"Science," the Greek word for knowledge, when appended to the word "political," creates what seems like an oxymoron. For who could claim to know politics? More complicated than any game, most people who play it become addicts and die without understanding what they were addicted to. The rest of us suffer under their malpractice as our "leaders." A truer case of the blind leading the blind could not be found. Plumb the depths of confusion here.


Postby admin » Sat Aug 01, 2015 8:55 pm

Memorandum Number Nine: Conclusions And Recommendations

A general conclusion is that The Order has been able to convert the educational system from one aimed at developing the individual child to one aimed at conditioning the child to be a unit in an organic, i.e., Hegelian, society.

When we look at philanthropic foundations in the next volume we shall see the way this has been implemented by private foundation funds.

There is not sufficient evidence to argue whether the decline in educational standards is an accidental byproduct of this "new education" or a deliberate subsidiary policy. In any event, the Reagan Administration policy of merit pay will compound, not solve, the problem.

Recommendations for reform have been forthcoming at intervals since the late 1950s when educational problems first surfaced. At the time of Sputnik there was a hue and cry about the backward nature of U.S. training in mathematics and science, which at the University level are not at all backward. Anyway the educational establishment recognized an opportunity and cried, "more, more money." They got it, and there was a massive expansion in the '60s. But the funds have been poured into social conditioning. Mathematics and sciences have taken back seat in the last 30 years.

Then in 1981, James S. Coleman of the University of Chicago produced a study of public schools for the U.S. Department of Education. In this study Coleman used the National Opinion Research Center to contact 58,728 sophomores and seniors in 1,016 public, parochial, and private schools across the United States. His findings were:

private and parochial schools provide an education closer to the common school ideal than do public schools,
• private school students learned more than public school counterparts,

• Coleman wrote it was paradoxical that "catholic schools function much closer to the American ideal of the common school ... than do public schools."
private schools provide "a safer, more disciplined and more ordered environment" than public schools,
• "blacks and Hispanics perform better at private schools."

The reason? Private schools are less under the influence of the Dewey educational philosophy. They still have to use accredited teachers, but these teachers -- quite bluntly -- have been able to survive the teacher training conditioning.

Yet the educational establishment does not see the writing on the wall.

In Fall 1983 a report by John Goodlad, Dean of the School of Education at University of Southern California, will be published. John I. Goodlad wrote the Foreword to Schooling For A Global Age (McGraw Hill, 1979) which includes these comments:

"Enlightened social engineering is required to face situations that demand global action now" (page xiii). "Parents and the general public must be reached ... otherwise children and youth enrolled in globally oriented programs may find themselves in conflict with values assumed in the home."

And more. Another 345 pages of globalony follows.

Nothing about the child as an individual. Nothing about the child as a repository of talents that need to be encouraged. Nothing about basic education: the 3 R's.

Yet this Goodlad report is being pushed in The New York Times (July 19, 1983) as the most "comprehensive report" ever made on American schools. These are some Goodlad proposals:

• education should start at 4 years old
• schools should be smaller
• head teachers with doctorates should have more pay

And this does nothing, of course, to stop what a former Commissioner of Education called "a rising tide of mediocrity."

If the United States is to survive in the coming technologically intensive age, then certain recommendations follow. These are:

• the function of the school is to develop individual talent. Social engineering as an objective has to be discarded.
• A thorough grounding in the 3 R's is essential for a good education. In other words, "content" is all important.
• It follows that Schools of Education should be abolished (this is under serious discussion at Duke University and has been proposed at University of Michigan and even Cal Berkeley).
• Teacher credentials should be based on subject matter entirely, not educational theory.
• All restrictions on private schools should be abolished.
• Public schools should be returned to local control.
Site Admin
Posts: 31991
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Postby admin » Sat Aug 01, 2015 8:56 pm



The operational history of The Order can only be understood within a framework of the Hegelian dialectic process. Quite simply this is the notion that conflict creates history.

From this axiom it follows that controlled conflict can create a predetermined history. For example: When the Trilateral Commission discusses "managed conflict", as it does extensively in its literature, the Commission implies the managed use of conflict for long run predetermined ends -- not for the mere random exercise of manipulative control to solve a problem.

The dialectic takes this Trilateral "managed conflict" process one step further. In Hegelian terms, an existing force (the thesis) generates a counterforce (the antithesis). Conflict between the two forces results in the forming of a synthesis. Then the process starts all over again: Thesis vs. antithesis results in synthesis.

The synthesis sought by the Establishment is called the New World Order. Without controlled conflict this New World Order will not come about. Random individual actions of persons in society would not lead to this synthesis, it's artificial, therefore it has to be created. And this is being done with the calculated, managed, use of conflict. And all the while this synthesis is being sought, there is profit in playing the involved parties against one another. This explains why the International bankers backed the Nazis, the Soviet Union, North Korea, North Vietnam, ad nauseum, against the United States. The "conflict" built profits while pushing the world ever closer to One World Government. The process continues today.

We apologize for the poor quality of some documents included in this volume. These are the best copies in existence today. In fact, it is a miracle they survived at all ... For example, letters between Patriarch Amos Pinchot (Club D. 95) and Patriarch William Kent (Club D. 85) would almost certainly have been destroyed if a New York State Commission had not seized the documents as part of an investigation into subversion in the United States.

However, even where contents cannot be clearly identified, the very existence of even a fragmentary text proves a vital point: There is a joint calculated effort among Patriarchs to bring about a specific objective. Furthermore, the diverse conflicting nature of these efforts, commented upon even in letters between Patriarchs, can only be explained in the terms of the Hegelian dialectic.

JANE FONDA: You know, people say, "Well, you keep going back. Why are you going back to Vietnam?" You have to keep going back to Vietnam, because I'll tell you what, the other side does. They're always going back. And they have to go back, the Hawks, you know, the Patriarchs. They have to go back, and they have to revise the going back, because they can't allow us to know what the back there really was."

-- "Sir! No Sir!," a David Zeiger Film

In brief, the existence of these documents is just as important as the nature of the contents. It demonstrates joint planned actions, ergo: A Conspiracy!

Antony C. Sutton April, 1984
Site Admin
Posts: 31991
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Postby admin » Sat Aug 01, 2015 9:01 pm

Memorandum Number One: Created Conflict And The Dialectic Process


The first volume of this series (Introduction To The Order) described in broad terms the nature and objectives of The Order.

Our first hypothesis, that the U.S. was ruled by an elite, secret society, was supported by documentary evidence: such a secret society does exist, its membership is concealed, and disclosure of membership is not a voluntary effort. Further, since publication of the first volume, the Sterling Library at Yale University which has major holdings of their records has refused to allow researchers further access to Russell Trust papers (the legal name for The Order).

We also argued in the first volume that the operations of The Order must be seen and explained in terms of the Hegelian dialectic process. Their operations cannot be explained in terms of any other philosophy; therefore The Order cannot be described as "right" or "left," secular or religious, Marxist or Capitalist. The Order, and its objectives, is all of these and none of these.

In Hegelian philosophy the conflict of political "right" and political "left," or thesis and antithesis in Hegelian terms, is essential to the forward movement of history and historical change itself. Conflict between thesis and antithesis brings about a synthesis, i.e., a new historical situation.

Our descriptive world history in the West and Marxist countries consists only of description and analysis within a political framework of "right" or "left." For example, historical work published in the West looks at communism and socialism either through the eyes of financial capitalism or Marxism. Historical work published in the Soviet Union looks at the West only through Marxist eyes. However, there is another frame for historical analysis that has never (so far as we can determine) been utilized, i.e., to use a framework of Hegelian logic, to determine if those elites who control the State use the dialectic process to create a predetermined historical synthesis.

Only tantalizing glimpses of any such creative process can be found in modern historical works. The most convincing glimpses are in the late Carroll Quigley's Tragedy And Hope which we shall quote below. Rarely some politicians on the periphery of elitist power have allowed brief insights into the public eye. For example, President Woodrow Wilson made the revealing statement: "Some of the biggest men in the U.S. in the fields of commerce and manufacturing know that there is a power so organized, so subtle, so complete, so pervasive that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it."

Who or what is this power? And how is it used?

This series argues that the current world situation has been deliberately created by this elitist power more or less by manipulation of "right" and "left" elements. We argue that the most powerful of all world elites has during the past 100 years or so developed both right and left elements to bring about a New World Order.

There is no question that the so-called establishment in the U.S. uses "managed conflict." The practice of "managing" crises to bring about a favorable outcome, that is, favorable to the elite, is freely admitted in the literature of, for example, The Trilateral Commission. Furthermore, there is no question that decisions of war and peace are made by a few in the elite and not by the many in the voting process through a political referendum. This volume explores some major conflict decisions made by the few in The Order and the way in which right-left situations have been deliberately created and then placed in a conflict mode to bring about a synthesis.

Finally, we will tie these decisions and operations back to the elite and specifically to The Order.


Throughout the last 200 years, since the rise of Kant in German philosophy, we can identify two conflicting systems of philosophy and so opposing ideas of the State, society and culture. In the U.S., the British Commonwealth and France, philosophy is based on the individual and the rights of the individual. Whereas in Germany from the time of Kant, through Fichte and Hegel up to 1945, the root philosophy has been universal brotherhood, rejection of individualism and general opposition to Western classical liberal thought in almost all its aspects. German idealism, as we noted in earlier volumes of this series, was the philosophical basis for the work of Karl Marx and the Left Hegelians as well as Bismarck, Hitler and the Right Hegelians. This is the paradox: that Hegel gave a theoretical basis not only to the most conservative of German movements, but also to most of the revolutionary movements of the 19th century. Both Marx and Hitler have their philosophical roots in Hegel.

From the Hegelian system of political thought, alien to most of us in the West, stem such absurdities as the State seen as the "march of God through history," that the State is also God, that the only duty of a citizen is to serve God by serving the State, that the State is Absolute Reason, that a citizen can only find freedom by worship and utter obedience to the State. However, we also noted in How The Order Controls Education that Hegelian absurdities have thoroughly penetrated the U.S. educational system under pressure from such organizations as the National Education Association and major foundations.

From this system of Hegelian philosophy comes the historical dialectic, i.e., that all historical events emerge from a conflict between opposing forces. These emerging events are above and different from the conflicting events. Any idea or implementation of an idea may be seen as THESIS. This thesis will encourage emergence of opposing forces, known as ANTITHESIS. The final outcome will be neither thesis nor antithesis, but a synthesis of the two forces in conflict.

Karl Marx, in Das Kapital, posed capitalism as thesis and communism as antithesis. What has been completely ignored by historians, including Marxists, is that any clash between these forces cannot lead to a society which is either capitalist or communist but must lead to a society characterized by a synthesis of the two conflicting forces. The clash of opposites must in the Hegelian system bring about a society neither capitalist nor communist. Moreover, in the Hegelian scheme of events, this new synthesis will reflect the concept of the State as God and the individual as totally subordinate to an all powerful State.

What then is the function of a Parliament or a Congress for Hegelians? These institutions are merely to allow individuals to feel that opinions have some value and to allow a government to take advantage of whatever wisdom the "peasant" may accidentally demonstrate. As Hegel puts it:

"By virtue of this participation, subjective liberty and conceit, with their general opinion, (individuals) can show themselves palpably efficacious and enjoy the satisfaction of feeling themselves to count for something."

War, the organized conflict of nations for Hegelians, is only the visible outcome of the clash between ideas. As John Dewey, the Hegelian darling of the modern educational system, puts it:

"War is the most effective preacher of the vanity of all merely finite interests, it puts an end to that selfish egoism of the individual by which he would claim his life and his property as his own or as his family's." (John Dewey, German Philosophy And Politics, p. 197)

Of course, this war-promoting Dewey paragraph is conveniently forgotten by the National Education Association, which is today busy in the "Peace Movement" -- at precisely that time when a "peace" movement most aids the Hegelian Soviets.

Above all, the Hegelian doctrine is the divine right of States rather than the divine right of kings. The State for Hegel and Hegelians is God on earth:

"The march of God in history is the cause of the existence of states, their foundation is the power of Reason realizing itself as will. Every state, whatever it be, participates in the divine essence. The State is not the work of human art, only Reason could produce it." (Philosophy Of Right)

For Hegel the individual is nothing, the individual has no rights, morality consists solely in following a leader. For the ambitious individual the rule is Senator Mansfield's maxim: "To get along you have to go along."

Compare this to the spirit and letter of the Constitution of the United States: "We the people" grant the state some powers and reserve all others to the people. Separation of church and state is built into the U.S. Constitution, a denial of Hegel's "the State is God on earth." Yet, compare this legal requirement to the actions of The Order in the United States, The Group in England, the Illuminati in Germany, and the Politburo in Russia. For these elitists the State is supreme and a self-appointed elite running the State acts indeed as God on earth.


The concept of the Hegelian dialectic is obviously beyond the comprehension of modern textbook writers. No historical or political theory textbook that we know of discusses the possible use of the Hegelian dialectic in American politics. Yet its use has been recorded by Professor Carroll Quigley in Tragedy And Hope, a trade book based on documents of the Council on Foreign Relations. Quigley not only describes banker J.P. Morgan's use of the "right" and the "left" as competitive devices for political manipulation of society, but adds an eye-opening comment:

"Unfortunately we do not have space here for this great and untold story, but it must be remembered that what we do say is part of a much larger picture." (Tragedy And Hope, p. 945)

This much larger picture is partly revealed in this book. First let's briefly note how J.P. Morgan used the dialectic process as a means of political control for financial ends. The only college attended by Morgan was 2-3 years in the mid-1850s at University of Gottingen, Germany, which was a center of Hegelian activism. We have no record that Morgan joined any secret society, no more than the KONKNEIPANTEN, one of the student corps. Yet German Hegelianism is apparent in J.P. Morgan's approach to political parties -- Morgan used them all.

As Quigley comments:

"The associations between Wall Street and the Left, of which Mike Straight is a fair example, are really survivals of the associations between the Morgan Bank and the Left. To Morgan all political parties were simply organizations to be used, and the firm always was careful to keep a foot in all camps. Morgan himself, Dwight Morrow, and other partners were allied with Republicans; Russell C. Leffingwell was allied with the Democrats; Grayson Murphy was allied with the extreme Right; and Thomas W. Lamont was allied with the Left. Like the Morgan interest in libraries, museums, and art, its inability to distinguish between loyalty to the United States and loyalty to England, its recognition of the need for social work among the poor, the multipartisan political views of the Morgan firm in domestic politics went back to the original founder of the firm, George Peabody (1795-1869). To this same seminal figure may be attributed the use of tax-exempt foundations for controlling these activities, as may be observed in many parts of America to this day, in the use of Peabody foundations to support Peabody libraries and museums. Unfortunately, we do not have space here for this great and untold story, but it must be remembered that what we do say is part of a much larger picture." (Ibid)

Quigley did not know of the link between the Morgan firm, other New York financial interests and The Order. As we have noted before, Quigley did publish a valuable expose of the British Establishment known as "The Group." And we know from personal correspondence that Quigley suspected more than he published, but identification of an American elite was not part of Quigley's work. The names Harriman, Bush, Acheson, Whitney -- even Stimson -- do not appear in The Anglo American Establishment.

We can therefore take the above paragraph from Quigley's Tragedy And Hope and insert identification of The Order. The paragraph then becomes more revealing. Although Morgan himself was not a member of The Order, some of his partners were, and after Morgan's death the firm became Morgan, Stanley & Co. The "Stanley" was Harold Stanley (The Order 1908). In Morgan's time the influence of The Order came through partner Henry P. Davison, whose son H.P. Davison, Jr. was initiated in 1920. The elder Henry P. Davison brought Thomas Lamont and Willard Straight into the Morgan firm. These partners were instrumental in building the left wing of Morgan's dialectic, including the Communist Party U.S.A. (with Julius Hammer, whose son is today Chairman of Occidental Petroleum).

Morgan partner Thomas Cochran was initiated in 1904. However, it was in the network of Morgan dominated and affiliated firms, rather than in the partnership itself, that one finds members of The Order. In firms like Guaranty Trust and Bankers Trust, somewhat removed from the J.P. Morgan financial center, although under Morgan control, we find concentrations of initiates (as we shall describe below).

This practice by The Order of supporting both "right" and "left" persists down to the present day. We find in 1984, for example, that Averell Harriman (The Order '13) is elder statesman of the Democratic Party while George Bush (The Order '49) is a Republican Vice President and leader of the misnamed "moderate" (actually extremist) wing of the Republican Party. In the center we have so-called "independent" John Anderson, who in fact receives heavy financial support from the elite.


This manipulation of "left" and "right on the domestic front is duplicated in the international field where "left" and "right" political structures are artificially constructed and collapsed in the drive for a one-world synthesis.

College textbooks present war and revolution as more or less accidental results of conflicting forces. The decay of political negotiation into physical conflict comes about, according to these books, after valiant efforts to avoid war. Unfortunately, this is nonsense. War is always a deliberate creative act by individuals.

Western textbooks also have gigantic gaps. For example, after World War II the Tribunals set up to investigate Nazi war criminals were careful to censor any materials recording Western assistance to Hitler. By the same token, Western textbooks on Soviet economic development omit any description of the economic and financial aid given to the 1917 Revolution and subsequent economic development by Western firms and banks.

Revolution is always recorded as a spontaneous event by the politically or economically deprived against an autocratic state. Never in Western textbooks will you find the evidence that revolutions need finance and the source of the finance in many cases traces back to Wall Street.

Consequently it can be argued that our Western history is every bit as distorted, censored, and largely useless as that of Hitler's Germany or the Soviet Union or Communist China. No Western foundation will award grants to investigate such topics, few Western academics can "survive" by researching such theses and certainly no major publisher will easily accept manuscripts reflecting such arguments.

