Copyright © 1971 by Gary Allen with Larry Abraham  ISBN: 0899666612

Having been a college instructor, a State Senator and now a Congressman I have had experience with real professionals at putting up smokescreens to cover up their own actions by trying to destroy the accuser. I hope that you will read the book carefully, draw your own conclusions and not accept the opinions of those who of necessity must attempt to discredit the book. Your future may depend upon it.

October 25, 1971 JOHN G. SCHMITZ UNITED STATES CONGRESSMAN

One current Opus Dei member worth noting is Joseph E Schmitz. A former Pentagon inspector general, he became chief of operations for Blackwater Worldwide, the private security firm, back in 2005. While at the Pentagon, he’d been tasked with the job of overseeing all war contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan. His connection to war profiteers became well known. At least $2 trillion went “missing” from the Pentagon during his watch. Shortly after Schmitz exonerated his friends in the war industry, he announced that he was going to work for Blackwater, where he is today.

In a 2004 speech Schmitz said, “No American today should ever doubt that we hold ourselves accountable to the rule of law under God. Here lies the fundamental difference between us and the terrorists.” Aside from his membership in Opus Dei, Schmitz is also a member of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, a Christian militia formed in the 11th century, before the first Crusades, with the mission of defending territories that the Crusaders had conquered from the Muslims. The Blackwater leadership apparently think they are following in that tradition.

(Interesting book — see “The Goddess, the Grail and the Lodge,”  Alan Butler)  (not that all reviews were good — I did read the book — but, for example,
“He uses very solid archelogical and other evidence from the megalithic period in Britain and Ireland and into Egypt, Crete, Malta, et al to prove there is a thread in the fabric of history regarding goddess worship and its ultimate connections thereof to modern religious practice. But, this is NO novel. It is REALITY that spans across thousands of years with a clear thread running through the fabric of history which Mr. Butler refers to as “The Golden Thread”. The reader will learn of a select group of indivduals who have perpetuated this practice throughout the ages.”   AND . . . .

“Alan Butler demonstrates, in the most fascinating manner possible, how an original veneration for a Great Goddess, perhaps as much as 5,000 years ago, never stopped in Western Europe and beyond and he explains how the rise of Christianity tried hard to destroy the Goddess worshipers. But what is most convincing about Alan Butler’s investigation is that it shows, clearly and in an entertaining style, just how important Goddess worship has been and remains to the progress of the world in which we live.”)

Relevance?  Current religion’s (Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, etc.) utter hatred of women, and why is this religion so “masculine,” really, and why has it degenerated into essentially dominating the feminine — and particularly, the weak — in society?)  (Just a side-note, there…)

**from the “outside and above” link — so you know how relevant this is, from a 2007 Los Angeles Times . . . .

The Blackwater ‘hole‘

Neither Iraqi nor U.S. laws apply to its contractors, so a controversial shooting may go unpunished.

November 09, 2007

‘They can get away with murder” has been the cry of critics of hiring private companies such as Blackwater to provide security for the U.S. military and diplomats in Iraq and other war zones. Now it looks as though the critics may be right — and in the worst way.

Legal experts say the Blackwater contractors accused of killing 17 Iraqi civilians and wounding 24 others while guarding a State Department convoy in Baghdad in September cannot be prosecuted under either Iraqi or U.S. law — even if an FBI investigation validates the Iraqi view that the contractors opened fire unprovoked. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, quizzed by a congressional committee last month, agreed that “there is a lacuna in our law about this. And even though this particular case . . . has been referred to the Department of Justice for further action, we believe that there is a hole.” What Rice didn’t say was that the State Department has been aware of that “hole” for at least two years and has rejected Pentagon suggestions to plug it by making security contractors subject to military law

fast forwarding some more (from “redice creations”) to remind us about the creation of the Federal Reserve — due to an engineered crisis, which precedes most centralization:

Just a passing mention to Benjamin Franklin’s OPPOSITION to centralized banking, which he’d apparently witnessed in London:

After the Bolshevik Revolution and the wholesale murder of the entire Russian royal family, Standard Oil of New Jersey brought 50% of the huge Caucasus oil field even though the property had theoretically been nationalized. In 1927, Standard Oil of New York built a refinery in Russia. Then Standard Oil concluded a deal to market Soviet Oil in Europe and floated a loan of $75 million to the Bolsheviks. Jacob Schiff and Paul Warburg at the Kuhn Loeb Bank started a campaign for a central bank in the United States. They then helped the Rothschild’s to manipulate the financial Panic of 1907.

