How Globalists Use Crazed Leftists To Piss Off the Populace and Provoke Dictatorship

➡ Ron Partain from the Untold History Channel is starting a series focusing on early 20th-century events and their modern implications. In his video, he discusses how globalists allegedly use radical leftists to create chaos and fear, leading people to give up their freedoms. He also talks about an interview with Anthony Sutton, who suggests that key figures in the Bolshevik Revolution were supported by Western elites. The video includes two other videos, one in the middle and one at the end, with subtitles corrected by Ron for accuracy.
➡ The text discusses how Wall Street elites used the Red Cross mission as a cover to support the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. They provided financial aid and even pressured the U.S. State Department to send arms and military instructors. The U.S. also helped the Bolsheviks by maintaining the Trans Siberian Railroad until they were strong enough to take over. Despite facing internal and external opposition, the Bolsheviks were able to consolidate their revolution with the help of Western assistance.
➡ The article discusses the parallels between past political movements and current events, highlighting the manipulation of political and social change through bureaucratic schemes. It suggests that these schemes, funded by taxpayer money, are used to push agendas such as multiculturalism and LGBTQ+ rights, aiming to create a one-world system and erase traditional Western principles. The article also draws comparisons between the rise of fascism in Europe after World War I and current leftist movements, suggesting that the public may be driven towards a similar form of governance due to societal unrest. Lastly, it warns of the potential for martial law in response to increasing leftist violence, and the potential dangers of such a move.
➡ The text discusses the author’s views on political conflict, suggesting that common Americans should handle issues independently to avoid government overreach. The author believes in freedom with responsibility and opposes anarchy. They argue that the U.S. was not founded as a nation where anything goes, but one that stands against tyranny. The author also mentions their work on a video about Anthony Sutton, who researched Western technology transfers to the Soviet Union and Wall Street’s contributions to different forms of socialism.
➡ Some American corporations, including General Electric and Standard Oil, financially supported Adolf Hitler’s rise to power and the German war industry. They provided technology and materials, such as tetraethyl for aviation gasoline, which were crucial for Germany’s war efforts. Interestingly, factories owned by these American corporations in Germany were not targeted during World War II bombings. This information, however, was not disclosed during the Nuremberg trials or to the American public.
➡ American and British corporations and banks played a significant role in financing Hitler’s regime and the Bolsheviks in Russia. This was done through loans and direct financial support, with the aim of controlling these markets. Major corporations also helped rebuild and expand Russia’s industry after World War II. This involvement was driven by the desire for power and control over global markets.
➡ Major Racy Jordan’s book from 1948 claimed that the U.S. helped the Soviets build nuclear weapons, and this was confirmed by a study of shipping documents. The U.S. also allowed the Soviets to develop MIRV missiles by providing them with essential technology. During the Vietnam War, the U.S. indirectly supplied both sides, as the Soviets used American-made trucks and received loans from the U.S. to finance their support of North Vietnam. Despite objections, the U.S. also helped build the Kama River plant in the Soviet Union, which had military potential and was used to produce vehicles for warfare.
➡ The text discusses the author’s experiences with the Hoover Institution and the suppression of certain publications. It also introduces the Trilateral Commission, a private organization founded by David Rockefeller in 1973, which has significant influence in the American government and media. The author suggests that this group, despite its small size, holds key positions in the government and media, potentially influencing major decisions and public opinion.

Welcome everybody to the Untold History Channel. My name is Ron Partain. It is Tuesday 15th April, 2025. Tax Day for those of you who are compliant with the tax system. And I’m going to do. This is kind of the first in. In a series of shows that I’m going to start to do where I really, what I’m, what I’m striving to be is I’m trying to be something that is going to be a. Not a competitor but a companion with what Colonel Towner is doing with Operation Gladio. And I’m going to be focusing a little bit more on the early 20th century, although I will probably get into some things that are like today that are much more modern and definitely have a Gladio twist to them.

The, the video today is going to be about how basically the, the globalists are using crazed leftists to foment revolution and scare the hell out of everybody to, you know, so that we’ll ultimately, you know, cave in and, and, and bring in, you know, well, they, they foment chaos which threatens our safety and then we give up our liberty which is, you know, Hegelian dialectic. So but anyway, let’s, let’s, let’s dive in here real quick. This is probably going to be, probably going to take me about 10, 15 minutes to read this article. But there’s two videos that are going to be playing that I’m going to play as well.

One of them is going to be I’m going to play it in the middle of the presentation and the second one I’m going to play at the, at the conclusion and that’ll be the, that that will, will, will end the video. The first one is about 15 minutes long and the second one is about 40 minutes long. And let me just say something about the one that I did with 40 minutes. It’s a, it’s an interview of, of Anthony Sutton and I, it took me about, it took me a couple of days to go through really and search research his books.

It, it spit out, I think the AI spit out a, like the, the subtitles but the subtitles were all wrong. So I went through the whole thing and I went through all the subtitles individually and I got them, I got them very close to accurate. I can’t, I’m not going to say it’s 100% but it’s like 99, 98, 99% accurate. Accurate. Certainly the most important parts where he lists companies and things of that nature and that’s all going to be in the subtitles. So I will put links to all this stuff in the description for you and I hope you enjoy it.

But but let’s just jump into the presentation here. This is the article. It’s on on on Lou Rockwell and it was written by Brandon Smith from Alt D. The title is How Globalists Use Crazed Leftists to Piss off the Populace and Provoke Dictatorship. There is nothing more dangerous than an Incompetent picture of history. A hundred years from now, if the powers that be have their way, the few children still allowed to be born due to carbon controls will be regaled with school lessons about the dark agents of nationalism when humanity was divided into warring states and divided societies that refused to embrace multiculturalism due to the detriment or due to the detriment of all.

They will say what a great movement for globalism and wokeness arose around that the courageous revolutionaries fought evil conservative fascists using any means necessary. The political left will be painted as human heroes fighting not for freedom but for equality and the greater good. Western culture, Christianity, meritocracy, moral objectivity, personal liberty and appeals to reason will be demonized as relics of the old world, monstrous constructs that prevented civilization from attaining true oneness. None of this will be true, of course. The majority of wars are triggered by by global interests, not nationalists, and the political left is a gaggle of insane zealots hell bent on destroying the West.

But as they say, history is written by the victors. Many conservatives and liberal advocates still don’t understand that we are in the middle of a fourth generation conflict. It’s not a political or ideological disagreement. It’s a war, a guerrilla war in which the enemy hides behind civilian status and illegal apparatus. And I’m going to inject here, I think he’s got this wrong. I think we’re in the middle of a fifth generation war where information is being weaponized. I think this I think it’s fifth generation would be a much more apropos generation of conflict that we’re in.

But I digress. They use our moral code and our constitutional provisions against us. They find loopholes in the governmental structure and exploit those weaknesses. They turn our society into a living suicide bomb, all while claiming they hold a position of ethical superiority. It has happened before. If you get the chance, I highly recommend readers check out the in depth investigative analysis of professor and economist Anthony Sutton, specifically his book the Wall street and the Bolshevik Revolution. In it he describes the historical timeline of how Trotsky and Lenin were funded and aided by the elites of the era the key leaders of the Marxist takeover of Russia could not have done what they did without the help of American and European globalists.