In fact, there is another largely unrecorded history and it tells a story quite different than our sanitized textbooks. It tells a story of the deliberate creation of war, the knowing finance of revolution to change governments, and the use of conflict to create a New World Order.

In the following Memorandum Number Two we will describe the operational vehicles used to create two revolutions and one world conflict. Then, in Memoranda Three and Four, we will explore thesis and antithesis in one major historical episode -- the development and construction of the Soviet Union (thesis) and Hitler's Germany (antithesis).

In Memorandum Five we will explore the continuation of this dialectic conflict into the last few decades, specifically Angola and China today. We will show that the purpose of The Order is to create a new synthesis, a New World Order along Hegelian lines where the State is the Absolute and the individual can find freedom only in blind obedience to the State.
Site Admin
Posts: 31991
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Postby admin » Sat Aug 01, 2015 9:03 pm

Memorandum Number Two: Operational Vehicles For Conflict Creation


Our first task is to break an almost universally held mind set, i.e., that communists and elitist capitalists are bitter enemies. This Marxist axiom is a false statement and for a century has fooled academics and investigators alike.

To illustrate this mind set, let's look at a report on revolutionaries in the U.S. compiled by the respected Scotland Yard (London) in 1919. London police investigators were then tracking the Bolshevik Revolution and attempting to identify its Western supporters. When it came to men with long beards and even longer overcoats, most police departments had no problem -- they looked like revolutionaries, therefore, they must be revolutionaries. But when it came to respectable black-suited bankers, Scotland Yard was unable to rise above its mind set and recognize that bankers might equally be revolutionaries. Witness this extract from a Scotland Yard Intelligence Report. [1]

"Martens is very much in the limelight. There appears to be no doubt about his connection with the Guarantee (sic) Trust Company. Although it is surprising that so large and influential an enterprise should have dealings with a Bolshevik concern."

Scotland Yard had picked up an accurate report that the Soviets were deeply involved with Guaranty Trust of New York, but they couldn't believe it, and dropped this line of investigation.

Even today the FBI has a similar mind set. For example, David Rockefeller has met regularly with a KGB agent in the United States -- weekly lunch meetings is a close description. Yet the FBI presumably can't bring itself to investigate David Rockefeller as a potential Soviet agent, but if Joe Smith of Hoboken, N.J. was lunching weekly with the KGB, you can be sure the FBI would be on his tail. And, of course, our domestic U.S. Marxists find it absolutely inconceivable that a capitalist would support communism.

Organizations like Scotland Yard and the FBI, and almost all academics on whom investigators rely for their guidelines, have a highly important failing: they look at known verifiable historical facts with a mind set. They convince themselves that they have the explanation of a problem even before the problem presents itself.

The key to modern history is in these facts: that elitists have close working relations with both Marxists and Nazis. The only questions are who and why? The common reaction is to reject these facts. On the other hand, national security alone demands that we face these unwelcome relations before any more damage is done to our way of life.

In this memorandum we will present the concept that world history, certainly since about 1917, reflects deliberately created conflict with the objective of bringing about a synthesis, a New World Order.

The operation actually began before 1917. In later volumes we will explore the Spanish-American War and the Anglo-Boer War of 1899. The first was created by The Order, i.e., the U.S. elite, and the second by "The Group," i.e., the British elite (with some U.S. assistance). We might aptly term these the First and Second Hegelian Wars, but this is another story. In this volume we are limited to the rise of Hitler in Germany and the rise of the Marxist state in the Soviet Union. The clash between these two powers or the political systems they represent was a major source of World War II.

After World War II the world stage was changed. After 1945 it became the Soviet Union on one side versus the United States on the other. The first dialectical clash led to the formation of the United Nations, an elementary step on the road to world government. The second dialectical clash led to the Trilateral Commission, i.e., regional groupings and more subtly to efforts for a merger of the United States and the Soviet Union.

In Introduction To The Order we established the existence of a secret society, The Order. We are now going to demonstrate how The Order created and developed two global arms needed for Hegelian conflict. Since 1917 the operational vehicles for this global battle have been:

(a) Guaranty Trust Company of New York, the same firm cited in the 1919 Scotland Yard report, and

(b) Brown Brothers, Harriman, private bankers of New York.

Before 1933, Brown Brothers, Harriman consisted of two firms: W.A. Harriman Company and Brown Brothers. Numerous members of The Order have been in both firms, but one individual stands out above all others as the key to the operation of The Order: W. Averell Harriman (The Order '13).


Marxist Russia

(1) Guaranty Trust Company
(2) Brown Brothers, Harriman (Formerly W.A. Harriman & Co.)
(3) RUSKOMBANK -- joint Guaranty Trust -- Soviet operation 1922

1917 Bolshevik Revolution
Construction and subsidy of the Soviet Union 1920 to 1984

Nazi Germany

(1) Guaranty Trust Company
(2) Union Banking Corp. (Harriman and Nazi interests)

1933 Hitler's accession to power. Construction and subsidy of National Socialism

World War II


(Post World War II United Nations as a first step to New World Order)


The name William Averell Harriman turns up behind world political scenes more frequently than any other member of The Order. Possibly it's because Harriman is a remarkably active man. Born in 1891, graduated Yale 1913, Harriman is still newsworthy in the 1980s. In June 1983 Harriman had a private meeting with Yuri Andropov in Moscow and in December 1983, at 92, broke his right leg while swimming in the sea off Barbados. Whatever else we say here about Averell, we must record his truly remarkable energy and longevity.

In official Harriman biographies, however, there is no mention of The Order, Skull & Bones, or the Russell Trust. Like other initiates Harriman has carefully expunged membership from the public record. We have not yet determined if this membership was ever made known to the FBI for use in background checks needed for government positions, or maybe no one ever bothered to ask for a background check on Averell Harriman.

To understand Averell Harriman we need to go back to his father, Edward H. Harriman, the 19th century "robber baron." Edward Harriman's biography (E.H. Harriman: A Biography) is as self-serving as all hired biographies. It was written by George Kennan (published by Houghton Mifflin in 1922) who was active in the Dean Acheson State Department. The author of the famous -- some say infamous -- National Security Council document 68 was none other than George Kennan. (See page 175)

Edward Harriman started work at 14 with little education, but married Mary Averell, daughter of a New York banker and railroad president. At 22, Harriman bought a seat on the New York Stock Exchange and got lucky or smart with Union Pacific after the crash of 1893.

Even the widely accepted Dictionary of American Biography states that Harriman was subsequently guilty of a combination in restraint of trade (1904 Northern Securities case), that his dubious financial activities netted him $60 million in a manner which led to investigation by the Interstate Commerce Commission. This source cites Harriman as "an example of how a road may be drained of its resources for the benefit of insiders."

Harriman printed securities with a nominal value of $80 million to expand capitalization of his railroads. On the other hand, Harriman neglected to acquire improvements and property for more than $18 million. In other words, $60 million of the securities was water, mostly sold through Kuhn Loeb & Co., his backers and bankers. The $60 million went into Harriman's pocket.

The 1904 ICC report stated:

"It was admitted by Mr. Harriman that there was about $60 million of stock and liabilities issued, against which no property had been acquired and this is undoubtedly an accurate estimate." [3]

In brief, Mr. Edward H. Harriman was apparently a thief, a crook, and a felon, because fraudulent conversion of $60 million is a felony. Harriman stayed out of jail by judicious expenditures to politicians and political parties. Biographer George Kennan relates how Harriman responded to President Theodore Roosevelt's 1904 plea for $250,000 for the Republican National Committee. [4]

These funds were turned over to the Committee by Harriman's friend and attorney, Judge Robert Scott Lovett. Lovett was also general counsel for the Union Pacific Railroad and could be described as Harriman's bagman. Judge Lovett's son, Robert Abercrombie Lovett (The Order '18) went to Yale and with the two Harriman boys, Roland and Averell, was initiated into The Order. We shall catch up again with Robert Abercrombie Lovett in the 1950s as Secretary of Defense, partner in Brown Brothers, Harriman, and a key force to have President Harry Truman recall General Douglas MacArthur from Korea. By itself the Lovett family is incidental. When we link it to the Harriman family we have an example of how these families help each other along the way for a common objective.

In any event, $250,000 hardly changed Theodore Roosevelt's view of Harriman. Two years after the gift, Roosevelt wrote Senator Sherman and described Harriman as a man of "deep seated corruption," an "undesirable citizen" and "an enemy of the Republic." [5]

Another description of Averell Harriman's father is in Concise Dictionary Of National Biography (page 402): "Self confident, dominant, cold and ruthless, he spared neither friend nor foe if they blocked his plans."

Now we cannot visit the sins of the father onto his sons, but we should keep this background in mind when we look at the careers of the Harriman boys, Averell and Roland. At least we have reasons to probe behind the public relations facade and perhaps suspect the worst.

The Harriman Family And Its Satellites In The Order

WOOLLEY: 2 members
AMES: 2 members
BROWN: 9 members in several families
BUSH: 3 members
LOVETT: 3 members
JAMES: 6 members

Superficially, Averell Harriman's life has been quite different than his fathers. Here's an official summary of Averell Harriman's long career:

• Married three times: (1) 1915 Kitty Lanier Lawrence; (2) 1930 Marie Norton Whitney [6]; (3) 1971 Pamela Churchill Hayward [7]
• Groton Prep School, then Yale. Initiated into The Order in 1913.
• Started with his father's company, Union Pacific Railroad
• 1917 organized the Merchant Shipbuilding Corporation, sold all shipping interests in 1925
• 1917 Director of Guaranty Trust. Family holdings of about one-third of Guaranty stock were put into a J.P. Morgan voting trust in 1912
• 1920 established W.A. Harriman Company, with his brother Roland as Vice-President
• 1923 formed Georgian Manganese Company
• 1933 W.A. Harriman merged with Brown Brothers to become Brown Brothers, Harriman
• 1934 Special assistant administrator of Roosevelt's National Recovery Act
• 1941 Minister to Great Britain in charge of Lend Lease for Britain and Russia
• 1941 Ambassador to the Soviet Union
• 1946 Ambassador to Great Britain
• 1946 Secretary of Commerce
• 1948 U.S. representative to ECA in Europe
• 1950 Special Assistant to President Truman
• 1951 U.S. representative at NATO defense meetings
• 1951 Director of Mutual Security Agency
• 1955 Governor of State of New York
• 1961 Ambassador at Large
• 1961 Assistant Secretary of State for Far East
• 1963 Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs
• 1968 U.S. representative at Paris "peace" talks on Vietnam
• 1974 Chairman Democratic Party Foreign Policy Task Force
• 1975 Limited Partner Brown Brothers, Harriman
• 1983 Visits Yuri Andropov in Moscow

With this lengthy global experience one might suspect that Harriman has developed a deep knowledge, understanding and perception of the world. But in fact his writings suggest he is either rather stupid or one of the most deceptive men ever to walk the face of our earth. Let's take one example: an article written by Averell Harriman, published in Look. October 3, 1967 and entitled "From Stalin to Kosygin: the myths and the realities."

Here are two extracts:

(1) "Therefore in the early twenties my firm participated in credits to finance trade with Russia. We found as others did that the new government was most meticulous in meeting its financial commitments."

In fact, the Soviets expropriated the concessions of the 1920s including Harriman's, usually without reimbursement. Harriman was double-crossed by the Soviets in his Georgian manganese concession, then persuaded to take $3 million in Soviet bonds as compensation. (See documents printed on pages 154-155). This Soviet "compensation" in effect put Harriman in a position of making the first U.S. loan to Russia, so breaching United States law against such loans.

But this is what Harriman told John B. Stetson, Jr. of the State Department (861.637-Harriman) "Mr. Harriman said that they expect to drop about three million dollars which they would charge off to experience." This, Harriman calls "most meticulous in meeting its financial obligations."

(2) "On the Russian side, one of the most troublesome myths is that America is run by a 'ruling circle,' made up of Wall Streeters and industrialists who have an interest in continuing the cold war and the arms race to prop up the 'capitalist' economy. Anybody who knows American politics knows what nonsense this is."

Unfortunately, the Russians are largely right on the political aspects of this one. In making the above statement Harriman not only confirms Russian paranoia, i.e., that capitalists can't be trusted to tell the truth, but also deceives the American reading audience in Look that they do, in fact, have a participation in running political affairs. Compare this paragraph to this series on The Order and you will see the devious way the Harriman mind works, perhaps not so different than Harriman senior.

The previously described official Harriman biography suggests that Harriman, given his decades on the political inside, must be well aware of the dependence of the Soviet Union on Western technology: that the Soviet Union can make no economic progress without Western enterprise technology. In fact, Stalin himself told Harriman as much back in 1944. Here's an extract from a report by Ambassador Harriman in Moscow to the State Department, dated June 30, 1944:

"Stalin paid tribute to the assistance rendered by the United States to Soviet industry before and during the war. He said that about two-thirds of all the large industrial enterprises in the Soviet Union had been built with United States help or technical assistance." [8]

Stalin could have added that the other one-third of Soviet industry had been built by British, German, French, Italian, Finnish, Czech and Japanese companies.

In brief, Harriman knew first hand back in 1944 at least that the West had built the Soviet Union. Now examine Harriman's official biography with its string of appointments relating to NATO, Mutual Security Agency, State Department, foreign policy, and so on. In these posts Harriman actively pushed for a military build-up of the United States. But if the Soviet Union was seen to be an enemy in 1947, then we had no need to build a massive defense. What we should have done was cut off technology. There was no Soviet technology -- and HARRIMAN KNEW THERE WAS NO SOVIET TECHNOLOGY.

Furthermore, Harriman has been in the forefront of the cry for "more trade" with the Soviet Union -- and trade is the transfer vehicle for technology. In other words, Harriman has been pushing two CONFLICTING POLICIES SIMULTANEOUSLY.

(a) a build-up of Soviet power by export of our technology, and

(b) a Western defense against that power.

Isn't this the Hegelian dialectic? Thesis versus antithesis, then conflict which leads to a new synthesis. In the following memoranda we will show how Harriman and his fellows in the Brotherhood of Power went about this program of conflict creation.

Moreover, Harriman is understandably highly sensitive when challenged on his pious "I am always right about the Soviets" attitude.

One memorable occasion was back in 1971 when author Edward (Teddy) Weintal was at a dinner party with Harriman when Harriman trotted out his well worn line: "I was the first to warn of Soviet dangers ..."

Weintal stopped him cold. In research for a book, Weintal had found documents incriminating Harriman in the National Archives (similar to those reproduced later in this book). In particular, Weintal cited a State Department telegram dated February 12, 1944 from Harriman to Roosevelt. Said Weintal,

"You told Roosevelt that you were convinced that the Soviets did not want to introduce a Communist government into Poland."

So up jumped 79-year-old Harriman from the dinner table and waved his fists at 70-year-old Weintal. Shouted Harriman, "If you print anything like that in your book, I'll break your jaw."

Reportedly, the agitated host separated the two men, but not before a Washington Post reporter noted the details (See Washington Post, March 17, 1971, VIP Column by Maxine Cheshire).


Guaranty Trust was founded 1864 in New York. Over the next 100 years the banking firm expanded rapidly by absorbing other banks and trust companies; in 1910 it merged Morton Trust Company, in 1912 the Standard Trust Company, and in 1929 the National Bank of Commerce. The J.P. Morgan firm has effectively controlled Guaranty Trust since 1912 when Mrs. Edward Harriman (mother of Roland and Averell Harriman) sold her block of 8,000 shares of the total outstanding 20,000 shares to J.P. Morgan. By 1954 Guaranty Trust had become the most important banking subsidiary of the J.P. Morgan firm and since 1954 the merged firms have been known as Morgan-Guaranty Company.

The original capital for Guaranty Trust came from the Whitney, Rockefeller, Harriman and Vanderbilt families, all represented in The Order, and on the Board of Guaranty Trust by family members throughout the period we are discussing.

Harry Payne Whitney (The Order '94) inherited two Standard Oil fortunes from the Payne and the Whitney families. H.P. Whitney was a director of Guaranty Trust, as was his father, William C. Whitney (The Order '63). Alfred Gwynne Vanderbilt (The Order '99) represented the Vanderbilt family until he drowned at sea in the sinking of the Lusitania in 1915. (His sister Gertrude married Harry Payne Whitney, above). The power of The Order is reflected in a bizarre incident as Alfred Gwynne Vanderbilt boarded the Lusitania in New York on its fateful voyage. A telegram warning Vanderbilt not to sail was delivered to the Lusitania before it sailed -- but never reached Vanderbilt. Consequently, Vanderbilt went down with the ship.

The Harriman investment in Guaranty Trust has been represented by W. Averell Harriman.

The Rockefeller investment in Guaranty Trust was represented by Percy Rockefeller (The Order '00).

In brief, The Order was closely associated with Guaranty Trust and Morgan-Guaranty long before 1912 when Mrs. Edward Harriman sold her interest to J.P. Morgan. Averell Harriman remained on the Board of Guaranty Trust after the transfer. The following members of The Order have also been officers and directors of Guaranty Trust Company:

Harold Stanley (The Order 1908): Harold Stanley, born 1885, was the son of William Stanley, an inventor associated with General Electric Company. Stanley prepared for Yale University at the elitist Hotchkiss School, Lakeville, Connecticut. An excellent athlete, Stanley graduated Yale in 1908 and was initiated into The Order.

After Yale, Stanley joined National Bank of Albany and then, between 1913-1915, was with J.G. White (prominent in construction of the Soviet First Five Year Plan). In 1915 Stanley joined Guaranty Trust as Vice President. From 1921 to 1928 he was President of Guaranty Trust and then a partner in the firm of J.P. Morgan, replacing William Morrow. From 1935 to 1941 he was President of Morgan, Stanley & Company, then a partner from 1941 to 1955 and a limited partner after 1956, until his death in 1963.