Then, the panic of 1907 was used as an argument for having a central bank to prevent such occurrences. Paul Warburg told the Banking and Currency Committee: ‘Let us have a national clearing house’.”

The Federal Reserve Act was the brainchild of Baron Alfred Rothschild of London. The final version of the Act was decided on at a secret meeting at Jekyll Island Georgia, owned by J.P. Morgan. Present at the meeting were; A. Piatt Andrew, Assistant secretary of the Treasury, Senator Nelson Aldrich, Frank Vanderlip, President of Kuhn Loeb and Co., Henry Davidson, Senior Partner of J.P. Morgan Bank, Charles Norton, President of Morgan’s First National of New York, Paul Warburg, Partner in Khun Loeb and Co. and Benjamin Strong, President of Morgan’s Bankers Trust Co.

Jekyll Island, Georgia, USA
A Talk by G. Edward Griffin Author of The Creature from Jekyll Island
The Federal Reserve Act of 1913, brought about the decimation of the U.S. Constitution and was the determining act of the international financiers in consolidating financial power in the United States. Pierre Jay, Initiated into the “Order of Skull and Bones” in 1892, became the first Chairman of the New York Federal Reserve Bank. A dozen members of the Federal Reserve can be linked to the same “Order

To be a little more balanced (?), here’s a site (found by searching Weishaupt) explaining things a little differently — but note, it talks about Gnosticism and calls Judaism, Christianity and Islam ‘Satanic’ religions:

http://armageddonconspiracy.co.uk/Adam-Weishaupt(1171348).htm

How did it come about that a revolutionary movement committed to the overthrow of corrupt European monarchies and privileged elites became, via the propaganda of its enemies, the very embodiment of everything it opposed? The Illuminati, through several historical epochs, have striven to overthrow the super rich and super powerful, and they have suffered savage persecution as a consequence. So how can they be confused with the puppetmasters who stand behind these tyrants of privilege and power? It’s absurd. Any person who knows anything of the history of the Illuminati should be able to see that their aims are incompatible with the aims commonly attributed to them by many anti-NWO conspiracy theorists.

Below we provide a Q&A list to address many of the myths surrounding the Illuminati’s most notorious Grand Master – Adam Weishaupt, and the Illuminati in general.

Quoting a long section here:  (“AW” stands for Adam Weishaupt)

Q. Did AW reject Catholicism and the Jesuits?
A. Yes. He became a Gnostic and therefore an enemy of the Satanic religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. He was content to be described as a deist rather than a theist. Anyone who understands Gnosticism will see why this should be so.

Q. Was AW influenced by the European Enlightenment?
A. Yes. He was a radical freethinker, but he did not go down the atheist/agnostic path as so many other leading thinkers did. He wanted to bring the light of knowledge/gnosis to those in the dark thrall of Satan.

Q. Was the Illuminati part of Freemasonry?
A. No. Freemasonry was a creation of the Illuminati, though it then evolved undesirably (paradoxically due to its success in America where all the main figures involved in the American Revolution were Masons) and eventually became everything the Illuminati opposed i.e. Freemasonry was corrupted and transformed itself into the very oppressive establishment it once resisted. (The vast majority of members of the Old World Order today are senior Freemasons.) The Illuminati did not travel the same path as the Masons. They remained true, steadfast and untarnished, although they have never subsequently been able to shake off their connection to Freemasonry in the eyes of the unenlightened and ill-informed. The Freemasons, as a creation of the Illuminati, are not party to any secrets unknown to the Illuminati, and were duped by the Illuminati to protect the Illuminati’s core secrets – as will be discussed in another section.

Q. Did AW and the Illuminati believe in perfecting human nature?
A. Yes. (As far as possible within the framework provided by Gnosticism.)

Q. Was the Illuminati linked to the Alchemists, the Cathars, and the Knights Templar?
A. Yes. They were all Gnostic, and the Illuminati stood behind all of them.

