Memorandum Number Three:

Thesis – The Order Creates The Soviet Union

In an earlier book, published in 1974, we presented major evidence of Wall Street assistance for the Bolshevik Revolution. This assistance was mainly cash, guns and ammunition, and diplomatic support in London and Washington, D.C.


Wall Street And The Bolshevik Revolution also introduced the concept which Quigley described, i.e., that Morgan and other financial interests financed and influenced all parties from left to right in the political spectrum.

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

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

Revolutionary activity was centered at Equitable Trust Building, 120 Broadway, in the building in the photograph on page 139. This had been E.H. Harriman's address. The American International Corporation was located at 120 Broadway. The Bankers' Club, where Wall Street bankers met for lunch, was at the very top of the building.


It was in this plush club that plans were laid by William Boyce Thompson for Wall Street participation in the 1917 Russian Revolution. Guaranty Securities was in 120 Broadway, while Guaranty Trust was next door at 140 Broadway (the building can be seen to the left of 120).





Fortunately we have a copy of the memorandum written by a member of The Order, summarizing intentions for the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution. The memorandum was written by Thomas D. Thacher (The Order'04), a partner in the Wall Street law firm of Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett. Thacher's address was 120 Broadway.


Today this law firm, now in Battery Plaza, has the largest billing on Wall Street and has former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance (Scroll & Key) as a partner. In 1917 Thacher was in Russia with William Boyce Thompson's Red Cross Mission. After consultations in New York, Thacher was then sent to London to confer with Lord Northcliffe about the Bolshevik Revolution and then to Paris for similar talks with the French Government.

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





  1. 120 Broadway Edward H. Harriman (before his death)

  2. 59 Broadway W.A. Harriman Company

  3. 120 Broadway American International Corporation

  4. 23 Wall J.P. Morgan firm

  5. 120 Broadway Federal Reserve Bank of New York

  6. 120 Broadway Bankers Club (top floor)

  7. 120 Broadway Thomas D. Thacher (of Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett)

  8. 14 Wall William Boyce Thompson

  9. 120 Broadway Guggenheim Exploration

  10. 15 Broad Stetson, Jennings & Russell

  11. 120 Broadway C.A.K. Martens of Weinberg & Posner (the first Soviet "ambassador")

  12. 110 W. 40th Street Soviet Bureau

  13. 60 Broadway Amos Pinchot's office

  14. 120 Broadway Stone & Webster

  15. 120 Broadway General Electric

  16. 120 Broadway Sinclair Gulf Corp.

  17. 120 Broadway Guaranty Securities

  18. 140 Broadway Guaranty Trust Company

  19. 233 Broadway Anglo-Russian Chamber of Commerce


  • George Webster Adams (The Order '04)

  • Allen Wallace Ames (The Order '18)

  • Philip Lyndon Dodge (The Order '07)

Here are the main sections from the Thacher memorandum:

"First of all ... the Allies should discourage Japanese intervention in Siberia.


In the second place, the fullest assistance should be given to the Soviet Government in its efforts to organize a volunteer revolutionary army.


Thirdly, the Allied Governments should give their moral support to the Russian people in their efforts to work out their own political systems free from the domination of any foreign power ...


Fourthly, until the time when open conflict shall result between the German Government and the Soviet Government of Russia there will be opportunity for peaceful commercial penetration by German agencies in Russia. So long as there is no open break, it will probably be impossible to entirely prevent such commerce.


Steps should therefore be taken to impede, so far as possible, the transport of grain and raw materials to Germany from Russia." 1

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


The reader should note in particular paragraph two:

"In the second place, the fullest assistance should be given to the Soviet Government in its efforts to organize a volunteer revolutionary army."

This assistance has been recorded in my National Suicide: Military Aid To The Soviet Union.

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

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

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

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




Note in particular the sentence:

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

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

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

So far as aiding the Soviet Army is concerned, there are State Department records that show guns and ammunition were shipped to the Bolsheviks. And in 1919, while Trotsky was making anti-American speeches in public, he was also asking Ambassador Francis for American military inspection teams to train the new Soviet Army. 1

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



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

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

Publisher's Note: To assist readers with the very poor reproductions of the following two letters we print our reading from the copies that we have. 211

Hon. William Kent,

May 29, 1919

U.S. Tariff Commission, Washington, D.C.


