Jeffrey A. Baker said:
“They camouflage their actions through the actions of others, constantly hiding
behind people or institutions of purported good intent.” When information leaks
out, like the Report From Iron Mountain, it is always attacked by the media and
corporate-approved experts. These experts hide their plans by denial or by claiming
they are protecting the people's rights. In 1931 Arnold Toynbee said: “We are at
present working discreetly with all our might to wrest this mysterious force called
sovereignty (from) nation states....All the time we are denying with our lips what
we are doing with our hands, because to impugn the sovereignty of the local
nation states of the world is still a heresy....”
The Brandt Commission, a multinational group of national leaders and
international financiers, defined the new world order as “A supra-national authority
to regulate world commerce and industry; an international organization that would
control the production and consumption of oil; an international currency that
would replace the dollar; a world development fund that would make funds
available to free and communist nations alike; an international police force to
enforce the edicts of the New World Order.”
The goal of the new world order is for the large corporations and superrich to
totally control the world's population, resources, communications, finances, trade,
and labor. This involves manipulating economics, politics, society, and religion
on a global level. Lincoln Bloomfield wrote “Arms Control and World Govern-
ment” in the July, 1962 journal World Politics. The article began: “The notion of
a world government is today—and perhaps for all time—a fantastic one.” Walter
B. Wriston, ex-chairman of Citicorp, wrote The Twilight of Sovereignty, ex-
plaining how the information revolution was ending nation-state sovereignty. He
said: “A truly global economy will require concessions of national power and
compromises of national sovereignty that seemed impossible a few years ago and
which even now we can but partly imagine.” World citizenship is to become the
standard. Already the Boy Scouts of America have a citizenship of the world merit
badge.
Individuals in all nations must submit to international law and a world court.
World law, not our Constitution, will rule supreme, and a world parliament is
planned. On June 14, 1992 on ABC's This Week with David Brinkley, ex-Reagan
adviser Michael Deaver said: “In five years we're going to have a World Parlia-
ment.” Free trade with a stable system of payments is part of the plan, as is
controlling the central bank in many countries like our Federal Reserve. These
elitists believe the only way to make big money is through a monopoly. John D.
Rockefeller once said “Competition is a sin.” The free market myth is perpetuated
by the giant corporations that strive to increase government regulation to limit
competition, to enhance their profits and power. The plan is to also establish a
new world religion and to remake the education system.
To reach these goals requires the destruction of the nation state, sovereignty,
patriotism, nationalism, property rights, and the family unit. In the book
Experiences, Toynbee, who spent many years working at the Chatham House
discussed in Chapter III, said: “We are now moving into a chapter of human
 The New World Order 27

history in which our choice is going to be...between one world and no world....In
the field of politics, nationalism is going to be subordinated to world-govern-
4
m e n t . . . . ” Elsewhere Toynbee said: “The cult of sovereignty has become
mankind's major religion. Its God demands human sacrifice.” On September 29,
1988, on ABC's Nightline Ted Koppel referred to nationalism as a virus. By
controlling people, world government can be established.
There is an intimate relationship between socialism and those promoting the
new world order with a one world government. Many early Fabian socialists like
H.G. Wells, Bertrand Russell, and George Bernard Shaw supported world govern-
ment and an end to sovereignty. Fabian socialists established the London School
of Economics to train government bureaucrats to enhance central government
control. Ultimately socialism is a greater threat than is communism, because
socialism uses a gradual and insidious approach to achieve total control over the
people, while the objectives of communism are more obvious. In the early 1900s
when plans for a world government were further developed, businessmen like Cecil
Rhodes provided money and influence while socialist intellectuals contributed ideas
to achieve world government.
A constant strategy is to claim that governments must work together to solve
the major problems of today. Supposedly, it is beyond the ability of individual
nations to solve todays problems, so there must be a co-ordinated world strategy.
A global approach with world government is needed to solve global problems,
especially as the world gets more complex. Arnold Toynbee said: “In all developed
countries a new way of life—a severely regimented way—will have to be imposed
5
by a ruthless authoritarian government.” The plan is to create a world army, world
court, world currency, world bank, and world tax. Each state will have only a
lightly armed police force, while private gun ownership will end.
Previously, the nuclear threat was stressed. Jonathan Schell, in The Fate of
the Earth, said world government was essential to avoid nuclear destruction. Today
environmental concerns, third world poverty, food shortages, hunger, and national
debts are more often used as an excuse for a world government. At a recent confer-
ence of the James A. Baker III Institute for Public Policy, the German Chancellor
said: “The stability of the new world order and the new global challenges require
cooperation between all global players to fight organized crime, international
terrorism, fundamentalism, and nationalism. The First Global Revolution A
Report By the Council of the Club of Rome presented similar views. The Club of
Rome is one of the corporate groups pushing for world government. Maurice
Strong, a senior UN environmental official, said: We may get to the point where
the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilization to collapse.”
Supposedly, if certain steps aren't taken by the elites of the world, conditions
will continue to deteriorate so the poor will inherit the earth and live in misery.
The U.S. standard of living is being deliberately lowered to the lowest common
denominator to match that of many other nations to promote world government. It
is claimed that democracy, or rule by the people, has too many limitations to
really work especially in the current grave crisis. “Democracy is no longer well
suited for the tasks ahead....Few politicians in office are sufficiently aware of the
global nature of the problems in front of them and have little if any awareness of
6
the interactions between the problems.” Supposedly, the people need the wise
hand of the elite, even if they don't realize this. The elite have decided this on their
own and believe they must act to save the world, also making themselves rulers to
28 Treason The New World Order

save the people who have no say in the matter. The people must continue believ-
ing they have a say in government, although that is a lie. CFR member George
C. Lodge has just released Managing Globalization in the Age of Interdependence,
in which he called for world “convergence and integration.” If necessary, this
convergence will be created by autocratically imposed fiat. Government will decide
what the people need, and the people will be reeducated to accept this new ideol-
ogy.
Fateful Visions, edited by CFR members, reviews from many sources what a
world government will entail. For instance, some declare a world government will
have the right to militarily enter a nation when there is just a rumor that a nation
will take disruptive action, or to support world government policy. A nation's
leaders could be arrested and direct rule imposed as in Somalia. The world govern-
ment army, at least 500,000 strong, will control all nuclear weapons, and
extensive international inspection will be required to maintain control. Admittedly,
there may be a misuse of international police powers. As the debate to establish
world government intensifies, civil war might occur in some countries as local
patriots try to block their nation from joining a world government, and foreign
troops will be used to defeat the patriots and support the pro-world government
faction. Bloomfield explains how a UN international military force would be used
7
to invade various countries. In other words, if the U.S. government continues
moving towards world government and widespread violence starts with the militias
trying to save our Republic, UN troops would be brought in to destroy the
militias. In addition, once world government is established, secession will not be
allowed. Once a consensus has formed to establish a world government, all nations
will have to join it. If some nations refused to do this, it supposedly would
8
threaten peace, so force would be used against them.
While most people remain asleep, elitists have for decades had deadly serious
debates about how to create a one world government. The Institute for World
Order, Inc. (now the World Policy Institute) through its newsletter, numerous
books, and lectures has promoted world government for years. Richard Falk, in the
Yale Law Journal, reviewed four proposed strategics to create a world government.
The first is the Utopian legalism of Clark and Sohn, as discussed in Introduction
to World Peace Through World Law, and World Peace Through World Law. A
second approach is Kissinger's geopolitical power politics, while a third school of
thought involving the multinational corporations and Trilateral Commission is
more geoeconomic. A fourth view involves global populism and human dignity.
Falk rejected the first approach as too unrealistic and the second and third
approaches for being too ruthless and exploitative. As a Utopian dreamer, he
believes the fourth approach will best serve the people. Falk and others also
seriously debate the importance of time and a transitional period for the claimed
9
paradigm shift into a world government.
Paul Warburg, testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on
February 17, 1950, said: “We shall have world government whether or not you
10
like it—by conquest or consent.” Warburg was a prominent Wall Street financier
and CFR leader. His father helped establish the Federal Reserve. In 1959 he wrote
The West in Crisis saying: “A world order without world law is an anachronism;
and that, since war now means the extinction of civilization, a world which fails
to establish the rule of law over the nation-states cannot long continue to exist.
We are living in a perilous period of transition from the era of the fully sovereign
 The New World Order 29

11
nation-state to the era of world government....” The Economist June 22, 1991
called for a global police force, an international court, and said the U.S. must
submit to “a collective world order.”
The second Humanist Manifesto in 1973 said: “We deplore the division of
humankind on nationalistic grounds. We have reached a turning point in human
history where the best option is to transcend the limits of national sovereignty and
to move toward the building of a world community...a system of world law and
world order based upon transnational federal government.”
Several strategics are being used to create a world government. One plan is to
gradually strength the UN and related international institutions. The UN has
published many documents calling for its expanded role, and Global Bondage by
Cliff Kincaid is a good reference on this. Second, regional governments and insti-
tutions are developing. Third, economic union is being used to create a political
12
union. The plan is to make people more dependent on each other, to become
comfortable with international institutions and control. Richard N. Gardner said, in
Foreign Affairs in April, 1974, “The hopeful aspect of the present situation is that
even as nations resist appeals for 'world government' and 'the surrender of
sovereignty,' technological, economic and political interests are forcing them to
establish more and more far-ranging institutions to manage their mutual interde-
pendence.” David Korten of the People-Centered Development Forum, a pro-UN
group, presented a paper at the 1995 International Development Conference
revealing part of the strategy to create world government. He said, led by
multinational banks, global consolidation was being promoted from above with
NAFTA, GATT, and the Maastricht treaty, and it was being promoted from below
by environmentalists, activists, and indigenous people.
The plan to create a one world government using a UN type body has existed
for decades. About the League of Nations in 1922 Foreign Affairs declared:
“Obviously there is going to be no peace or prosperity for mankind so long as it
remains divided into fifty or sixty independent states....The real problem today is
13
that of world government.” The United Nations: Planned Tyranny, by V. Orval
Watts, was published in 1955. In great detail, Walls described the coming one
world government and the UN's role in it. One person I spoke to in researching
this book told me her father, who worked in defense in the 1950s, learned of these
plans. Another contact working in the U.S. military in the early 1980s was
ordered to provide highly classified documents to the Soviets. When he refused, he
was told that by the end of this century the U.S. and the Soviet Union would join
in a one world government. When he still refused to commit treason, his career
was ruined.
Right from the start, the elite always planned for the UN to be a vehicle
towards a one world corporate dictatorship. On September 7, 1948, The
Philadelphia Inquirer quoted Senator Alben Barkley as stating: “The time is not yet
mature for what we mean by world government....We must strengthen the UN
before we can achieve our goal of world government.” John Foster Dulles, in
1950, wrote War or Peace saying: “The UN represents not a final stage in the
development of world order, but only a primitive stage. Therefore its primary task
is to create the conditions which will make possible a more highly developed
14
organization....Then, perhaps, a world police force could work.” On September
17, 1990, Time magazine said: “The Bush administration would like to make the
UN a cornerstone of its plans to construct a New World Order.” On March 6,
30 Treason The New World Order

1991, Bush told Congress: “Now, we can see a new world coming into view. A
world in which there is a very real prospect of a new world order....A world where
the United Nations, freed from cold war stalemate, is poised to fulfill the historic
vision of its founders.” On February 1, 1992, Bush said: “My vision of a New
World Order forsees a UN with a revitalized peacekeeping function. It is the sacred
principles enshrined in the UN charter to which we henceforth pledge our
allegiance.” A president should only pledge his allegiance to the U.S. and the
Constitution. The UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali recently said: “The
time of absolute and exclusive sovereignty has passed; its theology was never
matched by reality.”
A constant issue raised by elitists is a concern about overpopulation, food
shortages, and the environment. Especially since the turn of the last century, vari-
ous scientists have said overpopulation threatened economic growth and our very
existence. George Bernard Shaw, a Fabian socialist and early supporter of world
government, in 1928 wrote The Intelligent Woman's Guide to Socialism and
Capitalism. He said people would be forcible fed, taught, and employed even if
they didn't like this but “If it were discovered that you had not character and
industry enough to be worth all this trouble, you might possibly be executed in a
kindly manner....”
In Anticipations of the Reaction of Mechanical and Scientific Progress Upon
Human Life and Thought, H.G. Wells said: “The ethical system which will
dominate the world state, will be shaped primarily to favor...beautiful and strong
bodies, clear and powerful minds...and to check the procreation of base and servile
types....The new ethics will hold life to be a privilege and a responsibility...and
the alternative in right conduct between living fully beautifully, and efficiently
will be to die....The men of the New Republic (one world government) will have
little pity and less benevolence....They will hold...that a certain portion of the
population exists only on sufferance...and on the understanding that they do not
propagate, and I do not foresee any reason to suppose that they will not hesitate to
kill when that sufferance is abused....The men of the New Republic will not be
squeamish either in facing or inflicting death....They will have an ideal that will
make killing worth the while;....They will have the faith to kill....If deterrent
punishments are used at all in the code of the future the deterrent will (be) good
15
scientifically caused pain.”
Franklin Roosevelt closely followed and supported Well's views on having a
world government. On December 4, 1933 he wrote Wells saying: “I have read,
with pleasure and profit, almost everything that you have written....You are doing
much to educate people everywhere, and for that I am grateful.” On February 13,
1935 he wrote Wells: “How do you manage to retain such extraordinary clear
judgements?...I believe our (the New Deal) biggest success is making people think
during these past two years. They may not think straight but they are thinking in
the right direction—and your direction and mine are not so far apart....”
Born into an English aristocratic family, the philosopher Bertrand Russell
played a role in the British branch of the secret government. In various books like
Fact or Fiction, The Impact of Science on Society, and The Prospects of Industrial
Civilization, Russell called for world government. On July 11, 1955, he and
others presented a manifesto claiming that nuclear war threatened humanity's
survival, so national sovereignty must be limited. At times, Russell openly
expressed his contempt for the common man. In The Impact of Science on Society
 The New World Order 31

he discussed the planned terror: “I do not pretend that birth control is the only way
in which population can be kept from increasing....War...has hitherto been disap-
pointing in this respect, but perhaps bacteriological war may prove more effective.
If a Black Death could be spread throughout the world once in every generation
survivors could procreate freely without making the world too full....The state of
affairs might be somewhat unpleasant, but what of that? Really high-minded
people are indifferent to happiness, especially other people's. There are three ways
of securing a society that shall be stable as regards population. The first is that of
birth control, the second that of infanticide or really destructive wars, and the third
that of general misery except for a powerful minority....These considerations prove
that a scientific world society cannot be stable unless there is a world
government....Unless...one power or group of powers emerges victorious and
proceeds to establish a single government of the world with a monopoly of armed
16
force, it is clear that the level of civilization must continually decline....”
In 1948 Julian Huxley, the first head of UNESCO, wrote UNESCO: Its
Purpose and Its Philosophy. He spoke of “the implications of the transfer of full
sovereignty from separate nations to a world organization....Political unification
in some sort of world government will be required....Even though...any radical
eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible,
it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined
with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake
17
so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.” E x -
Senator William Benton said: “In its education program (UNESCO) can stress the
ultimate need for world political unity and familiarize all peoples with the impli-
cations of the transfer of full sovereignty from separate nations to a world
organization....Political unification in some sort of world government will be
required.”
In 1968 the Club of Rome concluded that civilization would collapse unless
the death rate was increased and the birth rate was lowered. Various investigators,
like John Coleman, report the Club of Rome developed a plan Global 2000 to kill
several billion people by 2050. The mass killings in Cambodia and Africa are
early stages of this operation. Paul Ehrlich, famous for his work on the popula-
tion threat, said it might be necessary to add “a sterilant to the drinking water or
staple foods” to sterilize the entire population, giving the antidote to a select
18
few. The forced sterilization programs of India and China may be the wave of the
future in a corporate controlled society. In The Population Bomb, Ehrlich said:
The population will drop from one of two solutions. The birth rate will be
lowered or the “death rate solution” will be used through “war, famine, pestilence.”
19
Ehrlich's wife is a member of the Club of Rome. He also said the “time of sugar
coated solutions is long gone,” and in a recent PBS documentary Ehrlich said: “If
you don't solve the population problem the environment will collapse and our
civilization will go along with it.”
The UN Fund for Population Activities praised China's “exceptionally high
implementation rate” and “high commitment” to population control methods such
as abortion. The liberal New Republic recently said the UN acted with extreme
slowness in Ethiopia regarding that nation's famine and then supported the gov-
ernment so many more died. Much UN food aid went to the military instead of the
people. In Somalia, the UN stayed away when other relief agencies tried to help.
When the UN finally got involved there were many problems. In Rwanda, the UN
32 Treason The New World Order

helped the armed militias, which had killed almost a million people, take control
of numerous refugee camps. One private aid official said the UN took the lead in
20
supporting these militias.
In 1969, U Thant said: “I do not wish to seem overdramatic but I can only
conclude that from the information that is available to me as Secretary-General (of
the UN) that the members of the UN have perhaps ten years left in which to sub-
ordinate their ancient quarrels and launch a global partnership...to defuse the
population explosion, and to supply the required momentum to development
efforts.” In 1987 the UN released a report, Our Common Future, claiming that in
order to achieve sustainable development, lifestyle habits must be radically altered
and closely regulated by government at all levels. Central planning was necessary
under the UN's environmental bureaucracy.
In Ecology and the Politics of Scarcity Revisited, William Ophuls called for a
world government with coercive powers. In Preparing For the Twenty-First
Century, Paul Kennedy described how the global outlook is causing a weakening
of the nation state. Overpopulation represented a threat to the nation state and the
large transnational corporations. Former Washington governor Dixy Ray said, in
Environmental Overkill, “The future is to be world government, with central
planning by the UN....If force is needed, it will be provided by a UN green-
helmeted police force.” Already there are the UN Commission on Sustainable
Development, UN Global Environmental Facility, and the UN treaty Agenda 21.
The UN is ready to regulate the world to have a sustainable environment. Jacques-
Yves Cousteau, in his journal Calypso Log, said it was necessary to create “an
international environmental police, 'green helmets,' who would be under the
direction of the UN. Our planet needs guardians...free of the constraints
of...national sovereignty.”
Foreign Affairs published an article with the ominous title “The Population
21
Threat.” In Living Within Limits: Ecology, Economics and Population Taboos,
Garrett Hardin said: “The issue of coercion must be faced....Loss of freedom is an
inevitable consequence of unlimited population growth.” Jacques-Yves Cousteau
said: “It's terrible to have to say this. World population must be stabilized and to
22
do that we must eliminate 350,000 people per day.” In one year that would equal
128 million people. At the UN Earth Summit in Rio, Cousteau said we have 10
years to solve the overpopulation problem, and he urged “drastic, unconventional
decisions.” The horrible truth is that there are individuals behind the new world
order who plan to exterminate vast numbers of people, so the elite will have a
world that meets with their approval. Covert Action and other sources report that
23
AIDS is really germ warfare. I discuss many population-extermination programs
in Chapter XIX.
To end overpopulation, many elitists call for controlling the family. Warren
Bennis and Philip Slater said, in The Temporary Society “One cannot permit
submission to parental authority if one wishes to bring about profound social
change....In order to effect rapid changes, any such centralized regime must mount
a vigorous attack on the family lest the traditions of present generations be
preserved.” The state must “create an experiential chasm between parents and
children to insulate the latter in order that they can more easily be indoctrinated
with new ideas. The desire may be to cause an even more total submission to the
state....One must teach (children) not to respect their tradition-bound elders, who
24
are tied to the past and know only what is irrelevant.” As shown in Nazi Ger-
 The New World Order 33

many and the Soviet Union, totalitarian governments weaken the family unit in
order to transfer loyalty to the state.
In the February, 1946 issue of Psychiatry, G.B. Chisholm said: “We have
swallowed all manner of poisonous certainties fed us by our parents, our Sunday
and day school teachers, our politicians, our priests....The re-interpretation and
eventual eradication of the concept of right and wrong which has been the basis of
child training, the substitution of intelligent and rational thinking for faith in the
certainties of the old people, these are the belated objectives...for charting the
changes in human behavior....Freedom from moralities means” to be “free from
25
outmoded types of loyalties....”
Garrett Hardin said: “It should be easy to limit a woman's reproduction by
sterilizing her....People need to recognize that population control is needed to
protect the quality of life for our children. The 'right' to breed implies ownership
of children. This concept is no longer tenable. 'My' child's germ plasm is not
mine; it is really only part of the community's store. I was merely the temporary
custodian of part of it. If parenthood is a right, population control is impos-
26
sible.”
In the April, 1981 issue of The Futurist magazine, Gene Stephens said to
lessen crime by 2000 much more control will be needed. “The movement to
license or certify parents may be well under way.” Usually couples will be allowed
to raise their own children; however, certain parents will be forced to surrender
“superior babies” to be raised by others the state deems more appropriate to be the
parents. “Child breeding and rearing...may be considered too important to be left to
chance....” Drugs and genetic engineering will be used so that “controlled breeding
will result in fewer biological reasons for crime.”
In The Case for Compulsive Birth Control, Edgar R. Chasteen proposed
subverting the traditional family by promoting alternative lifestyles. He said the
birth rate would be lowered if citizens were made “politically insecure” through
arrest and imprisonment with no right of appeal, no free speech, and invasion of
the home. For compulsory population control, the public must be convinced that
“parenthood (is) a privilege extended by society, rather than a right inherent in the
individual. Accordingly, society has both the right and the duty to limit popula-
tion when either its physical existence or its quality of life is threatened....There
are no natural rights conferred upon man....Rights are derived from the law and the
27
law is man-made.” The British surgeon Sir Roy Calne recently wrote Too Many
People, in which he called for adopting many of China's birthing policies such as
state-approved licensing to have children. The Manchester Guardian endorsed this
saying: “If we don't sacrifice some freedoms we may be left with none.”
The UN Convention on the Rights of the Child places the state over the
family. Already in some countries where this convention has passed, UN repre-
sentatives are interfering in traditional family practices, supposedly to protect
children. Clinton is pushing to get this treaty passed in the Senate. Hillary
Clinton's book It Takes a Village and Other Lessons Children Teach Us is a thinly
veiled attempt to increase state authority over the family in the name of protecting
the state's investment in children. Home visits by government agents will be
required in a world government. Ultimately, human births may only occur through
artificial means, when the state gives permission.
The Ford and Rockefeller Foundations, The World Research Institute, Re-
sources for the Future, and the Worldwatch Institute, led by members of the CFR,
34 Treason The New World Order

donate large sums to support population control and ecology groups. Under CFR
member Adele Simmons, the MacArthur Foundation leads the way in donations to
these groups. Over the years, these foundations have issued many reports calling
for central planning and world government to save the environment. For instance,
CFR member Lester R. Brown, head of the Worldwatch Institute declared, in
World Without Borders, that a world environmental agency was needed because
protecting the environment was not “possible within the existing framework of
independent nation-states.” He called for developing “supranational institutions” to
create a world government. Many environmental organizations have little interest
in protecting the environment; they have been subverted to support the corporate
agenda. These groups have even covered up Clinton's strong anti-environment
28
policy.
Laurance Rockefeller, in The Reader's Digest, warned that humanity must
follow a simpler path, more in tune with the environment, or “authoritarian
29
controls” may be used. Barbara Marx Hubbard, supported by Rockefeller's Fund
for Enhancement of the Human Spirit, wrote The Revelation: A Message of Hope
for the New Millennium. She said humanity may chose a “gentle path” surrender-
ing rule to an elite, but a sharp reduction of the world's population was necessary,
which may require a “violent path.” In the early 1980s, some of this material was
distributed privately but was not publicly published, because the corporate
controllers don't want the public to learn what is coming. Hubbard said: “Out of
the full spectrum of human personality...one-fourth is destructive....They are
defective seeds....In the past they were permitted to die a 'natural death.'...” Now
“the elders” have decided that “the destructive one-fourth must be eliminated from
the social body” in order to save everyone else. “Fortunately, you...are not
responsible for this act. We are. We are in charge of God's selection process for
planet Earth. He selects, we destroy. We are the riders of the pale horse,
Death....We come to bring death....The riders of the pale horse are about to pass
among you. Grim reapers, they will separate the wheat from the chaff. This is the
30
most painful period in the history of humanity.” Population and environment
concerns are considered a valid excuse for the elite to ultimately seize control, act
like Gods, and kill huge numbers of people.
I do not fully agree with those who attack the entire environmental move-
ment. There are serious environmental concerns that should be dealt with, but it is
also essential to respect people and private property. There must be a spirit of
compromise to solve real environmental problems. The millions of people
involved in the environment movement have no understanding or interest in
promoting world government. Most people in the environmental movement don't
understand the new world order. Environment and overpopulation concerns have
been manipulated by key environmental leaders who use the media to shape the
environmental agenda and increase government control over the people. People in
the wise use movement should understand that large corporations supporting this
movement are often closely allied to the corporate elite promoting the new world
order, and the corporations usually support both sides to manipulate events.
Covert Action provided an excellent article on this involvement by the transna-
31
tional corporations and Trilateral Commission.
Another constant theme raised in the rantings of those promoting the new
world order is to use technology and economic power to achieve social engineer-
ing. A typical book is Changing Images of Man, edited by Markley and Harmon.
 The New World Order 35