Q. Did the Illuminati believe in the abolition of religion?
A. No. Only in the abolition of Satanic religions that enslaved and damned people (such as Judaism, Christianity and Islam.) It is true that many members of the Illuminati went under the guise of orthodox Christians to avoid the penalties associated with heresy.

Q. Did the Illuminati believe in the abolition of government?
A. No. Only in the abolition of oppressive governments such as those of monarchs, aristocrats, and privileged elites. They opposed Communism for the same reason.

Q. Did the Illuminati believe that they should rule the world?
A. No. They wished to create a New World Order in which everyone would have the chance to go as far in life as their talents warranted. At that stage, there would be no further need of the Illuminati. The purpose of the Illuminati was to free and educate people as far as possible. A society composed entirely of free, well-educated and talented individuals would result in an emergent society from which a new, higher type of humanity would emerge. Throughout history, most people have been neither free nor educated, and the human race has remained enslaved.

Q. Are the Illuminati linked to a Masonic elite in the present day?
A. No. The Illuminati have repudiated Freemasonry and now rank it alongside the Satanic religions. Most Freemasons are Protestant Christians: anathema to the Illuminati. (The Illuminati are enemies of all forms of Satanic Christianity. Catholicism was their great enemy historically, but Protestantism now spawns the greatest opposition to the Illuminati.)

Q. Do the Illuminati believe in a free, just, noble and unified world?
A. Yes, that is their ultimate vision, though they believe it would take many steps to get there. They believe that nationalism, patriotism, separation, isolationism, different languages, different cultures, different religions, all inevitably lead to division, suspicion, fear and, finally, conflict. Humanity should emphasise what unites it rather than what divides it. A New World Order with a single world language and a single economy where there are no boundaries and no barriers best symbolizes this new state of being

Note:  Bible talks about the Tower of Babel and is opposed to this, i.e., the metaphor of confounding languages so that men wouldn’t again try to build a tower to heaven, etc ….

What comes next is telling:

Q. Do the Illuminati believe in the abolition of private property?
A. No. But they are opposed to excessive ownership of private property. They believe in a fair share for everyone. When one person gains more than his fair share, he is depriving another of his. You end up with a few families owning much of the land and wealth of a nation, thus placing massive power in their hands and outside the hands of the people. This cannot be tolerated. It is the basis of unfairness, inequality and injustice in society.

Q. Do the Illuminati believe in the abolition of the family?
A. No. But they do advocate much higher government involvement in the lives of failing families in order to save those families from themselves and stop them becoming a burden to other members of the community. All families are ultimately interdependent: a failing family affects all the families around it. Therefore government must intervene decisively to stop one bad apple spoiling the barrel, which is what happens too often in contemporary society. A huge underclass of failed families exists which sucks up taxpayers’ money and requires an extremely costly police force to keep it in order, an extremely costly criminal justice system, an extremely costly prison system, and an extremely costly welfare and social care system. These are huge costs that are never recovered. Failed families are a constant drain on the rest of society. Therefore, government must act before the failure of a family becomes cast in stone and irretrievable. No family has the right, in the name of personal freedom, to become a burden to other families.

OK, RIGHT THERE is where I make note of the (current and recent US Administration’s) ongoing assumption that we actually have a “meritocracy” right now — and that government is wise or capable enough to direct the lives of families.  We can see (taggs.hhs.gov and incorporation records) that the Federal Designer Family is a medicine worse than the disease, and is being used to further impoverish families, blaming them for being impoverished.  It is one of the most evil creations, a “conduit” theory, a “training theory” and so forth, I can think of.  

Then again, this is the female perspective after having had identity dismantled within a family, for having had a personal intellectual life before and during it — and then again afterwards, for failling to have blended well enough into a family, and continuing to have and act on a personal, moral, intellectual and professional life based on choice, and assessment of the situations.    Based on my existence as a free-will individual, within societal restraints against criminal behavior.

This also assumes that the familial failure has nothing to do with prior or current government policies!  In short, it indicates, “NOT” equal under the law.

The paragraph shows the “us/them” mentality in operation, and as such, I am opposed.   Families consist of people.  People do not ONLY exist in (functional, economic unit, etc.) families — nor should they be forced to.  It’s a force for good or evil, and seems to me, about 50% which way any particular family (rich or poor) might go.

Q. Did AW believe that the world would be improved if “every man were placed in the office for which he was fitted by nature and a proper education.”
A. Yes. This is a good definition of meritocracy.