In brief, a member of The Order was Vice President, then President of Guaranty Trust Company in the years 1915 to 1928 -- the years which record the Bolshevik Revolution and the rise of Hitler to power in Germany.

Joseph R. Swan (The Order '02). The Guaranty Company was a subsidiary of Guaranty Trust Co. Joseph Rockwell Swan (The Order '02) was President of the Guaranty Company as well as a director of Guaranty Trust Company.

Percy Rockefeller (The Order '00). Percy Rockefeller, born 1878, was the son of William D. Rockefeller (brother of John D. Rockefeller) and inherited part of the Standard Oil fortune. Percy was a director of Guaranty Trust in the 1915-1930 period.

How The Order Relates To Guaranty Trust Company And Brown Brothers, Harriman



HAROLD STANLEY (The Order '08)
W. MURRAY CRANE (The Order '04)
HARRY P. WHITNEY (The Order '94)
KNIGHT WOOLLEY (The Order '17)
FRANK P. SHEPARD (The Order '17)
JOSEPH R. SWAN (The Order '02)


HENRY P. DAVISON, JR. (The Order '20)
THOMAS RODD (The Order '35)
CLEMENT D. GILE (The Order '39)
DANIEL P. DAVISON (The Order '49)


ELLERGY S. JAMES (The Order'17)
RAY MORRIS (The Order 'O1)
KNIGHT WOOLLEY (The Order '17)
ROBERT A. LOVETT (The Order '18)


EUGENE WM. STETSON, JR. (The Order'34) (1937-42)
WALTER H. BROWN (The Order '45)
STEPHEN Y. HORD (The Order '21)


MATTHEW C. BRUSH (32° Mason)


The other operational vehicle used by The Order was the private banking firm of Brown Brothers, Harriman. Before 1933 W.A. Harriman Company was the vehicle, and Brown Brothers did not enter the picture. After 1933, the merged firm continued Harriman Company activities.

In Introduction To The Order we presented details of the merged firm (pp. 29-33). There is, however, one aspect we want to identify: the extraordinary role of the Yale Class of '17 in Brown Brothers, Harriman and the events to be described in Memoranda Three and Four.

The following five members in the class of '17 (only fifteen were initiated) were involved:

Knight Woolley (The Order '17) was with Guaranty Trust from 1919-1920, Harriman Company from 1927-1931, then Brown Brothers, Harriman from 1933 to the present time. Woolley was also a director of the Federal Reserve Bank.

Frank P. Shepard (The Order '17) also joined Guaranty Trust in 1919 and was a Vice President from 1920 to 1934, the period concerned with development of both Soviet Russia and Hitler's Nazi Party. From 1934 onwards Shepard was with Bankers Trust Company, a member of the Morgan group of banks.

Ellery Sedgewick James (The Order '17) was a partner in Brown Brothers, Harriman.

And finally, two interesting characters: Edward Roland Noel Harriman (The Order '17) and Sheldon Prescott Bush (The Order '17), the father of President George Herbert Walker Bush (The Order '49), and grandfather of President George Walker Bush (The Order '68).


From World War I until well into the 1930s The Order's "front man" in both Guaranty Trust and Brown Brothers, Harriman was Matthew C. Brush.

Brush was not Yale, nor a member of The Order, but through an accidental meeting in the 1890s his talents were used by The Order. Brush became a Knight Templar, a 32nd degree Mason and a Shriner, but not -- so far as we can trace -- more closely linked to the power center.

Brush was born in Stillwater, Minnesota in 1877 and was a graduate of the Armour Institute of Technology and MIT. By accident his first job in the 1890s was as a clerk with Franklin MacVeagh & Company of Chicago. Franklin MacVeagh was a member (The Order '62) and later Secretary of the Treasury (1909-1913) under President William Taft (The Order '78).

MacVeagh himself, as distinct from Brush, is a little difficult to classify. In 1913 MacVeagh left the Treasury and resigned as trustee of the University of Chicago. By 1919 he had become delinquent in his fees to Russell Trust. We have a copy of a dunning notice sent to MacVeagh by Otto Bannard (The Order '76), President of New York Life and Treasurer for The Order in 1919. The notice asked MacVeagh to pay up his dues.

While the trail of MacVeagh fades out after 1913, that of Matthew Brush, his one-time clerk, blossoms forth. After a series of posts in railroad companies, Brush was made Vice President of American International Corporation in 1918 and President in 1923. He was also Chairman of the Equitable Office Building, also known as 120 Broadway, illustrated on page 139.

Moreover, Brush was President of Barnsdall Corporation and Georgian Manganese Company; the significance of these posts will be seen in the next memorandum.

The purpose of this memorandum has been to demonstrate control of two banking houses by members of The Order. Both Guaranty Trust and Brown Brothers, Harriman can truly be said to have been dominated and substantially owned by individuals identified as members. Furthermore, both Guaranty Trust and the original W.A. Harriman Company were established by members of The Order. Brown Brothers was not absorbed until 1933.

Now, let's examine the evidence that these two banking firms have been vehicles for creation of war and revolution.


1. A copy is in U.S. State Department Decimal File, Microcopy 316, Roll 22, Frame 656.

2. Names of Brown Brothers, Harriman partners in 1972 were included in Introduction To The Order, pages 20-21. About 100 Harriman related documents from the 1920s may be found in U.S. State Department Decimal File, Microcopy 316, Roll 138 (861.6364-6461).

3. Gustavus Myers. History Of The Great American Fortunes (Modern Library, New York, 1937) p 500.

4. George Kennan. op cit., p 192

5. Augustus Myers, op cit., p. 214.

6. For Marie Norton Whitney, see Volume One, p 29 The Order, p. 29.

7. Pamela Hayward was formerly married to Randolph Churchill, thus linking Harriman to the British establishment.

8. Original in U.S. State Department Decimal File 033.1161 Johnston Eric/6-3044 Telegram June 30, 1944.
Site Admin
Posts: 31991
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Postby admin » Sun Aug 02, 2015 12:21 am

Memorandum Number Three: Thesis -­ The Order Creates The Soviet Union

In an earlier book, published in 1974, we presented major evidence of Wall Street assistance for the Bolshevik Revolution. This assistance was mainly cash, guns and ammunition, and diplomatic support in London and Washington, D.C. Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution also introduced the concept which Quigley described, i.e., that Morgan and other financial interests financed and influenced all parties from left to right in the political spectrum.

This Memorandum continues the story, but now links The Order to the earlier evidence of Wall Street involvement.

On the following pages we reproduce a map of the Wall Street area and a list of firms connected with the Bolshevik Revolution and financing of Hitler located in this area. We can now identify the influence, in fact the dominant influence, of The Order in these firms.

Revolutionary activity was centered at Equitable Trust Building, 120 Broadway, in the building in the photograph on page 139. This had been E.H. Harriman's address. The American International Corporation was located at 120 Broadway. The Bankers' Club, where Wall Street bankers met for lunch, was at the very top of the building. It was in this plush club that plans were laid by William Boyce Thompson for Wall Street participation in the 1917 Russian Revolution. Guaranty Securities was in 120 Broadway, while Guaranty Trust was next door at 140 Broadway (the building can be seen to the left of 120).


Fortunately we have a copy of the memorandum written by a member of The Order, summarizing intentions for the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. The memorandum was written by Thomas D. Thacher (The Order '04), a partner in the Wall Street law firm of Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett. Thacher's address was 120 Broadway. Today this law firm, now in Battery Plaza, has the largest billing on Wall Street and has former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance (Scroll & Key) as a partner.

In 1917 Thacher was in Russia with William Boyce Thompson's Red Cross Mission. After consultations in New York, Thacher was then sent to London to confer with Lord Northcliffe about the Bolshevik Revolution and then to Paris for similar talks with the French Government.

The Thacher memorandum not only urges recognition of the barely surviving Soviet Government, which in early 1918 controlled only a very small portion of Russia, but also military assistance for the Soviet Army and intervention to keep the Japanese out of Siberia until the Bolsheviks could take over.

New York Headquarters for Revolution: 120 Broadway, 1915


120 Broadway: Edward H. Harriman (before his death)
59 Broadway: W.A. Harriman Company
120 Broadway: American International Corporation
23 Wall: J.P. Morgan firm
120 Broadway: Federal Reserve Bank of New York
120 Broadway: Bankers Club (top floor)
120 Broadway: Thomas D. Thacher (of Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett)
14 Wall: William Boyce Thompson
120 Broadway: Guggenheim Exploration
15 Broad: Stetson, Jennings & Russell
120 Broadway: C.A.K. Martens of Weinberg & Posner (the first Soviet "ambassador")
110 W. 40th Street: Soviet Bureau
60 Broadway: Amos Pinchot's office
120 Broadway: Stone & Webster
120 Broadway: General Electric
120 Broadway: Sinclair Gulf Corp.
120 Broadway: Guaranty Securities
140 Broadway: Guaranty Trust Company
233 Broadway: Anglo-Russian Chamber of Commerce

INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF THE ORDER AT 120 Broadway: George Webster Adams (The Order '04); Allen Wallace Ames (The Order '18); Philip Lyndon Dodge (The Order '07)

Here are the main sections from the Thacher memorandum:

"First of all ... the Allies should discourage Japanese intervention in Siberia. In the second place, the fullest assistance should be given to the Soviet Government in its efforts to organize a volunteer revolutionary army. Thirdly, the Allied Governments should give their moral support to the Russian people in their efforts to work out their own political systems free from the domination of any foreign power ... Fourthly, until the time when open conflict shall result between the German Government and the Soviet Government of Russia there will be opportunity for peaceful commercial penetration by German agencies in Russia. So long as there is no open break, it will probably be impossible to entirely prevent such commerce. Steps should therefore be taken to impede, so far as possible, the transport of grain and raw materials to Germany from Russia." [1]

The reader should note in particular paragraph two: "In the second place, the fullest assistance should be given to the Soviet Government in its efforts to organize a volunteer revolutionary army." This assistance has been recorded in my National Suicide: Military Aid To The Soviet Union.

It was in fact the hidden policy adopted at the highest levels, in absolute secrecy, by the United States and to some extent by The Group (especially Milner) in Great Britain. Thacher apparently did not have too much success with the French Government.

When President Woodrow Wilson sent U.S. troops to hold the Trans-Siberian railroad, secret instructions were given by Woodrow Wilson in person to General William S. Graves. We have not yet located these instructions (although we know they exist), but a close reading of the available files shows that American intervention had little to do with anti-Bolshevik activity, as the Soviets, George Kennan and other writers maintain.

So grateful were the Soviets for American assistance in the Revolution that in 1920 -- when the last American troops left Vladivostok -- the Bolsheviks gave them a friendly farewell.

Reported the New York Times (February 15, 1920 7:4):


Revolutionist Staff Thanks Graves for Preserving Neutrality.

VLADIVOSTOK, Feb. 1 (Associated Press). -- Parades, street meetings and speechmaking marked the second day today of the city's complete liberation from Kolchak authority. Red flags fly on every Government building, many business houses and homes.

There is a pronounced pro-American feeling evident. In front of the American headquarters the revolutionary leaders mounted steps of buildings across the street, making speeches calling the Americans real friends, who at a critical time saved this present movement. The people insist upon an allied policy of no interference internationally in political affairs.

The General Staff of the new Government of Nikolak has telegraphed to the American commander, Major Gen. Graves, expressing its appreciation for efforts toward guaranteeing an allied policy of non-interference during the occupation of the city, also in aiding in a peaceful settlement of the local situation.

Note in particular the sentence:

"... calling the Americans real friends, who at a critical time saves this present movement."

Normally reports inconsistent with the Establishment line are choked, either by the wire services or by the rewrite desks at larger newspapers (small papers unfortunately follow New York Times). This is one report that got through intact.

In fact, the United States took over and held the Siberian Railroad until the Soviets gained sufficient power to take it over. Both British and French military missions in Siberia recorded the extraordinary actions of the United States Army, but neither mission made much headway with its own government.

So far as aiding the Soviet Army is concerned, there are State Department records that show guns and ammunition were shipped to the Bolsheviks. And in 1919, while Trotsky was making anti-American speeches in public, he was also asking Ambassador Francis for American military inspection teams to train the new Soviet Army. [2]


However, it was in Washington and London that The Order really aided the Soviets. The Order succeeded not only in preventing military actions against the Bolsheviks, but to so-muddy the policy waters that much needed vital raw materials and goods, ultimately even loans, were able to flow from the United States to the Soviets, in spite of a legal ban.

The following documents illustrate how members of The Order were able to encourage Soviet ambitions in the United States. While the Department of Justice was deporting so-called "Reds" to Russia, a much more potent force was at work WITHIN the U.S. Government to keep the fledgling Soviet Union intact.

Publisher's Note: To assist readers with the very poor reproductions of the following two letters we print our reading from the copies that we have.

May 29, 1919
Hon. William Kent,
U.S. Tariff Commission,
Washington, D.C.

Dear Billy:

This will introduce to you my friend, Professor Evans Clark, now associated with the Bureau of Information of the Russian Soviet Republic. He wants to talk with you about the recognition of Wolchak, the raising of the blockade, etc., and get your advice in regard to backing up the senators who would be apt to stand up and make a brave fight. Won't you do what you can for him.

As I see it, we are taking a (unreadable) Russia that will leave our, until now, mightily good reputation, badly damaged.

Hope to see you in Washington soon.

Faithfully yours,
A. P.


November 22, 1918
Mr. Santeri Nourteva,
Finnish Information Bureau,
299 Broadway, City

Dear Mr. Nuorteva:

Let me thank you for your very kind letter of November 1st; I apologize for not answering sooner.

I have read your bulletin on the barrage of lies, and I am, needless to say, heartily sympathetic with your view of the situation and with the work you are doing. One of the most sinister things at present is the fact that governments are going into the advertising business. They are organized so that they can make or wreck movements. I am sending you, under separate cover, a copy of a letter I have written, which I hope will interest you.

With kindest regards, I am

Sincerely yours,
Amos Pinchot.

Exhibits 211 and 212 From The Lusk Committee Files, New York

U.S. State Department Decimal File, 851.516 / 140 Stockholm Legation October 13, 1922

The above letter is from Amos Pinchot (The Order '97). His brother, conservationist Gifford Pinchot (The Order '89) was also a member. Amos Pinchot was a founder of the American Civil Liberties Union and active in aiding the Soviets during the early days of the Bolshevik Revolution. The above letter, exemplifying this assistance, was sent to Santeri Nourteva, November 22, 1918, just a year after the 1917 Revolution. Pinchot was "heartily sympathetic with your view of the situation and the work you are doing." [3]

Who was Nourteva? This name was an alias for Alexander Nyberg, a Soviet representative in the United States. Nyberg worked for the Soviet Bureau (at first called the Finnish Information Bureau -- a cover name), along with Ludwig C.A.K. Martens, the first Soviet Ambassador and formerly a Vice President of Weinberg & Posner. The New York office of Weinberg & Posner was at -- 120 Broadway! Nyberg's assistant was Kenneth Durant, an American newspaperman, later TASS correspondent in the U.S. and one time aide to "Colonel" Edward House, mystery man of the Wilson Administration. Director of the Commercial Department in this Soviet Bureau was "Comrade Evans Clark." Clark later became Executive Director of the influential Twentieth Century Foundation, and at Twentieth Century Foundation we find a member of The Order -- in this case Charles Phelps Taft (The Order '18), nephew of President and Chief Justice William Howard Taft. In the coming volume on FOUNDATIONS, we shall see how Evans Clark and The Order, working together at Twentieth Century Foundation, had a significant role in the Hegelization of American education.

The document on page 147 is a brief biography of "Comrade Evans Clark", issued by the Soviet Bureau in 1919 on his appointment as Assistant, Director of the Commercial Department of the Bureau, with the task of establishing trade relations with the U.S. Note the Harvard and Princeton associations.

Trade was vital for the survival of the Soviet Union. In 1919 all Russian factories and transportation were at a standstill. There were no raw materials and no skills available.

For assistance Evans Clark turned to The Order. On May 29, 1919, Amos Pinchot wrote fellow Skull & Bones member and strong Republican William Kent about raising the blockade against the Soviets. William Kent (The Order '87) was on the U.S. Tariff Commission and in turn wrote Senator Lenroot to request an interview for "Professor" Evans Clark. (Albert Kent, his father, was a member [The Order '53] and he married the daughter of Thomas Thacher (The Order '35].

In brief, two members of The Order, Pinchot and Kent, cooperated to push a known Bolshevik operator onto an unsuspecting Senator. Neither member of The Order advised Senator Lenroot about Clark's affiliation with the Soviet Bureau.

Exhibit Number 1500 From the Lusk Committee Files, New York.

299 Broadway, Room 1812

Statement April 19th

Comrade Evans Clark has resigned his position as Director of the Bureau of Research of the Socialist Aldermanic Delegation in New York and has been appointed Assistant Director of the Commercial Department of the Bureau of the Representative of the Russian Socialist Federal Soviet Republic with headquarters at the World's Tower Building -- 110 West 40th Street.

Comrade Clark has been a member of the Socialist Party since 1911 and has taken an active part in the labor movement in the United States. He is a graduate of Amherst College, Harvard University and the Columbia Law-School. He has been instructor of politics in Princeton University and was one of the organizers of the Intercollegiate Socialist Society of which he was the first President. Comrade Clark will assist Comrade Heller in the task of establishing trade relations between the United States and Soviet Russia.

