Part 2

excerpted from the book

The Shadows of Power

The Council on Foreign Relations and the American Decline

by James Perloff

Western Islands Publishers, 1988, paperback

Yetvas members of this same Establishment who were at the helm during the Vietnam War. ambassadors to Saigon from 1963 to 1973 - Henry Cabot Lodge, Maxwell Taylor, and Ellsworth Bunker - were members of the Council [on Foreign Relations]. LBJ sought John McCloy for that particular job, but he turned it down.

One of the chief engineers of the Vietnam fiasco was Walt Rostow, chairman of the State Department's policy planning council from 1961 to 1966, when he became National Security Adviser. The Washington Post of August 10, 1966, called him "the Rock of Johnson's Viet Policy." But was Rostow a hawk? A conservative rightwinger? Like his equally prominent brother, Eugene Victor Debs Rostow (named for the Socialist Party leader Eugene Debs), Walt Rostow had been a member of the CFR since 1955. He was rejected for employment in the Eisenhower administration three times because he could not pass security checks. In, Rostow declared that: -

Walt Rostow, chairman of the State Department's policy planning council from 1961 to 1966, and a CFR member, in his book 'The United States in the World Arena', 1960

It is a legitimate American national objective to see removed from all nations - including the United States - the right to use substantial military force to pursue their own interests. Since this residual right is the root of national sovereignty and the basis for the existence of an international arena of power, it is, therefore, an American interest to see an end to nationhood as it has been historically defined.

Robert McNamara who was Secretary of Defense during first half of the [Vietnam] war... After resigning, he stated, "I am a world citizen now," and was appointed president of the World Bank. During his tenure there, the Bank's annual lending grew from $1 billion to $11.5 billion; in 1978 he oversaw a $60 million loan to Communist Vietnam.

Averell Harriman served as Kennedy's Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, and was later chief negotiator at the Paris peace talks. Harriman ... was a trailblazer of trade with the Bolsheviks. He was instrumental in bringing the Communists to power in Romania. Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin customarily attended Harriman's birthday parties, and even vacationed with him in Florida.

Another critical Establishment figure was William Bundy, appointed Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs in 1964, the same year he became a director of the CFR. The Pentagon Papers later exposed him as a major architect of our Vietnam policy. It was he who "prematurely" drafted the Tonkin Gulf Resolution. And it was his brother, McGeorge Bundy (CFR) who, as National Security Adviser, oversaw the mission that resulted in the Tonkin incident. McGeorge went on to become president of the Ford Foundation.

William Bundy was certainly no flag-waving anti-Communist. He had once donated $400 to the Alger Hiss defense fund. In 1972, David Rockefeller chose him as the new editor of Foreign Affairs, replacing Hamilton Fish Armstrong, who was retiring after fifty years of service. Under Bundy's guidance, Foreign Affairs began to repudiate Cold War attitudes. J. Robert Moskin, writing in Town & Country, notes that "Bundy surprised his critics by publishing articles in Foreign Affairs that questioned the wisdom of American intervention in Southeast Asia."

Thus a grand paradox crystallized. Bundy had helped get us into the no-win war; now he edited a journal suggesting that Vietnam proved the futility of challenging Communism. His apologists believe that he was being penitent after realizing his errors in Vietnam. But there remains another possibility: that it was planned this way.

[Dean] Acheson, like [McGeorge] Bundy, attended Groton, Yale, and Harvard Law School. At the latter he became a protégé of the leftist professor Felix Frankfurter, who got him a job in Washington. Even before the Soviet Union was recognized by the U.S., Joseph Stalin hired An to represent Bolshevik interests in America. During the Roosevelt and Truman administrations, he alternated between private law practice and public service. In 1945, he told a Madison Square Garden rally of the Soviet-American Friendship Society. "We understand and agree with the Soviet leaders that to have friendly governments along her borders is essential both for the security of the Soviet Union and for the peace of the world."

During the Vietnam War, [Lyndon] Johnson met periodically with an advisory group he himself called "the Wise Men" - fourteen VIP's, twelve of whom were CFR members. Acheson was chief among these. McCloy, Lovett, and Harriman were included in the gatherings.