Dear Billy:

This will introduce to you my friend, Professor Evans Clark, now associated with the Bureau of Information of the Russian Soviet Republic. He wants to talk with you about the recognition of Wolchak, the raising of the blockade, etc., and get your advice in regard to backing up the senators who would be apt to stand up and make a brave fight. Won't you do what you can for him. As I see it, we are taking a (unreadable) Russia that will leave our, until now, mightily good reputation, badly damaged.


Hope to see you in Washington soon.


Faithfully yours,

A. P.

Mr. Santeri Nourteva,

Finnish Information Bureau,

299 Broadway, City

November 22, 1918


Dear Mr. Nuorteva:

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

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

With kindest regards, I am Sincerely yours,

Amos Pinchot






The above letter is from Amos Pinchot (The Order '97). His brother, conservationist Gifford Pinchot (The Order '89) was also a member. Amos Pinchot was a founder of the American Civil Liberties Union and active in aiding the Soviets during the early days of the Bolshevik Revolution.


The above letter, exemplifying this assistance, was sent to Santeri Nourteva, November 22, 1918, just a year after the 1917 Revolution. Pinchot was "heartily sympathetic with your view of the situation and the work you are doing."1


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

Who was Nourteva?


This name was an alias for Alexander Nyberg, a Soviet representative in the United States. Nyberg worked for the Soviet Bureau (at first called the Finnish Information Bureau - a cover name), along with Ludwig C.A.K. Martens, the first Soviet Ambassador and formerly a Vice President of Weinberg & Posner.


The New York office of Weinberg & Posner was at - 120 Broadway! Nyberg's assistant was Kenneth Durant, an American newspaper man, later TASS correspondent in the U.S. and one time aide to "Colonel" Edward House, mystery man of the Wilson Administration. Director of the Commercial Department in this Soviet Bureau was "Comrade Evans Clark."


Clark later became Executive Director of the influential Twentieth Century Foundation, and at Twentieth Century Foundation we find a member of The Order - in this case Charles Phelps Taft (The Order '18), nephew of President and Chief Justice William Howard Taft. In the coming volume on FOUNDATIONS, we shall see how Evans Clark and The Order, working together at Twentieth Century Foundation, had a significant role in the Hegelization of American education.

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

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

For assistance Evans Clark turned to The Order. On May 29, 1919, Amos Pinchot wrote fellow Skull & Bones member and strong Republican William Kent about raising the blockade against the Soviets. William Kent (The Order'87) was on the U.S. Tariff Commission and in turn wrote Senator Lenroot to request an interview for "Professor" Evans Clark.


Albert Kent, his father, was a member [The Order '53] and he married the daughter of Thomas Thacher [The Order '35]. In brief, two members of The Order, Pinchot and Kent, cooperated to push a known Bolshevik operator onto an unsuspecting Senator. Neither member of The Order advised Senator Lenroot about Clark's affiliation with the Soviet Bureau.



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





Between 1917 and 1921 the Soviets pushed their control of Russia into Siberia and the Caucasus. As we have noted, the United States intervened in Siberia along the Trans-Siberian Railroad. Histories of U.S. Intervention by George Kennan and the Soviets maintain this was an anti-Soviet intervention.


In fact, it was nothing of the kind. The U.S. spread troops along the Siberian railroad only to keep out the Japanese, not to keep out the Soviets. When they left through Vladivostok, the Soviet authorities gave American forces a resounding send-off. But this is yet another untold story, not in the textbooks.

The immediate problem facing the Soviets was to restore silent Russian factories. This needed raw materials, technical skills and working capital. The key to Russian reconstruction was the oil fields of the Caucasus. The Caucasus oil fields are a major segment of Russian natural resource wealth.