How the Order Controlled the Early Development of the Soviet Union


BROWN BROTHERS, HARRIMAN (Pre-1933 W.A. Harriman and Company)


Eugene Wm. Stetson, Jr. ('34)
Walter H. Brown ('45)
Stephen Y. Hord ('21)
John Beckwith Madden ('41)
Grange K. Costikyan ('29)

Matthew C. Brush (32° Mason)

Chairman: Matthew C. Brush

Chairman: Matthew C. Brush

Director: Matthew C. Brush


Between 1917 and 1921 the Soviets pushed their control of Russia into Siberia and the Caucasus. As we have noted, the United States intervened in Siberia along the Trans-Siberian Railroad. Histories of U.S. Intervention by George Kennan and the Soviets maintain this was an anti-Soviet intervention. In fact, it was nothing of the kind. The U.S. spread troops along the Siberian railroad only to keep out the Japanese, not to keep out the Soviets. When they left through Vladivostok, the Soviet authorities gave American forces a resounding send-off. But this is yet another untold story, not in the textbooks.

The immediate problem facing the Soviets was to restore silent Russian factories. This needed raw materials, technical skills and working capital. The key to Russian reconstruction was the oil fields of the Caucasus. The Caucasus oil fields are a major segment of Russian natural resource wealth. Baku, the most important field, was developed n the 1870s. In 1900 it was producing more crude oil than the United States, and in 1901 more than half of the total world crude output. The Caucasus oil fields survived Revolution and Intervention without major structural damage and became a significant factor in Soviet economic recovery, generating about 20 percent of all exports by value; the largest single source of foreign exchange.

The Bolsheviks took over the Caucasus in 1920-1, but until 1923 oil field drilling almost ceased. During the first year of Soviet rule "... not one single new well has started giving oil" [4] and even two years after Soviet occupation, no new oil-field properties had been developed. In addition, deepening of old wells virtually ceased. As a result, water percolated into the wells, and the flow of crude oil became a mixture of oil and water. Drilling records are an excellent indicator of the state of oil field maintenance, development, and production. The complete collapse after the Soviet takeover is clearly suggested by the statistics. In 1900, Russia had been the world's largest producer and exporter of crude oil; almost 50,000 feet of drilling per month had been required in Baku alone to maintain this production. By early 1921, the average monthly drilling in Baku had declined to an insignificant 370 feet or so (0.7 percent of the 1900 rate), although 162 rigs were in working order.

Then, Serebrovsky, Chairman of Azneft (the Soviet oil production trust), put forward a program for recovery in a Pravda article. The plan for 1923 was to increase oil well drilling to 35,000 Sazhens per year (245,000 feet). This would require 35 rotary drills (to drill 77,000 feet) and 157 percussion drills (to drill 130,000 feet). Serebrovsky pointed out that Azneft had no rotary drills, and that Russian enterprise could not supply them. Rotary drilling, however, was essential for the success of the plan.

He then announced:

"But just here American capital is going to support us. The American firm International Barnsdall Corporation has submitted a plan ... Lack of equipment prevents us from increasing the production of the oil industry of Baku by ourselves. The American firm ... will provide the equipment, start drilling in the oil fields and organize the technical production of oil with deep pumps." [5]

During the next few years International Barnsdall, together with the Lucey Manufacturing Company and other major foreign oil well equipment firms, fulfilled Serebrovsky's program. Massive imports of equipment came from the United States. International Barnsdall inaugurated the rotary drilling program, initiated Azneft drilling crews into its operational problems, and reorganized oil well pumping with deep well electrical pumps.

The first International Barnsdall concession was signed in October 1921, and was followed in September of 1922 by two further agreements. There is no doubt that Barnsdall did work under the agreements. Pravda reported groups of American oil field workers on their way to the oil fields, and a couple of months previously the United States, Constantinople Consulate, had reported that Philip Chadbourn, the Barnsdall Caucasus representative, had passed through on his way out of Russia. The U.S. State Department Archives contain an intriguing quotation from Rykov, dated October 1922:

"The one comparatively bright spot in Russia is the petroleum industry, and this is due largely to the fact that a number of American workers have been brought into the oil fields to superintend their operation." [6]

Who, or what, was International Barnsdall Corporation?

The Chairman of International Barnsdall Corporation was Matthew C. Brush whom we previously identified as The Order's "front man."

Guaranty Trust, Lee, Higginson Company and W.A. Harriman owned Barnsdall Corporation, and International Barnsdall Corporation was owned 75% by the Barnsdall Corporation and 25% by H. Mason Day. The Guaranty Trust interest was represented by Eugene W. Stetson (also a Vice President of Guaranty Trust), whose son, Eugene W. Stetson Jr., was initiated into The Order in 1934. The Lee Higginson interest was represented by Frederick Winthrop Allen (The Order '00).

In brief, The Order controlled International Barnsdall Corporation.

The second potentially largest source of Soviet foreign exchange in the 1920s was the large Russian manganese deposits. In 1913, tsarist Russia supplied 52 percent of world manganese, of which about 76 percent, or one million tons, was mined from the Chiaturi deposits in the Caucasus. Production in 1920 was zero, and by 1924 had risen only to about 320,000 tons per year. The basic problem was:

"that further development was seriously retarded by the primitive equipment, which was considered grossly inadequate even according to prewar standards."

The Chiaturi deposits, situated on high plateaus some distance from Batum, were mined in a primitive manner, and the ore was brought on donkeys from the plateaus to the railroads. There was a change of gauge en route, and the manganese had to be transshipped between the original loading point and the port. When at the port, the ore was transferred by bucket: a slow, expensive process.

The Soviets acquired modern mining and transportation facilities for their manganese deposits, acquired foreign exchange, and finally shattered American foreign policy concerning loans to the U.S.S.R., in a series of business agreements with W.A. Harriman Company and Guaranty Trust. [7]

On July 12, 1925, a concession agreement was made between the W.A. Harriman Company of New York and the U.S.S.R. for exploitation of the Chiaturi manganese deposits and extensive introduction of modern mining and transportation methods.

Under the Harriman concession agreement, $4 million was spent on mechanizing the mines and converting them from hand to mechanical operation. A washer and reduction plant were built; and a loading Elevator at Poti, with a two-million ton capacity and a railroad system were constructed, together with an aerial tramway for the transfer of manganese ore. The expenditure was approximately $2 million for the railroad system and $1 million for mechanization of the mines.

The Chairman of the Georgian Manganese Company, the Harriman operating company on the site in Russia, was none other than The Order's "front man" Matthew C. Brush.

State Department Letter to U.S. Embassy in London (861.637/1)

In reply refer to __
November 14, 1924.

Dear Mr. Atherton:

Please accept my thanks for your letter of October 30, 1924, transmitting a clipping from the TIMES of October 28, giving an account of the Prime Minister's speech in which reference is made to a concession granted to Americans for the manganese ore in Russia, and enclosing a confidential memorandum respecting the nature of the concession.

I appreciate your courtesy and thoughtfulness in the matter. The memorandum transmitted by you embodies the first information received by the Department concerning the concession other than that which has appeared in the public press.

Sincerely yours,
Evan B. Young.

Ray Atherton, Esquire.
Secretary, American Embassy,



While The Order carried out its plans to develop Russia, the State Department could do nothing. Its bureaucrats sat in Washington D.C. like a bunch of mesmerized jackrabbits.

Firstly, in the 1920s loans to the Soviet Union were strictly against U.S. law.
While American citizens could enter Russia at their own risk, there were no diplomatic relations and no government support or sanction for commercial activity. Public and government sentiment in the United States was overwhelmingly against the Soviets -- not least for the widespread atrocities committed in the name of the Revolution.

Secondly, the Harriman-Guaranty syndicate, which reflected The Order, did not inform the State Department of its plans. As the attached letter (page 152) from Washington to the London Embassy describes, the first information of the Harriman manganese deposit came from the American Embassy in London, which picked it up from London newspaper reports.

In other words, Averell Harriman sneaked an illegal project past the U.S. Government. If this is not irresponsible behavior, then nothing is. And this was the man who was later to become the U.S. Ambassador to Russia.

The State Department letter to London is quite specific on this point: "The memorandum transmitted by you embodies the first information received by the Department concerning the concession other than that which has appeared in the public press."

A month or so later came a letter from Department of Commerce asking for confirmation and more information. Apparently, Harriman didn't bother to inform Commerce either.

Commerce Department To State Asking For Confirmation of Harriman Manganese Concession (861.637 / 5)


JANUARY 23, 1925.

Hon. Wilbur J. Carr,
Assistant Secretary of State
Department of State
Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. Carr:

We have a copy of confidential despatch No. 2565 to the Secretary of State from Minister F.W.B. Coleman at Riga, Latvia, in regard to a conversation with a Mr. P.M. Friedlander on the subject of Russia.

On page 7 of this report there is a paragraph which reads as follows:

"Megraf is the Agent of the Imperial and Foreign Corporation, which represents its own, Harriman and Stinnes interest in the matter of the Chiaturi Manganese Concession. *********** It appears from Mr. Friedlander's account that they have pooled their interest and are presenting a united front."

The subject of the Chiaturi Manganese concession is of great interest to the American Mineral Industry and its control by an American concern will have a notable effect on the steel industry of this country. For this reason, we are interested in obtaining the most reliable information possible on this subject and therefore request that you obtain for us, if possible, confirmation of the above report. We would like to know something more as to the reliability of Mr. Friendlander's statements and any further facts in this case that are procurable.

Very truly yours,
R.C. Miller,
Liaison Officer


January 29, 1925

Dear Mr. Carr:

With respect to the attached letter from Mr. Miller, Liaison Officer with the Department of Commerce, there are certain and very definite reasons why I consider it very unwise for the Department to initiate any investigation with respect to the reported manganese concession. I shall be glad to explain these reasons to you orally if you so desire.

Evan E. Young.

861.637 / 5


I defer to your judgment upon this.

Now we reach the truly extraordinary point. The U.S. Government was not informed by W.A. Harriman or Guaranty Trust that they intended to invest $4 million developing Soviet manganese deposits. Yet this was clearly illegal and a move with obvious strategic consequences for the U.S. Neither was the U.S. Government able to pick up this information elsewhere; in those days there was no CIA. Economic intelligence was handled by the State Department. It is also obvious that Government officials were interested in acquiring information, as they should have been.


We reproduce on page 155 a memorandum from Evan E. Young in Division of Eastern European Affairs to Assistant Secretary of State Carr. Note this is a memorandum at the upper levels of the State Department. Young specifically writes: "... there are certain and very definite reasons why I consider it very unwise for the Department to initiate any investigation with respect to the reported manganese concession."

And Assistant Secretary of State Carr scribbles on the bottom, "I defer to your judgment upon this" (presumably after the suggested oral communication).

The distinct impression is that some behind-the-scenes power was not to be challenged.

U.S. State Department Decimal File, 861.516 / 140 Stockholm Legation October 13, 1922

... Max May, of the Guaranty Trust Company, New York, will take part. In the present arrangement Mr. Max May is designated as director of the foreign division of the Moscow bank.

The above paper gives the following information in regard to the new bank:

"There is a board consisting of five members and five active directors. Among these we note Mr. Schlesinger, former Chief of Moscow's Merchant Bank, Mr. Kalaschkin, Chief of the Junker Bank, and Mr. Ternoffsky, former Chief of the Siberian Bank. Mr. Max May is designated as director of the foreign division of the bank. According to Mr. Aschberg, the Russian bank, through the Ekonomibolaget, Mr. Aschberg's bank in Stockholm, will be in closer contact with German and American financial institutions."

The "Svenska Dagbladet," of October 17th, reports that the above mentioned Mr. Scheinmann has succeeded in obtaining the consent of Professor Gustav Cassel to act as adviser to the Russian State Bank, which bank it appears has a representative in the administration of the new Commercial Bank of Moscow and has the right to exercise control of its activities. Professor Cassel is quoted as stating in part:

"That a bank has now been started in Russia to take care of purely banking matters is a great step forward, and it seems to me that this bank was established in order to do something to create a new economic life in Russia. What Russia needs is a bank to create internal and external commerce. If there is to be an business between Russia and other countries there must be a bank to handle it.

"This step forward should be supported in every way by other countries, and when I was asked my advice I stated that I was prepared to give it. I am not in favor of a negative policy and believe that every opportunity should be seized to help in a positive reconstruction.

"The great question is how to bring the Russian exchange back to normal. It is a complicated question and will necessitate thorough investigation. To solve this problem I am naturally more than willing to take part in the work. To leave Russia to her own resources and her own fate is folly."

I have the honor to be, Sir,
Your Obedient servant,


S.R. Bertron (The Order '84*): Chairman of American-Russian Chamber of Commerce








July 1st, 1921.

State Department,
Russian Division,
Washington, D.C.


Can you give us answers to the following questions?

1. What date the following banks in Russia were taken over by the Soviet Government:

Banque International de Commerce. A Petrograd
Banque Russe Pours La Commerce Etranger, Petrograd
Bank de Commerce De Volga Kama, Petrograd
Bank de Commerce De L'A Zoff Don, Petrograd

2. What date trading in Russian credits was prohibited in the United States by Federal Authorities.

Any assistance you may be able to render in this matter will be greatly appreciated.

Yours very truly,
Evelyn Hyde Siegel


The Order kept a hold on every non-government strategic position related to the Soviet Union.
Nothing appears to have escaped their attention. For example, the Anglo-Russian Chamber of Commerce was created in 1920 to promote trade with Russia -- desperately needed by the Soviets to restore idle Tsarist industry. The Chairman of its Executive Committee, the key post in the Chamber, was held by Samuel R. Bertron (The Order '85), a Vice President of Guaranty Trust and formerly a member of the 1917 Root Mission to Russia. Elihu Root, Chairman of the Mission, was, of course, the personal attorney to William Collins Whitney (The Order '63), one of the key members of The Order. The letter from Bertron's Anglo-Russian Chamber of Commerce to State Department, printed on page 158 is noteworthy because it asks the question: "What date trading in Russian credits was prohibited in the United States by Federal authorities?"

This means that The Order was well aware in 1921 that "credits" to the U.S.S.R. were illegal and indeed were not made legal until President Roosevelt took office in 1933. However, illegal or not, within 18 months of this Bertron letter, Guaranty Trust established more than trading in Russian credits. Guaranty Trust made a joint banking agreement with the Soviets and installed a Guaranty Trust Vice President, Max May, as director in charge of the foreign division of this Soviet bank, the RUSKOMBANK (See document on page 157).

In brief, while the U.S. public was being assured by the U.S. Government that the Soviets were dastardly murderers, while "Reds" were being deported back to Russia by the Department of Justice, while every politician (almost without exception) was assuring the American public that the United States would have no relations with the Soviets -- while this barrage of lies was aimed at a gullible public, behind the scenes the Guaranty Trust Company was actually running a division of a Soviet bank! And American troops were being cheered by Soviet revolutionaries for helping protect the Revolution.

That, dear readers, is why governments need censorship. That's why even 50 years after some events, it is almost impossible for independent researchers (not the bootlickers) to get key documents declassified.

1927: Simpson Thacher & Bartlett Gets Around Non Recognition


JULY 21, 1927

Hon. R. E. Olds,
Under-Secretary of State.
Washington, D.C.


The State Bank of the U.S.S.R., although, as we are informed, its whole capital is owned by the Treasury Department (People's Commissariat of Finance) of the Soviet Government, is not itself the Soviet Government but a juridical entity, incorporated in November 1921 by edict of the Soviet Government, and capable of suing and being sued as an individual in the Soviet courts.

This Bank already has large sums on deposit in various banks in this country.

In view of the growing trade between companies in this country and the U.S.S.R. and the desire of the latter to increase this trade, the Bank would like to increase its deposits with banks in this country. Before advising the Bank to increase its deposits in the amounts it desires, we should like, if it is consistent for you so to favor us, to receive an expression of your opinion as to the traditional attitude of our Government with respect to such deposits. As a practical matter, if we understand your views correctly, it seems to us there can be no reason why the Bank should not so increase its deposits notwithstanding our Government has not recognized the U.S.S.R.

Very respectfully yours,



New York establishment law firms, several founded by members of The Order, have close links to banks and specifically those operational vehicles for revolution already cited.

Take the example of Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett which in the 1920s was located at 120 Broadway, New York. The firm was founded by Thomas Thacher (The Order '71) in 1884. His son Thomas Day Thacher (The Order '04) worked for the family law firm after leaving Yale and initiation into The Order. The younger Thomas Thacher went to work for Henry L. Stimson (The Order '88), a very active member of The Order discussed in Volume One of this series. About this time Thacher, who wrote The Order's statement on the Bolshevik Revolution (page 138), became friendly with both Felix Frankfurter and Raymond Robins. According to extensive documentation in the Lusk Committee files, both Frankfurter and Robins were of considerable assistance to the Soviets.

Another link between the 1917 Revolution and Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett is through the daughter of Thomas Anthony Thacher (The Order '35) who married William Kent (The Order '87) who we have linked to member Amos Pinchot in the case of intervention on behalf of the Soviets in Washington, D.C.

Furthermore, readers of Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution will recall that member Samuel Bertron was on the Root Mission to Russia in 1917. Moreover, Thomas Thacher (The Order '04) was a member of the Red Cross Mission with Allan Wardwell, son of Thomas Wardwell, Standard Oil Treasurer and a partner in another Wall Street law firm, Statson, Jennings & Russell (the links of this firm to The Order will be described in a later volume). Eugene Stetson, Jr., for example, is in The Order ('34).

Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett represented the Soviet State Bank in the U.S. and was the vehicle used by The Order to inform State Department of activities that might otherwise be blocked by low level bureaucrats following the government rulebook.

For example, in 1927 Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett informed the U.S. Government that the Soviets were in the process of substantially increasing deposits in the U.S. This increase was in preparation for the enormous outlays to be channeled to a few favored U.S. firms to build the Soviet First Five Year Plan.