Q. Do the Illuminati believe in democracy?
A. No. They believe in meritocracy where the vote is granted to those who have demonstrated that they can think meaningfully and productively about the issues of the day. No one should get an automatic right to a vote simply by living long enough to reach their 16th, 18th or 21st birthday.

(I note the plural “their” avoids using the pronoun “her” — No one should get an automatic right to vote simply by living long enough to reach his or her 16th, . . . . etc.)

Logical hole there — it’s presumed the someone exists intelligent and neutral (ethical) enough to determine what is or isn’t “meaningful and productive thinking” on the issues of the day.  Nontraditional, or visionary thinking, under this system, could easily be shut down.

Q. Is the Illuminati fascist?
A. No. Meritocracy is opposed to fascism. Fascism is obsessed with racial purity, nationalism, patriotism and xenophobia. Meritocracy is opposed to all of these. Ironically, many of the people who denounce the Illuminati as fascists could themselves be accurately described as fascists. The nationalist American “patriots” who despise their government, who rail against the Illuminati, who hate foreigners, who have never ventured out of their country, would all be classified by the Illuminati as dangerous fascists.

FINALLY — with apologies for quoting so much of this — The writer talks about “Master and Slave” mentality.  Essentially he is talking about Job versus  Business owner situation — and I find it hard to read, because unlike the (just go fulfil your joy-less work), I actually love the work I was doing, or put my heart into work outside that field; I loved the process of solving problems, engagement with others in the community, making  difference, and so forth.  This is going to sound like straight communism (and maybe is) — but think about it, OK?  How true is it?  How much has been bread and circuses, and have you actually struggled with and answered, to satisfaction, the principal questions of life — or have you swallowed others answers whole, or partially digested?  Do you adjust your world-view when confronted with evidence, it’s time to — and does that in any way change your actions?  I sure hope so.

Most of us are slaves. No matter how much we loathe that conclusion and reject it, it is true nevertheless.
If you want to know if you are a slave, consider these criteria.

Every day you go and do a job you don’t like. {{assumption — may be true or false…}}  It gives you no creative thrill, and you derive no feeling of self-worth from it. You are under someone else’s control. Your employer decides how you spend your time, not you. Your employer demands obedience, application and proper conduct from you. If you don’t comply, you will be fired. You must behave in the way that the employer sees fit, not in the way that you deem fit.

In other words, you have handed over your definition of “proper conduct” to another. You have sold your time and effort to your employer. Sure, you get a salary in return. {That is the DEFINITION of “JOB” (just over broke)}}

You can pay the bills, buy nice things, support your nearest and dearest, go on holidays, go out for fine meals at the weekend. {{Consume Bread and Circuses, if there’s leftover from food and housing, from basics}}   In short, you can live comfortably. It is on that basis – that your petty needs are satisfied – that you can justify the fact that you have given away your control over the most precious thing you have: your own life.

Your employer, on the other hand, is wealthy, loves what he {{note gender}} does, gets immense status and prestige from it, is admired and envied. His lifestyle is breathtaking. He has three magnificent homes, a 300-ft yacht, a stable of Ferrari supercars. He stays in the best hotels, and everyone is eager to do his bidding and fulfil his every wish. They are permanently at his beck and call, falling over themselves to please him. He can come and go as he pleases. He will never be sitting in front of another person waiting to hear if he is about to lose his job. He is the one who decides who gets hired and who gets fired. He controls his life. He allocates his time as he sees fit. He behaves as he wishes to. He imposes his views on others. Others depend on him, but he does not depend on them.

So, then, which are you…master or slave?

Who are the masters? The Old World Order. Who are the slaves? The rest of us.

Who is guilty? We are. Why? Because we allow the masters to rule us. In exchange for a “comfortable” living, we sign away our own lives. All over the globe, for billions of us, the headstones of our graves will bear exactly the same inscription: “Here lies the body of a person who was an adequate employee. He did what he was told and paid his taxes. He made no impact on the world. Nothing more need be said.” Are you happy for that to be your epitaph?

But on the marble headstones of the members of the Old World Order, overlooking vast, spectacular mausoleums, will be magnificent eulogies, great lists of achievements, the tales of the lives of people to whose tune so many danced.

