It often strikes a man to inquire what is the chief good in life; to one the thought comes that it is a happy marriage, to another great wealth, and as each seizes on the idea, for that he more or less works for the rest of his existence. To myself, thinking over the same question, the wish came to me to render myself useful to my country. I then asked the question. How could I?” The Last Will and Testament Of Cecil Rhodes. Edited by William T. Stead. (1)
Front row, left to right: Andrew Carnegie, J.P. Morgan, Alfred Beit, Lord Alfred Milner. Middle row (left to right): Henry Ford, Cecil Rhodes, Lionel Curtis. Back Row: Colonel Edward House, John D. Rockefeller, Sir Abe Bailey, and Nathan Rothschild.
In the year 1871, fueled by the poetic words of famous British poet John Ruskin, and backed by the bottomless fortune of the Rothschild family, British Imperialist Cecil John Rhodes – at the age of eighteen – entered the burgeoning South African diamond fields. By 1888, Rhodes had nearly monopolized the entire market and together with business partner and wealthy Jewish emigre, Alfred Beit, would build DeBeers Consolidated Mines Ltd into the most well known diamond company in the world. Rhodes would then spend the remainder of his life ‘rendering himself useful to his country’ by parlaying his immense wealth and influence into becoming Britain’s preeminent figure in the ‘Scramble for Africa’. He would be the main instigator of the second Anglo-Boar War – a brutal battle in which the British would put many of their Dutch enemies into concentration camps similar to what we would see some three decades later in eastern Europe. The imperialist Rhodes even served as Prime Minister of the Cape Colony and through a series of legislation inspired by his belief that the native Africans were a backwards race subjugated hundreds of thousands of men, woman and children into an everlasting life of poverty and slavery.
Throughout his entire life, Rhodes had kept a hand written copy of John Ruskin’s Oxford inaugural lecture – one in which Ruskin spoke poetically to the moral responsibility every Englishman had in spreading the civilized ideals of British culture throughout the world – for the betterment of all humankind. It was during these early formative years that Rhodes stated to a friend, “have you ever thought how it is that Oxford men figure so largely in most departments of public life? Where ever you turn your eye…an Oxford man is at the top of the tree.”(2) It was also during these early years that Rhodes was quietly developing the idea of a secret society in which he could enact these British imperialist principles through a discrete alignment with America – as evidenced by his personal letters to well known journalist and personal confidante, William T. Stead in 1877:
Cecil John Rhodes, DeBeers Diamonds
“I contend that we are the first race in the world, and that the more of the world we inhabit the better it is for the human race. I contend that every acre added to our territory means the birth of more of the English race who otherwise would not be brought into existence. Added to this, the absorption of the greater portion of the world under our rule simply means the end of all wars…What an awful thought it is that if we had not lost America, or if even now we could arrange with the present members of the United States Assembly and our House of Commons, the peace of the world is secured for all eternity! We could hold your federal parliament five years at Washington and five at London. The only thing feasible to carry this idea out is a secret one (society) …copied from the Jesuits as to organization…gradually absorbing the wealth of the world to be devoted to such an object…to crush all disloyalty and every movement for the severance of our Empire.”(3)
Only a few short years later, in the winter of 1891, along with William T. Stead and Lord Esher, Rhodes (already a Freemason) forms the secretive Rhodes Round Table Group fashioned after the internal workings of the Jesuits. He envisioned a system of concentric rings within rings where only those at the core would know the society’s true objectives, and all those in the outer rings would form an ‘Association of Helpers’. Rhodes would elect Stead, Esher and influential British statesman Lord Alfred Milner into his inner circle which Rhodes called ‘The Society of the Elect’. This association of helpers would include names from the highest levels of British aristocracy and cover all aspects of social, political, economic, military, and intellectual life. (4) Together, this small but powerful group of men of wealth and influence would go on to shape the world in their image with the explicit intent of combining American and British interests with the object of, “bringing the whole uncivilized world under British rule, for the recovery of the United States for the making the Anglo-Saxon race but one empire. What a dream!”(5). And if all of Rhodes’ hundred year old anglophile rhetoric somehow echoes familiar, you are paying attention dear reader – this same imperial exceptionalist banter has been the driving force behind every war in contemporary Western history including the most recent Iraq War at the beginning of this century. But more on that in a moment, allow me to continue connecting the dots.