In 1965, Johnson was reluctant to heighten our role in Vietnam any further, and explained his reasons before the assembled patriarchs. The Isaacson and Thomas book, The Wise Men, which is intended as a tribute to some of these men, relates:

"Acheson fidgeted impatiently as he listened to Johnson wallow in self-pity. Finally, he could stand it no longer. "I blew my top and told him he was wholly right on Vietnam," Acheson wrote [to Truman], "that he had no choice except to press on, that explanations were not as important as successful action."

Acheson's scolding emboldened the others. "With this lead my colleagues came thundering in like the charge of the Scots Greys at Waterloo," Acheson exulted to the former President. "They were fine; old Bob Lovett, usually cautious, was all out."

In effect, the Wise Men seized Johnson by the collar, kicked his butt, and told him to escalate. They were almost unanimous in this exhortation. William Bundy said that this was the occasion when "America committed to land war on the mainland of Asia. No more critical decision was made."

Each year, as the war intensified, Johnson consulted the Wise Men, who told him to push on.

But in private they felt differently. Halberstam notes: "As early as May 1964 Dean Acheson stopped a White House friend at a cocktail party and said he thought Vietnam was going to turn out much worse than they expected, that it was all much weaker than the reports coming in . And Acheson's correspondence from that period demonstrates pessimism about the war he did not share with the President.

Averell Harriman played the hawk for Johnson, so much that he received a scolding from former Kennedy aide Arthur Schlesinger. Harriman brought Schlesinger to his hotel room, took a stiff drink, and told him confidentially that he was against the war.

William Bundy wrote in a memoir that he had misgivings about the pro-escalation advice the elder statesmen had given the President, but he did not so advise Johnson.

Referring to Acheson, Lovett, and McCloy, The Wise Men asks:

Even in 1965, they harbored serious doubts about committing U.S. troops to the defense of the government of South Vietnam. Why did they fail to convey those doubts to the President?

That, of course, is the $64,000 question! But Isaacson and Thomas supply no satisfying answer.

In March 1968, in Science & Mechanics, a dozen top U.S. military officers made individual statements concerning Vietnam. They summarized how the restrictions on the armed forces had prolonged the war, and asserted that the U.S. could win in a few months if only it would adopt realistic strategy, which they outlined. Such views were considered extremely dangerous in Establishment circles.

That same month, Johnson was scheduled to see the Wise Men again. He expected that, as usual, he would be patted on the back and told to continue the war. But before the conference, the Wise Men received negative briefings about the war from three individuals whom the wily Acheson had been consulting over the previous month.

The next morning, Johnson sat down with the Wise Men, and received the shock of his life. Based on that single set of briefings, they had been wondrously transformed from hawks to doves: the war, they said, was a rotten idea after all. Acheson, seated next to the President, bluntly informed him that thoughts of victory were illusory, and that the time had come for the disengagement process. The Wise Men tells us:

General Maxwell Taylor was appalled and "amazed" at the defection. "The same mouths that said a few months before to the President, 'You're on the right course, but do more,' were now saying that the policy was a failure," recalled Taylor. He could think of no explanation, except that "my Council on Foreign Relations friends were living in the cloud of The New York Times."

Johnson hit the roof.


When the meeting broke up, he grabbed a few of the stragglers and began to rant. "Who the hell brainwashed those friends of yours?" he demanded of George Ball. He stopped General Taylor. "What did those damn briefers say to you?"

This, then, is the picture that now appears to be emerging. For years, the Wise Men had prodded LBJ deeper into Vietnam, until he had committed over a half million combat troops. Now, in effect, they said: "It's all a mistake - sorry about that," and left him holding the bag. It was he, not they, who bore the fury of a rebelling America.

Johnson briefly entertained thoughts of defiantly pushing for victory, but realized he would receive no support from the political infrastructure surrounding him. LBJ's March 1968 meeting with the Wise Men was his last. According to Townsend Hoopes, then Under Secretary of the Air Force, "The President was visibly shocked by the magnitude of the defection." One aide reported that it left him "deeply shaken." Five days later, a broken man, he announced on television:"... I shall not seek, and I will not accept, the nomination of my party for another term as your President." A surprised nation was left to conclude that this had been prompted by the good showing Bobby Kennedy and Eugene McCarthy were making in the Democratic primaries.