Now, here we go. I’m going to go ahead and play this video by Anthony Sutton and let me know what you guys will. Here you go. Getting back to the Bolshevik revolution. One of the ironies of it is that both Lenin and Trotsky were exile. One in Germany, one in the United States. Tell us about how. Who helped them get where they were going to make sure that revolution was pulled off. Well, let me summarize about four chapters into four minutes. Trotsky was in New York. He had no income. I summed his income for the year he was in New York.

It was about $600. Yet he lived in an apartment. He had a chauffeur limousine. He had a refrigerator, which was very rare in those days. He left New York and went to Canada on his way to the revolution. He had $10,000 in gold on him. He didn’t earn more than $600 in New York. He was financed out of New York. There’s no question about that. The British took him off the ship in Halifax, Canada. I got the Canadian archives. They knew who he was. They knew who Trotsky was. They knew he was going to start a revolution in Russia.

Instructions from London came to put Trotsky back on the boat with his party and allow them to go forward. So there is no question that Woodrow Wilson, who issued the passport for Trotsky, and the New York financiers who financed Trotsky and the British Foreign Office allowed Trotsky to perform his part in the revolution. Now, over in Switzerland, you get Lenin, who was in exile. He went through Germany and the famous sealed train by permission and with the encouragement of the German general staff. And yet Germany and Britain were supposedly fighting each other. And you get them both moving these two key revolutionaries into place inside Russia, and then, of course, the rest is history.

They created revolution with no more than about 10,000 revolutionaries. They needed assistance from the west, and they got assistance from Germany, from Britain, and from the United States to continue and consolidate the revolution. Just tell us all over again why. Why you won’t find this in the textbooks. Why is to bring about, I suspect, a plan to control world society in which you and I won’t find the freedoms to believe and think and do as we believe. Did these power brokers actually envision at that time a one world government that would be socialist? Yes. The second statement I made was that they did not want the Soviet Union to develop into another free enterprise society and that this would offset it.

Aiding revolution would offset this event that was made as a statement in 1919. You have various books, one by Gillette, the Razor Blade Gillette called the City, I think it was, which laid out this corporate socialism for the world to see as early as what, 1905, 1910. So around the turn of the century, you begin to see actually written statements by these internationalist businessmen as the kind of socialist empire they wanted to bring about. It’s there. But these books, of course, are not included in your courses in political science and history at the regular universities. Well, talk about the Red Cross mission.

Red Cross mission to Russia, 1919 18. Bankers, lawyers, businessmen. There were two doctors. I think there were two doctors. What was the mission? The mission was financed by William Boyce Thompson. Chase Manhattan Bank, Federal Reserve System. Red Cross didn’t want to send the mission. Red Cross said, we don’t need a mission to Russia. They already have one in Romania, which was doing a good job. But William Boris Thompson wanted this mission, and he put the money up. He financed it. And if you look, I printed a list of the people on the mission, and they were mostly bankers and lawyers, Wall street lawyers, and people in and around the Wall street establishment.

The function or the purpose of this mission was to be in place to assist the Bolshevik Revolution. The Red Cross mission to Russia was a cover vehicle. It enabled these Wall street elitists, these Wall street manipulators, to be there in place. And then I traced a cable, $1 million from the Morgan Company in New York to Petrograd. I forget which bank, but it came from William Boris Thomson, which financed the revolution. And then they put pressure back in the State Department in Washington to actually send arms to the revolution, which went forward in 1918. And then I found, and the State Department files, an extraordinary telegram in which Trotsky appealed to the State Department to send American army instructors to train the new Soviet Union army.

And I think I reprinted that in one of my earlier books. So briefly, the Red Cross mission was a cover vehicle to enable Wall street to be there in place to guide and manipulate the ongoing Bolshevik revolution. What was the response of the State Department? Oh, yes, they were quite willing to send us arm instead of us. Do you know, I don’t know if they went forward. I know the arms. I know the rifles went forward, forward. I didn’t trace the response to the telegram, except it was approved within the State Department. And I reprinted the telegram.

I never did find a response. That’s probably Taken up the files. Do you know the figure to which Wall street supported the Bolsheviks? Well, it was $1 million. Just the William Boyce Thompson figure, that figure. But then you’ve got the other assistance. For example, the whole Siberian episode. See, in 1918, the Bolsheviks really only controlled Moscow and what was then Petrograd, which is now Leningrad. They could not have beaten off the White Russians, the Czechs who were in Russia at that time, the Japanese who were under Bolshevik. They could not have beaten it off without assistance from the United States and from Britain.

And the Siberian railroad is critical because if you look at that map of Russia, you know, Moscow and Leningrad are stuck at the left end. And you’ve got the vast expanse of Russia which. And the backbone is the Trans Siberian Railroad. Now, the history books will tell you that American troops went in, they occupied the Trans Siberian Railroad in order to prevent Japanese from coming in. Well, this is absolute nonsense. I’ve never written the book. I hope to get around to it one day. I’ve got two big boxes of files on this. The purpose of the American army in Siberia was to hold the Trans Siberian Railroad until the Bolsheviks were strong enough to take it over.

And did that very far effectively. They held off the Japanese. They held them back near Manchuria. They evacuated the Czechs out along the Trans Siberian Railroad. The French and the British gave up because they said the Americans are helping the Bolsheviks. They evacuated. And in one of these books, I reprinted a little clipping from the New York times about in 1919, finally, the Bolsheviks got to Vladivostok, right at the far end of Siberia, near Japan, in which the local commissar addressed the American army and thanked them for aiding the revolution. And that was in the New York Times, and I reprinted it.

Now, this is totally contrary to everything you find in the textbooks. The textbooks say we went into Siberia to at least be neutral. And I suppose most people would assume we went into to stop the Bolsheviks. We didn’t. We went in to help the Bolsheviks. There’s no question, partner, there’s no question that they could not have consolidated their revolution without the capitalists. Absolutely not. Absolutely not. They had too many enemies. Not only, not only outside enemies, the White Russians, the Ukrainians themselves were not particularly happy. And all the Union ethnic groups in Russia were not particularly happy with the Bolsheviks.

They could not have won without Western assistance. There is no question about that. Then they were starving the factory. They couldn’t operate the factories because the Bolsheviks shut all the managers and the technicians. Either that or they left Russia. The factories were closed down. Russia was starving by 1922. Lenin himself said the end has come. They had no food. They had these closed down plants. The plants were not destroyed in the revolution. That’s what the textbooks will tell you. Including Kennan, the State Department expert. He says the plants, the Russian factories were destroyed in the revolution.

They were not destroyed. Why? Because I’ve seen the photographs after the revolution and the right in the Hoover Institution tower there are these massive boxes of photographs of Russian industry after the revolution. They could not operate the plants. So what do we do with Avery Harriman and the Nash Chase bank and national bank and our old friends on Wall Street? They go in there and of course the Hoover mission to feed Russia. We go in there and we have these 250, 300 concessions in which American companies went into Russia and they started up the idle plants.