Baku, the most important field, was developed n the 1870s. In 1900 it was producing more crude oil than the United States, and in 1901 more than half of the total world crude output. The Caucasus oil fields survived Revolution and Intervention without major structural damage and became a significant factor in Soviet economic recovery, generating about 20 percent of all exports by value; the largest single source of foreign exchange.1


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

The Bolsheviks took over the Caucasus in 1920-1, but until 1923 oil field drilling almost ceased. During the first year of Soviet rule "...not one single new well has started giving oil" and even two years after Soviet occupation, no new oil-field properties had been developed. In addition, deepening of old wells virtually ceased. As a result, water percolated into the wells, and the flow of crude oil became a mixture of oil and water.


Drilling records are an excellent indicator of the state of oil field maintenance, development, and production. The complete collapse after the Soviet takeover is clearly suggested by the statistics. In 1900, Russia had been the world's largest producer and exporter of crude oil; almost 50,000 feet of drilling per month had been required in Baku alone to maintain this production.


By early 1921, the average monthly drilling in Baku had declined to an insignificant 370 feet or so (0.7 percent of the 1900 rate), although 162 rigs were in working order.

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

He then announced:

"But just here American capital is going to support us. The American firm International Barnsdall Corporation has submitted a plan ... Lack of equipment prevents us from increasing the production of the oil industry of Baku by ourselves. The American firm ... will provide the equipment, start drilling in the oil fields and organize the technical production of oil with deep pumps."1

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

The first International Barnsdall concession was signed in October 1921, and was followed in September of 1922 by two further agreements. There is no doubt that Barnsdall did work under the agreements.


Pravda reported groups of American oil field workers on their way to the oil fields, and a couple of months previously the United States, Constantinople Consulate, had reported that Philip Chadbourn, the Barnsdall Caucasus representative, had passed through on his way out of Russia. The U.S. State Department Archives contain an intriguing quotation from Rykov, dated October 1922:

"The one comparatively bright spot in Russia is the petroleum industry, and this is due largely to the fact that a number of American workers have been brought into the oil fields to superintend their operation." 2

1 Pravda, September 21, 1922.
2 U.S. State Department Decimal File, Microcopy 316, Roll 107, Frame 1167.


Who, or what, was International Barnsdall Corporation?

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

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

In brief, The Order controlled International Barnsdall Corporation.

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


The basic problem was:

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

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

The Soviets acquired modern mining and transportation facilities for their manganese deposits, acquired foreign exchange, and finally shattered American foreign policy concerning loans to the U.S.S.R., in a series of business agreements with W.A. Harriman Company and Guaranty Trust. 1

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

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

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

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



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




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

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

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

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

The State Department letter to London is quite specific on this point:

"The memorandum transmitted by you embodies the first information received by the Department concerning the concession other than that which has appeared in the public press."

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





Now we reach the truly extraordinary point. The U.S. Government was not informed by W.A. Harriman or Guaranty Trust that they intended to invest $4 million developing Soviet manganese deposits. Yet this was clearly illegal and a move with obvious strategic consequences for the U.S.


Neither was the U.S. Government able to pick up this information elsewhere; in those days there was no CIA. Economic intelligence was handled by the State Department. It is also obvious that Government officials were interested in acquiring information, as they should have been.


We reproduce on page 155 a memorandum from Evan E. Young in Division of Eastern European Affairs to Assistant Secretary of State Carr. Note this is a memorandum at the upper levels of the State Department. Young specifically writes:

"... there are certain and very definite reasons why I consider it very unwise for the Department to initiate any investigation with respect to the reported manganese concession."

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

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







The Order kept a hold on every non-government strategic position related to the Soviet Union. Nothing appears to have escaped their attention. For example, the Anglo-Russian Chamber of Commerce was created in 1920 to promote trade with Russia - desperately needed by the Soviets to restore idle Tsarist industry.


The Chairman of its Executive Committee, the key post in the Chamber, was held by Samuel R. Bertron (The Order '85), a Vice President of Guaranty Trust and formerly a member of the 1917 Root Mission to Russia. Elihu Root, Chairman of the Mission, was, of course, the personal attorney to William Collins Whitney (The Order '63), one of the key members of The Order.


The letter from Bertron's Anglo-Russian Chamber of Commerce to State Department, printed on page 158 is noteworthy because :: asks the question:

"What date trading in Russian credits was prohibited in the United States by Federal authorities?"