'Ultimately, culpability for the war would be focused on the military. In 1971, Louisiana Congressman John Rarick declared:

The My Lai massacre, the sentencing of Lt. Calley to life imprisonment, "The Selling of the Pentagon," and the so-called Pentagon papers are leading examples of attempts to shift all the blame to the military in the eyes of the people.

But no one identifies the Council on Foreign Relations - the CFR - a group of some 1400 Americans which includes as members almost every top level decision and policy maker in the Vietnam War.

CBS tells the people it wants them to know what is going on and who is to blame. Why doesn't CBS tell the American people about the CFR and let the people decide whom to blame for the Vietnam fiasco - the planners and top decision makers of a closely knit financial-industrial-intellectual aristocracy or military leaders under civilian control who have had little or no voice in the overall policies and operations and who are forbidden by law to tell the American people their side.

The My Lai incident, "The Selling of the Pentagon," and the Pentagon papers have not scratched the surface in identifying the responsible kingmakers of the new ruling royalty, let alone in exposing the CFR role in Vietnam. Who will tell the people the truth if those who control "the right to know machinery" also control the government?

The war in Vietnam was not created by conservative "hawks". It, was created by luminaries of the CFR - whose globalism and tolerance of Communism is a matter of record. As in the world wars, it was these two systems that emerged as the victors. At home, nationalism - the anathema of the CFR - hit an all-time low, as embittered young Americans lost faith in their country. And on the other side of the world, little North Vietnam, like North Korea and Cuba before it, was allowed prestigious triumph against the mighty USA. Furthermore, thanks in part to the war's sapping of the Defense budget, the Soviets, militarily inferior at the war's outset, had reached parity with us by its end.

Richard Nixon, like Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson, was not ( a member of the Establishment by birth and breeding, but his political career became inextricably linked to it. In 1946, Nixon was a small-town lawyer who had never held any elected office, not even town dogcatcher. Yet six years later he was Vice President-elect of the United States. His supersonic success compared to that of his running mate, Dwight Eisenhower.

Nixon's political odyssey began with a race for the House seat of California's 12th District. In the election, he faced Democrat Jerry Voorhis, a ten-year veteran of Congress. Voorhis was an enemy of the banking establishment; he had introduced a bill calling for the dissolution of the Federal Reserve System, and had denounced deficit spending and the international bankers who profit from it in his book Out of Debt, Out of Danger.

Nixon won the Congressional seat. Then in 1950 he was elected to the Senate after a dirty campaign that earned him the nickname "Tricky Dick."

New York Governor Nelson Rockefeller had also sought the Republican "nomination in 1960; he even observed ritual by having an article entitled 'Purpose and Policy" published in Foreign Affairs that April. Rockefeller was an archetypal Establishment globalist. Speaking at Harvard, he declared that "the nation-state, standing alone, threatens in many ways to seem as anachronistic as the Greek city-state eventually became in ancient times.

Rockefeller could not win the support of enough grass roots part members to secure the nomination. But he did have the power to influence Nixon.

... Since the Establishment ... had de facto control of both parties' candidates, Nixon's defeat [by JFK] that November did not worry them. Ultimately, it didn't bother Nixon either, since he had only to wait for his ship to come in.

In 1968, Nelson Rockefeller made his third consecutive bid for the GOP nomination, logging another article in Foreign Affairs ("Policy and the People"). The press characterized him as Nixon's liberal "rival," but they were patently allies. If you can't be President, the next best thing is to have influence over the man who is.

Nixon gave the Establishment his own signals by writing an article for the October 1967 Foreign Affairs. Called "Asia After Vietnam," it hinted that the door could be opened to Communist China - a long-time CFR goal that became reality during his Presidency. The article also showed that Nixon was wise to globalist strategy. He wrote of the Asian disposition "to evolve regional approaches to development needs and to the evolution of a new world order." A "new world order" was precisely what Nelson Rockefeller was calling for in his 1968 campaign.

Between 1970 and 1972, the Establishment was rocked by the release of new exposés. These included The Naked Capitalist by former FBI official W. Cleon Skousen, and None Dare Call It Conspiracy by Gary Allen. The latter, even though it sold over five million copies, was ignored by the mass media. However, some defense of the Council on Foreign Relations began appearing in the press. Anthony Lukas in the New York Times and John Franklin Campbell in New York magazine wrote feature articles suggesting that the CFR was a has-been collection of foreign-policy fossils, no longer welcome in Washington with the "right-wing" Nixon in office. Campbell even titled his article "The Death Rattle of the American Establishment."

