The Rockefeller Files - Gary Allen

Building The Big Red Machine

"There has been a continuing, albeit concealed, alliance between international political capitalists and international revolutionary socialists—to their mutual benefit."
—Antony C. Sutton, Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution

That the Rockefellers are a unique and remarkable family is an understatement comparable to Custer observing that "the Indians seem restless today" just before his last stand. No fiction written would create such a family. No Hollywood movie mogul could concoct such a group to star in a celluloid epic.

The Rockefellers are bigger than life and stranger than fiction.

Yet, while many biographers have told of their fabulous wealth and virtually unlimited economic and political power, few have dealt with the most remarkable aspect of the family—its close relationship over many generations with its supposed arch-enemies, the Communists. Of course, there is much about this strange relationship that we do not know. But what is already a matter of public record is astounding. To say that things are not always what they seem is a hackneyed cliche, but there has never been a mystery to match that of the world Communist movement and the identity of its ultimate backers.

A bit of background is required in order to understand our subject. The Bolshevik Revolution in Russia was obviously one of the great turning points in history. It is an event over which misinformation abounds. The myth makers and re-writers of history have done their jobs well.

Today, most people believe the Communists were successful in Russia because they were able to gain the support of peasants who were sick of the tyranny of the Czars. This is not what happened.

While most know that the Bolshevik Revolution took place in November 1917, few recall that the Czar actually abdicated seven months earlier. With the collapse of Czar Nicholas II's monarchy, a provisional government was established by Prince Lvov, who wanted to pattern the new Russian government after the American Republic. But, unfortunately, Lvov was maneuvered out and replaced by Alexander Kerensky, an admitted Marxist who claimed to be an opponent of the Bolsheviks.

At the time the Czar abdicated and for the next several months, the eventual leaders of the Bolshevik Revolution, Lenin and Trotsky, were not even in Russia. Lenin was in Switzerland and had been living in exile since 1905. Trotsky also was in exile, working as a reporter for a Communist newspaper in—would you believe—New York City.

Trotsky was allowed to return to Russia with an American passport; Lenin was spirited across Europe in the famous sealed train. They joined forces and by November, through bribery, cunning, brutality and deception, were able to hire enough thugs and make enough deals to seize control of Petrograd. The Bolsheviks came to power not because the downtrodden masses of Russia called them back, but because very powerful men in Europe and the United States, including members of the Rockefeller family, sent them in.

But while these facts have been somewhat suppressed, the biggest secret of all is that throughout this period, the financing for the revolution came from super capitalists in the West, and primarily from the United States.

A meticulously documented book on this subject was written by Antony Sutton, a research fellow for the prestigious Hoover Institution for War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford University. Entitled Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution, this book by a respected and fastidiously thorough scholar was almost universally ignored by the mass media. One does not have to be a Quiz Kid to figure out why. Sutton sets the stage for the Bolshevik Revolution with this background:

"While monopoly control of industries was once the objective of J. P. Morgan and J. D. Rockefeller, by the late nineteenth century the inner sanctums of Wall Street understood that the most efficient way to gain an unchallenged monopoly was to make society go to work for the monopolists—under the name of the public good and the public interest. This strategy was detailed in 1906 by Frederick C. Howe in his Confessions of a Monopolist. Howe, by the way, is also A figure in the story of the Bolshevik Revolution. In his book Howe had stated:

"These are the rules of big business. They have superseded the teachings of our parents and are reducible to a simple maxim: Get a monopoly; let Society work for you; and remember that the best of all business is politics, for a legislative grant, franchise, subsidy or tax exemption is worth more than a Kimberly or Comstock lode, since it does not require any labor, either mental or physical, for its exploitation."

Sutton postulates why wealthy men like the Rockefellers would cooperate with and even finance the very Communists who are allegedly sworn to bury them. The British-born scholar points out:

" . . . one barrier to mature understanding of recent history is the notion that all capitalists are the bitter and unswerving enemies of all Marxists and Socialists This erroneous idea originated with Karl Marx and was undoubtedly useful to his purposes. In fact, the idea is nonsense. There has been a continuing, albeit concealed, alliance between international political capitalists and international revolutionary socialists-to their mutual benefit."

Through Sutton we can learn the names of the secret men who bankrolled the conspiracy in Russia. We know that no revolution can be successful without organization and money. The "downtrodden masses" usually provide little of the former and none of the latter. But the Rockefellers and their cohorts can provide both. In The Surrender of An Empire, the brilliant English historian Nesta Webster observed:

"Had the Bolsheviks been, as they are frequently represented, a mere gang of revolutionaries out to destroy property, first in Russia, and then in every other country, they would naturally have found themselves up against organized resistance by the owners of property all over the world, and the Moscow blaze would have been rapidly extinguished. It was only owing to the powerful influences behind them that this minority party was able to seize the reins of power and, having seized them, to retain their hold of them up to the present day."

