Rockefeller Internationalist - Emanuel Josephson




The Council on Foreign Relations —
The "Invisible Government"

The "Foreign Office" of the Rockefeller Empire

After the Rockefeller Empire had entered into its accord with Stalin and the Soviets, it required an agency that would not be suspect to serve in carrying out the terms of the Rockefeller Soviet pact, and to supplement and support the drive launched for it by Ivy Lee. For this purpose the Rockefeller interests selected the Council on Foreign Relations, an organization of which some of their group were members, notably, Ivy Lee, John Foster Dulles, Henry Harkness Flagler and the Pratts.

The Council on Foreign Relations was launched in 1919 at the Paris Peace Conference. The Rockefeller Empire had emerged tremendously wealthier and more powerful from the war which had been engineered and launched at a cost to us of tens of thousands of lives, hundreds of thousands of maimed and tens of billions of dollars of our wealth, and at even greater sacrifice to other lands. They had attained the objective for which had been incited the holocaust, control of the Near East and ownership of the Saudi Arabian concession. The situation was aptly summed up by Harold Nicholson in his book Peace Making (p. 352-61) in passages cited by the director of the council in its twenty-fifth year report, as follows:

"Friday May 30, (1919) A dinner . . . to discuss formation . . . of an Anglo-American Institute of Foreign Affairs. Bob Cecil supports it. He said 'There is no single person in this room who is not disappointed with the terms we have drafted. Yet England and America have got all they want and more; far more. Our disappointment is an excellent symptom; let us perpetuate it.'"

The report tells the following story of the origin of the Council:

"In Spring 1919, a group of men at the Peace Conference in Paris concluded that facilities were badly needed in their respective countries for the continuous study of international relations.

"Conversations between Gen. Tasker H. Bliss, Col. E. M. House, Prof. Archibald Cary Coolidge, Whitney H. Shepardson, Dr. James T. Shotwell and others of the American delegation, and British officials such as Sir Robert Cecil, Lionel Curtis, Sir Valentine Chirol, Lord Eustace Percy and Harold Temperley, led to a dinner meeting at the Majestic Hotel, Paris, on May 30,1919.

"It was formally agreed that an organization should be created for the study of international affairs. The first two resolutions set forth the proposed form and substance of the undertaking: "Resolved

"That those present undertake to form an Institute entitled The Institute of International Affairs founded at Paris in 1919 comprised at the outset of two branches, one in the United Kingdom and one in the U.S.

"That the purpose of this Institute should be to keep its members in touch with the international situation and enable them to study the relation between national politics and the interests of society as a whole.

". . . it seemed unwise to set up a single institute with branches. One group therefore established the British (now Royal) Institute of International Affairs, London; and the other group, returning to the U.S., merged with an informal body already in existence (Union Club), which was known as the Council on Foreign Relations. The Council had been organized in 1918 in New York City and welcomed on a number of occasions, distinguished foreigners coming to America in connection with the conduct of the war.

"The purposes of the Council are set forth as follows:

  • "to afford a continuous conference on international questions affecting the U.S. by bringing together experts in statecraft, finance, industry, education and science.
  • "to create and stimulate international thought among the people of the U.S., and to this end,
  • "to co-operate with the government of the U.S. and with international agencies coordinating international activities by eliminating, in so far as possible, duplication of effort, to create new bodies and to employ such other and further means as from time to time may seem wise and proper." (The Council on Foreign Relations. A Record of 25 Years.)

The report describes the Council's financing as follows: "no endowment . . . Derives financial support from four sources:

Dues and contributions $1,698,400
Proceeds from sale of publications $1,287,850
Grants from Foundations for research $1,134,700
Interest on investments $172,650

Approximately one third of the income of the Council was derived from foundations, all of it devoted to "research". With the exception of approximately $200,000 obtained from the Rockefeller dominated Carnegie foundations, all of these grants were derived from the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial and the Rockefeller Foundation in the form of a steady annual stream of grants, as follows:

1927 Laura Spelman Memorial $150,000
1929 Research American Foreign policy 30,000
1930 " " " " 30,000
1931 " " " " 30,000
1932 " " " " 30,000
1933 " " " " 25,000
1934 " " " " 25,000
1935 " " " " 25,000
1936 " " " " 30,000
1938 " " " " 99,000
1939 " " " " 44,500
1940 " " " " 73,375
1941 " " " " 57,000
1942 War & Peace Studies 70,700
1943 " " " " 60,800
1944 " " " " 74,908.90
1946 " " " " 60,000
1946 Preparation of History of World War II ) 139,000
1947 (to prevent debunking) 60,000
1949 Study of problems of aid to Europe 50,000
Total $1,164,283.90

It is notable that the Laura Spelman Rockefeller Memorial grant followed hard on the heels of the Rockefeller Stalin pact, and that the subsequent support assumed the form of annual grants instead of endowment. Obviously, annual grants provide a more direct and continuous method of control of a subsidiary organization than does endowment. Thus did the Rockefeller interests gain and hold domination over the organization that they proceeded to make their top political agency, their Foreign Office, without creating any suspicion of this situation. For such an agency is far more effective if it is regarded as independent. The Rockefeller interests, therefore, avoided publicizing their control of the Council. On the other hand, the Rockefellers deviated from their practise of requiring contributions from others as the price of their support. They did not wish to share their control of the Council with others. The Council, like its subsidiary Institute of Pacific Relations, is peculiarly a Rockefeller agency.

Membership in the Council on Foreign Relations has been attainable from the start, only by invitation. Originally it had included leaders of American industry, commerce, banking, politics and the press, as can be seen in the 1925 membership list.

In 1925, the membership was weighted in favor of internationalism. It contained a sprinkling of Marxist "liberals", such as Bruce Bliven, Walter Lippmann and Simeon Strunsky, of the leftist press; bankers of the same leaning, such as the Kuhn Loeb group who were identified with the Rockefeller interests, and acted for them, including Otto Kahn, Mortimer L. Schiff, Felix M. Warburg and Paul M. Warburg, and William Averell Harriman of Brown Bros. Harriman Co., as well as more conservative and American Walter E. Frew; and the J. P. Morgan & Co. crowd, sitting on both sides of the fence, with "liberal" Thos. W. Lamont, R. C. Leffingwell, Dwight W. Morrow, Edward R. Stettinius and the Davisons, side by side with Albert H. Wiggin, George B. Baker and Herbert H. Lehman. The Wilsonian Democrats were represented by Col. Edward M. House, the agent for the powers behind the throne in the Wilson regime, John W. Davis, Wall Street and Rockefeller attorney who was defeated presidential candidate, James W. Gerard, former ambassador to Germany; and the Republican regime by Ogden L. Mills, Secretary of the Treasury, Elihu Root, Secretary of State in the T. Roosevelt regime, Henry W. Taft and George W. Wickersham, U.S. Attorney General in the Taft regime.

The legal fraternity and the bench were represented by the Chadbournes, Frederick R. Coudert, Paul D. Cravath, Judge Learned Hand, and Archibald G. Thacher; Wall Street, by Jules B. Bache, Clarence Dillon, Samuel Goldman and Sam A. Lewisohn and E.R.A. Seligman; trade and industry by George Blumenthal, Newcomb Carlton, president of Western Union, T. Coleman DuPont, leftish Edward A. Filene, Arthur Curtiss James, the Strauses and the Strausses, Gerard Swope, Myron C. Taylor, Wm. H. Woodin and Owen D. Young. The Rockefellers were represented directly by their publicity man Ivy L. Lee, their kinsman John Foster Dulles, and the Standard Oil Co. by Henry Harkness Flagler and the Pratts. Such an organization could prove to be an invaluable front.

With assumption of control of the Council by the Rockefellers, the character of the membership changed sharply and strangely.

Communist agents, pro-Communist proteges of the Rockefeller interests. Reds of all complexions, "liberals" and frank, subversive high priests of the Marxist "social sciences", and New Dealers swelled the membership list, assumed key roles in the Council's activities and filled its conferences and publications with pro-Communist propaganda and the Party "line". The ringleaders of the Rockefeller financed Communist espionage agency, the Institute of Pacific Relations, including its former, Sovietdecorated Secretary, Edward Clark Carter, Philip C. Jessup, and the editors of its publications, including the notorious Amerasia magazine, Owen Lattimore, William W. Lockwood, Joseph Barnes and self-proclaimed Communist "leader", Frederick Vanderbilt Field, who was justly retired to a Federal penitentiary for his activities, became the leading spirits of the Council and filled its forums and its publication, Foreign Affairs, with their propaganda.