The authors said there must be important changes in industrial man and industrial
society if we are to survive. To deal with the growing scarcity of resources such as
food and the population explosion, various methods of social control are explored.
Zbigniew Brzezinski, in Between Two Ages, described a shift from an industrial to
a technetronic society shaped by the impact of technology and electronics. “Both
the growing capacity for the instant calculation of the most complex interactions
and the increasing availability of biochemical means of human control augment
the potential scope of consciously chosen direction, and thereby also the pressures
to direct, to choose, and to change.” This new society will “give rise to difficult
problems in determining the legitimate scope of social control. The possibility of
extensive chemical mind control, the danger of loss of individuality inherent in
extensive transplantation, the feasibility of manipulating the genetic structure will
32
call for the social definition of common criteria of use and restraint.”
World War II was seen as a great opportunity to move towards world govern-
ment. The CFR formed study groups and started working directly with the State
Department in 1939, to work for world peace and union after the war. Clarence K.
Streit formed the Federal Union in 1940 to promote world government. Supported
by prominent people like John Foster Dulles, a founder of the CFR and later
Secretary of State, it placed ads in major newspapers on January 5, 1942 urging
Congress to support union with certain foreign governments. This new union
would directly tax people, control all armed forces, and make and enforce all laws.
Streit wrote Union Now, Union Now With Britain, and in 1961, Freedom's
Frontier Atlantic Union Now calling for world government.
In 1942, Dulles while chairman of the Federal Council of Churches
Commission, issued a report calling for “a world government, strong immediate
limitation on national sovereignty, international control of all armies and navies, a
universal system of money, world-wide freedom of immigration, progressive
elimination of all tariff and quota restrictions on world trade and a democratically-
controlled world bank.” The report said “a new order of economic life is both
33
imminent and imperative.” In 1946 Dulles, in a Federal Council of Churches
Report, said changes in the U.S. and the Soviet Union would make it possible to
34
merge the two systems into a world government.
After the UN was formed, the United World Federalists (UWF) got 27 state
legislatures to pass resolutions supporting a constitutional convention to change
the U.S. Constitution to join a world government, but voters got most of these
resolutions repealed. Recently, the North Carolina general assembly rescinded, by
a 92-11 vote a 1941 resolution supporting participation in a “Federation of the
World,” a “new world order,” and an international convention to create a world
Constitution.
In 1954 Rowan Gaither, head of the Ford Foundation, told Norman Dodd, a
senator on the Reese Committee: “We operate here under directives which emulate
from the White House. The substance of the directives under which we operate are
that we shall use our grant making power to alter life in the U.S. so that we can
comfortably be merged with the Soviet Union.” On December 4, 1985, World
Federalist Association (WFA) vice-president John Logue told a subcommittee of
the House Foreign Affairs Committee: “It is time to tell the world's people not
what they want to hear but what they must hear. What they ought to hear is that if
we really want to have peace and promote justice, we must...strengthen the
 36 Treason The New World Order

UN....The UN must have taxing power....It must have a large peacekeeping

35
force....It must be able to make and enforce law on the individual.”
Over the years, especially after World War II, many in Congress worked to
surrender U.S. sovereignty to a world government, while others harshly attacked
such proposals. In 1947, Rep. Richard Nixon introduced a world government
resolution, and he wanted a UN police force. In June, 1952 the Senate held a
hearing on the push for world government and global citizenship. On July 10,
1952 Congress passed what became Public Law 495, Section 112 which said:
“None of the funds appropriated in this title (Department of State Appropriation
Act, 1953) shall be used...to pay the U.S. contribution to any international
organization which engages in the direct or indirect promotion of the principles or
doctrine of one world government or one world citizenship.” This law remained in
effect until it was deleted in 1987. Obviously Congress is not filled with racists,
anti-Semites, or conspiracy nuts.
In 1949, about 40 senators and 105 representatives introduced the Atlantic
Union Resolution which called for a convention to strengthen the UN and estab-
lish a world government. For 10 years, this resolution was continually introduced,
and one can read the Congressional Record to see the bitter debates on this topic.
The Atlantic Union Committee included many CFR members, while Rockefeller
provided rent free space for its headquarters. Its first head, former Supreme Court
Justice Owen J. Roberts, said national sovereignty was a “silly shibboleth.” Back
in 1943, in the May 2 issue of The Philadelphia Inquirer, Roberts said: “An
international government, with police power over every individual citizen in the
nations belonging to it...is the only way....” In a change of strategy, the NATO
Citizens Commission Law was passed in 1960. Later, pushed by the World
Affairs Council on January 30, 1976, 124 members of Congress signed a
Declaration of Interdependence: “Two centuries ago our forefather brought forth a
new nation; now we must join with others to bring forth a New World Order....”
Those promoting the new world order are now trying to influence more
people. In Time, July 20, 1992, Strobe Talbott, Deputy Secretary of State, CFR
and TC member, and Clinton's roommate at Oxford, said in the next century
“nationhood as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single,
global authority....National sovereignty wasn't such a great idea after all.” He said
that GATT and IMF are the future world government's “protoministries of trade,
36
finance and development for a united world.” This senior government official
wants to surrender U.S. sovereignty to a world government. Read this two-page
article and you may appreciate how dangerous things are. In response to this
article, Clinton wrote to the WFA expressing his congratulations. He said:
“Norman Cousins (past head of the WFA) worked for world peace and world
government....Best wishes for an enjoyable reception and for future success.”
The November, 1994 issue of The Rotarian had an editorial calling for world
37
government. The March/April, 1995 issue of Sojourners magazine had an ad
promoting world government, and Harper's magazine had a full page ad promoting
world government in its January, 1995 issue. This ad was promoted by a group
that has a world Constitution ready to replace our current Constitution.
The Western corporate elite have long worked closely with the communists to
promote world government. In 1916 Lenin said: “The aim of socialism is not only
to abolish the present division of mankind into small states and all-national
isolation, not only to bring the nations closer to each other, but also to merge
 The New World Order 37

them.” In 1936 the Communist International formally described three stages for
achieving world government. Speaking in Missouri in May, 1992, Gorbachev
said: “This is a turning point on a historic and worldwide scale and signifies the
incipient substitution of one paradigm of civilization for another....An awareness
of the need for some kind of global government is gaining ground, one in which
all the members of the world community would take part....Many countries are
morbidly jealous of their sovereignty, and...of their national independence and
identity....Here the decisive role may and must be played by the UN....The new
world order will not be fully realized unless the UN and its Security Council create
structures...authorized to impose sanctions and make use of other means of com-
pulsion. All members of the UN must recognize the acceptability of international
interference (in a nations internal affairs)....Under certain circumstances it will be
desirable to put certain national armed forces at the disposal of the Security
Council, making them subordinate to the UN military command.”
In 1993 Gorbachev said: “This has been a period of international transition.”
He spoke about the need for “international institutions acting on behalf of
all....Clinton will be a success if he manages to use American influence to
accomplish this transformation of international responsibility and increase signifi-
cantly the role of the UN.” While many feel this would limit U.S. independence
“accepting the aegis of a higher institution that operates on a consensus such as
the UN, would have many advantages....Clinton...will be a great president—if he
38
can make America the creator of a new world order.”
In late September, 1995, Gorbachev and his foundation hosted a world forum
in San Francisco to promote a new world order and a council of wise men to solve
the worlds problems. Jim Garrison, head of the Gorbachev Foundation, told the
San Francisco Weekly in the May 31-June 6, 1995 edition that the ultimate
purpose of the meeting was to shape the “next phase of human develop-
ment....Over the next twenty to thirty years, we are going to end up with world
government. It's inevitable.” Zbigniew Brzezinski said: “Finally, I have no
illusions about world government emerging in our lifetime....We cannot leap into
world government through one quick step....The precondition for eventual and
genuine globalization is progressive regionalization because by that we move
towards larger, more stable, more cooperative units.” Sam Keen declared that if the
world population was cut 90 percent this would protect the ecology.
Many corporations and foundations like UPS, United Airlines, and Archer-
Daniels financed and participated in this gathering, because they support the new
world order. They feel that free trade will increase profits, and the Constitution
doesn't show up in the balance sheet. In many ways, the large corporations are
working to increase federal government power and tighten control over the people.
Many people in government and the large corporations feel that world government
is inevitable, so they support it. Norman Cousins wrote in 1985 in Human
Events, “World government is coming, in fact, it is inevitable. No arguments for
or against it can change that fact.” Cousins was head of the WFA and Chairman of
Planetary Citizen. The debate to have a world government was concluded decades
ago, although most Americans were not allowed to take part in this discussion.
In 1984, in New Lies For Old, Anatoliy Golitsyn, an ex-KGB officer and
defector, described the coming collapse of the Soviet Union and the liberalization
policy, which he called a phony deception to mislead the West. He said the West
has generally understood the communist military threat, but not its political
38 Treason The New World Order

threat. He said the coming collapse of the Soviet Union was part of a long-range
disinformation campaign to fulfill long-range communist goals for world domina-
tion. By the end of 1993, 139 out of 148 of his predictions had been fulfilled for a
39
94 percent accuracy rate, while 46 predictions were yet to be fulfilled.
Golitsyn is not psychic; he just leaked plans that have existed between the
East and West for decades. Some communists, like Gorbachev, actually support
working with Wall Street to create a world government. As long as working with
the corporate elite brings Russia and China money, technology, and trade, most
communists will support having a one world government someday, but they will
never actually surrender their sovereignty unless they are in control. The cold war
is over, but the communist threat remains. In the future, it will be a wolf in new
clothes. They are playing the corporate elite for fools, and as with General Butler
in the 1930s, the corporate elite stupidly think they can bribe everyone to accom-
plish whatever treason they want. The CFR does not control Russia and China to
the degree that they think. In 1994 in Soil, Tied to Our Blood, Gennadi Zyuganov,
head of the Russian communist party, said: “We (Russians) are the last power on
this planet that is capable of mounting a challenge to the New World Order—the
global cosmopolitan dictatorship. We must work against our...destroyers, using
means as carefully thought-out and as goal-orientated as theirs are.” Reportedly,
Russian nationalist Vladimir Zhirinovsky, said on November 9, 1994, at the UN:
“There has long been a hidden agenda to merge America and Russia under the new
world order.”
Over the years, many have attacked the new world order. In The Open
Conspiracy, Blue Prints For A World Revolution, H.G. Wells called for world
government. G.K. Chesterton analyzed this work and said “Internationalism is in
any case hostile to democracy....The only purely popular government is local, and
founded on local knowledge...To make all politics cosmopolitan is to create an
40
aristocracy of globe-trotters.” Ralph Nader testified before a House subcommittee
that GATT “formalized a world economic government dominated by giant corp-
orations, without a correlative democratic rule of law to hold this economic
41
government accountable.”
On June 26, 1995, former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher spoke at
the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. She attacked the new world order
and defended state sovereignty, warning against turning British rule over “to
European institutions and non-elected bureaucracies.” She was also against trans-
ferring the power of British courts to a European court. She said the agenda of
European federalists would damage U.S. interests, and she was very critical of the
attacks on national sovereignty that have become so common in the “forced
internationalism.” At the Gorbachev conference, Thatcher warned, “Do not use the
UN for something for which it was not founded. We cannot put executive
decisions into its hands.” These views explain why she was removed from office.
The Catholic Church and the Pope understand what is coming. As an arch-
bishop in 1976 the Pope said: “We are standing in the face of the greatest
historical confrontation humanity has gone through...a test of 2000 years of
culture and Christian civilization....Wide circles of American society and wide
42
circles of the Christian community do not realize this fully....” In The Keys of
This Blood, Malachi Martin, with a decidedly Catholic Church influence, described
how certain elite groups are striving towards global unity and world domination in
a one world government. He identified certain groups involved, such as the inter-
 The New World Order 39

nationalists—political bureaucrats that focus on agreements between nations and

unity through politics, and transnationalists—business men who use cash to
achieve their goals of increased international trade. Reportedly, some elements of
the Catholic Church are quietly working to stop the coming world dictatorship,
while others support it, determined to preserve a strong position for the Catholic
Church.
A clue to what is coming was revealed in 1967, when Report From Iron
Mountain on the Possibility and Desirability of Peace was published. Some 15
Americans from various fields took over two years to do this think-tank study for
the government. It was never supposed to be published, which is understandable
when one reads it. Translated into 15 languages, it was on the best seller list, so
naturally its validity was denied, because it revealed so much about the coming
terror. When you plan to destroy a society, it is not wise to acknowledge this. I
read five reviews of this book, with the best one in the March, 1968 Bulletin of
the Atomic Scientists. It admitted the report might be false, but then explained
why it might be true. The report was written when ending the cold war was
considered possible and when there were many private government studies. In
November, 1967, the president of Dial Press, the publisher, defended the book's
authenticity in the New York Times, while John K. Galbraith, in a review,
defended its authenticity admitting he was asked to be part of the study group.
Reportedly, the report was leaked by a guilt-ridden participant to Leonard C.
Lewin. In 1972, Lewin, who wrote the book's introduction, claimed that he wrote
43
the book, and it was a satirical attack on the military. Simon & Schuster recently
republished this book.
According to this report, the war system has worked quite well and peace is
not desirable, because there would be many problems converting from a war
economy. Poverty is necessary and desirable, while the war system must continue
until new institutions can be developed to maintain social stability and political
control. War is also supposedly a necessary means of population control, because
disease no longer sufficiently reduces the population. Undesirable genetic traits
were self-liquidating but now continue because of medical advances, so new
methods of eugenics are needed. Most medical advances were considered a problem
and birth-control drugs might be added to food and water to limit population
growth. Teams of experimental biologists in the U.S., Mexico, and the USSR
44
were working to create life to make it much easier to limit population growth. A
world without war must ultimately turn to universal test-tube procreation to limit
population growth. In 1968 Brzezinski wrote of genetic manipulation to maintain
45
social control and “the creation of beings” that will function and reason like men.
George Bernard Shaw said: “If you want better people you must breed them as
46
carefully as you breed thoroughbred horses and pedigree boars.”
Without war, new institutions and alternate enemies must be created to
maintain control. Many substitutes for war were considered but each had serious
limitations. Space research and an outer space UFO menace were deemed to not be
sufficiently credible. It would be difficult to deliberately damage the environment
so that nations would surrender their sovereignty. A credible substitute for war
must create an omnipresent and readily understood fear of personal destruction, and
this fear must be sufficient to ensure adherence to society's values. The report
suggested “the reintroduction...consistent with modern technology and political
40 Treason The New World Order

processes, of slavery.” Noting the works of Wells, Huxley, and Orwell, the report
said that slavery might be essential in the future to maintain social control.
The book concluded that war is a good excuse to control and expand the
economy, control antisocial tendencies, establish standards for the arts, provide
motivation for scientific and technological progress, and help maintain political
authority, class distinctions, and ecological balance between the population and
raw materials necessary for survival. War helps maintain a stable government “by
providing an external necessity for a society to accept political rule.” Bertrand
Russell, in The Impact of Science on Society, said: “War has been throughout
history, the chief source of social cohesion....” This is the sick mentality of the
secret government. This vile report has to be read to be believed.
There are many who call the new world order socialist or communist. Cer-
tainly there are leftist elements in these groups, but there is also a strong neo-Nazi
faction in the corporate elite. In the 1930s, the corporate elite used fascist ideas to
promote a police state; in more recent years, they turned to communist principles.
In truth, the philosophical views of these people is not the key issue. Their
common ideology is an unrelenting lust for money, power, and control. Any
ideology is acceptable towards that end. Barry Goldwater correctly said of the CFR
and other elitist groups: “They have no ideological anchors. In their pursuit of a
new world order they are prepared to deal without prejudice with a communist
state, a socialist state, a democratic state, monarchy, oligarchy—it's all the same
47
to them.”
People who attack the view that there is a conspiracy involving the wealthy
and powerful to achieve world government are attacked for presenting a conspiracy
view of history. This is done partly because critics are unable to refute these
claims. When the message cannot be refuted, the messenger is attacked. “One of
the things we most need to understand—and one of the things historians most
often fail to discuss—are the precise means by which the dominant class and those
48
who serve it go about accomplishing their goals in politics.” Michael Parenti
said: “It should be noted that there are conspiracies among ruling groups, things
done in secrecy with the intent to sustain or extend power—as Watergate, the
Pentagon Papers, the FBI's COINTELPRO campaign against the left, and the
49
CIA's daily doings have demonstrated.” Thomas Jefferson warned: “Single acts of
tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day, but a scries of
oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, unalterable through every change of
ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate, systematical plan of reducing us to
slavery.”
At the same time, William Cooper has a point in saying there isn't a
conspiracy, because so much is published about the coming new world order. The
move towards world government involves the quiet networking of thousands of
individuals. If there is a conspiracy to establish a one world government, it is an
open one. Remember the title of H.G. Well's book, The Open Conspiracy, Blue
Prints For A World Revolution. The corporate elite reveal much about their plans,
because they look at the people with contempt and they have had their way for
many years. President Nixon told the New York Times on November 10, 1972:
“The average American is just like the child in the family.” Averell Harriman said
the American people wanted nothing better than to “go to the movies and drink
Coke.” In 1996, Ted Turner, head of CNN, said before an international forum:
“The U.S. has got some of the dumbest people in the world. I want you to know
 The New World Order 41

50
that. We know that.” These elitists are too blinded by their arrogance to under-
stand just how angry and educated more and more Americans are becoming.
The elites have traditionally had an extremely negative attitude towards the
people they ruled and have always had problems accepting the involvement of the
people in government. Charles Lasch, in The Revolt of the Elites and the Betrayal
of Democracy, said the elites “regard the masses with mingled scorn and apprehen-
sion.” Jose Ortega y Gasset, in The Revolt of the Masses, said the masses cannot
rule and their involvement in government has created a grave crisis. Walter
Lippmann said the “omnicompetent citizen” was no longer possible in the age of
specialization. He believed public opinion was no better than gossip and that real
governing should be left in the hands of experts.
While many dismiss the view of a corporate elite creating a one world gov-
ernment as left or right wing extremisms, the reality is that the new world order is
increasingly here. While most people ignore the motives behind the coming one
world government, and some debate whether or not such a government is coming
and if there is a conspiracy, the new world order is unfolding before our eyes. You
don't have to believe what I and others write; study the literature noted above and
the laws passed by Congress and other governments.
Stopping the corporate traitors from establishing a world dictatorship is the
foremost issue of our time. Many of the concerns people have today from labor
rights, to ending abortions, to having a balanced budget however important these
issues are will be irrelevant if we live in a police state. Many conflicts in our
society have been deliberately created to divert the people's attention so the
corporate elite can quietly and gradually shift this Republic into a world dictator-
ship. However, with many people awakening to these plans and a freer flow of
information, I believe the one world government dictatorship will never occur. In
the end, the new world order crowd will join Hitler's Third Reich in the ash heap
of history.
 43

Chapter V

Fooling the People

“The people never give up their liberties but under some delusion.”
Edmund Burke

“Political language...is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder

respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind....The first step in
liquidating a people is to erase its memory.”
George Orwell

There are many reasons why most people do not understand that our rights are
being lost. People think we have a democracy with the people in charge, because
this is what the controlled national media tells us. Certain agencies like the CIA
use public relations firms, authors, and journalists to fool the public and to
1
perform roles the government cannot legally do. In the 1970s it was revealed that
2
the CIA had hired hundreds of journalists to shape public opinion. It would be
extremely naive to not appreciate that such disinformation continues to manipulate
and confuse the people.
This propaganda along with various mind control techniques over the years
created a paradigm as described by the philosopher Thomas S. Kuhn in The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions. A paradigm represents a model or shared
beliefs of the way the world works for most people. Theories help create facts, and
people who exist inside a paradigm are quite comfortable with the facts they are
told. People who present information outside the existing paradigm are initially
called silly, but gradually as different views become a threat to the status quo,
people with new ideas are demonized as crazy, extremist, or racist. Conflicting
paradigms are sharply resisted.
This helps explain why almost no one in the Western intelligence community
foresaw the collapse of the Soviet Union. Everyone believed this would never
happen so the possibility was ignored by all but a few people, like Senator
Moynihan. One intelligence officer said in the late 1980s he would have been put
in a mental hospital if he had said the Soviet Union was soon going to collapse.
Despite growing contrary evidence inside the paradigm everyone felt the Soviet
Union remained a powerful and dangerous enemy. Other evidence was ignored or
3
disbelieved.
A crisis may cause the formation of a new paradigm as many people work to
reconstruct society with new institutions. Then society is divided into separate
factions, one defending the old paradigm, while the other group seeks to establish
new ideas and institutions. Once this happens normal political interaction may
fail, and serious conflict is possible. Political revolutions may occur when groups
in the population realize that existing institutions have ceased to properly meet the
44 Treason The New World Order

needs of the people. Then the question is, can the new paradigm solve the
4
problems that created a crisis in the old paradigm? Millions remain in a state of
denial today, thinking all is well, while the Patriot movement is getting stronger
partly because many people have broken out of the corporate managed paradigm of
America.
Previously propaganda and controlled elections were sufficient to control the
people. Now, along with controlling the media and subverting society, a key part
of the strategy of the secret government is to keep the people distracted with issues
that will not interfere with their goal of establishing tighter control and a one
world government. This is done by using various propaganda techniques to redirect
the people's actions. Emotional debates and conflicts are created so many people
are too busy to notice what is happening to our constitutional rights. The object
is to keep the people stupid and ignorant, watching television and sports or other
amusements diverting attention and keeping people from organizing. In certain
respects our country is like the Roman Empire in its dying days. Then citizens
watched people being eaten by lions; today, we are fed hundreds of stories
involving crime, sex, and sports. Eduardo Galeano said “The majority must resign
itself to the consumption of fantasy. Illusions of wealth are sold to the poor,
illusions of freedom to the oppressed,...dreams of victory to the defeated and of
power to the weak.” Arthur Miller in Democratic Dictatorship called this process
the tyranny of technology. Franz Neumann said: “The higher the state of
technological development, the greater the concentration of political power.”
People will be made to enjoy their enslavement.
A classic example of this strategy is the abortion debate. America is the only
nation where the abortion issue is such an intense focus for many. In no other
country, even where the Catholic church is much stronger, is there such an intense
abortion debate. The secret government often places provocateurs on opposing
sides of an issue to arouse the people. Whether the issue is child abuse, racial
tension, the environment, capital punishment, affirmative action, or women's
right, there are many intensely debated issues in our society where this quiet
manipulation proceeds. I do not question the sincere beliefs that people have
regarding abortion and these other issues, but it is also obvious that millions of
people are so involved in these debates that they have little time to examine what
is happening to our Constitution and the government. I also do not claim that the
secret government is at work in every issue debated in our society, but at times
this is a key hidden factor.
The corporate elite will sometimes set up front groups that supposedly
support a cause while they work to weaken the entire movement. Money is
donated and provocateurs are planted in various groups the secret government
wants to control. A classical example of this is corporate infiltration of the
environmental movement. Large corporations and foundations support certain
environmental groups like the Wilderness Society. The David and Lucile Packard
Foundation supports the Wilderness Society, which never challenged Hewlett-
Packard's poor land management in the Challis National Forest. One member of
the board of the Wilderness Society is Walter Minnick C.E.O. of a multinational
timber company, T J International, which is partly owned and allied with other
timber companies that are constantly cutting timber with little regard for the
environment.
 Fooling the People 45