This means that The Order was well aware in 1921 that "credits" to the U.S.S.R. were illegal and indeed were not made legal until President Roosevelt took office in 1933. However, illegal or not, within 18 months of this Bertron letter, Guaranty Trust established more than trading in Russian credits.


Guaranty Trust made a joint banking agreement with the Soviets and installed a Guaranty Trust Vice President, Max May, as director in charge of the foreign division of this Soviet-Dank, the RUSKOMBANK (See document on page 157).

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

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





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

Take the example of Simpson, Thacher & Bartlett which in the 1920s was located at 120 Broadway, New York. The firm was founded by Thomas Thacher (The Order '71) in 1884. His son Thomas Day Thacher (The Order '04) worked for the family law firm after leaving Yale and initiation into The Order.


The younger Thomas Thacher went to work for Henry L. Stimson (The Order'88), a very active member of The Order discussed in Volume One of this series. About this time Thacher, who wrote The Order's statement on the Bolshevik Revolution (page 138), became friendly with both Felix Frankfurter and Raymond Robins. According to extensive documentation in the Lusk Committee files, both Frankfurter and Robins were of considerable assistance to the Soviets.

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

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

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

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

The letter read closely is definite; it puts words in the mouth of the State Department, i.e., this is what we are going to do and in spite of the U.S. Government, there is no reason why we should not go ahead.


Note, for example, the last paragraph:

"... it seems to us there is no reason why the Bank should not so increase its deposits notwithstanding our Government has not recognized the U.S.S.R."


During the past four years the Government of the United States has maintained the position that it would be both futile and unwise to enter into relations with the Soviet Government so long as the Bolshevik leaders persist in aims and practices in the field of international relations which preclude the possibility of establishing relations on the basis of accepted principles governing intercourse between nations.


It is the conviction of the Government of the United States that relations on a basis usual between friendly nations can not be established with a governmental entity which is the agency of a group who hold it as their mission to bring about the overthrow of the existing political, economic and social order throughout the world and who regulate their conduct towards other nations accordingly.

The experiences of various European Governments which have recognized and entered into relations with the Soviet regime have demonstrated conclusively the wisdom of the policy to which the Government of the United States has consistently adhered. Recognition of the Soviet regime has not brought about any cessation of interference by the Bolshevik leaders in the internal affairs of any recognizing country, nor has it led to the acceptance by them of other fundamental obligations of international intercourse.


Certain European states have endeavored, by entering into discussions with representatives of the Soviet regime, to reach a settlement of outstanding differences on the basis of accepted international practices. Such conferences and discussions have been entirely fruitless. No state has been able to obtain the payment of debts contracted by Russia under preceding governments or the indemnification of its citizens for confiscated property.


Indeed, there is every reason to believe that the granting of recognition and the holding of discussions have served only to encourage the present rulers of Russia in their policy of repudiation and confiscation, as well as in their hope that it is possible to establish a working basis, accepted by other nations, whereby they can continue their war on the existing political and social order in other countries.

Current developments demonstrate the continued persistence at Moscow of a dominating world revolutionary purpose and the practical manifestation of this purpose in such ways as render impossible the establishment of normal relations with the Soviet government.


The present rulers of Russia, while seeking to direct the evolution of Russia along political, economic and social lines in such manner as to make it an effective "base of the world revolution", continue to carry on, through the Communist International and other organizations with headquarters at Moscow, within the borders of other nations, including the United States, extensive and carefully planned operations for the purpose of ultimately bringing about the overthrow of the existing order n such nations.

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



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


To demonstrate the degree of falsehood, we reprint here a page on Russian from a document,

"Excerpt from a statement entitled 'Foreign Relations' by the Honorable Frank B. Kellogg, Secretary of State, published by the Republican National Committee, Bulletin No. 5, I928."

Among the falsehoods promoted by Secretary Kellogg is the following:

"... the Government of the United States has maintained the position that it would be both futile and unwise to enter into relations with the Soviet Government."

In fact, at this very time the United States, with implicit government approval, was involved in planning the First Five Year Plan in Russia. The planning work was done actively by American firms.1


1 This story has been described in my Western Technology And Soviet Economic Development 1917-1930 and 1930-1945, published by the Hoover Institution at Stanford University.

