The Future Perfect Pt. 1 From the Paris Peace Conference…

By Diego Garcia

“I call this lecture ‘From Versailles to Cybernetics,’ naming the two historic events of the twentieth century. The word ‘cybernetics’ is familiar, is it not? But how many of you know what happened at Versailles in 1919?”

Gregory Bateson, lecture at the Two Worlds Symposium, Sacramento State College, April 21, 1966.

On August 1, 1917 as the world was reeling from the horrors of its very first war, Pope Benedict XV published, A Note to the Heads of All Belligerent Peoples. Benedict’s message, published in every major paper around the world, called for an end to the prolonged ‘massacre’. Benedict proposing ‘more moderate forms of counsel’, ‘calm deliberations’, and a collective move towards a ‘just and lasting peace’.   The Pope’s letter hoping to initiate a radical global shift away from the settling of disputes by the traditional, ‘material force of arms’, and towards a new international, ‘moral force of law’.

While the American president took almost a month to reply publicly, it was a much different story privately as three days later, on the third anniversary of Great Britain’s declaration of war on Germany, Felix Frankfurter, special counsel for the State Department, sent his now infamous memorandum from London recommending, “a bureau be established for the study and preparation of those questions which appear likely to be proposed at the Peace Conference.”  Wilson quickly forming an American bureau of international experts, hand-picked from the most prominent of Ivy League universities and charged with finding a solution to the traditional horrors of material war. A group soon to be known as the Inquiry. Their preparatory work beginning immediately in the back rooms of the New York Public Library and was to align with the work already being undertaken by the British and French.

Frankfurter, working hand in hand with the British and French foreign offices shows his involvement in the very earliest efforts to align American post war interests with that of her main allies. According to Inquiry historian Lawrence Gelfand, the Inquiry social engineers were creating more than a blueprint. They were building a foundation upon which the cyberneticians of the Macy Conferences would build an institution of mind control a generation later.

The Inquiry Intelligence Chiefs

“Treaty of Versailles was an attitudinal turning point.” Gregory Bateson


The Inquiry’s influence in Paris incalculable in that they are the authors of much of our modern-day one world monolith. The Inquiry representing the first ad hoc, interdisciplinary group of social science engineers, setting the stage in Paris for nothing less than what Bateson himself described as, one of the great sell outs in the history of our civilization”.  Bateson describing Wilson as a “pathologically trusting man” suggesting him a front who allowed himself to be swept up in the current of progressive idealism. Wilson allowing himself to become emotively persuaded by private scholars and diplomats – ‘entering wedges’ – used as tools to usurp the State Department’s own presidential advisory authority in one of history’s most obvious, yet oddly obscure, coup d’états.


“The Peace Treaty was not to be a return to the old diplomacy, but the establishment of a new world order.” James T. Shotwell, Inquiry member and author of, At the Paris Peace Conference, pg. 13.

“For five years, there has been no free play of public opinion in the world. Confronted by the inexorable necessities of war, governments conscripted public opinion … They goose-stepped it. They taught it to stand at attention and salute … It sometimes seems that after the Armistice was signed, millions of Americans must have taken a vow that they would never again do any thinking for themselves. They were willing to die for their country, but not willing to think for it.” Frank I. Cobb, editor New York World, excerpt from Liberty and the News, pg. 8.

The Manufacturing of Public Consent and The Entering Wedge

The story of the Inquiry certainly offering extraordinary historical precedent to anyone willing to think for themselves today as the quotes above sounding ominously reminiscent of our modern-day fake news reality. Just as today we may be forever waiting for a return to normal, those living then died waiting for a promised end to all war. The contemporary Western democratic world not led by election or choice, but by persuasion.  All the men of the Inquiry, just as the members of the later Macy Conferences, were deliberately recruited for their political and social science backgrounds. Nearly every member with an Ivy League Master’s degree in the liberal arts, all holding an Atlanticist worldview, all with a cosmopolitan, liberally progressive social conscience, and all sharing a common belief that, the technical expert, in an ever more complex and changing world, was essential in the guidance of the Greater Society.  This technique of manufacturing the public’s consent towards predetermined State goals already proven effective in persuading America into a war they had previously voted against. An astonishing American volte face the result of an extraordinarily well coordinated State sponsored propaganda campaign. A psychological operation on the minds of the American public.

A State sponsored psychological operation Walter Lippmann, James T. Shotwell, Felix Frankfurter, and the father of propaganda, Edward Bernays, all participated in. They worked directly with zero degrees of separation for the newly minted government propaganda division, the Committee on Public Information. The CPI founded by Executive Order 2594 on April 13, 1917 and under the direction of George Creel, Robert Lansing (Secretary of State), Newton D. Baker (Secretary of War), and Josephus Daniels (Secretary of Navy). Modern American propaganda is born from the embers of the first world war and George Creel, Walter Lippmann, Edward Bernays, three faces of the Propagandists Mt. Rushmore were there, in Paris, working together, shaping public opinion on an international level.

So, as much as the credit for the invention of propaganda is often given to the likes of Joseph Goebbels, these three Americans, and most especially Lippmann and Bernays above all, became the actual masters of manufacturing consent. Interesting to note reader that both Lippmann’s ground-breaking Public Opinion (1922) and Bernays’, Crystallizing Public Opinion (1923), published within months of each other are currently enjoying their one-hundred-year anniversary. Together these two books set the direction of public relations for the next century and the manufacturing of consent a phrase as well known to the coiner of the term as it was to the pioneering cyberneticians of the 1940’s like Norbert Weiner and Gregory Bateson.  It can not be overstated, as this concept the foundation upon which the entire scheme of public manipulation was made possible.