Evil Hyman took the manganese companies concessions arm and Hammer Occidental Petroleum took the pencil factories and the asbestos plants. And all these top capitalists went in and they got Russia going on behalf of the Bolsheviks. Because the Bolsheviks either shot or kicked out all the people who could run all the Russians who could run the plants. Another point, the Tsarist industry was at a very high level. Your textbooks would tell you that Tsarist industry was backward. It wasn’t torso. It’s came along that it began to make progress. This is absolute nonsense. The Soviets, The Russians in 1913 had two indigenous Russian vehicles, Russian automobiles.

There has never been an indigenous Soviet automobile. They’ve all come from the West. The Tsarist Russians produced an airplane in 1916 with a wingspan longer than the 747. This is not known today. It’s just wiped out history. Technologically, the Tsarist Russians were at least on a par with the rest of the world. They only began to decline when the Soviets took over. And then you’ve got the long history from that point onwards. How we got the first five year plan, 1929, 1933. I look at the first five year plan. I look at every plant that was built in Russia at that time.

Every single plant was built by Western companies. Not one single plant was built by the Soviets. You name any plant, if there are any Russians here from way back, you name any plant in the first five year plan and you know as well as I do who built it. It wasn’t the Soviets, it was a Western company. And you run down the list. Caterpillar tractor. There are more Caterpillar tractors in the Soviet Union. There are outside the Soviet Union. Ford, Ford Model A well, Ford built the Gorky plant and as soon as the Ford engineers left they started to turn out military vehicles, you name it.

In the first five year plan every single plant was built basically by American companies. But a lot of British, French and German and Japanese were in there too. Then the second five year plan in 1930s was a duplicate. They tried to copy the first five year plan with their own resources. They fell flat on their faces and they had to come back to the western companies for assistance to duplicate the plants put in the first five year plan. And for example I was in Douglas Aircraft Company. They let me into their files and it was amazing the detailed assistance given by Douglas aircraft.

They bought one DC3 and then they bought a DC3 in sub assembly and all kinds of duplicate spare parts to get the thing going. And then we’ve got that story, I don’t know how much detail you want, which continues right up to today, July 1st, 1987. And you mentioned, I think this morning, the Toshiba and the Toshiba Japanese plant and the Norwegian company, a government owned plant which provided the milling machines which enabled now the Soviet submarines to be 10 times quieter than they were before. And that’s going to cost us $4 billion so that we can offset what we have given them.

And this stupidity has continued for. Well, stupidity in my sense from the viewpoint of a Wall street capitalist, I guess it’s smart business. This has continued for 60 years and this supposedly by our allies. But this is not the people of Japan and Norway. This is again the internationalists. It’s the international Toshiba represented on the Trilateral Commission founded by David Rockefeller 1973. It’s your top corporate, corporate elitists, your top corporate establishment attorneys, the top politicians. Senator Mansfield once said you unless you don’t get along, unless you go along. All right, so as you can see, he, he lays a pretty compelling case for the, you know, for how Wall street and London, what they did and how they helped with, with, with the fomenting of the, of the Russian Revolution.

So, and, and I, I, I, I hate saying the Russian Revolution, it was really more of a Bolshevik invasion. You know, you in Gulag Archipelago with Alexander Solzhenitsyn, what he talks about, he says it was not a revolution in Russia, it was in an invasion and those people hated Christians. But anyway, I digress. The greater takeaway from Sutton’s revelation is not so much what happened in the past but what is happening now and how it is similar. The reality of a hidden hand behind the Bolshevik Revolution. Might sound rather familiar. Today’s Doge audits have exposed massive bureaucratic manipulation schemes through agencies like USAID to instigate political and social change in America and in foreign nations.

These schemes involve vast sums of taxpayer subsidies cycling through globalist controlled NGOs or non governmental organizations that then use the free cash to push multiculturalism, LGBT or LGBTQ plus and XML propaganda and color revolution. The agenda to create a one world system and erase traditional Western principles is ongoing, handed down from one generation of globalists to the next in a parasitic lineage. The people behind it are moral relativists and Luciferians. They worship themselves and desire to become godlike. They pursue their goals with the fervor of a religious culture. They believe in what they are doing utterly with as much conviction as you or I hold in our fight for freedom and accountability.

And I, I actually think that that’s, that’s very important to understand. They believe everything that they, everything that the left does. They are absolutely 100,000% convinced that they’re in the right and that they have, you know, that they’re, that they’re morally superior in, in, in what they’re doing in America. The process is beginning to parallel the leftist movements that ended with Marxist terrorism in Europe and eventual rise of fascism after World War I. Leftists engaged in a hurricane of disruptional tactics including industrial sabotage, mob intimidation, politically motivated worker strikes, terror attacks, bombings, assassinations, etc. Modern day academics try to paint these tactics as heroic or at the very least they claimed that the actions of Marxists had nothing to do with the European embrace of fascism.

That’s a lie. It was in fact the constant psychological attacks, economic attacks and direct attacks by far left groups that made fascism so appealing to common Europeans. Ernst Thalman, the Stalin backed leader of the far left during the last days of Weimar Germany came to the conclusion that modern left was a greater threat than the Nazis. The communists viewed the centrist liberals as an, as an impediment to their efforts. Much like the woke leftists of today treat moderates as heretics instead of allies. They alienated everybody and made everyone want to work with the fascists. And I’m going to agree with that.

In fact if you look at, you know how they talked about the, they viewed centrist liberals. I mean look at guys like Bill Maher and Anna Kasparian. I mean now they’re being viciously attacked by people on the left as they’re not, you know, they’re kind of like off the reservation now and, and they’re, they’re No, I mean, they’re not friends of MAGA at all, but they are not going down that far left route. So. And, you know, you look at what Trump is doing and how he’s. The, you know, the left is not necessarily offering suggestions of how they’re going to fix things.

It’s just whatever Trump says, they’re against that particular thing. And those, the things that they’re against are widely unpopular. I mean, like, maybe you only have a 20% popularity, you know, in the, in the polls. So, yeah, that’s. That, that’s a very true statement. Anyway, moving on. Of course, Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini both openly venerated Karl Marx and his social system of governance. Fascism was nothing more than a different flavor of leftist tyranny posing as a solution to leftist tyranny. But for Europeans tired after years of societal division and constant unrest, the fascist message of order was enticing.

Anthony Sutton outlines this dichotomy and how globalists helped the Nazis rise to power in his book Wall street and the Rise of the Third Reich. Now, here’s the video that I’m going to play, but I’m not going to play it here. I’m going to actually play it at the end. It’s. It’s much too long and I want to finish the article before I do it. So. But anyway, in other words, the globalist created a Marxist terror campaign across Europe and then used it to drive the public into the arms of another socialist empire in the form of the Third Reich.

In Germany, people supported fascism because they sought to drive out and eliminate the social rot created by Bolshevik relativism, very similar to the rot we see in America today. For instance, sexual degeneracy was rampant in Germany after World War II. The very first transgender clinic was founded in Berlin in 1919. The Marxists lobbied for legalization of abortion in order to garner more female support. The rise of the sexual Reformation was initiated in the 1920s. Equivalent of the gay pride movement was born. Pedophiles began to creep out of the woodwork. The concept of underage prostitution and rent boys was a notable problem in Berlin.