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

Since World War II the United States has kept the Soviets abreast of modern technology. This story has been detailed elsewhere. In brief, the creation of the Soviet Union stems from The Order. The early survival of the Soviet Union stems from The Order. The development of the Soviet Union stems from The Order. But above all, this story has been concealed from the American public --,"politicians ... more of this later. Now let's turn to the financing of the Nazi Party in Germany.

Return to Contents





Memorandum Number Four
Antithesis - Financing The Nazis

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

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

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

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






In Wall Street And The Rise of Hitler we described several financial conduits between Wall Street and the Nazi Party. This was later supplemented by publication of a long suppressed book, Hitler's Secret Backers.1


1 Wall Street And The Rise Of Hitler and Hitler's Secret Backers are obtainable from Research Publications, P.O. Box 39850, Phoenix Arizona 85069. Some other aspects are covered in Charles Higham. Trading With The Enemy (Delacorte Press).


Still other books have emphasized the Fritz Thyssen financial connection to Hitler. After he split with Hitler, Thyssen himself wrote a book, I Paid Hitler. We are now in a position to merge the evidence in these books with other material and our documentation on The Order.

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

The document reproduced on page 167 below, slipped through U.S. censorship because the Office of Director of Intelligence did not know of the link between Fritz Thyssen and the Harriman interests in New York.


Documents linking Wall Street to Hitler have for the most part been removed from U.S. Control Council records. In any event, we reproduce here the Intelligence report identifying Fritz Thyssen and his Bank fur Handel und Schiff (No. EF/Me/1 of September 4, 1945) and page 13 of the interrogation of Fritz Thyssen entitled "Financial Support of the Nazi Party."





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

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

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

This incident and Thyssen's subsequent publication, I Paid Hitler, has a parallel with the history of his father, August Thyssen. Through a similar confession in 1918 the elder Thyssen, despite his record as a staunch backer of pan-Germanism, succeeded in convincing the Allies that sole responsibility for German aggression should be placed on the Kaiser and German industrialists should not be blamed for the support they had given to the Hohenzollerns.


Apparently influenced by August Thyssen and his associates, the Allies made no effort to reform German industry after World War I. The result was that Thyssen was allowed to retain a vast industrial empire and pass it on intact to his heirs and successors.

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

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

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

During the next 2 years Thyssen dedicated his fortune and his influence to bring Hitler to power. In 1932 he arranged the famous meeting in the Dusseldorf Industrialists' Club, at which Hitler addressed the leading businessmen of the Ruhr and the Rhineland. At the close of Hitler's speech Thyssen cried, "Heil Herr Hitler," while the others applauded enthusiastically.


By the time of the German Presidential elections later that year, Thyssen obtained contributions to Hitler's campaign fund from the industrial combines. He alone is reported to have spent 3,000,000 marks on the Nazis in the year 1932.



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


Thyssen reported to his Project Dustbin interrogators that:

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

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

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

  1. E. Roland Harriman (The Order 1917) Vice President of W.A. Harriman & Co., New York

  2. H.J. Kouwenhoven (Nazi) Nazi banker, managing partner of August Thyssen Bank and Bankvoor Handel Scheepvaart N.V. (the transfer bank for Thyssen's funds)

  3. Knight Wooley (The Order 1917) Director of Guaranty Trust, New York and Director Federal Reserve Bank of N. Y.

  4. Cornelius Lievense President, Union Banking Corp. and Director of Holland-American Investment Corp.

  5. Ellery Sedgewick James (The Order 1917)  Partner, Brown Brothers, & Co., New York

  6. Johann Groninger (Nazi) Director of Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart and Vereinigte Stahlwerke (Thyssen's steel operations)

  7. J.L. Guinter Director Union Banking Corp

  8. Prescott Sheldon Bush (The Order 1917) Partner, Brown Brothers, Harriman. Father of President G. H. W. Bush

The eight directors of Union Banking Corporation are an interesting bunch indeed.


Look at the following:

  • Four directors of Union Banking are members of The Order: all initiated at Yale in 1917 - members of the same Yale class. All four were members of the same cell (club) D 115.

  • E. Harriman was the brother of W. Averell Harriman and a Vice-President of W.A. Harriman Company.

  • Guaranty Trust was represented by Knight Woolley.

  • Two of the Union directors, Kouwenhoven and Groninger, were Nazi directors of Bank voor Handel en Scheepvaart, formerly the von Heydt Bank.

  • Von Heydt was the intermediary between Guaranty Trust and Hitler named in Hitler's Secret Backer.

  • Ellery S. James and Prescott S. Bush were partners in Brown Brothers, later Brown Brothers, Harriman.

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

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

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



Out of war and revolution come opportunities for profit.

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

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

Although the U.S. did not officially go to war with Germany until 1941, legally, and certainly morally, the U.S. was at war with Nazi Germany after the Destroyer deal with Great Britain in December 1940, :.e., the exchange of 50 old U.S. destroyers for strategic bases in British territory.


Even before December 1940 the MS "Frederick S. Fales" owned by Standard Vacuum Company was sunk by a German submarine on September 21, 1940. Yet in 1941 Standard Oil of New Jersey (now EXXON) had six Standard Oil tankers under Panamanian registry, manned by Nazi officers to carry fuel oil from Standard Oil refineries to the Canary Islands, a refueling base of Nazi submarines.

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

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

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

Chase Manhattan Bank is not only a firm that plays both sides of the political fence, but with Ford Motor Company, was selected by Treasury Secretary Morgenthau for post-war investigation of pro-Nazi activities: These two situations [i.e., Ford and Chase Bank] convince us that it is imperative to investigate immediately on the spot the activities of subsidiaries of at least some of the larger American firms which were operating in France during German occupation ...

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

In December 1944 Treasury Department officials examined the records of the Chase Bank in Paris. On December 20, 1944 the senior U.S. examiner sent a memorandum to Treasury Secretary Morgenthau with the preliminary results of the Paris examination.





Here's an extract from that report:

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

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

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

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

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


  6. The whole objective of the Chase policy and operation was to maintain the position of the bank at any cost. In brief, Chase Bank was a Nazi collaborator, but the above preliminary report is as far as the investigation proceeded. The report was killed on orders from Washington, D.C.


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

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

Return to Contents





Memorandum Number Five
The New Dialectic - Angola And China


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

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

The source of the current process may be found in National Security Memorandum No. 68 of 1950, with its extraordinary omissions (analyzed in The Phoenix Letter, January 1984). NSC 68 opened up the road for Western technology to build a more advanced Soviet Union - which it did in the 1960s and 1970s with computerized space-age technology. At the same time NSC 68 presented the argument for massive expansion of

U.S. defenses - on the grounds of a future Soviet threat. The omission in NSC 68 was quite elementary, i.e., that :he Soviets could not progress without Western technology. NSC 68 allowed that technology transfer to go on. In other words, by allowing Western firms to expand the Soviet Union, NSC-68 also pari passu created the argument for a U.S. defense budget. We identified in our 'Phoenix Letter article the link between NSC-68 and The Order.

Unfortunately for The Order, but not surprisingly, given their limited perception of the world, the dialectic plan based on NSC-68 misfired. The principal devices used to control the dialectic process in the past two decades have been:

(a) information

(b) debt

(c) technology

These have become diluted over time.


They just don't work as well today as they did in the 1950s. By and large, control of information has been successful. The intellectual world is still locked into a phony verbal battle between "left" and "right," whereas the real struggle is the battle between individual freedom and the encroaching power of the absolute State.


The Soviet Union, with its tight censorship, presents a strictly Marxist (i.e., "left") orientation to its citizens. The enemy is always the "fascist" United States. The West is a little more complicated but not much more so. Quigley's argument in Tragedy And Hope, that J.P. Morgan used financial power to control politics, has been extended to The Order's control of information. In the West the choice is basically between a controlled "left-oriented" information and a controlled "right-oriented" information.1


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


The conflict between the two controlled groups keeps an apparent informational conflict alive. Unwelcome facts that fall into neither camp are conveniently forgotten. Books that fall into neither camp can be effectively neutralized because they will incur the wrath of both "right" and "left".