If you’ve been following our previous work, you know Walter Lippmann as a founding member of the Inquiry and a Council on Foreign Relations lifetime board member. He is also largely lauded by professors of media studies as “the father of modern American journalism.” Lippmann inventing the term, “manufacture of consent” in his, Liberty and the News, published in the year immediately following his involvement at the Paris peace conference:  

“Everywhere to-day men must deal with questions more intricate than any church or school had prepared them to understand. Increasingly they know that they cannot understand them if the facts are not quickly and steadily available. Increasingly they are baffled because the facts are not available; and they are wondering whether government by consent can survive in a time when the manufacture of consent is an unregulated private enterprise pg. 4,5 Liberty and the News

“The Great Society had grown so furiously and to colossal dimensions by the application of technical knowledge. It was made by engineers who had learned to use exact measurements and quantitative analysis. It could not be governed, men began to discover, by men who thought deductively about rights and wrongs. It could be brought under human control only by the technic which had created it.” Walter Lippmann, Public Opinion, Chapter 25, pg. 370, The Entering Wedge,  

The manufacturing of public consent by unregulated private enterprise certainly nothing new to us living in the 21st century – Lippmann and company’s, children of the future. The necessary business of steering public opinion towards a more noble, liberal vision of the future Lippmann often referred to throughout his career as, The Great Society. These social engineers had privately determined that an attitude change of the entire world was necessary while any public questioning of the scheme’s morality was not.  This great reset of one hundred years ago the technological schemata to which Lippmann dedicated his entire sixty-year career. Lippmann the owner of one of the longest syndicated columns in the history of journalism entitled, Today and Tomorrow. Note the very progressive sounding name, and the subtle absence of Yesterday. The memory hole founded and Lippmann one of those most influential in the steering of society towards a tomorrow we today now see quickly approaching on the horizon.

In chapter 25 of Public Opinion Lippmann writes of applying the social science technical expert as the entering wedge – Driven deliberately “between the private citizen and the vast environment in which he is entangled”. An eminence grise man of letters with no moral agency wielding facts and statistics as if they were weapons. Members of the Inquiry pioneers in these fields of facts, stats, and numbers, many becoming immensely effective in Statecraft and are to be considered the very forefathers to the cybernetics breakthrough to follow. The story of the Inquiry and that of the initial Macy Conferences nearly identical. Both groups were made of social scientists hired as special aides to assist in the scientific management of society. Experts in their respective fields of human study: sociology, history, economics, anthropology, human geography, psychology. Both groups of social and political scientists heavily funded by Rockefeller, Carnegie, and Ford foundations. Although separated by two decades both served similarly as effective counsel in the government of government, the understanding of understanding and in discovering the human use of human beings. Here it becomes very important to take note of the definitions of both cybernetics and, government:

government: guvernere: to govern; to steer or control as a pilot would a ship.
mens or mentis: the mind.

cybernetics: from the Greek kubernetes: to steer as would the helmsman of a ship; a governor.

The Inquiry and the League of Nations

The Inquiry worked with several interests in forging the Covenant of the League of Nations. As we discuss these groups below we begin to uncover overlapping memberships between each of these groups and with several elite social clubs. These secretive relationships, made in the Gentlemen’s Clubs of Washington and New York at places like: the Century Club, the Metropolitan Club, the Cosmopolitan Club, and the broader, more internationally minded, Pilgrims Society, make clear just where foreign policy is first developed.  These underreported memberships also prominent throughout the entire American Delegation, the Big Four Nations, and thus, the entire Peace Conference itself. This seemingly systemic unwillingness on the behalf of the media to report such important information a gross negligence of duty casting shade on every historians and journalist since.

  1. The Bryce Group: founded in London, 1914. Named after its chairman, the Scottish liberal and 1st Viscount, James Bryce (privy council to the Queen, Royal Society fellow, British Academy, House of Lords). Bryce, the Ambassador to the United States and the author of the widely read, The American Commonwealth in 1888. Bryce aided in the book’s popularity throughout American academic circles by his close friendship with American aristocracy, including one of the most supportive in Harvard phi beta kappa president, Charles W. Eliot. Bryce’s, The American Commonwealth important in the promotion of history told through an Anglo-American worldview and played an important role in a long awaited British and American alliance.  Bryce, it should be noted, was the actual author of the very report that provoked the first world war in the first-place by publishing, The Committee on Alleged German Outrages – now seen as a highly suspect, largely fictitious example of black propaganda. The Bryce Group inspirational in the creation of The League of Nations Society. James Bryce and his committee, while willing the war into reality on made up field reports, were conveniently present to pick up the pieces. Problem, reaction, solution.

1st Viscount James Bryce

2. The League to Enforce Peace: founded in Philadelphia, 1915, based on Theodore Roosevelt’s much earlier call for an international “League of Peace”. Roosevelt himself phi beta kappa and a Freemason. Roosevelt’s very protégé William Howard Taft, was elected President of the League to Enforce Peace. Taft, the 27th president of the United States after Roosevelt and the son of the very founder of Skull and Bones, also tapped phi beta kappa, also a freemason. Another founding member of the League to Enforce Peace was Elihu Root, Skull and Bones, phi beta kappa, Secretary of War at the turn of the century under both McKinley and Roosevelt. Root modernized the military, was a founder of the Preparedness movement and was president of Carnegie Endowment for World Peace. Another founder of the LEP was Henry Stimson, strangely enough also Skull and Bones, also phi beta kappa, also a founder of the Preparedness Movement, and the most proficient Secretary of War holding portfolio under Taft, FDR, Truman, and Herbert Hoover. Other LEP notables include founder and chairman of their executive committee, A. Lawrence Lowell. Lowell president of Harvard, and phi beta kappa. Richard T. Ely, an influential Progressive Era leader, advocate for Preparedness and “father of land economics,” also a founder of the LEP. Alexander Graham Bell and Zionist delegate in Paris, Rabbi Stephen Wise also founders.

* Note how both the Pilgrims and the CFR have the word ‘ubique’, meaning everywhere, in their logo.

3. The League of Nations Union: founded in New York 1918, a merger between the League of Free Nations Association and the League of Nations Society. Here we see a confluence of leaders from both sides of the Atlantic merging into one entity led by its first president, British Foreign Office Secretary Sir Edward Grey. The League of Nations Society founded by the founder of the National Birth Control Association, Margery Spring-Rice and its membership filled with authors who were writing books, pamphlets and other literature promoting the ideas of the Bryce Group. Within this milieu we have identified as members of the Executive Committee an interesting array of representatives of those organizations most in control of our society today.

