Authored by Matthew Ehret via The Duran,

Part One: The Rise of the Round Table Movement and the Sad Case of Canada (1864-1945).

“Two systems are before the world; the one looks to increasing the proportion of persons and of capital engaged in trade and transportation, and therefore to diminishing the proportion engaged in producing commodities with which to trade, with necessarily diminished return to the labor of all; while the other looks to increasing the proportion engaged in the work of production, and diminishing that engaged in trade and transportation, with increased return to all, giving to the laborer good wages, and to the owner of capital good profits… One looks towards universal war; the other towards universal peace. One is the English system; the other we may be proud to call the American system, for it is the only one ever devised the tendency of which was that of elevating while equalizing the condition of man throughout the world.”

-Henry C. Carey (Lincoln’s advisor), Harmony of Interests, 1856

The British Hand Behind the Deep State Today

With the election of Donald Trump in November 2016, it has become apparent that America isn’t what many thought it was.

Suddenly, for the first time since the assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1963, there was no longer one America but rather two opposing forces within America itself, and the question was raised “which is the real America and what is it that Trump was re-activating?”

Here was a political leader who wasn’t from the technocratic establishment, and who campaigned to work with Russia and China, end regime change wars, reverse the nation-killing effects of NAFTA, reviving the JFK-era space mission and even discussed restoring Glass Steagall.

A clue to what he chose to represent can be witnessed in his defense of the “American System” when he said “this is the system our Founders wanted. Our greatest American leaders — including George Washington, Hamilton, Jackson, Lincoln — they all agreed that for America to be a strong nation it must also be a great manufacturing nation.”

Soon, it became apparent that this Deep State structure mobilized to stop the re-emergence of the American System was not even American as many had supposed, but rather of a purely British Imperial pedigree and was even caught working against British nationalists such as Jeremy Corbyn. It finally came to light that the British Empire had never gone away after WWII, but had evoked a powerful sleight of hand after FDR’s untimely death in 1945.

How did this happen? By what means and motives did this Deep State arise? Was it always there or were there key moments in history that give us clarity into its origins and how it took over both America and other nations alike?

By approaching history shaped by a battle between British and American systems of social order (which represents much more than merely British or American nations per se), a “master key” to unlock the secrets of Britain’s takeover of America (and Europe) can be found by exploring the strange case of Canada.

What is this “strange partly British/partly American monarchy of the Americas”? At the best of times it was uplifted by the best constitutional traditions of America cited by Donald Trump above, and at the worst of times it was a platform to spread British intrigues upon the world exemplified by the Montreal-based assassinations of American System leaders Abraham Lincoln in 1865 and John F. Kennedy in 1963. Today those intrigues are led by such Rhodes Scholars as Chrystia Freeland and the modern Round Table movement of Ben Rowswell who have together played leading roles in the overthrow of Venezuela, the protection of fascists in Ukraine and advance of NATO against Russia and China.

The time has come to drag some skeletons out of the closet.

Lincoln’s American System Goes Global

Canada’s struggle for existence as a sovereign nation has been caught between two opposing views of mankind represented by the British and American System of social organization. As the great economist Henry C. Carey laid out while he was advancing the policy of Abraham Lincoln, the American System was designed to become a global system operating amongst sovereign nations for the progress and mutual benefit of each and all. By the end of the 19th century, American System thinking was resonating with statesmen and patriots in all corners of the globe who were fed up with the ancient imperial system of British Free Trade that had always strived to maintain a world divided and monopolized. This view for a post-colonial world was exemplified by Lincoln-ally and first Governor of Colorado William Gilpinwho described a world united by railways across all continents centered around the Bering Strait rail connection. This was outlined in his widely read 1890 “The Cosmopolitan Railway”.

Although British propagandists had made every attempt to keep the illusion of the sacredness of the British System alive in the minds of its subjects, the undeniable increase of quality of life, and creative thought expressed by the American System everywhere it was applied become too strong to ignore… especially within colonies such as Canada that had long suffered a fragmented, and underdeveloped identity as the price paid for loyalty to the British Empire.

In Germany, the American System-inspired Zollverein (customs union) had not only unified a divided nation, but elevated it to a level of productive power and sovereignty which had outpaced the monopoly power of the British East India Company. In Japan, American engineers helped assemble trains funded by a national banking system, and protective tariff during the Meiji Restoration.

In Russia, American System follower Sergei Witte, Transport Minister and close advisor to Czar Alexander II, revolutionized the Russian economy with the American made trains that rolled across the Trans-Siberian Railway. Under the influence of Witte and other American System allies Czar Nicholas II endorsed the Bering Strait rail connection in 1905, though a tragic turn of fate sabotaged it from unfolding.

Not even the Ottoman Empire remained untouched by the inspiration for progress, as the Berlin to Baghdad Railway was begun with the intention of unleashing a bold program of modernization of southwest Asia.

The American System Touches the Canadian Mind

In Canada, admirers of Lincoln and Henry C. Carey found their spokesman in the great American System statesman Isaac Buchanan (1). Buchanan rose to his highest position of political office in the Dominion of Canada when in April 1864, the new MacDonald-Taché Ministry appointed him the President of the Executive Council. This put him in firm opposition to the Imperial agenda of George Brown, and the later Prime Minister John A. Macdonald, of whom he and all patriotic co-thinkers counted as bitter enemies to Canada’s independence and progress. The policy which Buchanan advocated as he rose to higher prominence was outlined in his December 1863 speech:

“The adoption by England for herself of this transcendental principle [Free Trade] has all but lost the Colonies, and her madly attempting to make it the principle of the British Empire would entirely alienate the Colonies. Though pretending to unusual intelligence, the Manchester Schools are, as a class, as void of knowledge of the world as of patriotic principle… As a necessary consequence of the legislation of England, Canada will require England to assent to the establishment of two things: 1st, an American Zollverein [aka: Customs Union]. 2nd: Canada to be made neutral territory in time of any war between England and the United States”. (2)

While the customs union modelled on the Zollverein program of American System economist Friedrich List in Germany laid out by Buchanan, was temporarily defeated during the operation known as the Articles of Confederation in 1867, the potential for its re-emergence returned in 1896 with the election of Wilfrid Laurier, Canada’s next Prime Minister. By 1911, the customs union policy advanced by Laurier, who was a devout admirer of Abraham Lincoln, finally came to fruition. Laurier long recognized that Canada’s interests did not reside in the anti-American program of MacDonald which simply tied Canada into greater dependence towards the mother country, but rather with the interests of its southern neighbour. His Reciprocity program proposed to lower protective tariffs with the USA primarily on agriculture, but with the intention to electrify and industrialize Canada, a nation which Laurier saw as supporting 60 million people within two decades. With the collaboration of his close advisors, Adam Shortt, Oscar Skelton and later William Lyon Mackenzie King, Laurier navigated the mine field of his British enemies active throughout the Canadian landscape in the form of the Masonic “Orange Order” of Ontario, and later, the insidious Round Table movement.

While Laurier’s attempts to actualize a true Reciprocity Treaty of 1911 that involved free trade among North American economies united under a protective tariff against British dumping of cheap goods, it would not last, as every resource available to the British run Orange Order and Round Table were activated to ensure the Reciprocity’s final defeat and the downfall of Laurier’s Liberal government and its replacement by the Conservative government of Sir Robert Borden in its stead.(3) Laurier described the situation in Canada after this event:

“Canada is now governed by a junta sitting at London, known as “The Round Table”, with ramifications in Toronto, in Winnipeg, in Victoria, with Tories and Grits receiving their ideas from London and insidiously forcing them on their respective parties.” (4)

Two years before Laurier uttered this warning, the founder of the Round Table movement, Lord Milner wrote to one of his co-conspirators laying out the strategic danger faced by Buchanan and Laurier’s program with America:

“As between the three possibilities of the future: 1. Closer Imperial Union, 2. Union with the U.S. and 3. Independence, I believe definitely that No. 2 is the real danger. I do not think the Canadians themselves are aware of it… they are wonderfully immature in political reflection on the big issues, and hardly realize how powerful the influences are…” (5)

Without understanding either the existential struggle between the two opposing systems related above, or the creation of the Round Table movement by a new breed of British Imperialist as a response to Lincoln’s international victory in the face of the total bankruptcy of the British Empire at the turn of the last century, then no Canadian could honestly ever make sense of what has shaped his or her cultural and political landscape. It is the purpose of this present report to shed a clear light upon some of the principal actors on this stage of universal history with the hope that the reader’s powers of insight may be strengthened such that those necessary powers of judgement required to lead both Canada and the world out of our current plunge into a new dark age may yet occur.

The Round Table Movement: New Racist Breed, Same Racist Species

The Round Table movement served as the intellectual center of the international operations to regain control of the British Empire and took on several incarnations over the 20th century. It worked in tandem with the Coefficients Club, the Fabian Society, and the Rhodes Trust, all of whom witnessed members moving in and out of each other’s ranks. The historian Carrol Quigley, of Georgetown University wrote of this cabal in his posthumously published “Anglo-American Establishment” (6):

“This organization has been able to conceal its existence quite successfully, and many of its most influential members, satisfied to possess the reality rather than the appearance of power, are unknown even to close students of British history. This is the more surprising when we learn that one of the chief methods by which this Group works has been through propaganda.

It plotted the Jameson Raid of 1895; it caused the Boer War of 1899-1902; it set up and controls the Rhodes Trust; it created the Union of South Africa in 1906-1910; it established the South African periodical The State in 1908; it founded the British Empire periodical The Round Table in 1910, and this remains the mouthpiece of the Group; it has been the most powerful single influence in All Souls, Balliol, and New Colleges at Oxford for more than a generation; it has controlled The Times for more than fifty years, with the exception of the three years 1919-1922, it publicized the idea of and the name “British Commonwealth of Nations” in the period 1908-1918, it was the chief influence in Lloyd George’s war administration in 1917-1919 and dominated the British delegation to the Peace Conference of 1919; it had a great deal to do with the formation and management of the League of Nations and of the system of mandates; it founded the Royal Institute of International Affairs in 1919 and still controls it; it was one of the chief influences on British policy toward Ireland, Palestine, and India in the period 1917-1945; it was a very important influence on the policy of appeasement of Germany during the years 1920-1940; and it controlled and still controls, to a very considerable extent, the sources and the writing of the history of British Imperial and foreign policy since the Boer War.” (7)

To understand the pedigree of the Round Table movement as it was “officially” unveiled in 1910 as the ideological shaper of the policies and paradigm of the new “managerial class” of international imperialists dedicated to the salvation of the British Empire under an “Imperial Federation”, it would be necessary to go back a few decades prior, to 1873-74. It was in this year that a young Canadian named George Parkin lectured at Oxford on the subject imperial union as the sacred duty of all Anglo Saxons to advance. Parkin is popularly heralded by Oxford historians as “the man who shifted the mind of England”.

1873-1902 Empire on the Verge of Collapse: Re-organize or Perish

During this same period, a grouping of Imperial intellectuals known as the “X Club” (f. 1865) centering on Thomas Huxley, Matthew Arnold, Herbert Spencer and Joseph Hooker were assigned the responsibility to overhaul the British Empire’s controlling ideological structures that had proven themselves worn out. Each would specialize on various branches of the sciences and would all promote gradualist interpretations of change to counteract explanations which required creative leaps. This program was applied with the intention of: 1) saving the collapsing empire and 2) establishing the foundation of a new scientific religion based upon Charles Darwin’s highly materialistic model of Natural Selection as the explanation for the evolution and differentiation of new species.

As X Club co-founder Herbert Spencer went on to elaborate the system of “social Darwinism” as the logical outgrowth of Darwin’s system into human affairs, the intention behind the propagation of the Darwinian program was never “the enlightenment liberalism in battle against the ignorant dogmas of religion”, as it is so often recounted by popular historians of science. Rather, the “revolution in science” initiated by the X Club was merely the re-packaging of an idea as old as Babylon: The control of the masses by a system of oligarchical rule, simply under a new type of “scientific dictatorship”. But how, when the demonstration of creative reason’s power to elevate humanity’s conditions of life by encouraging new discoveries and applied technologies, as promoted by the American System of Political Economy, would the world now accept the conditions of mental and political enslavement demanded by the imperialist in a fixed system struggle for diminishing returns?

This was the challenge upon which young Oxford men would set their creative energies using the “scientific” reasoning established by Thomas Huxley’s X Club and for the service of the ruling oligarchical families of Europe. George Parkin like all young Oxford men at this time, was highly influenced by this network’s ideas, and used them to justify the “natural scientific inevitability” of the hegemony of the strong over the weak. In this case, the Anglo Saxon master race dominating the inferior peoples of the earth. This message could be seen in his 1892 work Imperial Federation: “Nations take long to grow, but there are periods when, as in the long delayed flowering of certain plants, or in the crystallization of chemical solutions, new forms are taken with extreme rapidity. There are the strongest reasons for believing that the British nation has such a period immediately before it. The necessity for the creation of a body of sound public opinion upon the relations to each other of the various parts of the Empire is therefore urgent.” (8)

In elaborating upon the danger of the British System’s collapse in light of nationalist movements following the American System model, Parkin went on to ask:

“Has our capacity for political organization reached its utmost limit? For the British people this is the question of questions. In the whole range of possible political variations in the future there is no issue of such far reaching significance, not merely for our own people but for the world at large, as the question whether the British Empire shall remain a political unit… or yielding to disintegrating forces, shall allow the stream of the national life to be parted into many separate channels.” (9)

One of Parkin’s Oxford contemporaries was Alfred Milner, a character who plays a vicious role in our drama as the catalyzer behind the formation of the Round Table Movement. Milner credited Parkin with giving his life direction from that point on (10). It was during 1876 that another contemporary of Milner and Parkin, named Cecil Rhodes left Oxford in order to make a fortune on a cotton plantation in South Africa. All three characters were also highly influenced by John Ruskin, the leader of the “artistic” branch of British Intelligence led by the “Pre-Raphaelite Society”.

The proceeds of Rhodes’ cotton fortune were multiplied many times by ventures into the diamond industry of South Africa, allowing him to rise to gargantuan heights of political power and wealth, peaking with his appointment as Prime Minister of Cape Town and Founder of Rhodesia. The current London-centered mineral cartels Rio Tinto, De Beers, and Lonrho now pillaging Africa, as well as the legacy of Apartheid which has stained so much of South Africa’s history are among two aspects of the scarring legacy Rhodes has passed down to present times.

Between 1876 and his becoming High Commissioner to South Africa in 1897, Milner’s path slightly diverged from Rhodes. Milner was recruited by the editor of the Pall Mall Gazette William T. Stead and became associate editor soon thereafter. The Gazette’s function was set out in the Pall Mall Gospel, a short mission statement which Stead demanded all of his employees abide to: “The Federation of the British Empire is the condition of its survival… as an Empire we must federate or perish.” The gospel also propagandized for the “inevitable destiny” that the USA and Britain “coalesce” (11). The role which the Pall Mall played in coordinating a cohesive vision of empire was the model followed by Milner and his minions later as they ran the Round Table periodicals. Stead was officially recruited to the grand design in 1889 which was instigated by Rhodes and his sponsor Lord Rothschild. It was when Stead had been recently released for prison due to his Gazette’s promotion of “organized vice” only to find his paper in serious financial trouble, when he was first called upon by Cecil Rhodes, a long time follower of his journal in South Africa. After their first meeting, Stead ecstatically wrote to his wife:

“Mr. Rhodes is my man! I have just had three hours talk with him. He is full of a far more gorgeous idea in connection with the paper than even I have had. I cannot tell you his scheme because it is too secret. But it involves millions. He had no idea that it would cost £250,000 to start a paper. But he offered me down as a free gift £20,000 to buy a share in the P.M. Gazette as a beginning… His ideas are federation, expansion, and consolidation of the Empire…. He took to me. Told me some things he has told no other man—save Lord Rothschild— and pressed me to take the £20,000, not to have any return, to give no receipt, to simply take it and use it to give me a freer hand on the P.M.G. It seems all like a fairy dream….” (12)

Quigley demonstrates that both Milner and Stead had become active members of the agenda laid out by Cecil Rhodes. But what was this agenda? In a series of seven wills written between 1879 and 1901,” Rhodes, the unapologetic racist, laid out his designs for the re-conquering of the world and indoctrinating young elites into his design:

“Let us form the same kind of society, a Church for the extension of the British Empire. A society which should have its members in every part of the British Empire working with one object and one idea we should have its members placed at our universities and our schools and should watch the English youth passing through their hands just one perhaps in every thousand would have the mind and feelings for such an object, he should be tried in every way, he should be tested whether he is endurant, possessed of eloquence, disregardful of the petty details of life, and if found to be such, then elected and bound by oath to serve for the rest of his life in his Country. He should then be supported if without means by the Society and sent to that part of the Empire where it was felt he was needed.’

In another will, Rhodes described in more detail his intention:

To and for the establishment, promotion and development of a Secret Society, the true aim and object whereof shall be for the extension of British rule throughout the world. The colonization by British subjects of all lands where the means of livelihood are attainable by energy, labour, and enterprise and especially the occupation by British settlers of the entire Continent of Africa, the Holy Land, the Valley of the Euphrates, the islands of Cyprus and Candia, the whole of South America, the islands of the Pacific not heretofore possessed by Great Britain, the whole of the Malay Archipelago, these aboard of China and Japan, [and] the ultimate recovery of the United States of America as an integral part of the British Empire.” (13)

It was under this specific design to create an indoctrination system of talented young disciples that Rhodes’ dream of stealing the world and reconquering America that the Rhodes Trust was established upon his death in 1902. Some historians have maintained that since Rhodes doesn’t literally bring up his call for a secret society in his last two wills, he must have “matured” and left those notions behind him. Yet Professor Quigley points out, that the belief pushed by such “authoritative” historians is a farce, evidenced by George Parkin’s revealing observation taken from his book The Rhodes Scholarship, published in 1912: “It is essential to remember that this final will is consistent with those which had preceded it, that it was no late atonement for errors, as some have supposed, but was the realization of life-long dreams persistently pursued.” (14)

Upon Rhodes’ death, George Parkin became the first head of the Rhodes Scholarship Trust in 1902 leaving his post as Principal of Upper Canada College (1895-1902) to fulfill his duty. It was under this post that Parkin recruited fellow Upper Canada College professor Edward Peacock, who joined him as a Rhodes trustee and promoter of what became the Canadian branches of the Round Table movement. While organizing for the ouster of Prime Minister Wilfrid Laurier and the defeat of the 1911 Reciprocity Treaty, this group recruited young talented disciples from their college connections along the way. The model of the Round Table involved a central coordinating body in London, with branches strategically placed throughout the Commonwealth in order to provide one vision and voice to the young and talented “upper managerial class” of the reformed British Empire. Parkin and Peacock were joined by Lord Alfred Milner, Sir Arthur Glazebrook, W.T. Stead, Arthur Balfour and Lord Nathan Rothschild as co-trustees.

Working in tandem with the eugenicists of the Fabian Society of Sidney and Beatrice Webb, Balfour had founded the first International Eugenics Conference in 1912 alongside enthusiastic recruits such as young Roundtable member Winston Churchill. Charles Darwin’s cousin and founder of eugenics, Sir Francis Galton died mere weeks before being able to keynote the conference. The Fabian Society and its sister organization “The Co-efficients Club” featured such other prominent eugenicists as Bertrand Russell, Halford Mackinder, H.G. Wells and George Bernard Shaw, and later Harold Laski and John Maynard Keynes [see accompanying article on the Eugenics bent of the Fabian Society]. Membership rosters of either organization frequently overlapped (15)

Much of the dirty work conducted by the original Roundtable movement was run primarily by the group of young Oxford men who got their start managing imperial affairs under Milner during the Boer War suppression of the Transvaal (South African) uprising of 1899 to 1902. Of this Kindergarden, Philip Kerr and Lionel Curtis were tasked with coordinating the Canadian branches from London (with Parkin and Peacock leading from Canada). While Oxford had long been the indoctrination center of young elites for centuries prior, now with the Rhodes Scholarship program in place, a new level of standardization had been initiated. The new program provided scholarships to young talent primarily throughout the Anglo Saxon family of nations which Rhodes yearned to see re-absorbed under one Aryan umbrella. The Fabian Society had founded the London School of Economics (LSE) for similar purposes. Both the LSE and Oxford have worked hand in hand at crafting agents of imperial change throughout the entire 20th century (16).

Each student, upon selection, would be provided a scholarship to Oxford University, a generous stipend, and red carpet treatment into the upper echelons of the ruling oligarchical social networks, if the student so willed. Each student was returned to their home country enflamed with a burning desire to fulfill the objectives of the British Empire and advance “the scientific management of society”. Their talents were expressed either in elected office, working in the civil service, media, law, the private sector or in academia. In most cases, these scholars acted upon the Fabian method of ‘permeation theory’… slowly permeating all levels of society’s controlling structures in order to shape perception and shift the invisible structures controlling mass behaviour away from a current of progress and love of truth and towards a materialistic struggle for survival. Each year, one scholarship was granted to each of the Canadian provinces (with the exception of P.E.I) and 32 were granted to the United States. To the present date, approximately 7000 scholarships have been awarded with increasing openness to the non-Aryan countries to service the imperial agenda.

The Milnerite Vincent Massey and the Rebirth of Canadian Oligarchism

While the Canadian experiment has long been trapped by its loyalist (anti-republican) tendencies fueled by such oligarchical systems as the Family Compact (17), Canada has never had a self-contained ruling class as witnessed in the case of Britain. To this present day, the London centered oligarchy loyal to Babylonian traditions, is expressed by the imperial crown as the “fount of all honours” from which all legal and actual authority across the Commonwealth emanates. This has been the model upon which different generations of the Canadian oligarchy have been shaped. Similarly, the American oligarchy has tended to follow a similar model of organization with families recruited by the Crown’s agents such as the Rockefellers, Morgans, Harrimans and Duponts who have merely shaped their values and customs of behaviour around the system led by the British Crown, and represent nothing at all intrinsically “American”. All attempts to evaluate history from the bias of “an international bankers conspiracy” or even “American imperialism” without this higher understanding of the British Empire is thus doomed to failure.

One of the central figures in the Rhodes network in forming the character and structure of the Canadian oligarchy, as well as the general mass culture of Canada is a man named Vincent Massey. Massey is the son-in-law of George Parkin, who, following the Darwinian edict of “breeding with the best” married his four daughters to leading Round Table and Oxford men. Massey, born into the wealthy Hart-Massey family dynasty became an early recruit to the Round Table, working alongside Canadian Round Table co-founder Arthur Glazebrook in setting up a branch in Ontario in 1911. Glazebrook admired Parkin so much that he even named his son George Parkin de Twenebroker Glazebrook, himself a Rhodes Scholar of Balliol who went on to help run this group alongside Massey by the late 1930s and would head the Canadian secret service during World War II. Arthur Glazebrook wrote a shining letter of recommendation to Milner upon Massey’s departure for studies at Oxford’s Balliol College on Aug. 11, 1911:

“I have given a letter of introduction to you to a young man called Vincent Massey. He is about 23 or 24 years of age, very well off, and full of enthusiasm for the most invaluable assistance in the Roundtable and in connection with the junior groups… He is going home to Balliol, for a two year course in history, having already taken his degree at the Toronto University. At the end of his two years he expects to return to Canada and take up some kind of serious work, either as a professor at the university or at some other non-money making pursuit. I have become really very attached to him and I hope you will give him an occasional talk. I think it so important to get hold of these first rate young Canadians, and I know what a power you have over young men. I should like to feel that he could become definitely by knowledge a Milnerite” (18)

Upon his return to Canada, Massey quickly rose in the ranks of the Roundtable, becoming Crown Privy Councilor in 1925, then leading a delegation in 1926 at the Imperial Conference at which point his fellow Roundtabler Lord Balfour passed the Balfour Declaration as a means of appeasing the nationalist sentiment hot in many colonies striving for independence from the mother country. Massey then became Canada’s first Minister (aka: ambassador) to the United States (1926-1930), where he coordinated policy with controlling institutions around the intelligence institutions centered around the Council on Foreign Relations. During his time in Washington, Massey’s official biographer (and University of Toronto President from 1958-1971) Claude Bissel points out that he was a frequent guest in “The House of Truth”, a stronghold of Round Table ideas in the United States housing such luminaries as Walter Lipmann, Felix Frankfurter, Loring Christie, Eustace Percy, and featuring such frequent guests as Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, and McGeorge Bundy. Most of these characters were hardcore eugenicists affiliated with the Council on Foreign Relations (the American branch of the Royal Institute for International Affairs) advancing the program of a British-led “Anglo-American Empire”. Oxford men Loring Christie, and Hume Wrong were both recruited to Massey’s staff during this period and played important roles in the postwar takeover of Canadian foreign policy. Hume’s father George Wrong was also an influential executive member of the Canadian Round Table and Massey ally.

Massey’s Washington deployment was followed by a stint as President of the Liberal Federation of Canada (1932-1935), and then Canadian High Commissioner to London (1935-1946). It was soon after this experience that Massey was assigned to unleash the second of a series of Royal Commissions (1949-1951) dedicated to destroy any lingering sentiments of the American System within the hearts, minds, political-artistic-scientific structures or economic behaviour of Canada, and reconstruct the Canadian identity based on his own twisted image. This operation had the dual effect of relieving responsibility from the Rockefeller and Carnegie Foundations financial responsibility for crafting the Canadian identity (19). As a token for a job well done, Massey then became the first Canadian-born Governor General (1952-1959). During his career, Massey served as Governor for Upper Canada College, and the University of Toronto, as well as founder of a university modeled on All Souls, Oxford called Massey College (f.1962). Like All Souls, Massey College serves as a central coordinating node for various operations run through the major universities in Canada.

Through his various political positions, Massey pulled every string possible to recruit as many agents of the Roundtable Movement and Rhodes Trust networks into prominent positions within the Canadian civil service, cultural control, and academia. During this same period in the United States, Rhodes scholars had swarmed into various influential positions of authority, with a special focus on the State Department, in order to prepare to commandeer Roosevelt’s New Deal program and convert it into a Keynesian nightmare at the first available opportunity. These operations resulted in a third attempt by the British Empire to achieve an agenda that had largely failed in its first two attempts between 1902 and 1933 (20). It is proper to briefly go through the first two before continuing with our report.

The First Attempt Fails: Imperial Union 1911-1923

The First incarnation of the World Government agenda to supersede the principle of sovereignty as the basis for world affairs had been the Imperial Union thesis around which the Roundtable had first been created. This involved the creation of a Federation of nations united under one empire, in which representatives of various colonies could hold representatives within an Imperial Parliament, much like the European Union structure chaining nations under the Troika today. The obvious mission under this structure was the participation of the United States ruled by the “economic royalists” of whom Roosevelt said should have left the nation back in 1776. Under Parliamentary structures, little more than an illusion of democracy exists while its bureaucratic nature permits for optimal control by a ruling oligarchy.

By the end of World War I, forces within the Round Table were dreading the failure of this program, and had resolved to dedicate themselves instead to the League of Nations doctrine in its stead whereby essentially the same outcome could be achieved, but through different means. Under this changing of gears, it was arranged that the Round Table be phased out in place of something new. Two aging controllers of Milner’s Kindergarten writing to each other in 1931 laid this problem squarely on the table and even proposed a solution:

“As a brotherhood we have lost interest in the Empire and are no longer competent to deal with it. I think, therefore, that if The Round Table is to go on, it should quite definitely change its character, remove its subtitle, and become, what it is much more fitted to become at the present time, a publication connected with the Royal Institute of International Affairs… all the heart and soul of The Round Table movement is petering out and I really don’t know that we stand for anything in particular nowadays.” (21)

It was with this failure of its original blueprint in mind that the Roundtable Movement began a conversion into its new costume with the creation of the Royal Institute for International Affairs (RIIA) in 1919, followed immediately thereafter with branches in the United States under the heading of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and International Pacific Institute. Carrol Quigley demonstrates that the CFR and IPI featured crossovers of members from the RIIA, CIIA, while funding was provided through the Rockefeller Foundation, Carnegie Foundation and RIIA. While possessing nominally American names, these organizations and their members were fully British.

The Failure of the Second Attempt: The Round Table Transformed 1923-1930

Both the RIIA, CFR and IPI were financed through large grants by the Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations which themselves were set up merely as financial instruments to further the British Imperial agenda at the same time the Round Table Movement was unveiled in 1910. These were two of the core foundations which had been used to finance eugenics laws and the statistics-based “scientific” premises justifying their political implementation. Quigley documents in his works the extensive array of financial support which these “philanthropic” organizations bestowed upon their London controllers.

Due to the regaining of power of the Liberal Party, now under the leadership of Mackenzie King, the Canadian infiltration was not happening at the pace which some RIIA operatives would have liked. In fact, due to the influence of key Laurier Liberals such as Oscar Skelton and King’s Justice Minister Ernest Lapointe in the famous Imperial Conference of 1923, the last attempt to impose the Round Table thesis for Imperial Union was defeated in that form. By 1925, Roundtable controller Philip Kerr (aka: Lord Lothian) wrote of the anti-British situation in Canada guided by Lapointe and Skelton in the following terms:

“I am afraid that things in Canada are not at present as satisfactory as they are in the United States… I even found in places a certain feeling that it was a mistake for returned scholars to avow themselves as Rhodes scholars and that the best would be that they should merge themselves in the population and forget their unhappy past!” (22)

In 1925, O.D. Skelton, Laurier’s friend and biographer, as well as longtime friend and trusted collaborator of Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King, was made Undersecretary of External Affairs. It was also at this time that resistance to Rhodes Scholar penetration into guiding positions of national policy was obstinately begun.

Canadian cooperation with British foreign policy largely came undone beginning with the Canadian rejection of Britain’s demands that Canada commit its forces to Britain’s near-war with Turkey during the Chanak Crisis of 1922. In subsequent Imperial Conferences throughout the 1920s, the Laurier Liberals led by Skelton and Lapointe went on to flank and reject various attempts at binding foreign policy between Imperial Federation or the League of Nations. Collaboration with leaders of the Free Irish State against Imperial policy was key in the success of the Canadian patriots’ fending off the Round Table.

Mackenzie King’s Failed Personality

Massey’s biographers have commonly referenced his own frustration with Skelton whom he saw as a barrier between himself and the Prime Minister, a man who he could generally manipulate as long as no one with geostrategic insight was near him (23). King’s increasing lack of cooperation with British Foreign policy resulted in the following quote by Massey brother-in-law, and Round Table member William Grant in 1925:

“It is very difficult to make a permanent impression on him [King] for two reasons. 1) He is as selfish a man as I have ever known, the selfishness disguised by a thick smear of sentimentalism. He will, therefore, sacrifice anyone or anything to his ambition, and then sob about it. 2) He has a mind as lacking in edge as a jellyfish. Fortunately for you he has a real fund of dignified, though rather windy eloquence, and will do little harm if given plenty of speeches to make” (24)

The Grant quote is instructive as it provides the reader an insight into the singular character flaw of King which would taint him his entire life. That is, the pitiful fact of his “other-directedness”, such that his tendency to frustrate evil influences who wished to use him for their own nefarious ends was frequently balanced by the frustration of good influences who tried to influence him the other way. For good or for ill, King was never his own man but was, in the end, a mother-dominated mystic who could never sever his ideological affiliations with the Monarchy. He may have been a man of deep personal conviction in a higher cause… but like the poor Venetian Prince in Schiller’s “The Ghost Seer”, his convictions were never his own. After the death of Skelton in 1940, King’s neurotic insecurity would express itself in his relief to be liberated by Skelton’s domineering influence: “I have frequently been thrown off following my own judgement and wisdom in these matters by pressure from Skelton and the staff that I made up my mind I would not henceforth yield to anything of the kind” (25). In another diary entry a year later, King wrote: “One of the effects of Skelton’s passing will be to make me express my own views much more strongly”. (26)

King’s pro-monarchist inclinations permanently schismed his modus operandi from those influences who he otherwise respected, evidenced in the following diary recordings of Skelton and King during two Imperial Conferences: “I defend ultimate independence, which he [King] opposes”, while after another conference, King later wrote: “[Skelton] is at heart against the British Empire, which I am not. I believe in the larger whole, with complete independence of the parts united by cooperation in all common ends”. (27)

Chatham House Comes to Canada

The Canadian branch of the RIIA (aka:’ Chatham House’) was created only in 1928, (at the same time as its Australian counterpart) largely as a response to the anti-Round Table tendencies of the Laurier Liberals upon King. The CIIA’s first President was none other than former Canadian Prime Minister and Masonic Orangeman Sir Robert Borden. Its second president was Newton Rowell, who later became president of the Canadian Bar Association, and chaired the failed Rowell-Sirois Royal Commission of 1935-1937 (28). Sir Joseph Flavelle and Vincent Massey were Vice Presidents and George Parkin de T. Glazebrook was honorary secretary. Other founding members were financier and later Conservative Party Cabinet official J.M. Macdonnell, Carnegie Foundation Trustee N.A.M. Mackenzie, UCC President William Grant, Rhodes Scholar George Raleigh Parkin, financier Edgar Tarr, journalist J.W. Dafoe, and Henry Angus. Raleigh Parkin, Grant and Macdonnell also had the distinction of being brothers-in-law with Vincent Massey, and sons-in-law of George Parkin. In 1933, through a donation from the Massey Foundation (which served as a mini clone of the Rockefeller Foundation), the CIIA hired its first Permanent Secretary named Escott Reid. Reid was a Rhodes Scholar fanatically governed by a commitment to world government through the League of Nations, expressed by his following remarks:

“It would be easier and more self-respecting for Canada to give up to an international body on which it was represented, the decision on which it should go to war than to transfer the right to make that decision from the government in Ottawa to the government in Washington.. It would thus appear probable that effective military cooperation between Canada and the United States is possible only within the framework of an effective world order of which both Canada and the United States are loyal members.” (29)

The five years after the CIIA was established, an affiliate organization was founded called the Canadian Institute for Public Affairs (CIPA) by similar networks associated with the CIIA, in order to shape national internal policy while the CIIA focused upon Canada’s foreign policy. Original featured speakers were the CIIA’s Norman Mackenzie, and the eugenicist leader of the newly created CCF Party J.S. Woodsworth. It would be another 20 years before both organizations began to jointly host conferences together. Today, CIPA exists in the form of the Couchiching Conferences and their regular brainwashing seminars have been broadcast across the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) for over 70 years.

The CIPA was affiliated with the YMCA, itself a major British-run indoctrination asset as it focused spreading its ideology on conferences, and workshops the world over. It was through this network that a young Maurice Strong was recruited and rose to the highest echelons of the management of the oligarchy’s affairs in later years.

1932-1935: America’s New Deal Crushes the League of Nations

Before FDR came to power in 1932, the United States was brought to its knees after four years of Great Depression itself induced by the blowout of a housing bubble built up artificially by British-Wall Street agents such as U.S. Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon. It was during this time of fear and want that the American population was at its most gullible, largely accepting the propaganda that immigration and bad genes were the cause of the rampant criminality in these painful years. The vast majority of the sterilization laws passed and fascist sympathy cultivated occurred during this time of fear.

As Franklin Roosevelt rallied the population behind the battle cry “there is nothing to fear but fear itself, and kicked the money lenders out of the temple through the implementation of Glass-Steagall and the activation of public credit issued through the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. The RIIA running their networks in Canada and especially in the United States had to re-adjust their programs. The renewed faith in the powers of sovereign government in effecting progressive change by the activation of the American System principles were evaporating the belief that world government was the only option for peace to be ensured. However, change for an empire is not always easy, and after decades of investing energy into their reconquest of the United States, the British made a violent attempt to crush FDR.

A startling revelation swept through the press in 1933 with General Smedley Butler’s public unveiling of the Wall Street-backed attempt to run a coup d’état against Roosevelt using 500 000 legionnaires (30). General Butler’s unveiling of the plan to install himself as puppet dictator was recounted in Butler’s famous book “War is a Racket” (31). This attempted coup had occurred mere months after the thwarted Masonic-run assassination plot to kill FDR which resulted in the killing of Mayor Cermak of Chicago.

As Pierre Beaudry reported in his study on the Synarchy:

“It was not a mere coincidence that, at the same time the British promoted the Nazis in Europe, in 1934, the synarchist Lazard Freres and J.P. Morgan financial interests in the United States were staging a similar fascist dictatorial coup against Franklin D. Roosevelt, using the same disgruntled Veterans of Foreign Wars groupings with operatives from the French Croix de Feu deployed to the United States. They ultimately failed to capture the leadership of General Smedley Butler, who ended the U.S. plot by publicly denouncing the conspiracy as the fascist coup that it was.” (32)

After having failed miserably in applying aggressive fascism in America, as was being done in Europe as the “solution” to the economic woes of the depression orchestrated by agents of the British Empire on Wall Street, the Rhodes networks decided that the only chance to defeat FDR was through the old Fabian method of infiltration and co-option. Every attempt was made to infiltrate New Deal institutions at all costs such that their full co-opting could occur relatively seamlessly upon the first opportunity of Roosevelt’s fall from power. For this, leading Fabian Society eugenicist John Maynard Keynes’ theories were used to first mimic the outward form of Roosevelt’s program without any of the substance.

1932: The Rhodes Trust Hive in Canada Shifts Gears

Just as Roosevelt was coming to power in America in 1932, the Rhodes Trust networks of Canada centering on Escott Reid, Frank Underhill, Eugene Forsey, F.R. Scott, and David Lewis founded a self-described “Fabian modeled think tank” customized for Canada known as the League for Social Reconstruction (LSR). Reid, Forsey, Scott and Lewis were all Rhodes Scholars while Underhill was an Oxford trained Fabian who was tutored by Harold Laski and G.B. Shaw at Balliol College. The avowed intention of the group was to institute a system of “scientific management of society” under Fabian precepts and expressed itself in the group’s selecting of J.S. Woodsworth, another Oxford-trained Fabian, to head the new Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) as an outgrowth of the LSR. The CCF called for the complete destruction of capitalism in its Regina Manifesto of 1933. Woodsworth, an avowed eugenicist, vigorously endorsed the passage of Alberta’s 1927 sterilization laws to eliminate the unfit (32). Following the gospel of his Fabian mentors H.G. Wells and G.B. Shaw, Woodsworth even advocated the abolishment of personal property. At its heart the CCF was not your typical “socialism”, but merely fascism with a “scientific” socialist face.

Knowing that a fearful mob tends to fall into extremes, the CIIA’s creation of a new polarized left and right did not produce the result as it should have. Under the logic of empire, the abysmal failure of the “right” wing conservative party of Prime Minister R.B. Bennett (1930-1935), should have created the conditions for a radical left turn by the time the CCF had been formed. Unemployment was over 25%, money tightening policies were choking what little production still existed and Bennett’s typically anti-American Tory stance was blocking any potential for increasing trade with the United States.

But something wasn’t working for the Empire’s agenda. While the political seeds for a “scientific socialist” world government were being planted on pace in Canada, the cultural fear and despair necessary for such programs to take root willingly by the choice of the masses were no longer in place. Indeed, the Canadian population was so inspired by the weekly Roosevelt Fireside Chats broadcast across the border, scattered with newspaper reports of inspiring.

New Deal projects, that hope for a better future and a national solution to the chaos of the Great Depression was close enough at hand such that no great polarization could occur. As such, the blind acceptance of a Woodsworth-CCF scientific dictatorship run by agents of Rhodes’s nightmare was avoided.

FDR’s power in the minds of the Canadian population forced even the radical anti-American blue-Tory Government of R.B. Bennett to eventually adapt to the language of the New Deal by trying to copy the U.S. program in a last ditch effort to save the 1935 election. This Delphic program was known as Bennett’s “New Deal for Canada” platform. The platform was a failure, as the program laid out by Bennett had two grave errors:

1) Promoting a vast array of social welfare proposals (ie: minimum wage, health insurance, unemployment insurance, expanded pension plan, minimum hours for the work week) but lacking any large scale nation building measures which defined the American success and gave meaning to the welfare measures, the Bennett knock-off simply copied the form without any of the substance of the true New Deal. The closest approximation to infrastructure programs involved slave labour driven “work camps” paying 25 cents per day which used and abused young desperate men so that piecemeal roads and patchwork building could occur devoid of any national mission (33).

2) The national credit system employed by Roosevelt through his understanding of American System thinkers as Alexander Hamilton and Abraham Lincoln was entirely absent from the mind of Bennett and his civil servants. While the creation of the Bank of Canada modeled on the privatized system of England’s Central Bank, was established in 1935 after an extensive Royal Commission run by Lord Macmillan (begun in 1933), its constitutional and structural mandate was designed to merely centralize control for the management of already existent wealth under the control of monetarist/accounting principles… not the creation of new wealth. This institution was designed as inherently monetarist/Keynesian, NOT Rooseveltian. Without a proper American styled credit system in place which tied credit to the increase of the productive powers of labour, then any large investments, even the superficial ones proposed by Bennett’s New Deal were doomed to failure. After the Conservative Party’s 1935 decimation at the hands of the Liberals, Bennett soon retired permanently to Britain, accepting a title of nobility as Viscount.

With a revival of the American System under Roosevelt, we can see why the Canadian culture was not induced to fall into the spider web set by London. However we have yet to explain how the CIIA/Rhodes Trust networks were prevented from fully taking over control of Canada’s foreign policy during the remainder of the 1930s.

The Laurier Liberals Rise again 1935-1940

On October 1935, the Liberals still under the leadership of Mackenzie King returned to power in Canadian politics attempting to gain a foothold amidst the two British controlled extremes of the left-wing CCF and right-wing Conservatives. At this point, Vincent Massey left his three year post as President of the Liberal Party to occupy his new position as the High Commissioner to Britain bringing into his staff such Oxford protégés as Lester B. Pearson as his personal secretary, as well as Rhodes Scholars George Ignatieff and Escott Reid. While most modern historians (often affiliated with the CIIA such as John English and Jack Granatstein (34) have held that the influx of Oxford men into the Department of External Affairs (DEA) was catalyzed by O.D. Skelton, the evidence demonstrates that none other than Vincent Massey himself and the CIIA networks were the true leaders in this process against the better intention of O.D. Skelton. The popular thesis cooked up by Granastein and his ilk, has merely been a mythology maintained in order to hide Canada’s true nation building heritage from present generations, as the following evidence will demonstrate.

While the CIIA had built up a large array of high level intellectuals which had successfully installed themselves at controlling nodes of all major universities across Canada, unlike its counterparts in the United States or Britain, the CIIA had been unsuccessful at permeating the Department of External Affairs (DEA). This was caused in large measure by the return of Oscar Skelton as Undersecretary of the DEA working alongside the Minister of External Affairs Mackenzie King. King was the only Prime Minister to occupy both posts simultaneously in Canadian history. Historian Adam Chapnick describes the suspicions of King and Skelton to CIIA infiltration in the following terms:

“He shared his prime minister’s suspicions of Britain’s political leadership and had never forgotten that following the British blindly into battle in 1914 had nearly destroyed his country… Skelton became the leader of “the isolationist intelligentsia” in the East Block”(35). This distrust was demonstrated in the words of the Prime Minister, who spoke to the Canadian population after the Imperial Conference of 1937 saying: “Those who looked to the conference to devise and formulate a joint imperial policy on foreign affairs defense or trade will find nothing to fulfill their expectations” (36).

As chaos began to spread and the echos of war could be heard, cracks began to appear in Skelton’s policy of keeping the CIIA nest from taking over Canadian foreign policy. In a diary entry of May 20, 1938, Skelton wrote the following ominous words:

“The British are doing their best to have the Czechs sacrifice themselves on the altar of European peace… apparently the French are softening in resistance. The Prime Minister said in council there seemed almost unanimous recognition of (the) impossibility of our staying out if Britain goes in: my 14 years effort here wasted” (37).

Chapnick describes the irony of the RIIA’s success in coordinating post war planning through the British Foreign Office as early as 1939, yet was unable to make any headway for similar planning in their Canadian branch:

“While Mackenzie King was bracing his country for the possibility of war, the RIIA’s world-order preparatory group held its first meeting at Chatham House on 17 July 1939. The discussion emphasized the importance of maintaining the rule of law in international relations. Unlike the CIIA, which struggled to be heard in Ottawa through much of 1941, the RIIA had already established close links to the government in London. Its impact was evident in October 1939 when Lord Lothian [aka: Philip Kerr], the British ambassador in Washington, alluded publicly to a future global federation. His comments foresaw an international order in which regional organizations would police the world under the umbrella of a unifying executive body.“ (38)

Historian Denis Stairs relates Philip Kerr`s frustration with Skelton`s influence on Mackenzie King when he wrote that “Kerr once pointedly observed to Vincent Massey that it “would be better if Skelton did not regard co-operation with anyone as a confession of inferiority”. Massey reported later in his memoirs that he agreed with the assessment.” (39) Massey, an enemy of Skelton since the 1923 Imperial Conference referred to Skelton in his diaries as “Herr Doktor Skelton”.

Upon the mysterious deaths of O.D. Skelton and Ernest Lapointe in 1941 (40), the gates holding back the CIIA’s hordes began to be lifted as Massey’s young recruit Norman Robertson (a Rhodes Scholar), was quickly installed as Skelton’s replacement as Undersecretary of External Affairs. With this veritable coup, things quickly changed for the CIIA’s role in shaping Canada’s foreign policy. Chapnick describes the situation in the following terms:

“Ironically, just as the CIIA abandoned its faith in the Canadian government, Norman Robertson finally began to mobilize the Department of External Affairs. Since wartime restrictions prevented him from hiring the additional staff necessary to pursue an internationalist agenda in the traditional way, he sought temporary help from his former academic colleagues. Himself a University of British Columbia graduate, Robertson first asked the professor of political science and economics Henry Angus to move to Ottawa and assume the position of departmental “special assistant.” Angus was a member of the CIIA and had studied the Versailles settlement in depth.

He was expected to contribute constructively to postwar discussions. George Glazebrook, known to Pearson from the History Department of the University of Toronto, soon joined him. Glazebrook had sat on the CIIA research committee that had been tasked with looking into the shape of the postwar world. In all, approximately twenty university professors eventually worked for External Affairs during the war, nearly all of whom had direct or at least indirect ties to the CIIA. The recruitment of these academics created a planning infrastructure within the Canadian civil service that was similar to those already established in Great Britain and the United States. Two years after the Anglo-American process of planning the postwar order had started, Canada was finally taking its first small step forward.” (41)

With the takeover of Canada’s foreign policy-making apparatus in the Department of External Affairs by the CIIA, Canada’s new program of the “Third Way” was set in place by the likes of Escott Reid, Lester Pearson, and later Pierre Elliot Trudeau. Under this program, Canada’s role in the post War world served as a counterweight to the bipolar Cold War dynamic of Mutually Assured Annihilation. Wherever possible Canada would disrupt America by befriending Communist Countries, while Britain’s Delphic foreign policy became one of closely mimicking the USA. The Third Way was described later by Pierre Trudeau when asked of his foreign policy approach as “the creation of counter-weights”. All this was done not for interests of Canada, a nation whose birth had become tragically aborted but in the service of the British Empire.

by Anton Chaitkin

The following is adapted from a pamphlet, issued in December 1994, by The New Federalist newspaper. Prompted by the growing threat at the time, of an assassination of President Bill Clinton, the LaRouche movement pulled together a dossier on previous (successful) British assassination efforts, namely, those against Presidents Abraham Lincoln, James Garfield, William McKinley, and John Kennedy.

The British have killed U.S. Presidents. The “British” authors of these murders are not the English people, but the oligarchy ruling Great Britain—the “Venetian party” feudalist aristocrats and bankers, headed by the Royal Family, and the European princes intermarried with the British Royals.

American Presidents who have been assassinated, were advancing U.S. interests in fierce conflict with British geopolitical aims. In each case, the killing, and the accession to office of the Vice President, hindered or reversed the policy direction of the murdered President. This is true of those shot to death—Abraham Lincoln, James A. Garfield, William McKinley, and John F. Kennedy. It is also true of the two 19th-Century Presidents who died abrupt and surprising deaths in office, purportedly of natural causes, William Henry Harrison and Zachary Taylor.

We review the salient features of the British assassinations, and their motives, below.

Britain’s Confederacy vs. Lincoln

John Wilkes Booth shot and mortally wounded President Abraham Lincoln on April 14, 1865, five days after Robert E. Lee’s Confederate Army of Northern Virginia surrendered in the Civil War.

In their biography of Lincoln, his two private secretaries, John G. Nicolay and John Hay, brought up the question of Booth, the Confederate Secret Service headquartered in British Canada, and how the murder plot was financed:

“[O]ne of the conspiracies, not seemingly more important than the many abortive ones, ripened. . . . A little band of malignant secessionists, consist[ing] of John Wilkes Booth, . . . Lewis Powell, . . . a disbanded rebel soldier . . . George Atzerodt, . . . a spy and blockade runner of the Potomac, David E. Herold, . . . Samuel Arnold and Michael O’Laughlin, Maryland secessionists and Confederate soldiers, and John H. Surratt [a Confederate spy and dispatch lander]. . . .

“Booth . . . visited Canada, consorted with the rebel emissaries there, and at last—whether or not at their instigation cannot certainly be said—conceived a scheme to capture the President. . . . He seemed always well supplied with money, and talked largely of his speculations in oil as a source of income; but his agent afterwards testified that he never realized a dollar from that source; that his investments, which were inconsiderable, were a total loss.”

The Confederate Secret Service was headed by the Virginia-based Confederate Secretary of State Judah P. Benjamin, who was born a British subject in the West Indies, and the London-based James Bulloch, uncle of the later U.S. President Teddy Roosevelt. They coordinated the supply of British rifles and British naval vessels to the Rebellion, and the transfer of gold through the then- British colony of Canada.

President Abraham Lincoln was engaged, throughout the war, in a two-front battle: a military struggle to save the Union and defeat the British-backed Confederacy, and a brutal conflict against the Wall Street firms representing Britain’s Rothschild and Baring banks and the British Crown. (Lincoln’s last photograph, Feb. 5, 1865, by Alexander Gardner.)

This engraving, printed in Harper’s Weekly, April 29, 1865, depicts the British/ Confederate spy John Wilkes Booth, as he fires the fatal shot at President Lincoln at Ford’s Theater, April 14, 1864.

A decoding sheet found in Booth’s trunk matched a coding device found in Confederate spymaster Judah Benjamin’s Richmond, Va. office.

Some months before he shot Lincoln, Booth deposited funds in the Montreal bank used by Benjamin’s operatives. John Surratt, who confessed in 1870 to plotting with Booth to abduct Lincoln, admitted to using that Montreal bank for the secret service funds. Surratt told of the days preceding the murder, and of his trip to Montreal, carrying money and messages from Judah Benjamin.

At Ford’s Theater, where John Wilkes Booth shot Lincoln, the U.S. National Park Service now displays a decoding sheet found by police in Booth’s trunk, and a matching coding device found in Judah Benjamin’s Richmond office. Benjamin fled to England immediately following the assassination and became a wealthy Queen’s Attorney. Booth was shot by pursuing U.S. troops, and four co-conspirators were hanged.

James G. Blaine, a Lincoln-allied Congressman and later U.S. Secretary of State, wrote that Judah Benjamin sought to create “a confederacy whose . . . one achievement should be the revival and extension of English commercial power on this continent. . . . Benjamin took quick refuge under the flag to whose allegiance he was born. . . . [T]he manner in which he was lauded into notoriety in London, the effort constantly made to lionize and to aggrandize him, were conspicuous demonstrations of hatred to our Government, and were significant expressions of regret that Mr. Benjamin’s treason had not been successful. Those whom he served either in the Confederacy or in England in his efforts to destroy the American Union . . . eulogize him according to his work.”

Why Lincoln Was Killed

Henry C. Carey, creator of the nationalist economic platform of Lincoln’s Republican Party, wrote, just before the 1860 election, that the British Empire waged continual political and economic “warfare . . . for discouraging the growth of manufactures in other countries . . . for compelling the people of other lands to confine themselves to agriculture . . . for producing pauperism.”

During his Presidency, Lincoln defied British free trade doctrines and revolutionized the U.S. economy. Lincoln’s 50% tariff started the American steel industry, while his transcontinental railroads, subsidies for mining, the science-educating Agriculture Department, free land for family farmers, free state colleges, and full-scale immigration policy forced the transformation of a bankrupt, cotton-exporting country into the world’s greatest industrial power within the 25 years during and following his Presidency.

In a brutal conflict against the Wall Street firms representing Britain’s Rothschild and Baring banks and the British Crown, Lincoln fought to reassert the national government’s control over credit. He put through anti-usury and other strict Federal banking laws, sold bonds directly to the people, and issued hundreds of millions of dollars of national currency. He was seeking to crack down on the Anglo-American manipulation of gold when he was killed.

Vice President Andrew Johnson succeeded Abraham Lincoln in 1865, and promised rewards for the arrest of the “rebels and traitors . . . harbored in Canada” who had “incited, concerted and procured” Lincoln’s murder.

Johnson was himself a free trader. But Lincoln’s nationalist political legacy was revived by Presidents Ulysses S. Grant (1869-77) and James A. Garfield (assassinated in 1881). Despite the tightening grip of British-run banking over U.S. finances, America persisted in Lincoln’s nationalist measures and became the world’s economic superpower, inspiring emulation on a broad enough scale—including in Germany, Russia, and Japan—to threaten the British Empire itself.1

The Case of James Garfield

Charles Guiteau’s 1881 murder of U.S. President James A. Garfield is treated historically as a senseless act, and the perpetrator, a “disappointed office-seeker.”

Contrary to this “lone-assassin” portrayal of events, we shall show here a murder motive: the Garfield Ad- ministration’s prosecution of a virtual war against the British Empire; and a murder machine: Britain’s transatlantic financial and political apparatus, and its criminal underground inside America, which included Garfield’s assassin.

James Blaine, chosen as Secretary of State by the President-elect, candidly warned Garfield of “the machine in New York” and its allies, within their own Re- publican Party: “This section contains all the desperate bad men of the Party, bent on loot and booty, and ready for any Mexican invasion or Caribbean annexation, and looking to excitements and filibustering and possibly to a Spanish war as legitimate means of continuing political power for a clique. These men are . . . harmless when out of power, and desperate when in possession of it” (Blaine to Garfield, Dec. 10, 1880).

Britain’s influence in America had grown ominously in 1879. British bankers, whose Wall Street agents ruled the “desperate” New York political machine, had compelled the resumption of gold (specie) payments to foreign holders of U.S. bonds. This gave the Rothschild-Morgan syndicate a blackmail dictatorship over U.S. finances.

Secretary of State Blaine was the de facto “prime minister” in the incoming administration. His political identity was built around his family tradition of America’s resistance against British imperial power. He had lived, as a teenager, with his close relative Thomas Ewing, while Ewing was U.S. Treasury Secretary, lieutenant to anti-British nationalist spokesman Henry Clay, and the stepfather of Garfield was susceptible to the hard-money dogma, but he and his old political comrade Blaine came to power with the high tariff program of Clay and Lin- coln. Blaine exhorted Irish-Americans and other workingmen to defend their wages by defeating the economic policy of “Ireland’s oppressors”—“British free trade.”

President James Garfield (left) was murdered, in 1881, because he was waging a virtual war against the British Empire. His ally, James Blaine (below, left), warned Garfield against “the machine in New York,” run by banker August Belmont (below), a Rothschild lackey, and head of the Democratic Party.

The Union War Government Revived

Garfield and Blaine took office in March 1881, with Abraham Lincoln’s son Robert as War Secretary. In May, Blaine sent Lincoln’s counterintelligence expert, retired Gen. Stephen Hurlbut, as a special envoy to face down the British in South America.

The British-sponsored proxy army of Chile had invaded Peru and Bolivia, grabbing control of nitrate deposits, and seeking to crush U.S.-allied nationalism in the region. Britain’s diplomats demanded that Peru surrender and cede its richest provinces. Peru’s army had collapsed, relying as it did for military supplies on Britain’s Lima-based merchant king, the W.R. Grace Company. Grace controlled virtually all shipping on South America’s Pacific Coast on behalf of British banking and political power.

On May 23, 1881, Charles J. Guiteau wrote to President Garfield: “Mr. Blaine is a wicked man, and you ought to demand his immediate resignation; otherwise you and the Republican Party will come to grief.” Guiteau shot Garfield on July 2, 1881, four months into his term.

As Garfield clung to life, General Hurlbut arrived in Peru, clashed sharply with British diplomats, and recognized the regime of García Calderón, who had been chosen by the underground Peruvian nationalist leadership. The USS Alaska landed a brother of President Calderón in Mollendo, with money and instructions for Peruvian resistance fighters. Britain’s Chilean proxies arrested President Calderón and took him away to Santiago. On Nov. 29, 1881, Secretary Blaine, still in office, called for a peace conference of all republics in the Western Hemisphere, to convene in Washington one year later.

The incoming President Chester Arthur replaced Blaine two weeks later with Frederick Frelinghuysen, who cancelled the proposed hemispheric peace conference, so as not to invite “European jealousy and ill will.” Congressman Perry Belmont, law partner of Frelinghuysen’s son, chaired a Congressional investigation of the supposed corruption of James Blaine and General Hurlbut. Belmont’s father, August Belmont, the House of Rothschild’s U.S. representative, wrote that “the country might have been plunged into a war with Peru if poor Garfield had not been assassinated. Blaine is about the most unscrupulous politician we ever had.”

Blaine told Congress, “The Chilian government . . . pledge[d] . . . to pay . . . into the Bank of England for the benefit of the English bondholders who put up the job of this war on Peru. It . . . was loot and booty. . . . The iron-clads that destroyed the Peruvian Navy were furnished by England. . . . It is an English war on Peru, with Chile as the instrument, and I take the responsibility of that assertion.”

The New York Machine and the Assassin

There was at that time a triumvirate ruling that New York “loot and booty” machine about which Blaine had warned Garfield:

1) Banker August Belmont, Rothschild representative and longtime head of the U.S. Democratic Party;

2) Britain’s W.R. Grace, the Peru-based enforcer, who had moved to the U.S., and was elected Mayor of New York City in 1880. Grace managed Wall Street’s opposition to Blaine’s 1884 Presidential bid, and ar- ranged the official 1890 British contract seizing Peru’s land and minerals;

3) Speculator Leonard Jerome, owner of the New York Times. His daughter Jennie had married Britain’s Randolph Churchill, who in 1880, with his partner Arthur Balfour, founded a new ultra-feudalist leadership group in British politics. Jerome’s grandson Winston Churchill was then six years old. This Balfour

circle, Benjamin Disraeli’s “Venetian Party,” had taken over managing various British Intelligence projects of the occult and the criminal underground, centered in New York State and New England.

Assassin Charles J. Guiteau dictated an autobiography to a jail officer while awaiting his execution. His story was printed in the July 2, 1882 (Washington) National Republican.

Guiteau’s father, a disciple of New England cult leader John H. Noyes, took Charles as a teenager to live on the commune that Noyes had established on the Oneida Indian Reservation in upstate New York. Noyes was a Vermont “blueblood,” the son of a Congressman who had sided with the enemy during the War of 1812 between America and Britain.

Guiteau said “I went [to Oneida] and got under that influence, and I was unable to get away from that influence. . . . A man was just as isolated from the world as if he were confined in state’s prison or a lunatic asylum. I suffered greatly in mind and body and spirits during incarceration in that community.” He said he had been “perfectly beside himself” under Noyes’s control from 1858 to 1870.

In 1880, Charles Guiteau, who had never had anything to do with politics, suddenly began hanging around the Republican National Committee’s New York City headquarters. After the Garfield election victory, Guiteau began loitering in the White House and State Department lobbies in Washington, on the pretext of asking for appointment as a diplomat. He bought a pistol with money from “a gentleman,” and shot the President after stalking him for several days.

McKinley Versus T.R.

The “McKinley Act” of 1890 was the great protective tariff law of the last generation of American nationalist leaders. Its author, Ohio Congressman and former Union military officer William McKinley, said that “the law of 1890 . . . gave work and wages to all such as they had never had before. It did it by establishing great industries in this country. . . . It had no friends in Europe.”

McKinley was elected to the Presidency in 1896 on a platform of high wages and defiance of British free trade doctrines. McKinley’s first act as President was to push through a law heavily taxing British and other imports, so as “to preserve the home market . . . to our own producers; to revive and increase manufactures; to relieve and encourage agriculture . . . to aid and develop mining and building; and to render to labor in every field of useful occupation the liberal wages and adequate rewards to which skill and industry are justly entitled.”

In the 1900 election campaign, the only serious issue was who should replace Vice President Garret Hobart, who had died in 1899. President McKinley and his leading advisor, Sen. Marcus Alonzo Hanna, bitterly opposed the nomination of Great Britain’s fanatical political ally Theodore Roosevelt, or “T.R.”

Teddy Roosevelt’s identity had become clear to American patriots in 1883, when James D. Bulloch, Teddy’s uncle, hero, and later military-history ghost- writer, published his famous anti-American history, The Secret Service of the Confederate States in Europe. Bulloch, in permanent exile in Britain, had been one of the two coordinators of the secret service whose operatives killed Abraham Lincoln.

But, under immense pressure, the McKinley faction capitulated to the naming of T.R. as Vice Presidential candidate. The McKinley-Roosevelt ticket was elected. The President was shot to death by anarchist assassin Leon Czolgosz less than six months after the inauguration, and Teddy Roosevelt became President.

The attack had been fully expected. McKinley’s chief of staff, Senator Hanna, had requested in a security report the previous year, “that proper safeguards be thrown around the person of the President,” because the government had been informed that “anarchists or Socialists through their various organizations resolved to rid the earth of a number of its rulers [starting with] the Empress Eugenie of Austria . . . the King of Italy . . . [and] then the President of the United States . . . and . . . the first two calls . . . have come to pass as predicted.” After the election of the McKinley-Roosevelt ticket, the New York City Police Commissioner, through his detective Lt. Joseph Petrosino, had issued a warning: that the Henry Street Settlement House in New York City, then the U.S. political headquarters for anarchist leader Emma Goldman, was a center of assassination threats to President McKinley.

The assassin Czolgosz told police after his capture that he was a disciple of Emma Goldman’s, and had heard her lecture on the destruction of government two weeks before he killed the President. Goldman, who had helped plan the attempted murder of industrialist Henry Frick nine years earlier, was arrested on suspicion of complicity in the McKinley shooting. However, when charges were brought against her, and she was released from police custody, she immediately launched a public sympathy campaign for the assassin.

London: ‘Breeding Ground for Plots’

Goldman and the anarchists were sponsored in high style in America and in England. New York’s Henry William McKinley (left) was elected to the Presidency in 1896, on a platform of high wages and defiance of British free-trade doctrines. His Vice President Teddy Roosevelt (below) became President when McKinley was shot and killed by a disciple of the anarchist Emma Goldman, who maintained headquarters in London. T.R. was the leading representative of the British imperial model war party.

Street Settlement House was built in 1893 by Wall Street’s Jacob Schiff, in cooperation with his partner Sir Ernst Cassell, personal banker to the British Royal Family and to the Fabian Society. Goldman wrote about a Russian anarchist revolutionary who came to New York and met with the Anglophile elite, backing the overthrow of the U.S.-allied Russian government. “I acted as interpreter . . . at most of the private gatherings arranged for her . . . among [those participating was Anson] Phelps Stokes” of the Phelps-Dodge Corp. and the Liverpool and London and Globe Insurance Co. “Lillian Wald [head of the Henry Street Settlement House] . . . arranged receptions . . . and succeeded in interesting scores of people in the Russian cause.”

In 1901, the Russian journal Svet wrote: “Let us hope that the death of [President McKinley] will rouse those lands which . . . harbor bad elements and become the breeding grounds for plots, to action against the enemies of civilization.” “In England,” Belgium’s King Leopold had explained years earlier, “a sort of menagerie of [revolutionaries] is kept to let loose occasionally on the continent to render its quiet and prosperity impossible.”

Emma Goldman wrote in her autobiography about flourishing “anarchist activities in London. . . . England was the haven for refugees from all lands, who carried on their work without hindrance.” She described her London headquarters, the home of William Michael Rossetti. There, the anarchist journal Torch was published. The brother of the Pre-Raphaelite poet/painter Dante Gabriel Rossetti, William Michael had been a senior British government official and the manager of the “Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood,” which openly advocated the return to the feudal Dark Ages of the 14th Century. Goldman helped organize Britain’s worldwide Neo-Malthusian League. Following Goldman’s deportation from the U.S., neo-Malthusian leader Bertrand Russell sponsored her return to England.

Reversing American Revolution

Teddy Roosevelt had been the leading representative of the British imperial-model war party, whose intrigues had dragged the reluctant President McKinley into the 1898 war against Spain in Cuba and the Philippines. But McKinley had pursued peace, reciprocity, and mutual industrial development with the nations of the Western Hemisphere.

As President, Teddy Roosevelt blatantly attacked and intimidated Latin America, blackening the name of the American republic. He broke up the U.S. alliances

with Japan, with Russia, and with Germany. He closed the American West to settlement, cancelled all of Lincoln’s economic development measures, and turned over national financial power to the British banking cartel of Rothschild and Morgan.

The Case of John F. Kennedy

Two newly discovered pieces of evidence point to- wards a direct role of the British Crown in the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963.

The first piece of evidence, is a membership list in the super-secret 1001 Club, listing the late Canadian-born British Special Operations Executive (SOE) official Maj. Louis Mortimer Bloomfield as a charter member of the group founded by Prince Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh (see EIR, Oct. 28, 1994). Bloomfield was also an early leader of the Canadian branch of Prince Philip’s World Wildlife Fund (WWF), prior to his involvement in the JFK assassination plot.

The second piece of evidence, a pair of obscure photographs from a New Orleans Parish weekly newspaper from 1963, show David Ferrie and Clay Shaw together at a party. Ferrie and Shaw were two critical figures in the Kennedy assassination plot, according to the late New Orleans District Attorney, Jim Garrison (as reported in his 1988 book on the Kennedy assassination, On the Trail of the Assassins).

Taken together, the new pieces of evidence for the first time establish an unbroken chain of proof tying the known associates of self-described “patsy” Lee Harvey Oswald to the highest echelons of the British Crown and its Secret Intelligence Services.

Through agencies like the WWF and the 1001 Club, the assassination apparatus that murdered John Kennedy remains intact today. And this apparatus has al- ready been implicated in at least one threat to the life of President Clinton, a May 11, 1994 public statement by a gun-toting ex-Arkansas state official Larry Nichols. While the U.S. Attorney’s office in Washington, D.C. was announcing this past week that Francisco Martin Duran, the man who opened fire on the White House on Oct. 29, would be tried for attempted murder of the President, Larry Nichols was still walking the streets, the apparent beneficiary of protection by “friends in high places” who are opponents of President Clinton’s decidedly anti-British policies.

Critical Missing Evidence

In 1967, New Orleans DA Jim Garrison indicted Clay Shaw, the director of the New Orleans International Trade Mart, on charges that Shaw had conspired in the assassination of JFK. Shaw, a prominent New Orleans businessman and socialite, was linked by Garrison’s investigators to a local secret intelligence unit housed at 544 Camp Street, in the offices of former FBI official Guy Bannister. Throughout 1963, the office had been frequented by Shaw, David Ferrie, Lee Harvey Oswald, and other figures linked to the events in Dallas on Nov. 22.

During the trial two years later, Judge Garrity ruled inadmissible Shaw’s own statement to the police, in which he linked himself to Ferrie, the man who first recruited Lee Harvey Oswald to U.S. intelligence, a decade before the Kennedy assassination. The trial of Shaw came down to conflicting testimony over whether or not Shaw and Ferrie knew one another.

Shaw lied on the witness stand under oath that he had never met Ferrie, a notorious homosexual and mercenary who had worked under FBI Division Five official Bannister in the New Orleans- based training and weapons supply operation for Cuban exiles, that had also employed Oswald.

Like Presidents Lincoln, Garfield, and McKinley, John F. Kennedy was assassinated by the British, while advancing U.S. interests in conflict with British geopolitical aims. Kennedy is shown below, in the motorcade in Dallas, on Nov. 22, 1963, with his wife Jaqueline, moments before he was struck down. National Archives/Abbie Rowe

The jury, under instruction from

Judge Garrity, ruled that there was insufficient evidence to convict Shaw, solely on the basis that there was “reasonable doubt” about the Shaw-Ferrie association. Afterwards, Garrity and the majority of jurors said they believed there was a conspiracy to kill the President. On his deathbed, Garrity told a friend that he was convinced Shaw was guilty as charged, and that he was shocked when the jury ruled not guilty.

The Crown’s Permindex Front

Clay Shaw was a member of the board of Major Bloomfield’s Permindex (“Permanent Industrial Expositions”) front company. Already, by 1967, Bloomfield’s Permindex organization had been thrown out of Italy, France, and Switzerland, after French authorities found it had paid for assassination attempts against French President Charles de Gaulle. A New Orleans-based Permindex spin-off, the Caribbean Anti-Communist League, had funneled several hundred thousand dollars to members of the Secret Army Organization (OAS) in France to kill de Gaulle.

What’s more, since World War II, SOE officer Bloomfield had served as the liaison between British Crown Intelligence and the FBI. Under agreements struck be- tween Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt, Bloomfield had served as J. Edgar Hoover’s personnel advisor for the Bureau’s foreign counterintelligence section, known as Division Five.

Bloomfield’s early involvement in Prince Philip’s WWF and 1001 Club placed the Canadian spook-attorney even more in the center of the Crown apparatus. Membership in the 1001 Club was drawn from the inner circles of the Duke of Edinburgh and his Dutch counterpart, the former Nazi intelligence operator, Prince Bernhard. A second Permindex figure, Swiss-based Israeli banker Dr. Tibor Rosenbaum, the conduit for Permindex funds into the OAS, was also a charter member of 1001.

The WWF, widely misrepresented as a group concerned with the environment and endangered species, was launched by Prince Philip and Prince Bernhard in 1961 to draw together powerful European oligarchical networks into a covert recolonization and One World government scheme. At the center of the WWF effort was the revival of radical Malthusian population reduction programs. John F. Kennedy’s policies represented the antithesis of this Malthusian revival.

Oswald and Hoover

The 20-year intimate collaboration between Bloomfield and Hoover sheds further light on another of the anomalies of the JFK assassination and its cover-up. Why, if Lee Harvey Oswald was the actual assassin of John Kennedy, would he have sent a personal telegram to Hoover 48 hours before the killing in Dallas, warning of a plot against the President’s life? And why, if Oswald was anything other than a patsy, would Hoover have suppressed that telegram and ordered FBI offices all across the country to bury any documentation linking FBI informant Oswald to the Bureau?

Up until the moment that Oswald was gunned down by Jack Ruby inside the Dallas Police Department headquarters (Ruby had been a Bannister informant back in Chicago prior to the Division Five agent’s “retirement” from the Bureau), he was insisting that he had been a “patsy” and had not shot the President.

New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison (right) prosecuted the only trial ever held on the Kennedy assassination, that of Clay Shaw, a shady businessman, on the board of Major Louis Bloomfield’s Permindex assassination bureau. As Lee Harvey Oswald insisted, before he was gunned down in the Dallas police station, he was just a “patsy”—one of the many throwaway agents deployed by the highest levels of British intelligence. Louis Mortimer Bloomfield, Clay Shaw, Lee Harvey Oswald

A trial of Oswald would have been fatal to the Permindex assassins and their vast cover-up apparatus.

Garrison’s prosecution of Clay Shaw failed to produce a conviction. Shaw, Ferrie, Oswald, Bloomfield, and Garrison are all dead. Yet, the newly uncovered evidence—31 years after the fact—still provides a basis for getting at the truth, and making sure that no British Crown plot ever claims the life of an American President again.

The Enemy Explains His Crimes

Like Presidents Lincoln, Garfield, and McKinley, Kennedy was killed by the British oligarchy while advancing U.S. interests in conflict with British geopolitical aims. In his foreign and domestic policies, Kennedy had astonished the world by reverting to the idealistic nationalism seen in those earlier murdered American Presidents.

But let us allow the enemy to speak for himself on this.

The Encyclopaedia Britannica “published with the editorial advice and consultation of . . . a committee of members of the faculties of Oxford, Cambridge, and London Universities,” found the U.S. President’s murder a cause for celebration. The Introduction to the Britannica Book of the Year 1964 began:

“That 1963 would be remembered as a year of great beginnings—and of some tragic endings—could not be doubted. . . . The assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy . . . was surely the most stunning of the year’s events. Its suddenness and senselessness left virtually all of the civilized world in a state of shock. . . .

“And yet even this monstrous killing somehow pointed to a kind of beginning or at the least, a renewal, of sensibility among Kennedy’s countrymen and among the United States and other nations. The event certainly gave evidence that—like it or not—the world community was in fact a reality. The nations had become too tightly intermeshed and interdependent through both military and mercantile treaties; too many of the educated people of the world crossed international frontiers too often and accommodated themselves too easily in foreign lands to have any lingering intellectual response to 19th-century nationalism, though an emotional residue persisted and was still exploited in some areas of the world.”

Kennedy’s investment tax credit for industrial development; his face-down of J.P. Morgan’s steel price increase; his order for the Treasury to print non-Federal Reserve U.S. currency; his Apollo Moon landing program; his commitment to overwhelming U.S. technological and military superiority, combined with cooperation with the Soviets for Third World development, not “balance of power” wars; his decision to take retired Gen. Douglas MacArthur’s advice and get out of the Vietnam trap: All of these lit the British fuse for his murder.

The Owners of the Circus

District Attorney Garrison’s prosecution of the Kennedy case began with his discovery that the alleged assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, had been based in a New Orleans political operations office at 544 Camp Street. The manager of this office, Guy Bannister, was formerly chief of the FBI in Chicago.

Garrison described 544 Camp Street as a virtual “circus”: FBI agents; CIA agents; Oswald, himself a long-time FBI informant, passing out agent-provocateur

pro-Castro leaflets; flaming homosexual David Ferrie and his anti-Castro Cubans—all of these parading in and out of Bannister’s office. Oswald murderer Jack Ruby was also an informer and intimate of Bannister, from the Chicago FBI days.

Garrison was led to the actual proprietors of this New Orleans “circus” by being informed that the internationally powerful Clay Shaw had arranged for legal services for Lee Oswald; he had even personally taken Oswald to get registered to vote.

The exotic sadomasochist Clay Shaw made the International Trade Mart in New Orleans a subsidiary of Permindex, known to the world’s police as an assassination bureau.

Bloomfield, Shaw’s superior in the Permindex command structure, co-authored an assassination strategy manual, Crimes Against Protected Persons: Prevention and Punishment (New York: Praeger, 1975). Bloomfield’s law firm managed the Bronfman family liquor empire, utilizing global organized-crime capabilities.

Bloomfield’s Permindex directors included Clay Shaw, who had fallen in with the British as an Office of Strategic Services liaison man stationed with the office of Prime Minister Winston Churchill; various European aristocrats who had been associated with the Hitler and Mussolini governments; and Jean de Menil, owner of Schlumberger Co. of Houston, which had provided weapons for the hit attempts on de Gaulle and for the Carribbean adventures of the Shaw-Ferrie-Bannister group.

Perry R. Russo, a Baton Rouge insurance agent and longtime acquaintance of David Ferrie, testified that he had sat in on a Kennedy assassination planning discussion between Clay Shaw and David Ferrie, on the need for triangulation of crossfire, and their intended alibi locations while contracted hit men were to be killing the President.

It was to this corrupted and betrayed U.S. security apparatus, from Bloomfield and J. Edgar Hoover on down, that Oswald turned for help. As a Naval Intelligence agent assigned to the FBI, Oswald sent a tele- gram from Dallas, warning Director Hoover personally of a local FBI cover-up of a live assassination threat against the President in the Dallas-Fort Worth area.

Hoover’s trashing of the warning was misprision of a felony, or treason. And with the President’s murder, and the public’s acquiescence in what was widely believed to be a cover-up, the nation shamefully betrayed itself.

1. See Anton Chaitkin et al., “The ‘Land-Bridge’: Henry Carey’s Global Development Program,” EIR, May 2, 1997, with reports on the introduction of American System economics in Germany, Russia, and China. See also EIR’s full issue devoted to Alexander Hamilton and the American System, Jan. 3, 1992, which covers the above countries as well as Japan and Ibero-America. Online, see http://american_almanac. tripod.com/intro.htm. Library of Congress