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

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

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

The dialectic plan therefore misfired for several reasons. Firstly, the informational blackout has not been as successful as The Order expected. We shall describe later how control of Time and Newsweek gave The Order dominance over weekly news summaries. The TV networks have been able to orchestrate viewer reactions - to some extent. For example, the three ABC blockbusters in 1983 were The Day After, Thornbirds, and Winds Of War, all with a common propaganda theme.


But The Order was unable to restrict individuals and relatively small non-academic groups, almost always outside Universities, from exploring obvious inconsistencies in establishment propaganda. These groups often mistakenly termed "left" or "right" are outside the generally manipulated left-right spectrum.

Secondly, the debt weapon was over-used. Communist countries are now saturated with debt to Western bankers. Thirdly, while technology is still a useful weapon, there are distinct stirrings among independent analysts of the danger posed for the Western world by building enemies.

Consequently, in today's world we can identify two facts in construction of a new dialectic.

  • First, cautious reinforcement of the Marxian arm (the thesis presented in Memorandum Three), i.e., Marxist Angola gets a green light, but a Marxist Grenada got a red light.

  • Second, the construction of a completely new arm, that of Communist China, itself Marxist, but with conflict potential for the Soviet Union.

Major efforts by The Order are in progress, only partly revealed in the press, to create a new superpower in a conflict mode with the Soviet Union. This is the new antithesis, replacing Nazi Germany.


Angola, a former Portuguese province on the southwest coast of Africa, is a contemporary example of continued, but more cautious, creation of the Marxist arm of the dialectic process. The official establishment view of Angola is that Angola was a Portuguese colony and oppressive Portuguese rule led to an independence movement in which the Marxists won out over "democratic" forces.

This view cannot be supported. If the Portuguese were colonists in Angola, then so are the Boston Brahmins in Massachusetts. Luanda, the chief town in Angola, was settled by the Portuguese in 1575 - that's half a century before the Pilgrims landed in Massachusetts.


The indigenous population of Angola in 1575 was less than the Indian population of Massachusetts. Over three centuries the Portuguese treated Angola more as a province than as a colony, in contrast to British, French and Belgian colonial rule in Africa. So if Angola belonged to non-existent indigenous natives, then so does Massachusetts logically belong to American Indians.

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

"He [Kennedy] then turned to the negotiations with Portugal over the Azores base. He said that not much seemed to be happening and that he would be grateful to have me take the matter over and see if something could be done.


I asked him for permission to talk about the situation for a few minutes and said about the following:

"The Portuguese were deeply offended at what they believed was the desertion of them by the United States, if not the actual alignment of the United States with their enemies. The problem, it seemed to me, lay not so much in negotiations with the Portuguese as in the determination of United States policy. The battle would be in Washington, rather than in Lisbon."

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

"The President then asked me why I was so sure that there was no room for negotiations under the present conditions. I said that, as he perhaps knew, we had in fact been subsidizing Portugal's enemies; and that they strongly suspected this, although they could not prove it. He said that the purpose of this was to try to keep the Angolan nationalist movement out of the hands of the communist Ghanians, etc., and keep it in the most moderate hands possible.


I said that I quite understood this, but that it did not make what the Portuguese suspected any more palatable to them. We were also engaged in smuggling Angolese out of Angola and educating them in Lincoln College outside of Philadelphia in the most extreme nationalist views. Furthermore the head of this college had secretly and illegally entered Angola and on his return had engaged in violent anti-Portuguese propaganda.


We voted in the United Nations for resolutions "condemning" Portugal for maintaining order in territory unquestionably under Portuguese sovereignty. I pointed out that the Portuguese were a proud people, especially sensitive because they had declined to such an impotent position after such a glorious history. They would rather proceed to the ruin of their empire in a dignified way, as they had in Goa, than be bought or wheedled into cooperating in their own destruction."

There is an extremely important, although seemingly minor, point in President Kennedy's comments. Kennedy apparently believed the U.S. was financing Nationalists, not Marxists, whereas the U.S. was actually aiding Marxists, as it was later to do in South Africa, following a pattern going back to the 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia.


There is a point well worth following up in the Kennedy files, i.e., just how much Kennedy knew about CIA and State Department operations, where The Order was in control.