The ‘apostle of internationalism’ Stephen Duggan. Harvard Law School handler of Frankfurter, Brandeis and Lippmann, Billings Learned Hand. JP Morgan counsel Thomas W. Lamont. Zionist leaders and fellow Harvard Law alumni, Felix Frankfurter and Julian Mack. Inquiry members David Hunter Miller, Edward Slosson, Edwin Gay and Alvin Johnson all members. Frank Walsh’s inclusion interesting in that he was chosen to head the failed investigation (the Walsh Commission), into the unlawful and inhumane labor relation practices of the tax-exempt foundations. The League of Nations Union was ultimately under the leadership of the Rhodes Round Table movement as its president was Round Table member Sir Edward Grey. Grey working with Lord Milner, Lionel Curtis, and Philip Kerr. All these men present in Paris 1919 and were prominent in the League’s creation.


4. 1917 Club founded in 1917 among the political salons of Soho London. Founded by Leonard Woolf and the British intelligence cryptographer, Oliver Strachey. Named after the February 1917 Bolshevik revolution. Membership was largely made up of Labour Party members, Liberal Party members of the Union of Democratic Control, and the Bloomsbury Set. And within the Bloomsbury Set we find the Cambridge Apostles. Making for an interesting collection of artists, authors, painters, and intellectuals indeed. Beginning with Leonard’s famous wife, one of the most influential modernist writers of the 20th century, Adeline Virginia Woolf.

Other notables include: Aldous Huxley, H.G. Wells, Ramsay MacDonald and Lord Walter Rothschild. The British economist John Maynard Keynes, Bertrand Russell, G. E. Moore, and Ludwig Wittgenstein all members as Cambridge Apostles. Russell and Wittgenstein considered two of the most influential of 20th century philosophers.


To find those most responsible for this international scheme we are forced to peel back several layers of the established historical narrative. There is no denying the complicit involvement in the creation of the League of Nations by the Taft, Grey, Woolf, and Bryce groups, but publicly it was Woodrow Wilson’s innermost circle of advisors that led the charge. Wilson’s advisory group of specially appointed political and social scientists, private professors, international lawyers and economists, while usurping in importance the president’s own administration, were intermingling with and serving the interests of the House of Morgan, Wall Street financers, American aristocrats, US Court Justices, Zionist world leaders, and members of the burgeoning US military intelligence community. And it is from this ominous circle of friends we find those most responsible for the writing of the Fourteen Points published on January 8, 1918, and its final draft, the Covenant of the League of Nations, signed on January 10, 1920.

Note the Inter-Allied Conferences were chaired by Sidney Webb and George Bernard Shaw an executive member. Also note on the same document how several delegates were confused as to why the word ‘socialist’ was included on their credentials. This is why we refer to these meetings as the Inter-Allied Socialist and Labor Conferences. These documents can be found in their entirety in our House of Applied Knowledge above.


A closer look revealing that it is here, within these obscure groups, and not in Paris, that we find the actual launch of the League. We see uncovered fraternal affiliations that transcend party affiliation, woven together through years of friendship into an incredibly eclectic mosaic.  All these groups openly pacifist, but to varying degrees. All were considered progressives united in their search for a collective security. A quick look through the memberships list of these various groups reveals distinct cross over as not only the most influential politicians, statesmen, diplomats, and scholars of our modern history are explicit in their involvement, so too their necessary compliment of popular Western authors, writers, poets, and painters. Here we see how societal control and the manipulation of the masses really works. All these well-known social reformers working in parallel and employing all forms of propaganda in the manufacturing of the public’s consent as America transitioned from the last days of the Gilded Age to the bright promise of modernity and the establishment of a new world order.

There is no denying the complicit involvement in the creation of the League of Nations by the Taft, Grey, Woolf, and Bryce groups, but publicly it was Woodrow Wilson’s innermost circle of advisors that led the charge. Wilson’s advisory group of specially appointed political and social scientists, private professors, international lawyers and economists, while usurping in importance the president’s own administration, were intermingling with and serving the interests of, not our lady liberty or the Constitution of the United States, but the financial interests of the House of Morgan, Wall Street financers, American aristocrats, US Court Justices, Zionist world leaders, and members of the burgeoning US military intelligence community. The very first experts. And it is from this ominous circle of friends we find those most responsible for the writing of the Fourteen Points published on January 8, 1918, and its final draft titled the Covenant of the League of Nations, signed on January 10, 1920.

Louis Dembitz Brandeis

Felix Frankfurter

Wilson’s Inquiry, like Taft’s League to Enforce Peace, was predominantly made up of men of honours tapped phi beta kappa. Woodrow Wilson, Louis Brandeis, Walter Lippmann, Felix Frankfurter all primary authors of Wilson’s Fourteen Points, all secretly PBK. As were Taft, Stimson, and Root. Even Wilson’s personal physician, Cary Grayson had to be phi beta kappa. Also prominent in the writing of the League was Inquiry members Isaiah Bowman, and David Hunter Miller, Secretary of War Newton D. Baker, and (according to Bateson, but not yet substantiated), chairman of the Committee on Public Information, George Creel.  So while, in the one hundred years following the events of Paris, the legacy of the Fourteen Points remains largely attached to Wilson, research herein shows that much credit must go to those surrounding him – especially those leading fatherly voices, those founders and advocates of the Efficiency and Preparedness movements, both subsets of Progressivism: Taft, Root, Stimson, and Lippmann, Frankfurter, Roosevelt.  Frankfurter living up to his moniker here as the ‘kochleffel’ or ‘the stirring spoon’, by being the link connecting the New Republic/House of Truth Set with the Taft Trifecta.

And perhaps there was no more influential voice in the Progressive movement than that of the ‘sage advisor to all’, Frankfurter’s half brother half father, mentor, and Supreme Court Associate Justice Louis Brandeis. Brandeis very influential in persuading Wilson to create from out of executive order the Federal Reserve and the Federal Trade Commission. Brandeis was the soft touch, guiding hand while his protégé, the Judge Advocate General Felix Frankfurter, the heavy-handed iron fist representative of State justice. Frankfurter supervising courts-martial cases for the War Department during the Great War on behalf of the government.  Both Brandeis and Frankfurter massive in the implementation of the first international world order and both central in the creation of the nation of Israel. In fact, Frankfurter, according to eyewitnesses had his foot in every delegation in Paris and, acting as a Brandeis conduit, was one of the conferences most influential figures. Frankfurter parlaying the key personal relationships made earlier at the House of Truth into world changing international policy in Paris.

