Chapter 10: An Open Secret

As unified strides were being taken by the Rockefeller Reich over the course of the century to consolidate this cabal’s control over America’s education, wealth, public information, national security, and the collective mind as a whole, there is in fact no room for doubt on where the oligarchs were taking this in the long run. David Rockefeller is far from the only power elite spokesman to make their intentions for a New World Order publicly known, although no particular meaning of this term need be presumed up front. James Warburg, son of Federal Reserve founding chairman Paul Warburg, gave a senate committee on foreign relations his strict assurance that “we shall have world government, whether or not we like it. The question is only whether world government will be achieved by consent or by conquest.”

And there is no doubt that under the Rockefeller Reich the pieces were being moved gradually in that direction. For even as they were focused on conquering the American psyche in the early 1950s, another chapter in their groundwork for globalized consolidation was under construction in Europe. During his stint as U.S. Ambassador to England, Averell Harriman brought with him to the United States  Dr. Joseph Retinger, a founder of the post World War II European Movement, where he was introduced to David and Nelson Rockefeller, John Foster Dulles, and then-CIA director, Walter Bedell Smith (a Knight Commander of the Order of Bath, who succeeded Harriman as Ambassador to Moscow). 

Shortly after Retinger’s visit to the states, Smith left his post as Director of Central Intelligence, handing the baton over to Allen Dulles, and then proceeded to become a founding member of the super secret Bilderberg Group with Retinger, “Father of the Bilderbergs,” and Holland’s Prince Bernhard—a former I.G Farben executive and SS member. Retinger had previously worked with Allen Dulles to form the American Committee on a United Europe. C.D. Jackson of the PSB was also key in organizing this think tank which had their first official gathering at the Netherlands’ Bilderberg Hotel in 1954.    

It should be noted that the Harriman, the Dulles and Rockefeller brothers all led in the formation of this group using their CFR influence. Remembering the nature of the CFR’s concentric inner circle(s) of secrecy, and the ancestry of its converged Masonic streams, it comes as no coincidence that the Bilderberg’s first meeting resulted in the European Union. For it was the medieval Knights Templar who envisioned a unified Europe under a centralized structure, and at last, this dream was well on its way to materializing through their masonic lineage.

But by the early 1970s, published books and other media had proliferated just enough so that this degree of consolidation around David Rockefeller made him the focal point of conspiratorial scrutiny even among nationally syndicated voices. Perhaps in their overconfidence, David and other CFR figureheads had gotten too sloppy with their cult-like dominance in politics and media. John J. McCloy once boasted, “Whenever we needed a new man (for a government position), we just thumbed through the roll of council members and put through a call to New York.” 

An interesting exception to this pattern of recruitment is seen in the sudden rise of Henry Kissinger. An obscure academic at the time, Kissinger had attended a 1955 meeting at Virginia’s Marine Corp School when its host, Nelson Rockefeller, perceived something special in his worldview and thinking (perhaps it also helped that Kissinger had been translator for Allen Dulles during his post as OSS station chief in Berlin). Kissinger was subsequently introduced by Nelson to his brother David and to ranking members of the Atomic Energy Commission, the CIA, military, and State Department. Kissinger’s resulting book, Nuclear Weapons and Foreign Policy, articulated with policy-shaping power the case that a nuclear war for the United States was winnable. 

Then again, Kissinger’s sudden rise to power was no exception in its reflection of the weight David Rockefeller carried toward foreign policy stakeholders as CFR chairman. As even the Rockefeller family biographer, Alvin Moscow, admits, “So august has been the membership of the Council [of Foreign Relations] that it had been seen in some quarters as the heart of the eastern Establishment. When it comes to foreign affairs, it is the eastern Establishment.  In fact, it is difficult to point to a single major policy in U.S foreign affairs that has been established since [Woodrow] Wilson which was diametrically opposed to then current thinking in the Council on Foreign Relations.” 