Following Rhodes’ death in 1902, Lord Alfred Milner – a man who despised the party system – set the itinerary and directives for the Round Table Group. Milner served as the perfect successor as he was the one man with whom Rhodes trusted with the responsibility of continuing the secret goals set out in his Last Will and Testament, stating, “I support Milner absolutely without reserve. If he says peace, I say peace; if he says war, I say war. Whatever happens, I say ditto to Milner.”(7) In fact, so influential after Rhodes’ death was Milner that this secret society became known as The Milner Round Table Group, and it is important to note that, despite losing it’s founder in Rhodes, the pursuit of their goals and the spirit with which they chased them remained the same. Largely unknown to the general public, this group was highly influential. Key members of The Milner Group were the primary instigators in changing the name of the British Empire to the British Commonwealth of Nations, they were even the chief influence in British Prime Minister Lloyd George’s War Administration of 1917. Members of The Milner Group even dominated the British delegation at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference and were key participants in the formation of the League of Nations.
Rhodes and Milner both number themselves of that great unformed party which is neither the ins nor the outs, which touches here the foreign politics of the one, here the home politics of the other…a party which seems to have no name, no official leader, no paper even, but which I believe, when it comes by a soul and a voice, will prove to include a majority of the British in Britain and a still greater majority of the British overseas. (6)
And it is the less publicized events of the 1919 Paris Peace Conference that are of the utmost importance for this article as it was during this conference that Lionel Curtis, an inductee into The Milner Group’s inner society of the elect, and Colonel Edward M. House, chief adviser to Woodrow Wilson, who would quietly bring together British and American delegates to form the Royal Institute of International Affairs (Chatham House) and eventually it’s American counterpart, the Council on Foreign Relations in 1921.(8)(9) These organizations remain today as two of the most influential think tanks in the world and their creation was seen by those gathered in Paris as an integral convergence of Western ideals and a huge step towards accomplishing Rhodes’ Anglo-American ‘dream’.(10) This point further underlined in the following quote from Carroll Quigley below. It is also worthy of note that Colonel Edward House did much of the preliminary work, along with British Foreign Secretary Edward Grey(also a Milner Group associate) in formulating the main components of the peace treaty of 1919 and would be hugely influential in assisting Wilson in writing his famous Fourteen Points Speech. House was in fact such an influence on Wilson both personally and professionally that further discussion on this man is needed; however, for purposes of time and space, and for fear of digression, the subject will be left for my follow up article entitled, From Hidden Hand to Iron Fist.
The Royal Institute of International Affairs is nothing but the Milner Group ‘writ large.’ It was founded by the Group, has been consistently controlled by the Group, and to this day is the Milner Group in its widest aspect. It is the legitimate child of the Round Table organization, just as the latter was the legitimate child of the ‘Closer Union’ movement organized in South Africa in 1907. All three of these three received their initial financial backing from Sir Abe Bailey, and all three used the same methods of working out and propagating their ideas (the so-called Round Table method of discussion groups plus a journal). This similarity is not an accident. The new organization was intended to be a wider aspect of the Milner Group, the plan being to influence the leaders of thought through The Round Table [journal] and to influence a wider group through the RIIF. – Anglo American Establishment, Carroll Quigley, page 182.
Colonel Edward House is seated three seats to Woodrow Wilson’s right while Lord Alfred Milner sits five places to the presidents left.