The relationships forged at the House of Truth a decade prior proving priceless in Paris as Eustace Percy and Loring C. Christie, former flat mates of Frankfurter and Lippmann, held key positions within the British and Canadian Delegations. Percy, a diplomat and close advisor to, not only British Prime Minister David Lloyd George in Paris, but former chief assistant to the British Ambassador, 1st Viscount Bryce and British Foreign Minister and Round Table member Sir Edward Grey in the British Foreign Office. Percy also staying at the House while accompanying Lord Balfour’s foreign mission to Washington in 1917 to discuss past secret imperial treaties mere days after America announced their inclusion in the war. The Balfour Mission while in Washington stayed at Breckinridge Long’s mansion at 2829 16th St NW Washington, not only near the House of Truth but directly across the street from the newly minted Scottish Rite Freemason Lodge. Loring C. Christie, another roommate at the House was another Harvard Law alum, editor-in-chief of the Harvard Law Review and graduated alongside Frankfurter. Christie, despite being a Canadian, worked as an assistant to another House of Truth resident, Winfred Denison in the Department of Justice under Stimson. In fact Frankfurter, Denison and Christie all employed by the Taft government under Stimson years before Paris. Loring C. Christie was, during the peace talks, the personal legal advisor to Canadian Prime Minister, Robert Borden. The entire House of Truth fraternity massive in Paris.

Teddy Roosevelt helping to close this Progressive circle in that, besides being the reason for the creation of the House of Truth, Roosevelt an essential figure in the growth of internationalism. Roosevelt himself recommending the 1907 meetings in the Hague and speaking of the idea of an international League of Peace as early as the Spanish American War before the turn of the century. Roosevelt also phi beta kappa, also a freemason and perhaps the founding father of Progressivism, running the very first progressive platform in 1912 called the Bull Moose Party.

The Century Club

So, when one interested in such things looks past the surface reasoning we witness an undeniable deep secret society association between all of these shapers of the League that transcends party affiliation but not social status.  An additional, but no less important layer of secrecy is revealed when we see that all three members of the 1912 presidential election: Wilson, Taft, and Roosevelt, were all members of New York Gentlemen’s club The Century Association. Other notable Century Club members include: Walter Lippmann, Henry Stimson, Elihu Root, Colonel Edward Mandel House, Thomas W. Lamont, Newton D. Baker, Billings Learned Hand, and Inquiry members Sidney Mezes, Charles Seymour, and James T. Shotwell. Just to name a few.  This list, while not even fully unpacked goes a long way to making sense of our society today. The three successive presidencies of Roosevelt, Taft, and Wilson representing a twenty-year period to begin the 20st century in which presidents and parties would change but not their progressive mission. While the helmsman may have changed, the general direction and destination of the ship remained the same. The Great Society.

The Pilgrims Society

Incredibly, an even more amazing third level of secrecy is uncovered that proves without a doubt a shared interest within these groups for an international order. When one peruses the members list of the Pilgrims Society, the international conspiracy becomes obvious: James Bryce, Elihu Root, Henry Stimson, Robert Cecil, Arthur Balfour, Lord Rothschild, J.P. Morgan, John D. Rockefeller Sr., John D. Rockefeller Jr., Andrew Carnegie, John W. Davis, Charles Dawes, Chauncey Depew, John Foster Dulles, Allen Dulles, Jacob H. Schiff, Richard T. Ely, Nicholas Murray Butler, Andrew Mellon, King Charles III and his wife, the recently diseased, Queen Elizabeth II.

The Fabians Society

All the planning may have officially culminated in Paris, but the work was done in London at meetings held during the war at the Inter-Allied Socialist Labor Conferences held in London from 1915 to September of 1918. The British Labor Party and the Fabians heavily represented at the London based Inter-Allied meetings most notably by two very founders of the Fabian movement, George Bernard Shaw and Sidney Webb. Webb head of the Procedure Committee, a member of the Permanent Inter-Allied Executive Committee, and a chairman of the final meetings in September of 1918. When tracing the creation of the League back to source, it is in these London labor and socialist meetings and not the gilded golden hall of mirrors at the Palace of Versailles that the League was first formalized.  And it is here, during these far more obscure meetings, that we see an amazing confluence of interests. These socialist meetings, clearly dominated by a syndicate of internationally minded men brought together the Fabians, the British Labor Party, the American Progressive movement, with the leaders of international labor. It amazes this historian to know that it was this handful of liberally progressive men and woman who were chosen to shape the League. A far cry from what we are told in school. If we are told of this incredibly important epoch at all. Intellectuals, popular authors, famous poets and painters joined with Wall Street financiers, Supreme Court judges, tax-free foundations, Ivy League scholars, the modern US intelligence community, international Zionism, through secret society memberships in clubs like the Cambridge Apostles, Phi Beta Kappa, Skull and Bones fraternity, the Gentlemen’s Clubs of New York and Washington, Freemasonry, and the Pilgrims Society and more.

Many of these people are the biggest names in their field of work. Many of them pioneers and founders of the professions that most and a vast majority bonded by common fraternal brotherhoods.


What happened at the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 – to answer Gregory Bateson’s question – is more than just the signing of a treaty.  The meetings in Paris profoundly shifted world hegemony westward. And when the Paris peace conference of 1919 is taken in its broadest sense, we can clearly see, without a doubt, that this is where nearly everything we struggle to navigate today found its modern origins. Its where the US formally becomes the new world post graduate understudy to the old-world British imperial emeritus.  Its where America makes its grand debut on the world stage as the preeminent international power. Its where, in less than a year, the American president went from pacifist to interventionalist to internationalist.  And in less than six months, Wilson went from declaring war on Germany to secretly planning a coordinated exit strategy. Almost as if the war itself was a cog of something bigger turning.

When looking at the promise of Paris through the established mainstream narrative nothing about it seems to make sense. Despite claiming Paris was the end to war, war is now perpetual and world peace remains, as it always has, an unattainable ideal.  But, when overlapping the circles of these secret organizations we all of a sudden find commonality. This the modern beginnings to the networking of power that dominates our society today.  As we overlap those shared membership circles we find within the vesica pisces, an exclusive group of men, almost as if the new world order can be distilled down to its purity. Found within the vesica pisces those common to all circles and at the center of these clubs we find the men most influential and responsible for our present-day conundrum. Those engineers of the League of Nations and the Treaty of Versailles named above are now preserved for future historians and the general public to consider.