SO — is there a resurrection and different, eternal life or not?  The question counts!  (cf.  “you can’t take it with you.”)

Overwhelmingly, the masters are those born into privilege, those handed huge advantages from the outset. Their parents are wealthy. They live in the finest neighbourhoods. They go to the finest schools. They join Masonic societies with the other sons and daughters of privilege. They agree to carve up all of the best jobs amongst each other. They marry each other and breed new generations of masters. They don’t care about anyone else. Why should they? They have everything they want. On their side of the equation, there is no question to be answered.

{{You KNOW there is some truth to this!}}

The people who must answer the question are the slaves. The question could not be simpler. It is: Why do we let the masters get away with it? And the answer is a painful one. It’s because we are lazy, apathetic, cowardly, satisfied with our trivial comforts. We’d rather accept the status quo than make any attempt to change things because then we’d need to leave our comfort zone, put in time and effort, and above all be brave and take bold risks. If we weren’t content with our enslavement, we’d be doing something about it. We’d be fighting back. But how many of us are doing anything at all? Don’t ask others what you need to do. Use your initiative.

(THEN, he brings up Hegel…)

You want to listen to masters talking about what to do with slaves?  They will generally bring up religion and family.  Anyhow, here’s a sample:

• Upper class — has assets and an income stream, minimizes taxes, the real job of life is to fill all the free time with something meaningful, like changing the world according to one’s particular desires.
• Middle class — works decent enough jobs to own homes, or at least consistently pay rent, raise children, even get them to college.  Works at businesses owned, or invested in, by upper class, and is a good employee so as to make it to retirement, and keep cash flow going.   Too busy to really learn investing, so if there’s something to invest, hires professionals to do this.
• “The Poor” — live paycheck to paycheck and are stuck in public institutions everytime the roll out of bed in the morning.  Or, have no jobs.   Have more of their stuff tracked — if they are on food stamps or cash aid, some bureaucrat literally knows what they eat, wear, and where they shop!  (you get the picture).  They bury their dead more often and have more relatives in prison.  This doesn’t mean they have more relatives engaged in criminal activity.

The Abrahamic religions — all of them — tell a different story.  The one thing I have to say though — and face — is that they’re good at hating (and, more rarely, some — loving).   Christianity talks about spirit, as in a spiritual awakening through baptism in the name of Jesus.  Are these just different languages for the same things?  Is it possible to love without hating, and why all the murder?  what’s all this about DEFINING “God” and Monotheism?

(etc. . . . . . ).  Those who do, and those who do not, believe in “God” are so often considering themselves superior — and the other inferior — on that basis alone, it gets ridiculous.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

 Back to title Topic: (though it overlaps, ALL this above was a distraction, or exploration, of the person who wrote the introduction to the book “None Dare Call it Conspiracy.”  It ain’t my fault he happened to be conservative Republican, possibly a very poor husband & father, and have a son involved in The Knights of Malta, or at least Blackwater!    The point is to keep understanding how did we get to this (insane) point in US history.   AND NDCC provides insight.

From Chapter One:  “Don’t Confuse Me With Facts” (remembering, this is 1971!!!):

Millions of Americans are concerned and frustrated over mishappenings in our nation. They feel that something is wrong, drastically wrong, but because of the picture painters they can’t quite put their fingers on it.

Millions of Americans are concerned and frustrated over mishappenings in our nation. They feel that something is wrong, drastically wrong, but because of the picture painters they can’t quite put their fingers on it.

. . .We keep electing new Presidents who seemingly promise faithfully to halt the world-wide Communist advance {{See date…}}, put the blocks to extravagant government spending, douse the tea of inflation, put the economy on an even keel, reverse the trend which is turning the country into a moral sewer, and toss the criminals into the hoosegow where they belong. Yet despite high hopes and glittering campaign promise these problems continue to worsen no matter who is in office. Each new administration, whether it be Republican or Democrat continues the same basic policies of the previous administration which it had so thoroughly denounced during the election campaign. It is considered poor form to mention this, but it is true nonetheless. Is there a plausible reason to explain why this happens? We are not supposed to think so. We are supposed to think it is all accidental and coincidental and that therefore there is nothing we can do about it.