Questions of personal liberty are fair to argue, but without moderation. Psychosexual obsessions embraced on a large scale can trigger social collapse. The true intent of any sexual reformation is to normalize cultural and psychological outliers. Weimar Germany in the 1920s was very much like America in the 2000 and twenties in this way. Then there was hyperinflation, economic hardship and vying political factions that drove fear into the common Germans. The fascists offered a declared vision. They offered economic prosperity, they offered domestic peace. They offered an end to the morally bankrupt madness of the left, and the public jumped at the chance.

It was not a good choice, but it was better to them than allowing a communist takeover. I’m not sure I agree with 100% of that, but I understand the perspective that he’s coming from. The globalists have a tendency to attack a target population from two sides using chaos they control and then order that they control. Marxism plays the role of chaos, and fascism plays the role of order. Most of us are familiar with the idea of the Hegelian dialectic, Hegelian dialectic being problem, reaction, solution. They caused the problem. They have this. They. They. They cause the problem which causes a reaction, and then they offer the solution to the problem that they caused.

However, I would argue that the situation is much more complex today than it has ever been. There is only one true option. Order is the obvious choice. Leftists and globalists must be removed from power. But how do we avoid doing what the Germans did? How do we remove the leftist threat without diving headfirst into our own brand of totalitarianism? It might not be possible. As I warned in my article, terror attacks kick off in 2025. It’s only going to get worse, so Be Prepared, published in January. There is now a rising tide of leftist sabotage. Today, activists across the country are using property destruction for intimidation.

It’s not going to stop there. It’s just the first phase. I’ll actually include a link to this particular article where. Which will have. I mean, to the article that I’m reading, which will have a link to this particular article as well. There is the judicial overreach by activist judges to thwart any cuts to the bureaucracy and attempts to stop deportations of legals. There’s steady online threats of assassination and calls for alliances with foreign adversaries and terror groups. Just be ready for bombings, shootings and rampaging mobs, because that’s all coming this summer. I have no doubt the risk of martial law being declared is very high if things go the way I suspect they will go, and a majority of the United States public will applaud the idea.

Donald Trump has taken measures to follow through on every one of his campaign promises so far, and I believe that has earned him the benefit of the doubt. However, if he did call for martial law under the circumstances I described to expedite matters, conservatives would be falling into a classic government power trap. Once that door is opened, it will be hard to Reverse matters, then there’s no guarantee that the right wing will be in control of the machine as it shifts from checks and balances into a streamlined, tap down autocracy. We almost fell off that cliff under the Biden administration during COVID and it’s a miracle the country is still in one piece.

The scary thing is, beyond the hypothetical risks involved, it’s difficult to argue that martial law is unreasonable. The leftists are making it very hard for us to want to fight for their liberty. And frankly, most conservatives will not care if they were shipped off to an isolated island somewhere where they can cannibalize each other. If you examine how these activists rationalize their violence on social media, one can only conclude that they need to be locked up or booted out of the country. They’re not redeemable. And I dare I say, you know what, I’m not 100% sure that that’s really the best way to go, because if you look at, if you look back at what happened in, in 1905 when, when they, when they tried to do the, the first Bolshevik revolution in, in Russia, what the czar did is he just kicked him out.

Well, yeah, that 12 years later they came back and they were like, yeah, we’re, we’re back. And then they, they came back with a vengeance and a whole lot of money. And of course they succeeded at that time. Out of the country. I’m not sure is, is, is example, is, is a, is the proper, proper route. I think they, there’s a, there’s, you know, I’m not necessarily an advocate for the death penalty, but, you know, and, and if somebody’s trying to overthrow our country and they’re not going to see things the way that we’re going to see, then, you know, I don’t, I don’t necessarily see an alternative, but that’s just me.

I don’t want anybody, I don’t want anybody to die necessarily, you know, unnecessarily. But at the same time, I mean, I don’t know another way to, you know, to get rid of that sort of mentality other than just, you know, eradication. Kind of similar to how it was in the Bible, you know, just being honest. Their actions are designed to elicit a call of force from conservatives. Then the activists rush to the global stage and scream, you see, right wingers really are the fascists, and we said they were. The mere act of applying law and order becomes tyranny by the definition of the progressives.

In the meantime, a lot of libertarians are out there are still out there actually in the wilderness, searching for a perfect solution in which no one’s rights are stepped on and all viewpoints are respected. I’ve accepted that this is not going to happen. There is no silver bullet, no magically pure society in which everyone leaves everyone else alone. In a war, sometimes someone’s rights are going to go out the window. It’s a zero sum game for conservatives because the more we accommodate the political left and treat them like fellow citizens rather than an enemy insurgency, the more the US will degrade into chaos.

If we respond to them as enemies, crushing them like the bugs that they are, then we become the bad guys and potentially welcome in a level of government power that could hurt us all in the end. My solution is an ugly one and it’s something that most conservative commentators don’t want to touch on with a 10 foot pole. Instead of relying on government power to stop the political left and the globalists, common Americans should organize and handle the problem independently. This removes the danger of government overreach and constitutional trespass. The average American is not limited by the Constitution.

The government is. We don’t have to respect the legal rights of NGOs. We don’t have to give leeway to leftist rioters because we’re afraid of political optics. We don’t have to let globalists operate in the United States with impunity and keep and without fear. Keep in mind that the United States was not founded as a libertine nation where anything goes. The founders believed in revolution against tyranny, not revolution against morality. They believed in freedom as long as it’s freedom with responsibility. They believed in rules and order, not anarchy. There’s no way on earth they would have tolerated leftists and globalist machinations.

And neither should we. When we do act, we have to make sure we don’t create a governmental golem that ultimately turns on us. It was a very well written article, very well written. And, and you know, he makes an interesting point when he talks about, you know, us being the ones that go through and do this as opposed to the military and things like that. And you know what? There, there is, there’s, there’s, that’s, that’s an interesting, some interesting thoughts. So anyway, with that said, I’m going to go ahead now and play the Anthony Sutton video that I worked hard on and I actually, I made a few, I tried to use some AI to upscale the videos so it’s a little bit better quality than some of the ones that you find out there.

And There’s a few things that he talks about that you guys may not completely understand. And what I’ve done is I’ve, I’ve, I’ve put a few extra little things in there that, that hopefully will help to give some context to what he’s saying. So let me know how you like this video. Let me know how you like this format. I’m going to, I’m kind of going to take the channel in a little bit of a different direction here. Not going to, you know, I’m still be doing the Mondays and the Tuesdays with, and, and the, and the Friday is Fridays, but I’m going to be, I’m starting to do quite a bit of other content that’s going to be different.

So anyway, curious to what you guys think. With that said, enjoy Anthony Sutton. And do me a favor and leave a comment in the comment section. Let me know how you like this. So hope everybody is having a great day and I look forward to seeing you again very, very soon. Take care, everybody. Dr. Sutton, you wrote three series of books while you were a research fellow at the Hoover Institute. Can you give me basically the background of the content of these series? Yes. The series I wrote at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University concerned the transfers of Western technology to the Soviet Union and essentially comprised three individual books.