An obvious diversion for many years was the communist threat. The result
was and is that anything could be done to justify the national security state.
Historically, after each war America substantially dismantled the military and
related industries that supported it, but this did not occur after World War II and the
cold war. Some try to justify continuing the defense/security apparatus by
speaking of nuclear proliferation, militias, war on drugs, and third world terrorism,
or by using the military for national emergencies to stay on a permanent war
footing. On the CBS Evening News, March 19, 1995, there was a report on
growing Muslim fundamentalism and its threat to the U.S. Senator John Glenn
and the NATO Secretary General described Islamic fundamentalism as even more
dangerous than communism. At least one reporter called this “absurd” and
5
suggested that NATO needed a new threat to justify its existence.
Bertram Gross, in Friendly Fascism, said technology and corporate central
government power were gradually shifting the U.S. towards totalitarianism.
Buttressed by constitutional restraints and splits among the elites, he felt that
fascism would come gradually through silent encroachments, and the great danger
would be that this slow process would be unnoticed by most Americans. It is
essential to preserve the facade of democracy while gradually shifting to a police
state. The goal is to “accustom the American people to the destruction of their
freedoms.” By the time people realize what is happening it could be too late. In
America, fascism will come from “powerful tendencies within the Establishment,”
not from the right or left. The American model of fascism will be “pluralistic in
nature” with “no charismatic dictator, no one-party rule, no mass fascist party, no
glorification of the state, no dissolution of legislatures, no discontinuation of
elections....” William Shirer, author of The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, said
America may be the first country in which fascism takes power through
democratic elections.
The forces that have prevented friendly fascism from developing, such as
strong labor unions and a free press, have been subverted by the large corporations.
Many labor leaders have become bureaucrats unable to represent their members.
Through “mind management and sophisticated repression” incentives, punish-
ments, and escape valves are provided to pave the way for friendly fascism. Wide-
spread diversions such as sex, drugs, cults, mental illness, and sports are used to
control people, so they will accept servitude and not oppose government policies.
The “soma pills” described by Aldous Huxley, in Brave New World, have arrived.
In Brave New World, Aldous Huxley said the especially efficient totalitarian
state would be one in which the political bosses and managers control a
population of slaves who do not have to be coerced, because they love their
servitude. To make people love their slavery is the task today assigned to
totalitarian states. We accept our bondage partly because we don't even realize that
we have become enslaved by the addiction of television and other forms of modern-
day propaganda. To become free, we must first recognize our entrapment.
A major strategy to delude the people is to transform the country gradually
into a dictatorship, not upsetting the people. CFR member Henry Morgenthau,
who was FDR's Secretary of the Treasury, said: “We can hardly expect the nation-
state to make itself superfluous, at least not overnight....The transition will not be
dramatic, but a gradual one.” CFR member Philip C. Jessup, in The International
Problems of Governing Mankind, said: “I agree that national sovereignty is the
root of the evil....The question of procedure remains. Can the root be pulled up by
46 Treason The New World Order

one mighty revolutionary heave, or should it first be loosened by digging around it

and cutting the rootlets one by one?” The Fabian Socialist H.G. Wells said
Roosevelt's New Deal was “the most effective instrument possible for the coming
of the new world order....He is continuously revolutionary in the new way without
ever provoking a stark revolutionary crisis.”
In 1955 Milton Mayer wrote a remarkable book, They Thought They Were
Free. Ten dedicated Nazis, people from the middle class, for example a policeman
and cabinetmaker, were interviewed to explain how Hitler took control. People
should study this book especially the chapter entitled “But Then It Was Too Late”
to understand how the tactic of gradualism can transform a free people to slavery.
Daniel Webster cautioned: “If this Constitution be picked away by piecemeal, it is
gone as effectively as if a military despot had grasped it, trampled it underfoot and
scattered it to the winds.”
An important strategy the secret government uses to maintain control is to
support ambitious people early in their careers. People are promoted if they have
demonstrated intelligence, ambition, leadership, and few morals. These people are
corrupted though sex, money, and drugs with evidence of criminality gathered to
blackmail them, if necessary. They must follow orders, or their careers will be
ruined and they may go to jail. This principle is applied to many politicians, but
is applied with special care to senior officials, like presidents. Once the invisible
government chooses someone to become president, the instruments of corporate
power distort the news to protect the chosen one. The people are only allowed to
participate by voting, which is why many no longer bother. Who will win is
decided long before election day. The CFR and TC don't care which party elects the
president, as long as they control each candidate and the people continue to be
fooled. This system guarantees a corrupt leadership and a disillusioned populace.
In FDR, My Exploited Father-In-Law, C.B. Dall said: “Politics is the gentle
art of having to pretend to be something that you know you are not, for vote-
catching purposes, while being aided by our press....Usually, carefully screened
leading 'actors' are picked well in advance of election day by a small group, picked
for both major parties, thereby reducing the promotional risk to just about
zero....It is desirable for such a candidate to have great personal ambition and,
perchance, to be vulnerable to blackmail for some past occurrences; hence,
someone not apt to become too independent in time, but always amenable to
'suggestions' on the policy level.” Colonel House, the chief aide to Woodrow
Wilson, knew that, along with great personal ambition, Wilson was vulnerable to
blackmail. Dall said Wilson appointed Brandeis to the Supreme Court because he
6
was being blackmailed and couldn't obtain $250,000 to get back certain letters.
While President, Eisenhower made a speech at a park Bernard Baruch had
founded. He said: “Twenty-five years ago as a young and unknown major I took
the wisest step in my life—I consulted Mr. Baruch.” When the war started
Eisenhower was promoted over at least 150 senior officers to head the allied war
effort in Europe. For many years Baruch protected the interests of Wall Street in
7
Washington.
In 1969 Alexander Haig was a colonel, but within several years he became a
senior White House aide and later head of NATO, because he hitched his career to
Henry Kissinger. Colin Powell and Jimmy Carter were promoted by the CFR
beginning in the early 1970s. Lamar Alexander turned one dollar into $620,000.
Even Hillary Clinton couldn't match such corruption. General John M.
 Fooling the People 47

Shalikashvili was advanced over many officers to become chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff. Hillary Clinton's commodities trade was an obvious set-up. The
massive corruption of Clinton is clear to many as are his drug and sexual
appetites.
On November 18, 1993 in The Wanderer, a national newspaper, James K.
Fitzpatrick a prominent journalist revealed that while he has never believed in
stories of a secret government or the Illuminati, Clinton's support of NAFTA
made him wonder, especially because of statements made by Clinton. During his
acceptance speech when nominated by the Democrats, Clinton spoke about the
influence his old professor Carrol Quigley, author of Tragedy and Hope, had on his
life. After his election Clinton told reporters how Quigley had spoken and written
about a secret shadow government of powerful businessmen and bankers who
controlled our political agenda. Clinton said, while a student, he decided to work
with this secret group to enhance his political career. Fitzpatrick, not under-
standing how controlled our news is, was shocked that this interview wasn't
discussed in the media. That this technique of controlling our leaders has long
existed helps explain why attention should be directed to stop the corporate leaders.
The politicians are just agents who can easily be replaced.
In recent years, the growing use of computerized vote machines has provided
new opportunities to control elections. There have been dozens of instances of
vote fraud throughout the country such as in Florida, Wisconsin, and California;
and sometimes judges throw out election results. The growing problems with
these machines is being documented by Computer Professionals for Social Re-
sponsibility in Palo Alto, Election Watch in Pacific Palisades, California, and
Cincinnatus in Cincinnati. Even the national media, including the New York
Times and Wall Street Journal, have discussed the dangers of computerized voting
8
machines. On November 7, 1988 the New Yorker had a 23 page report on the
dangers of computerized voting machines. Science News explained how modern
9
vote machines help steal elections. Amazingly, when vote results are challenged
the computer programs usually aren't analyzed because the manufacturers have
successfully claimed they are proprietary. Private corporations increasingly own
our elections. Computer scientist Peter G. Neumann, in Computer-Related Risks,
said: “The opportunities for rigging elections (are) childs play for vendors and
knowledgeable election officials.” In the 1988 New Hampshire primary, Dole won
the precincts that used paper ballots while Bush won the computerized ones.
Even more threatening is the fact that, in many states, election results are
reported to the New York City based News Election Service (NES), a private
company owned by ABC, CBS, NBC, and the Associated Press (AP). The book
10
Votescam: The Stealing of America documents the dangers of this operation.
There is no system to challenge the announced results. For instance, each caucus
in the Iowa primary reports the results to the NES. In Dubuque County, Iowa,
Buchanan got 870 votes, but the next day the Cedar Rapids Gazette quoted the AP
saying Buchanan got 757 votes and Dole's total was increased. When people
complained, they were told there could be no final count until April. Numerous
other instances of suspicious behavior occurred, and Buchanan may have been
cheated out of victory in Iowa, Arizona, and South Carolina. This is why
thousands came to see Buchanan, while only a few voters came to see Dole. It is
rather suspicious that Buchanan refused to complain about this.
48 Treason The New World Order

The most dangerous scam used against the people are presidential edicts.
Every president has issued orders and directives which are often called Executive
Orders (EO); however, in the 20th century the use, scope, and authority of EOs
greatly increased. These edicts have the force and effect of law; however, there is
no constitutional basis for a president to make laws. Congress should make the
law and the president should administer and enforce it. There is much room for
abuse of presidential power with these edicts. Nowhere does the Constitution say
that a president can issue an EO, nor do any federal statutes exist defining the
purpose or permissible subject matter of EOs.
Previously, most EOs dealt with routine administrative issues such as land
use and civil service regulations. EOs now exist for the Feds to seize all
communications (EO 10995), to takeover all food supplies and farms (EO 10998),
to control all transportation (EO 10999), to force all civilians into work brigades
(slave labor) (EO 11000), to takeover all health and education activities (EO
11001), and for the post office to register everyone (EO 11002). These and other
EOs have been combined into EO 11490, which Carter signed in 1979. This is a
dictatorship in waiting. One can only image the horrors of the secret EOs that
have never been published or leaked.
The greatest abuse of presidential authority lies in presidents declaring a
national emergency and martial law. Presidents have already signed EOs declaring
national emergencies because of events in the Middle East, Yugoslavia, South
Africa, Kuwait, and chemical/biological problems. How these events require a
national emergency in the U.S. defies reality. In 1985 the New York Times asked
11
why there had to be a national emergency in the U.S. over South Africa. Having
a national emergency with a weakened Constitution has become the norm to
gradually get people used to the conditions of a police state.
EO 9066 issued February 19, 1942 by President Roosevelt caused the
internment of 120,000 Japanese Americans in glorified concentration camps.
Along with being imprisoned for several years, these people, 75,000 of whom
were American citizens, lost most of their assets. For this to happen just because
a president signed one piece of paper shows how dangerous things are. If a phony
emergency is declared, Clinton could then call for the surrender of all arms and the
arrest of his political opponents who would be called a threat to national security.
Passing especially dangerous EOs started March 9, 1933 when Roosevelt
weakened the Constitution by declaring a national emergency that put us into a
12
state of war. On June 17, 1995 the Texas Republican party issued Resolution 5
calling for a return to constitutional government and an end to Roosevelt's
emergency rule and weakening of the Constitution. The press responded with a
resounding silence.
Recent EOs have become absurd. On October 2 1 , 1994 Clinton issued an EO
requiring schools to expel students who bring a gun to school. Such students
should receive serious punishment, but Clinton has no constitutional authority to
decided how schools deal with local problems. Clinton is only the president.
Clinton's speech announcing this policy received wide publicity yet no one in the
media complained about this abuse of power. Must we now get used to a president
announcing new laws on the most minute details of our lives. Just after the
November, 1994 elections, The Washington Post reported that Clinton and his
13
staff planned to govern more with executive orders and regulations. Clinton was
elected president, not king or dictator.
 Fooling the People 49

When Rep. Jack Brooks in March, 1987 asked presidential aide Frank Carlucci
to provide a list of all presidential edicts issued since 1981 he refused to comply.
Speaker of the House Jim Wright said: “Congress cannot react responsibly to new
dictates for national policy set in operation by the executive branch behind closed
doors.” Presidential edicts are often classified with no one in Congress even aware
of their subject matter.
Control by Congress over executive rule making has been replaced by a
powerful executive branch which is destroying the checks and balances designed by
the Constitution. In Myers v. U.S. (1926) the Supreme Court said: “The doctrine
of the separation of powers was adopted by the Convention of 1787, not to
promote efficiency but to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power. The purpose
was, not to avoid friction, but, by means of the inevitable friction incident to the
distribution of the governmental powers among three departments, to save the
people from autocracy....Speed and efficiency, however, are not the proper ends of
government. If they were, the framers would have created a dictatorship.” Rule by
executive edict means that a president can sign a piece of paper and pass unpopular
laws that are totally against the will of Congress and the people, as we saw when
Clinton used an EO to loan money to Mexico.
Those promoting the new world order are deliberately changing our history
and culture. A good book that describes how history books are confusing and
distorting our history is Lies My Teacher Told Me, by James W. Loewen. Text
book publishers avoid controversies, only present a positive tone, and ignore
much American history. Schools socialize students to be good and obedient
citizens. The racial prejudice of people like President Wilson, the contributions of
women, and the role of militias in founding our Republic are removed from
history. Issues such as General Butler and the planned military coup, the
munitions hearings in the 1930s, and corporate treason during World War II are
rarely discussed in history books. Loewen, to his credit, said there may be an
upper-class conspiracy “manipulated by elite white male capitalists who
orchestrate how history is written as part of their scheme to perpetuate their own
14
power and privilege at the expense of the rest of us.” State-controlled curricula
promote corporate-influenced distortions of our heritage.
It will be much harder for the younger generation to stand up for constitu-
tional government because of the distortions being taught in the schools. In
November, 1995 the U.S. Department of Education released a report based on
questioning 22,000 school children about our history. Fifty percent of the children
weren't even aware that the cold war existed! A 1994 study by the National As-
sessment of Educational Progress revealed that 57 percent of public high school
seniors lack a basic understanding of U.S. history. With poor schooling and TV
addiction, for many history started with the New Deal. People no longer remember
the values of our Republic and the wisdom of the Founders. The shift to outcome
based education, Goals 2000, and multiculturalism means that if the corporate
controllers aren't stopped, one day few people will defend the Constitution because
few will even remember that it once existed. Multiculturalism has played a key
15
role in destroying Canada as a nation state, and this is also why it is being push-
ed in the U.S. It is one more strategy being used to weaken national sovereignty,
to move towards a world government.
Multiculturalism is also being used to separate us from our Christian heritage
and Western culture. Other cultures are highlighted while ours is undermined. The
50 Treason The New World Order

California Teachers Association released a calendar that doesn't identify July 4th. It
includes Buddhist Nirvana day and Ramadan but not Christmas or Thanksgiving.
The National Educational Association passed out millions of calenders to teachers
that listed UN day and various Buddhist and Moslem holidays but did not mention
Christmas. Listing various religious holidays is fine, but to remove traditional
American religious and patriotic holidays is outrageous.
Increasingly, basic American constitutional and political history is not being
taught. Under the new world order, within a few generations our history will be
forgotten, because it will be banned. On May 16, 1993 Parade Magazine published
an article about putting false words in the mouth of dead people. It cited as an
example the supposedly false words of Patrick Henry “Give me liberty or give me
16
d e a t h . ” In fact, Henry said these noble words, March 23, 1775, at St. John's
Church in Richmond Virginia in conjunction with the second Virginia
17
convention. Karl Marx said: “If you can cut people off from their history they
can be easily persuaded.”
An important book is The Rewriting of America's History by Catherine
Millard. A librarian at the Library of Congress, she documents many instances
where our Christian heritage and memorial to the Founding Fathers are being
erased or distorted. Independence Square in Philadelphia, where the Constitution
and Declaration of Independence were signed, had a National Museum which was
taken over by the Independence National Historic Park in 1951. The museum was
disbanded with its contents dispersed to different buildings and many of the
exhibits are no longer available to the public. Important Christian markers and
plaques around Philadelphia have been replaced with humanistic plaques. The
Liberty Bell has been moved from its original site and it is now called a “symbol
of world freedom.” An important painting “The First Prayer in Congress” has been
lost. In Christ Church in Philadelphia, often called the Nation's Church, famous
stained glass such as “Patriots Window” and “Liberty Window” were moved,
18
supposedly to be cleaned, but instead they have been replaced by plain glass.
Sections of the Library of Congress have been closed for renovations, but the
“improvements” made it much harder for librarians and researchers to use the facil-
ities. The main card catalogue was almost deliberately destroyed except that the
librarians and their union prevented this by threatening to sue. The computerized
replacement has an error rate of 50 percent. The new head librarian in October 15,
1987 fired many people with no replacements, leaving various departments dis-
organized and understaffed. In an especially disgusting display of what is happen-
ing, religious scenes in the Library of Congress were replaced during renovations
by grotesque gargoyle paintings. This exemplifies how Christ will be replaced by
atheism or worse in the new world order.
In the Library of Congress rare books pertaining to our Christian heritage and
the Founding Fathers are now listed as “missing in inventory” and “changed to the
rare book collection,” which means the public cannot see these books. In some
instances, Millard found that books listed as missing were in their correct place.
Millard listed groups of books that were all removed from circulation at the same
time. There is an organized campaign to remove from public reach rare books on
Christianity and the Founding Fathers. In some historical and religious exhibits,
American history has been greatly altered and falsified. Millard was refused
promotions and salary raises when she fought these changes.
 Fooling the People 51

Deborah Maceda works for the Library of Congress as a police detective in its
Protective Services Office. For several years she complained about many books
being damaged and stolen. One would expect that she would have been thanked for
doing her job. Instead her many memos, which also included ways to improve
security, were ignored until she was transferred. There were proceedings to fire her
until Congress intervened. Now several agencies, including the FBI are investig-
19
ating the Library of Congress which a union called “out of control.” On July 6,
1996 CBS Evening News said the Library of Congress was often using psychia-
trist testing, which are generally illegal in the workplace, to harass and fire
whistleblowers.
“If people are stripped of the ability...to make their own things and their own
history, they may continue to act properly, but they lose the capacity to learn for
themselves about their own rightness. They stagnate or surrender....Those who
steal their right to make their own history...can be condemned, for they steal from
people the right to know what they know, the right to become human....History
20
is culture.” Our history is being cleansed to fit what our corporate controllers
want.
Since 1670 when a jury refused to convict William Penn, it has been part of
our heritage that juries have a right to decide a case based on the law as well as the
facts of the case. In 1794 Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Jay said in
Georgia v. Brailsford: “The jury has a right to judge both the law as well as the
fact in controversy.” Alexander Hamilton said: “Jurors should acquit, even against
the judge's instruction...if exercising their judgement with discretion and honesty
they have a clear conviction that the charge of the court is wrong.” The
Constitutions of four states—Maryland, Indiana, Oregon, and Georgia—
specifically guarantee the right of jurors to “judge the law.” Today 23 states declare
the right of jury nullification (the right of a jury to judge a law) in freedom of
speech regarding libel and sedition. Throughout the 1800s this principle was
primarily challenged only once when Congress passed an anti-slave law which
northern juries refused to support. Then the government was close to the people,
so laws were rarely passed that were against the people's wishes. However, in
1895 in Sparf and Hansen v. U.S., the Supreme Court ruled that while juries still
21
had the right to judge the law a judge didn't have to inform a jury of this.
In the 1900s we have been swamped with laws that many are against because
government often no longer represents the people. The Fully Informed Jury
Association (FIJA) informs citizens of the right to reject a law while on a jury
22
despite what a judge states. People informing perspective jurors of this right
have been harassed by the authorities, and some have been arrested and tried for
jury tampering. In other words, people just quoting the words of the Founding
Fathers like Thomas Jefferson are being arrested. The authorities are getting
desperate, because increasingly juries in various cases are voting not guilty as
word gets out. Perhaps next people telling perspective jurors about the right to
free speech and freedom of worship will also be arrested. Where will it stop? On
June 19, 1995 CBS Evening News completely distorted our history. A judge said
letting a jury decide the law would create anarchy and this would be taking the law
into their own hands. The head of the FIJA was interviewed and while he discussed
the views of the Founders supporting the right of jury nullification, this was
censored from what appeared on TV.
52 Treason The New World Order

After the Oklahoma bombing, the Wall Street Journal wrote a propaganda
piece defining jury-power activism as a racist and anti-Semitic militia plot. That
the Founders and many justices have long supported this right, which exists to
23
this day, was ignored. The Village Voice quoted this article suggesting that jury
24
rights people may well be extremists and racists. It was stated in the Wall Street
Journal, so it must be true! Disinformation creates more lies and our heritage is
gradually forgotten. A few public trials like the O.J. case are now being used as an
excuse to attack and change the jury system to further weaken our civil rights.
Another strategy is to create more crime and a false war on drugs by
deliberately flooding the country with illegal drugs. “U.S. officials had undercut
the war on drugs for so long, and exposes had dribbled out so sporadically, that
25
public outrage never reached critical mass.” This is being done to scare people
into giving up certain constitutionally protected rights such as the right to bear
arms. Chaos and fear have historically been used to create a totalitarian state.
Rather than trying to seize all guns, a far better solution to crime would be to
resolve the issues that have turned people to criminal activity and to stop the
government from flooding the country with illegal drugs.
On one radio show, a student quoted his college professor as saying the main
reason why the Founders wanted people to own a gun was to prevent government
tyranny. The “expert” on the show, who had written a book on gun control, said
this was a myth. Most historians and legal scholars understand that the student and
his professor are correct, but many now say otherwise. One reason we no longer
have constitutional government is because our constitutional heritage is being
relegated to the level of a myth. On May 9, 1994 ABC ran Day One: America
Under the Gun. A reporter said with so much crime the Constitution is becoming
a luxury.
The media constantly tells us that crime keeps getting worse when that is not
true. The Washington Center for Media and Public Affairs found that between
1992 and 1993 the number of crime stories reported on ABC, CBS, and NBC had
doubled. The drug scare is being used as an excuse to tighten government control
over the people and to strengthen the national security state. Crime is being used
as an excuse to federalize and militarize state and local police into a unified
national police force.
An obvious example of how drugs have been used to control and demoralize
the people is exemplified by the black ghettos being flooded with illegal drugs.
Ample supply helped create demand. The radical black movement of the 1960s
became submerged in a drug haze. Louis Farrakhan was quite right to state, when
being interviewed by Barbara Walters on ABC in 1994, that in the mid-1960s the
black community was suddenly flooded with illegal drugs and this was done by the
government. Norval Morris, a law professor, interviewed almost 100 experts in
law enforcement and they called the war on drugs a war against blacks. White
26
people buy and sell most illegal drugs, but most people imprisoned are black.
It is much easier to control and manipulate a society that loses its will to
drugs. Drug use weakens will power and the ability for independent thinking. This
can be illegal drugs like cocaine or legal drugs like Prozac or Valium. Many
schools post “Drug Free Zone” signs and proceed to drug the children with Ritalin
to control them. The end result is that people have difficulty thinking clearly and
defending their rights, which are slowly being lost. When Japan ruled China
 Fooling the People 53

during World War II, it flooded China with opium, as did England in the 1800s, to
27
control the populace and raise money for government operations.
Besides these key strategies, many other techniques are used to fool the
people. Reasonable goals are proclaimed that most would support, while hidden
objectives are promoted that support the one world government. Noble objectives
are promoted that also provide more wealth and control for the corporate elite
while weakening the rights of the people. False promises of greater material
wealth, jobs, and environmental protection were used to promote NAFTA and
GATT, while these treaties actually foster the destruction of the middle class and
U.S. sovereignty. Under President Carter there was a call to help third world
nations with their debt crisis. Many decent people wanted to raise the standard of
living in these nations, so they supported a plan to provide assistance. Instead that
money was used to pay interest on multinational bank loans.
Asset forfeiture laws show that laws are passed, supposedly to protect the
people against criminals, and then the laws are enforced well beyond their original
intent or language to remove the people's rights. These laws were originally pass-
ed to seize the property of drug dealers and mafia leaders, but today they are often
applied to innocent citizens while the criminals hide their assets so they cannot be
seized. These laws are being enacted supposedly to protect the people, when in fact
constitutional rights are violated.
Another strategy is to introduce an especially egregious law or program in a
less-populated state where there is less media coverage. If the law passes, it is
introduced in other states. If there is great resistance, the government backs down,
always watching how the people react, perhaps presenting the same law in another
state with certain changes. In 1989 Oklahoma passed a law requiring everyone to
register their assets, with a heavy fine if you refused or hid any assets, so similar
laws may be passed in other states. As discussed in Chapter XV, today the
National Guard has basically established martial law in parts of Puerto Rico. This
has been going on for several years with little press coverage. It is done in the
name of protecting the people from crime, as the people lose their rights. How
long will it be before this occurs in many states?
Very long laws are passed that include obscure clauses that are difficult to find
and that few would support. These clauses are rarely discussed by the press or in
Congress. After Senator Brown read NAFTA, a 2,000 page document, he was
shocked enough to reverse his vote and reject it. The GATT treaty establishing the
World Trade Organization contains 22,000 pages. Provisions in GATT make it
harder for Americans to save for retirement. The amount U.S. employees can
contribute to 401(k) plans has been reduced to compensate for lost revenue due to
tariffs being reduced. A UN food safety and trade commission will help set GATT
standards, which may lower or remove many U.S. consumer safety laws such as
pesticide use. We may soon be flooded with radiated products because other nations
will insist on this under GATT. Under the Constitution, Article 1, Section 8
Clause 3, Congress shall “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations....” This has
been illegally surrendered by GATT—to a foreign entity.
GATT created a new commission, CODEX, under the UN World Health
Organization. It is now in the process of establishing strict international standards
which will require a doctor's prescription to obtain supplements, because this is
what the large drug companies want. This will cause many problems in the
alternative health movement, and many health food stores will close. Politicians
54 Treason The New World Order

like Clinton and Dole will complain for five minutes, and then pass more laws
destroying U.S. sovereignty.
After the Oklahoma bombing, I constantly read and heard the right wing
attacked in the national media as being conspiracy nuts, partly because it felt the
UN was a serious threat to the U.S. Never once was mere a discussion of the huge
body of evidence supporting such concerns. A classic example of this propaganda
took place in late October, 1995 on Talk of the Nation, a PBS talk radio show.
The topic was the UN and the three guests were all pro-UN. Sure enough, as the
show began, the announcer asked about right-wing concerns over the UN
controlling the U.S. The three guests immediately agreed this was foolish. This
was like asking a Marxist to criticize communism. When you debate a topic and
have three guests, at least one should take an opposing position. Otherwise, you
just get propaganda.
It is not that the UN alone is a threat, it is the large corporations that have
always controlled the UN, and the concern is what they plan to do with it. Right
from the start the UN has been a corporate front. The CFR, led by the Soviet
agent Alger Hiss, played a key role in establishing the UN, and its headquarters are
built on Rockefeller-donated land. The U.S. delegation to form the UN included
many CFR members. The press declares that the UN is quite disorganized and
incompetent, and an example of this is the failed UN peacekeeping operations.
This is a convenient excuse to hide the future plans for the UN to be the center of
a one world government. C.B. Dall, FDR, My Exploited Father-in-Law, said:
“The UN is but a long-range, international-banking apparatus neatly set up for
financial and economic profit by a small group of powerful One-World
28
Revolutionaries, hungry for profit and power.”
Truman signed the UN Participation Act on December 20, 1945. Under this
act “The President shall not be deemed to require the authorization of the
Congress” to provide troops to the UN security council as the president desired.
The constitutional requirement that only Congress can declare a war was illegally
weakened by this treaty. Rep. Frederick Smith said: “This measure strikes at the
very heart of the Constitution. It provides that the power to declare war shall be
taken from Congress and given to the President. Here is the essence of dictator-
ship, and dictatorial control over all else must inevitably tend to follow.” Time is
proving him correct. Congress has little influence over how the U.S. votes at the
UN. The UN, not Congress, approved the Korean War. At the UN on October 24,
1950 Truman said: “The men who laid down their lives for the UN in Korea...died
in order that the UN might live.” Are you prepared to die for the UN? Ask the
relatives of the 54,000 soldiers killed in that “nonwar” if we should be concerned
about the UN. To this day U.S. troops serving in Korea serve under the UN.
When U.S. serviceman David Hilemon was killed over North Korea in 1994, his
body was returned in a casket covered with a UN flag. On April 25, 1996,
Anthony Lake, Clinton's national security adviser, said in a lecture we need to be a
“global 911” to manage the world's crises.
While many criticize the actions of UN peacekeepers, people don't understand
that NATO is a military arm of the UN. NATO and SEATO were created as
collective defense organizations under Article 51 of the UN charter. Articles 1, 5,
7, and 12 in the NATO treaty show the reliance of NATO on the UN for its
legitimacy. On December 15, 1995, the UN Security Council approved the NATO
mission to Bosnia. This approval was necessary for NATO to act. Supporting the
 Fooling the People 55