On May 30, 1919, a little group of diplomats and scholars from Britain and the United States convened at the Hotel Majestic, billet of the British delegation, to discuss how their fellowship could be sustained after the peace. They proposed a permanent Anglo-American Institute of International Affairs, with one branch in London, the other in New York. (11)
Over one hundred years later, Rhodes’ colossal influence can still be felt as you walk the grounds of prestigious All Souls College and Balliol College, or as you walk through The Great Milner Hall inside Rhodes House at Oxford University. The original Rhodes vision, laid out in his sixth and final Last Will and Testament, lives on today through the Rhodes Trust and the Rhodes Scholarship program and it is Rhodes’ original idea of an Anglo-American union that wealthy American industrialists like J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller, Andrew Carnegie and Henry Ford would directly align themselves with by funding many projects undertaken by the Council on Foreign Relations. And this same undercurrent of British/American exceptionalism continues to be the primary object of the Council as evidenced by the comments of it’s President Emeritas, Leslie H. Gelb when he stated, “If the Council as a body has stood for anything these 75 years, it has been for American Internationalism based on American interests.”(12)
“Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – One World, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.” David Rockefeller, Memoirs, pg 404,405
And, when Gelb’s comment is put together with the preceding comments made by the Council’s Honorary Chairman David Rockefeller we see an admitted, unquenchable thirst for global domination. And, in turn, when these comments are understood within their full historical context, using the true origins of the Royal Institute of International Affairs and the Council on Foreign Relations as a backdrop, we see both motive and method of operation fully exposed under the light of the truth, we see an internationally coordinated push to subjugate all other races that is anything but conspiracy ‘theory’. We see Rhodes acting as a millionaire monarch of the modern world, blanketing all backward, uncivilized races underneath the authority of one race – what he called the ‘first race’ – and the origins of a slow march towards what we know today as a One World Government, or a New World Order(13)
Over the course of the 1950’s large foundations stepped in to support and enlarge the Council as a leading force in America’s international awareness; from the Rockefeller Foundation and Carnegie Corporation came $500,000 each, topped by $1.5 million from the new Ford Foundation in 1954. (14)
The Administration of William Jefferson Blythe III, the Rhodes Scholar
After receiving a Bachelor of Science in Foreign Service degree while studying under the tutelage of history professor Carroll Quigley at Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service in 1968, a young William Jefferson Blythe III crossed the Atlantic to take up residence at Oxford University. And, although he departed prior to receiving a degree (some contend his departure was rather acrimonious), he was still heavily influenced by his time there, he had met a great deal of influential people, a few of whom would end up in his White House cabinet two decades later. Blythe III would rise to world prominence as the president of the United States and a key historical figure in the furtherance of Cecil Rhodes’ Anglo-Saxon dream. In fact, Blythe III’s cabinet was littered with fellow Rhodes Scholars as well as the aforementioned Lionel Curtis inspired, Council on Foreign Relations – and each and every one of them not elected by the people, but appointed to their positions by Blythe III.
Blythe’s communications director, George Stephanoupoulos is a Rhodes scholar and a CFR member while Blythe’s Secretary of State Madelaine Albright is a longtime member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Blythe’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Walter B. Slocombe was Under Secretary of Defense for Policy over the entirety of Blythe’s tenure as president but also served under Carter and Reagan and was on the Committee on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction under George W. Bush – he is both a Rhodes Scholar and a member of the CFR. R. James Woolsey was appointed to Blythe’s staff as the Director of the CIA from 1993 to 1995; is a core member of a Project for a New American Century; a senior adviser to what Bloomberg named “the world’s most profitable spy organization” Booz Allen Hamilton from 2002 to present day and has heavily influenced the Carter, Reagan, and George H.W. Bush administrations as well as being a Rhodes Scholar. Richard Danzig served as Blythe’s Under Secretary of the Navy (1993-1997) and was promoted to US Secretary of Navy from 1998-2001 and is a Rhodes Scholar. David E. Kendall met Blythe while both were attending Oxford, and is legal counsel for both him and his wife Hillary Clinton – advising William during his impeachment trials and Hillary during the more recent private email scandal while she was U.S. Secretary of State – Kendall is a Rhodes Scholar.
William Jefferson Blythe III
Walter B. Slocombe
Stephen A. Oxman, was a liaison at the very heart of the Anglo American Establishment, serving under Blythe III as Assistant Secretary of State for European and Canadian Studies, he is both a Rhodes Scholar and a CFR member. Robert Reich is also a Rhodes Scholar, served under both Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter and was Secretary of Labor under Blythe. Blythe’s Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott is a Rhodes Scholar and a CFR member. Ashton Carter served as Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Policy under Blythe III and, following 9/11, was responsible for strategic affairs including the treatment of weapons of mass destruction and adviser on the creation of the Department of Homeland Security under George W. Bush. He was also the Deputy Secretary of Defense under Obama, overseeing the DOD’s budget – Carter is both a member of the CFR and a Rhodes Scholar.