This was far from the truth. Richard Nixon broke all records by giving more than 110 CFR members government appointments. As under Eisenhower, GOP regulars were by and large excluded from the search for administration personnel. Once again, the faces were mostly new, but the ideology was not.

John F. Kennedy's choice for National Security Adviser was McGeorge Bundy, who had been teaching a course at Harvard called "The United States in World Affairs." Nixon's choice for National Security Adviser was the professor who succeeded Bundy in teaching that course: Henry Kissinger.

Kissinger, who advised Bundy during the Kennedy years, was undoubtedly the most powerful figure in the Nixon administration.

... The professor [Kissinger] authored many articles for Foreign Affairs, including one in January 1969 on how the Vietnam peace talks should be conducted. Not surprisingly, he later became our chief negotiator in Paris.

The Rockefellers' intimacy with Kissinger equaled that of the Council's. J. Robert Moskin notes:

It was principally because of his long association with the Rockefellers that Henry Kissinger became a force in the Council. The New York Times called him "the Council's most influential member," and a Council insider says that "his influence is indirect and enormous - much of it through his Rockefeller connection."

syndicated columnist James Reston (CFR), 1970

It is true that Nixon rose to power as an anti-Communist, a hawk on Vietnam, and an opponent of the New Deal, but once he assumed the responsibilities of the presidency, he began moving toward peace in Vietnam, coexistence with the Communist world of Moscow and Peking, and despite all his political reservations, even toward advocacy of the welfare state at home.

John Kenneth Galbraith wrote in New York magazine, 1970

The least predicted development under the Nixon administration was this great new thrust to socialism. One encounters people who still aren't aware of it. Others must be rubbing their eyes, for certainly the portents seemed all to the contrary.

David Rockefeller moved to form a new internationalist organization - the Trilateral Commission. For some three decades, CFR members had pushed for "Atlantic Union," a bilateral federation of America and Europe. The Trilateral Commission (TC) broadened this objective to include an Asiatic leg.

How did the TC begin? "The Trilateral Commission," wrote Christopher Lydon in the July 1977 Atlantic, "was David Rockefeller brainchild." George Franklin, North American secretary of the Trilateral Commission, stated that it "was entirely David Rockefeller's idea originally." Helping the CFR chairman develop the concept was Zbigniew Brzezinski, who laid the first stone in Foreign Affairs in 1970:

A new and broader approach is needed - creation of a community of the developed nations which can effectively address itself to the larger concerns confronting mankind. In addition to the United States and Western Europe, Japan ought to be included .... A council representing the United States, Western Europe and Japan, with regular meetings of the heads of governments as well as some small standing machinery, would be a good start.

That same year, Brzezinski elaborated these thoughts in his book Between Two Ages It showed Brzezinski to be a classic CFR man - a globalist more than lenient toward Communism. He declared that "National sovereignty is no longer a viable concept," and that "Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man and a victory of reason over belief."

The Trilateral Commission was formally established in 1973 and consisted of leaders in business, banking, government, and mass media from North America, Western Europe, and Japan. David Rockefeller was founding chairman and Brzezinski founding director of the North American branch, most of whose members were also in the CFR.

In the Wall Street Journal, David Rockefeller explained that "the Trilateral Commission is, in reality, a group of concerned citizens interested in fostering greater understanding and cooperation among international allies."

But it was not all so innocent according to Jeremiah Novak who wrote in the Atlantic (July 1977):

The Trilateralists' emphasis on international economics is not entirely disinterested, for the oil crisis forced many developing nations, with doubtful repayment abilities, to borrow excessively. All told, private multinational banks, particularly Rockefeller's Chase Manhattan, have loaned nearly $52 billion to developing countries. An overhauled IMF would provide another source of credit for these nations, and would take the big private banks off the hook. This proposal is the cornerstone of the Trilateral plan.

Senator Barry Goldwater put it less mercifully. In his book With No Apologies, he termed the [Trilateral] Commission "David Rockefeller's newest international cabal", and said, " It is intended to be the vehicle for multinational consolidation of the commercial and banking interests by seizing control of the political government of the United States.