We look forward to publishing the follow up article, The Future Perfect Part 2 the Cybernetics Revolution soon. In it we make amazing historical connections between the founders of the Inquiry and the cyberneticians of the 1940’s.  A definite trail of evidence connecting the “two most historic events of the 20th century” almost as if one was the natural transgression of the other.

Please follow the author at The History of Propaganda on youtube. Follow on twitter @TriviumMethod or sign up at our very own website at and become a member of a growing concerted effort towards the truth. Footnotes, citations, if not provided in the body of the work can be found at our archives, The House of Applied Knowledge, here at bulletproof.

How I Survived the Bomb and Learned to Love Logical Fallacy Little Boy and the Fat Man

During the Cold War era there was plenty of information available on how best to survive an atomic bomb. The hysteria was everywhere. Helpful tips on how to cook or dress for the apocalypse were in every magazine and it was not uncommon to open the newspaper and see graphics detailing how long after an atomic explosion to expect fallout, or how to best preserve foods, or even how to handle post bomb depression. Many of those who lived it remember the media induced hysteria well. They remember the military style school drills. They remember hiding under their desks and being told by the teacher to ‘never look into the light children!’ There were bomb shelters being built in suburbia and frantic headlines on each doorstep. The ‘apocalyptic’ scorched earth storylines everyone living today is familiar with got their start in 1950’s Cold War fanaticism. But in the end not one shot was ever fired. History shows the headlines to be nothing more than propaganda, and for the generations who were forced to live lives in fear, the only mushroom cloud they ever witnessed were of our own devise.  Cold War rhetoric so ubiquitous over the second half of the 20th Century its effects are still being comprehended by modern thinkers. 

The effects on society of such long lingering fear culture so widespread that its left a permanent scar still very visible today – some thirty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the official end to the Cold War – as the American public is once again being sold a terror vision from behind the ‘iron curtain’.

Do we learn from the past or are we condemned to repeat it?<—————————–


It is a significant observation to consider that the Cold War era, despite covering a nearly fifty-year span, came and went without an ‘official’ shot fired. Especially with the similarity to events unfolding today, it is critical in real time to know the history. We all know today the Cold War never actually lived up to what the media, government, military intelligence and specifically the Council on Foreign Relations had promised. All the talk of checking Russian militarism running cover fire for Americas own expansionist interests, usually near in proximity and related in both means and method yet exist in a realm far outside the headlines. Even the author of the X Article George Kennan, the very article that introduced both the term and US foreign policy of ‘containment’ to the world, when asked regarding alleged Soviet aggressions years later, admitted the idea a propaganda ruse. A psychological operation.  Kennan wrote the article under the pseudonym ‘X’ and it was published in July of 47′ in Foreign Affairs magazine, Kennan claimed Stalin’s rule was based on a “pseudo-scientific justification” of Lenin – Marxist ideology and that the permeation of Russian thought and industry throughout Eurasia should not be tolerated by the West. Stalin went from wartime ally to villain marauder in a flash. The rest is history.

In the year 2022, the evil enemy isn’t nearly as identifiable as a mushroom cloud. No, this enemy hidden in the grammar, in the language, and in the very definitions of the words we use. And those unaware of the mainstream game of semantics fall for every appeal to empathy, every ad hominem. They fall for every effort to distract. Simply because they’ve never known logical fallacy. It being one of the most powerful pieces of knowledge removed from our schooling. And the reasons obvious to those well versed in them. And, as we live seventy some years later during the time of the Great Information War, survival tips are again being circulated through the mainstream, once again by the usual suspects we hear the same claims of threats to our democracy, and once again, the villain hails from beyond the horizon.  Just beyond our view. Only today new meets nostalgic as we witness a rebranding of history. We now have a repeating pattern from which to infer more than meets the eye.

So what’s this new 21st Century redux of the Cold War? … Fake News.

And how is it that this newly fabricated fear reminiscent of the red menace can once again so tightly grip the public’s liberal sympathies as to completely render them blind to reality?  … A history shadow. A collective historical blind spot.

Yesterday’s Cold War is today’s RussiaGate. Similar in its two syllable bark the red menace is resuscitated through its penchant to spread ‘fake news’. The term revitalized as Russia is vilified remorselessly by the mainstream through the era of Trump journalism and beyond. The Steele Dossier taking the place of the X Article. The Steele Dossier story, like that of X Article, admitted by its author as itself being faked. Unsubstantiated. And this admission, as did Kennans, came shortly after the time of its publishing. Yet the American public are moved forward never the wiser. Progress people. The facts can’t get in the way of a good narrative. The original lie now believed by millions furrows the mind and readies the rut for the seeding of more lies of an ever more damaging type. The entire storyline snowballs incredibly, it gets out of control aided by a collective emotional attachment, and what we get is what we got – a large portion of the public suffering from psychosis as they can’t make sense of reality. A paralyzing dysfunction washes over them and for the most part they are demeaned to the role of spectator – the very purpose of the hysteria. To inactivate. Mission accomplished. While we look over here, they operate out of view over there. What they claim the enemy is doing to us is precisely and exactly what they are indeed doing to the enemy.


In the year 2022, an entirely new weapons strategy must be employed to combat these new rules of engagement. New ways to defend ourselves must be realized as we move from the old-world way of material force of law to the immaterial, grammatical and memetic. The battlefield no longer fought on the traditional landscape of Mittel Europa. This war untelevised being raged with similar ferocity to all other world war, only this time the battlefield is found in the six inches between our ears.

So, what are these new weapons strategies? What are these tools designed to protect us from being fooled ever again? And how do they protect us from harmful false ideology? How do they allow us to remain unaffected in the face of universal deceit?