Nancy-Ann DeParle is a Rhodes Scholar and served under Blythe as the director of the Health Care Financing Administration from 1997 to 2000. Robert Malley was Assistant National Security Adviser and Director for Democracy, Human Rights and Humanitarian Affairs at the National Security Council under Blythe, a fellow at the CFR and a Rhodes Scholar. Daniel R. Porterfield was chief speechwriter and Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs(Policy & Strategy) for US Health and Human Services Secretary under Blythe and a Rhodes Scholar. Susan Rice was on the National Security Council under both Blythe and Obama, the US Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs during Blythe’s second term, and was even honored by the Royal Institute of International Affairs for – of all things – her dissertation entitled Commonwealth Initiative in Zimbabwe (formerly named Rhodesia after Cecil Rhodes). Rice is both a member of the CFR and a Rhodes Scholar.
Because Blythe’s presidency was book-ended by the Bush war regimes, many simply dismiss out-of-hand any claim of Blythe as a warmonger, but the aggressive foreign policy he initiated is prolific and displayed for all to see in the annals of documented history. Blythe’s reign is consistently cited as the longest period of peacetime economic expansion in American history(15)(16)(17) and while this author may not disagree with the expansionist part, the inclusion of the words ‘peace time’ pushes the definition well beyond even it’s most widest interpretation and into the realm of blatant lies.
By whitewashing a truly repulsive eight-year term into something resembling the altruistic acts of a saint, these journalists and political pundits participate in logical fallacy and do a great disservice to the American people. And it is because of this general misunderstanding of the Blythe regime that it becomes imperative to understand the most infamous event of his tenure under the proper light. The Monica Lewinsky affair and the subsequent Kenneth Starr trial was a mere smokescreen for the continuance of a global takeover objective initiated by an unchecked global superpower.
During Blythe’s eight years in office, the U.S. military bombed Afghanistan, Bosnia, Serbia, Sudan, Somalia and Iran. Interestingly, Blythe also ordered the bombing of the Iraqi intelligence headquarters of Saddam Hussein with cruise missiles on reports Hussein was building WMD’s. A man simply before his time, Blythe imposed a no-fly zone over Iraq that lasted his entire term and the bombing campaign persisted right up to the 2003 Bush led Iraq invasion. He deployed troops in Albania, Central African Republic, East Timor, Kuwait, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Liberia, and, in Iran we see, for the first time, a president use the term ‘state sponsored terrorism’ – yet all we remember from his presidency is an Oval Office tryst and him as a ‘peace time’ president. All of these aforementioned countries opposed to the rule of an overzealous Western ideology and all of it done under the guise of ‘spreading democracy’ or, for the ‘liberation of an oppressed people’. In truth, when all things are considered, the Blythe administration was simply maintaining the initiative that Rhodes had set out as early as 1891, “to crush all disloyalty and every movement for the severance of our Empire.” Under Blythe, the expansionist war drum never missed a beat.
I did not have sexual relations with that woman.” William Jefferson Blythe III, January 26, 1998
The Project for A New American Century
Chances are, nearly everyone above the age of consent in 1998, will remember where they were when William Jefferson Blythe III called an impromptu news conference to address allegations of his sexual transgressions within the Oval Office; but I’m sure an even greater number of people would be completely unaware that on that same infamous day in history a memorandum from a small group of upstart neoconservatives landed on the president’s desk that would have far more serious global implications that are still being felt today. These men, unknown to anyone outside of Washington at the time, would rise to world prominence less than a year after the conclusion of Blythe’s presidency when on September 11, 2001 – another infamous day in history – the world changed forever, ‘dividing our past and future into a before and after’.
In this fateful letter, signed by eighteen members and outside supporters of a newly formed neocon think tank called The Project for a New American Century were calling for a much needed “diplomatic, political and military effort” for “the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime from power”. They pointed to an eroding policy of containment from partners in the Gulf War coalition and a “misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council” as the leading causes and were urging Blythe in the upcoming presidential address to “chart a clear and determined course” to combat this threat.(18) More on this in a moment.
Further research shows Rhodes Scholars and CFR members are well represented within the ranks of every administration for the past five decades and this obvious Rhodes influence shows an undeniable ominous continuity of pro Anglo-Saxon ideology that transcends the authority of government, overlapping from one administration to the next, seriously calling into question, if not entirely obliterating – the validity of the two party system. When those with whom the people elect to the highest offices of government are deeply influenced by special unelected advisers and strategists who all come from the same ‘school of thought’ and who all adhere to the same imperialist principles of global domination set out in Cecil Rhodes’ Last Will and Testament we begin to see cogent evidence as to why the West – no matter what party holds power – is in a state of constant conflict with the areas of the world that resist the culture of a foreign entity hellbent on imposing it upon them and why we see a toxic axiom of doublespeak constantly emanating from Washington that is straight out of Orwell’s 1984 – War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, Ignorance is Strength.
“Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor. ”
– The Project for a New American Century, Rebuilding America’s Defenses, September 2000, pg. 51.
Elliott Abrams (CFR, neocon, Spec. Assistant to President, NSC), Richard L. Armitage (neocon, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State), William J. Bennett (neocon, Dir. of Office of Nat. Drug Control Policy), Jeffrey Bergner (neocon, Assistant to Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs), John Bolton (neocon, U.S. Ambassador to the UN), Paula Dobriansky (Senior Vice President CFR, neocon, Under Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs), Francis Fukuyama (CFR, neocon), Robert Kagan (CFR, neocon), Zalmay Khalilzad (CFR, neocon, U.S. Ambassador to the UN), William Kristol (CFR, neocon), Richard Perle (neocon), Peter W. Rodman (neocon, U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs), Donald Rumsfeld (neocon, U.S. Secretary of Defense), William Schneider, Jr. (CFR, neocon, U.S. Department of Defense), Vin Weber (CFR, neocon), Paul Wolfowitz (CFR, neocon) Deputy Secretary of State), R. James Woolsey (CFR, neocon, Dir. of CIA), Robert B. Zoellick (CFR, neocon, Deputy Secretary of State, U.S. Trade Representative).
Members of the Bush administration who were not signatories but were either Council on Foreign Relations members, neoconservatives, or both, include:
Paul Bremer(CFR, neocon, Coalition Provisional Authority), Dick Cheney (Director of CFR, neocon, Vice President of United States, ). Condoleezza Rice (CFR, 66th Secretary of State), Colin Powell (CFR, 65th Secretary of State), Henry Paulson (CFR, 74th Secretary of the Treasury), John W. Snow (neocon, 73rd Secretary of the Treasury, American Enterprise Institute). Robert Gates (CFR, neocon, Secretary of Defense, CIA, NSC), John Ashcroft (neocon, U.S. Attorney General), Anne Veneman (CFR, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture), Elaine Chao (CFR, Secretary of Labor), Tommy G. Thompson (CFR, U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services), Christine Todd Whitman (CFR, Administrator of EPA).
Note: Several of Blythe’s administration were known as the Vulcans and had previously held important cabinet positions under the previous president, George H. W. Bush and then later, under George W. Bush.
The Project for a New American Century (PNAC) was a neoconservative not-for-profit think tank established in 1997 – “to promote American global leadership”. It was established by neocons, William Kristol and Robert Kagan and represents – to many of today’s political pundits and historians – as the very peak of neoconservativism. Kagan, one of its directors is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and served in the State Department during the troubled second half of Reagan’s presidency as a member of it’s Policy Planning Staff. William Kristol was the acting chairman of PNAC, and while there is no public mention of his membership to the CFR, he certainly has no aversion to rubbing shoulders with those who are – publishing multiple articles within the CFR’s bi-monthly magazine, Foreign Affairs. And when one considers that William Kristol’s father Irving, was himself a member and is credited with being the ‘godfather of neoconservatism’ we see such an obvious alignment of ideologies that William’s absence from the CFR’s membership list becomes merely anecdotal. All other co founders and key contributors to PNAC are officially listed as directors and in the paragraph to follow – for reasons that will become clear later – I include all relevant titles or associations they held prior to, during, or after their involvement with PNAC. They were: Devon Gaffney Cross, Bruce P. Jackson, John R. Bolton, Gary Schmitt and Thomas Donnelly.
Devon Gaffney Cross is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and worked under famous neocon hardliner Richard Perle at the Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee. Bruce P Jackson makes the neoconservative list and is also a member of the CFR. He was vice president of Strategy and Planning for Lockheed Martin and president of the US Committee on NATO – a non-profit corporation formed to promote the expansion of NATO and the strengthening of ties between the US and Europe. Jackson served in military intelligence and has been the president for the Project on Transitional Democracies from 2002 to the present day. John R. Bolton‘s legendary hawkish reputation on U.S. foreign policy precedes him, he is a senior fellow and former Senior Vice President for public policy research for the American Enterprise Institute – another infamous neocon haunt. He argued against biological weapons inspections of U.S. military sites in 2001 and is a very outspoken proponent for the overthrow of Iraq, Iran and Syria. He is presently the National Security Advisor for the Trump administration. Gary Schmitt is a well known neoconservative but is also listed as the co founder, chairman and executive director of PNAC and was the executive director of the US Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board under Reagan. Thomas Donnelly is another neoconservative who now – after some degree of sexual identity reform – goes by the name of Giselle. She was deputy director of PNAC and has been the project director at the Lockheed Martin Corporation since 2002.
