by Patrick Wood
11 November 2011
Speaking of his
influence in the original creation of the European Union,
wrote in 1998,
“Back in the early Seventies, the hope for a
more united EUROPE was already full-blown - thanks in many ways to the
individual energies previously spent by so many of the Trilateral
Commission’s earliest members.”
In the Beginning - The Trilateral Commission at 25, 1998, p.11)
Some argued that “that was then and this is now,” and that the Commission’s
influence had waned with the passing of the older generation.
Nonsense. It was Trilateral Commissioner Vallery d’Estaing who authored the
EU’s Constitution in 2002-2003 when he was President of the Convention on
the Future of Europe.
On November 10, 2011, Robert Wenzel, Editor & Publisher of the Economic
Policy Journal, wrote the following
And the Big Time Banksters Come Marching In
“Here’s what you need to know about the current crisis in the Eurozone. The
big time banksters are getting direct hands on control:
“Mario Drgahi has become president of the European Central Bank as of
November 1. He was vice chairman and managing director of Goldman Sachs
International and a member of the firm-wide management committee. He was the
Italian Executive Director at the World Bank. He has been a Fellow of the
Institute of Politics at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard
“Lucas Papademos takes over today as Prime Minister of Greece. He was an
economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. He was a visiting professor
of public policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University.
And, he was previously a vice president of the European Central Bank. He has
been a member of the Trilateral Commission since 1998.
“Indications are that Mario Monti will succeed Silvio Berlusconi as prime
minister of Italy, within in days. Monti completed graduate studies at Yale
University, where he studied under James Tobin (see the Tobin Tax). He is a
member of the European Commission. He is European Chairman of the Trilateral
Commission and and member of the Bilderberg Group.
“If you get the sense that the elitist banksters are going to take this
financial crisis and push it in whatever direction they want, you are
probably very right.”
As you can see, little has changed since 1973, and the same Trilateral
Commission membership keeps popping up in the most hallowed positions of
power and influence.
The Commission’s defense is that it was simply
coincidental for their members to be picked for various high-level positions
because of their superior talents and abilities. This is not hearsay: I have
had this spoken directly to me by members of the Commission.
Considering that the membership hovers around 300-350 at any given time,
it is statistically impossible that they could have been randomly picked at
such a high frequency over such a long period of time.
In the U.S. alone
since 1973, Commission members held,
8 out of 10 U.S. Trade Representative appointments
6 our of 8 World Bank presidencies
6 out of 7 President/Vice President elections
Could any sane person think that they Trilaterals just stumbled into all of
these positions? Of course not.
The historical evidence declares that the Trilateral Commission hijacked the
global political system for the exact purposes it stated in 1973.
“foster a New International Economic Order.”
Just who rules the world economy?
When Antony Sutton and myself studied the Trilateral Commission in 1978, one
analytical technique we used was a derivative of sociology called “network
We assembled names of directors, executives and major
shareholders of companies associated with the Trilaterals and then
diagrammed them to show overlaps and other non-obvious associations. Our
results were stunning. We found a tight interlocking network that was far
stronger than a bunch of independent companies. In graphical form, the
network was clearly visible. (See
Trilaterals Over Washington, Volume I)
Recently, three researchers in Switzerland (S. Vitali, J.B. Glattfelder, and
S. Battiston) have released a similar and modern study called “The
Network of Global Corporate Control.”
In the abstract they state,
“We find that transnational corporations form a giant bow-tie structure and
that a large portion of control flows to a small tightly-knit core of
financial institutions. This core can be seen as an economic “super-entity”
that raises new important issues both for researchers and policy makers.”
This is an understatement.
In Table S1 (below image) buried in the appendix, they list the
“top 50 control-holders,” where shareholders are ranked according to their
level of network control. These are the companies who comprise the
inner-core of global control.
Of the 50 companies, 45 are banks, insurance or other financial
From the U.S. we see the usual:
JP Morgan Chase
Bank of America
In short, this core of banks/financials are the
real rulers of the world
There is no speculation here: This is hard and compelling evidence.
This is also the exact same conclusion that Sutton and I reached in 1978
with more rudimentary, non-computerized analysis.
The report concludes,
“This is the first time a ranking of economic actors by global control is
presented. Notice that many actors belong to the financial sector (NACE
codes starting with 65, 66, 67) and many of the names are well-known
global players. The interest of this ranking is not that it exposes
unsuspected powerful players.
Instead, it shows that many of the top
actors belong to the core. This means that they do not carry out their
business in isolation but, on the contrary, they are tied together in an
extremely entangled web of control. This finding is extremely important
since there was no prior economic theory or empirical evidence regarding
whether and how top players are connected.
Finally, it should be noted that governments
and natural persons are only featured further down in the list.”
co-founder of the Trilateral Commission with David Rockefeller in 1973,
summed up the “network” in his 1970
Between Two Ages - America's
Role in the Technetronic Era:
“The nation-state as a fundamental unit of
man’s organized life has ceased to be the principal creative force:
International banks and multinational corporations are acting and
planning in terms that are far in advance of the political concepts of
Unfortunately, this is the reality of the matter.
With international banks
at the center and various multinational companies in the periphery, the
network continues to dominate and control the course of world events. The
citizens of the respective countries are little more than objects to be
taxed and manipulated.
In Europe, the financial demise of Italy and Greece threatens to melt down
the European region, if not the entire global economy.
bankers Papademos and Monti, respectively, would take the helm as Prime
Minister of their own nation-state should be likened to be a receivership
move designed to protect the assets of the banks (the “Network”) they
represent. If nothing else, it certainly shows that the Trilateral hegemony
over Europe is alive and well.
Until this hegemony is somehow dissolved, the game of national political
elections (in the U.S. or Europe) is largely an exercise in futility.
Electors are simply deceived when they fail to recognize and address the
real power behind the political/economic system.