policy of the UN being used to create a one world government, the new head of
NATO is a Spanish Marxist. Rep. Funderburk and 35 others in Congress attacked
this appointment.
Led by members of the CFR in 1961, the U.S. State Department issued a
publication, Freedom From War, outlining in detail plans to disarm the U.S.
military and establish a UN army. The U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament
Agency, also established in 1961, is working towards this goal. Books like A
World Effectively Controlled By the UN, Introduction to World Peace Through
World Law, and World Peace Through World Law describe these plans in great
detail. Aside from local police who will carry small arms, the entire world is to be
disarmed except for a powerful UN army and police force. In 1992, UN Secretary
General Boutros Ghali presented An Agenda for Peace calling for a permanent UN
army. The report said: “The time of absolute and exclusive sovereignty has
passed,” and it listed reasons that would justify the UN using its army to intervene
in a nation. Senator Boren, in the New York Times August 26, 1992, said the
world needs a UN army to create the new world order. On June 27, 1995 the New
York Times called for a UN world army that could be paid for by people paying
dues as UN citizens. Articles 42 and 43 of the UN charter provide the basis for
29
creating a UN army under the UN Security Council. In the April 11, 1993
Washington Post, the prominent journalist George Will said “Article 43 is the law
of the land—our land.” Why weren't the American people asked to approve this
change?
For years there have been calls for ensuring UN domination by transferring all
nuclear weapons to a UN army. No nation will be allowed to have nuclear
weapons. On December 17, 1995 the Rocky Mountain News said Clinton trans-
ferred a ton of plutonium at Rocky Flats and 199 tons of nuclear material in Oak
Ridge, Tennessee to the UN. Done without congressional approval, this represents
20 percent of U.S. strategic nuclear reserves.
Foreign Policy, a corporate mouthpiece, presented an article that actually
30
listed nations to be taken over by the U N . The use of UN troops in Somalia and
Haiti exemplifies the coming trend. Clinton used U.S. troops to enter Haiti after
receiving UN permission; he refused to seek the approval of Congress as required
by the Constitution. Strobe Talbott, a CFR member and Deputy Secretary of
State, said “once a country utterly loses its ability to govern itself, it also loses its
31
claim to sovereignty and should become a ward of the UN.” Under the Dayton
Accord, Bosnia got a new Constitution which surrendered sovereignty and required
that it become a UN protectorate. Foreign judges will be appointed and a UN
32
representative will be “the final authority in theatre.” Rep. Duncan Hunter, in the
January 26, 1996 Human Events, said Bosnia will be controlled for five years and
that our commitment to reshape this society is much deeper and longer than the
American people understand. Already the New York Times reported on June 13,
1996 that U.S. troops may have to remain in Bosnia beyond 1996. The Bosnia
horror may have been deliberately created so the UN solution could be provided as
a test case to end a nation's sovereignty. William Pfaff in the International Herald
Tribune, which is owned by the Washington Post and New York Times, said:
“The principle of absolute national sovereignty is being overturned....The civil
war in Yugoslavia has rendered this service to us.”
Another example of this pattern occurred in late July, 1991 on CNN.
Stansfield Turner, ex-head of the CIA, said about Iraq: “We have a much bigger
56 Treason The New World Order

objective. We've got to look at the long run here. This is an example—the
situation between the UN and Iraq—where the UN is deliberately intruding into the
sovereignty of a sovereign nation....Now this is a marvelous precedent (for) all
countries of the world....” In 1933 H.G. Wells, in The Shape of Things to Come,
said the new world order would develop in around 50 years out of a conflict near
Basra, Iraq when “Russia is ready to assimilate.” With the Gulf War, he was
almost correct.
Already an international police force has formed and is serving in Bosnia. The
Daily Universe quoted Kissinger associate Lawrence Eagleburger's speech at
Brigham Young University on November 8, 1994. He said: The U.S. “can either
become the world policeman, or an international policing force must be
established with adequate authority and force to maintain world peace....We have to
be the world's thought policemen to create a world police force.” In 1995 the U.S.
contributed millions of dollars to establish an international police training center
in Hungary.
The Chicago Tribune, on September 29, 1993 presented an editorial by Bob
Greene describing the many problems in the U.S. He said a UN multinational
force is desperately needed in the U.S. On April 16, 1996 NBC Evening News said
“5,000 police officers from around the world” will protect the Olympics in
Atlanta. Newsweek on June 24 said “foreign law enforcenment agencies” would
protect the Olympics. The Economist said on June 22 that over 2,000 interna-
tional police would be on hand. Obviously, the U.S. has enough trained people to
provide proper security, but this exercise will help get Americans used to foreign
troops patrolling our streets.
The unofficial word in the U.S. military is that, to get ahead in their careers
officers must promote working under the UN in various peacekeeping missions.
Traditional patriotism is no longer sufficient. This new role was described by
James J. Schneider in the April, 1995 military journal Special Warfare. Schneider
teaches at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. He said: “The
U.S. Army of the future will face its greatest challenge since the end of the Civil
War....The future will be dominated by a single overwhelming presence—the
United Nations. The resurgence and growing influence of the UN will not only
affect our soldiers but may change the very structure of the nation-state....” There
is growing pressure on military officers to adjust to the new world order or to
resign.
On May 24, 1994 the UN Disarmament Commission adopted a working
paper proposing the control of guns in the U.S. and other nations to limit
international arms trafficking. Clinton supports this objective. Foreign Affairs
called for the prompt global control of small arms and weapons, because such
weapons allow militias to challenge UN and U.S. troops. There may one day be a
33
treaty requiring strict gun control in the U.S.
There are growing calls for a world UN tax. In 1993 the Ford Foundation
financed a study, Financing an Effective United Nations, by TC and CFR
members. This report called for a UN tax. The UN's Human Development Report,
in 1994 called for a UN tax. A global UN tax was discussed at the UN conference
in Copenhagen in 1995. Sweden's Prime Minister Ingvar Carlsson, Australia's
Foreign Minister Gareth Evansand, and Pakistan's Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto
have called for a UN tax. Jon Stewart wrote a column that appeared in many
newspapers calling for a UN tax. Reportedly the International Court of Justice
 Fooling the People 57

34
may force Congress to pay this future tax. On January 15, 1996 and in the
March/April 1996 issue of Foreign Affairs, Boutros Ghali called for a UN tax and
said ultimately such a tax would be applied. On May 13, 1996 The Nation called
for a world flat tax to support the UN and other global institutions. According to
this article “A global flat tax...would be in the interest of working and middle-
class Americans.” If you prefer to think that concern about a new world order is
foolish fantasy, you will one day look back and think how low your taxes once
were. In the new world order, there will be a new direct tax to support the world
government. The U.S., which strongly supports the UN, could easily pay the
money it owes the UN. However, using congressional resistance, the government
may be deliberately creating a crisis, so that the UN will be given the authority to
tax people directly.
In 1994 the Congressional Research Service published a revised version of a
1990 report “An International Criminal Court” stating that the UN is gradually
trying to establish a permanent criminal court. In the future U.S. citizens may be
tried before such a court for many different crimes. Foreign Affairs called for the
examination of bank deposits in all nations and to establish a Global Bank Police
35
to enhance banking security and limit money laundering. Certain sites, like
Yellowstone, have been declared World Heritage Sites by the UN. Park rangers in
certain Colorado parks admit off the record that some land is now controlled by the
UN. In other countries the UN has intervened in how land is used. The recent book
Our Global Neighborhood in 410 pages outlined in great detail the coming world
government. The plan, in the next few years, is to quietly sign treaties that will
force all nations to join a world government. There are many books that explain
how dangerous the UN is. As with many of the issues discussed in this chapter,
this is a complex topic I will discuss in more detail in a future book.
Manipulating statistics is another widely used gimmick to fool the people.
Clinton said domestic violence is the number one “health risk for women between
the ages of 15 and 44 in our country” as he announced federal grants of $26
million to prevent this violence. According to the AP on March 22, 1995, the
government released shocking statistics such as a claim that three to four million
women a year are victims of domestic violence, to support Clinton's claim.
Various authorities challenged this claim with some questioning what the
government defines as violence. Detroit News columnist Tony Snow said
typically in Washington “When you want to persuade people to do something that
they see no need to do, don't reason with them. Make up a statistic so stunning
that they will feel obligated to go along.” Naturally, one result is more govern-
ment control over our lives.
Other statistics are hidden from the people. We are constantly told that gun
control is essential to ease the crime problem, yet when statistics suggest
otherwise they are hidden or denied. Since Florida passed a law in 1987, 100,000
people have obtained a license to carry concealed handguns. There have been few
abuses with only 17 licenses revoked because of a crime committed with a licensed
gun. The national murder rale increased 12 percent between 1987 and 1992 but it
dropped 21 percent in Florida. In this same period, Florida crime rose 17.8 percent
but nationally it rose 24 percent.
Typically when a scandal surfaces and the public is aroused, an investigation
is held but the people doing the investigating are carefully chosen, so that some
information is released to satisfy the public but the full story is suppressed. This
58 Treason The New World Order

is done to convince people that the system still works. And officials may lie or
not call certain witnesses during an investigation to cover-up unpleasant facts.
After the Ames case broke, the CIA director said he would propose that Brent
Scowcroft and Harold Brown should head a committee to review U.S. intelligence
operations. It is business as usual with these CFR members. In the recent
Whitewater hearings, Congress refused to question key people like Larry Nichols.
Bo Gritz was only called at the last minute at the end of the Randy Weaver
hearings with little press coverage.
The Task Force on Radiation and Human Rights tried to get people who were
more sympathetic to the victims added to the government's recent investigation of
secret government radiation experiments on people, but the White House was not
responsive. Key people on the government's committee have links to the radiation
experiments they are now investigating. Some panel members were from the same
36
institutions being investigated. One member of the government's investigation,
Jay Katz, a medical ethics specialist said: “We don't want to pass severe moral
37
judgments, because it's really more important to look at the present.” The
standards have changed little from the 1940s, when the 1946 Nuremberg Code was
38
established which required the agreement of people in experiments. Already the
Clinton regime is showing signs of wanting to get done with this story without
revealing too much. The investigating committee released an Interim Report in
October, 1994, and reported that various government agencies including the CIA
are not providing the required information.
The three events that provided a convenient rationale for big government, and
thus greater corporate power in the 20th century, were the two world wars and the
great depression, with the resulting New Deal. In each instance the large
corporations manipulated the people by using the Hegelian principle of creating a
problem, then creating opposing views, and finally providing solutions that the
people would otherwise never have accepted. Often one position has definite
weaknesses, so the people will unknowingly accept the choice of the corporate
elite.
During these emergencies, the government needed to borrow money which
allowed the bankers to gain influence and profit. In such emergencies, the
government surrendered more of its sovereignty to the large banks as collateral.
This strategy has been used many times to create wasteful bureaucracies further
enhancing federal corporate power. During a national crisis, normal constitutional
restraints are forgotten, and once the federal government gets new powers it rarely
gives them up. The constitutional scholar, Edward S. Corwin, said the New Deal
and World War II greatly increased presidential powers and was leading to the
dissolution of constitutional government and law. Our constitutional system of
dual federalism and the doctrine of separation of powers has been radically altered
39
as tremendous power shifted to the central government.
During the great depression many like, Charles A. Beard in The Open Door
At Home, felt the U.S. would best develop though regional trade, high tariffs, and
self-sufficiency. The CFR used the depression to claim that it was partly caused by
40
limiting trade and that global free trade would help solve the depression. It is a
deliberately created myth that the Hawley-Smoot Tariff Act of 1930 and “laissez-
faire capitalism” of the 1920s caused the 1929 crash and great depression, so that
big government was needed to control the excesses of capitalism. In previous
depressions, the government didn't intervene, and the depression was settled much
 Fooling the People 59

sooner and with far lower unemployment than in the 1930s. Extensive
41
government intervention in the New Deal guaranteed a long and deep depression.
Business cycles, especially depressions, are very influenced by government
monetary intervention. Murray N. Rothbard and the Ludwig von Mises Institute
have provided ample evidence that government intervention with loose bank credit
during the 1920s played a key role in creating the great depression. There was a
major increase in money supply from 1921 until July, 1929 primarily from an
increase in bank deposits and bank credits. A House hearing on stabilizing the
dollar disclosed, in 1928, that the Federal Reserve was working closely with
42
European central banks and a major crash was planned. The Federal Reserve
followed a policy of continuous credit and a low discount during the 1920s causing
inflation and foreign lending. By manipulating interest rates they inflated stock
prices and then a tightened money supply caused a collapse in stock prices. Even
Alan Greenspan, current head of the Federal Reserve admitted in The Objectivist
July, 1966, that Fed excess credit policies in the 1920s “nearly destroyed the
economies of the world.”
Various bankers, such as J.P. Morgan, deliberately created several artificial
panics to pressure the formation of a central bank. In the panic of 1893, Senator
Robert Owen testified before a congressional committee about the Panic Circular
of 1893 that his bank received. It said: “You will at once retire one-third of your
circulation and call in one-half of your loans....” Life magazine on April 25, 1949,
43
discussed the role of the Morgan bank in creating the panic of 1907. William
Bryan in The United States Unresolved Monetary and Political Problems described
how the New York banks methodically called in broker call loans which meant
stocks had to be sold which helped start the market collapse. After the Federal
Reserve was created Rep. Charles Lindberg said: “From now on depressions will
be scientifically created.”
Rep. Louis McFadden, Chairman of the House Banking Committee, said: “It
(the depression) was not accidental. It was a carefully contrived occurrence....The
international bankers sought to bring about a condition of despair here so that they
might emerge as the rulers of us all.” On November 2 1 , 1971 the New York
Times Magazine quoted Rep. McFadden as stating the Federal Reserve Act
established “a world banking system...a super-state controlled by international
bankers and international industrialists acting together to enslave the world for
their own pleasure.” Every American should read McFadden's nine page statement
about the Fed in the Congressional Record on June 10, 1932.
People were fooled into buying more stocks so they desperately needed
government help after the market crashed. The Fed encouraged short-term
borrowing then, at the appointed time, it called in the loans. Wealthy individuals
aware of this manipulation sold slocks short or stayed out of the market and men
made a fortune during the depression by buying stocks at sharply discounted
prices. In FDR, My Exploited Father-In-Law, C.B. Dall said: the depression “was
the calculated 'shearing' of the public by the World-Money powers, triggered by
the planned sudden shortage of the supply of call money in the New York money
market. Dall worked on the New York stock exchange floor during the depression.
He said each day Ben Smith, supported by Tom Bragg and Joe Kennedy and their
44
brokers, sold stocks short to undercut the entire market.
In 1913 just before Christmas with only a few members present, Congress
passed the Federal Reserve Act. No one challenged the false claim that the states
60 Treason The New World Order

had ratified this act. The Ninth Circuit court held in Lewis v. U.S. (1982) the
“Federal Reserve Banks are privately owned, locally controlled corporations.” Title
12 U.S. C. 283 and Title 12 U.S. C. 287 even list stock valuation information
for this private corporation. The Fed is owned by various U.S. and European
banks, yet under the Constitution, Article 1, Section 8, only Congress has the
power “To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof....” If the U.S. Treasury prints
money, there is no interest. Instead the government borrows billions of dollars a
year paying about $250 billion a year just in interest for Federal Reserve notes
that have no real value, while the media perpetuates the myth that the Federal
Reserve is part of the U.S. government. The federal debt developed after the
Federal Reserve was established, while gold and silver certificates were replaced by
Federal Reserve notes. Congress cannot even investigate the daily activities of the
Fed. This fraud worked because the politicians committed treason, and the people
were asleep. In FDR, My Exploited Father-in-Law, C.B. Dall said: “The One-
World Government leaders and their ever-close bankers...have now acquired full
control of the money and credit machinery of the U.S....,via the creation...of the
45
privately owned Federal Reserve Bank.”
Like any private corporation, the Fed takes actions to protect its stockholders;
it does not represent the American people or even the federal government. This is
why so many criticize Fed policies over interest rates. Your IRS checks are
deposited into this private bank not in the U.S. Treasury, with no real
accountability as to where the funds actually go. President Kennedy was
assassinated partly because he printed U.S. Treasury notes along with the usual
Federal Reserve notes. The Fed is the only profit-making corporation in the U.S.
that isn't taxed. The talk about balancing the budget is an attempt to deflect the
people's attention about the illegal activities of the Federal Reserve and the fact
that the U.S. is bankrupt. Someday people will look back and wonder in
amazement that so many people could have been so fooled for so many years by
this scam.
The New Deal reforms were originally presented to extend and share governing
power to assist the weak and unrepresented. The proclaimed goal was to create new
forums and agencies for decision making, to provide a vehicle for citizens to be
more involved in a representative government. Instead the New Deal enhanced
government power over the people, created a national emergency that continues
today, and allowed the power of the moneyed interests to spread. The federal
government that has existed since the New Deal is an aberration that is anathema
to our political heritage. Constitutional restraints were removed in the name of
more democracy and greater equality. In 1936 former Senator James A. Reed,
previously a supporter of the New Deal, attacked it as a “tyrannical” measure
“leading to despotism, sought by its sponsors under the communistic cry of
'social justice.'” On the Senate floor he said Roosevelt's family “is one of the
largest stockholders in” GE, and FDR was a “hired man for the economic
royalists” on Wall Street.
The New Deal welfare state was set up with the intention of having a free
people become addicted to big government. The welfare state represents
government addiction. The process was like drug dealers who go to schools and
give away free drugs, so people will become addicted and buy more and more.
Then it is that much easier to manipulate and control the people. The myth was
created that big government is good and that it should take care of everyone. The
 Fooling the People 61

foremost principle of the Founding Fathers was that people should be allowed to
lead their lives without government interference. With the New Deal we achieved
the exact opposite. Our tradition of limited constitutional government with a
system of checks and balances was forgotten. The mythology that Roosevelt saved
America from the great depression and helped lead us through the second world war
covers up the fact that we were once a free and independent people with little
government interference except in clearly delineated areas. In the New Deal people
sacrificed freedom and a belief that our rights come from God for a false sense of
economic security. The paternalistic welfare system perpetuates dependency and
weakness while robbing us of self-reliance and citizenship. A primary goal today
should be not just to reinvent government but to restore responsible citizenship.
Numerous historians have pondered why there weren't more radical changes
during the New Deal. William E. Leuchtenburg, author of Franklin D. Roosevelt
and the New Deal 1932-1940 and a widely respected scholar of the New Deal,
called it a “halfway revolution.” He concluded that Roosevelt carefully prevented
challenges to vested interests, while the unorganized people rarely benefited. The
National Recovery Administration did little to speed recovery and probably
hindered it, the Agricultural Adjustment Agency curbed farm production when
people were hungry which also hurt tenant farmers, and the Home Owners Loan
Corporation helped refinance homes but also foreclosed on 100,000 mortgages.
Walter Karp in Indispensable Enemies has perhaps presented the best
summary and analysis of Roosevelt's phony policies. “Roosevelt almost never
fought for reform until it was forced upon him by overwhelming popular pressure,
whereupon he saw to it that the reform enacted was as minimal as he could make
46
it....Roosevelt's duplicity was a heinous act of bad faith and betrayal.” For
instance, the Emergency Banking Relief Act was a very conservative document
that restored the bankers' power at public expense, despite what reformers wanted.
Richard Hofstadter in The Age of Reform criticized the New Deal for
opportunism and stressed the discontinuity of the New Deal with the populist
reform tradition. Howard Zinn said Roosevelt was cautious about supporting
candidates who wanted bold economic and social change, and he never created new
political forces among the poor and disadvantaged who would have helped bring
47
about a more complete economic transformation and redistribution of wealth.
Barton J. Bernstein said most New Deal reforms accomplished far less than
many claimed. “Though vigorous in rhetoric and experimental in tone, the New
Deal was narrow in its goals and wary of bold economic reform.” The “maneuvers
in social reform were limited to cautious excursions.” The New Deal reforms did
not transform the American system; there was no real redistribution of income.
Corporations did not become more responsible, and the political power of
businesses was never weakened. Instead it grew stronger. Many Americans received
no assistance in the 1930s, and while most ultimately didn't starve, there was little
48
improvement in the economic lives of people aside from the rhetoric.
I have discussed the New Deal partly because of another gigantic hoax called
the Contract With America. This is another sophisticated plan to give the large
49
corporations more money and power, and it is another diversion to distract the
people and Congress while more of our rights are removed. Amazingly many
consider this contract revolutionary. Arthur Schlesinger, Jr feels the Republican
attempts to dismantle the federal government is bringing the country back to the
50
Articles of Confederation.
62 Treason The New World Order

Money magazine explained how, under the guise of attacking greedy lawyers,
both houses with the aid of powerful financial lobbyists approved a law that
seriously cripples the rights of investors to be protected against fraudulent
financial advisors. The Republicans also strengthened federal controls and
eliminated state laws that protected individual investors, supposedly to help the
people. The representatives pushing this received large sums of money from
groups like J.P. Morgan, Citicorp, and Merrill Lynch. The people want less
federal control, but Congress won't really listen because the bankers and corporate
51
elite control the Democratic/Republican party. Tort reform includes corporate
friendly clauses that limit punitive damages and the amount that can be collected
in personal injury cases. In addition, tax money still goes to Washington, and the
push for more federal control over crime continues.
The National Security Restoration Act was supposed to prevent U.S. troops
from serving under UN command. On January 26, 1995, Secretary of State Warren
Christopher lied before the House International Relations Committee declaring
this provision unconstitutional. The resulting bill was so watered down that it is
worthless. If the president certifies that service under the UN is in the vital
national interest of the U.S., it is allowed, despite the Constitution. Article 1,
Section 8 grants Congress the exclusive authority to declare war and raise and
support the military.
The Brookings Institution released a report, Fine Print, saying the Contract
With America is not a radical break with big government. Instead it “represents the
final consolidation” of federal power; it will not significantly lessen federal
government control over our lives. “The Contract preserves the national
government's role in making, administering, and funding the vast and varied array
52
of post-New Deal and post-Great Society domestic policies and programs.”
The contract and other Republican policies have been handled so poorly
perhaps because there is a deliberate plan to defeat the freshmen members of the
House. The corporate controllers don't really care who is in power in the Demo-
cratic/Republican party, unless there are individuals who threaten their influence as
is the case with many of the new Republicans. An obvious move for Wall Street
is to bring back the big government Democrats. Unfortunately, these new Repub-
licans are too naive to understand who is really in control. In 1936 Roosevelt had
a serious problem when so many liberal democrats were elected. Not wanting real
reforms that would help the people and injure corporate power, Roosevelt took
steps that rolled back the liberal tide in 1938. We may be seeing the same
maneuver today.
The principle of providing government benefits to make the people more
dependent on the government has been applied in hundreds of programs. Rep.
Lamar Smith and Senator Simpson introduced bills to control immigration by
creating a new federal computer system to identify every American hired. This
would create a vast new federal bureaucracy and tighten federal control over the
people despite GOP rhetoric. A national identification system is part of the plan.
The Clinton health plan was supposed to benefit the people's health but it
would have increased federal control with a smart card introduced for better
surveillance over our lives. A universal Health Security Card would have become a
national ID card, and it would have been harder to use alternative healing methods
under Clinton's plan. Presently smart cards can store 1,600 pages of information.
 Fooling the People 63