FDR once said “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.” He was in a good position to know

Or, because of racial or religious bigotry, they will take small fragments of legitimate evidence and expand them into a conclusion that will support their particular prejudice, i.e., the conspiracy is totally “Jewish,” “Catholic,” or “Masonic”. These people do not help to expose the conspiracy, but, sadly play into the hands of those who want the public to believe that all conspiratorialists are screwballs.

Is it not theoretically possible that a billionaire could be sitting, not in a garret, but in a penthouse, in Manhattan, London or Paris and dream the same dream as Lenin and Hitler? You will have to admit it is theoretically possible. Julius Caesar, a wealthy aristocrat, did. And such a man might form an alliance or association with other like-minded men, might he not? Caesar did. These men would be superbly educated, command immense social prestige and be able to pool astonishing amounts of money to carry out their purposes. These are advantages that Hitler and Lenin did not have.

It is difficult for the average individual to fathom such perverted lust for power. The typical person, of whatever nationality, wants only to enjoy success in his job, to be able to afford a reasonably high standard of living complete with leisure and travel. He wants to provide for his family in sickness and in health and to give his children a sound education. His ambition stops there. He has no desire to exercise power over others, to conquer other lands or peoples, to be a king. He wants to mind his own business and enjoy life. Since he has no lust for power, it is difficult for him to imagine that there are others who have … others who march to a far different drum. But we must realize that there have been Hitlers and Lenins and Stalins and Caesars and Alexander the Greats throughout history. Why should we assume there are no such men today with perverted lusts for power? And if these men happen to be billionaires is it not possible that they would use men like Hitler and Lenin as pawns to seize power for themselves?

In keeping with the fact that almost everybody seems to have his own definition of Communism, we are going to give you ours, and then we will attempt to prove to you that it is the only valid one. Communism: AN INTERNATIONAL, CONSPIRATORIAL DRIVE FOR POWER ON THE PART OF MEN IN HIGH PLACES WILLING TO USE ANY MEANS TO BRING ABOUT THEIR DESIRED AIM-GLOBAL CONQUEST.

It’s claimed that The Woodlawn Foundation (assets, see tax returns) which funds Opus Dei-served nonprofits (i.e., some of the men’s & women’s homes and retreats, I gather — and there are 40 to 50 of them around the US) holds stock in AES (Advanced Energy Systems) — lots of it.  For a sample of what AES does (just a random find here) and how technical, first understand, it used to be part of Northrup Grunman:

Our Mission:

To be the supplier of choice for advanced radiation sources, high brightness commercial accelerator applications, government accelerator projects, and integrated engineering services.

Our History

On September 28, 1998, the former employees of NorthropGrumman’ sAdvancedEnergySystems Group completed the formation of a new small business, Advanced Energy Systems, Inc. (AES). Incorporated in New York and purchased from Northrop Grumman as a legacy organization, AES retains all former assets including the skilled personnel,intellectualproperty,accelerator development laboratories, prototype machine shops, computational analysis systems and contracts. The new company can draw upon a 22-year experience base in accelerator and fusion technology to supply full service engineering and physics analysis & design, in addition to component fabrication. Our active customers include many US national laboratories, international laboratories, and commercial corporations. AES technical operations are conducted within a 7,800 ft2 facility in Medford, NY, that includes a machine shop and a 650 ft2 facility in Princeton, NJ. Specific areas of AES expertise include: electron accelerators and free electron lasers, advanced radiation sources, low energy ion accelerator systems for commercial applications, high power ion accelerator systems for government applications, and fusion systems.

They are into, “Scientific Research, Homeland Security, Medical Imaging, Drug Discovery, Defense”  -“Putting Accelerator Technology To Work”  get the picture?  Prior to spinoff from Northrup Grunman (it says), it delivered more than $400M in sales to NG.     Highly technical.

Now– assuming The Woodlawn Foundation indeed has a good amount of shares in this group, how much wealth do we think is going through the foundation?  And that’s just one example (Note:  author cited “hoover on-line” a database I don’t know to use yet).

Back to the Congressional investigations of the role of these tax-exempt foundations:

Education Group Tries to Rebound After Diatribe By KRISTEN McQUEARY Published: December 2, 2011

“Stand for Children Leadership Center” 2002 return.  Scroll through, esp. board of directors at the end (includes Geoffrey Canada (Harlem Children’s Zone), someone from the National Council of Churches, Jonah’s mother, Marian Wright, and others. . . . Mostly, notice their planning — 33 centers nationwide, shared offices with the 501(c)4 “Stand for Children, Inc.”   They simply tell you what they are doing, and are not ashamed of “deep pockets” to influence school boards or politics.