It was Alger Hiss, however, who became the outstanding member and leading spirit in the Council on Foreign Relations. His role was virtually that of Prime Minister of the Rockefeller Empire and the head of its Foreign Office. His services to the Rockefeller-Soviet Axis earned him the accolade of both the Rockefellers and Stalin. With it went, ex officio, the policy making role of the U.S. State Department in the Roosevelt regime, the power to dictate the foreign policy of the U.S. (a mere subsidiary of the Rockefeller Empire) and, with the approval of Stalin, the authorship of the Yalta pacts and the United Nations charter.

The rabidly pro-Communist members of the State Department and of other Government services are honored for their distinguished services to the Rockefeller Empire and the Axis, by membership in the Council. Outstanding among these are Dean Acheson, the late Edward Stettinius, Philip C. Jessup, W. Averell Harriman, Ralph J. Bunche, Senator William B. Benton, Justice Felix Frankfurter and many others. These take their place with the Amerasia galaxy, beside the Rockefellers, Nelson A., John D. 3d and David, and such luminaries as Marshall Field, Harold Stassen and General Dwight D. Eisenhower, as indoctrinators of the Council's membership and dictators of its policies.

In effect the Council on Foreign Relations has become an assembly of the top Rockefeller agents, associates, and collaborators in business, industry, banking, politics and other less creditable activities, who have served the Empire or the Axis or both, well and loyally. It bears the same relation to the Rockefeller Empire as do the higher orders of knighthood to the British Empire—an accolade for distinguished service. Its membership, by invitation, can be regarded as equivalent to decoration.

Many of the members of the Council were claimed openly as their agents by the Rockefellers in the publicity that they released through William S. Dutton to Collier's in the issue of April 28, 1951, (p. 78) as a build-up. Among these are: Karl T. Compton, Robert G. Sproul, Harold W. Dodds, Owen D. Young, Walter S. Gifford, former Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes, former Ambassador to Great Britain, Lewis W. Douglas, John Foster Dulles, Dr. Thomas Parran, U.S. High Commissioner John J. McCloy, Douglas S. Freeman and Times publisher, Arthur Hays Sulzberger.

It is obviously the function of the Rockefeller dominated Council to establish contact of the radical and subversive elements with the State Department and with the highest officials for the purpose of indoctrinating them, influencing their policies in the totalitarian sense required by the objectives of the Rockefeller Empire, and gaining entry into the government to directly further those objectives. This scheme met with complete success.

Pretense is made of study and research in all phases of international relations that especially interested the Rockefeller Empire. They were undertaken with Rockefeller grants. The leaders of the research were generally puppets who could be depended upon to guide the "study" and "research" to the desired and predetermined conclusion, and at the same time to brief the membership and the participating public officials in the manner desired by their sponsors. Foreign Relations Committees in as many as twenty-four cities, also subsidized by the Rockefeller Foundation and Carnegie Corporation, were used in the same manner to indoctrinate and brief local agents and unsuspecting accomplices. The Council, with its Committees and allied and subsidiary organizations thus constituted a gigantic lobby and pressure group serving to influence and warp the nation's policies. It is a lobby, however, that boasts that Secretary of State Cordell Hull himself and other high government officials participated in its activities; that holds in its membership Secretary of State Dean Acheson.

It vaunts the fact that top government officials come to it for "guidance and advice". And it relates in its Annual Report of the Executive Director, 1H9-1950 (pp. 40-41):

"At 10 a.m. on June 9, some thirty-five men took their places at the horse-shoe table in the large meeting room of the Council . . . During the morning, afternoon and evening, they devoted themselves to consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of bipartisan collaboration in American foreign policy. To provide expert testimony at their daytime discussions they had as guests Ernest A. Gross, Deputy Representative of the United States to the United Nations, and former Assistant Secretary of State for Congressional Relations; Benjamin Cohen, former Presidential Assistant at the White House; Francis O. Wilcox, Chief of Staff of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee . . .

"At their dinner session they were joined by a score of Council members for an informal 'seminar' on the conference theme (bipartisan collaboration) with the Honorable Thomas E. Dewey, Governor of New York, serving as discussion leader. Honorable Thomas K. Finletter, Secretary of the Air Force, presided."