The letter read closely is definite; it puts words in the mouth of the State Department, i.e., this is what we are going to do and in spite of the U.S. Government, there is no reason why we should not go ahead. Note, for example, the last paragraph: "... it seems to us there is no reason why the Bank should not so increase its deposits notwithstanding our Government has not recognized the U.S.S.R."


During the past four years the Government of the United States has maintained the position that it would be both futile and unwise to enter into relations with the Soviet Government so long as the Bolshevik leaders persist in aims and practices in the field of international relations which preclude the possibility of establishing relations on the basis of accepted principles governing intercourse between nations. It is the conviction of the Government of the United States that relations on a basis usual between friendly nations cannot be established with a governmental entity which is the agency of a group who hold it as their mission to bring about the overthrow of the existing political, economic and social order throughout the world and who regulate their conduct towards other nations accordingly.

The experiences of various European Governments which have recognized and entered into relations with the Soviet regime have demonstrated conclusively the wisdom of the policy to which the Government of the United States has consistently adhered. Recognition of the Soviet regime has not brought about any cessation of interference by the Bolshevik leaders in the internal affairs of any recognizing country, nor has it led to the acceptance by them of other fundamental obligations of international intercourse. Certain European states have endeavored, by entering into discussions with representatives of the Soviet regime, to reach a settlement of outstanding differences on the basis of accepted international practices. Such conferences and discussions have been entirely fruitless. No state has been able to obtain the payment of debts contracted by Russia under preceding governments or the indemnification of its citizens for confiscated property. Indeed, there is every reason to believe that the granting of recognition and the holding of discussions have served only to encourage the present rulers of Russia in their policy of repudiation and confiscation, as well as in their hope that it is possible to establish a working basis, accepted by other nations, whereby they can continue their war on the existing political and social order in other countries.

Current developments demonstrate the continued persistence at Moscow of a dominating world revolutionary purpose and the practical manifestation of this purpose in such ways as render impossible the establishment of normal relations with the Soviet government. The present rulers of Russia, while seeking to direct the evolution of Russia along political, economic and social lines in such manner as to make it an effective "base of the world revolution", continue to carry on, through the Communist International and other organizations with headquarters at Moscow, within the borders of other nations, including the United States, extensive and carefully planned operations for the purpose of ultimately bringing about the overthrow of the existing order in such nations.

A mass of data with respect to the activities carried on in the United States by various Bolshevik organizations, under the direction and control of Moscow, was presented by the Department of State to a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations in January 1924.


All this Soviet-building activity recorded in the Lusk Committee and State Department files was carefully concealed from the American public. What the public was told can only be described as a pack of lies, from beginning to end.

To demonstrate the degree of falsehood, we reprint here a page on "Russia" from a document "Excerpt from a statement entitled 'Foreign Relations' by the Honorable Frank B. Kellogg, Secretary of State, published by the Republican National Committee, Bulletin No. 5, 1928."

Among the falsehoods promoted by Secretary Kellogg is the following: "... the Government of the United States has maintained the position that it would be both futile and unwise to enter into relations with the Soviet Government."

In fact, at this very time the United States, with implicit government approval, was involved in planning the First Five Year Plan in Russia. The planning work was done actively by American firms. [8]

Construction of the Soviet dialectic arm continued throughout the 1930s up to World War II. In 1941 W.A. Harriman was appointed Lend Lease Administrator to assure the flow of United States technology and products to the Soviet Union. Examination of Lend Lease records shows that U.S. law was violated. The law required military goods only to be shipped. In fact, industrial equipment in extraordinary amounts was also shipped and Treasury Department currency plates so that the Soviets could freely print U.S. dollars.

Since World War II the United States has kept the Soviets abreast of modern technology. This story has been detailed elsewhere.

In brief, the creation of the Soviet Union stems from The Order. The early survival of the Soviet Union stems from The Order. The development of the Soviet Union stems from The Order.

But above all, this story has been concealed from the American public by politicians ... more of this later. Now let's turn to the financing of the Nazi Party in Germany.


1. The full document is in U.S. State Department Decimal File Microcopy 316, Roll 13, Frame 698.

2. See Antony C Sutton, National Suicide (Arlington House, New York, 1974) and Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution (Arlington House, New York. 1974)

3. Exhibit Number 1543 from the Lusk Committee files, New York.

4. U.S. State Dept. Decimal File, 316-137-221.

5. Pravda, September 21, 1922.

6. U.S. State Department Decimal File, Microcopy 316, Roll 107, Frame 1167.

7. The interested reader is referred to over 300 pages of documents in the U.S. State Dept. Decimal File 316-138-12/331, and the German Foreign Ministry Archives. Walter Duranty described the Harriman contract as "utterly inept" and von Dirksen of the German Foreign Office as "a rubber contract." The full contract was published [Vysshii sovet nardnogo khoziaistva, Concession Agreement Between The Government Of The U.S.S.R and W.A. Harriman & Co. Inc. Of New York (Moscow, 1925)].

8. This story has been described in my Western Technology And Soviet Economic Development 1917-1930 and 1930-1945, published by the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.
Site Admin
Posts: 31991
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Postby admin » Sun Aug 02, 2015 12:30 am

Memorandum Number Four: Antithesis - Financing The Nazis

The Marxist version of the Hegelian dialectic poses financial capitalism as thesis and Marxist revolution as antithesis. An obvious puzzle in this Marxian statement is the nature of the synthesis presumed to evolve out of the clash of these opposites, i.e., the clash of financial capitalism and revolutionary Marxism.

Lenin's statement that the State will wither away at the synthesis stage is nonsensical. In fact, as all contemporary Marxist states testify, the State in practice becomes all powerful. The immediate task of "the revolution" is to convey all power to the state, and modern Marxist states operate under a constant paranoia that power may indeed pass away from the hands of the State into the hands of the people.

We suggest that world forces may be seen differently, although still in terms of the Hegelian dialectic. If Marxism is posed as the thesis and national socialism as antithesis, then the most likely synthesis becomes a Hegelian New World Order, a synthesis evolving out of the clash of Marxism and national socialism. Moreover, in this statement those who finance and manage the clash of opposites can remain in control of the synthesis.

If we can show that The Order has artificially encouraged and developed both revolutionary Marxism and national socialism while retaining some control over the nature and degree of the conflict, then it follows The Order will be able to determine the evolution and nature of the New World Order.


Office of the Director of Intelligence
Field Information Agency, Technical

Mail Address: WS/ff
c/o USFET Main
APO 757, U.S. Army

IN FIAT I 350.09-77

4 September 1945


SUBJECT: Report No. 1, Parts I and II, on the Examination of Dr. FRITZ THYSSEN.
TO: FIAT Distribution.

1. The report consists of two parts:

a. Three statements prepared and signed by THYSSEN, in conjunction with his interrogations.

(1) THYSSEN's Relations with the Nazi Party.
(2) A second statement on the same subject.
(3) THYSSEN's Interview with GOERING, 29 January 1941.

b. Notes on various subjects, from stenographic transcripts of his interrogations.

(1) Real Estate and Personal Records
(2) Financial Resources
(3) Movements during the War
(4) Opinions at the Outbreak of Hostilities
(5) Examination by the Gestapo
(6) Personalities
(7) Financial Support of the Nazi Party
(8) Defence of his Support of the Nazi Party
(9) The Famous Meeting in DUESSELDORF, 1932
(10) The Book I Paid HITLER
(11) Opposition to the Nazi Party
(12) Resistance in the Ruhr, 1923
(13) The YOUNG Plan

2. The report is based on interrogations of THYSSEN by Mr. CLIFFORD HYNNING, U.S. Group Control Council (Germany), Finance Division, at DUSTBIN, on 13, 20, and 23 July 1945.

For the Director of Intelligence:
Chief, Economic and Financial Branch

Economic & Financial Br.



In Wall Street And The Rise of Hitler we described several financial conduits between Wall Street and the Nazi Party. This was later supplemented by publication of a long suppressed book, Hitler's Secret Backers. [1] Still other books have emphasized the Fritz Thyssen financial connection to Hitler. After he split with Hitler, Thyssen himself wrote a book, I Paid Hitler. We are now in a position to merge the evidence in these books with other material and our documentation on The Order.

The records of the U.S. Control Council for Germany contain the post-war intelligence interviews with prominent Nazis. From these we have verification that the major conduit for funds to Hitler was Fritz Thyssen and his Bank fur Handel and Schiff, previously called von Heydt's Bank. This information coincides with evidence in Wall Street And The Rise Of Hitler and Hitler's Secret Backers, even to the names of the people and banks involved, i.e., Thyssen, Harriman, Guaranty Trust, von Heydt, Carter, and so on.

The document reproduced on page 167 slipped through U.S. censorship because the Office of Director of Intelligence did not know of the link between Fritz Thyssen and the Harriman interests in New York. Documents linking Wall Street to Hitler have for the most part been removed from U.S. Control Council records. In any event, we reproduce here the Intelligence report identifying Fritz Thyssen and his Bank fur Handel und Schiff (No. EF/Me/1 of September 4, 1945) and page 13 of the interrogation of Fritz Thyssen entitled "Financial Support of the Nazi Party."



G. Financial Support of the Nazi Party.

My first connection with the Nazi party was through General LUDENDORF, following the evacuation of the Ruhr by the French troops. He told me about the Party and asked for my help. I agreed, but I did not want to give any money directly to the Party, so I gave it to LUDENDORF and he gave it to the Party. LUDENDORF introduced me to HITLER in 1923 before the Putsch. After the Putsch the two got separated, and I too got separated from the Nazis.

In 1930 or 1931, I think EMIL KIRDORF asked me to obtain some foreign credits for the Nazi Party. I had known him for a long time, though not in connection with business. He was my neighbor. After the death of my father, he was the oldest industrialist in the Ruhr. KIRDORF sent HESS to me; HESS had gone first to KIRDORF and reported that he had purchased the Brown House in MUNICH and could not pay for it, and KIRDORF said he could not help him, but that he should apply to me. I told HESS that I could not do as he wished, but that in order to show my good will and because Mr. KIRDORF sent him I would arrange a credit for him with a Dutch bank in ROTTERDAM, the Bank fur Handel und Schiff.

I arranged the credit by writing a letter in which I arranged that if the bank would give credit to HESS, he would pay it back in three years in equal rates. I was not officially guarantor of the loan, but because I had proposed it, I was really responsible. I chose a Dutch bank because I did not want to be mixed up with German banks in my position, and because I thought it was better to do business with a Dutch bank, and I thought I would have the Nazis a little more in my hands. HITLER pretended he never got any help. It was difficult to do nothing in those days when things were going, nobody knew where, and I always thought I would have some influence. It was for the same reason that I would not give up my position later as member of parliament, because I always thought perhaps I could prevent war.

The credit was about 250-300,000 marks -- about the same sum I had given before. The loan has been repaid in part to the Dutch bank, but I think some money is still owing on it; it had not all been paid when I left Germany in 1939. I have had to make payments on it myself -- perhaps 200,000-280,000 marks which the Nazi Party didn't pay; they did repay some.

The Nazis applied first to KIRDORF rather than direct to me because KIRDORF was a great friend of HITLER -- he was fascinated by him. But KIRDORF told me that he was not himself in a position to give such an amount, and so I made this arrangement. But I certainly would not have done it if KIRDORF had not sent this man HESS to me.

I do not know of anyone else among the industrialists who was supporting the Party financially in 1928; I was then its principal supporter. Later, [Ernst] TENGELMANN, [Emil] KIRDORF, [Albert] VOGLER, [Gustav] KNEPPER all contributed, that was some sort of tax imposed on the whole industry. The reason for it was that HITLER would fight the communists: it was clear that the power would fall either to the communists or to the Nazis. When the Reichstag was burned, everyone was sure it had been done by the communists. I later learned in Switzerland that it was all a lie.

My contributions to the Party since that day have not been important -- part of what the industry gave. I did help them in the riding school in my place. In 1932 I made two small contributions to Gauleiter TERBOVEN. He came and asked for the winter help and assistance: the winter contribution was made every year. At that time I gave him a pretty nice sum, something like 20,000 marks. This became an annual contribution; I am not sure whether the sum was increased. You see, we had a winter contribution of our own. When the unemployment began, my family undertook a winter help of our own, and gave poor people food, clothing, and shelter.

I joined the Party when they offered me membership in the Reichstag, I think in the election of 1931 or 1932. Before that time I was a German Nationalist. It is correcte to say that my only contributions from my personal resources to the Party were the small annual dues, the subscription to various publications of the Party, and the winter help to the amount of 20-30 thousand marks. In other words the total amount I paid to the Nazi Party and its affiliates in any one year may have been a little over 50,000 marks; certainly not so much as ...



Fritz Thyssen was the German steel magnate who associated himself with the Nazi movement in the early '20s. When interrogated in 1945 under Project Dustbin, Thyssen recalled that he was approached in 1923 by General Ludendorf at the time of French evacuation of the Ruhr. Shortly after this meeting Thyssen was introduced to Hitler and provided funds for the Nazis through General Ludendorf.

In 1930-31 Emil Kirdorf approached Thyssen and subsequently sent Rudolf Hess to negotiate further funding for the Nazi Party. This time Thyssen arranged a credit of 250,000 marks at the Bank Voor Handel en Scheepvaart N.V. (the Dutch name for the bank named by Thyssen in the attached document), at 18 Zuidblaak in Rotterdam, Holland.

Thyssen was former head of the Vereinigte Stahlwerke, The German steel trust, financed by Dillon Read (New York), and played a decisive role in the rise of Hitler to power by contributing liberally to the Nazi Party and by influencing his fellow industrialists to join him in support of the Fuehrer. In reward for his efforts, Thyssen was showered with political and economic favors by the Third Reich and enjoyed almost unlimited power and prestige under the Nazi regime until his break with Hitler in 1939 over the decision to invade Poland and precipitate the Second World War.

This incident and Thyssen's subsequent publication, I Paid Hitler, has a parallel with the history of his father, August Thyssen. Through a similar confession in 1918 the elder Thyssen, despite his record as a staunch backer of pan-Germanism, succeeded in convincing the Allies that sole responsibility for German aggression should be placed on the Kaiser and German industrialists should not be blamed for the support they had given to the Hohenzollerns. Apparently influenced by August Thyssen and his associates, the Allies made no effort to reform German industry after World War I. The result was that Thyssen was allowed to retain a vast industrial empire and pass it on intact to his heirs and successors.

It was against this background that Fritz Thyssen took over control of the family holdings following the death of his father in 1926. The new German steel baron had already achieved fame throughout the Reich by his defiance of the French during their occupation of the Ruhr in 1923. Like Hitler, Thyssen regarded the Treaty of Versailles as "a pact of shame" which must be overthrown if the Fatherland were to rise again. This is the story in Hitler's Secret Backers.

Thyssen set out along the same road as his father, aided by ample Wall Street loans to build German industry. August Thyssen had combined with Hugenburg, Kirdorf, and the elder Krupp to promote the All-Deutscher Verband (the Pan-German League), which supplied the rationale for the Kaiser's expansionist policies.

His son became an active member of the Stahlhelm and later, through Goring, joined the Nazis. Finally, after the crash of 1931 had brought German industry to the verge of bankruptcy, he openly embraced national socialism.

During the next 2 years Thyssen dedicated his fortune and his influence to bring Hitler to power. In 1932 he arranged the famous meeting in the Dusseldorf Industrialists' Club, at which Hitler addressed the leading businessmen of the Ruhr and the Rhineland. At the close of Hitler's speech Thyssen cried, "Heil Herr Hitler," while the others applauded enthusiastically. By the time of the German Presidential elections later that year, Thyssen obtained contributions to Hitler's campaign fund from the industrial combines. He alone is reported to have spent 3,000,000 marks on the Nazis in the year 1932.


This flow of funds went through Thyssen banks. The Bank fur Handel and Schiff cited as the conduit in the U.S. Intelligence report was a subsidiary of the August Thyssen Bank, and founded in 1918 with H.J. Kouwenhoven and D.C. Schutte as managing partners. In brief, it was Thyssen's personal banking operation, and affiliated with the W.A. Harriman financial interests in New York. Thyssen reported to his Project Dustbin interrogators that:

"I chose a Dutch bank because I did not want to be mixed up with German banks in my position, and because I thought it was better to do business with a Dutch bank, and I thought I would have the Nazis a little more in my hands."

Hitler's Secret Backers identifies the conduit from the U.S. as "von Heydt," and von Heydt's Bank was the early name for Thyssen's Bank. Furthermore, the Thyssen front bank in Holland -- i.e., the Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart N.V. -- controlled the Union Banking Corporation in New York.

The Harrimans had a financial interest in, and E. Roland Harriman (The Order 1917), Averell's brother, was a director of this Union Banking Corporation. The Union Banking Corporation of New York City was a joint Thyssen-Harriman operation with the following directors in 1932:

E. Roland Harriman (The Order 1917): Vice President of W.A. Harriman & Co., New York
H.J. Kouwenhoven (Nazi): Nazi banker, managing partner of August Thyssen Bank and Bank voor Handel Scheepvaart N.V. (the transfer bank for Thyssen's funds)
Knight Wooley (The Order 1917) : Director of Guaranty Trust, New York and Director Federal Reserve Bank of N. Y.
Cornelius Lievense: President, Union Banking Corp. and Director of Holland-American Investment Corp.
Ellery Sedgewick James (The Order 1917): Partner, Brown Brothers, & Co., New York
Johann Groninger (Nazi): Director of Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart and Vereinigte Stahlwerke (Thyssen's steel operations)
J.L. Guinter: Director Union Banking Corp
Prescott Sheldon Bush (The Order 1917): Partner, Brown Brothers. Harriman. Father of President G. H. W. Bush

The eight directors of Union Banking Corporation are an interesting bunch indeed. Look at the following:

• Four directors of Union Banking are members of The Order: all initiated at Yale in 1917 -- members of the same Yale class. All four were members of the same cell (club) D 115.
• E. Harriman was the brother of W. Averell Harriman and a Vice-President of W.A. Harriman Company.
• Guaranty Trust was represented by Knight Woolley.
• Two of the Union directors, Kouwenhoven and Groninger, were Nazi directors of Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart, formerly the von Heydt Bank. Von Heydt was the intermediary between Guaranty Trust and Hitler named in Hitler's Secret Backer.
• Ellery S. James and Prescott S. Bush were partners in Brown Brothers, later Brown Brothers, Harriman.