Contrast SCLC 2002 with 2010 – it has close to $11 million revenues, 135 employees, nearly 6,000 volunteers; several directors now being paid $100K or well over (Jonah, $190K), and I saw approximately $1 million on contractors, including consultants, strategy group, etc.  Whether their idea is basically good, or not so good (breaking the back of teachers’ unions appears to have been involved, in part), the fact is, they are getting that strategy pushed through; the family has a history of organizing for change, obviously, and is going about it state by state, now.

Concentrations of power.

(more from “the hidden evil: tax-exempt foundations” link):

The first glimpse into foundation influence came under the Congressional Act of August 23, 1912, when the Commission on Industrial Relations studied labor conditions and the treatment of workers by the major U.S. industrial firms. They eventually examined the foundations, which were interlocked with them. “Starting with a study of labor exploitation, it [the Commission on Industrial Relations] went on to investigate concentrations of economic power, interlocking directorates, and the role of the then relatively new large charitable foundations (especially of Carnegie and Rockefeller) as instruments of power concentration,” wrote Wormser.

During the commission hearings, future Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis testified on January 23, 1915, that he was seriously concerned about the emerging danger of such a concentration of power. He said, “When a great financial power has developed … which can successfully summon forces from all parts of the country … to carry out what they deem to be their business principle … [there] develops within the State a state so powerful that the ordinary social and industrial forces existing are insufficient to cope with it.”

“Control is being extended largely through the creation of enormous privately managed funds for indefinite purposes, hereinafter designated ‘foundations'” declared Mr. Basil M. Manly, director of research for the commission. The commission’s report concluded that, “As regards the ‘foundations’ created for unlimited general purposes and endowed with enormous resources, their ultimate possibilities are so grave a menace … [that] it would be desirable to recommend their abolition.”

On August 1, 1951, a motivated Congressman E. E. Cox (Democrat) of Georgia introduced a resolution in the House of Representatives to conduct a thorough investigation into the foundations. He asserted, “There are disquieting evidences that at least a few of the foundations have permitted themselves to be infiltrated by men and women who are disloyal to our American way of life. They should be investigated and exposed to the pitiless light of publicity…”

The Cox resolution to investigate the foundations was passed in 1952. Unfortunately, Congressman Cox died during the investigation. The commission met the same fate as the one before it. No actions were taken to prevent the expansion of these foundations, or provide means for future accountability to the public. And as Smoot described it, “the final report of his [Cox] committee (filed January 1, 1953) was a pathetic whitewash of the whole subject.”

However, it did still yield some important facts. Part of the final report on January 1, 1953 said some foundations “supported persons, organizations, and projects which, if not subversive in the extreme sense of the word, tend to weaken or discredit [our] system as it exists in the United States and to favor Marxist socialism.” Or in other words, they were found to promote Communism.

The third attempt to investigate the foundations lasted from 1953 to 1955, during the Reece Committee hearings. Smoot wrote, “On April 23, 1953, the late Congressman Carroll Reece, (Republican, Tennessee) introduced a resolution proposing a committee to carry on the ‘unfinished business’ of the defunct Cox Committee. The new committee to investigate tax-exempt foundations … was approved by Congress on July 27, 1953.” Author Perloff added, “For what was probably the … last time, the CFR came under official scrutiny.

CAN YOU AGREE WITH ME ON THE NEXT PART — THAT THE MILLIONS BEING DUMPED INTO SOCIAL SCIENCES (including literally starting institutes and centers at various universities around the US) PLUS PSYCHOLOGY IS INAPPROPRIATE, IF NOT SUSPICIOUS — BUT DEFINITELY EXISTS?   (see welfare reform, diversionary funds).   

Iserbyt essentially states that public schools are factories, & compares the educational process to an assembly line, whereas, at the end of this line (graduation), you’ll find a predictable product–an indoctrinated person. This appears to be a process of mental castration where students are conditioned to be small-minded, which makes them easier to control. This new system has an emphasis on “global interdependence,” with little tolerance for independent freethinkers. This means the financial interests that funded this revolution want everyone completely dependent on the global state in their New World Order. This is obviously for control purposes.