It is a lobby that stands above the law and actually boasts of its lobbying activities with impunity. It boasts about its shady lobbying tricks and of its control of the foreign policy of the United States, in its annual reports. Thus in his annual report for 1948-1949, its executive director crows (p. 36):

"The front page of the New York Times on February 16, 1949, carried the familiar index: "World News Summarized". One of its items read as follows: 'Sixty percent of "leading citizens" independently polled felt that the country had a 'moral commitment to give help to the free nations of Europe.'

"Who were those 'leading citizens'? Who sought their views and for what purpose?

"Answers to these and other questions were found in the Times' accompanying dispatch. It was a story that figured on the front pages here and abroad, the recapitulation of the findings of a Council (on Foreign Relations) publication, 'Military Cooperation with Western Europe'!

"In October, 1948, the Council had begun work on an inquiry addressed to the members of the twenty-two Foreign Relations Committees. Previous inquiries, resulting in printed reports 'American Policy Toward Germany' and 'The Marshall Plan as an American Policy', had been widely circulated and had received favorable comment.

"For its new study, the Council again wanted to sound out Committee members on an important problem of American foreign policy. The issue of American military aid for Western Europe was selected, and the resulting survey set forth the views of Committee members on the relation of the United States to the Brussels Treaty Powers and to other European nations, the implementation of the Vandenberg Resolution, and on the nature and extent of American military aid. FROM PRIVATE AND OFFICIAL SOURCES THE COUNCIL CONTINUES TO ACQUIRE EVIDENCE OF THE REACH AND USEFULNESS OF THESE INQUIRIES."

The Council further brags, in the report of its executive director for the year 1949-1950, of its success in infiltrating our government with its members and agents, as follows (pp. 39-40) :

"The primary purpose of Council discussion groups is to keep members informed of the course of events in the field in which they are particularly interested, and to give them an opportunity to deepen their knowledge. But very often the groups serve, as well, as training ground for members called upon to serve the government in important positions. SUCH INSTANCES ARE TOO NUMEROUS TO RECORD HERE, but members who have recently undertaken official posts include:

  • Thomas K. Finletter, a director of the Council who has been active in various discussion groups and who became Secretary of the Air Force on April 14, 1950;
  • Philip C. Jessup, a former Group Chairman, who was named Senior Adviser to the Secretary of State on March 9, 1950;
  • Charles M. Spofford, for two years Chairman of the Council's group on Western Europe, who was appointed Deputy U.S. Representative on the North Atlantic Treaty Council on June 22, 1950; and
  • George N. Shuster, a member of the Committee on Studies, who became State Commissioner for Bavaria on April 17,1950."

The director was over-modest in stating the distinction and qualifications of the distinguished, or shall one say notorious, members of Council appointed to these posts.

The executive director of the Council was also guilty of understatement when he wrote: "Such instances (of Council members being appointed to high government positions) are too numerous to record here." So consistently have high, policy-making positions in the government been filled from the ranks of Rockefeller's Council that it can be called the invisible government of the United States. This is strikingly illustrated by the Office of Price Stabilization. Its original head was Alan Valentine, a Rockefeller Foundation subsidized professor and non-resident member of Rockefeller's Council. When he was ousted in response to public dissatisfaction with inaction of his office, Washington went no further than Eric Johnston, a resident member of the Council, for his replacement.

Within the months preceding the publication of this book, four policy-making appointments were made by Truman: General Dwight D. Eisenhower, as head of SHAPE, Robert A. Lovett, as Secretary of Defense, Edwin A. Locke Jr., as Administrator for the Point 4 program in the Near East, and George F. Kennan as interim Ambassador to Russia. All of them with the exception of Lovett are members of Rockefeller's Council on Foreign Relations. Lovett is a Trustee of the paramount agency, the Rockefeller Foundation. Kennan was president of the East European Fund of the Ford Foundation, that also is dominated by the Rockefeller interests.