Each book covers a period of time since 1917. And then you wrote a second series of books on Wall Street. Yes. These were trade books. In other words, they’re not academic books. They’re written for the general public. They concerned the build up of the three types of socialism, Bolshevik socialism and Russia, what we might call welfare socialism in the United States and Hitlerian or national socialism. And each book examines the financing and the contributions made by Wall street by international bankers to the development of that specific form of socialism. Now, in your research and analysis and your efforts to bring out the facts about what was going on in our society, did you encounter any effort to discourage you to prevent you from bringing out the background of America’s involvement in the financing of international Communism? Yes, very definitely.

For example, when I was at the Hoover Institution in 1972, I went to Miami beach to give some testimony before the Republican National Committee. And although a congressman had hand delivered to the wire services this testimony, which was later printed, the wire services refused to transmit it to the newspapers. Then when I got back to the Hoover Institution in California, I was called into the Office of the Director. And I was told in no uncertain terms not to make any more speeches like that and that this information should not be made public. This was the information that we were giving the Soviet Union the technology to develop its war potential.

Oh, yes, at that time, we were in Vietnam, and as you know, the Soviets were supplying the North Vietnamese. This was 1972. 1972, yes. And for example, I knew that the Gorky plant, which was built by the Ford Motor Company, the Gorky plant in Russia produces the gas series of vehicles. The gas vehicles had been seen on Ho Chi Minh Trail. We were supplying equipment to the Gorky plant in the middle of the Vietnamese War. And these trucks were being used to carry ammunition supplies which were killing Americans. I thought this was morally wrong. And I said so at Miami beach and at the Hoover Institution.

And it was this type of information that was suppressed. And so what eventually happened as far as your activities of the Hoover Institution were concerned? Well, I didn’t pay much heed to the warnings. I published a book called National Suicide in the following year which summarized our assistance to the Soviets, our military assistance to the Soviets. And when that book came out again, there was great pressure to stop the book. There was pressure on both the publishers and me personally. And I felt I couldn’t take this. And if years later I just left the Hoover institution and since 1975, I’ve been an independent author without any ties whatsoever.

Let’s go a little bit into the background of the financing of the German war machine that we fought in the period 1941 to 1945. Could we start first of all with the original financing of Hitler between 1922 and 1923, when he was first making his effort to come into prominence in Germany? The original financing of Hitler, that’s in the years 1922, came only partly from Germany. One of the most prominent Americans concerned with financing Hitler was Henry Ford. In fact, Henry Ford received a medal in 1938 for his assistance to the early Nazi party. Then, of course, Hitler had his attempted push in 1923.

He went to jail and then would begin another era in the rise of Hitler. Right. And of course, he eventually came to power in 1933 by the electoral process. What about the financing of Hitler’s electoral activities in 1933? This I can trace. I have traced very exactly. I discovered amongst the Nuremberg records a series of bank transfer slips to the Delbrok Schickler bank in Berlin to an account which was under the control of Rudolf Hess. And this was the fund that was used to finance Hitler’s access to power in March 1973. And amongst the corporations that transferred money to Hitler I find not only RG Farben, which is quite widely known, but also German General Electric, aeg, which is under the control of General Electric and New United States, or was at that time.

And companies like Osram and now. What was the tie in between Osram and General Electric? The tie in was a share tie in International. General Electric in the United States had controlling interest in German General Electric and also through share interlocks, a controlling interest in Osram in Germany. So then we have four, and we have General Electric helping to finance Adolf Hitler’s rise to power. Or any other large American corporations involved. Very definitely. Standard Oil, through its technical association with IG Farben, for example, Germany could not have gone to war in 1939 without tetraethyl. You need tetraethyl to raise the octane value of aviation gasoline.

Germany had no means of doing that. This was developed in the Athil laboratories in the United States and transferred to the Germans. Standard Oil came up with the hydrogenation idea, which was very essential for Germany in the 1930s because to raise the quality of its gasoline for aviation purposes, this was transferred to the Nazis. And itt, for example, International Telephone and Telegraph was very intimately associated with the Nazis through Dr. Schroeder, who was head of the ITT subsidiaries in Germany. And ITT controlled companies which made not only electrical instruments, but also the Focke Wulf plant, which made airplanes, fighter airplanes.

So what you’re suggesting then is that American corporations were helping to finance the German industry that was building up the war potential. American corporations, only a few, not many, financed Hitler through their subsidiaries. They transferred technology. They transferred material assistance, for example, stocks of tetra ethyl before the Germans could manufacture it under the joint manufacturing agreement with the United States. And also they financed this, for example, Standard Oil financed in 1933 the development of the gasoline industry in Germany, which was needed to fight World War II. And that’s a very interesting point. Could you go a little bit into the background of where Germany got its oil to fight the Second World War? Because certainly Germany doesn’t have oil resources.

Germany does not have oil resources. That’s true. It used In World War II, synthetic oil, which it got from coal. And the basic technical processes for the development of oil from coal came from the United States, essentially from the Standard Oil laboratories, which had this technical assistance agreement with IG Farben. And of course, IG Farben contributed something like 60% of the explosives needed by the German Wehrmacht, probably about 40, 50% of the gasoline needed by the Wehrmacht, owned by the German Air Force, Luftwaffe. And was there a definite interlock between IG Farben and Standard Oil? The interlock was at the technical level, the exchange of patents.

It was through a financial technical assistance agreement. There were other interlocks with the United States through a subsidiary, IG Farben in the United States, but with Standard Oil interlocks at the technical and financial level. And is it a fact, it’s been stated that there were members of the board of directors of Standard Oil who are also on the board of directors of American IG Farben. Yes. Walter Teagle is one name that comes to mind. There were several. There were several directions. Was it an interlock with Ford between IG Farben and American, IG Farben and the Ford Motor Company? Not that I can recall.

Not offhand. Not offhand. So basically what we’re seeing then is American industry helping to provide the technology, helping to provide the finance, helping to provide the. The material that is going to allow Hitler to create his war machine. Yes, that is correct. That is correct. Now, in your book Wall street and the Rise of Hitler, you talked about the bombing patterns during the Second World War and the fact that it was amazing that there were certain factories that were not bombed whereas the majority of the German factories were decimated. German owned factories. There were certain factories that tied in into this interlock.

We’ve already alluded to that for some strange reason seem to escape the devastation of our saturation bombing in World War II. The German Electrical industry was or should have been a prime target for western bombing. But in practice, the German General Electric plants were not bombed. Of the 10 major plants, not one, one was bombed and half a dozen others had trifling damage, broken windows, that kind of thing. So what we have here is a very interesting case of an industry which should have been bombed in World War II, but was not bombed. And yet we have American ownership, which raises a certain amount of suspicion as to why it was not bombed.