Iserbyt wrote, “I had experienced traveling in and living in socialist countries. When I returned to the United States I realized that America’s transition from a sovereign constitutional republic to a socialist democracy would not come about through warfare (bullets and tanks) but through the implementation and installation of the “system” in all areas of government… The brainwashing for acceptance of the “system’s” control would take place in the school–through indoctrination and the use of behavior modification, which comes under so many labels…” She warned that this, “war has, in fact, become the war to end all wars … [if] citizens on this planet can be brainwashed … using dumbed-down Pavlovian/Skinnerian education, to accept what those in control want.”

This revolution apparently took place as part of the installation of a world government & according to Iserbyt, the “brainwashing” is part of a plan to achieve a type of “global feudalism,” which will be managed by behavioral scientists. “[T]he carefully laid plans to change America from a sovereign, constitutional republic … to just one of many nations in an international socialist (collectivist) system (New World Order) are apparent,” proclaims Iserbyt. “Only a dumbed down population … could be expected to willingly succumb to the global workforce training planned by the Carnegie Corporation and the … Rockefellers …which is being implemented by the United States Congress.” This global school system is managed by UNESCO.

 JUST another reminder:  At a certain point, you either continue to process information, cognitively, (see “the 3 brains,” above), or have a “fight-or-flight” response — and RUN from it, after which, your cognitive system will continue to go down the same road, next time more evidence shows up — and after a period of time, your thinking will become potentially useless in processing this.   World views will have to shift back to an altered reality to convince you, somehow, that the “powers that be” are really well-intentioned, if inefficient, and that with better communications, we all can just get along with each other!

Not to mention continuing to believe that because you may have even got to the level of talking to a Congressman or woman, you are talking to someone actually in power.

And that it’s OK if your children’s education and futures was worse than your own (as the case may be) . . . .

(Consider yourself warned . . . .. )

Griffin:  How would you describe the motivation of the people who created the foundations — the big foundations — in the very beginning?  What was their motivation?

Dodd:  Their motivation was, well, let’s take Mr. Carnegie, as an example.  His publicly declared and steadfast interest was to counteract the departure of the colonies from Great Britain.  He was devoted just to putting the pieces back together again.

Griffin:  Would that have required the collectivism to which they were dedicated?

Dodd:  No.  No.  No.  These policies are the foundations’ allegiance to these un-American concepts;  these policies are all traceable to the transfer of the funds over into the hands of Trustees, Mr. Griffin.  Those Trustees were not the men who had a hand in the creation of the wealth that led to the endowment, or the use of that wealth for what we would call public purposes.

Griffin:  It was a subversion of the original intent, then?

Dodd:  Oh, yes!  Completely so.  We got into the worlds, traditionally, of bankers and lawyers.

Griffin:  How have the purpose and direction of the major foundations changed, over the years, up to the present?  What are their purposes and directions today?

Dodd:  100% behind meeting the cost of education, such as it is presented through the schools and colleges of this United States, on the subject of our history -– to prove that our original ideas are no longer practical.  The future belongs to collectivistic concepts.  There is just no disagreement on this.

Griffin:  Why do the foundations generously support communist causes in the United States?

Dodd:  Well, because, to them, communism represents a means of developing what we call a monopoly — as the organization, we’ll say, of large-scale industry into an administrable unit.

Griffin:  Do they think that they will?

Dodd:  They will be the beneficiary of it, yes.

And I have to agree with this.  We are SO far down the road, but still, it’s a hard sell to have acknowledged.

The Insiders are counting on your being too preoccupied with your own problems or too lazy to fight back while the chains of slavery are being fastened on you. They are counting on their mass media to con you, frighten you, or ridicule you out of saving your freedom, and, most of all, they are counting on your thinking you can escape by not taking part in opposing their takeover.

They are also counting on those of you who recognize the conspiracy becoming so involved with watching all moves that you become totally mesmerized by their machinations, and thus become incapable of acting.

The choice is yours. You can say, “It can’t happen here!” But nearly every one of the one billion people enslaved by the Communists since 1945 doubtless said the same thing. Or you can end run this whole conspiratorial apparatus.