Sutton introduces his evidence of "powerful influences" behind the Communists by stating:

"In brief, this is a story of the Bolshevik Revolution and its aftermath, but a story that departs from the usual conceptual strait jacket approach of capitalists versus Communists. Our story postulates a partnership between international monopoly capitalism and international revolutionary socialism for their mutual benefit. The final human cost of this alliance has fallen upon the shoulders of the individual Russian and the individual American. Entrepreneurship has been brought into disrepute and the world has been propelled toward inefficient socialist planning as a result of these monopoly maneuverings in the world of politics and revolution . . . "

So long as we see all international revolutionaries and all international, capitalists as implacable enemies of one another, then we miss a crucial point—that there has indeed been some operational cooperation between international capitalists, including fascists.

Sutton then proceeds to present evidence of such cooperation. The proofs, which are on the public record that international banking elements, most notably Morgan and Rockefeller interests, financed the take-over by the Bolsheviks, are simply overwhelming. The thousands of facts and documents that Sutton cites are too numerous to even summarize here. For those interested in the complete story, I highly recommend reading Sutton's book, Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution.

The Hoover Institute researcher asks the obvious question: What is the motivation behind this coalition capitalists and Bolsheviks? The advantages to the Communists are obvious. But of what possible benefit could such a union be to the super-capitalists of the West?

Sutton suggests that Russia was then—and is today—the largest untapped market in the world. Moreover, Russia then and now, comprises the greatest potential competitive threat to American industrial and financial supremacy. "Wall Street", says Sutton, "must have shivers when it visualizes Russia as a second super American industrial giant." By saddling Russia with unproductive economic system dependent on the West for continuous infusions of capital and technology for survival Russia could be both exploited and contained Sutton concludes:

"Revolution and international finance are not at all inconsistent if the result of revolution is to establish more centralized authority. International finance prefers to deal with central governments. The last thing the banking community wants is laissez-faire economy and decentralized power because these would disperse power.

"This, therefore, is an explanation that fits the evidence. This handful of bankers and promoters was not Bolshevik, or Communist, or socialist, or Democrat, or even American. Above all else these men wanted markets, preferably captive international markets-and a monopoly of the captive world market as the ultimate goal . . . ."

Wall Street did indeed achieve its goal. American firms controlled by this syndicate were later to go on and build the Soviet Union, and today are well on their way to bringing the Soviet military-industrial complex into the age of the computer.

Of course, far more is involved here than just monopolists seeking new captive markets. The same people who bankrolled the Russian Communist Revolution turn out to be the same ones who fastened the graduated income tax onto the American middle-class while avoiding it themselves; and it is the same group that foisted the fraudulent Federal Reserve System onto an unsuspecting American public. The actions of these super-capitalists over a period of many decades reveal that they were not merely plotting to acquire more profits; they were involved in a conspiracy for control of the world!

No doubt all this has been a handy and profitable byproduct of the super-capitalist capture of Russia. But, it is only part of a bigger picture. Like the cartel capitalists, the Communists work for a world government. And world government is promoted from both the top and the bottom of the conspiratorial apparatus.

In the Bolshevik Revolution we have some of the world's richest and most powerful men financing a movement which claims that its very reason for existence is to strip of their wealth such super-rich cartel and banker capitalists as the Rockefellers.

But obviously these men have no fear of international Communism. It is only logical to assume that if they financed it, and are willing—even eager—to cooperate wit it, it must be because they control it. Can there be another explanation that makes sense? Remember that for over 100 years it has been a standard operating procedure of the Rockefellers and their allies to control both sides of every conflict.

Having created their colony in Russia, the Rockefellers and their allies have struggled mightily ever since to keep it alive. Beginning in 1918 this clique has been engaged in transferring money and, probably more important technical information to the Soviet Union. This is made abundantly clear in Antony Sutton's monumental three volume history, Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development. Using for the most part official State Department documents, Sutton proves beyond any possible doubt that virtually everything the Soviets possess has been acquired from the West, principally America. It is not an exaggeration to say that the USSR was made in the USA. No one has even attempted to refute Sutton's almost excessively scholarly works. They can't. But the misinformation machines that compose our mediacracy can ignore Sutton.

None of the foregoing makes sense if Communism really is what the Communists and the Rockefeller Establishment tell us it is. But if Communism is an arm of a bigger conspiracy to control the world by power-mad billionaires (and brilliant but ruthless academicians who have shown them how to use their power) it all becomes perfectly logical.

It is at this point that we should again make it clear that this conspiracy is not made up solely of Rockefellers and other bankers and international cartelists, but includes every field of human endeavor. Starting with Voltaire and Adam Weishaupt and running through John Ruskin, Sidney Webb, Nicholas Murray Butler, and on to the present with Insiders such as Henry Kissinger and John Kenneth Galbraith, it has always been the scholar looking for avenues of power who has shown the "sons of the very powerful" how their wealth could be used to rule the world.

We cannot stress too greatly the importance of the reader keeping in mind that this book is discussing only one segment of the conspiracy. Other important segments which work to foment labor, religious and racial strife in order to promote socialism have been described in numerous other books. These other divisions of the conspiracy often operate independently of the Rockefellers and other international bankers and it would certainly be disastrous to ignore the danger to our freedom they represent.