But as far as the German owned electrical companies, did they undergo a rather, I took a look at that. The Siemens plant for example, they were bombed, there’s no question. But the industry was not targeted as a general target. So Siemens, for example, was not bombed as heavily as say tank plants or aviation plants, that kind of thing. You mentioned the Ford plant in Cologne. Was this a prime military target? The Ford planting Cologne should have have been a prime military target. For example, the British Air Force, the Royal Air Force did bomb the Ford plant at Poissy in France.

But the Ford plant in Cologne, which was the by Far the largest Ford plant in Germany was not bombed in World War II. But did our military planners intend to bomb it? In other words, was it on the aiming report? Well, I did look at the aiming reports for the plants in Cologne. Ford was known about. They knew that it was producing a equipment for the Vermont, but it was not bombed. It was scheduled as a target, but it was not bombed. So somewhere along the line, as far as the planning was concerned, the name of the Ford motor plant in Cologne was deleted.

And yet the city of Cologne itself was totally decimated. The city of Cologne was decimated, as, of course, many other cities in Germany were decimated. But somewhere along the line, something happened. I suspect it was in the aiming committers. And without question, orders were sent out not to bomb certain targets, even though these were prime military targets. And that’s rather reminiscent of some of the orders that went out during the Korean War, some of the orders that went out during the Vietnamese War to leave specific targets within the enemy’s domain untouched by our strategic bombing. I understand that was so, although not investigated it.

Now, in your book Wall street and the Rise of Hitler, there was one very interesting section about a special fund that Heinrich Himmler had and the funneling of money from German corporations into this fund, even up into the years 1943 and 1944. And many of these corporations had strong ties into the American corporations, into their. The American Parents Corporation. Could you tell us a little bit about the Kepler Fund? The Kepler Fund was also known as the Contos Fund. It was what we might call Heinrich’s personal slush fund. He used it for his own personal projects.

And what amazed me was both in 1933 and in 1944, the two days, the two years for which I examined the records, over half the funds came from. From American corporations. For example, in 1933, ITT, Standard Oil, General Electric and possibly Osram were contributors. Even in 1944, in the middle of World War II, we find that ITT was funneling funds to Heinrich Himmler’s fund through Schroder, who was the chairman of the ITT subsidiaries in Germany. We also find that Depag, the Standard Oil subsidiary in Germany, was financing Heinrich. And this was in the middle of World War II.

Now, were these facts ever brought out at the Nuremberg hearings? They were never brought out at the Nuremberg hearings. Although the documents do exist within the. Within the files, within the records. They have not been been published as far as I know. And you actually had access to these records? Yes. There’s some 400 tons of these records available and many of them were at the Hoover Institution or copies were at the Hoover Institution. And that’s where I found the original documentation. I think it’s a tragic part of our history when the American public doesn’t realize the interplay then between great American corporations and the financing, the funding of the Nazi movement.

Movement. Now I wanted to talk just a little bit about the Nuremberg trials. Because of the Nuremberg trials, the Nazis, the Nazi war criminals, the Nazi generals were held specifically guilty for what transpired. Were there any Americans involved? Were any Americans indicted? Were any Americans convicted? As far as the financing of the Nazi war movement? A very definite, definitely not. I looked at the criteria for what we might call war crimes under the Nuremberg Tribunal and there’s no question in my mind that certain Americans well fitted the criteria which required indictment and trial. But no Americans were ever brought to trial.

Do you think there was any conscious effort to conceal this fact both from the nerd war tribunal and from the American public? Well, there was a conscious effort in the fact that these businessmen were very prominent in stating in 1946 that they had no knowledge of what Hitler was doing and yet they were intimately involved with the build up with Hitler. I suspect that this was not published in the media at the time, although I’ve not checked that. But certainly the role of American corporations and Americans businessmen in aiding Hitler has not been published. Now what about the actual financing? What about the loans from large American banks, from large British banks to Hitler’s government in that period between 1933 and 1939 when Hitler was preparing for war? Well, you’ve got to go back a little earlier and look at what are known as the Young loans, which are very important because I think they brought about the economic collapse of Germany in 1933.

That was the Young plan. This was Owen Young, who was of course chairman of General Electric. Here we got a man who actually made the loans as an officer of the United States government which brought about the collapse of Germany in 1933, enabling Hitler to take over. And then subsequent to 1933 you get a series of loans. A very good one is Standard Oil, which loans several minutes dollars at least to Germany to build up its aviation gasoline facilities and the other examples. Fine. Well, I’d like to get a little bit into the background of the financing of Bolshevism because I think this is vitally important.

And we can go back to the period after the second revolution, which was in October and November of 1917. The initial financing of Lenin’s movement How did it tie into the American corporations? Was there any American involvement in that period between 1917 and 1918 when Bolshevism was just beginning to get a foothold in Russia? Yes, there were several incidents. The most important is one involving Colonel William Boyce Thompson, who was the largest shareholder in the Chase bank, which of course today is Chase Manhattan Bank. And I published in one of my books a copy of a cablegram which transferred funds from New York to Petrograd in December 1917.

$1 million to be precise. And Colonel Thompson made the statement later that this $1 million was given to the Bolsheviks to consolidate. They had just begun to take over Russia. They only controlled Moscow and Petrograd at that time to aid the control that the Bolsheviks were extending in Russia. This is a very clear case. $1 million American funds transferred through an American Wall street intermediary to the Bolsheviks. And didn’t you publish that document here in Wall street and rise of Bolshevism? I published two statements. One is a copy of the cablegram and the other is a copy of, of the news clip of the statement made by Colonel Thompson at that time that he had given made his contribution.

Now why would an American capitalist and American financier help to aid Bolshevism? The only answer, and of course this puzzled me for years, you know, why? Why? Because we understand to be an opposition. And the only answer I can come to is one of captive markets. The United States did not want another United States in the world. Of course, if you look at the world map, Russia is 2, 3 times larger than the United States. Imagine this as another United States, as another competitor to the United States. What the United States wanted or Wall street wanted was a captive market.

And of course socialism is a captive market because my earlier studies at Stanford University had brought out the fact that a socialist system cannot innovate. It’s going to import in a very of technology from the West. And so I think the aim behind this was to encourage the development of Marxism and other social, other types of socialism because this would give these Wall street bankers control of a world market, a captive market. At the end of the First World War, Russia was devastated by famine and America sent relief mission. It was the Hoover mission. Do you know any of the facts surrounding the Aztec activities of the Hoover Commission? Well, there’s no question that in 1922, 1923, Russia was finished.

Industrial output was perhaps 8 or 10% of 1913 figures and people were starving by the hundreds of thousands. And the Hoover mission was organized of course, to send aid to Russia. But most of the aid went to the Bolsheviks, who controlled really quite a small part of Russia at that time. Only a very small part of the aid went to the White Russians or to the Far East. And then after 1922, 1923, Lenin instituted something known as the New Economic Policy or this series of five Year Plans. Can you tell us about the five Year Plans and the part that the major American corporations, major world corporations played in building up the Soviet Union? Well, there are two separate phases here.