In an information war knowledge of logical fallacy becomes our surface to air missiles, our proximity fuse, our bulletproof vests, our radar; primary sourced material becomes our heavy artillery; the Truth becomes the new atomic bomb; and the well-developed individual becomes the perfect antidote to a tyrannical government. Our ability to remove labels becomes the latest in cloaking technology. The ad hominem becomes evidence of no argument and the appeal to empathy and non sequiturs become simply explained mainstream false narratives.  Only with a knowledge of logical fallacy do we identify contradiction of statements and verify its falsity of facts. And only then do we have the necessary tools we need to identify news when it is fake. And, maybe more importantly, when it is not. The truth is that left behind after successful identification of contradictions, falsity of facts and logical fallacy. There is a process and each lie has a name. And, with time, people become expert pattern observers. And the more we apply ourselves to the truth the more fake news is seen as a primarily mainstream construct meant to dissuade the public from listening or even considering the viewpoints of those fighting for the truth in a decaying human reality. We must in these extraordinary times be able to discern fake from real. We must be able to see the filters and stereotypical beliefs in our own thinking. We must in an efficient manner discard what is false and embrace that which is real before it’s too late.


“sooner or later a false belief bumps up against solid reality, usually on a battlefield”  

The Inquiry in Paris Part 2

Many members of the Inquiry would parlay their work with the Inquiry into illustrious international careers later working with the largest American foundations in the specific areas of social research and applied science. Many would go on to preside over major American institutions, reaching key leadership positions in all aspects critical to the management of society. They were instrumental in creating entire fields of discipline we now simply take for granted. Bowman integral in the International Map of the World Project that has directly led to our present day global surveillance grid would later be involved in the Manhattan Project as president of Johns Hopkins University. Shotwell, working for Carnegie Endowment was, even according to his Columbia University alma mater, “present at, indeed instrumental in, the creation of some of the most important international institutions of the twentieth century.” Two other inquiry members, William Curtis Farabee and ethnographer Roland Burrage Dixon were both presidents of the American Anthropological Association, Farabee’s work primarily in human genetic research and Dixon on the racial history of man. Leonard Porter Ayres a very early Inquiry recruit, headed the American Statistical Association, Ayres an acting chairman within the Skull and Bones executive arm Russell Sage directing voluminous studies on the casualties of war, “backward children”, and the lazy of society. His large-scale statistical projects on behalf of Skull and Bones, very reminiscent of the Fabian social reform ideas published by Sidney and Beatrice Webb, Graham Wallas, and George Bernard Shaw.


Inquiry member Charles Homer Haskins was a child protégé teaching at Harvard at the age of seventeen and the first academic renaissance and medieval historian in the United States, he worked for years with the American Historical Association, a corporation of university teachers of history, before becoming its president. Haskins was a leading member of the Committee of Seven, where he set standards for college admission and national public school history curriculum and was the chair of the first American Council of Learned Societies, bringing together a nationwide network of historians and was Dean of the Graduate School in the Arts and Sciences from 1908 to 1924. In Paris he was a key personal advisor to president Wilson. He was an American member of the Commission on Belgian and Danish affairs and helped arrange three historically contentious and economically important areas along the German French border in Alsace Lorraine, and the Ruhr and Saar Valleys. 


Allyn Abbott Young, the president of the American Statistical Association, the American Economic Association and the London School of Economics wielded a wide circle of influence similar to Haskins. Mark Jefferson was a leading pioneer in American cartography at the time of his hiring and was hired by his former student Isaiah Bowman as chief of Geography and Cartography for the Inquiry. Jefferson today is still considered one of the most influential of all American geographers. All of these men of the Inquiry sharing the same progressive, socialist school of thought of a future society of peace achieved through an international, technical expertise.


With the creation of the Inquiry was founded the very profession of scholarly counsel of government from out of the necessity of war. The Treaty of Versailles, despite all of its liberal promises, proven now to be less the end of all war and more the start of the next. The conference was Prompting Pilgrim Society member and American delegation member Frederick C. Howe to state,

“economic forces moved the conference, like players about a chess-board. Boundary-lines were shifted to include harbors, copper, oil, mineral resources. Races were split, natural demarcations ignored. The imperialist interests that had kept the world on edge for thirty years before the war were making a killing…The British Admiralty wanted oil; it had talked oil for years. British maritime prescience saw that oil was the fuel of to-morrow. The French steel trust wanted a grip on coal and iron oar, to gain command of the Continent and strip Germany of her war-making power. Munition-makers were busy. They were getting ready for the next war.”


Nothing short of American sponsored global chaos the exact kind of which Wilson first protested against and then himself became, when refuting the Popes call to belligerents for a “peace without victory”.  Wilson, doubling down, went for the German throat stating in response, “the object of this war is to deliver the free peoples of the world from a vast military establishment which secretly planned to dominate the world” further promising to the world that America would “deliver its blow fiercely and quickly”. But one hundred years later, the History of Propaganda asks, who possesses this “vast military establishment”? Who is it that the free peoples of the world need to be freed from? And, who is it that has consistently, in the over one hundred years since exhibited the behaviour indicative of a foreign policy bent on world dominance?  Today there remains only one clear answer to that question.


In Paris we see the interests of many factions aligning that had nothing to do with the ending of world wars or making the world safe for democracy. Atlanticist interests of the Round Table Group aligning with that of the Internationalist. The Edwardian era imperialist and Old World French colonial interests aligning with that of the Wilsonian Progressive with that of the Zionist, And despite their perceived differences, these men mostly members of the private Century Club, or the Coefficients Dining Club, and the Pilgrims Society. The long ago made plans of private elite society culminating at The Palace at Versailles, in the Hall of Mirrors. 


Many of the men on both the American and British delegations having shared these less public allegiances that extend well beyond that of delegation or even national loyalty. They are the motor that drives the Anglophile narrative, unfettered from party affiliation and government bureaucracy who’s work was “about bringing Britain and the US together as the two ‘great manufacturers and traders of the world, and therefore the great advocates of international peace.”(3) Nearly the entire American and British delegations were made up of members and friends of one or several of these secret societies and gentleman’s dining clubs. This the elephant in the room of American life. A small coterie of elites rule this world through the coveting of money, influence and power. Pilgrims founder Charles Beresford believed in an, “‘Anglo-Saxon patriotism’ which was in addition to our domestic patriotism and our Imperial or American patriotism'”.