In 1992 candidate Clinton said: “Everyone will carry a smart card, encoded with his
53
or her personal medical information.”
There is a serious risk that our Constitution will be replaced with a corporate
approved version. Several new Constitutions have already been prepared. For in-
stance, in 1964, the Ford and Rockefeller Foundations spent millions of dollars
preparing the Proposed Constitution for the New States of America. In it the Bill
of Rights was replaced by the grant of certain privileges. Our God given rights
would be assigned and granted by the state when it deemed appropriate. The World
Constitution and Parliament Association in Lakewood, Colorado has already pre-
pared a world Constitution for the planned world government. Steven Boyd in
Alternative Constitutions for the U.S. presents 10 proposed new Constitutions. If
the one world government takes over, the present Constitution will be banned as a
subversive document. Phil Marsh a tax protester was brought to trial. One count
involved him sending the Constitution through the mail. When McVeigh's sister
was initially questioned about the Oklahoma bombing, the press said she was
found with extremist literature like the Constitution.
For years there have been attempts to hold a constitutional convention under
the guise of weakening federal power and restoring state rights. In May, 1994 Utah
Governor Mike Leavitt, a leader of the National Conference of State Legislatures
which is supported by the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations, called for a
Conference of States (COS). Leavitt said: “Our national government...is outdated
and old-fashioned....There is a much better way.” According to the May 25, 1994
Salt Lake Tribune, Governor Leavitt called for a constitutional convention but
people were so angry at this that he soon denied making such a statement. In 1995
the National Governor's Association joined in the call to hold this meeting in
Philadelphia October 22-25, the 50th anniversary of the UNs founding. With little
public awareness, attending this convention was approved in various states, often
with no debate, because of pressure by local political leaders.
In each state people quietly promoted this convention, denying it would be a
constitutional convention despite the gathering evidence. It was claimed that the
meeting would not have the force of law, so why was each state legislator required
to pass a Resolution of Participation? They required that two-thirds of the states
pass the resolution which is what is required to hold a constitutional convention.
The conference would make its own rules and, per the Constitution, could petition
Congress to hold a Constitutional convention and do whatever they wanted, even
though the American people would have no idea the meeting was even taking
place. This would have been the first meeting of all the states since the original
Constitutional convention, but the national media rarely discussed this plan.
Senators Helms and Brown introduced Resolution 82 asking the states to
convene a COS to add amendments to the Constitution “and that such states then
consider whether it is necessary for the states to convene a constitutional
convention pursuant to Article V of the Constitution of the U.S., in order to adopt
such Amendment.” Some people promoting COS, like Charles Cooper, openly
call for changing our constitutional form of government. Paul Weyrich founder of
the American Legislative Exchange Council which is also pushing COS said in a
March 8, 1987 editorial in the Washington Post “Our national strategy is outdated,
dysfunctional and insupportable....If we are going to be a serious nation, we need a
serious system...we need some type of shadow government....” The clearest
expression of subversion came in the book Reforming American Government
64 Treason The New World Order

released by the Committee on the Constitutional System, another CFR controlled

group pushing for parliamentary government in America. One of it directors James
M. Burn's, using text from The Power to Lead, said: “Let us face reality. The
framers have simply been too shrewd for us. They have outwitted us. They
designed separated institutions that cannot be unified by mechanical linkages, frail
bridges, tinkering. If we are to 'turn the founders upside down'...we must directly
54
confront the constitutional structure they erected.”
The Patriot movement got numerous state legislators to reject attending this
convention, so the necessary number of states required for it to convene was not
attained and it was cancelled. There was an intense debate in about 25 states. The
Philadelphia city council voted unanimously March 16, 1995 not to support
holding the meeting. The Wall Street Journal pushed for a constitutional
55
convention, while the New York Times in frustration announced that extreme
56
right wing conspiracy theorists had blocked the meeting.
This is a classic example of how the corporate view decides what is politically
correct in America. The states rejected this phony conference because so many
Americans complained to their state legislators. When America speaks and it
doesn't reflect the corporate view the left or right is slandered. The canceling of
this phony convention demonstrated the patriotism and influence of the Patriot
movement. It also angered and scared the corporate elite. The call for this
conference is coming from the large corporations, not from the people.
Before, the plan was to quietly get the states to agree to hold this meeting
without anyone noticing. Now the plan is to use money. The corporate elite,
including Mobile, Chevron, and Philip Morris, have already announced plans to
redouble their efforts and to donate millions of dollars to various legislators to
hold this convention, which is now called a Federalism Summit, in 1996. A
meeting was held in Cincinnati October 22, 1995 to plan the strategy. Contact
your local representatives and tell them not to allow this convention, which would
change the Constitution and remove many of our rights.
James Weinstein, in The Corporate Idea in the Liberal State, 1900-1918,
described how the liberal social reforms of the 20th century, from the New Deal to
the New Frontier and the Great Society, ultimately were developed and managed by
the corporations, not by progressive elements. The purpose always was to prevent
anti-corporate sentiment and to control the marketplace. Weinstein describes “a
conscious and successful effort to guide the economic and social policies of federal,
state, and municipal governments by various business groupings in their own
long-range interest as they perceived it.”
The special interest groups, especially the large corporations, remain in
control of the federal government and various schemes are used to fool the people
about this. As shown in the 1994 election many people are fed up with the
overwhelming power of the federal government; yet there are few attempts by
Congress to return power to the states and the people. Programs by the states to
make changes in welfare still require money to come from the federal government.
The Contract With America didn't even include lobbying and campaign-finance
reforms. Most people remain convinced that the source of many problems is the
government, when in fact it is that the large corporations control the government.
This reality has been deflected by careful propaganda. We have all been lied to for
so long that that we are losing sight of our heritage and the truth can be quite
shocking.
 65

Chapter VI

State Rights and the Federal Government

“I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of freedom of the people by
gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden
usurpations.”
James Madison

“When all government, domestic and foreign, in little as in great things shall be
drawn to Washington as the center of all power, it will...become as venal and
oppressive as the government from which we are separated....I believe the states
can best govern our home concerns and the general government our foreign ones.”
Thomas Jefferson

The first attempt at federation occurred in 1643. For defense purposes four
New England colonies formed the United Colonics of New England which was
called a firm and perpetual union. In 1686 the union was disbanded. The original
Articles of Confederation were abandoned because the central government was too
weak. Now we have gone to the other extreme. As stated in the Declaration of
Independence July 4, 1776, “That whenever any Form of Government becomes
destructive of these ends, (described freedoms) it is the Right of the People to alter
or abolish it, and to institute new Government....” Our Constitution does not state
that the federal government shall exist in perpetuity, partly because the Articles of
Confederation were four times declared to exist in perpetuity yet that agreement
soon failed.
The federal government was created by 13 sovereign and free nations. Great
Britain recognized the sovereign independence of each state at the 1783 Paris peace
treaty. In Sturges vs. Crowninshield (1819), Chief Justice of the Supreme Court
Marshall said at the beginning “we were divided into independent states, united for
some purposes, but in most respects sovereign.” These independent states decided
on their own to accept the new Constitution. Before the Civil War the words used
in various federal documents were “the U.S. are” but than that was changed to “the
U.S. is.” In older versions of the Bill of Rights the word “State” was always in
capital letter but that is no longer true. Each of the 13 colonies performed the
duties of sovereign states such as having a legislature to raise taxes and conduct
war, raise a militia, and have relations with other states. To this day many states
have economic relations with foreign nations to increase commerce.
Before accepting the new Constitution, Massachusetts demanded “that it be
explicitly declared that all powers not delegated by the aforesaid Constitution are
reserved to the several States, to be by them exercised.” According to the New
Hampshire Constitution, “The people of this Commonwealth have the sole and
exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and independent
66 Treason The New World Order

State; and do and forever hereafter shall exercise and enjoy every power, jurisdic-
tion, and right which is not, or may not hereafter be, by them, expressly delegated
to the U.S.”
When Virginia joined the new Union on June 25, 1788, it declared “the
powers granted under the Constitution, being derived from the people of the U.S.,
may be resumed by them whensoever the same shall be perverted to their injury or
oppression....” When New York joined the Union on July 25, 1788, it said: “That
the powers of Government may be re-assumed by the people, whensoever it shall
become necessary to their happiness....” Rhode Island and North Carolina did not
join the Union for over a year after the Union had been approved. They were con-
sidered independent sovereign nations by the other states. Upon joining the Union,
Rhode Island declared: “That the powers of Government may be resumed by the
people, whensoever it shall become necessary to their happiness....” Other state
constitutions, like Texas, have similar protections.
William Rawle wrote Views of the Constitution in 1825, suiting: “It depends
on the State itself to retain or abolish the principle of representation, because it
depends on itself whether or not it will continue a member of the Union. To deny
this right would be inconsistent with the principle on which all our political
systems are founded, which is, that the people have in all cases, a right to deter-
mine how they will be governed....The secession of a State from the Union
depends on the will of the people of such a State.” Rawles, born in Philadelphia,
was a friend of Benjamin Franklin and George Washington. His book was widely
used in constitutional law courses at various colleges throughout the country,
including at West Point.
Before the Civil War, the states sometimes challenged federal authority. Many
patriots today would draw inspiration from the debates in the late 1700s. The
Alien and Sedition Acts angered many, and if Jefferson hadn't become president in
1800 and rejected these laws, the country might have split apart. Many considered
the federal government the enemy of the people, and newspaper criticism was
widespread. In 1797 Jefferson said the federal government represented “foreign
jurisdiction.”
The right of nullification was initially proclaimed in 1798, with the Virginia
and Kentucky Resolutions, which were written by Madison and Jefferson. The
doctrine of nullification is based on the understanding that the Union is an agree-
ment among sovereign states, that the states have the right to judge violations of
the Constitution, and the states don't have to follow the laws set forth by their
agent, the federal government. Kentucky said nullification was the “rightful
remedy” for violating the Constitution. Madison said federal inherent or implied
powers were “creatures of ambition” which would ultimately “swallow up the
State sovereignties.” Since the states and the people created the Constitution, a
1
state had a right to nullify or reject an unconstitutional federal law. The federal
government is an agent for the states that created it and who are its principals.
Congress does not have the right to pass laws that violate the Constitution. Any
such laws are invalid, because the federal government is not above the Constitu-
tion.
The U.S. did poorly in the War of 1812 partly because some states refused to
provide a militia. They felt this was strictly a war between England and the federal
government. In 1814 the New England states met in Hartford to consider seceding
 State Rights and the Federal Government 67

from the Union because the war had cost them considerable trade losses. They
proclaimed the right of nullification.
In 1831 John Calhoun said: “The great and leading principle is that the
general government emanated from the people of the several states, forming
distinct political communities, and acting in their separate and sovereign capacity,
and not from all the people forming one aggregate political community.” Calhoun
also said: “The object of a Constitution is to restrain the government, as that of
laws is to restrain individuals.” In the 1830s Georgia refused to follow several
Supreme Court decisions regarding the Cherokee Indians. In 1832 South Carolina
declared certain federal tariffs null and void. President Andrew Jackson, on Decem-
ber 10, 1832, called nullification rebellion and treason, but both sides backed
down. In the 1850s various northern States nullified the 1850 Fugitive Slave Law
by passing personal liberty laws. Slavery was a constant source of tension before
the Civil War.
In 1848 Abraham Lincoln said: “Any people anywhere being inclined and hav-
ing the power have the right to rise up and shake off the existing government, and
form a new one that suits them better.” In 1860, when confronted with these
words, Lincoln defended his view of maintaining the Union by turning to God and
the mystical belief that the Union must be saved at all costs. The power of the
federal government increased tremendously during and after the Civil War.
Supreme Court Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase said state sovereignty died at Ap-
pomattox.
In 1868 the Fourteenth Amendment was passed unconstitutionally. This act
created a new class of citizenship. The Senate then consisted of 72 members, in-
cluding 22 southerners. Since the Senate did not have the required 48 votes to pass
the Fourteenth amendment, it would not seat the southerners. As a result, only 34
votes were needed. However, they were still one vote short so, without a hearing,
they illegally unseated a New Jersey senator who was against the amendment be-
cause he had only been elected by a plurality. Such an election was legal in New
Jersey and in other states so this act was illegal but the conspirators used this
strategy because they did not have the required two-third vote needed to expel a
seated senator. The Fourteenth Amendment was passed by 33 of 49 senators. In a
similar manner, the House would not seat 58 southern representatives, so the 182
northern members only needed 122 votes to pass the amendment. Although the
vote was two short of the two-thirds required, the amendment was declared passed
with 120 votes.
By March, 1867 only 17 of 37 states had ratified the amendment. Then the
Reconstruction Act was passed, legalizing military occupation of all southern
states except Tennessee—which had approved the new amendment. Under the
military occupation most southern whites lost the right to vote, and six southern
states were forced to pass the Fourteenth Amendment. This insured that the
required 29 states were reached. Although Ohio and New Jersey repealed their
earlier approval, disgusted with these events, they were still counted and the
2
amendment was ratified.
In Dyett v. Turner (1967) the Utah Supreme Court attacked the method by
which the Fourteenth Amendment was passed. In State v. Phillips (1975) the Utah
Supreme Court said: “No court in full possession of its faculties could honestly
hold that the amendment (Fourteenth) was properly approved and adopted.” The
Fourteenth Amendment has been used to expand federal power “not only not
 68 Treason The New World Order

granted to it, but expressly forbidden to it....History is strewn with other examples
which demonstrate that undue, uncontrolled and unwieldy concentrations of power
in any individual or institution tends to destroy itself. It is our opinion that this is
the evil which the founders feared so keenly and tried so zealously to guard against,
but which is now rife upon us.” Although the Fourteenth Amendment has often
been used to expand federal power, the Supreme Court has never ruled on its con-
stitutionality.
Until early this century people still felt primarily loyal to their state. The
federal government was a distant body that had little direct impact on people's
lives. This is a key reason why so many southerners left the Union during the
Civil War. It is difficult for us to appreciate such state loyalty today. The federal
government was greatly enhanced when the Sixteenth Amendment, to collect
income taxes, was falsely passed in 1913. This directly linked the federal govern-
ment to every taxpayer and gradually played a further role in weakening state
sovereignty.
The Ninth and Tenth Amendments strictly limit the federal government to
those powers defined in the Constitution to protect state sovereignty and the
people's rights. The evidence clearly shows that “the ratifying States regarded this
statement of reserved powers as a vital, indeed an absolutely necessary addition to
3
the Constitution.” And the first article of the Constitution states: “All legislative
Powers herein granted....” which means the federal government only has the
powers granted to it by the Constitution. That these amendments have been
greatly weakened in this century, in violation of the Constitution, is the heart of
our problem. The federal government has a role to play but it should be strictly
within the Constitution.
Under the Constitution, the states agreed to give certain of their sovereign
powers to the federal government. However, these few powers were specifically
outlined with all other powers reserved to the states and the people. During the
debate over ratifying the Constitution, this principle was widely understood, so
many wondered in amazement how anyone could ever imagine that the federal
government would usurp state sovereignty. Alexander Hamilton said in, The
Federalist Papers, number 9: “The proposed Constitution so far from implying an
abolition of the state governments, makes them constituent parts of the national
sovereignty, by allowing them a direct representation in the Senate, and leaves in
their possession certain exclusive and very important portions of sovereign
power.” In The Federalist Papers, number 17, Hamilton added: “Allowing the
utmost latitude to the love of power which any reasonable man can require, I
confess I am at a loss to discover what temptation the persons entrusted with the
administration of the general (federal) government could ever feel to divest the
states of the authorities of that description....It will always be far more easy for
the state governments to encroach upon the national authorities, than for the
national government to encroach upon the state authorities.”
James Madison said in The Federalist Papers, number 45: “The state
governments may be regarded as constituent and essential parts of the federal
government; whilst the latter is nowise essential to the operation or organization
of the former....The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the federal
government are few and defined. Those which are to remain in the state govern-
ments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on
external objects, as war, peace, negotiations, and foreign commerce....The powers
 State Rights and the Federal Government 69

reserved to the several states will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary
course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the
internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the state.” This hardly sounds like
our present government. Leaving most powers including those undefined to the
states and people and only a few defined powers to the federal government was a
deliberate system of checks and balances to prevent the tyranny that is so common
in concentrated government power. Today Washington has forgotten that the
ultimate purpose of separate government powers is to protect the people from
government tyranny.
During the ratification debate in Virginia, Patrick Henry and George Mason
opposed the new Constitution. Henry said: “Be extremely cautious, watchful, and
jealous of your liberty. Instead of securing your rights, you may lose them
4
forever. There will be no checks, no real balances, in this government.” George
Mason said having a central government “is totally subversive of every principle
which has hitherto governed us. This power is calculated to annihilate totally the
State governments....These two concurrent powers cannot exist long together; the
one will destroy the other....” Mason was also very critical of the taxing power
5
which he said “must carry everything before it.”
In 1816 Thomas Jefferson wrote: “The way to have good and safe government
is not to trust it all to one, but to divide it among the many....Let the national
government be entrusted with the defense of the nation and its foreign and federal
relations; the state governments with the civil rights, laws, police and administra-
tion of what concerns the state generally; the counties with the local concerns of
the counties....What has destroyed the liberty and the rights of man in every
government which has ever existed under the sun? The generalizing and concen-
6
trating of cares and powers into one body.”
State and federal governments have legitimate functions, but the Constitution
should be used as a guideline to set proper boundaries. This is rarely done today.
The federal government has no legal authority to intervene in the affairs of states,
except in the areas delegated under the Constitution. “The genius of the U.S.
Constitution is that it's the world's only anti-government Constitution. The
Founders understood clearly that the principle threat to the American people was
7
then, and would always be, our own government.”
The states created a federal government partly because they found that a few
issues such as diplomacy, interstate commerce, defense, and disputes among the
states could best be settled by a national government. However, since the New
Deal, it has been believed that all problems must be solved on a national level.
The Constitution is supposed to be a system of restraints against the natural
tendency of government to continue growing, but the federal government has gone
way beyond its constitutional mandate; it has violated the rights of the states and
the people. The New Deal represented a fundamental change in federal authority,
but the Constitution was never changed to legalize this power.
History has shown time and again how corrupting the influence of power can
be. Edmund Burke said: “The greater the power the more dangerous the abuse.” In
1888 John Fiske, a Harvard historian, said: “If the day should ever arrive when the
people of the different parts of our country shall allow their local affairs to be
administered by prefects sent from Washington...on that day the progressive
political career of the American people will have come to an end, and the hopes
 70 Treason The New World Order

that have been built upon it for the future happiness and prosperity of mankind
will be wrecked forever.”
Passage of the Seventeenth Amendment in 1913 meant that senators were
chosen in a general election instead of being elected by state legislatures. On a
practical level, state legislators were much more able to see that senators protected
state rights than is the case with voters involved in many varied activities. Federal
programs like unfunded mandates would never have passed if senators were still
elected by state legislators. The removal of this important protection established
by the Founders played a major role in weakening state sovereignty. It is not by
chance that the federal government grew so large in the years after this amendment
was passed.
It has been increasingly accepted that the federal government has a right and
duty to exercise greater and greater power. This view represents “the first principle
of totalitarianism: that the state is competent to do all things and is limited in
8
what it actually does only by the will of those who control the state.” The New
Deal made people think that government was the source of our happiness. The
federal government is supposed to be the agent of the states, but today it is the
other way around. The federal government has gone from being a servant with few
powers to a master with virtually unlimited power. The Constitution is ignored,
the principle of limited government is forgotten, and great power has been trans-
ferred to fewer people. “Like so many other nations before us, we may succumb
9
through internal weakness rather than fall before a foreign foe.”
The bureaucracy and executive branch have become much more powerful,
while the legislature has conceded many of its powers, such as the power of the
purse and declaration of war. Constitutional government has been replaced by bu-
reaucratic decrees. There is a growing conflict between the people and the experts
who make policy. These experts rarely reflect the real values and concerns of the
American people. Yankelovich calls this “creeping expertism” and says “it under-
mines the country's ability to reach consensus on how to resolve important
10
i s s u e s . ” Think tanks have narrowed the political debate using statistics to
support any position.
Administration has replaced electoral politics, and policy is decided in the
executive bureaucracy. The bureaucracy is used by those who distrust the people as
another layer to separate the ruling elite from the people. Alexis de Tocqueville
called this “administrative despotism.” Bureaucracy is undemocratic, because it
rests on the belief that an expert's opinion has more value than a nonexpert's.
Eugene McCarthy warned: “The only thing that saves us from bureaucracy is
inefficiency. An efficient bureaucracy is the greatest threat to liberty.” Too often
local and state officials are overruled by federal bureaucrats who often think they
are above the law. If constitutional government is restored, there must also be a
serious debate about the role of bureaucracy and administrative law in our
Republic. This is long overdue. Administrative agencies are not even described in
the Constitution.
Rep. J.D. Hayworth has introduced H.R. 2727, requiring that regulatory
rulings would not take effect unless Congress voted for them. For too long
11
legislative power has unconstitutionally shifted to administrative agencies. The
public must become more involved and educated, while the bureaucrats must be
more willing to listen and let people become involved in decisions. The experts
and technocrats have encroached on the people's territory. This problem is one
 State Rights and the Federal Government 71

more reason why fewer people vote. Whoever wins, few promises are kept and
little changes. People increasingly understand that the bureaucrats and ruling elite
make the decisions with little input from the people or regard for what they want.
That people have wanted greater federal involvement in their lives weakened
state rights. Only since the 1994 election has state rights again become a national
priority. There has yet to be much discussion of the fact that the federalization of
so many government functions has also greatly weakened the basic rights of the
individual. People should understand that as they demand more aid from the federal
government, it increasingly comes at a very heavy price—the loss of our
freedoms. As a consequence of so many functions being federalized, we as a people
have become far too dependent on the federal bureaucracy. We are being bribed into
slavery! Fortunately people are awakening to this reality, and bringing federal
12
projects to your district no longer guarantees reelection.
A key part of the problem is that lobbyists represent millions of Americans,
not just a few special interests. The entitlement programs represent about one-
sixth of all personal income. The federal government has gotten too big partly
because most people love entitlement programs. “The ultimate problem with all
process reforms is that lobbies are us, and you cannot isolate a democratic
13
government from its own society.” People must be willing to make fewer
demands on government. That people think federal programs are free is a distorted
view. Money for federal programs ultimately comes from the people, and an in-
crease in federal programs promotes an increase in federal control over our lives.
Reviving state rights is solidly grounded in our constitutional history. Under
the Constitution the federal government doesn't have the authority to set up many
of the programs that it has instituted in this century. It is remarkable that the
federal government owns or controls one-third of all land in America. There are
many federal programs that should be cancelled, consolidated, or transferred to the
states. These programs include welfare, housing, energy, commerce, agriculture,
education, environment, public power, and most forms of crime prevention.
Limiting areas the federal government could regulate worked for 150 years,
partly because the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce was nar-
rowly interpreted. In 1895 the Supreme Court stopped federal regulation of sugar
in U.S. v. E.C. Knight Co. because interstate commerce was narrowly affected. In
1937, under pressure from Roosevelt, the Supreme Court used the commerce and
general welfare clauses in Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution to expand the
power of the federal government into many areas always reserved to the states. The
general welfare clause was meant to limit federal spending; instead, especially
since the New Deal, it has been used in just the opposite manner. It was meant to
benefit the nation and people as a whole, such as in national defense, not to bene-
fit individuals or special interest groups. In 1798 Thomas Jefferson said:
“Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only
14
those specifically enumerated.”
The first Agriculture Adjustment Act passed in 1933 under the general welfare
clause of the Constitution was declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in
U.S. v. Butler (1936). Congress responded by passing similar legislation under the
guise of interstate commerce, and the Supreme Court declared this similar law
constitutional in Wickard v. Filburn (1942). Filburn grew crops only for his
family. The court said if a farmer had not used his own feed, he might have bought
someone else's wheat, which might affect the price of wheat which was transported
72 Treason The New World Order

in interstate commerce. Henceforth the commerce clause was extended to cover

what wasn't interstate or even commerce. Through such machinations our Consti-
tution has been subverted by the courts and politicians. Previously, intrastate
commerce only conducted within a state was left to the states to regulate. The
Supreme Court had said that production is inherently local.
Alexander Hamilton warned in The Federalist Papers, number 17:
“Supervision of agriculture and of other concerns of a similar nature...which are
proper to be provided for by local legislation, can never be desirable cares of a
general jurisdiction. It is therefore improbable that there should exist a disposition
in the Federal councils to usurp the powers with which they are connected; because
the attempt to exercise those powers would be as troublesome as it would be
nugatory.”
In recent years many federal environment, welfare, civil rights, and crime laws
have passed using the commerce and general welfare clauses. In Heart of Atlanta
Motel v. U.S. the 1964 Civil Rights Act was upheld under the interstate
commerce clause. Since 1965 the federal government has been using preemption
statutes transferring entire areas of authority from the states to the federal author-
ities, with national standards being established. While I strongly support the civil
rights revolution, to continuously increase federal authority will ultimately cause
our demise as a free people. As Time magazine noted, despite what the federal
government likes us to believe, areas such as crime prevention and education are
15
reserved to the states under the Constitution.
After the Civil War, Congress gradually expanded federal criminal jurisdiction
regarding federal agencies, such as activities involving interstate commerce. The
Post Office Code of 1872 made it a crime to promote obscenity, fraud, or lotteries.
In 1896 Congress provided funds to build the first federal prison. Only in this
century have we seen a vast increase in federal crimes and the establishment of
federal police such as the FBI. In 1910 it became a federal offense to take a woman
across state lines for immoral purposes, and in 1919 transporting a stolen car
across state lines became a federal crime. The 1994 crime bill placed under federal
jurisdiction numerous acts involving drugs, guns, and juveniles that have tradi-
tionally been controlled by state and local governments. Even car-jacking and child
support are now federal concerns.
Despite Clinton's “Mandate for Change” describing crime as an area in which
“no federal role is justified,” we got the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act
of 1993 and the Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Senator
D'Amato and other Republicans call for more federal involvement in crime
prevention while at the same time proclaiming that they are cutting the federal
government. Senator Biden said on August 22, 1994, that under the Violence
Against Women Act, which is part of the 1994 federal crime law, if officers do not
make arrests in domestic violence cases, police department can lose federal funds;
yet on the same day Senator Biden said Washington wasn't exerting control over
local police. Senator Feingold voted against the 1994 crime bill saying “The
architects of our nation purposely did not establish a national police force and
largely left law enforcement as a state and local responsibility....Some members of
this body are no longer committed to this aspect of federalism and local control.
They apparently would have us federalize almost every crime that has made a
headline anywhere in our nation.”
 State Rights and the Federal Government 73