Zbigniew Brzezinski showed how serious TC [Trilateral Commission] ambitions were in the July 1973 Foreign Affairs, stating that "without closer American-European-Japanese cooperation the major problems of today cannot be effectively tackled, and... the active promotion of such trilateral cooperation must now become the central priority of U.S. policy."

After Watergate tainted the Republican Party's image, it became probable that a Democrat would win the 1976 Presidential election. Candidate James Earl Carter was depicted by the press and himself - as the consummate outsider to the Washington Establishment. He was, the story went, a good ol' boy from Georgia, naïve to the ways of the cigar-puffing, city-slicker politicians. People magazine even showed him shoveling peanuts in denims.

Typical of press comment at that time were the words of columnist Joseph C. Harsch of the Christian Science Monitor, who asserted that Carter


has that nomination without benefit of any single kingmaker, or of any power group or power lobby, or of any single segment of the American people. He truly is indebted to no one man and no group interest.


But Harsch belonged to the CFR, whose members are loath to disclose the power of the group, or of its kingmaker, David Rockefeller.

In 1973, Carter dined with the CFR chairman at the latter's Tarrytown, New York estate. Present was Zbigniew Brzezinski, who was helping Rockefeller screen prospects for the Trilateral Commission. Brzezinski later told Peter Pringle of the London Sunday Times that "we were impressed that Carter had opened up trade offices for the state of Georgia in Brussels and Tokyo. That seemed to fit perfectly into the concept of the Trilateral.'" Carter became a founding member of the Commission - and his destiny became calculable.

Senator Barry Goldwater wrote:

David Rockefeller and Zbigniew Brzezinski found Jimmy Carter to be their ideal candidate. They helped him win the nomination and the presidency. To accomplish this purpose, they mobilized the money power of the Wall Street bankers, the intellectual influence of the academic community - which is subservient to the wealth of the great tax-free foundations - and the media controllers represented in the membership of the CFR and the Trilateral."

Seven months before the Democratic nominating convention, the Gallup Poll found less than four percent of Democrats favoring Jimmy Carter for President. But almost overnight ... he became the candidate.

In June of 1976, when the Los Angeles Times described a "task force" that had helped the candidate [Jimmy Carter] prepare his first major foreign policy (which began: "The time has come for us to seek a partnership between North America, Western Europe, and Japan"). The Carter advisors enumerated by the were: Brzezinski, Richard Cooper, Richard Gardner, Henry Owen, Edwin 0. Reischauer, Averell Harriman, Anthony Lake, Robert Bowie, Milton Katz, Abram Chayes, George Ball, and Cyrus Vance. There was one problem with the above list. Every man on it was a member of the CFR. We alluded earlier to Cooper's Foreign Affairs article proposing an international currency, and Gardner's piece calling for "an end run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece."

In a speech in Boston, candidate Carter said: "The people of this country know from bitter experience that we are not going to get changes merely by shifting around the same group of insiders .... The insiders have had their chance and they have not delivered." After the election, top Carter aide Hamilton Jordan remarked: "If, after the inauguration, you find a Cy Vance as Secretary of State and Zbigniew Brzezinski as head of National Security, then I would say we failed. And I'd quit. But that's not going to happen." But it did happen, and Jordan did not quit. Carter simply shifted around "the same group of insiders," turning, like his predecessors, to the institutions built by Wall Street and the international banking establishment.

The new President appointed more than seventy men from the CFR, and over twenty members of the much smaller Trilateral Commission. Zbigniew Brzezinski acknowledges in his White House memoirs: "Moreover, all the key foreign policy decision makers of the Carter Administration had previously served in the Trilateral Commission... " (Carter is considerably less candid in his own memoirs: he does not even mention the Commission.)

Vice President Walter Mondale (CFR-TC) had flown his colors in the October 1974 Foreign Affairs, where he encapsulated much of the Establishment line in a single sentence: "The economic cooperation that is required will involve us most deeply with our traditional postwar allies, Western Europe and Japan, but it must also embrace a new measure of comity with the developing countries, and include the Soviet Union and other Communist nations in significant areas of international economic life."