This group of elites with anglophile dreams heavily represented in Paris. The conference in fact largely steered by them. When we identify those most influential at the conference they call come from these secretive private clubs: Elihu Root, Henry Stimson, James Bryce, Lord Robert Cecil, Lord Edward Grey, Philip Kerr, Thomas W. Lamont, Lord Alfred Milner, Lord Northcliffe, Frank Lyon Polk, Winston Churchill, John Foster and Allen Dulles, and Henry White were all influential in the creation of the League.  But the Pilgrim’s Society membership also includes Wall Street legend JP Morgan who famously loaned hundreds of millions of dollars to the French, British and Russian armies and was represented in Paris to get his money back. American royalty well represented within these society clubs, the Aldrich’s, the Astor’s, the Vanderbilt’s, the Whitney’s even Queen Elizabeth II, Prince Philip, Prince Charles, Prince and Andrew, are all members. Making for a very influential membership list first inspired by its most honourary member, Cecil John Rhodes. 


Here we see the very obvious fascist takeover of America. Corporations are by nature expansionist and align well with a foreign policy with the same initiatives and the think tanks created then meant to steer society as a helmsman would a ship. The not-for-profit think tank designed to transcend political party, their whole creation meant to be bipartisan and apolitical, to gather members of all parties, to transcend the quagmire of the voting process and to get beyond government bureaucracy. The introduction of these institutions left little doubt to those watching then what would eventually evolve out of such an ill thought-out plan. We witness its results in real time today as the CFR and RIIA both drive narratives domestic and abroad, admitted as an authority by the very politicians they direct.  An effort by our social engineers to form societal order out of chaos using dialectics was the plan. 


So, in the end, as the Big Four walked the Place de Concorde to the admiration of the media and the headlines of peace spread around the earth heralding Wilson, Lloyd George, and French Prime Minister Clemenceau as the new fathers of victory, these lesser-known men of the Inquiry, hidden in the shadow work of statecraft, far from the glare of flash cameras, intellectual scholars responsible for creating a shadow government within the Woodrow Wilson administration that has existed ever since, emerge to the modern day historian as the prime movers in Paris, the men of the Inquiry without a doubt, the most influential men of action at modern history’s most influential of peace conferences.

Century Association logo. All three presidents of the 1912 election were Centurions. Two of which considered founding fathers of the Progressive Era.

You can follow the author on twitter @TriviumMethod and at The History of Propaganda on Youtube.

The Inquiry in Paris

“The scholar expert, today has a status and role both commonplace and indispensable. This was not always so: the change began with US participation in the First World War, when professional historians from the most respected universities in the country were brought into government service as technical experts and advisers.” (4)


Officially, the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 was to establish a new and lasting world peace. The conference and its promise inspiring the hearts and minds of the world, and the American Delegation, on the international stage for the first time, was to deliver on that promise.   Despite what most still think, the Great War was never meant to “make the world safe for democracy”, nor has it since lived up to the promise of Fabian propagandist H. G. Wells as, “The War That Will End War”. Yet, strangely, these verifiably false slogans remain as the stated causal factors behind the war. Today, these headlines are seen as poorly aged propaganda from even before the ink was dry, as we, their children of the future, find ourselves in an historically unique position to both, bear witness to, and cast final judgement upon the long-term results of the Great War and the peace talks that followed. We now endure a nearly perpetual world of war while never truly experiencing democracy in our lifetimes.


And, as we mark the 100th anniversary of both Walter Lippmann’s Public Opinion and Edward Bernays’ Crystallizing Public Opinion with yet another war of containment in Central Europe we at The History of Propaganda continue our From the Embers of War series with part three, the Inquiry in Paris.


By the time the Inquiry arrived in Paris, they had been reduced to a couple dozen of their most important and influential members. When they boarded in New Jersey, they were all fairly obscure social science professors, but in Paris they became the technical ‘expert’ in search of a permanent world peace. Each division chief was hand-picked for his particular field of study but each member also chosen for his liberal, progressive sentimentality. Nearly all members of the America Delegation in Paris were liberal. Wilson and his advisors made a specific point of it. The entire conference itself presented within a progressive liberal framework of social equality and reform. Liberation of the State through self-determination the conference’s professed mission. And the Inquiry were to play a leading role in nothing less than: the formation and dissolvement of entire countries, the writing of all five peace treaties, the finalizing of war reparations, and the authoring of the conference’s primary achievement, the first international body, the very Covenant of the League of Nations.


But the Inquiry’s immense influence doesn’t end there, they were also central in the formation of both the foreign offices, and the modern intelligence agencies, of the United States and Britain. The Inquiry members were all major proponents of an Anglophile reunion, the bringing back of America under the control of Great Britain. This one of the primary goals in Paris, setting the foundation for the entire profession of international affairs as we know it, and it is in Paris, for the first time in the modern era, we see the first formal association between academia, government, private corporations, and press media. And, from out of the embers of the first world war the scholar expert emerges as the sage counsel to all. Such an indispensable part of today’s culture, this reliance on ‘the expert’ opinion got its start in Paris. Created as a necessary element to an ever more complex world meant to guide global policy and public opinion through the advice of the technical expert. The Inquiry in Paris a major harbinger to the American exceptionalism that would define the 20th Century.


Each Inquiry member was named a Division Chief in Paris, and was given a portfolio representing a geographical region on the grand chessboard of Eurasia.  And each Division Chief was provided for by a team of secretaries and researchers, tasked with presenting to the conference and its delegations ethnographic, topographic, and geographic reports on the socio-economic issues confounding each region, taking into account secret treaties of the past. Each Inquiry member according to his specific ability was tasked with providing the conference according to its specific needs. Their recommendations on national self-determination, demilitarization, border placement, rights to rare earth minerals, and the settling of colonial disputes largely accepted and authored into the Covenant of the League of Nations. They became nation builders, students of the king-maker, moving away from the old-world czarism that existed prior to the war, moving away from the traditional material force of arms, and towards a permanent court built on the principles of international justice. The League, the forebearer to NATO and the UN, was to avoid war through membership into a liberally minded global community, governed through conformity to the greater good.