Wilson Nicholas, a delegate to the Virginia convention that ratified the Con-
stitution, said: “Congress has power to define and punish piracies, counterfeiting,
and felonies committed on the high seas, and offenses against the laws of nations;
but they cannot define or prescribe the punishment of any other crime whatsoever
without violating the Constitution.” In Brown v. Maryland (1827) Chief Justice
Marshall said: “The police power, unquestionably remains, and ought to remain,
with the States.” Until this century federal courts upheld the view that the federal
government could only deal with crimes specifically mentioned in the Constitu-
tion. In 1911 the Supreme Court said: “Among the powers of the State not
surrendered—which powers therefore remain with the State—is the power to so
regulate the relative rights and duties of all within its jurisdiction as to guard the
public morals, the public safety, and the public health, as well as to promote the
public convenience and the common good.” At the founding of this Republic,
there were only four federal crimes: treason, counterfeiting, piracy, and crimes
against the laws of nations. Now there are 3,000 federal crimes, 300,000 federal
administrative regulations, and about 85,000 local governments with 513,200
elected officials, or one in every 500 people. Our Republic is being destroyed by
thousands of laws and enforcers.
While conservatives in Congress attack social-welfare spending programs as
wasteful, no one in Congress proclaims that there is no authority under the
Constitution to spend the people's money on the welfare state. Such spending is
unconstitutional because the Constitution does not grant the federal government
the authority to spend such money. In 1794 James Madison criticized aid to
French refugees: “I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the
Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of
benevolence, the money of their constituents.” In 1854 President Franklin Pierce
vetoed a bill for the mentally ill saying: “I cannot find any authority in the
Constitution for public charity.” To provide such financing would be “subversive
to the whole theory upon which the Union of the States is founded.” In the late
1800s Congress increasingly appropriated money for veterans' pensions and public
charity based on the “general welfare.” President Grover Cleveland rejected hun-
dreds of these bills saying, “I can find no warrant for such an appropriation in the
Constitution.” I happen to support providing some public support for people in
need, but it should only be done by the states. The federal government has no
16
constitutional basis to provide such aid.
Since the New Deal, states have had to rely on the federal government for
money to run many programs. With most tax dollars going to the federal govern-
ment, the states don't have the fiscal independence to serve their constituents and
preserve their sovereignty. The power of taxation has been largely transferred to
the federal government, with the important policies of the day established by
Washington. By the 1960s states and cities generally received 25 percent of their
funding from the federal government, which made it much easier for the federal
government to dictate policy. If federal taxes were lowered, state taxes could be
increased proportionally, per the wishes of the people so that people paid about the
same taxes each year, depending on what programs the states established. The
states would then have the funds to pay for many programs now being run by the
federal government. For instance, if the U.S. Education Department was closed, it
would be possible to calculate what that department was spending each year and
then lower federal taxes based on that rate. Time should be allotted before these
74 Treason The New World Order

federal programs are closed, so people in each state could decide what federal
programs they might want to establish and how much funding would be needed.
Returning government to the states would ease the growing sense of
alienation and loss of control over their lives that millions now feel. Thomas
Hobbes said: “Freedom is government divided into small fragments.” This shift
back to the states would also be an effective means to restore the Constitution and
prevent tyranny yet still assist people as they gradually get over the addiction of
government aid. A weakened federal government would have less power to
blackmail states into accepting more federal control or lose federal money.
States are much better able to handle programs partly because they are closer
to the people and are thus more efficient and responsive. Local authorities get
faster feedback to improve programs. Local problems are better handled by local
governments than by a distant federal bureaucracy, and states cannot create money
so their potential for abusive powers is limited. Already many states have reformed
their welfare rules with many improvements, and people are gradually being
weaned off welfare. With such poor results from the huge sums spent for the war
17
on poverty, it is time for a change.
Returning many federal government activities to the states would weaken the
power of the lobby groups. They would have to divide their resources for 50
states. Various states could test different solutions and programs to see what
worked best, and there would be more competition and variety. If one state be-
comes too rigid, people and businesses can move to other states. New York and
California, with high taxes, have made it difficult for businesses, so many
companies have moved.
Transferring certain federal powers back to the states is not a new idea.
Presidents Eisenhower and Nixon formed commissions to study this. Eisenhower
warned in the 1950s: “Those who would be free must stand eternal watch against
concentration of power in government.” He appointed the Kestenbaum Commis-
sion to study ways federal programs and powers could be transferred to the states,
but nothing was accomplished. When the Advisory Committee on Intergovern-
mental Relations made a few proposals in 1969, again nothing was done.
More recently this same committee suggested a three-part pragmatic test to
determine which government should be involved in various programs. First, the
federal government should not be involved in programs where there is a strong
history of local involvement. Education and police enforcement exemplify this.
Little of value is accomplished by federal intrusion in these areas. Second, what is
the relative amount of federal financing in relation to total government spending?
For instance, highway construction, law enforcement, and education receive far
less money from the federal government than does welfare aid. Third, would ending
federal aid cause destructive competition among the states? Should there be federal
equalization of standards in some areas such as with environment or welfare laws,
so that states with strict standards will not be punished when other states have lax
standards? A fourth criterion is whether a particular program is really of national
concern. Bruce Babbitt, currently Clinton's Secretary of the Interior, said in 1981,
as governor of Arizona, “Congress ought to be worrying about arms control and
18
defense instead of potholes in the street.”
When Senator Kerry ran for president in 1992 he promised to reduce the
number of cabinet posts by half and to reduce nonentitlement domestic spending
by a quarter. Shortly before the 1994 elections, Utah governor Mike Leavitt said
 State Rights and the Federal Government 75

“The common citizen may not use the term 'unfunded mandate,' but they know
intuitively that the federal government is reaching beyond what was intended.” In
1992 the Brookings Institution published a book, Reviving the American Dream,
by Alice M. Rivlin, who became deputy director of the Clinton Administration's
Office of Management and Budget. She said “ T h e federal government has taken on
too much responsibility and should return some of its functions to the states. A
clearer division of responsibilities between the states and the federal government
could make both levels operate more effectively.” The Republicans trounced the
Democrats in the 1994 election partly because of a promise to diminish govern-
ment.
On November 6, 1994 CBS released a poll in which 63 percent of the public
felt the federal government should be doing less for us and 30 percent felt that it
should be doing more. We have to dismantle much of the federal government be-
cause it has gotten too large, out of control, and distant from the people which it
no longer represents. Not only would this be in accord with the Constitution, it
would provide more effective government for individuals and many businesses and
lessen the power of lobbyists. Americans must give up the idea that the federal
government can solve all problems.
When the Wall Street Journal reviewed the book, Lost Rights, the heading
19
was “Fix Washington Before It Enslaves Us All.” Even this bastion of the
establishment is getting the picture. A sad example of how ridiculous things have
become was shown on the evening news in early December, 1994. Federal
legislation will require cities to change most of their street signs so they are more
legible to the Washington bureaucrats. Denver, for example, will have to spend $2
million to satisfy this requirement. Allowing the federal government to interfere
this much in our daily lives was never the intent of the Founders. If they under-
stood that the federal government would one day control the shape of street signs
there would never have been a federal government.
There has been a move to restore more responsible representation by estab-
lishing new local governments. In 1992 Staten Island voted overwhelmingly to
secede from New York City. Nine counties in Kansas and parts of Texas,
Colorado, and Oklahoma are trying to become a new state in Western Kansas.
People in several regions of Washington state are trying to establish new counties,
as that state's Constitution allows, and there is a move to divide California into
20
three states for better representation.
State, local, and federal authorities should privatize and deregulate many
government functions as many other countries have done in recent years. Private
businesses can collect garbage more efficiently than the government, and tens of
billions of dollars could be saved and earned by selling various federal agencies,
21
such as Amtrak and low income housing. Only recently did Congress agree to
sell the helium reserve from the 1920s, although special interests assure us this
reserve remains vital to national security. Deregulation of the trucking industry is
expected to save up to $20 billion a year as the shipping industry is freed from the
22
clutches of the I C C .
There are often problems in distributing federal grant money. When the
Justice Department recently awarded money to local communities to ease crime,
Indianapolis lost to a suburb with a much lower crime rate. Politics, not local
need and efficiency, too often decide federal grant money. This issue would remain
a problem if states took over many federal programs, but state and local grants
76 Treason The New World Order

would receive closer scrutiny, and local officials would have a better understanding
of local problems.
In Demosclerosis, Jonathan Rauch describes how democracy is being weak-
ened by an inability of government to act and make things work. “In principle, the
U.S. government's situation is like the Soviet economy's....In both, the method
of trial and error reached the point of critical failure. In Washington, old programs
and policies cannot be gotten rid of, and yet they continue to suck up money and
energy. As a result, there is less and less money or energy for new programs and
23
policies.”
Every federal program takes on a life of its own, so it will be extremely
difficult to transfer power from the federal government to the states. It is difficult
to change, much less kill or transfer, a federal program once it has been
established, even after it has served its usefulness. We will only reverse the trend
towards greater federal power when we elect people who want to rid themselves of
the power they have been given. The New Deal view of an all-powerful, benef-
icient central government must be replaced with a return to federalism and a
separation of powers.
Gradually states are taking more aggressive action to curtail the federal gov-
ernment. California and 21 other states passed a resolution asserting state
sovereign rights under the Tenth Amendment. The California joint resolution 44
said: “Whereas, the scope of power defined by the 10th Amendment means that the
federal government was created by the States specifically to be an agent of the
States; and Whereas, In the year 1994 the States are demonstrably treated as agents
of the federal government; and...whereas, Many federal mandates are directly in
violation of the 10th Amendment to the Constitution of the U.S.” The resolution
also demanded that the federal government immediately stop mandates that are
beyond the scope of its constitutionally delegated powers. Similar resolutions have
been introduced in most other states.
A more radical solution has been proposed by the Committee of 50 states
which is chaired by former Utah governor J. Bracken Lee. The goal is to get 38
states to pass the Ultimate Resolution so if Congress allows the national debt to
reach six trillion dollars, or if Congress or the president by any means including
by Executive Order (EO) ever attempt to abolish or suspend the Constitution, then
the Union will automatically be dissolved back to 50 sovereign states. By 1996
the national debt had reached over five trillion dollars.
The objective is not to actually dissolve the Union but to establish the legal
principle that this power will automatically exist to be exercised if the federal
government goes too far in removing our rights. For instance, if the president
signed an Executive Order declaring martial law and removing all guns from the
people or restricting travel, this resolution would automatically take hold, if
approved and the federal government would be dissolved. In such a situation this
solution would be far more effective and necessary than nullification. By March,
1994 this resolution had been introduced in nine states; it missed passing in the
Arizona House by a 27-26 vote. There have already been two sanctioned instances
of secession—West Virginia was formed out of Virginia, and Vermont from New
24
Hampshire.
The Sovereignty Resolution calls for Congress to use its constitutional
mandate (Article 1, Section 8, Clause 5) to provide interest free loans of up to
$360 billion over four years to local tax-supported bodies to pay current debts and
 State Rights and the Federal Government 77

to finance capital projects. This would create many jobs, help local businesses,
improve the economy, and restore the deteriorating infrastructure. By January 1,
1996 this had been endorsed by 3,295 local governments including the U.S.
Conference of Mayors and the Michigan legislature. As usual the corporate-
controlled press won't discuss this resolution despite its growing popularity.
25
Banks would earn no interest under this plan.
After the large corporations, the greatest factor causing the end of constitu-
tional government in America has been judicial tyranny by federal judges. Thomas
Jefferson said: “It is a very dangerous doctrine to consider the judges as the
ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions. It is one which would place us
under the despotism of an oligarchy.” Federal judges will inevitably increase
federal power. The Supreme Court has gone from being an arbitrator of con-
stitutional questions to protecting the power of the corporations and the federal
government, especially the executive branch. In Dyett v. Turner (1967) the Utah
Supreme Court said: “The U.S. Supreme Court...has departed from the Constitu-
tion as it has been interpreted from its inception and has followed the urgings of
social reformers....It has amended the Constitution in a manner unknown to the
document itself...The federal courts have arrogated unto themselves the powers
and duties which rightfully belong to the state courts.”
Increasingly in the last 100 years, powerful corporate interests have delib-
erately subverted the intent of the Founders by appointing judges who would
enhance corporate and federal power and weaken the constitutional system of
checks and balances. While many today attack the New Deal as representing the
demise of constitutional government in America, this attack really began in the
late 1800s, when the federal courts led by the Supreme Court started destroying
state sovereignty and allowed the federal government to take over numerous duties
and responsibilities that under the Constitution had been left to the people and the
states. States did not turn to the Supreme Court to leave the Union before the
Civil War partly because the Constitution does not grant federal courts the right to
control state sovereignty. The Constitution did not create judicial supremacy, and
there is extensive evidence that the Founders never granted the Supreme Court the
26
power to rule over the president, Congress, or the states.
Congress should reaffirm the Tenth Amendment, and courts should be in-
structed to not preempt state or local authority unless specifically permitted by the
Constitution. Congress, as it did after the Civil War per the Constitution, Article
III, Section 2, should specifically limit the jurisdiction of courts to act in ways
27
that limit state sovereignty. On September 6, 1995 Rep. John Shadegg intro-
duced H.R. 2270, while Senator Spencer Abraham introduced a similar bill in the
Senate, requiring Congress to identify the constitutional authority for all bills.
In U.S. v. Conner the court found invalid the Anti Car Theft Act of 1992
because the Feds had no authority under the interstate commerce clause to extend
its authority here. This decision was reversed by the Sixth Circuit Court of
Appeals. In 1988 Congress passed the Indian Gambling Regulation Act to regulate
gambling on Indian reservations. Three courts found this violated the Tenth
28
Amendment, but they were reversed by the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals.
These appeals judges should be impeached and fired.
Several recent Supreme Court decisions offer some hope, but it is too early to
tell if the court is determined to enforce the Tenth Amendment and support state
sovereignty. The Supreme Court in New York v. U.S. (1992) supported New
78 Treason The New World Order

York, which refused to accept radioactive waste, because New York was a
sovereign state protected under the Tenth Amendment. The court said “Congress
cannot commandeer the legislative or regulatory processes of the states” and the
“Constitution divides authority between federal and state governments for the
protection of individuals.”
In U.S. v. Lopez (1995) the Supreme Court ruled that the federal Gun-Free
School Zones Act was unconstitutional. Congress had no right to decide that it
was illegal for schools to allow guns in or near schools. This was a clear misuse
of the commerce clause and a gross overextension of federal powers. In the
decision Justice Thomas wisely warned: “The substantial effects test suffers from
the further flaw that it appears to grant Congress a police power over the nation.”
The government told the court it could not even list any limits to federal govern-
ment power under the commerce clause. An observer in Forbes magazine warned,
if there are no limits to the power of the federal government then “we have a
29
totalitarian state.” Amazingly, the dissenting justices said the court cannot go
against the main views of public opinion. Apparently they haven't yet seen the
1994 election results. Clinton was horrified at this decision saying: “I am deter-
mined to keep guns out of our schools.” He instructed the attorney general to find
a way around this court ruling, again showing his contempt for the Constitution.
Forty states already have laws preventing guns near schools.
Many want to maintain federal authority. The New York Times said, in
response to this decision, to weaken congressional power would be a return “to the
misguided rulings of earlier times.” One member of Congress said this ruling
could invalidate hundreds of federal laws. That is just the point! The commerce and
general welfare clauses have been misused since 1937 to break with 150 years of
constitutional government. Before 1937 the Tenth Amendment curtailed federal
power. The Supreme Court has played a major role in severely damaging our sys-
tem of constitutional checks and balances. Hopefully, this will now be reversed.
Federal judges in 1994 told Congress it was improper to federalize many crimes.
Instead of the states deciding what powers will be delegated to the Feds, the
federal government and courts have taken many powers from the people and states,
which completely violates the Constitution and the stated wishes of the Founding
Fathers. Yet the Washington politicians wonder why they are held in such
contempt by the people. Tocqueville warned against the habit of centralization and
the survival of a free people. He said: “I am of the opinion that a centralized
administration is fit only to enervate the nations in which it exists, by incessantly
30
diminishing their local spirit.”
None of the original 13 States would have ratified the U.S. Constitution if
the people understood that the federal government would someday have such
tremendous power. We must encourage competition among the sovereign states
and protect the rights of individuals to limit government and prevent tyranny and
31
monopoly power. This will also weaken the influence of interest group politics.
If the federal government cannot be significantly disbanded, we should start over
with 50 sovereign states keeping the Constitution, making some slight adjust-
ments as the people desire and try for a fourth time to establish a federation among
the states—being more careful to control a new federal government and to protect
the rights of the people and the sovereign states.
 79

Chapter VII

Early Signs of Treason

“Who controls the past controls the future: who controls the present controls the
past.”
George Orwell

“The pretense of objectivity conceals the fact that all history, while recalling the
past, serves some present interest.”
Howard Zinn

There are numerous incidents in the 20th century that show how dangerous
the bankers and corporate elite are. Carroll Quigley described how international
financiers worked behind the scenes in many conflicts influencing governments
and making deals. The Laurence Boothe Papers at the Hoover Institution document
how, in return for economic concessions, Wall Street assisted the 1912 rebellion
of Sun Yat-sen in China. The corporate elite have fomented many rebellions and
wars. To the ruling elite war is just another means to increase power and profits.
During and after World War I numerous bankers, corporate leaders, and
government officials provided assistance and millions of dollars to place the
communists, and later Hitler and Mussolini, into power. Some apologists have
claimed that money was only given to the communists to keep Russia in the war
against Germany during the first world war, but the evidence clearly refutes this
view. These financiers also supported the anti-communists, like Admiral Kolchak
in Siberia. It was important to support both sides to insure future profits. Some of
the financiers supporting the communists, like Thomas Lamont head of the
Morgan banking group, also supported the fascists.
While various authorities such as Gary Allen have discussed this interaction,
Antony Sutton from the Hoover Institution at Stanford University has provided
the most irrefutable and detailed evidence of this alliance in several books, espe-
cially in Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler and Wall Street and the Bolshevik
Revolution, using U.S. State Department documents, congressional reports,
released archives such as from the Nuremberg trials, and newspaper reports. Sutton
spoke before the Republican platform committee in 1972, but his news conference
was cancelled, and when he returned to the Hoover Institute he was ordered to not
make any public statements and his contract with the Hoover Institute was not
renewed.
The Rockefeller-controlled Chase Bank (later Chase Manhattan Bank) helped
finance the Bolsheviks as did Lord Milner, head of the London Round Table, a
member of the British cabinet, and director of a London bank. The Washington
Post on February 2, 1918 said William B. Thompson, a director of the Federal
80 Treason The New World Order

Reserve Bank of New York, gave the Bolsheviks one million dollars to spread
their doctrine. On October 17, 1918 William L. Saunders, deputy chairman of the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York, wrote to President Wilson “I am in sympathy
with the Soviet form of government as that best suited for the Russian people....”
John Reed, a communist, worked for the Metropolitan magazine which was con-
trolled by Morgan. Jacob Schiff, head of the New York bank Kuhn, Loeb &
Company, heavily financed President Wilson's 1912 election. On February 3,
1949 the New York Journal-American said: “Today it is estimated, even by Jacob's
grandson, John Schiff, a prominent member of New York society, that the old
man sank about $20 million for the final triumph of Bolshevism in Russia. Other
New York banking firms also contributed.” Jacob Schiff helped found the Council
on Foreign Relations.
Much of this nefarious activity took place from 120 Broadway in New York
City. A few of the parties based at this address included: the New York Federal
Reserve, GE, Guaranty Trust Co., Franklin Roosevelt, and the first Soviet
ambassador to the U.S. The first Soviet bank was controlled by Morgan with its
Guaranty Trust Company the U.S. agent. American International Corporation,
founded in 1915 by Morgan interests and located at 120 Broadway, played a key
role in supporting the Bolshevik revolution, and later some of its directors such as
Arthur Lehman and Pierre Du Pont supported Roosevelt.
On March 24, 1917 the New York Times revealed that Schiff had financed the
distribution of revolutionary literature to 50,000 Russian military prisoners cap-
tured during the Russian-Japanese war. The Times article quoted a later telegram
from Schiff in which he said: Trotsky was “what we had hoped and striven for
these long years.” In January, 1916 Schiff arranged to bring Trotsky to the U.S.
Trotsky entered the U.S. without a passport and was then given a U.S. passport to
1
get back to Russia. There was an international warrant for his arrest, and when he
was detained in Canada, U.S. authorities got him released. In the June, 1919 issue
of MacLean's, J.B.MacLean said Trotsky was released “at the request of the British
Embassy at Washington...and that the Embassy acted on the request of the U.S.
2
State Department, who was acting for someone else.” In The Road to Safety,
Arthur Willert, Washington correspondent for the London Times, said Colonel
House, chief aide to President Wilson, told him President Wilson wanted Trotsky
released. He conveyed this request to the British government. Because Canada and
England wanted to keep Russia in the war, it was not in their interest to allow
Trotsky to get back to Russia to help end the war. When Trotsky returned to
Russia, he learned that Max Warburg, the Hamburg banker, had granted him funds
3
in a Swedish bank. This credit helped finance the Russian revolution. De Witt C.
Poole, the American charge d'affairs in Archangel, Russia, quit because Wilson
continued supporting the Bolsheviks. With American troops in Russia supposedly
to stop communism those who understood what was really happening were quite
angry.
In The Intimate Papers of Colonel House, Charles Seymour said House was
able “to prevent the formulation of a policy, demanded by certain groups among
the French and British, of assisting the anti-Bolshevik factions in Russia.” The
U.S. illegally gave loans to the Soviet Union partly through the Federal Reserve
bank. Individuals like Averell Harriman and companies like Standard Oil of New
Jersey actively negotiated trade arrangements with the communists, while banks
4
like the Chase National gave loans to the Soviet Union. Sutton spent 10 years
 Early Signs of Treason 81

researching Technology and Soviet Economic Development. He also wrote

National Suicide: Military Aid to the Soviet Union and The Best Enemy Money
Can Buy documenting how certain Western corporations and financiers built the
economy of the Soviet empire. In June, 1944 Averell Harriman, then ambassador
to the Soviet Union, in a report to the State Department, quoted Stalin as saying
that about two-thirds of all large enterprises built in the Soviet Union had been
built with U.S. aid. This pattern continues today, as a vast amount of advanced
technology is being quietly transferred to China, partly through Secretary of
5
Defense William Perry's business tics and the U.S. Patent Office.
Early this century the corporate elite infiltrated the right and left in America.
The Guaranty Trust Company helped found the anti-Soviet United Americans. On
March 28, 1920 the New York Times, quoting the United Americans, warned of a
Soviet invasion of America within two years. Before World War I the Morgan
6
bank also infiltrated domestic left-wing political groups. “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
7
financial coterie....” Oswald Spengler said, in Decline of the West: “There is no
proletarian, not even a Communist movement, that has not operated in the
interests of money, in the direction indicated by money, and for the time being
permitted by money....” It was easy to exercise this control because these groups
needed money and wanted to influence the people. The purpose was to keep
informed as to the thinking of radical groups, provide a mouthpiece so they could
blow off steam, and be in a position to veto their actions especially if they became
too radical. Morgan money established The New Republic. Waller Lippmann, an
early recruit of the London Round Table Group, became a widely influential
reporter who was used to direct American public opinion.
Although much of this history has been cleansed, as suggested by the accom-
panying cartoon, early in this century many Americans understood this corporate
communist interaction. This was done, not because of a belief in these ideologies,
but to gain monopolistic control over foreign markets, to create wars for more
profits, and to progress towards a one world government. Sutton said: “Revolution
and international finance are not at all inconsistent if the result of revolution is to
8
establish more centralized authority.” The radical left, especially the communists,
supported greater government control which was in alignment with the corporate
elites move towards a one world government. The view that capitalists and
communists are enemies is a fraud perpetuated to hide the fact that both groups
have long worked together. When Trotsky died, Foreign Affairs said: “He gave us,
in a time when our race is woefully in need of such restoratives, the vision of a
9
man. Of that there is no more doubt than of his great place in history.” In an 11-
page salute, the lords of Wall Street bid farewell to comrade Trotsky. International
communism was created by the bankers to enslave the masses. Few scholars
acknowledge, this partly because universities and think tanks often get money
from the banks and corporations that committed this treason. C.B. Dall in FDR,
My Exploited Father-in-Law is one of the few sources to discuss this interaction.
James and Suzanne Pool, in Who Financed Hitler, describes how wealthy
businessmen from the U.S. and various European countries financed Hitler's rise
to power. Many of the German firms that supported Hitler were linked to U.S. and
other foreign corporations. Most of the directors of U.S. subsidiaries in Germany
strongly supported Hitler. In the 1920s and 1930s, Wall Street and firms like GE
82 Treason The New World Order

Cartoon by Robert Minor in St. Louis Post-Dispatch (1911). Karl Marx

surrounded by an appreciative audience of Wall Street financiers:
John D. Rockefeller, J. P. Morgan, John D. Ryan of National City
Bank, and Morgan partner George W. Perkins. Immediately behind
Karl Marx is Teddy Roosevelt, leader of the Progressive Party.