Out of eight directors of Thyssen's bank in New York, we can therefore identify six who are either Nazis or members of The Order.

This private bank was formerly named Von Heydt Bank and von Heydt is named by Shoup in Hitler's Secret Backers as the intermediary from Guaranty Trust in New York to Hitler between 1930 and 1933. Above all, remember that Shoup was writing in 1933 when this information was still only known to those on the inside. Out of tens of thousands of banks and bankers, Shoup, in 1933, names those that evidence surfacing decades later confirms as financing Hitler.

In brief, when we merge the information in PROJECT DUSTBIN with Shoup's Hitler's Secret Backers, we find the major overseas conduit for Nazi financing traces back to THE ORDER and specifically cell D 115.


Out of war and revolution come opportunities for profit.

Conflict can be used for profit by corporations under control and influence of The Order. In World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnamese War, we can cite examples of American corporations that traded with "the enemy" for profit.

This "blood trade" is by no means sporadic or limited to a few firms; it is general and reflects higher policy decisions and philosophies. Corporations -- even large corporations -- are dominated by banks and trust companies, and in turn these banks and trust companies are dominated by The Order and its allies. (This will be the topic of a forthcoming volume).

Although the U.S. did not officially go to war with Germany until 1941, legally, and certainly morally, the U.S. was at war with Nazi Germany after the Destroyer deal with Great Britain in December 1940, i.e., the exchange of 50 old U.S. destroyers for strategic bases in British territory. Even before December 1940 the MS "Frederick S. Fales" owned by Standard Vacuum Company was sunk by a German submarine on September 21, 1940. Yet in 1941 Standard Oil of New Jersey (now EXXON) had six Standard Oil tankers under Panamanian registry, manned by Nazi officers to carry fuel oil from Standard Oil refineries to the Canary Islands, a refueling base of Nazi submarines.

A report on this dated July 15, 1941 from Intelligence at Fifth Corps in Columbus, Ohio is reproduced on page 172. The report is in error recording that no Standard Oil ships had been sunk by the Nazis; Major Burrows apparently did not know "Frederick S. Fales" in 1940.


July 15, 1951


SUBJECT: Standard Oil Company of New Jersey Ships Under Panamanian Registry.

TO: A.C. of S., G-2
War Department
Washington, D.C.

1. A report has been received from Cleveland, Ohio, in which it is stated that the source of this information is unquestionable, to the effect that the Standard Oil Company of New Jersey now ships under Panamanian registry, transporting oil (fuel) from Aruba, Dutch West Indies to Teneriffe, Canary Islands, and is apparently diverting about 20% of this fuel oil to the present German government.

2. About six of the ships operating on this route are reputed to be manned mainly by Nazi officers. Seamen have reported to the informant that they have seen submarines in the immediate vicinity of the Canary Islands and have learned that these submarines are refueling there. The informant also stated that the Standard Oil Company has not lost any ships to date by torpedoing as have other companies whose ships operate to other ports.

For the A.C. of S., G-2,
Major, Military Intelligence
Asst. A.C. of S., G-2

Another example of profit from war is recorded in the document on page 173. This records the association of RCA and the Nazis in World War II. RCA was essentially a Morgan-Rockefeller firm and so linked to The Order.

Memorandum of Conversation
DATE: May 24, 1943.
SUBJECT: Communications.
PARTICIPANTS: Colonel Sarnoff, RCF
Mr. Long

I talked to Colonel Sarnoff on the telephone and explained to him that we had reason to believe that more messages than the agreed 700 code-groups a week were being sent from B.A. by the Axis powers to their Governments. I told him I could not disclose down there the source of our information. In an effort to obtain additional information our representatives down there had approached Hayes. Hayes had seemed to them noncooperative. There may have been very sound reasons why he refused to disclose the exact number of messages sent in code-groups by each of the Axis representatives to their Government. However, there didn't seem to be any reason why the managership should not request a report on all code-groups being sent over a period of time, day by day, and to include a report on all belligerents, and that if he would obtain that information through confidential channels we would be appreciative. I suggested it be not done by telegraph or telephone and suggested the mail, but offered to make the pouch available.

Colonel Sarnoff replied that he would talk to Mr. Winterbottom but he saw no reason why we should not do it and that he would communicate with us if they wanted to use the pouch.

After receipt of this information we will be in a better position to judge what our policy should be.



Yet another example is that of Chase Bank. Chase was linked to The Order through the Rockefeller family (Percy Rockefeller, The Order 1900) and Vice-President Reeve Schley (Yale, Scroll & Key). Directors of Chase in The Order included Frederick Allen (The Order 1900), W.E.S. Griswold (The Order 1899) and Cornelius Vanderbilt, whose brother Gwynne Vanderbilt (The Order 1899) represented the family before his death. President of Chase was Winthrop Aldrich. This was the Harvard branch of the Aldrich family, another branch is Yale and The Order.

Chase Manhattan Bank is not only a firm that plays both sides of the political fence, but with Ford Motor Company, was selected by Treasury Secretary Morgenthau for post-war investigation of pro-Nazi activities:

These two situations [i.e., Ford and Chase Bank] convince us that it is imperative to investigate immediately on the spot the activities of subsidiaries of at least some of the larger American firms which were operating in France during German occupation ...

The extent of Chase collaboration with Nazis is staggering -- and this was at a time when Nelson Rockefeller had an intelligence job in Washington aimed AGAINST Nazi operations in Latin America.

In December 1944 Treasury Department officials examined the records of the Chase Bank in Paris. On December 20, 1944 the senior U.S. examiner sent a memorandum to Treasury Secretary Morgenthau with the preliminary results of the Paris examination. Here's an extract from that report:

a. Niederman, of Swiss nationality, manager of Chase, Paris, was unquestionably a collaborator;

b. The Chase Head Office in New York was informed of Niederman's collaborationist policy but took no steps to remove him. Indeed there is ample evidence to show that the Head Office in New York viewed Niederman's good relations with the Germans as an excellent means of preserving, unimpaired, the position of the Chase Bank in France.

c. The German authorities were anxious to keep the Chase open and indeed took exceptional measures to provide sources of revenue.

d. The German authorities desired "to be friends" with the important American banks because they expected that these banks would be useful after the war as an instrument of German policy in the United States.

e. The Chase, Paris showed itself most anxious to please the German authorities in every possible way. For example, the Chase zealously maintained the account of the German Embassy in Paris, "as every little thing helps" (to maintain the excellent relations between Chase and the German authorities).

f. The whole objective of the Chase policy and operation was to maintain the position of the bank at any cost.

In brief, Chase Bank was a Nazi collaborator, but the above preliminary report is as far as the investigation proceeded. The report was killed on orders from Washington, D.C.

On the other hand, Chase Bank, later Chase Manhattan Bank, has been a prime promoter of exporting U.S. technology to the Soviet Union. This goes all the way back to the early 1920s when Chase broke U.S. regulations in order to aid the Soviets. As early as 1922 Chase was trying to export military LIBERTY aircraft engines to the Soviet Union!

In conclusion, we have seen that the two arms of the dialectic described in Memoranda Three and Four clashed in World War II. Furthermore, the corporate segment of the elite profited from Lend Lease to the Soviets and by underground cooperation with Nazi interests. The political wing of The Order was at the same time preparing a new dialectic for the post World War 11 era.


1. Wall Street And The Rise Of Hitler and Hitler's Secret Backers are obtainable from Research Publications, P.O. Box 39850, Phoenix Arizona 85069. Some other aspects are covered in Charles Higham, Trading With The Enemy (Delacorte Press).
Site Admin
Posts: 31991
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Postby admin » Sun Aug 02, 2015 12:37 am

Memorandum Number Five: The New Dialectic -- Angola And China


World War II was the culmination of the dialectic process created in the 1920s and 1930s. The clash between "left" and "right," i.e., the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, led to creation of a synthesis -- notably the United Nations, and a start towards regional groupings in -- i.e. Common Market, COMECON, NATO, UNESCO, Warsaw Pact, SEATO, CENTO, and then the Trilateral Commission. A start towards New World Order.

World War II left The Order with the necessity to create a new dialectical situation to promote more conflict to achieve a higher level synthesis.

The source of the current process may be found in National Security Memorandum No. 68 of 1950, with its extraordinary omissions (analyzed in The Phoenix Letter, January 1984). NSC 68 opened up the road for Western technology to build a more advanced Soviet Union -- which it did in the 1960s and 1970s with computerized space-age technology. At the same time NSC 68 presented the argument for massive expansion of U.S. defenses -- on the grounds of a future Soviet threat. The omission in NSC 68 was quite elementary, i.e., that the Soviets could not progress without Western technology. NSC 68 allowed that technology transfer to go on. In other words, by allowing Western firms to expand the Soviet Union, NSC-68 also pari passu created the argument for a U.S. defense budget. We identified in our Phoenix Letter article the link between NSC-68 and The Order.

Unfortunately for The Order, but not surprisingly, given their limited perception of the world, the dialectic plan based on NSC-68 misfired. The principal devices used to control the dialectic process in the past two decades have been (a) information, (b) debt and (c) technology. These have become diluted over time. They just don't work as well today as they did in the 1950s.

By and large, control of information has been successful. The intellectual world is still locked into a phony verbal battle between "left" and "right," whereas the real struggle is the battle between individual freedom and the encroaching power of the absolute State. The Soviet Union, with its tight censorship, presents a strictly Marxist (i.e., "left") orientation to its citizens. The enemy is always the "fascist" United States. The West is a little more complicated but not much more so. Quigley's argument in Tragedy And Hope, that J.P. Morgan used financial power to control politics, has been extended to The Order's control of information. In the West the choice is basically between a controlled "left-oriented" information and a controlled "right-oriented" information. [1] The conflict between the two controlled groups keeps an apparent informational conflict alive. Unwelcome facts that fall into neither camp are conveniently forgotten. Books that fall into neither camp can be effectively neutralized because they will incur the wrath of both "right" and "left".

In brief, any publication which points up the fallacy of the Left-Right dichotomy is ignored ... and citizens keep trooping down to the polling booths in the belief they have a "choice".

The second control mechanism is debt. If Marxist countries have to import technology, they need to earn or borrow Western currencies to pay for it. Loans have to be repaid. So to some extent, debtors are under control of creditors, unless they default. Default is the weakness.

The third control mechanism is technology. If technology to advance to more efficient production levels has to be imported, then the recipient is always kept away from the "state of the art". The weakness for The Order is that military technology does not require a market system.

The dialectic plan therefore misfired for several reasons. Firstly, the informational blackout has not been as successful as The Order expected. We shall describe later how control of Time and Newsweek gave The Order dominance over weekly news summaries. The TV networks have been able to orchestrate viewer reactions to some extent. For example, the three ABC blockbusters in 1983 were The Day After, Thornbirds, and Winds Of War, all with a common propaganda theme. But The Order was unable to restrict individuals and relatively small non-academic groups, almost always outside Universities, from exploring obvious inconsistencies in establishment propaganda. These groups often mistakenly termed "left" or "right" are outside the generally manipulated left-right spectrum.

Secondly, the debt weapon was over-used. Communist countries are now saturated with debt to Western bankers.

Thirdly, while technology is still a useful weapon, there are distinct stirrings among independent analysts of the danger posed for the Western world by building enemies.

Consequently, in today's world we can identify two facts in construction of a new dialectic. First, cautious reinforcement of the Marxian arm (the thesis presented in Memorandum Three), i.e., Marxist Angola gets a green light, but a Marxist Grenada got a red light.

Second, the construction of a completely new arm, that of Communist China, itself Marxist, but with conflict potential for the Soviet Union. Major efforts by The Order are in progress, only partly revealed in the press, to create a new superpower in a conflict mode with the Soviet Union. This is the new antithesis, replacing Nazi Germany.


Angola, a former Portuguese province on the southwest coast of Africa, is a contemporary example of continued, but more cautious, creation of the Marxist arm of the dialectic process.

The official establishment view of Angola is that Angola was a Portuguese colony and oppressive Portuguese rule led to an independence movement in which the Marxists won out over "democratic" forces.

This view cannot be supported. If the Portuguese were colonists in Angola, then so are the Boston Brahmins in Massachusetts. Luanda, the chief town in Angola, was settled by the Portuguese in 1575 -- that's half a century before the Pilgrims landed in Massachusetts. The indigenous population of Angola in 1575 was less than the Indian population of Massachusetts. Over three centuries the Portuguese treated Angola more as a province than as a colony, in contrast to British, French and Belgian colonial rule in Africa. So if Angola belonged to non-existent indigenous natives, then so does Massachusetts logically belong to American Indians.

In the early 1960s the United States was actively aiding the Marxist cause in Angola. This is clear from former Secretary of State Dean Acheson. The following extracts are from a memorandum recording a conversation between Dean Acheson (Scroll & Key), McGeorge Bundy The Order '40), and President Kennedy dated April 2, 1962:

"He [Kennedy] then turned to the negotiations with Portugal over the Azores base. He said that not much seemed to be happening and that he would be grateful to have me take the matter over and see if something could be done. I asked him for permission to talk about the situation for a few minutes and said about the following: "The Portuguese were deeply offended at what they believed was the desertion of them by the United States, if not the actual alignment of the United States with their enemies. The problem, it seemed to me, lay not so much in negotiations with the Portuguese as in the determination of United States policy. The battle would be in Washington, rather than in Lisbon."

Then Dean Acheson comments on a topic apparently already known to President Kennedy, that the United States was supporting the revolutionary movements in Angola:

"The President then asked me why I was so sure that there was no room for negotiations under the present conditions. I said that, as he perhaps knew, we had in fact been subsidizing Portugal's enemies; and that they strongly suspected this, although they could not prove it. He said that the purpose of this was to try to keep the Angolan nationalist movement out of the hands of the communist Ghanians, etc., and keep it in the most moderate hands possible. I said that I quite understood this, but that it did not make what the Portuguese suspected any more palatable to them. We were also engaged in smuggling Angolese out of Angola and educating them in Lincoln College outside of Philadelphia in the most extreme nationalist views. Furthermore the head of this college had secretly and illegally entered Angola and on his return had engaged in violent anti-Portuguese propaganda. We voted in the United Nations for resolutions "condemning" Portugal for maintaining order in territory unquestionably under Portuguese sovereignty. I pointed out that the Portuguese were a proud people, especially sensitive because they had declined to such an impotent position after such a glorious history. They would rather proceed to the ruin of their empire in a dignified way, as they had in Goa, than be bought or wheedled into cooperating in their own destruction."

There is an extremely important, although seemingly minor, point in President Kennedy's comments. Kennedy apparently believed the U.S. was financing Nationalists, not Marxists, whereas the U.S. was actually aiding Marxists, as it was later to do in South Africa, following a pattern going back to the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. There is a point well worth following up in the Kennedy files, i.e., just how much Kennedy knew about CIA and State Department operations, where The Order was in control.

The Marxists under Neto's MPLA obtained control of Angola. The Order with powerful allies among multinational corporations has exerted pressure on successive Administrations to keep Angola as a Cuban-Soviet base in Southern Africa.

Back in 1975 the U.S. in conjunction with South Africa did indeed make a military drive into Angola. At a crucial point, when South African forces could have reached Launda, the United States called off assistance. South Africa had no choice but to retreat. South Africa learned the hard way that the U.S. is only nominally anti-Marxist. In practice the U.S. did to South Africa what it had done many times before -- the elite betrayed its anti-Marxist allies.

By the early 1980s The Order's multinational friends came out of the woodwork while carefully coordinating public actions with Vice President Bush (The Order 1948). For example, in March 27, 1981, The Wall Street Journal ran a revealing article, including some nuggets of reality mingled with the Establishment line. This front page article viewed U.S. multinational support for the Angolan Marxists under the headline "Friendly Foe: companies urge U.S. to stay out of Angola, decline aid to rebels" (these rebels being anti-Marxist Savimbi's UNITA forces aided by South Africa).

The leader of the pro-Marxist corporate forces in the U.S. is Melvin J. Hill, President of Gulf Oil Exploration & Production Company, a unit of Gulf Oil which operates Gulf Cabinda. This is a refinery complex in Angola, protected from Savimbi's pro-Western rebels by Cubans and Angolan Marxist troops. Hill told the WSJ "Angola is a knowledgeable, understanding and reliable business partner." Hill not only appeared before Congress with this pro-Marxist line, but met at least several times with then Vice President Bush.

PWJ Wood of Cities Service added more to the Gulf Oil mythology. Said Wood:

"The Angolans are more and more development oriented. They aren't interested in politicizing central Africa on behalf of Cubans or the Soviet Union. Our people aren't persona non grata in Angola."

Hill and Wood, of course, are no more than public relations agents for Marxist Angola, although we understand they have not registered as foreign agents with the U.S. Department of Justice. Angola is very much a Cuban-Soviet base for the take-over of Southern Africa, yet 17 western oil companies and other firms are in Angola. They include Gulf, Texaco, Petrofina, Mobil, Cities Service, Marathon Oil and Union Texas Petroleum. Other firms include Allied Chemical, Boeing Aircraft, General Electric and Bechtel Corporation. It should be remembered that both Secretary of State Schultz and Secretary of Defense Weinberger are on loan from Bechtel Corporation.