In the organizational chart offered below, taken from James T. Shotwell’s, At the Paris Peace Conference, we see the organizational chart for the American Delegation. The Inquiry here again, officially labelled as intelligence chiefs, and Bowman the Chief Territorial Specialist and Executive Officer. Bowman was one of the most influential tools of the trade in Paris, later lauded for his expertise and influence on the novel profession of geopolitics was, along with several other Inquiry members, present in San Francisco some twenty-five years after Paris at the creation of the United Nations. Inquiry Chief of Russian and Poland, Robert Howard Lord, was instrumental in the self determination of Poland; William Christian Bullitt, otherwise Horwitz was Scroll and Key from Yale was the head of a mission to Russia during the conference meeting with Lenin and the Bolsheviks three days after Soviet Russia withdrew from war.  The aforementioned James T. Shotwell, largely responsible for authoring the International Labor Organization in Paris was, according to his alma mater at Columbia “present at, indeed instrumental in, the creation of some of the most important international institutions of the twentieth century”.   

Walter Lippmann, James Brown Scott and David Hunter Miller were also indispensable in Paris. Lippmann, the primary author of Wilson’s Fourteen Points speech that leads to the League of Nations covenant, and Miller, international law expert of the Inquiry, co-authoring that very Covenant of the League of Nations. Lippmann again, this time together with other Inquiry members including George Louis Beer and Whitney Shepardson, as well as many others within the larger US delegation, also happened to be American members of Cecil Rhodes inspired Round Table Movement. With the explicit desire to bring together all of the English-speaking races. The merger between the Inquiry and the Round Table members a rarely spoken of, but none the less important proceeding in Paris in that meetings between the two groups, outside of plenary conferences, held at the Majestic Hotel, were instrumental in the creation of both the Council on Foreign Relations and her British counterpart, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, two key components to their British/American Reunion. Today, these institutions remain two of the leading not-for-profit think-tanks in the world, steering global opinion through public diplomacy ever since.

All of the men of the Inquiry, as were those of the larger American delegation, and the entire conference itself, with its 32 participating countries, all acting in the name of a noble lie, they were willing samaritans, called to the highest of humanitarian purposes, a world-wide call for peace that today more resembles that of a holy pious science fiction. And, the public’s continued blind reliance on the expert, first established by the Inquiry in Paris having run its course for over a century, now surpassing in definition even that of cult religion as scientist sponsored dogmas fabricated from whole cloth are repeated ad nauseam byway of television hypnotism, consumed hook, line, and sinker by the ever-loyal living room sycophant. This phenomenon observed at the time by New York World editor Frank Irving Cobb, “Confronted by the inexorable necessities of war, governments conscripted public opinion …. They goose-stepped it. They taught it to stand at attention and salute … It sometimes seems that after the armistice was signed, millions of Americans must have taken a vow that they would never again do any thinking for themselves. They were willing to die for their country, but not willing to think for it.” This reliance on the technical expert as an answer to an ever more complex world the common progressive school of thought shared throughout the conference has resulted in the rampant, runaway societal apathy that now threatens to cast away to the winds forever the rights of due process and informed consent; personal autonomy and honest, uncontaminated scientific exploration.

History shows that these men at the nexus of business and statecraft instead of delivering an idyllic dream,created the blueprint for a real-life utopian nightmare. The plans for an open-air prison panopticon the likes of which Fabians Huxley and Orwell and Wells would eventually take their bestselling storylines from. The League of Nations, to the surprise of most, in fact a Fabian creation, and Paris proving to be nothing more than a front, a blind for a socialist inter-allied plan of global socialist control. The pursuit of a universal liberal hive mind.

The peace conference, a reflection of the war in that it was primarily economic in nature, not humanitarian. For when has a war ever been humanitarian? At stake in Paris in fact, were the chief economic regions of Mittel Europa. The main areas of conflict during the war perfectly overlay the most richly concentrated areas of Central European natural resources as well as the most important trade routes – those connecting the Western European trade routes with the Near and Far East oil and gas reserves. What national security advisor under Carter, Zbigniew Brzezinski coined “the grand chessboard“.  This area of immense historical importance in the world and the processes by which it was reformed following World War I have directly led to the catastrophic social programmes and institutions we are buckling under today. These institutions and the ideologies that steer them, and the real reasons for the peace conference of 1919 of great interest to the History of Propaganda and will be the subject of a series of future articles.

“These institutions and the ideologies that steer them, and the real reasons for the peace conference of 1919 are of great interest to the History of Propaganda and will be the subject of a series of future articles.”

How Secret Societies Rule The World

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

George Stephanopoulos

Madeleine Albright

Walter B. Slocombe

James Woolsey

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.

Of the eighteen signatories of the letter, thirteen would go on to fill important cabinet positions within the Bush administration; at least eleven were members of, or worked directly within the Council on Foreign Relations; and every last one of the eighteen were well known neocons:

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)



William Kristol

Robert Kagan


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

As I’m sure is now clear to the reader, we see a commonality in the inner structure of all of these secretive groups of powerful men: the Rhodes Round Table, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Royal Institute of International Affairs and even the more contemporary Project for A New American Century who all operate in a consistent manner of secrecy and – from Rhodes to Rumsfeld – all are driven by a common thread of Anglo American supremacy that can be traced directly back to The Last Will and Testament of one Cecil John Rhodes. An imperial aggression being hidden under words like ‘interventionalism’ and ‘expansionism’.  They all subscribe to the “Round Table method of discussion plus a journal” and their intent is to influence the ‘leaders of thought’ to steer foreign and domestic policy in any way they see fit. In all cases, their goals are largely hidden from the public, yet their buildings are brick and mortar. Their names are scrubbed from the front pages of history, yet they have procured disproportionate power and influence through their unelected advisory roles. both in the public and private sectors, and often times simultaneously it is these secret collectives that direct corporate policy of not only large Defense contractors like Booz Allen, Lockheed Martin and Halliburton, but government policy on a state, federal and international level.

You can follow the author on Bitchute, Gab, Minds, Trooth, and Twitter @TriviumMethod, and on Facebook and YouTube at The History of Propaganda

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) pages 58,59,61, 73.

4) See also


6) E. Garrett, The Empire of the Century. 1905, 481. See also, The Nation and the Empire, 1913, introduction.



9) pg 5.


11) pg 5.

12) forward, Continuing the Inquiry, The Council on Foreign Relations From 1921 to 1996.

13) pg 29

14) pg 29





19) Statement of Principles—statement%20of%20principles.pdf



Connect with Team BPInsights - Updates - Publications

Join Our Mailing List