In PNAC’s initial Statements of Principles, published on June 3, 1997 – some three years before the letter sent to Blythe – the coauthors indicate an urgency to reestablish the United States as the preeminent force of global dominance, stating that “American foreign and defense policy is adrift” and that conservatives “had not confidently advanced a strategic vision of America’s role in the world. They have not set forth guiding principles for American foreign policy. They have allowed differences over tactics to obscure potential agreement on strategic objectives. And they have not fought for a defense budget that would maintain American security and advance American interests in the new century.” And through the creation of PNAC, they “aimed to change this”. They aimed to “make the case and rally support for American global leadership”. Within this initial piece of literature, the authors laid out, in bullet form, the four most effective ways to accomplish their goals:
- We need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
- We need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
- We need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;
- We need to accept responsibility for America’s unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.(19)
The increase of defense spending, the challenging of hostile regimes, the promotion of freedom abroad, and the preservation and extension of American principles presented in the four points above is the exact rhetoric the world heard in the lead up to every war since Rhode’s Last Will and Testament, including World War I, World War II, the Vietnam War, Operation Desert Storm and the Iraq War. In fact, the Project for a New American Century is widely understood today as the single greatest influencing factor in the U.S. invasion of Iraq and was what gave the smoldering neocon warmonger mandate its first draft of oxygen just as the flame of the ‘old’ century was dying out and just prior to the start of the one we find ourselves in today – a dominant ‘new American century’ and Brzezinski’s Middle Eastern chessboard fully engulfed in flames.
The 25 signatories of The Statement of Principles that has set the course for American foreign policy since 9/11 also reads reads like a CFR, neocon guest list and can be found below. You will see an overlapping of some names when compared to those who signed off on the letter sent to Blythe, but note the importance of some of the additions:
Elliott Abrams (CFR,neocon,spec.assistant to president, NSC), Gary Bauer (neocon), William J. Bennett (neocon, Dir. of Nat. Drug Control Policy), Jeb Bush, Dick Cheney (CFR,neocon,Vice Pres.), Eliot A. Cohen(CFR,neocon, counsellor US State Dept.), Midge Decter (neocon, wife of founder of neoconservativism), Paula Dobriansky (Senior Vice Pres. CFR,neocon), Steve Forbes (Editor-In-Chief of Forbes magazine and grandson of the magazines founder), Aaron Friedberg (CFR,Deputy Ass. for Nat. Sec. Affairs), Francis Fukuyama (CFR,neocon), Frank Gaffney (neocon), Fred Ikle, Donald Kagan, Zalmay Khalilzad (CFR,neocon,US Ambassador to UN), Scooter Libby (CFR,neocon, Ass. to Vice Pres. for Nat. Sec. Affairs, Chief of Staff, Ass. to Pres.), Norman Podhoretz (CFR,neocon, advisor to US Information Agency), James Danforth Quayle, Peter Rodman (neocon,Ass.Sec. of Defense for Int’l Sec. Affairs), Stephen Peter Rosen, Harry Rowen (Sec. of Defense Policy Avisory Board), Donald Rumsfeld (neocon, Sec. of Defense), Vin Weber (CFR,neocon), George Weigel and Paul Wolfowitz (CFR,neocon, Deputy Sec. of Defense).(20)(21)
The obvious catalyst for the continued American occupation of the Middle East was the events that transpired on the morning of September 11, 2001, and since then, nothing has made any logical sense. From the immediacy with which the mainstream media had identified the culprit as a mysterious cave dwelling ‘mastermind’ named Usama bin Laden and Hussein’s heretofor to be discovered ‘weapons of mass destruction’ to the circumstances surrounding both of their capture and subsequent deaths; from the 9/11 Commission’s obviously compromised investigation to the resulting war on terror and omnipotent domestic surveillance that only grows in scale, the American public continue to be fed a steady dose of fallacy. The absence of empirical evidence to support the sensational claims made by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and their ilk in the immediate aftermath were obvious to those who were paying attention at the time and now, years later, that dissenting voice has only been further verified. Many at the time voiced their outrage at how the entire narrative was implanted into the public mind and taken as the gospel truth despite many glaring contradictions. And, conveniently enough, any public blow back from a very vociferous minority regarding the lateral shift from Afghanistan and Usama Bin Laden to Iraq and Saddam Hussein was stifled by a CFR member, neocon and head spokesman in the rebuild of Iraq, Paul Bremer(!) Bremer, put there by Rumsfeld, just as the Bush Administration changed the name of the organization from Office for Reconstruction and Humanitarian Assistance to the much more inauspicious sounding, Coalition Provisional Authority and just like that, the U.S. military had slyly shifted from liberators to occupiers in less than three months after arrival.