Gulf Oil Corporation is controlled by the Mellon interests. The largest single shareholder of the outstanding shares. The Mellon Bank is represented on the Board of Gulf Oil by James Higgins, a Yale graduate but not, so far as we can determine, a member of The Order.

The next largest shareholder is the Mellon Family comprising the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, the Richard King Foundation, and the Sarah Scaife Foundation. This group, which thinks of itself as "conservative," holds about 7 percent of the outstanding shares. Morgan Guaranty Trust (a name we have encountered before) holds 1.8 million shares or about 1 percent of the outstanding shares.

To a great extent these corporations with Angolan interests have themselves out on a limb. It is surprising, for example, that South Africa has not moved to take counter action against Angolan based firms, especially General Electric, Boeing, Morgan Guaranty Trust, Gulf Oil and Cities Service. After all, the South Africans are directly losing men from the massive support given to the Angolan Marxists by these firms. It would be cheaper in South African lives to direct retaliatory action against the corporations rather than against Cubans and Angolans.

After U.S. betrayal of South Africa in 1975, when South African forces could have reached Luanda, it is a tribute to South Africa's caution that it has not used this rather obvious counter weapon. After all, a South African surgical strike on Cabinda would neatly remove the Angolans' largest single source of foreign exchange, and give multinational Marxists a little food for thought. We are not, of course, recommending any such action, but it does remain an option open to South Africa. And the possible U.S. reaction? Well the State Department and CIA had best be ready with an explanation for the U.S. Embassy plane caught photographing South African military installations!

We cite the above only to demonstrate the dangerous nature of The Order's conflict management scenarios.


Just as we found the Bush family involved with the early development of the Soviet Union, then with financing the Nazis, and vaguely behind the scenes in Angola, so we find a Bush active in construction of the new dialectic arm: Communist China.

In 1971 Mr. Nixon appointed George "Poppy" Bush (The Order 1948) as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, irrespective of the fact that Bush had no previous experience in diplomacy. As chief U.S. delegate, Bush had responsibility for defense against the Communist Chinese attack on the Republic of China, an original free enterprise member of the United Nations. With the vast power of the United States at his disposal, Bush failed miserably: the Republic was expelled from United Nations and Communist China took its seat. Shortly after that fiasco, Bush left United Nations to take over as Chairman of the Republican National Committee.

This is not the place to tell the whole story of American involvement in China. It began with Wall Street intervention into the Sun Yat Sen revolution of 1911 -- a story not yet publicly recorded.

During World War II the United States helped the Chinese Communists into power. As one Chinese authority, Chin-tung Liang, has written about General Joseph W. Stilwell, the key U.S. representative in China from 1942 to 1944: "From the viewpoint of the struggle against Communism . . . [Stilwell] did a great disservice to China." [2]

Yet Stilwell only reflected orders from Washington, from General George C. Marshall. And as Admiral Cooke stated to Congress, "... in 1946 General Marshall used the tactics of stoppage of ammunition to invisibly disarm the Chinese forces. [3]

But when we get to General Marshall we need to remember that in the U.S. the civilian branch has final authority in matters military and that gets us to then Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson, Marshall's superior and a member of The Order (1888). By an amazing coincidence, Stimson was also Secretary of War in 1911 -- at the time of the Sun Yat Sen revolution.

The story of the betrayal of China and the role of The Order will have to await yet another volume. At this time we want only to record the decision to build Communist China as a new arm of the dialectic -- a decision made under President Richard Nixon and placed into operation by Henry Kissinger (Chase Manhattan Bank) and George "Poppy" Bush (The Order).

As we go to press (early 1984) Bechtel Corporation has established a new company, Bechtel China, Inc., to handle development, engineering and construction contracts for the Chinese government. The new President of Bechtel China, Inc. is Sydney B. Ford, formerly marketing manager of Bechtel Civil & Minerals, Inc. Currently Bechtel is working on studies for the China National Coal Development Corporation and the China National Offshore Oil Corporation -- both, of course, Chinese Communist organizations.

It appears that Bechtel is now to play a similar role to that of Detroit based Albert Kahn, Inc., the firm that in 1928 undertook initial studies and planning for the First Five Year Plan in the Soviet Union.

By about the year 2000 Communist China will be a "superpower" built by American technology and skill. It is presumably the intention of The Order to place this power in a conflict mode with the Soviet Union.

There is no doubt Bechtel will do its job. Former CIA Director Richard Helms works for Bechtel, so did Secretary of State George Shultz and Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger. That's a powerful, influential combination, if any Washington planner concerned with national Security gets out of line sufficiently to protest.

Yet, The Order has probably again miscalculated. What will be Moscow's reaction to this dialectic challenge? Even without traditional Russian paranoia they can be excused for feeling more than a little uneasy. And who is to say that the Chinese Communists will not make their peace with Moscow after 2000 and join forces to eliminate the super-super-power -- the United States?


1. There are exceptions. Obviously Review Of The News, American Opinion and Reason are large outside the controlled right' frame. To some extent the U.S. Labor Party is outside the left frame but includes so much spurious material that its publications are hardly worth reading. Henry George sit clear-cut left exception.

2. Chin-Tun Liang, General Stilwell In China, 1942-1944: The Full Story. St. John's University, 1972, p. 12.

3. Ibid., p. 278.
Site Admin
Posts: 31991
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Postby admin » Sun Aug 02, 2015 12:38 am


Memorandum Number One: An Introduction to the Secret Cult of the Order

Secret political organizations can be -- and have been -- extremely dangerous to the social health and constitutional vitality of a society. In a truly free society the exercise of political power must always be open and known.

Moreover, organizations devoted to violent overthrow of political structures have always, by necessity, been secret organizations. Communist revolutionary cells are an obvious example. In fact, such revolutionary organizations could only function if their existence was secret.

In brief, secrecy in matters political is historically associated with coercion. Furthermore, the existence of secrecy in organizations with political ambitions or with a history of political action is always suspect. Freedom is always associated with open political action and discussion while coercion is always associated with secrecy.

There are numerous historical examples to support this premise. Back in the late 17th century the Elector of Bavaria, the constitutional government of Bavaria, banned the Illuminati organization. Accidental discovery of Illuminati documents demonstrated that a secret organization was devoted to the overthrow of the Bavarian state and establishment of a world society run by elitist Illuminati.

More recently in England there have been startling discoveries involving use of the Masonic movement by the Soviet KGB to subvert and infiltrate British intelligence. True freemasonry is an establishment conservative organization, but its organizational structure can be -- and has been -- used for revolutionary purposes. Masonic aims are publicly stated to be fraternity and charity, but it is also well known that masons help each other in areas supposedly based on talent.

In The Brotherhood [1] Stephen Knight comments that many have suffered because freemasonry has entered segments of society where it has no place:

"... there can be no doubt that many ... have suffered because of freemasonry entering into areas of life where, according to all its publicly proclaimed principles, it should never intrude. The abuse of freemasonry causes alarming miscarriages of justice" (p. 4).

In England at any rate freemasonry has become a self-serving organization always discriminating in favor of its own members when it comes to contracts, jobs, careers and promotions. Moreover, we now know that the masonic movement in England was used by the Russian KGB to infiltrate, take over and finally head British intelligence organizations.

In September 1984 Scotland Yard in London advised all its police officers not to join the freemasons lest its reputation for impartiality be lost.

Given this background, The Order, a secret society also known as Skull & Bones, is a clear and obvious threat to constitutional freedom in the United States. Its secrecy, power and use of influence is greater by far than the masons, or any other semi-secret mutual or fraternal organization.

How secret is Skull & Bones?

The most careful analysis of the society is by Lyman Bagg in Four Years At Yale [2] published in 1871, but still the only source of documented information on the cultic aspects of The Order.

According to Bagg, The Order is intensely secret:

• "They (the senior societies at Yale) are the only Yale societies whose transactions are truly secret."
• "Their members never mention their names, nor refer to them in any way in the presence of anyone not of their own number, and as they are all seniors, there are no old members in the class above them to tell tales out of school."

This intense secrecy even extends to documents printed for internal use.

On the next page we reprint an internal circular distributed among Patriarchs which has disguised references as follows:

• "P" i.e., Patriarch
• "P---s" Patriarchs


The distribution of the accompanying pamphlets establishes the custom of mailing these and similar publications of the College authorities, annually to every P. The issues of previous years, and other College publications will also be sent upon application. Badges and catalogues can also be obtained.

Within a few months the "old kitchen" will doubtless be transformed, through the generosity of some New Yorkers, into a library room, lighted from above, affording accommodations for the books, etc., which are over-crowding the present shelves.

The "Library" has three departments:

1. All books, pamphlets, etc., written or edited by P--s.
2. All printed matter having any reference to Yale.
3. Very old or curious volumes, or engravings.

Each of these departments is at present very defective. An effort is being made to fill up these deficiencies.

Of the first, little need be said. Every one will know whether he has anything to add thereto -- and many have. It is hoped that these will take notice.

The scrap books, student publications, college histories and miscellaneous pamphlets relating to Yale, compose the second section. The scrap books have been well cared for during the past few years, but very little of the College memorabilia of previous years has been preserved. Such a collection, however, would be as interesting as valuable, and would become more so every year, forming in one sense a history of Yale, or at least of that side of it which seldom gets into history -- the character and customs of student life. Very few who read this will probably have anything to furnish to such complete collection of Yalensia as, it is hoped, will be gathered, and fewer still will be willing to part with what they may have. Therefore, let every one who has anything of this description, and has lost something of his interest in it, or who is willing to make this disposal of it, communicate at once with the undersigned. Anything which you may have, could not be deposited in a safer place surely, nor where it would be more permanently useful. If any duplicates should be obtained they will be returned, or given to a similar collection in the College Library.

The third department is yet in its infancy.


If The Order has this intense secrecy, then how are we able to reproduce its documents and memberships rolls?

Simply because secrecy attracts attention. Secrecy creates suspicion of intentions. This in turn generates action to break the secrecy.

This series of books is based on several sources, including contemporary "moles." However, information on the cultic aspects comes from a century-old Yale concern about the operations and intentions of Skull & Bones. This concern generated two pamphlets, one issue of a journal and a chapter in a book, as follows:

(1) An anonymous pamphlet entitled Skull & Bones. This is an account of the 1876 break-in at the "Bones" Temple on the Yale campus. An extremely rare document, it is reproduced in full as an appendix to this book.

The pamphlet begins:

"As long as Bones shall exist the night of September 29th (1876) will be to its members the anniversary of the occasion when their temple was invaded by neutrals, their rarest memorabilia confiscated and their most sacred secrets unveiled to the eyes of the uninitiated."

This is reference to a break-in by a group of Yale students, and the pamphlet describes in minute detail the contents of the Temple. For example, it describes the walls, e.g., "... the walls are adorned with pictures of the founders of Bones at Yale and of the members of the Society in Germany when the Chapter was established here in 1832."

This sentence becomes of interest when the Illuminati aspect is discussed in Memorandum Five below.

Here's another interesting paragraph from this pamphlet:

"Bones is a chapter of a corps in a German University. It should properly be called, not Skull & Bones Society but Skull & Bones Chapter. General R------ (Russell), its founder, was in Germany before Senior Year and formed a warm friendship with a leading member of a German society. He brought back with him to college, authority to found a chapter here. Thus was Bones founded."

Think about this: Skull & Bones is not American at all. It is a branch of a FOREIGN secret society.

Presumably this is one reason why intense secrecy is vital. It also raises the question of just who and what this foreign organization is and whether its objectives are compatible with those of the Constitution of the United States.

(2) The Order, The Fall of Skull and Bones (New Haven, 1876)

This is an anonymous satire published 1876 apparently in New Haven, Connecticut by a group calling itself The Order.

The subtitle reads "Compiled from the minutes of the 76th regular meeting of The Order of the File and Claw."

The opening paragraphs are as in Skull & Bones cited above (1). However, the text continues with considerably more detail and appears to have been written by another member of the break-in crew.

In particular, this book gives the identification of the owner of the human skull found in one of the rooms of the Temple:

"A light is always kept burning in the Jo (D) which is ornamented with a dilapidated human skull ... here is also a tombstone marked SPERRY, seemingly taken from the same grave as the skull."

In brief, it appears this "respected" Order of Yale gentlemen is no more than a coven of grave robbers hoarding skulls, skeletons and tombstones.

Then further down is the following:

"In the Pantry (F) are large quantities of dishes, each piece of crockery ornamented with a picture of a skull and crossbones, each spoon and fork marked S.B.T." (Skull and Bones Trust).

This suggests a preoccupation with skulls and human bones is built into the cultic structure of The Order.

Then on page 4 we learn that each member of Skull & Bones (as well as Scroll & Key) has an "inside name" and these names bear a remarkable resemblance to those used by the Illuminati, e.g., Chilo, Eumenes, Glaucus, Prisaticus and Arbaces.

The conclusion of this pamphlet is:

"... we will say that a thorough examination of every part of the Temple leads us to the conclusions that the most powerful of college societies is nothing more than a pleasant convivial club."

This conclusion ignores other evidence presented elsewhere. It is acceptable given only the findings of the break-in crew.

(3) The Iconoclast, New Haven 1873

Only one issue of this journal has been found, and only a single copy of that issue exists. It is reproduced as an appendix below. The editor of The Iconoclast considered Skull & Bones "a deadly evil" and emphasized their interest in political control. Moreover, the Iconoclast states that The Order obtained control of Yale, and its members care more for their society than for Yale:

Out of every class Skull and Bones takes its men. They have gone out into the world and have become, in many instances, leaders in society. They have obtained control of Yale. Its business is performed by them. Money paid to the college must pass into their hands, and be subject to their will.

(4) Chapter "Senior Societies" in Lyman Bagg, Four Years at Yale.

This is the reference cited above at the beginning of this chapter.

Other sources include an article in Esquire Magazine by Ron Rosenbaum entitled "The last secrets of Skull and Bones" (September 1977). From this article we learn such tidbits as:

"Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart ... dressed up in a skeleton suit, howled wildly at an initiate in a red velvet room inside the tomb ..."

"McGeorge Bundy wrestled naked in a mud pile as part of his initiation."

According to a dossier obtained by Ron Rosenbaum, the 1940 initiation ceremony went like this:

New man placed in coffin -- carried into central part of building. New man chanted over and reborn into society. Removed from coffin and given robes with symbols on it (sic). A bone with his name on it is tossed into bone heap at start of evening. Initiates plunged naked into mud pile.

Again, we have a sordid preoccupation with coffins, skeletons and death.

This about summarizes sources of information.

Strangely enough, the long-time proponent of conspiracy theories, the John Birch Society, has made little contribution to our knowledge of The Order. Apparently JBS recognizes its existence but considers it merely a "recruiting ground," which, of course, it is.

This "recruiting ground" interpretation suggests several points. Firstly, the documentary evidence is quite clear: Knights, i.e., the just recruited initiates, spend only one year as Knights. They become Patriarchs after leaving Yale and spend a lifetime as Patriarchs. Second, continual correspondence and meeting as Patriarchs continues after leaving Yale. In fact, the Deer Illand Club is specifically for annual meetings of Patriarchs and the Russell Trust Association is run entirely by Patriarchs.

In brief, the JBS "recruiting ground" theory just doesn't match all the facts.

Furthermore, The Order is the ONLY fully documented example we have of a secret society within the U.S. establishment. JBS has never produced membership lists of any other society and yet seems unwilling to recognize the existence of The Order.

Similarly, New Solidarity, i.e., the Lyndon LaRouche outfit, claims to have exposed The Order back in 1979. Unfortunately, neither Lyndon LaRouche nor anyone else can produce documents dated 1983 and 1984 in 1979. In any event, the degree of documentation in our volumes on The Order has not been matched elsewhere.

The answer is that this author does have -- and fully admits to having -- clandestine sources within The Order. We understand that for specific reasons these sources are not available to either JBS or Lyndon LaRouche. At that point we will leave our discussion of sources and move on to the ritual aspects of The Order.



1. Stephan Knight, The Brotherhood: The secret World of the Freemasons, Granada, London, 1984.

2. Lyman Bagg, Four Years at Yale, Henry Holt & Co., New York, 1871. The chapter "Senior Societies" is reprinted in full as an appendix to this book.
Site Admin
Posts: 31991
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Postby admin » Sun Aug 02, 2015 12:48 am

Memorandum Number Two: The Organization of The Order

The Yale Senior society system is unique to Yale University. There is nothing like it elsewhere in the United States or for that matter in the entire world. According to Lyman Bagg in Four Years at Yale, "the senior societies are such peculiarly Yale institutions that it will be difficult for an outsider fully to appreciate their significance" (Bagg, p. 142, see page following for full context). Nothing like them exists elsewhere and according to Bagg, "Harvard is the only college where, under similar conditions they possibly could exist."

There are three senior societies, Skull & Bones, Scroll & Key and Wolf's Head. Each year 15 male Yale juniors are tapped for admission. They spend only one year in the society, an entirely different procedure to fraternal organizations found on other campuses.

Skull & Bones was founded in 1833 and has initiated 15 members each year since 1833 (except for 1945 when only 10 were tapped). Every year during commencement week 15 Yale juniors receive an invitation "Skull & Bones. Accept or reject?" Those who accept, presumably the greater number, are invited to attend the Bones Temple on campus to undergo an initiation ceremony. (See next page)

Tap day in modern times is a private, almost concealed operation; it was not always that way.

Before 1953 juniors were herded into a yard and representatives from senior societies would circulate among assembled students, selecting those wanted for initiation.