The membership of Rockefeller's Council on Foreign Relations interlock it with the control of every important "philanthropic" foundation, and a host of Rockefeller agencies and fronts that serve as a huge propaganda agency and lobby that promote the cause of the Rockefeller Empire and the Axis. Though the same group of their agents, members of the CFR, constitute the core of all of these organizations, their controlled press represents their propaganda as the considered views of the nation at large. On April 19,1951, for example, their official gazette, the New York Times, reported under the headline Survey Confirms Policy On Soviet, that 765 prominent citizens (all members of local Committees on Foreign Relations subsidiary to the CFR and financed by the Rockefeller interests) in twenty-four of the nation's largest cities "approved the broad policy of 'containment' of Soviet Russia, even at the risk of war with that nation" and urged that "we should not change our attitude on issues abroad, just to lessen our commitments . . . essential to the security of America as to other free nations." This report was "edited", according to the Times, by Joseph Barber, R.C. Leffingwell, Hamilton Fish Armstrong, John W. Davis, Lewis W. Douglas, Thomas K. Finletter, W. Averell Harriman, Philip D. Reed and Myron C. Taylor, for the CFR.

William Fulton, in a series of articles in the Chicago Tribune in January, 1951, described how the multitude of organizations headed by the Council on Foreign Relations, including the Carnegie Endowment For International Peace, the English Speaking Union, the Foreign Policy Association, the American Association for the United Nations, Freedom House, the Institute of Pacific Relations and a host of others, cooperate through their interlocking directorates and supplement each other's "internationalist" propaganda. The Washington Times Herald, another newspaper of the patriotic, McCormick chain commented editorially on Fulton's series in its issue of January 10, 1951, as follows:

"These organizations cultivate a pious pretense of existing to 'study' foreign relations. This function is easily stretched into advocacy of the Administration's foreign policy in detail and in general. These old-line interventionist agencies are backed up from time to time by newly created propaganda fronts when it is thought that additional heat must be generated to put over some particular world-saving enterprise. The Committee To Defend America By Aiding The Allies was typical of this sort of activity when the effort was under way to put the United States into World War II.

"The Administration's present hysteria concerning Russia has led to the formation of two new committees, one called the Committee On The Present Danger and the other The Crisis Committee. The formula is to gather together a group of windbags who have publicity value through corporate, banking, legal or academic connections and to assail the public with manifestos . . .

"The efforts of these propaganda media are to raise sufficient noise so that legitimate public opinion will be blanketed by highly organized . clamor from the other direction. A relatively few people, speaking through a considerable number of microphones, can create a fictitious impression that there is a 'public demand' for policies which lack appeal to the great body of people, who have no such convenient propaganda organs to make their desires heard.

"Some of the cruder smear jobs are left to letterhead organizations which specialize in character assassination at a price, while volunteers can always be counted on to step forward from among the professional union bosses to do the same job . . .

" . . . If misery and ruin of the Republic were the avowed objectives of these ENEMIES WITHIN THE GATES, they could not have adopted doctrines and methods better calculated to achieve that disloyal purpose . . ."

On December 9, 1950, courageous, patriotic and American Chicago Tribune, one of the few newspapers that has dared attack and expose the Council on Foreign Relations (though it has omitted to point out its Rockefeller control) in an editorial entitled BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS, replied to a release made by the Council locally through its Chicago subsidiary, that sought to throw the blame on their opponents for the situation revealed by General MacArthur's statement that in Korea "we face an entirely new war", as follows:

"There is not a word in all this to suggest that what has happened in Korea is the direct consequence of a line of policy (often spoken of as internationalism or interventionalism) which has had the support of the Council on Foreign Relations. . .

"Thanks to these policies, 300,000 American boys lost their lives in the 1941-45 war and 5,600 more have been listed as killed thus far in Korea. All that the members of the Council can show in Europe in return for the sacrifices is the substitution of Russian for German tyranny and menace; and all that has happened in Asia is the substitution of Russian domination of all of China for Japanese domination of a part of it.

" . . . The decision to send Americans to fight in Korea was taken . . . by Harry S. Truman pursuing a policy of intervention strongly favored in principle by most of the members of the Council.

"The members of the Council are persons of much more than average influence in the community. They have used the prestige that their wealth, their social position, and their education have given them to lead their country toward bankruptcy and military debacle. They should look at their hands. There is blood on them—the dried blood of the last war and the fresh blood of the present one."

A more true, more eloquent and more patriotically American editorial it would be hard to find. It supplements the equally plain-spoken statement in the same tenor made by Senator Harry Shippe Truman in 1942 in regard to the activities of another key Rockefeller agency: "YES IT IS TREASON".