Other Carter appointees who were in both the CFR and Trilateral Commission: Defense Secretary Harold Brown; Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker; Deputy Secretary of State Warren Christopher; Under Secretary of State Richard Cooper; Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke; Under Secretary of the Treasury Anthony M. Solomon; Deputy Secretary of Energy John Sawhill; Special Assistant to the President Hedley Donovan; Ambassador at Large Henry Owen; and several others. And of course there were "plain" CFR members like Treasury Secretary W. Michael Blumenthal, HEW Secretary Joseph Califano, SALT negotiator Paul Warnke, and dozens of others.

Ronald Reagan has been billed as a thoroughgoing conservative. But history bears witness that, like Eisenhower's and Nixon's, his conservatism rarely goes beyond his speeches.

Campaigning in 1980, Reagan said he intended to balance the budget by 1983. Jimmy Carter's annual federal deficits ranged from $40.2 billion to $78.9 billion. Under Mr. Reagan, the red ink came to a record $127.9 billion in fiscal 1982, then skyrocketed to $208.9 billion in 1983.

... Reagan's annual deficits have actually exceeded the annual budgets of Lyndon B. Johnson, who had a Vietnam War to pay for as well as the Great Society. He has chalked up more government debt than all the Presidents before him combined. It is true that Congress shares in the responsibility for this, but the blame cannot simply be offloaded on them; the President's own budget proposals have contained estimated deficits in the $100-200 billion range since fiscal 1983.

Reagan is touted as an enemy of taxation and big government. Yet during his first term, although he did cut tax rates, he also pushed through the largest single tax increase in our nation's history, as well as boosts in the gasoline and Social Security taxes. And big government got bigger: the civilian work force in the executive branch grew by nearly 100,000 between 1981 and 1986.

In 1983, Walter Heller, former economic advisor to Presidents Kennedy and Johnson, was prompted to write a column in the Wall Street Journal entitled "Mr. Reagan Is a Keynesian Now." In 1984, economist Richard Parker echoed this conclusion in the Los Angeles Times, noting: "While he proclaims Reaganomics' success, Reagan also owes Americans a shocking confession: He's become a born-again Keynesian." That same year, economist Lester Thurow observed in Newsweek that "President Reagan has become the ultimate Keynesian." He continued:

Not only is the Reagan Administration rehabilitating exactly the economic policies it pledged to bury when entering office, it is applying them more vigorously than any Keynesian would have dared. Imagine what conservatives would be saying if a liberal Keynesian Democratic president had dared to run a $200 billion deficit.

In 1917, Congressman Oscar Callaway inserted the following statement in the Congressional Record:

In March, 1915, the J. P. Morgan interests, the steel, shipbuilding, and powder interests, and their subsidiary organizations, got together 12 men high up in the newspaper world and employed them to select / the most influential newspapers in the United States and sufficient number of them to control generally the policy of the daily press of the United States.

These 12 men worked the problem out by selecting 179 newspapers, and then began, by an elimination process, to retain only those necessary for the purpose of controlling the general policy of the daily press throughout the country. They found it was only necessary to purchase the control of 25 of the greatest papers. The 25 papers were agreed upon; emissaries were sent to purchase the policy, national and international, of these papers; an agreement was reached; the policy of the papers was bought, to be paid for by the month; an editor was furnished for each paper to properly supervise and edit information regarding the questions of preparedness, militarism, financial policies, and other things of national and international nature considered vital to the interests of the purchasers ....

This policy also included the suppression of everything in opposition to the wishes of the interests served.

What we have operating in America is an Establishment media.

As erstwhile New York Times editor John Swinton once said: "There is no such thing as an independent press in America, if we except that of little country towns."

The Times itself was bought in 1896 by Alfred Ochs, with backing from J. P. Morgan, Rothschild agent August Belmont, and Jacob Schiff of Kuhn, Loeb. It was subsequently passed on to Ochs' son-in-law Arthur Hays Sulzberger (CFR), then to Orville E. Dryfoos (CFR), and finally to the present publisher, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger (CFR). The Times has had a number of CFR members in its stable of reporters, including Herbert L. Matthews, Harrison Salisbury, and Lester Markel. Currently, executive editor Max Frankel, editorial page editor Jack Rosenthal, deputy editorial page editor Leslie Geib, and assistant managing editors James L. Greenfield, Warren Hoge, and John M. Lee are all in the Council.

The Times' friendly rival, the Washington Post, was bought by Eugene Meyer in 1933. Meyer, a partner of Bernard Baruch and Federal Reserve Board governor, had joined the CFR in 1929. Meyer began his reign at the Post by firing its editor for refusing to support U.S. recognition of the Soviet Union.

Today the Post is run by Meyer's daughter, Katharine Graham (CFR). Managing editor Leonard Downie, Jr., editorial page editor Meg Greenfield, and deputy editorial page editor Stephen S. Rosenfeld are all Council members.

The Washington Post Company owns Newsweek, which is a descendant of the weekly magazine Today, founded by Averell Harriman, among others, to support the New Deal and business interests. Newsweek's editor-in-chief Richard M. Smith and editor Maynard Parker both belong to the CFR, as have a number of its contributors. Both Newsweek and the Post have donated money to the Council.

Time magazine maintains the same kind of rivalry with Newsweek as the New York Times does with the Post: they compete for readers, not in viewpoint. Time was founded by Henry Luce (CFR-IPR-Atlantic Union), who rose as a publisher with loans from such individuals as Dwight Morrow and Thomas Lamont (both Morgan partners and CFR members), Harvey Firestone (CFR), and E. Roland Harriman (CFR).

Time's longtime editor-in-chief was Hedley Donovan (Trilateral Commission member, CFR Director, trustee of the Ford Foundation and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, and eventually Special Assistant to President Jimmy Carter). The current editor-in-chief, Henry Grunwald, is in the CFR, along with managing editor Henry Muller. Time, Inc., which also publishes People, Life, Fortune, Money, and Sports Illustrated, has several Council members on its board of directors.

The CFR also has interlocks with the major TV networks. William S. Paley, chairman of the board at CBS for many years, belonged to the Council on Foreign Relations, as does the chairman today, Thomas H. Wyman, and eleven of the fourteen board members listed

for 1987. CBS news anchor Dan Rather is in the CFR. CBS helped finance the Trilateral Commission, and the CBS Foundation has contributed funds to the Council.

NBC is a subsidiary of RCA, which was formerly headed by David Sarnoff (CFR). Sarnoff had financial backing from Kuhn, Loeb and other Rothschild-linked banking firms. He was succeeded by his son Robert, who married Felicia Schiff Warburg, daughter of Paul Warburg and great granddaughter of Jacob Schiff. RCA's chairman of the board now, Thornton Bradshaw, is a CFR man, as are several other board members. The Council has had a number of NBC newsmen on its roster over the years, including Marvin Kalb, John Chancellor, Garick Utley, and Irving R. Levine.

There are CFR figures on ABC's board, and in its news department, including Ted Koppel and David Brinkley.

The Council on Foreign Relations also has links to the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, the Associated Press wire service, PBS, and other major news sources. The Council's annual report for 1987 notes that 262 of its members are "journalists, correspondents, and communications executives."

Admiral Chester Ward a former Council [on Foreign Relations] member

CFR [Council on Foreign Relations], as such, does not write the platforms of both political parties) or select their respective presidential candidates, or control U.S. defense and foreign policies. But CFR members, as individuals, acting in concert with other individual CFR members, do.

A U.S. financial cave-in would probably draw the whole planet into its vortex, as did the Great Depression In the long run, a new world order under one government would be offered as a global panacea. This would incorporate / Free World countries with Communist states.

For decades, the Council on Foreign Relations has advocated regional alliances against the Soviet Union, but with the footnote that, in the end, the USSR should be brought into "the community of nations." This would be preceded by a fusion of Eastern and Western Europe, a favorite Foreign Affairs theme.

In the fall of 1953, Norman Dodd, Director of Research for the Reece Committee [of Congress] was invited to the headquarters of the Ford Foundation by its president H. Rowan Gaither (CFR). According to Dodd, Gaither told him: "Mr. Dodd, all of us here at the policy-making level have had experience, either in O.S.S. or the European Economic Administration, with directives from the White House. We operate under those directives here. Would you like to know what those directives are?" Dodd replied that he would. Gaither said: "The substance of them is that we shall use our grant-making power so to alter our life in the United States that we can be comfortably merged with the Soviet Union."

Thomas Jefferson

Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions, begun at a distinguished period, and pursued unalterably through every change of ministers, too plainly prove a deliberate systematical plan of reducing us to slavery.

The Shadows of Power

Home Page