With Rockefeller’s thought-control over foreign (and therefore national) policy becoming this obvious, the public optics conundrum likewise threatened the CIA by association. For one, almost all of the agency’s directors have been CFR members, and as CIA whistleblower Victor Marchetti would note, “The influential but private Council, composed of several hundred of the country’s top political, military, business, and academic leaders, has long been the CIA’s principal ‘constituency’ in the American Public. When the Agency has needed prominent citizens to front for its proprietary company or for other special assistance, it has often turned to Council members.”

In apparent attempt to manage perception, Rockefeller did make some changes to the CFR in the early 1970s, extending its invitation-only membership to a few blacks and more than a dozen women. But indeed, this was little more than the bandaging of a public relations wound. Perhaps in keeping with Adam Weishaupt’s prescription, the time had come for the Reich to transition into a new wineskin. 

The idea of the Trilateral Commission, originally brought to David Rockefeller in 1972 by Zbigniew Brzezinski, had its rudimentary thesis In Brzezinski’s 1970 book, Between Two Ages: America’s Role in the Technotronic Era. It presaged a global community “that is shaped culturally, psychologically, socially, and economically by the impact of technology and electronics”—one for which a new social order would be required. 

In this world’s not too distant future, “National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept,” he argues, and “though the objective of shaping a community of developed nations is less ambitious than the goal of a world government, it is more attainable.” But as Brzezinski laid out in a CFR paper that same year, a council representing the United States, Western Europe, and Japan would be a  “good start” in this direction toward world government, in the event it proves necessary.

After Brzezinski idea was well received at a Bilderberg meeting, the Trilateral Commission’s planning began in July of 1972 at the Rockefeller Estate in Pocantico Hills, New York. But since David Rockefeller was the Commission’s founder, it also would attract conspiratorial concern for being a centralized power circle having its tentacles around the White House and national security apparatus. 

Brzezinski, who was the Trilateral Commission’s first director, was the one to have recruited Jimmy Carter as a member in 1973. Then, three years later Carter made Brzezinski his assistant for National Security Affairs just before becoming president in 1977. And watching eyes would definitely take notice of this posturing. Journalist Robert Eringer cautioned, “Many of the original members of the Trilateral Commission are now in positions of power where they are able to implement policy recommendations of the Commission; recommendations, that they themselves prepared on behalf of the Commission. It is for this reason that the Commission has acquired a reputation for being the Shadow Government of the West.” As such, even the establishment-friendly Washington Post had to address the elephant in the room.

“But here is the unsettling thing about the Trilateral Commission. The President-elect (Carter) is a member. So is Vice-president-elect Walter F. Mondale. So are the New Secretaries of State, Defense and Treasury, Cyrus R. Vance, Harold Brown and W. Michael Blumenthal. So is Zbigniew Brzezinski, who is a former Trilateral director and Carter’s national security advisor, also a bunch of others who will make foreign policy for America in the next four years.”

And yet, the Rockefeller Reich’s dominance wouldn’t last only four more years. In 1980, when California Governor Ronald Reagan was competing with George H. W. Bush for the Republican presidential nomination, Reagan blasted his opponent for having belonged to both the CFR and Trilateral Commission, assuring listeners that there would be no place for Bush in his administration. 

Soon after this statement, however, the strangest thing happened. 

The talking point began to resound throughout the news media echo chamber that a dream ticket for the Republicans would be a Reagan-Bush merger, unifying the party in terms favorable to  voters. And before long, Reagan would find himself under immense pressure and little other choice but to recommend on the convention floor the nomination of George H.W Bush as his running mate.

It is thought-provoking that President Reagan hadn’t been in office but a couple of months when a disturbed man named John Hinckley opened fire on him. Witnesses described the hypnotic look on Hinckley’s face much as witnesses did of RFK’s assassin, Sihran Sihran, who looked absent-minded as he fired and missed several shots within point blank range of Kennedy. It is likewise thought provoking that Allen Dulles—according to his scheduling calendar—had met with MK Ultra’s lead scientist, Sydney Gottlieb, just two weeks after RFK’s assassination. Could it be that the CIA’s shadow director had success after all with his ambitions for mind-controlled assassins? 