Furthermore to all of this, the 9/11 Commission – the investigation that was supposed to unveil to the world the guilty party behind the attacks – quickly disintegrated into a farce led by executive director and CFR member Philip Zelikow. In the end, the official story was rubber stamped for approval and cleared for public consumption without ever having asked key members of the Bush administration any serious questions. In fact, it is an article co written less than one year prior to the events of 9/11 by Zelikow, and fellow CFR member and Rhodes Scholar, Ashton Carter, along with Director of the CIA, John Deutch that serves as a shining example of Hegelian Dialectic (problem, reaction, solution) and indicates the level upon which these secret societies work.
secretiveweThis information, gathered from primary sources, at the very least destroys the official narrative that was being spewed by the Bush administration and repeated by mainstream outlets immediately following 9/11 – that the Bush administration was caught unaware – and we instantly go from considering the neocons implicit responsibility to them having a complicit and intimate knowledge of the crime. With all of the institutions and information at their disposal it becomes the argument of a mad man to try and defend their actions. Even the most adept in sophistry could not spin the facts and circumstances to make anyone believe that the most historic attack to happen on American soil since the burning of the White House was carried out by a handful of men with box cutters – yet much of America, still do wholeheartedly accept this phantasm as fact. And from this problem came the reaction predicted from the American people and a convenient two pronged solution in the form of The Patriot Act that served to embolden further authoritarian measures of surveillance and control on the citizens of America and a never ending war in the Middle East.
So it is with this knowledge of the Council on Foreign Relations and the Project for A New American Century, its members, and their original mandates, that we begin to see a much clearer and accurate demarcation between allegedly opposing factions; we see a circle of secretive friends that goes much deeper in explaining the real reasons for the overthrow of Hussein than the mainstream narrative had lamely offered. We see organizations that transcend political party. While the ‘reputable’ news organizations all forced the ‘weapons of mass destruction’ fallacy down the throats of an already angry mob of Americans willing to believe anything, and we continue to wait for evidence of this claim some 15+ years after it was first postulated. And, armed with an understanding of the hidden door policies created by PNAC, we can, through forensic historical analysis, create a far better understanding of the events that led up to the invasion of Iraq. We can go from an uninformed citizenry inundated with conflicting, nonsensical conclusions, to a population able to really see, empowered with the knowledge of the truth that transcends the color of Party
You can follow the author on Bitchute, Gab, Minds, Trooth, and Twitter @TriviumMethod, and on Facebook and YouTube at Duane Hayes.
Citations and Footnotes:
2) Wikipedia Cecil Rhodes. See also, Alexander, Eleanor, ed. (1914). “Chapter XIV: «South Africa 1893»”. Primate Alexander, Archbishop of Armagh. A memoir. London: Edward Arnold. p. 259.
3) https://archive.org/details/lastwilltestamen00rhodiala/page/58 pages 58,59,61, 73.
6) E. Garrett, The Empire of the Century. 1905, 481. See also, The Nation and the Empire, 1913, introduction. https://archive.org/details/nationempirebein00miln
12) https://cfrd8files.cfr.org/sites/default/files/book_pdf/Continuing_The_Inquiry.pdf forward, Continuing the Inquiry, The Council on Foreign Relations From 1921 to 1996.
19) Statement of Principles https://www.rrojasdatabank.info/pfpc/PNAC—statement%20of%20principles.pdf