Cartoon used: by Robert Minor in 1911 for St. Louis Post-Dispatch

 Early Signs of Treason 83

and Ford provided money and technical aid to develop German and Italian industry.
New York bankers like J. P. Morgan and Kuhn, Loeb and Co. helped Mussolini
solidify power. German munitions firms like I.G. Farben could not have developed
their extensive war capacity without this foreign aid. On the board of directors of
I.G. Farben, which produced the gas used in the death camps, were Henry Ford,
Paul Warburg, a New York banker, and Charles E. Mitchell of the Federal Reserve
Bank of New York. William Dodd, U.S. Ambassador to Germany, reported on the
interaction of U.S. industrialists with the Nazis in Ambassador Dodd's Diary,
1933-1938. This aid was planned and deliberate. The scholar Gabriel Kolko said:
“The business press (in the U.S.) was aware from 1935 on, that German prosper-
ity was based on war preparations. More important, it was conscious of the fact
that German industry was under the control of the Nazis and was being directed to
10
serve Germany's rearmament....” This interaction was part of the deliberate plan
to establish a financial system of world control that Carroll Quigley described in
Tragedy and Hope.
In the 1930s many Wall Street and media interests, such as the Hearst
newspapers, supported fascism. The July, 1934 issue of Fortune was devoted to
glorifying Italian fascism saying: “Fascism is achieving in a few years or decades
such a conquest of the spirit of man as Christianity achieved only in ten cen-
turies....The good journalist must recognize in Fascism certain ancient virtues of
the race....Among these are Discipline, Duty, Courage, Glory, Sacrifice.” Promi-
nent newspapers like the Chicago Tribune, New York Times, and the Wall Street
11
Journal praised Mussolini for bringing stability and prosperity to Italy. In
January, 1933 the New York Times editorialized under the banner “The Tamed
Hitler” that there would soon be a “transformation” in Hitler as he started
“softening down or abandoning...the more violent parts of his alleged program.”
For years numerous scare stories attacked the communist threat, but the press saw
fascism as a stabilizing factor. In 1983 the Boston Globe described how the
12
American press supported Hitler.
The corporate elite saw fascism and the supposed reforms of Hitler and
Mussolini as a way to preserve capitalism and increase their wealth and control
over society. They created the conditions that led to the New Deal to limit
competition and enhance economic and political control. In 1936 in I'm For
Roosevelt Joseph Kennedy said “an organized functioning society requires a
planned economy....Otherwise, there results a haphazard and inefficient method of
social control.” There were many similarities between the New Deal and Hitler's
four year plan, and both were supported by the same industrialists. People like
Putzi served as intermediaries between Wall Street, Washington, and the Nazis to
13
coordinate and promote their common policies.
Sutton studied many sources, including archives from the Roosevelt library,
and has documented in Wall Street and FDR many of Roosevelt's activities. While
history tells use FDR was a man of the people, he was actually a creature of Wall
Street. Since the late 1700s the Roosevelt family has been involved in banking. In
the 1920s FDR held 11 corporate directorships, two law partnerships, and was
president of a major trade association. During this period he often used question-
able politics for economic gain; yet few historians have discussed his extensive
business activities. He worked closely with many unsavory elements on Wall
Street who supported the Nazis and communists, and many of these corporate
interests also helped Roosevelt. This nefarious interaction with the Council on
84 Treason The New World Order

Foreign Relations (CFR) and one-worlders is often discussed by C.B. Dall in

FDR, My Exploited Father-in-Law. Waller Teagle of the Federal Reserve Bank of
New York helped the Nazis and worked in Roosevelt's National Recovery Admin-
istration (NRA). Roosevelt supporters Bernard Baruch and his aide, NRA head
Hugh Johnson, were based at 120 Broadway. GE, a financial backer of the
communists and Nazis, actively promoted the New Deal.
The NRA originated with the Swope Plan which was developed by Gerald
Swope, president of GE. It also had its origins with Bernard Baruch and the 1915
14
U.S. War Industries Board. The NRA established centralized corporate and gov-
ernment control over industry. Henry Harriman, president of the Chamber of
Commerce, called the NRA a “Magna Charta of industry and labor” and said there
must be a “planned national economy.” The large corporations wanted government
intervention to prevent competition. Hoover refused to support the Swope Plan
because of it fascist nature, so Wall Street turned against him. People like Sena-
tors Wagner, Borah, and Gore were not fooled, and they attacked the plan as a scam
15
to give the large corporations control of the nation's wealth. Historians will one
day understand that Hoover was right when he called the New Deal a “fascist
measure.” Fortunately, the NRA was a failure and was found unconstitutional by
the Supreme Court in 1935.
When the NRA floundered, the corporate elite turned to a second plan to
establish a dictatorship. They were aware that Hitler and Mussolini had used
veterans' groups to take power. In the early 1930s General Butler was the most
popular general in the U.S., especially among the veterans, because he was tireless
in his efforts on their behalf. Butler had the gift to speak without notes and keep
an audience spellbound. He had served in the Marine Corps for 33 years, being
posted overseas on 12 expeditions, and had received the Congressional Medal of
Honor twice, one of only four men to be so honored. He retired in 1930 as a major
general in the Marines. In 1933 a Wall Street bond trader, Gerald MacGuire,
approached General Butler gradually revealing plans to make him head of the
American Legion (AL) and create an army of 500,000 veterans to lake control of
the government. Van Zandt head of the Veterans of Foreign Wars said he was also
approached by the plotters. The Du Ponts controlled the Remington Arms Com-
pany which was to supply arms to the veterans' army. Butler was perhaps the one
officer in the U.S. who could have recruited thousands of veterans, which is why
the corporate elite tried to use him. The AL was established in 1919 by rich
officers including Grayson Murphy, the boss of MacGuire. Into the 1930s it was
controlled and used by big business especially to control the unions.
Butler was pressured to lead a new organization which appeared in September,
1934 called the American Liberty League. Officials in the league included John W.
Davis, Democratic presidential candidate in 1924, and Al Smith former, governor
of New York and Democratic presidential candidate in 1928. In the early 1930s,
Davis was chief attorney for the Morgan Bank, while Smith worked for the Du
Pont family. Smith attacked the Roosevelt reforms, even stating in 1936 that the
New Deal was guiding the nation into communism. Other members of the league
included the Mellon group, Rockefeller group, and the Pitcairn family. According
to the Scripps-Howard press and its UPI wire service, one of the few pro-
Roosevelt organs of the national press, leaders of the league were also executives
with U.S. Steel, GM, Standard Oil (now Exxon), Chase National Bank, Goodyear
Tire, and Mutual Life Insurance. Several groups openly associated with the league
 Early Signs of Treason 85

16
were fascist, anti-labor, and anti-Semitic. The Du Ponts financed various Ameri-
can fascist groups such as the American Liberty League, Clark's Crusaders, and the
Black Legion, which was fanatically against blacks and Jews.
Butler remained completely loyal to the Constitution, listening to the trea-
sonous plot to gather evidence and learn who was behind it. After the charges of a
plot were made public, Congress held an investigation, although only three people
testified. Paul French, a reporter for the Philadelphia Record and New York
Evening Post, had gained MacGuire's confidence and he supported Butler's testi-
mony. French even quoted MacGuire as reporting that someone on Wall Street
with $700 million planned to create an army in the Civilian Conservation Corps.
This was a third back-up plan to seize the country. MacGuire also testified but was
caught in numerous lies. Butler implicated people with J.P. Morgan, the Rocke-
fellers, GM, E.F. Hutton, and General MacArthur, who was a son-in-law to a
17
Morgan partner. It is not certain if MacArthur was involved in the plot although
some of his aides like George Van Horn Moseley and Charles Willoughby attacked
18
the Jewish influence and had strong fascist leanings. MacArthur called the plot
“the best laugh story of the year.”
After French published stories about the plot, there was public concern partly
because powerful people named in the plot were not even called before Congress to
testify. When Thomas Lamont of the Morgan Bank returned from Europe he told
reporters “Perfect moonshine! Too utterly ridiculous to comment upon!” This was
the typical way the plotters responded. Remember this point. In the future if
prominent politicians and respected businessman are accused of treason, however
detailed and reliable the charges, it will be denied.
Although Congress did a poor investigation, the investigating committee on
February 15, 1935 said it found evidence “verifying completely the testimony of
General Butler....There is no question that these attempts were discussed, were
planned, and might have been placed in execution when and if the financial backers
19
deemed it expedient.” Unfortunately, Congress took no action against the plot-
ters because it was too late. The large corporations already controlled all the levers
of power. Not only did Congress refuse to get testimony from various corporate
leaders involved in the plot, some of General Butler's and Paul French's testimony,
especially concerning the involvement of corporate leaders, was suppressed in the
released reports. Along with Congress, the White House also suppressed corporate
20
involvement in the plot. Despite the concern of many, the mass media belittled
the plot. “The largely anti-Roosevelt press of the New Deal era scotched the story
as expeditiously as possible by outright suppression, distortion, and attempts to
21
ridicule General Butler's testimony as capricious fantasy.” On Dec 3, 1934 Time
22
magazine in an article entitled “Plot Without Plotters” ridiculed the plot. The
Nation and the New Republic said fascism comes from pseudoradical mass move-
ments so Butler's revelations of a Wall Street plot was not a worry.
Fortunately, Butler's full testimony was published by a reporter, John Spivak,
and by George Seldes when the investigating committee accidently gave Spivak
the complete version. In 1967 Spivak wrote A Man in His Time. He said: “What
was behind the plot was shrouded in a silence which has not been broken to this
day. Even a generation later, those who are still alive and know all the facts have
kept their silence so well that the conspiracy is not even a footnote in American
histories.” He was also concerned that the committee refused to call the wealthy
conspirators before it and was angry that nothing was done after Congress con-
86 Treason The New World Order

firmed this treason. Spivak said the plot failed because “though those involved had
astonishing talents for making breathtaking millions of dollars, they lacked an
23
elementary understanding of people and the moral forces that activated them.”
George Seldes discussed the plot in Facts and Fascism, in his newsletter In
fact, and in One Thousand Americans, he said: “There was one of the most repre-
hensible conspiracies of silence in the long history of American journalism.”
About these events in the 1930s House speaker McCormack said: “The (New
York) Times is the most slanting newspaper in the world....They brainwash the
24
American people.” The national media cannot be trusted to educate and protect the
rights of the people. Jules Archer in The Plot to Seize the White House has
preserved the records of this plot, and many of these events from the 1930s are
also discussed in The Revolt of the Conservatives by George Wolfskill.
General Butler strongly attacked the role of big business in national affairs.
On August 2 1 , 1931 he said: “I spent 33 years...being a high-class muscle man
for big business, for Wall Street and the bankers....I helped make Mexico...safe for
American oil interests in 1916....I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for
the national City (Bank) boys to collect revenue in....I helped in the rape of half a
dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street....Looking back
on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints.” He accused big business of
causing U.S. entry into the first world war and said, on WCAU radio in Phil-
adelphia, that his military expeditions overseas were “the raping of little nations to
collect money for big industries” that had large foreign investments. Butler wrote
War Is A Racket declaring that war “is conducted for the benefit of the very few at
the expense of the masses. Out of war a few people make huge fortunes....Newly
acquired territory promptly is exploited by the...self-same few who wring dollars
out of blood in the war. The general public shoulders the bill.” Butler told Spivak
“War is a racket to protect economic interests, not our country, and our soldiers are
sent to die on foreign soil to protect investments by big business.” If General
Butler were alive today, the recent invasion of Haiti and Mexican loan guarantee
would have shown him that nothing has changed.
Roosevelt did not have the plotters arrested partly because of his intimate ties
with these people. Certain plotters supported Roosevelt and many of them, such
as the Du Ponts and Remington Arms had offices at 120 Broadway, which was
described above. That Davis and Smith, two of the conspirators, had been demo-
cratic presidential candidates in the 1920s also did not encourage Roosevelt to
expose the plot. “There is strong evidence to suggest that the conspirators may
have been too important politically, socially, and economically to be brought to
25
justice after their scheme had been exposed....” While Roosevelt's exact role in
the plot has never been delineated, that he refused to investigate the plot, even after
Congress concluded that it was real, means that he violated his oath of office to
defend the Constitution.
That no action was taken against any of the plotters was an extremely danger-
ous precedent. They should have been arrested and tried for treason and sedition and
received long prison sentences if found guilty. Instead they were allowed to con-
tinue their treasonous acts, which helped cause World War II and the present
dangerous situation that we now have in America. This could have been stopped in
the 1930s. Corporate influence in our society today makes it impossible to find
this plot discussed in any school history books, although in 1977 Hollywood did a
 Early Signs of Treason 87

movie The November Plan on the plot. General Butler is one of the great unsung
heroes of our Republic.
Butler's charges against big business were strengthened when the Nye Com-
mittee investigated the influence of the armament industry and bankers to draw the
U.S. into World War I. Between 1934 and 1936 this committee held numerous
hearing that described the great profits the munitions industries and financiers made
26
from the war. Wall Street helped finance most U.S. trade with the allies from
1915 to 1917. Bankers like J.P. Morgan testified and Senator Nye said: “The
record of facts makes it altogether fair to say that these bankers were in the heart
and center of a system that made our going to war inevitable.” The committee
issued seven reports in 1935 and 1936 declaring that while evidence did “not show
that wars have been started solely because of the activities of munitions makers
and their agents” it was “against the peace of the world for selfishly interested
27
organizations to be left free to goad and frighten nations into military activity.”
Andre Tardieu, Ambassador to the U.S. and later French Prime Minister,
wrote France and America and said American loans to the allies made a U.S.
28
victory essential for America. New York Mayor Fiorello H. La Guardia said:
“Wars are directed by bankers.” Antibusiness sentiment was extremely strong, and
these hearings were hugely popular, making headlines around the world. News
analyst Raymond Swing expressed the view of most Americans when he said “It is
almost a truism that the U.S. went into the World War in part to save from ruin
the bankers who had strained themselves to the utmost to supply Great Britain and
29
France with munitions and credits.” Today these hearings are almost totally for-
gotten because they have been removed from our history.
General Butler was not the only individual who attacked the bankers. After
Governor Huey Long became a senator, he called for a redistribute of wealth in
America. In various congressional speeches Long attacked the power of Morgan
30
and Rockefeller and this secret ruling class. In April, 1932 he said the supposed
plan by the government to soak the rich was really “a campaign to save the
rich....Unless we provide for the redistribution of wealth in this country, the
country is doomed; there is going to be no country left here very long.” On May
26, 1933 Long called for an investigation of the influence of the J.P. Morgan
banking empire on the Roosevelt administration. He also said our involvement in
the Spanish-American War and World War I were murderous frauds perpetrated to
support Wall Street, which hated and feared him.
In February, 1934 on national radio Long inaugurated a Share Our Wealth
Society to redistribute wealth in America. In the midst of the depression this
program was hugely popular. By 1935 there were 27,431 Share Our Wealth clubs
existing in every state with at least 4,684,000 members. Long was extremely
popular, with a powerful political base in the South. As many were aware, he had
decided to run for president in 1936, establishing a third party, since he expected
Roosevelt to get the Democratic nomination. He might have won or perhaps have
thrown the election to the Republicans. A secret poll revealed that Long, as a third
party candidate would get three to four million votes and that he would seriously
31
weaken the Democratic party in many states. Long represented a direct political
threat to the corporate elite which had to be dealt with. On August 9, 1935 Long,
in Washington, discussed a plot to kill him. He was shot September 8, 1935 and
died a few days later. There were charges of a conspiracy but solid proof was never
88 Treason The New World Order

32
provided. In 1939 two critics of Long said Washington knew about the assassi-
33
nation in advance.
On November 23, 1937 GM and Du Pont representatives met with Nazi lead-
ers in Boston and signed an agreement aligning GM and Du Pont with Germany.
The goals were to defeat Roosevelt in the next election, remove Jewish influence
in America, and place an American fuhrer in the White House. A secretary at the
meeting sent a copy of the secret agreement to George Seldes, and he published it
in his newsletter In fact. On August 20, 1942 Rep. John M. Coffee read the
agreement into the Congressional Record, demanding that action be taken against
the Du Ponts and officials at GM, but nothing was done. During the 1930s the Du
34
Pont family controlled GM through stock ownership.
Before and during World War II, there was considerable Nazi support in the
U.S., which is rarely discussed today. Groups like the Christian Front and Silver
Shirts had hundreds of thousands of followers including people in the military,
police, and National Guard. They planned to provoke a communist uprising and
use that excuse to establish a fascist state. There was a serious concern about a
coup d'etat; these groups were extremely violent with many blacks and Jews
attacked in various cities. Hundreds disappeared. Leaders like William Bishop were
arrested and brought to trial. While some were convicted, others were freed. The
FBI and certain members of the cabinet actively worked to negate this influence,
but the large corporations and certain members of Congress supported these fac-
tions, so prosecutors like Bill Maloney and O. John Rogge were ultimately fired
or forced to resign from the government. These fascists were protected by powerful
people in the government. By the late 1930s, seven senators and 13 representatives
were using their free mail privileges to distribute Nazi literature. Some of this
activity continued throughout the war.
A good example of the fascist influence during the war was the case of Martin
Monti. While stationed in the U.S. Army in Italy, he stole a plane and flew to
enemy territory. Brought to Berlin he broadcast via radio Nazi propaganda to
American troops. As a reward he was made a lieutenant in the SS. After the war,
for this treason, he was given a 15 year suspended sentence and allowed to reenlist.
Good Nazis were needed to fight communism.
Considering the association of Wall Street and the newer American fascist
groups with the European fascists, there was probably a close alignment with
these two American groups which represented a fourth attempt by the corporate
elite to establish a fascist state in America. However, this has not yet been clari-
fied by historians. One prominent American Nazi, Lawrence Dennis, formerly of
the State Department, worked for E.A. Pierce and Co., a Wall Street firm. Many
of these groups supported retired General Moseley, past aide to General
MacArthur, to be their leader. In a 1939 speech before the New York Board of
Trade, Moseley praised Hitler and Mussolini and attacked the Jews, Roosevelt, and
35
c o m m u n i s m . Arthur L. Derounian, under the pseudonym John Roy Carlson,
spent five years studying American fascists and, in Under Cover, reported that one
leader, Merwin K. Hart, had considerable support from many business leaders in-
cluding Lamont Du Pont and officials at GM, Remington-Rand and Otis Elevator
36
Company.
In 1940 opinion polls showed that over 80 percent of the people did not want
to get into a European war, and the America First Committee (AFC) had 850,000
members and millions of sympathizers. Although it refused to work with Nazi
 Early Signs of Treason 89

organizations and had many Jewish members, it was attacked as being pro-fascist
and anti-Semitic in a manner similar to today's attack on the militias. Isolationism
was equated with racism. This was typical government and media propaganda.
Except for infiltration by fascists and anti-Semites in a few places, this populist
movement simply believed in peace. It supported the Bill of Rights and attacked
excessive federal government power and secrecy. Members included future presi-
dents John F. Kennedy and Gerald Ford. John Flynn, a leader of the AFC, became
a strict constitutionalist when he realized that Roosevelt, with the New Deal, was
paving the way for a future dictator. Flynn became a major critic of the New Deal
37
partly because Roosevelt brought so many Wall Streeters into the government.
He investigated how Roosevelt, Wall Street, and the British conspired to use film,
radio, and the press to promote war and to slander groups like the AFC for want-
ing peace. Flynn discovered that Carlson, who wrote Under Cover, also wrote for
the communists and his attack on the AFC was partly Wall Street propaganda to
38
weaken legitimate American patriotism.
Trading With the Enemy, by Charles Higham, is a remarkable book that
presents in great detail the financial transactions of American corporations with the
Nazis before and during World War II. Much of this information was obtained
through the Freedom of Information Act in the late 1970s, before that act was
weakened. Industrialists especially from American, England, and German met in
1920s and 1930s to divide up the world through secret agreements. Published in
1983, Barnes & Noble reprinted it in 1995.
Planning another war, various bankers established the Bank for International
Settlements (BIS) in 1930 in Switzerland, so bills between countries could be
more easily paid during a war. Owned by the world's central banks and Morgan
Bank, it was also used to send millions of dollars to Germany to build its war
machine. Throughout World War II, BIS was used to pay bills between the U.S.
and Germany, and BIS remained a correspondent bank for the Federal Reserve Bank
in Washington. World War II was planned in the board rooms of Berlin, New
York, and London. Various corporate/banker groups like the CFR blocked the
U.S. and England from interfering with Hitler's aggressive moves before the war.
A world war meant great profits and offered another chance to establish a second
League of Nations and world government.
The Chase Bank, Standard Oil of N.J., Morgan Bank group, ITT, RCA, Ford,
GM, and many other American companies provided the Nazis with crucial war
supplies during World War II, while thousands of Americans died fighting the
Axis powers. These companies and people were called the Fraternity. Nazi cor-
porate assets in the U.S. were also protected during the war. The U.S. war effort
never benefited from this trade, and it was sometimes hindered because certain
supplies America needed were instead diverted to the Nazis. Some U.S. corpora-
tions distributed pro-Nazi literature in the U.S. before and during World War II
because they wanted the Nazis to win the war. Then it would have been easier to
establish a similar fascist state in the U.S. President Roosevelt supported this
trade by signing E.O. 8389 on December 13, 1941 which legalized trading with
the enemy. Just as with the collapse of the Soviet empire, when the power of the
secret government is broken, many of our heroes will be exposed and forgotten.
“The auto industry, the oil industry, the aluminum industry, the steel industry and
many great corporations sabotaged America before and after Pearl harbor....”
90 Treason The New World Order

CHAPTER X—GENERAL LICENSES

GENERAL LICENSE UNDER SECTION ever, that such transaction or act is au-
3 (a) OF THE TRADING WITH THE thorized by the Secretary of the Treasury
ENEMY ACT by means of regulations, rulings, instruc-
By virtue of and pursuant to the au- tions, licenses or otherwise, pursuant to
thority vested in me by sections 3 and 5 Executive Order No. 8389, as amended.
of the Trading with the enemy Act, as FRANKLIN D ROOSEVELT
amended, and by virtue of all other au-
thority vested in me, I, FRANKLIN D. T H E W H I T E HOUSE
ROOSEVELT, PRESIDENT of the December 13, 1941.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, do pre-
scribe the following: H. MORGENTHAU, Jr.
Secretary of the Treasury
A general license is hereby granted li-
censing any transaction or act prohibited FRANCIS BIDDLE
by section 3 (a) of the Trading with the Attorney General of the
enemy Act, as amended, provided, how- United States

Various congressional investigations and the Assistant Attorney General of

the U.S., Thurman Arnold, “have produced incontrovertible evidence that some of
our biggest monopolies entered into secret agreements with the Nazi cartels and
39
divided the world among them.” The U.S. auto and aviation industries constantly
delayed converting to tank, plane, and military vehicle production, so there was
40
talk of their production facilities being taken over by the government. I.F. Stone
discussed this treason in Business As Usual. Arnold warned that war production
was being crippled by the machinations of certain large corporations. He
complained about their international agreements. On June 26, 1941 Secretary of
Interior Ickes said “If America loses the war it can thank the Aluminum
Corporation of America.” Alcoa had a cartel agreement with I.G. Farben, so
Germany had sufficient aluminum for war production while the U.S. lacked
41
enough aluminum before and during the war. The Milwaukee Journal suggested
the death penalty for corporate leaders who sabotaged the war effort. However,
most large newspapers took ads from these corporations and defended their actions.
In 1939 with the U.S. very short of rubber, Standard Oil of N.J., the largest
oil company in the world, in the Jasco accord agreed that I.G. Farben would
control the production of synthetic oil, with Standard Oil producing it in the U.S.
only if and when I.G. Farben allowed this. This deal blocked American develop-
ment of synthetic rubber. Senator Truman on March 26, 1942 called this treason.
 Early Signs of Treason 91

Even with a war, this serious charge by a prominent senator was largely ignored
by the press and only two important newspapers reported this charge. The Truman,
Bone, and Kilgore Committees said Standard Oil had “seriously imperiled the war
preparations of the U.S.”
Standard Oil of N.J. sent oil and oil parts to Germany through South
America, Spain, and Switzerland throughout the war and at lower prices than the
U.S. paid. It even refueled German U boats on the open seas. The Germans were
constantly short of oil, so this aid probably prolonged the war by many months.
Only Standard Oil, Du Pont, and GM had the rights to tetraethyl lead, a key
42
additive used in gasoline. In 1992 the Village Voice reported that the Wall Street
investment firm Brown Brothers Harriman arranged for the Nazis to get and be
trained in using tetraethyl lead in 1938. A senior partner of this firm was Prescott
Bush, father of George Bush. This supply was critical to conduct modern warfare.
In 1939 the Germans were short of this fuel, so they purchased S20 million of it
from Standard Oil to invade Poland.
On March 26, 1942 Rep. Jerry Voohis entered a resolution in the House to
investigate the BIS to learn why an American remained president of a bank which
was aiding the Axis powers. During World War II, R. Buckminster Fuller served
as head mechanical engineer of the U.S.A. Board of Economic Warfare. In this
position he saw government transcripts of intercepted phone conversations, letters,
and cables. “As a student of patents I asked for and received all the intercept
information relating to strategic patents held by both our enemies and our own big
corporations, and I found the same money was often operative on both sides in
43
World War II.”
ITT provided telephones, air raid warning devices, radar equipment, and 30,000
fuses per month for artillery shells to better kill allied troops. This rose to 50,000
fuses a month by 1944. ITT also supplied ingredients for the rocket bombs that
hit England. During the war two of the largest tank producers in Germany were
Adam-Opel and Ford of Cologne. Both were wholly owned subsidiaries of GM and
44
Ford. Ford trucks were built for the German army while the Chase Bank kept its
branch open in Paris throughout the war, with the agreement of the New York
office, to provide financial services to the Nazis. “On January 6, 1944, the U.S.
Government had indicted the Du Ponts and Imperial Chemicals Industries of
Britain for forming a cartel with I.G. Farben of Germany and Mitsui of
Japan....The Du Ponts secretly helped in the armament of Germany, and especially
45
aided Hitler,” even betraying military secrets to Germany. During the war U.S.
owned factories in Germany were often deliberately not bombed by the allies.
Several sources claim that after the war the U.S. government paid firms like GM
millions of dollars because some of their factories did sustain damage from allied
bombings.
Throughout the war, a Philadelphia company controlled by the Sweden-SKF
company supplied the Nazis with large quantities of ball bearings via South
America, although the U.S. was short of these items. Without ball bearings,
planes and trucks could not operate properly. Some of the employees and execu-
tives at the Philadelphia plant protested what was occurring but the Fraternity was
too powerful for the U.S. government to do anything. One partner running this
firm was William Batt of the U.S. War Production Board, while another partner,
Hugo von Rosen, was cousin to Hermann Goring, head of the Nazi air force.
92 Treason The New World Order