The New Economic Policy was started in 1923 by Lenin. And I found, and I published this in my first book from Stanford, that every single Russian investment industry was rebuilt or restarted by foreign corporations, mostly German, British, French and American. By 1928, Russia was back to approximately its 1913 industrial output. And at that point she began to think of these grandiose five year plans. And in 1928, Goss planned, which is the Russian government planning commission, actually designed an initial five Year Plan. But this was thrown out, it was inadequate. And American corporations were built in, were brought into Russia.

And the first Five Year Plan and the second Five Year Plan were actually designed in the United States by American corporations. And what were these corporations? Which ones specifically were involved? The design of the first Five Year Plan was by a corporation probably not known to most Americans, Albert Kahn. But Albert Kahn was the foremost industrial architect in the United States. And Albert Khan laid out the basics of the first Five Year Plan for the Soviets. And then we find again the same corporations involved, involved with the construction of the plants. International, General Electric, most certainly dupont, Ford Motor, Hercules Motor, Curtis Wright in aircraft engines, and even some corporations which today were forgotten about, like Valte and Chance Vought.

These were aircraft manufacturers at that time. And so American corporations came in and they built the first five Year Plan. But what was important, the Soviets then copied these plans. And this accounts for the tremendous Russian output. They took this initial equipment and they multiplied it, they copied it by the hundred. Now, how about Ford Motor Company? Did they play a part in the building up of the Soviet potential? Very definitely. Ford Motor Company built the Gorky plant. And the Gorky plant produces the GAZ series of vehicles. That’s gaz, and these are trucks, and there’s some automobiles.

And right from the early 1930s you find that the gas plant has had military potential. And Ford knew that when it went in and built the Gorky plant. And we know it because I found statements to this effect within the State Department files. Sometimes we hear the name Averell Harriman, did he play a part in building up the Soviet technology? Very definitely. In fact, April Harman came out of the Soviet Union financially at a profit. He took over the Georgian manganese concession in the early 1920s, got this back on his feet for the Soviets. And manganese became a prime export for the Soviets.

And so they were able to sell as a board, get foreign exchange, which financed their industrialization. And then they bought out Harriman about 1929. And Errol Herman received as compensation $1 million more than he put in in the first place. How about Armand Hammer of Occidental Petroleum? Armored Hammer is a very interesting example. Armored Hammer received the first foreign concession in 1822 in Asbestos in the Ural Mountains. And he also conducted for the Soviets a number of other enterprises by downer pens and pencil manufacturing, for example. But Armored Hammer is interesting because his father, although Armored Hammer today, is chairman of Occidental Petroleum Corporation.

His father was Julius hammer, who in 1919 was Secretary General of the Communist Party USA, which emphasizes the argument I made throughout my books that at the top level, there’s no difference between your top Communists and your top capitalists. That interlink, you’ve got Armond Hammer, chairman of Occidental Petroleum. His father was secretary of the Communist Party USA in 1919. So it’s basically a power grab. It’s a power grab, an international power grab. Now, during the Second World War, why, Russia was pretty well decimated once again by German forces. What part did the American Lend Lease program play in building up Russia’s industrial capacity after the Second World War? Well, Lend Lease built up Russia’s capacity, modernized it and expanded it during World War II.

And there was some continuation all the way through, perhaps to 1948, 1949. There was a program after Lend Lease which was supposed to be restricted to foodstuffs and industrial materials. But in effect, I check the records in the warehouses in Suitland, Maryland. I find that even after World War II, and this was against the intent of Congress, I suspect there was a massive transfer of the latest industrial equipment to the Soviet union under the Circle Lend Lease program. Now, in 1948, there was a fascinating book came out by Major Racy Jordan in which he talked about American aid to the Communists as far as their ability to build nuclear weapons.

Did you ever have an opportunity of verifying the facts that we had given them the heavy weapons, water, we’d given them the wherewithal to build their atomic weapons? Well, as part of the work I was doing at Stanford, I Did investigate the, the shipping documents for that lease. And I took a sample of these documents. I checked them against Major Jordan and broadly, Major Jordan was correct, within, say, about 5%. And the major Jordan. Jordan, of course, made the charge that we had shipped materials to the Soviets 1944 and 1945, which were later used in their atomic program.

There is no doubt he is correct. We shipped heavy water, which is essential, but we shipped other items which are perhaps less obvious to the layman. We shipped, for example, aluminum tubes, and aluminum tubes are essential for atomic energy development. We shipped graphite and graphite is another essential component. So generally, as far as I could check, and I checked the original government lend lease document, General, Major Jordan was correct. Now, as the years have gone by, of course, we see a growing Soviet nuclear threat. The Soviets now have mirved missiles. Can you get a little of the background on how the Soviet Union, which really didn’t have the technology to develop those MIRV missiles that threaten our cities today, how are they able, able to develop the MIRV capacity? Well, you’ve got to go back and look at how the Russians were able to develop a rocket space technology.

Anyway, what they did after World War II was American forces were held back for a while while the Soviets occupied East Germany. They stripped East Germany, they took back the latest of the V2 rocket technology from Peenemunde and other places, and the V2 became the basis of the Russian space technology. Now, if you skip the intervening years, you will find when you come to the early 1970s, that the Russians did not have the capability to MIRV their missiles. And in particular they lacked the ability to produce the VOI precision micro miniature ball bearings that are needed for the control systems.

There was only one company in the world, Bryant, Chuck and Grinder, which could make the machinery, which machines, the races which within which these ball bearings run. And without those races, you just cannot make mirved missiles in any quantity. You can make one off, but not in quantity. Brian Chucking Grinder was allowed to ship to the Soviet Union for 25 of these machines. At a time when we only had 33 in the United States. Wasn’t there any objection to doing this? I objected at Miami beach in 1972. Other people objected, but the objections were squashed. And predominantly at fault here is Henry Kissinger and the incoming administration, the incoming Nixon administration.

This was known, I’m sure it was known in DoD. If I knew it, then certainly DoD knew it. But the objections were squashed and there was suppression of the information. And so once again, we see America building up the military capacity, the nuclear threat from the Soviet Union. Well, this goes, you know, when you talk about moving of missiles, you’re talking about a quantum jump in your military technology. Now, I’m not a military man, but to me the ability to do that is a, is a massive leap forward. And we enabled them to do it, and we did it knowingly and deliberately.

During the Vietnamese War, the Soviet Union and the Eastern European satellites were the primary suppliers of war materials to the North Vietnamese who were killing American boys in South Vietnam. Would you comment on our aid and trade with the Soviet Union and with the Eastern European satellites during that period of time? Well, there’s no question that the Soviets were the prime suppliers of military equipment and suppliers to the North Vietnamese. Let me give you an example. The American pilots, as they flew over the Ho Chi Minh Trail, described the trucks that they were seeing as American trucks.

Well, they were American trucks because they came from the Gorky plant. And Gorky was built by Henry Ford. And so you have the situation where we were in effect supplying both sides in the Vietnamese War. The trucks were being built by the Soviet Union. However, were they getting any materials from the United States to help build those trucks? Yes, in the early 1970s, I know specifically of shipments of equipment into the Gorky plant while the war was going on, which in effect, were aiding the Soviets to build more trucks to be used by the North Vietnamese.