In those days rejection by a senior society was considered social suicide, so Yale ordered tapping a private affair, to avoid the traumatic wait and fear of rejection by the assembled juniors.

For the ambitious, "tapping" is the magic password to a future career. Wherever he turns, the success of the Yale senior society system is obvious. Yale University President, A. Bartlett Giamatti, was a member of Scroll & Key, while George Bush, Vice President of the United States was a member of Skull & Bones. The Yale campus student is well aware that the senior society system is geared to the affluent outside world, to the world after graduation. Money and connections flow from membership. Reportedly, Skull & Bones donates $15,000 and a grandfather clock to each initiate. Certainly alumni pay for everything associated with society meetings. In one case reported by New York Times (April 16, 1983), the alumni paid for a three-hour phone call from Colorado to Yale by two members of Scroll & Key unable to attend a meeting in the Scroll & Key tomb.




2:00 p.m. President and Mrs. Giamatti's Reception for members of the Senior Class and their guests, 43 Hillhouse Avenue.
8:00 P.M. Commencement Review by the Yale Dramatic Association, University Theater 222 York Street.


8:00 p.m. Commencement Review. (See notice for Friday.)
9:00 p.m. Senior Dance, Branford College and Saybrook College Courtyards.


10:00 a.m. Baccalaureate Address by President Giamatti, Woolsey Hall for students in Berkeley, Branford, Davenport, Timothy Dwight, Morse, and Ezra Stiles Colleges.
11: 30 a.m. For students in Calhoun, Jonathan Edwards, Pierson, Saybrook, Silliman, and Trumbull Colleges. (Guest seating only at 11: 10.)
3:00 p.m. Class Day Exercises (in academic costume), Old Campus.
4:00 p.m. Receptions in Master's Houses for Seniors and guests.
7:00 p.m. Concert by the Yale Band, Old Campus.
8:00 p.m. Commencement Review (see notice for Friday).
8:30 p.m. Concert by the Yale Glee Club and Whiffenpoofs of 1984, Woolsey Hall.


9:30 a.m. Assembly of Seniors (in academic costume), College Courtyards.
10:30 a.m. Commencement Exercises, Old Campus.
12:00 noon Presentation of diplomas at the individual Colleges and Schools by the Masters and Deans. (Presentation of Ph.D. diplomas in Woolsey Hall.)


322 VIII S.B.T.

(Supper at 7:00 p.m.)


Reunions for the Classes of 1919, 1919S, 1924-24S, 1929, 1934, 1954, 1959: 1964, 1969, 1974, and 1979. (The Classes of 1939, 1944, and 1949 held Fall 1983 Reunions.) Registration at Class headquarters. Rooms available Thursday, May 31.


9:00 a.m. Panel discussion: "College Admissions and Financial Aid," W William L. Harkness Hall, Room 201.
11:00 a.m. Panel discussion: "Education at Yale College," Sprague Hall.


11:00 a.m. Yale-Harvard Boat Race, Now London.
11: 30 a.m. Interfaith Service of Remembrance, Sprague Hall.
12:30 p.m. Picnic for All Reunion Classes on the Cross Campus.

Although the John Birch Society, the long time conservative promoter of conspiracy theory, emphasizes that these senior societies are merely recruiting grounds, in effect the societies are the source of a vast establishment network, a formalized "old boy" network that effectively shuts out the newcomers and the non-Yale talented from the halls of power. Because these are senior societies, the emphasis is not on campus activities but on post graduation ambitions. That is the fundamental difference to all other campus societies in the U.S.

As Bagg points out:

"The statement is therefore again repeated that Bones and Keys are peculiarly Yale institutions, genuine outgrowths of a system that flourishes nowhere else, the only organizations of the kind existing in the country" (p. 183) and the senior society "is an association with no weak members whatever and the history of the matter shows that unless this ideal is adhered to with reasonable closeness, such a society cannot live long at Yale" (p. 144).


Each annual class of new initiates forms a club consisting of 15 members. Initiates are called Knights in the first year and thereafter Patriarchs.

The annual announcement of new initiates has not varied over the ears. We reproduce on page 194 the announcement of new members for 1917 and on pages 195-196 those for 1984 and 1985.

Each club has a number. This is located in the top right hand corner of the announcement sheet (i.e., D 115 for 1917 and D 183 for 1984). Further, one member is designated a "club chairman" or agent, with the function to act as liaison with the Secretary of the Russell Trust Association in New York.

p. 2113. / W.113
Alfred Raymond Bellinger: Syracuse, N.Y.
Prescott Sheldon Bush: Columbus, O.
Henry Sage Fenimore Cooper: Albancy, N.Y.
Oliver Baty Cunningham: Evanston, Ill.
Samuel Sloan Duryee: New York City
Edward Roland Noel Harriman: Arden, N.Y.
Henry Porter Isham: Chicago, Ill.
William Ellery Sedgwick James: New York City
Harry William LeGore : LeGore, Md.
Henry Neil Mallon: Cincinnati, O.
Albert William Olsen: Glenbrook, Conn.
John Williams Overton: Nashville, Tenn.
Frank Parsons Shepard, Jr. : St. Paul, Minn.
Kenneth Farrand Simpson: New York City
Knight Woolley: Brooklyn, N.Y.

p. 2183. W.183
James Emanuel Boasberg: Washington, D.C.
William John Carr Carlin, Jr.: Brooklyn, New York
Ashok Jai Chandrasekhar: New York, New York
Scott David Frankel: Pepper Pike, Ohio
Jay Alan Grossman: Randolph, Massachusetts
Wei-Tai Kwok: Annandale, Virginia
Peter Barnes Lindy: Memphis, Tennessee
Timothy Charles Misner: Silver Spring, Maryland
Steven Terner Mnuchin: New York, New York
James Gerard Patela: Branford, Connecticut
Richard Hart Powers: Niantic, Connecticut
Morgan Robert Smock: New Hope, Minnesota
Horace Dutton Taft: New Haven, Connecticut
Gregory Allan Thomson: Brooklyn, New York
Kevin Sanchez Walsh: Pelham Manor, New York


BOASBERG, James Emanuel, 3136 Newark Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 20008
CARLIN, William John Carr, Jr., 21 Schermerhorn Street, Brooklyn, New York 11201.
CHANDRASEKHAR, Ashok Jai, 120 East 34th Street, New York, New York 10016.
FRANKEL, Scott David, 3290 Kersdale Road, Pepper Pike, Ohio 44124.
GROSSMAN, Jay Alan, 48 Niles Road, Randolph, Massachusetts 02368.
KWOK, Wei-Tai, 5 109 Philip Road, Annandale, Virginia 22003.
LINDY, Peter Barnes, 105 South Perkins, Memphis, Tennessee 38117.
MISNER, Timothy Charles, 1009 Crest Park Drive, Silver Spring, Maryland 20903.
MNU CHIN, Steven Terner, 721 Fifth Avenue, New York, York 10022.
PATELA, James Gerard, 47 Knollwood Drive, Branford, Connecticut 06405.
POWERS, Richard Hart, 21 Haigh Avenue, Niantic Connecticut 06357.
SMOCK, Morgan Robert, 4017 Louisiana Avenue North, New Hope, Minnesota 55427.
TAFT, Horace Dutton, 403 St. Ronan Street, New Haven, Connecticut 06511.
THOMPSON, Gregory Allan, 118 Whitman Drive, Brooklyn, New York 11234.
WALSH, Kevin Sanchez, 1030 Clay Avenue, Pelham Manor, New York 10803.


Each member of The Order receives an updated annual catalog of members. At one time it was a single volume bound in black leather.


The latest practice is to issue the catalog in two clothbound volumes: Volume One for Living Members and Volume Two for Deceased Members.

Preceding is the title page of the October 1983 catalog, the latest issued. Volume Two is the same with "Deceased Members" in place of Living Members."

Inside the title page is the address of the Secretary of the Russell Trust Association responsible for administration of the current affairs of The Order:

"Please send any corrections or changes of address to:

The Secretary
RTA Incorporated
P.O. Box 2138 Yale Station
New Haven, Conn. 06520"

Then follows an alphabetical listing of members and brief information on the following:

Name and class year with awarded degrees.

A brief notation of occupation, i.e., law, education, finance, business.

Date of birth is followed by current business and private addresses.

Then follows a list of positions held starting with current position.

Military and civilian awards and honors follow, usually extensive because The Order "old boy" network can guarantee awards to each other -- an excellent means of mutual support to build up collective power and prestige.

The final item is a listing of wives and children.

ABERG, 1952; DONLAN VINCENT, JR. -- (Business) -- Born Nov. 18, 1928, Cleveland, O.; bus. Pres., Nutrition Products of America, 8929 S. Sepulveda Blvd., Suite 312, Los Angeles, Calif. 90045; res. 15843 Tobin Way, Sherman Oaks, Calif. 91403; Republican Committeeman, N.Y. '64-'69; m. July 16, '55, Jean Helen Brose; s. Donlan Vincent III, Peter Christopher ('81); d. Gretchen Marie.
ABRAMS, 1983, PETER MARK -- add. 456 Concord St., Lexington, Mass. 02173.
ACHESON, 1943, DAVID CAMPION, LL.B. -- (Law) -- Born Nov. 4, 1921, Washington, D.C.; Ptnr. Drinker, Biddle & Reath, 1815 H St., N.W., Suite 1200, Washington, D.C. 20006; res. 3101 Garfield St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008; Assoc. '50-'58 & Ptnr. '58-'61, Covington & Burling; U.S. Attorney for Dist. of Columbia, '61-'65; Special Asst. to Sec. of Treasury, '65-'67; Senior V.P. & Gen. Counsel, Communications Satellite Corp., (COMSTAT), '67-'74; Ptnr., Jones Day Reavis & Pogue, '74-'78; Lieut. U.S.N.R., '42-'46; Campaign Ribbons -- Pacific Theatre, Southwest Pacific -- 2 battle stars; Philippines -- 2 battle stars; Chinn., Leadership Gifts, Campaign for Yale, Washington, D.C. Area; Trustee, Washington Cathedral '76-'82; Pres., National Cathedral Assn., '77-'80; Mbr. Bd. of Regents, Smithsonian Institution; Dir., Committee on the Present Danger; m. May 1, '43, Patricia James Castles; s. David C. Jr. ('72), Peter W. ('76); d. Eleanor Dean.
ACKERMAN, 1957, STEPHEN H., M.B.A. -- (Finance) -- Born August 22, 1935, Rhinebeck, New York; Vice President, Finance & Administration, Caesars World, Inc., 1801 Century Park East, Suite 2600, Los Angeles, Calif. 90067; res. 4145 Via Marina, Apt. 310, Marina Del Rey, Calif. 90291; Major, USCMR Sept. '57-Dec. '60; m. July 8, '60, Kaye Tamblin (divorced); d. Lani Ackerman Tulin.


The Order's retreat is the Deer Iland (spelled Iland after the request of Patriarch G.D. Miller) Alexandria Bay on the St. Lawrence River, New York. The island was donated in 1906 by Patriarch Miller and renovated over the years, but particularly in the 1950s and 1980s.

Here's an extract from the latest February 29, 1984, report to Patriarchs:

Deer Iland had another successful year in 1983, the 76th season of the Club since its establishment under the direction of George Douglas Miller, D. 68' in 1907. Was it the best year ever? Maybe. They're getting better and better. The results of the past five or six years have seen the Club become a much more viable enterprise from the years of the late '60s and early '70s when its future was much in doubt.

The positive response made by Patriarchs is seen in the following paragraph from the same annual report:

Increased use of the island is not the only factor in its present sound financial footing. Your generosity through your contributions to our annual fund drives has kept the Club going through lean times and supports it today. Most recently, the splendid response to the special capital fund drive in 1981-82, commemorating the 75th anniversary of the Club, has enabled us to make major capital improvements to our facilities -- a process which is still underway. I should add that those special contributions are not being used to meet current operating expenses but are specially designated for capital improvements. Current income from all sources -- guest receipts, the G.D. Miller trust, and the annual appeal -- has met or exceeded our expenses for seven years, giving us both welcome security and the means to improve further the island's classic river-style structures. (I don't want to use the word "modernize" except perhaps in reference to the plumbing. You may so inform your wives.)

In brief: the organization of The Order both as Russell Trust Association and Deer Iland Corporation is essentially geared towards the post graduation world, the outside world. It is a senior society. Knights spend only one year as Knights. The rest of their lives are spent as Patriarchs in an active influential organization able to guarantee wealth and ambition.

* D. 68 - It is a practice for members to place their Club identification after their name in writing each other.
Site Admin
Posts: 31991
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Postby admin » Sun Aug 02, 2015 1:10 am

Memorandum Number Three: The Ritual of The Order

The ritual of The Order is a closely held secret. The most that anyone can do at this stage is piece together some elements of the ritual and their probable meaning.

The extraordinary secrecy is itself part of a ritual. Members are sworn not to discuss the organization, its procedures or its objectives. Presumably, only an FBI or Congressional investigation could break this code of "omerta" (Mafia = silence).

The secrecy is carried to extraordinary lengths. Members may not remain in the room if The Order is under discussion. Words spoken within The Order may not be placed on paper, even in letters to fellow members. For example, witness the following extract from a letter circulated to members by W. lain Scott (D. 171), President of Deer Iland Club Corporation:

But beyond these mere quantitative measures of success, it is the quality of the Deer Iland experience that commends the Club to your attention. There are few, if any, places where the B-n-s life thrives in such luxuriance outside the thick and tomblike walls in New Haven. Our Order is, to use an economic term, very much horizontally integrated. That is, our ties to it are strongest through a very narrow slice of time - one special year. Deer Iland, for me and I believe many others, has expanded these ties vertically through contact with younger and older members. Visitors to the island last summer ranged from D. 124 to D. 182, twelve of them. It serves as prelude to the music of the B-n-s for the "newly fledged exalted K---- ts" and as an endlessly rising canon on that wonderful theme to the p-tr--rchs."

Notice three abbreviations to conceal internal use of words from any possible outsider who may stumble on a copy of the letter:

B-n-s =Bones (cited twice)
k---- ts = Knights
p-tr--rchs = Patriarchs

The reader may consider this juvenile, and it may well be. On the other hand, these "juveniles" are the men today running the United States.

Chapter meetings of Patriarchs are announced using a format which has not changed since the early 19th century. An interesting and significant aspect of these announcements is the manner in which they reflect elements of the ritual: the skull and bones, the periods into which The Order has placed its history and the club numbers.

We reproduce below announcements for the following years:

1. July 28, 1859 -- the earliest year for which we have a copy. Note the Roman letters VI in the center of the sheet.

2. July 23, 1868 -- the last year for which we have a record of the VI appearing. We understand that 1869 was actually the last year with VI.

3. July 21, 1870 -- the first year with VIII in the center. Note that VII appears to have been skipped completely.

4. June 17, 1936 -- note that the format remains almost the same. This one was signed by Potter Stewart, later (1958-1981) Supreme Court Justice.

5. May 31, 1984 -- the latest announcement notice. Note that the Club number D. 183 now appears, but in essence the sheet remains exactly as in 1859. It appears they even used the same skull and bones.

The initiation ceremony itself has been partially described in both the 1876 documents (reproduced below) and a century later by Ron Rosenbaum in "The Last Secrets of Skull & Bones" (Esquire, September 1977).

Each year 15 newly tapped members are put through what has been described as a "harrowing" ordeal presumably to test their manhood -- a manner traditional with fraternity hazing.

According to Rosenbaum, "one can hear strange cries and moans coming from the bowels of the tomb" during initiation.

Four elements of the initiation ceremony are recorded:

• that the initiate has to lie naked in a sarcophagus,
• that he is required to tell the "secrets" of his sex life to fellow initiates,
• that Patriarchs dressed as skeletons and acting as wild-eyed lunatics howl and screech at new initiates.
• that initiates are required to wrestle naked in a mud pile.

Undoubtedly there is more. However, the above is enough to warrant branding The Order as based on behavior more suited to juvenile delinquents.

Undoubtedly the more serious part of the initiation process is peer pressure, the conversion of juveniles into presumably responsible members of an unelected elite. As Rosenbaum comments, "the real purpose of the institution was ... devoted to converting the idle progeny of the ruling class into morally serious leaders of the establishment."

What happens in the initiation process is essentially a variation of brain-washing or encounter group processes. Knights, through heavy peer pressure, become Patriarchs prepared for a life of the exercise of power and continuation of this process into future generations.

In brief, the ritual is designed to mold establishment zombies, to ensure continuation of power in the hands of a small select group from one generation to another. But beyond this ritual are aspects notably satanic.

Thursday Evening, July 28, 1859.
Cara tamen lacrymis ossa futura nostris.
Prop. I. 19: 18.
Edward Bottwood, S.E.C.
Thursday Evening, July 7.

Thursday Evening, July 23d, 1808.
Boni Bonos diligant, asciscautque sibi.
Cicero Laelius, XIV, 50.
John B. Isham, S.E.C.
Thursday Evening, July 9th.

Thursday Evening July 21st, 1870.
Hoc quidem constat, bonis inter bonos quasi necessariam benevolentiam.
Cicero de Amicitia, xiv. 50
A.B. Mason, S.E.C.
Thursday, July 7th.

Wednesday Evening, June 17th, 1936.
Servendis hic castra bonis
Potter Stewart, S.E.C.
June 1, 1936.

Thursday Evening, May 31, 1984
D. 183
Quamvis mors non sit bonum, bona tamen est bonis.
Holbein, Alphabetum Mortis. 14.
Douglas R. Henston, S.E.C.
APRIL 25, 1984
Site Admin
Posts: 31991
Joined: Thu Aug 01, 2013 5:21 am


Return to Political Science

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest