-Caveat Lector- www.ctrl.org DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- Begin Message ---
-Caveat Lector-

The Grand Deception - Part One
A Second Look at the War on Terrorism
 
http://www.freedom-force.org/granddeception2.htm
 
" . . .
JOHN RUSKIN PROMOTES COLLECTIVISM AT OXFORD
 
We are finally ready to reactivate out time machine. From the minutes of the Carnegie 
Endowment for International Peace, we recall the curious words: "We must control 
education in America." Who is this "we? " Who are the people who are going to control 
education in America? To answer that question we must set the co-ordinates on our 
machine once again, and we are now moving further back in time to the year 1870. We 
find ourselves suddenly in England in an elegant classroom of Oxford University, and 
we are listing to a lecture by a brilliant intellectual, John Ruskin. 

Ruskin was a Professor of Fine Arts at Oxford. He was a genius. At first I was 
prepared not to like him, because he was a total collectivist. I didn??t think I would 
like anything about him. But, when I got his books and started to read the notes from 
his lectures, I had to acknowledge his great talent. First of all he was an 
accomplished artist. He was an architect. He was a philosopher. About his only flaw 
was that he believed in collectivism. He preached it eloquently, and his students, 
coming from the wealthy class - the elite and the privileged from the finest areas of 
London - were very receptive to his message. He taught that those who had inherited 
the rich culture and the traditions of the British Empire had an obligation to rule 
the world and make sure that all the less fortunate and stupid people had proper 
direction. That was basically his message, but it was delivered in a very convincing 
and appealing manner. 

Ruskin was not the originator of collectivism. He was merely riding the crest of an 
ideological tidal wave that was sweeping through the whole Western World at that time. 
It was appealing to the sons and daughters of the super wealthy who were growing up 
with guilt complexes because they had so much wealth and privilege in stark contrast 
to the world??s poor and starving masses. 

In this milieu there were two powerful ideological movements coming to birth. One of 
them was Marxism, which offered the promise of defending and elevating these 
downtrodden masses. Wealthy young people felt in their hearts that this promise was 
worthy and noble. They wanted to do something to help these people, but they didn??t 
want to give up their own privileges. I will say this about John Ruskin, he actually 
did give of his own wealth to help the poor, but he was one of the rare ones. Most 
collectivists are hesitant about giving their own money. They prefer to have 
government be the solver of problems and to use tax revenues - other people??s money - 
to fund their projects. 

Collectivists recognize that someone has to run this governmental machine, and it 
might as well be them, especially since they are so well educated and wise. In this 
way, they can retain both their privilege and their wealth. They can now be in control 
of society without guilt. They can talk about what they are doing to lift up the 
downtrodden masses using the collectivist model. It was for these reasons that many of 
the wealthy idealists became Marxists and sought positions of influence in government.

THE FABIAN SOCIETY
Some of the more erudite of those from the wealthy, intellectual classes of England 
came together and decided they would form an organization to perpetuate the concept of 
collectivism. It was called the Fabian Society. It is now 1884, and we find ourselves 
observing a group of these people, including Sydney and Beatrice Web (founders of the 
London School of Economics), George Bernard Shaw, Arnold Toynbee, H.G. Wells, and 
people of that high caliber. The Fabian Society exists today, and a lot of very 
prominent, influential, and powerful people are members. Tony Blair, for example, 
England??s Prime Minister, is a member. 

H.G. Wells wrote a book to serve as a guide for Fabians and their friends showing how 
collectivism can be embedded into society without arousing alarm or serious 
opposition. It was called The Open Conspiracy, and the entire plan is spelled out in 
detail. He even said that the old religions of the world should give way to the new 
religion of collectivism. The new religion should be the state, he said, and the state 
should take charge of all human activity with, of course, elitists such as himself in 
control.

As mentioned previously, there were two powerful ideological movements coming to birth 
in this same period of history, and they had much in common. One of them was Marxism, 
which eventually was physically planted onto Russian soil and manifested itself as 
Communism. The other was Fabianism. Please note that Communism and Fabianism are 
merely variants of collectivism. Their similarities are much greater than their 
differences. That is why their participants often move from one group to the other 
with ease - or may even be members of both groups at the same time. Communists and 
Fabians are usually friendly with each other. They may disagree intensely over 
procedural issues, but never over goals, because their mutual goal is collectivism.

Fabians say, "Let us come to power quietly so as not to alarm anyone. Let us penetrate 
and capture control of the organs of society: the educational institutions, the media, 
the labor unions, agencies of government. Let us penetrate into the power centers of 
society and quietly guide it in the direction of collectivism. No one will realize 
what is happening, and there will be very little opposition or bloodshed." Fabians 
consider themselves to be humane. To emphasize this strategy of patient gradualism, 
they adopted the tortoise as their symbol, and the emblem on their shield is a wolf in 
sheep??s clothing.
 
Communists, on the other hand, are less genteel. They are adept at using all the same 
tactics of deception and quiet penetration into power centers as used by the Fabians, 
but they are more inclined to rely on violence and terror to accelerate their 
progress. They raise the clenched fist and say, "Let us come to power through 
revolution. Let us put masses into the streets and overthrow the target government by 
force and violence. Let the land be drenched with the blood of our enemies." 
Communists are in a hurry. 

That is the debate. The only difference between Communists and Fabians is a question 
of tactics. They may compete over which of them will dominant the coming New World 
Order, over who will hold the highest positions in the pyramid of collectivist power; 
they may even send opposing armies into battle to establish territorial pre-eminence 
over portions of the globe, but they never quarrel over goals. Through it all, they 
are blood brothers under the skin, and they will always unite against their common 
enemy, which is any opposition to collectivism. 

The Fabian tortoise and the wolf in sheep??s clothing are emblazoned on a stained 
glass window that used to be in the Web house. The Webs donated their home to the 
Fabian Society, and it is now the headquarters of that organization in Surrey, 
England. The window was recently removed, but there are many photographs of it showing 
the symbols in great detail. Perhaps the most significant part is written across the 
top. It is that famous line from Omar Khayyam: "Dear love, couldst thou and I with 
fate conspire to grasp this sorry scheme of things entire, would we not shatter it to 
bits and then remould it nearer to the hearts desire?" Please allow me to repeat that 
line. This is the key to modern history, and it is the key to the war on terrorism: 
"Dear love, couldst thou and I with fate conspire to grasp this sorry scheme of things 
entire, would we not shatter it to bits and then remould it nearer to the hearts 
desire?" 

Elsewhere in the stained glass window there is a depiction of Sydney Webb and George 
Bernard Shaw striking the earth with hammers. The earth is on an anvil, and they are 
standing there striking the earth with hammers. "Shatter it to bits," That??s what 
they were saying at the Carnegie Endowment Fund. That??s what they were saying at the 
Ford Foundation. "War is the best way to remold society. War! Shatter society to bits. 
Break it apart. Then we can remold it nearer to the heart??s desire. And what is our 
heart??s desire? Collectivism."

THE SECRET SOCIETY CREATED BY CECIL RHODES
As we sit here in the classroom listening to the impassioned lecture by John Ruskin, 
we notice that one of the students is taking copious notes. His name is Cecil Rhodes. 
It will be revealed in later years that this young man was so impressed by Ruskin??s 
message that he often referred to those lecture notes over the next thirty years of 
his life. Rhodes became a dedicated collectivist and wanted to fulfill the dream and 
the promise of John Ruskin: to bring the British Empire into control over the entire 
world and to create world government based on the model of collectivism. Most people 
are aware that Rhodes made one of the world??s greatest fortunes in South African 
diamonds and gold. What is not widely known, however, is that he spent most of that 
fortune to promote the theories of John Ruskin. 

One of the best authorities on the Fabian Society is Carroll Quigley, who wrote the 
book, Tragedy and Hope. Quigley was a highly respected professor at Georgetown 
University. You may recall that, shortly after President Clinton was elected, during a 
press conference he gave honorable mention to Quigley, his former professor. What 
Quigley was teaching was probably similar to what John Ruskin was teaching, and 
Clinton, as a student, took his lectures very seriously, even to the point of 
mentioning to the world how much he owed to his professor. 

In his book Tragedy and Hope, Quigley says this: "The Rhodes scholarship established 
by the terms of Cecil Rhodes?? seventh will are known to everyone. What is not so 
widely known is that Rhodes, in five previous wills, left his fortune to form a secret 
society, which was to devote itself to the preservation and expansion of the British 
Empire. This secret society continues to exist to this day." 

The structure of the secret society was formed along classical, conspiratorial lines. 
If you study any of the better-known conspiracies of history, you find that they often 
are structured as rings within rings. Generally there??s a leader or a small group of 
two or three people at the center. They form a ring of supporters around them of 
perhaps eight or ten or twelve, and those people think they are the total 
organization. They are not aware that two or three of them are in control. And then 
the twelve are instructed to create a larger ring around them of perhaps one- or 
two-hundred people who all think they are the total organization, not realizing there 
are twelve who are really directing it. These rings extend outward until, finally, 
they reach into the mainstream community where they enlist the services of innocent 
people who perform various tasks of the secret society without realizing who is 
creating the agenda or why. 

The Rhodes organization was set up exactly along those lines. Quigley tells us this: 
"In the secret society, Rhodes was to be leader. Stead, Brett, and Milner were to form 
an executive committee. Arthur Balfour, Sir Harry Johnston, Lord Rothschild, Albert 
Grey, and others were listed as potential members of a Circle of Initiates, while 
there was to be an outer circle known as the Association of Helpers."
After the death of Cecil Rhodes, the organization fell under the control of Lord 
Alfred Milner, who was Governor General and High Commissioner of South Africa, also a 
very powerful person in British banking and politics. He recruited young men from the 
upper class of society to become part of the Association of Helpers. Unofficially, 
they were known as "Milner??s Kindergarten." They were chosen because of their class 
origin, their intelligence, and especially because of their dedication to 
collectivism. They were quickly placed into important positions in government and 
other power centers to promote the hidden agenda of the secret society. Eventually, 
this Association of Helpers became the inner rings of much larger groups, which 
expanded throughout the British Empire and into the United States. 

This is what Quigley says: "Through Lord Milner??s influence, these men were able to 
win influential posts in government, in international finance, and become the dominant 
influence in British imperial affairs and foreign affairs up to 1939. In 1909 through 
1913, they organized semi-secret groups known as known as Round Table Groups, in the 
chief British dependencies and the United States. Once again the task was given to 
Lionel Curtis who established, in England and each dominion, a front organization to 
the existing local Round Table Group. This front organization, called the Royal 
Institute of International Affairs, had as its nucleus in each area the existing, 
submerged Round Table Group. In New York it was known as the Council on Foreign 
Relations, and was a front for J.P. Morgan and Company."

Finally, we begin to understand the significance of an obscure organization that plays 
a decisive roll in contemporary American political life, The Council on Foreign 
Relations. Now we see where it came from, who controls it, and how its rings within 
rings fit into the global strategy for collectivism. 

THE COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS
 
Who are the members of the Council of Foreign Relations? I??m going to take more time 
than I really want to spare in order to read these names to you but, otherwise, you 
may think this organization and its members are not important.

Let??s start with the Presidents of the United States. Members of the Council on 
Foreign Relations (CFR) include: Herbert Hoover, Dwight Eisenhower, Richard Nixon, 
Gerald Ford. James Carter, George Bush Senior, and William Clinton. John F. Kennedy 
claimed he was a member, but his name does not appear on former membership lists. So 
there is confusion on that one, but he said he was a member. I might add that Kennedy 
was a graduate of the London School of Economics, which was founded by Sydney and 
Beatrice Webb to promote the ruling-class and collectivist concepts of the Fabians.

Secretaries of State who were CFR members include: Dean Rusk, Robert Lansing, Frank 
Kellogg, Henry Stimpson, Cordell Hull, E.R. Stittinius, George Marshall, Dean Acheson, 
John Foster Dulles, Christian Herter, Dean Rusk, William Rogers, Henry Kissinger, 
Cyrus Vance, Edmund Muskie, Alexander Haig, George Schultz, James Baker, Lawrence 
Eagelberger, Warren Christopher, William Richardson, Madeleine Albright, and Colin 
Powell. 

Secretaries of Defense who were members of the CFR include James Forrestal, George 
Marshall, Charles Wilson, Neil McElroy, Robert McNamara, Melvin Laird, Elliot 
Richardson, James Schlesinger, Harold Brown, Casper Weinberger, Frank Carlucci, 
Richard Cheney, Les Aspin, William Perry, William Cohen, and Donald Rumsfield. It is 
interesting that Rumsfield has asked that his name be removed from the current list of 
CFR members. However, you will find his name on previous lists.

CIA Directors who were members of the CFR include Walter Smith, William Colby, Richard 
Helms, Allen Dulles, John McCone, James Schlesinger, George Bush, Sr., Stansfield 
Turner, William Casey, William Webster, Robert Gates, James Woolsey, John Deutch, 
William Studeman, and George Tenet.

In the Media there are past or present members of the CFR holding key management or 
control positions - not just working down the line - but in top management and control 
positions of The Army Times, American Publishers, American Spectator, Atlanta 
Journal-Constitution, Associated Press, Association of Barron??s, Boston Globe, 
Business Week, Christian-Science Monitor, Dallas Forbes, Foreign Affairs, Foreign 
Policy, Morning News, Detroit Free Press, Detroit News, Dow Jones News Service, USA 
Today, Wall Street Journal, Los Angeles Times, New York Post, New York Times, San 
Diego Union-Tribune, Times Mirror, Random House, W.W. Norton & Co., Warner Books, 
American Spectator, Atlantic, Harper??s, Industry Week, Naval War College Review, Farm 
Journal, Financial World, Insight, Washington Times, Medical Tribune, National 
Geographic, National Review, New Republic, New Yorker, New York Review of Books, 
Newsday, News Max, Newsweek, Political Science Quarterly, The Progressive, Public 
Interest, Reader??s Digest, Rolling Stone, Scientific American, Time-Warner, Time, 
U.S. News & World Report, Washington Post, The Washingtonian, Weekly Standard, World 
Policy Journal, Worldwatch, ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC, PBS, RCA, and the Walt Disney Company. 
Are you beginning to understand why we have a problem with our news and our media? 

CFR media personalities include David Brinkley, Tom Brokaw, William Buckley, Peter 
Jennings, Bill Moyers, Dan Rather, Diane Sawyer, and Barbara Walters.
In the universities, the number of past or present CFR members who are professors, 
department chairman, presidents, or members of the board of directors is 563. 

In financial institutions, such as banks, the Federal Reserve System, the stock 
exchanges, and brokerage houses the total number of CFR members in controlling 
positions is 284. 

In tax exempt foundations and think tanks, the number of CFR members in controlling 
positions is 443. Some of the better known names are: The Sloan and Kettering 
Foundations, Aspen Institute, Atlantic Council, Bilderberg Group, Brookings Institute, 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Carnegie Foundation, Ford Foundation, 
Guggenheim Foundation, Hudson Institute, John & Catherine MacArther Foundation, Mellon 
Foundation, RAND Corp., Rhodes Scholarship Selection Commission, Rockefeller 
Foundation and Rockefeller Brothers Fund, Trilateral Commission, and the UN 
Association.

Some of the better known corporations controlled by past or present members of the CFR 
include The Atlantic Richfield Oil Co., AT&T, Avon Products, Bechtel (construction) 
Group, Boeing Company, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Chevron., Coca Cola and Pepsi Cola, 
Consolidated Edison of New York, EXXON, Dow Chemical, du Pont Chemical, Eastman Kodak, 
Enron, Estee Lauder, Ford Motor, General Electric, General Foods, Hewlett-Packard, 
Hughes Aircraft, IBM, International Paper, Johnson & Johnson, Levi Strauss & Co., 
Lockheed Aerospace, Lucent Technologies, Mobil Oil, Monsanto, Northrop, Pacific Gas & 
Electric, Phillips Petroleum, Procter & Gamble, Quaker Oats, SBC Yahoo, Shell Oil, 
Smith Kline Beecham (pharmaceuticals), Sprint Corp., Texaco, Santa Fe Southern-Pacific 
Railroad, Teledyne, TRW, Southern California Edison, Unocal, United Technologies, 
Verizon Communications, Warner-Lambert, Weyerhauser, and Xerox.

And finally, the labor unions that are dominated by past or present members of the CFR 
include the AFL-CIO, United Steel Workers of America, United Auto Workers, American 
Federation of Teachers, Bricklayers and Allied Craft, Communications Workers of 
America, Union of Needletrades, and Amalgamated Clothing and Textile Workers. 
Please understand that this is just a sampling of the list. The total membership is 
about four thousand people. There are many churches in your community that have that 
many members or more. What would you think if it were discovered that members of just 
one church in your community held controlling positions in 80% of the power centers of 
America? Wouldn??t you be curious?
First of all you would have to find out about it, which would not be easy if those 
same people controlled the avenues of information you rely on to learn of such things. 
I should emphasize that most of these people are not part of a secret society. The CFR 
calls itself a semi -secret organization, which, indeed, it is. It is not the secret 
society. It is at least two rings out from that. Most members are not aware that they 
are controlled by an inner Round Table Group. For the most part, they are merely 
opportunists who view this organization as a high level employment agency. They know 
that, if they are invited to join, their names will appear on a prestigious list, and 
collectivists seeking to consolidate global control will draw upon that list for 
important jobs. However, even though they may not be conscious agents of the secret 
society, they have all been carefully screened for suitability. Only collectivists are 
invited, and so they have the necessary mindset to be functionaries within the New 
World Order.
REVIEW
Let's review. The power centers of the United States are controlled by the Council on 
Foreign Relations. This, in turn, is controlled by a submerged Round Table Group, 
which is associated with other Round Tables in other countries. These are extensions 
of a secret society founded by Cecil Rhodes and still in operation today. I call it 
the Fabian Network, not because these people are members of the Fabian Society, for 
most of them are not. It is the Fabian Network, because they share the Fabian ideology 
of collectivism and the Fabian strategy of patient gradualism. 
Is this for real? If I were in your position, hearing this for the first time, I 
probably would think, "Oh come on! This can??t be for real!" Well, before you dismiss 
it as theater of the absurd, I??d like to refer you one more time to Professor 
Quigley. He said this: "I know of the operation of this network because I have studied 
it for twenty years and was permitted for two years during the 1960??s to examine its 
papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have 
for much of my life been close to it and to many of its instruments. In general my 
chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown." ..."


www.ctrl.org
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please!   These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:

http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

--- End Message ---

Reply via email to