It would be equally disastrous to lump all businessmen and bankers into the conspiracy. A distinction must be drawn between competitive free enterprise, the most moral and productive system ever devised, and cartel capitalism dominated by industrial monopolists and international bankers. The difference is crucial: the private enterpriser operates by offering products and services in a competitive free market, where consumers have numerous choices offered to them, while cartel capitalists use the government to force the public to do business with them. These corporate socialist-fascists are the deadly enemies of competitive private enterprise.

Liberals are willing to believe that the Rockefellers will fix prices, rig markets, establish monopolies, buy politicians, exploit employees and fire them the day before they are eligible for pensions, but they absolutely will not believe that these same men would want to rule the world or would use Communism as the striking edge of their conspiracy. When one discusses the machinations of the Rockefellers and their allies, Liberals usually respond by saying "But don't you think they mean well?"

However, if you assemble the evidence, carefully present your proofs, and try to expose these power seekers, the Establishment's mass media will accuse you of being a dangerous paranoid who is "dividing" our people. In every other area, of course, they encourage dissent as being "healthy in a democracy."

The Rockefeller-CFR Insiders began pushing to open up Communist Russia to US traders soon after the revolution. However, at that time public opinion ran so high against the Bolsheviks because of their barbarism that it was official US government policy not to deal with the outlaw government. The US did not even recognize the Bolshevik regime until 1933.

Galloping to the rescue were the super-capitalists of the West—men like the Vanderlips, the Harrimans, and the Rockefellers. One of the first to arrive was Frank Vanderlip, an agent of the Rockefellers and president of the Rockefeller First National City Bank, who once favorably compared Lenin to George Washington.

Before the Bolshevik revolt, Russia had succeeded the US as the world's number one oil producer. The chaos and destruction of the revolution effectively eliminated Standard Oil's competition from Russia for several years until Standard could move in and get a piece of the Russian oil business.

In 1926, Standard Oil of New York and its subsidiary, Vacuum Oil Company, concluded a deal to market Soviet oil in European countries. Part of the price for the arrangement, it was reported at the time, was a loan of $75,000,000 to the Bolsheviks. In 1927, Russia's secret partner, Standard Oil of New York, built an oil refinery in Russia. The refinery helped immeasurably in putting the Bolshevik economy back on its feet. According to Professor Sutton, "This was the first United States investment in Russia since the Revolution." (We have been unable to find out if Standard Oil was even theoretically expropriated by the Communists.)

It is possible the Rockefellers still own oil production facilities behind the Iron Curtain and get the profits out through Switzerland. By doing this, they would not have to share the loot with stockholders or the tax collector.

Wherever Standard Oil would go, Chase National Bank was sure to follow. In order to rescue the Bolsheviks, who were supposedly the archenemy of profit-seeking businessmen, the Chase National Bank was instrumental in establishing the American-Russian Chamber of Commerce in 1922. President of the Chamber was Reeve Schley, a vice-president of Chase National Bank. According to Professor Sutton:

"In 1925, negotiations between Chase and Prom-bank extended beyond the finance of raw materials and mapped out a complete program for financing Soviet raw material exports to the US and imports of US cotton and machinery . . . Chase National Bank and the Equitable Trust Company were leaders in the Soviet credit business."

The Rockefeller's Chase National Bank also was involved in selling Bolshevik bonds in the United States in 1928. Patriotic organizations denounced the Chase as an "international fence." Chase was called "a disgrace to America . . . They will go to any lengths for a few dollars' profits."

Congressman Louis McFadden, chairman of the House Banking Committee, maintained in a speech to his fellow Congressmen:

"The Soviet government has been given United States Treasury funds by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Banks acting through the Chase Bank and the Guaranty Trust Company and other banks in New York City . . .

". . . Open up the books of Amtorg, the trading organization of the Soviet government in New York, and of Gostorg, the general office of the Soviet Trade Organization, and of the State Bank of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and you will be staggered to see how much American money has been taken from the United States Treasury for the benefit of Russia. Find out what business has been transacted for the State Bank of Soviet Russia by its correspondent, the Chase Bank of New York."

In his three-volume history of Soviet technological development, Professor Sutton proves conclusively that there is hardly a segment of the Soviet economy which is not a result of the transference of Western, particularly American, technology.

This cannot be wholly the result of accident. For fifty years the Federal Reserve-CFR-Rockefeller-Insider crowd has advocated and carried out policies aimed at increasing the power of their satellite, the Soviet Union. Meanwhile, America spends $90 billion a year on defense to protect itself from the enemy the Insiders are building up.

What has been true in the past is even more valid today. Heading the parade to transfer technology and increase aid and trade with the Communists are the Rockefellers and the Council on Foreign Relations.

The bandmaster for the entire enterprise is David Rockefeller.

Most Americans regard Nelson Rockefeller as the most important member of the Rockefeller family. He is, after all, the (unelected) Vice President of the United States. Since 1960 he has been a perennial candidate for the Presidency. Nelson Rockefeller is a compulsive extrovert who loves to be in the public eye. As a result, he is far better known than his brothers. But notoriety is an unreliable measure of power.

Students of the Eastern Establishment are well aware that while Nelson gets the ink, it is little brother David who wields the power. "As the de facto head of the American Establishment", reports Time "It has been said that for him the presidency would be a demotion."

The New York Times concurs: "He has come to be regarded as a spokesman for enlightened American capitalism." Of course, to the New York Times, "enlightened American capitalism" means government planning of virtually every facet of the American economy, major transfers of America's vital technology to the Communists, the internationalizing of American business through multi-national holding companies, and the creation of a World Government.

In 1964 David Rockefeller and Nikita Khrushchev were closeted in Moscow for two and a half hours. The Chicago Tribune of September 12, 1964, reported:

"David Rockefeller . . . briefed President Johnson today on his recent meeting with Premier Nikita Khrushchev of Russia . . . the Red leader said the United States and the Soviet Union should do more trade." Khrushchev, according to Rockefeller, said he would like to see the United States extend long-term credits to the Russians.

As a matter of fact, the meeting between Rockefeller and Khrushchev had been held two months earlier, in July. Apparently whatever trouble had developed was not settled until the President was briefed in September.

Within a month, Khrushchev was deposed. David Rockefeller was soon meeting on the Black Sea with his successor, and in October of 1966 L.B.J. announced his new policy of "building bridges" to Eastern Europe. This was at the time the Communists were escalating the Vietnam War, and virtually all of the war material to do so came from the ammunitions factories of Eastern Europe. It seemed politically incredible for Johnson to propose such a policy while American troops were being killed and maimed by ammunition and weapons from the Communist bloc. It would have been flabbergasting if one had not been following the machinations of David Rockefeller.

On October 7, 1966, President Johnson, a man who has appointed a CFR member to virtually every strategic position in his administration, stated:

"We intend to press for legislative authority to negotiate trade agreements which could extend most-favored-nation tariff treatment to European Communist states . . .

"We will reduce export controls on East-West trade with respect to hundreds of non-strategic items . . . "

Six days later, the New York Times reported:

"The United States put into effect today one of President Johnson's proposals for stimulating East-West trade by removing restrictions on the export of more than four hundred commodities to the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe . . .

"Among the categories from which items have been selected for export relaxation are vegetables, cereals, fodder, hides, crude and manufactured rubber, pulp and waste paper, textiles and textile fibers, crude fertilizers, metal ores and scrap, petroleum, gas and derivatives, chemical compounds and products, dyes, medicines, fireworks, detergents, plastic materials, metal products and machinery, and scientific and professional instruments."

Virtually every one of these "non-strategic" items has a direct or indirect use in war. Later, items such as rifle cleaning compounds, electronic equipment, computers, and radar were declared "non-strategic" and cleared for shipment to the Soviet Union. Congress drew the lines at sending "strategic" goods to the Reds, but the trick was simply to declare almost everything "non-strategic" A machine gun is strategic, but the tools for making it and the chemicals to propel the bullets were declared "nonstrategic."

The Viet Cong and North Vietnamese received 8 percent of their war materials from Russia and the Soviet bloc nations. Since their economies are incapable of supporting a war, the Communist arm of the conspiracy needed help from the Finance Capitalist arm. The United States financed and equipped both sides of the terrible Vietnamese war, killing nearly 55,000 of our own soldier by proxy. Again, the mass media kept the American public from learning this shocking truth.

Not surprisingly, the Rockefellers have been leaders in championing this bloody trade. On January 16, 1967, one of the most incredible articles ever to appear in a newspaper graced the front page of the Establishment's daily, the New York Times. Under the headline, "Eaton Joins Rockefellers To Spur Trade With Reds," the article stated:

"An alliance of family fortunes linking Wall Street and the Midwest is going to try to build economic bridges between the free world and Communist Europe.

"The International Basic Economy Corporation, controlled by the Rockefeller brothers, and Tower International, Inc., headed by Cyrus S. Eaton, Jr., Cleveland financier, plan to cooperate in promoting trade between the Iron Curtain countries, including the Soviet Union . . . "

International Basic Economy Corporation (IBEC) is run by Richard Aldrich, grandson of Federal Reserve plotter Nelson Aldrich, and Rodman Rockefeller (CFR), Rocky's son. On October 20, 1969, IBEC announced that N.M. Rothschild & Sons of London had entered into partnership with the firm.

Cyrus Eaton, Jr. is the son of the notoriously pro-Soviet Cyrus Eaton, who began his career as secretary to John D. Rockefeller. It is believed that Eaton's rise to power in finance resulted from backing by his mentor. So the agreement between Tower International and IBEC continues an old alliance. Although Eaton's name does not appear on the CFR's membership rolls, the Reece Committee which investigated foundations for Congress in 1953 found that the notorious Soviet apologist was a secret member.

[Imprimateur] from The Rockefeller Files by Gary Allen

David Rockefeller, chairman of the Chase Manhattan Bank, is the most important and most effective promoter In the US of aid to the Communists. He was all smiles (above) after concluding a deal in Red China with Chou En- lai; he has joined wit Cyrus Eaton Jr. (see clipping a left) to promote further trade with the Soviet Union; his successes have delighted such important Communist rulers a Soviet Finance Minister V. F Garbuzov, (below). Thanks to the House of Rockefeller, "trade" with the Communists (always financed by the US taxpayer, of course), now amounts to millions of dollars every year.

Among the "non-strategic" items which the Rockefeller-Eaton axis is going to build for the Communists are ten rubber goods plants and a $50 million aluminum producing plant for the Reds. (Aluminum for jet planes has been considered "non-strategic" under the Johnson Nixon-Ford Administrations.)

Even more incredibly, the Times reveals:

"Last month, Tower International reached a tentative agreement with the Soviet patent and licensing organization Licensintorg, covering future licensing and patent transactions. Until now, Mr. Eaton said the Russians have left the buying and selling of licenses and patents to the Amtorg Trading Corporation, the official Soviet agency in this country for promoting Soviet-American trade."

This means that the Rockefellers and Eatons have a monopoly on the transfer of technological capability to the supposed enemies of the super-rich, the Soviet Union. According to the Times:

"Mr. Eaton acknowledged the difficulties that Amtorg's representatives had encountered here in trying to arrange licensing agreements with American companies." As you can imagine," he said," it is almost impossible for a Russian to walk into the research department of an American aerospace company and try to arrange the purchase of a patent."

Certainly every loyal American will say to himself, "Well, I would hope to God the Soviets couldn't walk into our defense plants and buy a patent." The Rockefellers and the Eatons have solved that problem for the Communists. Now, instead of dealing with an official agency of the Soviet government, American concerns will be dealing with the Rockefellers. You can imagine how many doors that will open to the Communists!

Thus, by the purchase of patents for the Communists, the Rockefellers are virtually in charge of research and development for the Soviet military machine. Their goal is to enable the Soviets to mass-produce American developments. And let us emphasize that the transfer of such technical knowledge is even more important than the sale of weapons. Ammunition is used once, then it is gone. Weapons break down, vehicles need replacement parts, and sophisticated arms are not easy to produce in a backward economy, no matter how much manpower is available.

While the trade doors were, opened during the LBJ Administration, the advent of detente under the Nixon Kissinger era produced an open house in American plants and research labs for the Red traders. Now, a process that may have taken an American corporation a decade to develop is transferred in toto to the Communists. Does it make sense to spend $90 billion a year on national defense and then deliberately to increase the war-making potential of an avowed enemy? It does to Mr. Rockefeller and the Insiders.

Since the Rockefellers now have an exclusive contract to supply American patents to the Soviets, they are by dictionary definition agents of the Big Red Machine. It goes without saying that they are the most important Communist agents in history. Or perhaps it would be more accurate to define the Communists as Rockefeller agents?

An increasingly important tool for the looting of America by the Rockefellers and their cohorts is the Export-Import Bank, known as Eximbank. It was established in 1934 to finance and promote trade with the Soviet Union. But it wasn't until Richard Nixon signed a "Presidential Determination" on October 18, 1972, that the Eximbank began to finance trade with the Soviets.

The process by which the Eximbank works is simple enough. An US exporter goes to his own bank, which makes arrangements for the Eximbank to loan money to the exporter's foreign buyer. Eximbank then grants a credit to the American bank, which in turn pays the US exporter. Thus the exporter is immediately paid, the American bank is cut in on the deal, and the foreign importer gets a subsidized interest rate.

Who pays the interest subsidy? You hardly need ask. The US taxpayer pays it through Treasury grants to the Eximbank. While most Americans consider themselves lucky if they can arrange to borrow money for less than twelve percent interest, and even the prime rate (the rate at which the largest American corporations with the best credit rating can borrow) is as high as ten percent, the Eximbank has been making loans to foreigners at six percent interest. The difference is a four percent subsidy to any foreigner who buys our goods.

What happens if the foreign buyer defaults? Auf Wiedersehen. Adios. Sayonara. If the customer sneaks out of the restaurant without paying the check, the waiter puts the arm on the American taxpayer who, once again, picks up the tab. How would you like to be in a business in which the government paid you in full for all sales and accepted the responsibility for collecting all accounts receivable? As the late General Thomas Lane noted:

"In this system, the U.S. exporter has nothing to lose by sales to bad credit risks. The US commercial bank has nothing to lose. The inclination therefore under our profit system is to sell products to anyone who will sign a loan agreement which you can run by the Eximbank. Irresponsibility is rewarded . . ."

It is an old story. Public money is nobody's money. As a sense of civic responsibility declines, the public money is used to private advantage [often the Rockefellers].

As with other free enterprisers, we favor foreign trade. But when American exporters ask the taxpayers to take the risks while they take a guaranteed profit, it is not trade but looting. It is as though you were an automobile dealer with an exclusive to sell Cadillacs to deadbeats in Chad, and you had a guarantee that American taxpayers would make all payments the Chads defaulted. Assuredly, you could" sell a lot of cars that way. You could unload every Cadillac General Motors could produce! And you wouldn't care a fig whether the customer ever pays for the car.

Shortly after the May 1972 Summit Conference in Moscow, the Nixon Administration began pushing to extend the credit of the US taxpayers directly to the Soviets. As part of the Nixon-Kissinger detente, Congress was to extend to the Bolsheviks tariff status as a "Most Favored Nation," and Eximbank loans were to be arranged for the transfer of the most advanced American technology to Russia and for the development of Soviet energy sources. A UPI release dated July 17, 1973, provides the explanation David Rockefeller gave for such outrages:

"David Rockefeller, board chairman of Chase Manhattan Bank, urged Congress Tuesday to grant most favored nation trading status to the Soviet Union, claiming the move could help slow the arms race. 'The desire of the Soviets to use Western trade, credits and technology to bolster their own economy hopefully could be accompanied by their giving lower priority to military programs," Rockefeller testified . . . "We haven't stopped the arms race by withholding exports (in the past)," he said.

David told an audience in Rome that he would replace the Iron Curtain with "a plate-glass curtain." He claimed "Better communication and then understanding through expanding trade are ingredients of world peace." Just as the scrap metal we sold Japan before Pearl Harbor helped bring peace!

So far, Most Favored Nation status has not bee granted by Congress because of publicity about Russia' policy of refusing emigration by Soviet Jews to Israel. But the sluice gates for loans have been opened. Already legal counselor for Eximbank, under pressure from President Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger has pushed the bank's directors to approve questionable loans to the Reds.

As part of the massive effort to build the Communist economy by looting the United States, on credit, Richard Nixon appointed William Casey as president of the Export-Import Bank. Casey, a member of the Rockefeller-controlled CFR, is the perfect man for the job that Kissinger and the Rockefellers have in mind. As part of his goal of promoting trade with the Communists, last year he told the Society of American Business Writers:

"To implement this vital aspect of our overall foreign policy, our Ambassadors to Communist nations have been instructed to put trade promotion at the top of their list of priorities. Shortly we will have doubled the number of State Department employees serving in commercial positions in the USSR, eastern Europe and [Communist] China."

Naturally the Communists are delighted to have the American super-capitalists build factories for them as long as the American taxpayers agree to pick up the tab when the Commissars default. It is foreign aid in a big, big way!

The first of the giant projects we are inflating our currency to build on credit for our Bolshevik brothers is he Kama River factory, which is to be the largest producer of trucks in the world. But please don't mention that trucks are the backbone of modern military operations, and that during open warfare truck factories are quickly converted to build tanks. If you do so, Liberals will look at you as if you have four heads and nine eyes.

The Kama River factory will produce 150,000 heavy trucks and 150,000 heavy engines per year. This output is greater than the combined production of such trucks by all factories in the United States. The complex is being built by a division of the Pullman Company at a cost of two million dollars. The Soviets are going to put up ten percent of the cash for the project, while David Rockefeller's Chase Manhattan Bank and the Export-Import Bank will each advance forty-five percent.

To say that Eximbank is bending over backwards with our tax dollars to accommodate the Soviets is like saying that J. Paul Getty is fairly confident his personal check won't bounce. On Exim's usual loans, repayments must start in three to five or, at the most, seven years. The repayment period for this loan is twelve years, with a grace period of 4.5 years. Which means that it will be 16.5 years, if ever, before anyone sees the first payment! Try to get that kind of a deal as an American businessman . . . at six percent interest.

And what happens when the Comrades don't pay? Do we foreclose and repossess the factory? That's about as practical as growing bananas in Minnesota. Krupp, the German industrial giant, almost collapsed as a result of its extension of credit to the Soviets. It had to be bailed out by its government.

But, you say, surely David Rockefeller, the shrewdest and most powerful banker in the world, would not risk Chase Manhattan's money unless he were sure of repay merit. You're right. David is sure of repayment. Chase's loan is guaranteed by the US taxpayer through other government agencies, the Overseas Private Investment Corporation and the Foreign Credit Insurance Association. The US taxpayer is on the hook for every dime, just as with the Eximbank loans, OPIC and FCIA guarantee the "businessmen" a profit no matter how badly the deal turns out. What is happening is that we are giving the Soviets a two-billion-dollar truck plant and insuring the Rockefellers' cut on the deal.

The Kama River project kicked off a spree of such looting. One of these loans is for thirty-six million dollars to help construct and equip an international trade center in Moscow. Joint venturing in this deal—all fully guaranteed by you, the taxpayer—are Chase Manhattan and the Bank of America. Arranged by Armand Hammer of Occidental Petroleum, a personal friend of Lenin and son of a founder of the US Communist Party, the huge Trade Center will be built by the Bechtel Corporation. Comrade Hammer and his Occidental Petroleum also have a huge natural gas deal in the mill with the Soviets. According to former Eximbank boss Henry Kearns:

"For a proposed gas development deal in Siberia that the Soviets are eager to make, the required Eximbank credit is $1.5 billion—more than the bank has granted any other customer. The Soviet Union has already received Exim credits of about $350 million without disclosing financial data . . ."

The Nixon-Kissinger Administration had to pour millions in paper currency into our economy, thus pushing inflation higher, to lend the Soviet Union $180 million at six percent interest. The deal is for the construction on a Soviet site of a new fertilizer plant made in the USA. This, incidentally, comes at a time when America is in the midst of a severe fertilizer shortage. Crops are being limited in our own country because of that shortage, but our government is determined to help the Comrades at our expense, by looting us of the hardware to build this desperately needed fertilizer plant.

The cost of the Russian fertilizer plant will be $400 million. Of this, the Soviet Union is putting up only $40 million—a mere 10 percent of the cost. All the rest will come from the US.

In addition to the Export-Import Bank's loan, for which the bank has already made a preliminary commitment, private American banks will lend another $180 million for the Russian plant—but at a realistic 10 to 12 percent interest. The American taxpayer is therefore subsidizing the Export-Import Bank's part of the loan—a subsidy that could cost between $50 million and $75 million in lost interest over the 12-year period of the loan.

"The Soviet Union is the last great undeveloped market for the US," says Alfred R. Wentworth, senior vice president of Chase Manhattan Bank and head of Chase's recently opened Moscow office. "It now is opening up, and our bank wants to participate in the many opportunities being created."

To be sure no one misunderstands, Chase Manhattan Bank has been running advertisements in major newspapers across the country. They read:

"Now you can get banking insights on developing business relationships in the Soviet Union direct from our Moscow office . . . In addition to our Moscow office, we have another in Vienna for dealings in Eastern Europe . . . Our Moscow representatives can be contacted at: Metropol Hotel, 1 Karl Marx Square, Room 227, MOSCOW, USSR. Tel: 225-6277.

"From 1 Chase Manhattan Plaza to 1 Karl Marx Square, we are international money experts with a knack for making good sense out of confusing East-West trade talk."

One would expect the Rockefellers to open up shop at the most prestigious (and, as Business Week says, "symbolic") address in town. As Newsweek magazine headlined its report: The Kremlin now has a "Comrade at Chase." So has Peking. After David and Nelson Rockefeller called for the "normalizing of relations" and establishing "trade-with Mao Tse-tung and the Red Chinese", Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger reversed the Republican platform and a hundred Nixon promises to follow that line also. The door was opened for trade with the butchers of Red China.

While Mr. Nixon's sudden cozying up to the Peking mob received reams of comment and publicity, there is one aspect of all this which has attracted virtually no attention. It is the fact that large oil deposits have been found near the Senkaka Islands in the East China Sea.

Our Insider-arranged deals with Red China are cut from the same cloth as our trade with the Soviet bloc; we have made numerous concessions and have asked none in return. Perhaps one of the "concessions" we will receive will be drilling rights for Standard Oil. After all, David Rockefeller has been promoting an opening with Red China for the past five years. Yes, the plot thickens. And in this case oil is thicker than blood.

"I'm very encouraged," said David Rockefeller in July 1973. "In every case we've been invited by the socialist governments and have been warmly and generously received even though I head a large capitalist bank and my name is closely identified with capitalism."

David was so impressed with the glories of Mao land that he wrote a puff piece for the New York Times of August 10, 1973, entitled "From A China Traveler." The chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations observed:

"One is impressed immediately by the sense of national harmony . . . Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing a more efficient and dedicated administration but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose . . . The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history."

Batten, Barton, Dursten & Osborne couldn't have written better ad copy to puff the "social experiment" which has killed some sixty-four million of its own people and keeps millions more in the slavery of labor camps.

"And you must remember," says David Rockefeller, "the Chinese are not only purposeful and intelligent, they also have a large pool of cheap labor. So they should be able to find ways to get trading capital."

If wages are low behind the Iron Curtain in Europe, imagine how attractive they are in Red China. Such things are not missed by David Rockefeller.

What does the building of the Big Red Machine in the Soviet Union and Red China mean? Constructing some of the world's largest factories for the Soviet Union, and shipping the Communists the most sophisticated US technology and equipment has a multitude of implications. Professor Antony Sutton, the world's foremost expert on the use of Western technology to develop the Soviet Union, has written an entire book on this subject under the provocative but very deliberate title, National Suicide.

The military potential of the industrial plants which we are building for the Soviets should be obvious to anyone. Trucks, aircraft, oil, steel, petrochemicals, aluminum, computers—these are the very sinews of a military industrial complex. These factories, the product of American genius and financed by American capital, could have been built in the United States. Instead, they are constructed at the US taxpayers' expense in the Soviet Union—a nation whose masters still keep millions in concentration camps and who have sworn to bury us.

And the program to loot America to build the Soviet Union is escalating. Remember that the factories we are constructing for the Communists represent the latest in American technology. This technology is unobtainable anywhere else in the world.

Another important thing to remember is the strong possibility that Russian factories using American capital and American technology will, with Soviet slave labor, produce goods which will undersell those produced by American labor in world markets. Just as many thousands of Americans have already lost their jobs to foreign labor (working in European and Asian factories constructed with American foreign aid) still more American workers will see their jobs destroyed by their own government. And these runaway "capitalists" are well aware of the cost benefits of such slave labor.

But as important as jobs are, there is even a more important aspect to the on-going "partnership" between the Rockefellers and the Communists which has been operating for over fifty years. At stake is the very survival of independence and liberty in this country.

Professor Sutton has assembled an abundance of evidence which nobody has even attempted to refute. First, he has shown that Communism is a stagnant system incapable of innovation or high productivity. Its survival, even at a subsistence level for its captives, has required regular transfusions of capital and technology. Without aid from the West, the Soviet Union would have long since collapsed. But without the Soviet Union, the Rockefellers and other super-rich would not have had an "enemy" to justify their schemes for monopoly World Government.

The Soviet Union was first saved by Herbert Hoover with food. Next, came Lenin's New Economic Plan which let the super-capitalists back into Russia. This was followed by FDR's diplomatic recognition of Russia (long advocated by the Rockefellers), which allowed the Soviets to obtain desperately needed credits. World War II turned on the $11 billion Lend-Lease spigot. Following the war. Russia was allowed to denude much of Germany of factories and scientists.

During the Kennedy Administration, we started providing wheat for hungry Soviet factory workers. During the Vietnam War, America shipped vital supplies to the East European bloc, which was providing North Vietnam with the war equipment to kill our own soldiers. Now we are supplying the world's largest truck factory, extremely sophisticated computers and a cornucopia of other manufacturing technology. To cap the climax, the Wall Street Journal of April 25, 1975, headlines "U.S. Quietly Allows Uranium Shipments to Soviet Union For Processing Into Fuel." Is that unbelievable?

Where was the public outrage that the mediacracy is capable of creating?

As former Secretary of the Navy James Forrestal observed:

"Consistency never has been a mark of stupidity. If the diplomats who have mishandled our relations with Russia were merely stupid, they would occasionally make a mistake in our favor."

In short, what is happening is not just the looting of our economy, but treason. There is something rotten, but it's not in Denmark, it is in Manhattan.

The game plan is simple: We are going to be blackmailed into surrendering or merging with the Soviets. Meanwhile, our Congress wants to stop weapons development so that we can have more welfare programs. Since most of the military budget goes to salaries which cannot be cut, any slashing of "fat" usually means that real muscle-weapons systems has been amputated.

For five decades the Communists' propaganda line has been that they were going to destroy the Rockefellers and the other super-rich. Yet the Rockefellers have been breast feeding the Bolshevik monster since its childhood. Today they are leading the parade to provide their Soviet Frankenstein with a high-protein diet. We are supposed to believe those international cartelists do this because they are foolish or greedy. Of course the Rockefellers are greedy for the profits produced by their alliance with the Soviet Union, but that cannot be the total answer. Lenin claimed that capitalists would sell the Communists the rope with which they would be hung, if it could be done for a profit. The Rockefellers know that. And now they are building them factories in the Soviet Union.

But the Rockefellers are not fools. They are brilliant, far-sighted plotters who became immensely powerful by devious Machiavellian planning and by infiltrating, subsidizing and controlling their opposition.

Plain old-fashioned common sense insists that the Rockefellers know something about Communism that we do not. Since they subsidize it and do not fear it, logic tells us they are either partners with the Communist hierarchy, or they control it.

But if this is true, how do the Rockefellers keep their partners from taking the gun and turning it against their secret backers? We do not pretend to know that answer. There has to be a control mechanism. The Rockefellers would not be so foolish as to let a competitor put a pistol to their heads—let alone provide the pistol. So we must conclude once again that the Rockefellers know something that we do not. Certainly this ultimate secret is known only to the top handful of the conspirators. No researcher is going to learn the answer by pouring over the New York Times at his local library.

Because we cannot identify the control mechanism, or describe how it works, many will ridicule our thesis. But, how do they explain the fifty-year Rockefeller program to build the power of Communism? Since the days of John D. Sr., the Rockefellers have prided themselves on their intelligence gathering capabilities. They know more about their competitor opponents than those competitors know about themselves. You can bet your bippy that the Rockefellers are not naive about the Communists.

But let us assume that they are. Let us assume that in the end the Rockefellers will be the major victims of the Communist empire they have played such an important role in creating. Assume that it has all been done out of sheer stupidity and greed. Where does that put us? Right in the Gulag Archipelago along side them, that's where it puts

Either way you lose. The Big Red Machine may or may not devour the Rockefellers. We are convinced it will not, because we believe the Rockefellers and their allies control the comrades who control the guns. But the question is rather academic, because the whole purpose of the Big Red Machine is to swallow us! And unless some big changes are made mighty quickly, that's exactly what it will do.