A lot more could be made of this mystery given the strange ties that Reagan’s shooter, Hinckley, had to Nazism, to Yale’s campus—even though he wasn’t a student—and to the Bush family in general through their associates, the Hinckley family. What we do know, is that following his recovery from the failed attempt Reagan ceased to give the establishment difficultly during his two terms in the White House. Regardless, it is in the abundance of hard facts available to our 2020 Overview that the cryptic reference of a “New World Order” made by both Bush presidents reveals the concept for what it is—a repackaged, globalized macrocosm of what Nazism in its nationalistic framing called Germany’s “New Order.” 

Of course, even to this day, any immediate results from an online search of “New World Order” populates with the contextual warning of being a conspiracy theory. But the question remains, what precisely is theoretical about it? As recently as 1997, Abby M. O’Neill, niece of David Rockefeller and chairwoman of the Rockefeller Brother Fund, wrote in the Fund’s annual report of their having “a refocused one-world strategy, with an explicitly global perspective and emphasis on the convergence of national and international frameworks.”  

Meanwhile, the Democrat president occupying the Oval Office for the bulk of that decade was no less an advocate for “New World Order,” and all evidence points to the fact that Bill and Hillary Clinton were nothing other than groomed successors of the Rockefeller-Harriman-Bush Clique. In fact,  Dr. John Coleman, a former British intelligence officer and whistleblower on the Conspiracy, published his prediction in Bill Clinton’s 1992 run for the White House one year before any public announcement was made. How did he acquire this information?

According to Coleman, the basis of this prediction was a British intelligence contact who tipped him off to a meeting the Arkansas Governor had with Pamela Harriman, widow of the late Averell Harriman, wherein she offered him her blessing and support to run as the Democratic candidate against their fellow insider incumbent President George H. W. Bush.  With this assurance of the Reich’s Hegelian control over the White House, the oligarchy could sleep well knowing their secrets would be in trusted hands.

Foregoing the temptation to unpack the scandal of Governor Clinton’s providing cover for the Bush CIA during their drug-running days in Mena, Arkansas, we may skip ahead to other simple facts indicating that the Reich’s “monolithic conspiracy” has remained intact up through recent history. Strobe Talbott, Clinton’s personal foreign policy advisor throughout his administration, is an embodiment of this reality. 

At Yale Talbott was chairmen of Yale Daily News, a position held previously by such Skull and Bones media giants Henry Luce and William F. Buckley. At Oxford, Talbott shared not just his living space with Bill Clinton as roommate, but their status as Rhodes Scholars—an endowment originally established by Cecil Rhodes (founder of the supersecret Round Table at the CFR’s core). Before his promotion to the White House as part of Clinton’s inner circle, Talbott had penned The Birth of a Global Nation, a Time article in July of 1992 in which he passionately argued that, “In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all.” 

But perhaps the oligarchy’s heralding of an NWO through Hegelian means was applied never more arrogantly than in 2004, when America’s voters were essentially given the choice of either a Republican or Democrat candidate—Governor George W. Bush and Senator John Kerry—but none regarding the fact that both were members of Skull and Bones, or that both would be verbal advocates of that nebulous term “New World Order,” which, curiously, its chuckling purveyors would never clearly and intelligibly explain to listeners.

Perhaps this “open secret” approach set forth by H.G. Wells has proven a most effective means of hiding their agenda toward world dominion in fulfillment of Weishaupt’s instruction of “open, hearty behavior, show” and condescension. What has since come of the Rockefeller Reich and these plans toward global consolidation, wherever they may be at this point by the year 2020, is not the question we will herein pursue. Any pursuit of the answers belongs to the alert and knowledgeable citizenry of today who understand the matter’s practical relevance to quality of life, and who are equipped now with a historical framework to connect certain dots on their own. 

Keep in mind, Martin Luther King Jr. observed in his day the oddity that in a time when the technology has availed itself to eliminate poverty and hunger throughout the world, these scientific breakthroughs were being applied instead toward war and bloodshed. King’s would become the journey of learning that a “corrupt regime stacked against the poor” was in control of an artificial democracy. Throughout that final year of his life, limited by the information of his day, King could only make it so far. His legacy, however, is not yet done paving the way for a new generation to harness the power of Truth toward a preferable world.

MLK: The Hegelian Antidote

Naturally, the well-meaning person will ask what could be so nefarious about the idea of a one-world government. But hopefully the well-meaning person will also consider just who would be running its massive totalitarian structure. Would we, the world’s everyday people, want governance from an oligarchical lineage of elitists whose heritage includes hushed efforts to target ethnicities for population reduction based on their idea of race hygiene? 

Consider the duplicity that historically characterized the Reich’s Hegelian grip on the American mind. The Rockefeller Brother Fund (just mentioned above) had also been providing money to the NAACP and various grassroots organizations, just as they had done for opposite causes. Similarly, they had been funding some of the leading environmental movements while owning industries that were gravely responsible for pollution. Are we to believe that the motivation for such funding was altruistic, or might it more logically reflect a Hegelian foothold to control from within any uprising toward the oligarchy through such avenues?

In other words, a totalitarian government it would certainly be in the hands of those who achieved consolidation by gradually subverting democracy while paying it lip service. Inevitably, this suppression of individual empowerment goes in hand with rigged economic and social paradigms (the “State”, according to Wundt, Hegel, and Marx) which in turn shape the academic and professional context rigged against true progress and creativity, leaving enough room for these virtues in artificial display only. A limited hangout, as it were.

But early as 1949, amid his days at Crozer Theological Seminary, a deliverer for setting the world’s people free from this bondage by opening their eyes to it was arguably in the making. For even at that young age, Martin Luther King Jr. was discovering a vision for “ministry” that didn’t fit any societal mold. He wanted to think of a way to peacefully reconcile racial and other divisions between people of very different backgrounds at their root cause. 

This would require that he first understand the different backgrounds and world views where people were coming from. With the self-educating fire this vision sparked in his bones, the young seminarian spent his Christmas break in 1949 reading Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital, wishing to learn for himself what appealed to people about Marxism. He would come away from his studies concluding that the Truth which could set humankind free from bondage to the 20th century social ills of war, famine, racism, and poverty was found neither in Communism or Capitalism in the way that it was traditionally being modeled (the Reich’s monopoly capitalism). For these two “isms” smacked of a contrived and false dichotomy. So already, a 20 year old King was refusing the power elite’s purple cool aid.

It was as early as the Montgomery bus boycotts in 1955, when a local newspaper printed disinformation about the desegregationist leaders who were organizing the event, that King discerned and defused this as a “divide and conquer” propaganda tactic, which aimed to stir dissension among the movement’s leaders. Perhaps this gave observing powers their first glimpse into a man who would not be so easily bewitched by their Hegelian devilry. And it is through the lens of this 2020 Overview that the truth of King’s assassination becomes the story of how a cabal whose ways are death made plans to pull the trigger on him having accepted that his unique intellectual make-up countered their Hegelian hold on America’s psyche at every point of grip. 

Whereas the Kennedy brothers threatened to undermine this establishment through their use of executive power, King’s is the real-life manual of how a person lacking the formal powers of office can have the courage, independence of mind, and keys of grassroots leadership to dethrone an oppressive regime through the power of well-integrated ideas. Herein lies an untapped trove of no small history lessons. Could this be partly why the truth of his assassination has remained so aggressively suppressed until now?

Either way, if we the world’s common people will have a fighting chance at retaining our intellectual freedoms—or at re-authenticating them to discover the potential of a real democracy—more servant leaders of MLK’s brass are needed. For such a time as this, we would do well to unravel the layers of this man’s learning and soul substance to fully discover what made him the stuff of nightmares for the power elite.