How about loans? Was American extending loans to the Soviet Union during this period when they were the primary financiers of the North Vietnamese? Yes, beginning about 1970, there was a massive grant of loans to the Soviet Union. I say by about 1976, it must have totaled perhaps $40 million, $40 billion outstanding. And so this, of course, these loans were used to enable the Soviet Union to purchase industrial equipment in the United States States. And this industrial equipment was used to manufacture, in part, military supplies which were used against us in Vietnam. How about Russian shipping that was being used to ferry supplies to North Vietnam? Shipping is a very interesting example because the Soviets published a shipping register about 6,000 ships.

And I analyzed every one of these ships, both the origin of the technology of the ship itself, the hull and the engine. Most of them are marine diesel engines. And I find that 60% of the Soviet merchant marine, which of course has military usefulness, 60% was built aboard only 40% in the Soviet Union, and that largely to Western design. But when you come to marine diesel engines, you find something really fascinating. You find that 80% of the marine diesel engines In Soviet merchant ships are Western engines. Burmeister and Wayne of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Sultzer of Switzerland, Fiat of Italy, because that name has come up before.

But the other 20% of marine diesel engines built in the Soviet Union are built to Western design under technical assistance contracts from Sultza and Burmeister and Wayne. So in effect, there could be no Soviet merchant marine without assistance from the West. How about the building of the Kama river plant? Kama river was built in the late 1960s, early 1970s. The basic design contract was let to the Italian firm of fiat. Giovanni Agnelli is the chairman of the board. And this is important because Agnelli is tied in with Chase Manhattan Bank. He’s on the international advisory committee of Chase Manhattan.

What caught my attention was that Fiat does not manufacture automobile manufacturing equipment. All the Fiat plants in Italy contain American equipment. And what I found was that the equipment was coming perhaps about 60, 70% of it from the United States, from major automobile equipment suppliers in the United States. I think it was known as the Fiat plant as a cover to perhaps divert attention from the fact that doing this Vietnamese War, we were building the largest plant in the world. It covers 36 square miles. We were building for the Soviets with American equipment, the largest plant in the world.

And so it was called the Italian Fiat plant. And I think this was a blind. And so they were building their trucks and armored personnel carriers and other things that could be used then for warfare in South Vietnam. We knew that the Karma plant had military potential. In 1972, I wrote it in National Suicide. I said as much in Miami beach in 1972. This plant has military potential. It can produce military vehicles. We knew it. And of course, today in Afghanistan, we find that the Karma vehicles are there in Afghanistan today form the Karma plant built by American and Italian countries.

And it was after you brought out this information that efforts were made to suppress your book National Suicide, your other studies. Yes, because I was bringing out the fact that the Kama river plant had military potential, that we were moving the missiles with the Bryant chucking grinder equipment. And of course, Elefax along these lines. And what sort of pressure was brought to bear upon you? What sort of pressure was brought to bear upon the publisher of your book National Suicide? There was pressure on the publisher to prevent publication, to stop publication. He refused to do so.

This pressure brought upon me first to withdraw the book and then a rather deceitful sort of pressure. It was claimed at the Hoover Institution that I had plagiarized volume three of my Western Technology Series, which was being published by Stanford University. Well, firstly I challenged them to point out the plagiarization. And nobody could find even two sentences that match up. But then I pointed out that I cannot plagiarize my own work. I hold a copyright on both books and nowhere in the world can I plagiarize myself. That’s a logical impossibility. And then gradually it built up over the following years that my research was perhaps going a little out of what was perhaps required or welcome would be a better word.

And it should be confined within my more narrow boundaries. And at that point in 1975, I left the Hoover Institution. And since then I’ve become an independent author and I can publish what I want to publish. Do you know of any other instances where efforts were made to suppress publication of books through the Hoover Institute? I know one example, one I was personally aware of, and that was Julius Epstein’s book on Operation Cukehole, which is a very important book on the treatment of Russian prisoners of war in Germany after World War II. This book was in manuscript for several years and he was not allowed to publish it.

I heard that firsthand from Julius. Right. And eventually it was of course brought out. It was at a later point. Another example I can give is my own Western Technology series. The third volume of that was held in galleys for one year. Now it could. It costs a lot of money to hold a book in galleys because when a book is in galleys, you want to get out on the market to start recouping your investment. That book was held in galleys for one year because it was not politically wise or acceptable to publish it at that time, even though it was an academic book.

Now, you’ve done some fascinating studies on the Trilateral Commission. Can you tell us about the Trilateral Commission? The Trilateral Commission is a private organization founded by David Rockefeller in 1973. It was essentially financed by Rockefeller and some of the foundations. Kettering Foundation, Danforth Foundation, Ford Foundation. Ford foundation was a very major contributor. And the stated objective is to encourage discussion amongst what they call the trilateral regions. I should point out that of the 300 members, 1/3 conflict from the United States, one third from Japan and one third from Europe. But in effect, I find that the actions of the Trilateral Commission are very much self interested on the part of the international banking community in New York.

Now, as far as the Trilateral Commission’s influence on the American government is concerned, it’s been said that there is a very excessive representation of the Trilogical commission in Jimmy Carter’s cabinet and in Jimmy Carter’s administration. Well, excessive is rather an understatement. I think there’s some 200 million people in the United States. There are only 77 trilateral members who are American. Out of that 77, I counted no fewer than 18 trilateralists. That’s what, about one third the trilateral American trilateral contingent turns up in the Carter administration. Mr. Carter himself has a trilateral almost in Mondale. Miss. Mr.

Brown, Mr. Vance, Mr. Blumenthal, Mr. Brown, Secretary of Defense. In other words, they occupy all the senior cabinet and sub cabinet posts. In fact, there’s some key committees, intelligence and defense committees, which are only comprised of trilaterals. So Here you’ve got 77Americans selected by one man, David Rockefeller, who’s chairman of Chase Manhattan bank. And we find that they turn up in the key controlling positions in Washington under the current administration. And with this suggest to you that perhaps we do not select the government, that it is selected by these people who work behind the scenes. You can come to no other conclusion.

If you look today at who’s running for office, you find Mr. Bush is a trilateral. You find Mr. Anderson is a trilateral. Mr. Carter’s a trilateral. We find articles appearing in Newsweek magazine, Time magazine, US News and World Report, many of the major, major media telling us there’s really nothing to be concerned about from the Trilateral Commission. Is there any interlock between the trilateral Commission and the major media in the United States? Yes, there is an interlock, particularly in the news media. For example, the Chicago Sun Times, the executive editor there, James Hoogie, is a trilateral.

You’ll find Sol Leinowitz is the director of Time magazine and I think, yes, Henry Schacht is a director of cbs. So there very definitely is an interlock between the trilaterals and the media. And perhaps this is the reason then that they rather play down the influence of the Trilateral Commission on contemporary American government. Yes. I had a computer survey made of all articles that have been printed on the trilateral commission since 1973. I could find worldwide only 73 articles. Now, what’s the relationship between the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations? Well, of course, Council on Foreign Relations is a much older organization, founded in 1920.

I did a study in which I compared trilaterals with or without membership in the CFR Council on Foreign Relations. I find there’s something over 50% overlap.
[tr:tra].