During the war many American insurance companies reinsured their business
through Swiss insurance companies which further insured the polices through
German companies. Because of this these foreign insurance companies knew in
advance the sailing date, location, and cargo contents of U.S. ships going to Eu-
rope. This is why so many ships were sunk. Even after the Justice Department
told U.S. insurance companies to stop forwarding such information, the practice
continued for at least one and a half years into the war. The Germans also obtained
the blueprints of many insured U.S. installations, like the White House, which
made it easy to identify and blow up key buildings. In 1945 so much of this in-
formation was found in the files of German intelligence that they had a good
46
understanding of U.S. military production.
While these corporations did this trade for profit, they also believed in
fascism. Like Hitler they considered democracy and communism inherently sub-
versive. Many business leaders were also extremely anti-Semitic. Henry Ford
wrote The International Jew in 1927 and attacked the Jews in various newspapers
such as the New York World. Many in Germany, including Hitler, were very
influenced by this book, and Ford was one of the few people praised in Mein
Kampf. Ford's book also helped make respectable the bizarre ideas of the Nazis.
The New York Times on December 20, 1922 reported that Ford was funding
Hitler, then an obscure fanatic.
Based on government documents and interviews with many retired U.S. and
British intelligence agents and diplomats, the book The Secret War Against the
Jews, described much corporate treason before, during, and after World War II. The
authors confirmed much information provided in Trading With the Enemy while
adding many new insights. Allen Dulles was called one of the worst traitors this
Republic has ever had. The British established a wiretap network in Manhattan to
learn who was aiding the Nazis. Then they brought in a hit squad that secretly
killed American businessmen, bankers, lawyers, and dockworkers involved in this
trade. Reportedly this was done with the agreement of Roosevelt. The British
operation was led by William Stevenson, who later wrote A Man Called Intrepid,
47
in which he described some of these activities. In 1989 the Washington Post
published an article on British operations in America during the war. A reporter
was allowed a brief look at a 423-page document the British wrote in 1945
48
describing these activities.
Throughout World War II American diplomats in Switzerland included promi-
nent Wall Streeters like Allen Dulles. Head of U.S. intelligence in Switzerland
during the war, Dulles for years had worked for German firms and he conducted
49
secret meetings with the Nazis that Roosevelt was not aware of. He wanted an
allied/Nazi alliance against the Soviets, and he reportedly gave the Nazis the allied
war plans for Europe. When Dulles went to Switzerland, a law partner, De Lano
Andrews, replaced him to continue representing various German firms in New
York. Lada Mocarski, director of the New York branch of Schroeder Bank, became
U.S. Vice Counsel in Zurich. Leland Harrison, U.S. minister in Berne, Switzer-
land, helped Standard Oil ship the Nazis oil. These diplomats protected American
business interests in Germany, and if German firms needed supplies like oil or
munitions they provided assistance.
Allen Dulles was legal advisor to the Anglo-German Schroeder Bank. This
was the German bank for I.G. Farben, and Quigley, in Tragedy and Hope, said this
bank helped bring Hitler to power. The Dulles brothers attended the meeting,
 Early Signs of Treason 93

which was sponsored by the Schroeder Bank, of leading industrialists in Berlin on

January 4, 1933, in which the commitment was made to support Hitler. A
Cologne branch of this bank, the Stein Bank, was the main financier to Himmler
and the SS leadership. When Hitler took control in 1933, Kurt von Schroeder
became the German representative to BIS. Schroeder was arrested after the war, but
he was not prosecuted.
John Foster Dulles, later Secretary of State, along with his brother Allen
Dulles, was a partner at Sullivan and Cromwell, the New York law firm that
handled loans to Germany during the 1920s and 1930s, and they handled all I.G.
Farben legal work in the U.S. In 1936 a Schroeder investment group merged with
a Rockefeller group to form the Schroeder Rockefeller Company. The alliances of
50
these corporate elitists would take hundreds of pages to describe.
Only one American went to jail for this treasonous trade with the enemy dur-
ing World War II. Throughout the war, senior government officials like Treasury
Secretary Henry Morgenthau, Jr. tried to stop this treason, while others such as
Dean Acheson, a former Standard Oil lawyer and later Secretary of State, blocked
efforts to stop this trade. Several times there were threats to stop oil supplies to
the allies if pressure against this corporate treason didn't end. For protecting Nazi
industrialists, one British officer was court martialed and jailed for two years,
while several American officials were dismissed. It is understandable why many
now promoting the new world order have such contempt for the American people.
Their treason was promoted and protected by the federal government, and the guilty
were rarely punished. Some senior American officials who tried to stop this
treason were after the war called communists and forced to retire.
During World War II James Martin headed the Economic Warfare Section of
the Justice Department. This group studied German international business agree-
ments. After the war Martin spent several years in Germany leading efforts to end
Nazi influence and break up their cartels. In 1950 he wrote All Honorable Men. In
great detail this book depicts the secret alliances between German, U.S., and
British companies through secret treaties, foreign subsidiaries, patent restrictions,
and interlocking directorates. Directors of Standard Oil, GE, and ITT, through
German subsidiaries and personal contacts, contributed money to Himmler's Circle
51
of Friends until 1944. For these contributions the companies were protected by
the SS, and they got first pick of slave labor for their factories. If there were any
problems, certain U.S. government officials made sure the money flow continued.
After the war U.S. Army Colonel Bogdan tried to hide this money transfer from
investigators.
Martin explained how, after the war, attempts to end Nazi influence, break up
the large German cartels, and seize Nazi assets in various countries were deliber-
ately blocked, supposedly to assist German recovery. He called the group that
successfully went against official U.S. government policy towards Germany the
international brotherhood or the international fraternity. Documents seized after the
war showed how companies like Ford and Chase Bank conducted business as usual
with their European subsidiaries during the war. The U.S. Treasury wanted to
investigate numerous banks including Chase, Morgan, National City, Bankers
Trust, and American Express but this was blocked.
Key American representatives in Germany after the war came from large cor-
porations like Rufus Wysor from Republic Steel Corporation, Frederick Devereux
from AT&T, and Louis Douglas from GM. The First Director of the U.S. Eco-
94 Treason The New World Order

nomics Division in Germany, Colonel Graeme Howard from GM, wrote a book in
1940 America and a New World Order. The next head, General William Craper was
Secretary-Treasurer of Dillion, Read & Co. an investment banking firm that
played a major role in lending money to Germany after World War I. These people
and many aides they brought to Germany deliberately blocked Washington's anti-
Nazi policies after World War II. Martin said: “In the end we were caught between
businessmen representing private interests and others of the same persuasion hold-
ing official positions, where they had power to change the orders under which we
52
operated.” Many of these people, like General Clay, were members of the CFR.
In 1948 after many complaints about U.S. policy not being carried out in
Germany, Congress held an investigation. The Ferguson Committee report was
released April 15, 1949, but the Army still refused to carry out U.S. policies.
Alexander Sacks an American official trying to carry out these policies said: “The
policies of the Roosevelt and Truman Administrations have been flagrantly
disregarded by the very individuals who were charged with the highest responsi-
bility for carrying them out.” For his honesty he was promptly fired, although he
53
was reinstated. U.S. corporations were afraid that if the Nazis were prosecuted,
their own involvement would be revealed.
Martin warned about the dangerous power of the large corporations that gov-
ernments needed to control. He complained that our government had not stood up
to this great economic power partly because of a belief that corporations do not
need to be governed. “We cannot allow the lack of social responsibility character-
istic of the international behavior of private corporations during the last quarter-
century to become a pattern for government.” He understood that economic power
must be brought under some kind of responsible control. “Since power is a public
trust, the first job of a government is to see that power is used in the public
interest and not against it. This is where a government must be different from a
corporation....National governments in all parts of the world have granted power
over segments of their national economics to various corporations....” to “build a
private 'world government.' This new order, stretching far beyond the boundaries
of any one nation, has operated under no law except the private law of the
agreements themselves....It is time to view the results of this abdication by
constitutional governments in favor of private governments.” Martin warned that
just as the large corporations brought Hitler to power, unless something was done
54
to limit corporate power, something similar could happen in the U . S .
Certain influential Nazis realized they would lose the war so they gradually
moved large sums of money, people, and corporate structures overseas, with the
help of people like the Dulles brothers. Called “The Odessa” a 1945 U.S. Treasury
Department report said the Nazis had established at least 750 businesses overseas
capable of bringing in $30 million a year to support Nazi operations. Nazis helped
create South Africa's racist laws and South American death squads, they trained the
Arabs to fight Israel, and the many Nazis allowed into the U.S. subverted our
55
institutions and culture.
U.S. investigators after the war deliberately changed, ignored, or concealed
evidence of war crimes against Nazi scientists and officials. Our laws were violated
56
and many Nazi scientists moved to the U.S. under Project Paperclip. For years
the immigration of Nazi war criminals into the U.S. was kept out of the press, or
there was biased reporting. U.S. intelligence agents changed the records of many
Nazi war criminals, so that by 1955 about 800 Nazi scientists were working in the
 Early Signs of Treason 95

U.S. As described in some National Security Council directives in the late 1940s
and 1950s, this was official U.S. policy. As civilian High Commissioner in
Germany in 1949, John J McCloy, a leader of the CFR, helped direct Project
Paperclip.
For years after the war, a Nazi General Gehlen was the main source for U.S.
intelligence regarding the communist nations. Later it became clear that he delib-
erately provided false information or exaggerated the capabilities of the Soviet
Union and its allies, which caused the West great harm. General Karl Wolff, an SS
officer and aide to General Gehlen, said: “We'll get our Reich back again. The
others will begin to fight among themselves eventually and then we'll be in the
middle and can play one off against the other.” Gehlen deliberately brought his
intelligence organization to the U.S. so he could secretly help the Odessa oper-
57
ations and create East West tensions.
U.S. officials and the corporate controllers loved Gehlen's lies because his
information justified the cold war and the spending of billions of dollars for the
national security state. And certain fascists in the U.S. quietly supported preserv-
ing Nazi influence. These Nazi war criminals were also used by our government to
promote ideals of freedom and democracy in the communist nations. Often Nazi-
like propaganda was filtered into the messages received by the communist
58
nations.
After 1950 the Displaced Persons Commission openly allowed fascists into
the U.S. The CIA-inspired Crusade for Freedom used various fascist groups to
support the cold war in the U.S. These individuals joined right wing groups and an
Eastern European emigre fascist network linked to former Nazi collaborators
entered the Republican party through its ethnic programs such as the Heritage
59
Groups Council. In 1971 the Washington Post did an article on the fascist back-
60
ground of some elements of the Republican party. In September, 1988 the racist
and anti-Semitic leanings of certain Republican ethnic leaders was revealed and
eight officials were forced to resign from the Bush campaign.
Many of the banks and corporations conducting these treasonous activities are
the same groups today plotting to establish a one world government. While there
may today be no individuals in these businesses who committed treason before and
during World War II, few would argue that international corporations today are
much less loyal to America than was true 50 years ago. Millions of jobs have
been lost as corporations shift manufacturing jobs overseas for more profits. The
devastating impact this has on the U.S. is not relevant to these corporations.
While this certainly does not mean every international corporation would commit
treason, it does suggest that the treason conducted in World War II would not be
foreign to many present day conglomerates.
Setting up antagonistic forces to create a war is a normal business practice
that doesn't get discussed in history books. Bankers are almost always the one
group guaranteed to profit from a war, and when they prolong a war, profits are
higher. On December 9, 1950 the Chicago Tribune said: “The members of the
council (CFR)...have used the prestige that their wealth, their social position, and
their education have given them to lead their country toward bankruptcy and mili-
tary debacle. They should look at their hands. There is blood on them—the dried
blood of the last war and the fresh blood of the present one (Korean War).” To this
we can add the Vietnam and Gulf Wars.
96 Treason The New World Order

Frederick C. Howe acknowledged in, Confessions of a Monopolist in 1906,

that a monopoly was essential to acquire great wealth and the best way to establish
this was through politics, making society work for the large corporations under
the guise of public interest. The welfare state, fascism, communism, and social-
ism are really similar means used by the corporate elite to gather wealth and con-
trol the people. Those who reject the view that there is a secret government in
control and that these groups intend to remove the Constitution and establish a
police state should carefully reflect on our history early this century. The corporate
elite attempted to establish a dictatorship then so it should not surprise the objec-
tive observer that these forces are now attempting to do the same thing. As
politicians demonstrate every day, the rule of law has been replaced by the rule of
money in America.
 97

Chapter VIII

Rise of the Corporate State

“The 20th century has been characterized by three developments of great political
importance: the growth of democracy, the growth of corporate power, and the
growth of corporate propaganda as a means of protecting corporate power against
democracy.”
1
Alex Carey

“To erect and concentrate and perpetuate a large moneyed interest...must in the
course of human events produce one or other of two evils, the prostration of
agriculture at the feet of commerce, or a change in the present form of federal
government, fatal to the existence of American liberty.”
Patrick Henry

While it has been suppressed from our history, in Liggett v. Lee (1933)
Supreme Court Justice Brandeis described how, in the early years of our Republic,
states either wouldn't allow or sharply restricted the formation of corporations
because they limited freedom and opportunity for the people. The people kept the
power to charter corporations strictly in the hands of the legislature. Corporations
were chartered to serve the public good, corporate privileges were often conferred
for a fixed terms of years, and strict limits were placed on the allowed indebt-
edness. Previously corporations could only be established for specific activities;
permission to incorporate for any lawful purpose was not common until 1875. At
times the corporate privilege was revoked, when the state felt this was best for the
community. For years there were strict limits on the amount of authorized capital
that could be used when a business incorporated. Until 1918 mining companies
could incorporate in Maryland with only up to S3 million.
Many forget that corporations have no inherent right to exist. This is a power
granted by the state. Gradually limits on corporate charters were removed through
corporate influence, money, and lawyers, as judges issued rulings to support
corporations. States competed with each other to raise money by chartering corpo-
rations with few requirements. That many corporations today are registered in
Delaware is a vestige of that competition. The movement of large corporations
into thousands of small towns gradually shifted economic and political power from
Main Street to Wall Street, which created a disparity of income and concentrated
wealth. Brandeis said big business limited self-government by eroding the civic
2
and moral capacities of the people and by controlling democratic institutions.
Until the late 19th century the law primarily focused on the rights of
individuals. After the Civil War the role and rights of corporations were gradually
established. The Supreme Court, in Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific
Railroad (1886), said corporations would now be considered “persons” for purposes
98 Treason The New World Order

of the Fourteenth Amendment. A corporation became a legal fiction granted legit-

imacy by judicial and legislative degree. The revolutionary trends of the 18th
century that began in America and France and promoted individual liberty were
weakened with the introduction of corporate rights.
Increased concentration of wealth and power in the hands of fewer people
developed after the Civil War. Before the 1880s society was mostly agrarian and
most businesses were directly managed by the owners. Most people were self-
employed; they owned their own land, produced their own food, and there was little
manufacturing. Gradually people had to work for others to earn money. There
developed an economically powerful elite, and most people worked for others as
laborers. Around the turn of the century, 90 percent of the population was still
self-employed. By 1992 only four percent of the people were self-employed. We
are no longer a nation of shopkeepers, farmers, and independent craftsman. This
change helped make money foremost in people's lives. The new corporate order
meant less democracy and increased concentration of economic power, with busi-
ness controlling all means of production. The old mercantile aristocracy became
the new corporate elite. With mechanization fewer workers were needed on farms,
so people moved to the cities. The loss of small farmers to the cities meant the
loss of many independent thinkers, which weakened the democratic fabric of our
Republic. Large businesses now dominate agriculture. Aided by the railroad the
frontier disappeared and a truly national economy developed.
The rise of and preoccupation with mass-market consumerism and indulgence
gradually developed after the Civil War, especially in the 1890s. “In the decades
following the Civil War, American capitalism began to produce a distinct culture,
unconnected to traditional family or community values, to religion in any
conventional sense, or to political democracy. It was a secular business and market
-oriented culture, with the exchange and circulation of money and goods at the
foundation of its aesthetic life...The cardinal features of this culture were acquis-
ition and consumption as the means of achieving happiness; the cult of the new;
the democratization of desire; and money value as the predominant measure of all
3
value in society.” The psychoanalyst Erich Fromm said: “In contrast to the
nineteenth century, in which saving was a virtue, the twentieth century has made
consumption into the main virtue.” The age of mass consumption also brought
with it the dawn of the advertising industry, and people's habits were changed to
consume more. And people were socialized to accept the harsh conditions of mass
4
production in factories which many workers rebelled against.
God was replaced by gain. Caring relationships were too often replaced with a
desire to succeed in business. Instead of having a close relationship with one's
family, a career became more important. Corporate values replaced family values.
One result, of course, is the much higher divorce rate today. One's standard of liv-
ing became the primary focus and objective in life. Our ideal of freedom became
the ability to purchase and consume. We were no longer proud citizens of a
Republic; we became consumers in a market economy. World War I “had not been
fought for democracy or for nationalism but for industrialism” to ensure that “the
5
power of production would never again be endangered....”
“From the 1890s on, American corporate business, in league with key instit-
utions, began the transformation of American society into a society preoccupied
with consumption, with comfort and bodily well-being, with luxury, spending,
and acquisition....American consumer capitalism produced a culture almost vio-
 Rise of the Corporate State 99

lently hostile to the past and to tradition, a future-oriented culture of desire that
confused the good life with goods. It was a culture that first appeared as an
6
alternative culture...and then unfolded to become the reigning culture of the U.S.”
Aided by the industrial mobilization of World War I, corporations attained an
increasingly dominant role in America.
This new culture was promoted by commercial groups allied with other elites
attempting to accumulate ever greater amounts of capital. Other conceptions of the
good life were pushed aside. Business leaders cooperated with educators, politi-
cians, social-reformers, entertainers, artists, and religious leaders to create a new
economy and culture. American public life was diminished as democratic traditions
and institutions were pushed aside to make way for the new culture. New institu-
tions like the Harvard Business School and the Metropolitan Museum of Art were
recruited to shape the new America. At the turn of the century during the age of
the muckrakers, magazines attacked monopolies and private economic power. By
the 1920s magazines had gone from exposing corporate corruption to praising
business success and the consumer society. The corporate way become the Ameri-
can way partly because big business gained control of the media. Socialism never
succeeded in America because the goals of socialism such as a classless society and
liberty for all already occurred in America, or at least this is what the media told
us.
Inspired by growing incomes and a rising standard of living, many capitalists
and progressive reformers promoted a new form of democracy at once more in-
clusive and more confining than before. Self-pleasure and self-fulfillment over
community or civic well-being became the norm. Comfort and prosperity became
the cornerstone of life in America. The influential economist, John Bates Clark,
said that despite the growing inequality of life in America, democracy could be
ensured through the free market and the ever growing supply of goods and services.
This new thinking was discussed in The New Democracy by Walter Weyl in
1912. Weyl said: “Democracy means material goods and the moral goods based
thereon....To socialize our consumption we must therefore depend upon the direct
7
or indirect action of the state....” A new and improved morality, a new ethics of
pleasure would be derived from a new economic order in conjunction with political
democracy. Weyl and other prominent thinkers like Simon Patton, an economist
and professor at the Wharton School of Economics, felt that modern corporations
were moral institutions, and there was nothing wrong with the new emphasis on
money and consumption.
A powerful populist movement arose with many farmers, independent mer-
chants, religious leaders, social-reformers, socialists, intellectuals, economists, and
unionists attacking this new way of life. Previously, democracy was thought to be
partly based on ownership of property and control of one's production. In 1879 the
economist Henry Carter Adams warned: “Either you must establish a more eq-
uitable division of properly and produce or the fatal end of democracy will be
despotism and decadence.” Part of the broad appeal of the prairie populist, Rep.
William Jennings Bryan of Nebraska in the 1890s, was a rejection of the new
value system offered by the corporate culture and a call to restore Jeffersonian
grass-roots democracy. Large corporations were often hated and considered undem-
ocratic. The “patriotic role” that corporations supposedly played during World War
I changed this attitude. According to the press, the corporations helped preserve
100 Treason The New World Order

democracy. Intense antibusiness sentiment eased during the war because business
produced the goods needed to win the war.
Many religious people at the turn of the century criticized the new values of
the corporate culture. Today many religious groups have closely aligned them-
selves with the corporate culture. Most people don't realize that millions of
Americans have been captivated and transformed by a corporate culture that was
once considered quite foreign and alien to traditional American political, economic,
and spiritual values.
Citizen involvement that had spawned the progressive movement changed to
citizen apathy. One commentator in the 1920s said “The private life became the all
in all.” The disgust that many now feel towards public office and politicians was
8
quite common in the 1920s. Apathy and cynicism ruled the day. The public was
too busy trying to get rich to notice or care what the politicians were doing.
In 1924 Samuel Strauss, a political scientist and journalist, wrote an article
about the changes in America that is even more relevant today. “Something new
has come to confront American democracy. The fathers of the Nation did not fore-
see it....That which has stolen across the path of American democracy and is
already altering Americanism was not in their calculations” and would have been
9
considered abnormal to them. The Founders could not have foreseen, nor would
they have necessarily agreed with the importance of manufacturing and money in
America.
Consumptionism produced remarkable changes in America. People stopped
attacking the very wealthy as luxury, comfort, and security became the essential
elements of the good life. Strauss said “The new kind of man sees, not human
beings, but things at the centre of life.” The new man “had no interest in keeping
10
us free..except as we must be free to consume goods.” Television insures that
we continue to equate consumerism with democracy. President Woodrow Wilson
said: “The truth is we are all caught in a great economic system, which is heart-
less.”
It was felt all people had an equal right to consumer goods. The revolution in
mass production and growth of consumer capitalism filled stores with goods to
satisfy needs not yet understood to even exist. The present focus in society is how
to develop enough interest in goods that are produced, i.e., how to produce con-
sumers. Good government has come to mean that the government provides the
people with the means to buy more goods. The progressive Senator Robert
LaFollette, Sr. said: “The welfare of all the people as consumers should be the
supreme consideration of government.”
We have gone from being a nation of citizens, with rights and responsibili-
ties, to being consumers addicted to more and more goods that the corporations
produce for us to buy even when there is no need. Consumerism had replaced
citizenship. G.K. Chesterton, an English author, made many trips to the U.S. in
the 1920s and 30s. He said: “Americans are good neighbors rather than good
citizens. That pure and positive public spirit has faded from their life more than
from that of any people in the world. What is the matter with America is that
every American has been tacitly or loudly taught that his job is not only more
vital than his vote, but more vital than that virtue of public spirit which the vote
11
represents.”
Critical of anti-democratic business corporations, Chesterton said: “Industrial
capitalism and ideal democracy are everywhere in controversy; but perhaps only (in
 Rise of the Corporate State 101

America) are they in conflict.” Only in America was “industrial progress...the

most undemocratic...The reality of modern capitalism is menacing the
(democratic) ideal with terrors and even splendors that might well stagger the
wavering and impressionable modern spirit. Upon the issue of that struggle
depends the question of whether this great civilization continues to exist....” When
defining our Republic, Chesterton compared the collapse into capitalism to the
collapse into barbarism and the fall of the Republic. He said capitalism is like
feudalism, with people employed and guarded by large corporations much like the
12
feudal lords cared for and controlled the serfs.
The power of the federal government expanded enormously during and after the
Civil War, as a vast bureaucracy developed and the government intervened more in
political, social, and economic matters. The traditional government role of regu-
lating business gradually included serving business. In the 1890s government
intervened to absorb commercial banks' losses, and after 1910 the U.S. Commerce
Department expanded its activities. Business gradually depended on government
guarantees of bank deposits and farm loans. These trends prepared the way for the
New Deal. Led by the press and Washington, people allowed the federal govern-
ment in league with business to play a more prominent role in their lives. The
New Deal economic reforms represented the political application of economic and
social trends that had been taking place for some years.
There was a nationalization of the political system during the New Deal as
political power shifted from local and state government to the federal government.
In the federal government the executive branch and bureaucracy were strengthened
and freed of party control, while the legislature was weakened as was the people's
sense that they were actually represented by government. Corporations and the two
political parties developed together, each promoting the other, with individual
citizens increasingly removed from the political process.
There was also a shift in constitutional law along with a change in how we
perceived the role of government. Instead of having a government of limited
powers, with a federal government that could only act in certain areas per the
Constitution, a new federal government was born with unlimited powers to tax
and rule in whatever fashion it deemed appropriate. Experts henceforth decided how
we were ruled, as the people learned to follow orders. Supposedly experts who
were above partisan politics would make technical decisions. The controlled media
made sure the people didn't understand what had happened. The corporate culture
became so strong that in 1939 the House Un-American Activities Committee
called Consumers Union, which produces Consumer Reports, un-American.
President Roosevelt said the task of modern government was “to assist the
development of an economic declaration of rights, an economic constitutional
order.” The traditional reliance on individual self-reliance was replaced by a new
understanding of individualism, with government regulating the economy and
guaranteeing people protection fr