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

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

By the early 1980s The Order's multinational friends came out of the woodwork while carefully coordinating public actions with Vice President Bush (The Order 1948). For example, in March 27, 1981 The Wall Street Journal ran a revealing article, including some nuggets of reality mingled with the Establishment line.


This front page article viewed U.S. multinational support for the Angolan Marxists under the headline,

"Friendly Foe: companies urge U.S. to stay out of Angola, decline aid to rebels" (these rebels being anti-Marxist Savimbi's UNITA forces aided by South Africa).

The leader of the pro-Marxist corporate forces in the U.S. is Melvin J. Hill, President of Gulf Oil Exploration & Production Company, a unit of Gulf Oil which operates Gulf Cabinda. This is a refinery complex in Angola, protected from Savimbi's pro-Western rebels by Cubans and Angolan Marxist troops.


Hill told the WSJ "Angola is a knowledgeable, understanding and reliable business partner." Hill not only appeared before Congress with this pro-Marxist line, but met at least several times with then Vice President Bush.

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


Said Wood:

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

Hill and Wood, of course, are no more than public relations agents for Marxist Angola, although we understand they have not registered as foreign agents with the U.S. Department of Justice. Angola is very much a Cuban-Soviet base for the take-over of Southern Africa, yet 17 western oil companies and other firms are in Angola.


They include Gulf, Texaco, Petrofina, Mobil, Cities Service, Marathon Oil and Union Texas Petroleum. Other firms include Allied Chemical, Boeing Aircraft, General Electric - and Bechtel Corporation. It should be remembered that both Secretary of State Schultz and Secretary of Defense Weinberger are on loan from Bechtel Corporation.

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

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

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

It would be cheaper in South African lives to direct retaliatory action against the corporations rather than against Cubans and Angolans. After U.S. betrayal of South Africa in 1975, when South African forces could have reached Luanda, it is a tribute to South Africa's caution that it has not used this rather obvious counter weapon.


After all, a South African surgical strike on Cabinda would neatly remove the Angolans' largest single source of foreign exchange, and give multinational Marxists a little food for thought. We are not, of course, recommending any such action, but it does remain an option open to South Africa.


And the possible U.S. reaction?


Well the State Department and CIA had best be ready with an explanation for the U.S. Embassy plane caught photographing South African military installations! We cite the above only to demonstrate the dangerous nature of The Order's conflict management scenarios.



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

In 1971 Mr. Nixon appointed George "Poppy" Bush (The Order 1948) as U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, irrespective of the fact that Bush had no previous experience in diplomacy. As chief U.S. delegate, Bush had responsibility for defense against the Communist Chinese attack on the Republic of China, an original free enterprise member of the United Nations.


With the vast power of the United States at his disposal, Bush failed miserably: the Republic was expelled from United Nations and Communist China took its seat. Shortly after that fiasco, Bush left United Nations to take over as Chairman of the Republican National Committee.

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

During World War II the United States helped the Chinese Communists into power. As one Chinese authority, Chin-tung Liang, has written about General Joseph W. Stilwell, the key U.S. representative in China from 1942 to 1944:

"From the viewpoint of the struggle against Communism ... [Stilwell] did a great disservice to China."1

Yet Stilwell only reflected orders from Washington, from General George C. Marshall. And as Admiral Cooke stated to Congress, 2... in 1946 General Marshall used the tactics of stoppage of ammunition to invisibly disarm the Chinese forces.

1 Chin-Tun Liang, General Stilwell In Chino, 1942-1944: The Full Story. St. John's University 1972, p. 12.
2 Ibid., p. 278.

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

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

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

It appears that Bechtel is now to play a similar role to that of Detroit based Albert Kahn, Inc., the firm that in 1928 undertook initial studies and planning for the First Five Year Plan in the Soviet Union. By about the year 2000 Communist China will be a "superpower" built by American technology and skill. It is presumably the intention of The Order to place this power in a conflict mode with the Soviet Union.

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

Yet, The Order has probably again miscalculated. What will be Moscow's reaction to this dialectic challenge? Even without traditional Russian paranoia they can be excused for feeling more than a little uneasy.


And who is to say that the Chinese Communists will not make their peace with Moscow after 2000 and join forces to eliminate the super-super-power - the United States?


Return to Contents